On Criticism
Before we begin, I must first establish this: criticism is not unhealthy but rather important to the longevity and health of a movement. Criticism during times of suppression and tension is not necessarily a bad thing -- but if followed through in a constructive manner, can be quite useful.
There is a difference between maintaining a healthy, sustainable unity--which encourages discussions on mistakes, ideological fault lines, and chooses to struggle until we come to a resolution--and weaponizing the rhetoric of unity to ignore crucial divisions in the movement.
The correct and democratic method of resolving contradictions was elaborated in the formula "unity, criticism, unity." As Mao describes, it begins with the desire for maintaining unity, resolving contradictions through criticism or struggle and arriving at a new unity on a new basis. This is the manner in which one maintains unity -- not by dismissing concerns or criticisms for the sake of a faux peace, but addressing contentions together as a collective to grow. Liberalism rejects this ideological struggle and stands for an unprincipled "peace" which produces political degeneration.
The criticisms I bring forward are going to cause division, but then I argue, what is the point of being part of a movement that cannot and will not engage in discussion? What makes us different from our oppressors when we silence dissent? What is unity worth at the expense of people's sanity and well-being? We must reject such a unity that weaponizes "community" to silence others and embrace criticism and reflection.
What worth is unity that protects an abuser?
What worth is unity built on lies?
There are no excuses in a refusal to engage in criticism -- Chinese and Vietnamese revolutionaries actively fighting against capitalism and colonialism were able to resolve differences while engaged in guerilla warfare, we too must hold ourselves to a higher standard and be able to resolve such differences amongst our own for greater unity and for the oppressed. Any attempt to frame this as "divisive" is simply an exposure of the internal weaknesses of the movement.
If discussion leads to division, how weak was your movement in the first place?
With this in mind, I commit now to a thorough analysis of Austin organizing for Palestine.
Austin Organizing General Overview
To understand Austin organizing, we must first examine its history and conduct a proper analysis.
The Mexican state allowed Texas settlers to ethnically cleanse and genocide indigenous communities in return for settling that land as Mexican citizens -- which they then used to force African slaves to farm the land. This is a history of the occupied lands of Texas -- one that begins in genocide, slavery, and settler colonialism.
If we examine UT Austin's structural history, one of the first people to live in what is now UT Austin was a slave named Mahala Murchison, arriving in Austin four months after it was founded in 1839 and maintained a consistently large black population early on, with around 28-30% of Austin being black. Austin now however is largely white -- a result of the historical gentrification and oppression of its black communities who have been a core part of the city's history for decades.
Austin's so-called "liberal" character is a result of this carefully planned and intentional redlining of historic black communities over decades -- with now "hip" petit-bourgeois white liberals now occupying parts of the city that once embodied black history.
Austin's position as the capital also produces a situation where it is virulently more politicized -- police and state trooper presence is higher, surveillance is intense, and there are infiltrators and police who have successfully permeated the ecosystem of Austin organizing. We can examine Austin organizing's history further when we analyze the Red Guards cult -- which held significant sway and control over leftist organizing till its collapse -- and in its demise, several liberal/anarchist orgs rose up to take a more dominant position.
Principled and radical organizers have faced and continue to face these multi-fold issues and in contesting liberal organizers of many kinds: there are three varieties: white liberals, POC liberals, and white anarchists masquerading as radical but perpetuating liberal tendencies. Many of these within Austin organizing leadership and general membership are largely petit-bourgeois -- with working class organizers often finding it difficult or isolating to organize due to a lack of support and proper infrastructure. Petit-bourgeois can be defined as a social class of individuals from what can be considered upper middle-class to rich backgrounds (Lawyers, doctors, small business owners, college professors) but not necessarily the ruling class, which directly owns the means of production (big buisness owners, CEOs, investment banks, etc). This is best embodied by the very presence of the Democrats for Palestine in the Austin for Palestine Coalition -- which is an oxymoron in of itself, how can a genocidal party built on the blood of indigenous and black people be for a free Palestine?
While it is not incorrect for petit-bourgeois individuals to engage in struggle (I myself am of a petit-bourgeois background) -- we must always remember that we are largely disconnected from the material realities of the working class, who are an instrumental part in mobilizing and agitating against the ruling class. As Mao said, "Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." The issue of Palestine is not an issue of primarily producing enough awareness, it is an issue of capital, and it becomes significantly important for organizers to be aware that it is those who contest capital that will be able to force the ruling class to bend. That is also not to say that we primarily focus on class as this is a reductionist analysis -- but we understand that both things can exist: an understanding of petit-bourgeois tendencies and characteristics as unhelpful and limiting to the movement and that nationally oppressed communities such as the Palestinians, indigenous communities, black people, and any others must be centered in struggles for liberation in the imperial core.
If we are to give an example -- we can point to the frequent calls for strikes that do not seem to have a sustainable infrastructure: they largely are called for by petit-bourgeois individuals with no material connection to the realities of poverty who do not have to worry about food/utilities/rent, they do not work and collaborate with labor organizers or unions in meaningful ways, and strikes are sanitized from their ability to produce and continue to produce radical action into merely a day of vacation. A strike degenerates from something legitimately radical to a sporadic action carried out by a few, disorganized and disconnected from the working class -- done by petit-bourgeois professionals with the luxury to take a day off.
Combat Liberalism
How does this liberalism affect organizing?
As expressed before, the refusal to engage with criticism to maintain peace is the first core element of Austin organizing. The phrase "gossip culture" is often utilized to dissuade comrades from communicating their concerns or worries -- one manipulative way of weaponizing unity to silence opposing opinions. When attempting to bring forward criticism -- there is no forum or space to do so, and when done so, it is interpreted as an attack. When Austin organizers engage in harmful and coercive behavior -- a common trend expressed by other organizers was to be passive or look the other way to maintain "unity" and "peace". There is a second aspect to this -- which is the predominance of gossiping amongst Austin organizers instead of directly engaging in criticism and resolving conflicts.
Disorganization is second core element of Austin organizing.
There is no legitimate end goal in sight -- from sporadic parade-like rallies and excessive banner drops and other random events, to the lack of a divesment campaign despite asking for one since Oct 2023, to an utter lack of discipline in having regular meetings accompanied by no notes/agenda/outline, to no cultivation of a disciplined cadre that can be trusted to carry out actions; Austin organizing is toothless, headless, and has no consistency. As Mao explains this tendency: "To work half-heartedly without a definite plan or direction; to work perfunctorily and muddle along."
Where are we going? What are we attempting to accomplish?
When confronted on these -- Austin organizing leadership will claim the passage of a divestment resolution, but materially, what does that entail, and how can we achieve it? Can one achieve a divestment resolution through simply parade-like rallies where we are escorted by police? Can one achieve a divestment resolution through open letters and petitions?
What does fighting for liberation entail, what does true sacrifice entail for Gaza? Is all that we can give merely our presence at another cyclic rally, another banner drop ignored by passerbys, when we are far more capable of far more?
A lack of democracy is the third core element of Austin organizing. We can examine three specific tendencies:
- A pattern of organizers forming social cliques with their close friends and refusing to allow comrades outside of this clique to partake in decision-making. This is a popular trend in Austin organizing amongst white anarchists and their self-hating whitewashed POC minions in particular who claim to disavow hierarchal and structural leadership but then create hierarchies within their own organizing groups that follow patterns of prioritizing white and male leadership and isolating marginalized community members.
-
A liberal-NGO hierarchy of organizing with a rigid bureaucracy that prioritizes an "employment" form of activism. In this format of organizing, comrades not in leadership positions are subject to their "superiors" in organizing, and not to the movement itself -- which results in a tedious form of political activism where one must have their ideas "approved" by organizing leadership who hold closed meetings instead of engaging in open democratic discussions together on how to agitate the masses. A leadership position in a liberal hierarchy entails superiority -- but a leadership position in a movement for liberation merely entails a higher level of responsibility, not superiority or a larger amount of power which one abuses for their own gains. We serve the movement, not ourselves.
-
A form of ultra-democracy where comrades of varying levels of political development and activity contribute but are politically uneducated, disorganized, and misguided. Ultra-democracy is ultimately an aversion to discipline -- when there are wrong ideas in a movement, we do not simply accept them because that is "what the majority wants", but we struggle against it together to come to a resolution. There is no cultivation of a politically educated and principled cadre across any Austin organizing groups for Palestine.
This lack of proper democracy, open forums of criticism, and disorganization coupled with the intense surveillance and police presence produces a political ecosystem of infighting, abuse, and unhealthy organizing. Not only do comrades not have the forum to express concerns -- they also do not have a place to hold leadership accountable in the event of unprincipled behavior.
These critiques are not isolated to Austin -- but a general pattern one can observe all over Texas and the United States of infighting, division, and disorganization. Now that we understand the character and history of Austin and political organizing, we can now examine the various allegations brought about by multitudes of community members, organizers, and trusted comrades.
Allegations
Every single allegation I list here was one I was actively involved in investigating and/or experienced myself.
I want to make it known that I never intended to hide these allegations -- as I previously stated before, I was in the process of conducting investigations, scheduling confrontations, and ensuring complete and utter transparency before my political persecution.
This is the results of my initial investigation.
Despite being the largest and most well-known organization for Palestinian liberation in Austin, PSC cannot even conceive to protect its own members from harassment. I begin this first allegation with an analysis of a pattern of non-Muslim and non-Arab men who would enter PSC spaces and take advantage of the lack of transparency, communication, accountability to isolate vulnerable community members.
Liberal Zionists such as Samuel Weiss and Elijah Kahlenberg from the pathetic Zionist organization Atidna entered PSC spaces and had a frequent pattern of fetishizing Muslim women of color. In addition, members of the former leftist cult Students for Revolution (Who have now disbanded, but still operate as a quasi-organizing group and social clique) have numerous allegations of sexual abuse, fetishization, and harassment. I myself was subject to an uncomfortable level of fetishization and tokenization from SFR members due to my identity as a Kashmiri Muslim woman.
While PSC was able to successfully push these two out in around mid to late 2023 to early 2024 and somewhat cold shoulder SFR members, their inability and ineffectiveness to provide a proper accountability process, complete transparency, and remove SFR members from PSC spaces would later lead to a more serious concern: PSC steering member Ryan being accused of fetishization of Arab and Muslim women and taking advantage of a leadership position to infiltrate such spaces. In my investigation, I was able to discover a pattern of behavior and I would have been able to discover more if not for my political persecution. We must remember that fetishization is not merely a preference but carries the potentiality of sexual violence and abuse, which must be immediately investigated.
This issue of being unable to hold proper accountability procedures for sexual abuse and harassment is not isolated to PSC — but a tendency demonstrated in other organizations as well.
Can Palestinian Youth Movement Austin (PYM) properly explain why one of their members spoke on a panel with Ashraf Zayed who engaged in inappropriate behavior towards teenagers, attempting to isolate them -- especially since they were already aware of his actions in May 2024 when I and other concerned community members investigated his behavior? Is there any explanation as to why PYM Austin deemed it acceptable to be in the same space as an abuser while continuously preaching values of "movement culture" and being "principled"?
Can Austin for Palestine Coalition explain why they allowed PSL leadership to engage in repeated misogynoir against black organizers? Is it acceptable when this concern was raised to PYM Austin -- they dismissed it as "gossip culture" and continued to maintain a close relationship with Austin PSL? Can they explain why they allowed older organizers in A4PC to berate and bully younger comrades and create a hostile atmosphere?
Is it "wrong" to ask PSL the source of their funding when it is famously known that they are funded by billionaires and remarkably corrupt? Is it acceptable that an older PSL organizer attempted to bully and harass comrades for voicing criticisms of PSL, claiming that comrades did not respect "coalition unity"?
Can Night School/Red Triangle Edu (Formerly known as the People's Liberation Zone) properly explain why they still have not publicized on their Instagram socials or released a thorough statement explaining their accommodation, centering, and support of an abusive white man, Reiss Funicelli -- who was later revealed to be a pedophile possessing 50+ counts of child pornography, a fact they frequently denied and even attempted at questioning his former partners without any regard for their mental health or potentiality of them being also abuse victims?
As demonstrated by my analysis -- this is a result of the liberal tendencies in Austin.
Investigation
My comrades and concerned community members should demand immediate investigations into the allegations here to hold sexual abusers and those complicit in supporting them accountable. Each and every single iota of information should be made accessible and open. I encourage you all to take initiative in things -- do not leave it to Austin organizing leadership for Palestine.
While I was there, I had hoped to deal with every single one of these sexual abusers. I had desired that I would be able to establish a community process of accountability and to make all information accessible. My plan was to deal with all of this within the next year and establish a process with my comrades who I trusted to properly investigate and hold abusers and those complicit in supporting them accountable. I am aware that after such allegations are brought forward -- my personal character, political background, and experience will be attacked and a variety of stories shall be concocted to slander my name.
No matter -- after all, retaliation to criticism and honesty is a core aspect of petit bourgeois selfishness and individualism, one that I have anticipated and was already willing to accept.
If there is anything I ask my comrades in Austin and those who care for this movement to do on my behalf, it is to properly investigate these claims.
Part 3 will come soon.