What does the surprising defeat of an academic boycott at AAA mean for the trajectory of BDS within academic associations?
Israel’s decision to take the BDS fight seriously reflects understanding that the battlefield has shifted to places where words are spoken vs. shots fired.
Should we adopt BDS tactics designed to accomplish militant goals in order to accomplish our non-militant ones?
War is unforgiving of wishful thinking and ambiguity, which is why it is vital to judge an opponent not by what they say but what they do.
Methodist moves to reject BDS can be seen as a form of sanity breaking out within a Mainline movement that’s been jerked around by Israel haters for two decades.
Bit of a change-up here at Divest This over the next few months. My new friend Andrew Pessin, who I met at the recent StandWithUs conference, has kindly given me space in the online publication Algemeiner which I’m using to run a new series on how the language of war can help clarify the fight against […]
The spiritual scale and nature of this loserness of BDS was never more on display than it was last week at Brown University.
In justifying the bigoted behavior of El-Qoulaq, Harvard Law students are defining deviance down to the point where bigotry may no longer exist.
Lacking a mob to shut down at Israeli speaker at Harvard Law, Husam El-Qoulaq dazzled the world with his ingenious repartee by asking her why she was “so smelly.”
The big news on the BDS front is about a lawsuit just filed against the American Studies Association (ASA) over the anti-Israel boycott they put in place in 2014.
In BDS: Disneyland of Hate, Israeli think-tankers Igal Ram and Eliana Rudee present a powerful example of Fantasy Politics run amok.
The BDS brigade is playing another community under the radar: the world of socially responsible investment (SRI).