Yeeess, thank you for this incisive reflection on Yorke's "statement" (jeremiad an appropriate categorization of it). His rhetorical framing for me strongly echoed that of irritating reactionary centrist pundits, who proffer (ungrounded in reality) "enlightened" moral equivocations between what they see as far-left & far-right politics, and whose conclusions generally cede ground to far-right futurisms ("let's go back to some imagined past, when discussions were sensible and fundamental power dynamics were un-examined & -expressed!").
Another horrific & nauseating roundup, and as always, thank you for this work.
The comparison with the “irritating reactionary centrist pundit” is so appropriate. I feel like I’ve already read Yorke’s take in the Atlantic and NYT opinions section.
What annoys me is how these people unwittingly prop up colonial narratives under the guise of moral clarity. They don't say anything profound. They just pepper in different words into the same colonial narrative framework to make it sound like they're thinking outside the box.
He calls into question the unquestioned Free Palestine slogan? Word vomit. A slogan is questioned but not the occupation? It obscures how empire and capitalism function. You can only believe & say it should be questioned if you don't believe Palestinians are being colonized, and denying colonization already means you dehumanize them b/c the colonized have always been cast as morally inferior, while the actual material violence of the colonizers is obscured. And the subtext within this performative morality is always the same - "But what about Hamas?"
I'll also add that it reveals how deep the racism is embedded in the collective western subconscious that it renders many incapable of seeing Palestinians as human beings who are colonized & who have a right to resist.
Good article on the hypocrisy of successful artists who use weasel words to dodge the obvious - the Israeli State supported by Europe and North America is attempting to erase another people, full stop. Also we should look at how people like Bruce Springsteen are travelling around the country attacking Trump and saying nothing about the genocide in Gaza. Somebody should remind him of when he and Steve van Zant organized artists to boycott apartheid South Africa. Now they are just mouthing platitudes about Joe Biden, genocide enabler, being an honourable man.
Thank you for this long and disgusting review of despicable statements, behaviors and merciless killing. Just finished listening to Ten Years After's appropriate ditty, "I'd Love to Change the World".
As always, your reflection comes as a relief in this twisted time. Thom is just as bad as talking to liberal Zionists who think a 2 state solution is the best option so they can still keep their entitlements and pretend they care about equality and safety of all people. Like them, Thom has lived a pretty cushy lifestyle selling the public a version of himself as a progressive, anti imperialist, but when push comes to shove, he’s just too comfortable in his hypocrisy circle jerks. At least we see him for what he is.
Thank you for writing! Yorke's statement was infuriating and obviously paternalistic, seeped in colonial logic. He needs to read Perfect Victims. Yeah constantly framing state violence, including our own, as the result of "ultra-nationalist" or even "alt-right" just is complete denial of how colonial and capitalist systems function. Really frustrating.
Thank you so much. These articles are so helpful. Do you know someone I can contact at Drop Site News? I’ve messaged on IG but haven’t heard back. I really want to know how they obtained the text of Hamas’ offer. No other mainstream media have this and they won’t report it bc Drop Site doesn’t say how they got it. Can you help?
I mean the fact that Jeremy scahill published a 90 minute video interview with a senior Hamas official should be adequate for any journalist to believe their reporting is sound. If your friend has a problem with them talking to Hamas at all, that’s a different issue—but Scahill has a long, illustrious career of interviewing “the other side.”
I wouldn't expect them to reveal their sources but I've been working on convincing a friend at a main stream news media outlet that their is bias in their reporting and I sent them the article from Drop site (to show them how it is reported in media not biased against Hamas vs how they report it) and this was their response: "So, there are big reasons to be cautious here. I don't know what dropsite news is. They say they have Hamas' proposal. Usually that would come with some explaination of who gave it to them or how they got it. Probably veiled in some way (Sr official involved in negotiations our something)- there's nothing like that here."
Is this just my friend being an asshole snobby journalist or is there some validity to it?
Yeah I'd say the issue here is that journalistic standards seem to shift when a report challenges the dominant narrative of mainstream outlets. Sure it's valid to want sourcing (I used to work in journalism so I get it) but that standard isn't evenly applied. When mainstream news outlets publish claims attributed to vague sources such as 'senior Israeli officials', those claims are rarely scrutinized.
I remember that CNN report by Nic Robertson in Nov '23 where he was led into hospital basements & the reporting was filled with 'Israel says'. But no independent verification. Even when CNN admitted that no evidence had been found, it continued to give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Also, that bogus report by Clarissa Ward in Syria also comes to mind.
Mainstream outlets never afforded that type of framing to Hamas. DropSite is a lesser known news outlet but has been in direct contact with Hamas & published an interview with a senior Hamas official. The evidence & substance is there and they're still dismissed.
As always, thank you for documenting... well, too much. I had to skip some parts - although i will look, eventually.
Mainstream media and European politicians are subtly shifting their tone... So quietly, so carefully, so cowardly... And yet, although it's too little, too late, I am grabbing onto this barest shred of hope that the unravelling of their relationship with a genocidal government will begin, at last. No more arm shipment, no more intelligence sharing, maybe? As a start?
As for Thom Yorke... he's been hailed as a genius forever, it's not much of a surprise that he's, really, not. I still love Ocean Bloom, it's a beautiful composition.
As always I appreciate your words and level of knowledge on this topic.
My only personal issue with this write-up is to condemn someone who is posing a question as "having no idea idea what you're talking about" (albeit as a quote from his song to wrap up your article).
Most people will know 99% less than you on this topic - when we've had personal conversations on this you know I'm always open minded and receptive.
With all difficult topics, we have to be open to 'making mistakes' when sharing our points of view. I've learned this over the past few years when talking about race and gender identity. I'd be too scared of saying the 'wrong thing' so I wouldn't say anything at all.
I just think the most productive way of talking about I/P is to respectfully disagree with patience - if you told me 'you don't know what you're talking about' (whether that's true or not) I'd shut down pretty quickly.
One of my favorite Radiohead songs is Optimistic (Kid A, 2000):
My issue isn’t his ignorance—it’s the way he pairs it with a tone that suggests everyone else is petty, misinformed, or callous, while he alone has the moral clarity to ask the tough questions. Had he taken a more humble tone, I don’t think I’d have felt the need to write all this.
I would argue that he has had plenty of time to inform himself.
I do fully agree though, that we have to allow people the freedom to make mistakes (feel free to speak their minds) as they learn abut something. Questions and perspectives are welcome and important. That is if someone is being genuine. Is he?
Yeeess, thank you for this incisive reflection on Yorke's "statement" (jeremiad an appropriate categorization of it). His rhetorical framing for me strongly echoed that of irritating reactionary centrist pundits, who proffer (ungrounded in reality) "enlightened" moral equivocations between what they see as far-left & far-right politics, and whose conclusions generally cede ground to far-right futurisms ("let's go back to some imagined past, when discussions were sensible and fundamental power dynamics were un-examined & -expressed!").
Another horrific & nauseating roundup, and as always, thank you for this work.
Yeah really nailed it with The Atlantic.
The comparison with the “irritating reactionary centrist pundit” is so appropriate. I feel like I’ve already read Yorke’s take in the Atlantic and NYT opinions section.
Ha, exactly. And how lucky are we all that such enlightened, rational ones plumb the depths 🤔 JuSt AsKiNg QuEsTiOnS!?! 🤔
Lol.
I'm going to start calling it the devil's advocate & contrarian syndrome
What annoys me is how these people unwittingly prop up colonial narratives under the guise of moral clarity. They don't say anything profound. They just pepper in different words into the same colonial narrative framework to make it sound like they're thinking outside the box.
He calls into question the unquestioned Free Palestine slogan? Word vomit. A slogan is questioned but not the occupation? It obscures how empire and capitalism function. You can only believe & say it should be questioned if you don't believe Palestinians are being colonized, and denying colonization already means you dehumanize them b/c the colonized have always been cast as morally inferior, while the actual material violence of the colonizers is obscured. And the subtext within this performative morality is always the same - "But what about Hamas?"
I'll also add that it reveals how deep the racism is embedded in the collective western subconscious that it renders many incapable of seeing Palestinians as human beings who are colonized & who have a right to resist.
Good article on the hypocrisy of successful artists who use weasel words to dodge the obvious - the Israeli State supported by Europe and North America is attempting to erase another people, full stop. Also we should look at how people like Bruce Springsteen are travelling around the country attacking Trump and saying nothing about the genocide in Gaza. Somebody should remind him of when he and Steve van Zant organized artists to boycott apartheid South Africa. Now they are just mouthing platitudes about Joe Biden, genocide enabler, being an honourable man.
Thank you for this long and disgusting review of despicable statements, behaviors and merciless killing. Just finished listening to Ten Years After's appropriate ditty, "I'd Love to Change the World".
As always, your reflection comes as a relief in this twisted time. Thom is just as bad as talking to liberal Zionists who think a 2 state solution is the best option so they can still keep their entitlements and pretend they care about equality and safety of all people. Like them, Thom has lived a pretty cushy lifestyle selling the public a version of himself as a progressive, anti imperialist, but when push comes to shove, he’s just too comfortable in his hypocrisy circle jerks. At least we see him for what he is.
Fun fact: the Arabic word for “Radiohead” is “zaballe” 🚮🗑️.
95,000 sounds much much too low.
Thank you for writing! Yorke's statement was infuriating and obviously paternalistic, seeped in colonial logic. He needs to read Perfect Victims. Yeah constantly framing state violence, including our own, as the result of "ultra-nationalist" or even "alt-right" just is complete denial of how colonial and capitalist systems function. Really frustrating.
Thank you so much. These articles are so helpful. Do you know someone I can contact at Drop Site News? I’ve messaged on IG but haven’t heard back. I really want to know how they obtained the text of Hamas’ offer. No other mainstream media have this and they won’t report it bc Drop Site doesn’t say how they got it. Can you help?
I mean the fact that Jeremy scahill published a 90 minute video interview with a senior Hamas official should be adequate for any journalist to believe their reporting is sound. If your friend has a problem with them talking to Hamas at all, that’s a different issue—but Scahill has a long, illustrious career of interviewing “the other side.”
Thanks so much. True.
I’m sure they won’t reveal their sources connected to Hamas.
I wouldn't expect them to reveal their sources but I've been working on convincing a friend at a main stream news media outlet that their is bias in their reporting and I sent them the article from Drop site (to show them how it is reported in media not biased against Hamas vs how they report it) and this was their response: "So, there are big reasons to be cautious here. I don't know what dropsite news is. They say they have Hamas' proposal. Usually that would come with some explaination of who gave it to them or how they got it. Probably veiled in some way (Sr official involved in negotiations our something)- there's nothing like that here."
Is this just my friend being an asshole snobby journalist or is there some validity to it?
Yeah I'd say the issue here is that journalistic standards seem to shift when a report challenges the dominant narrative of mainstream outlets. Sure it's valid to want sourcing (I used to work in journalism so I get it) but that standard isn't evenly applied. When mainstream news outlets publish claims attributed to vague sources such as 'senior Israeli officials', those claims are rarely scrutinized.
I remember that CNN report by Nic Robertson in Nov '23 where he was led into hospital basements & the reporting was filled with 'Israel says'. But no independent verification. Even when CNN admitted that no evidence had been found, it continued to give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Also, that bogus report by Clarissa Ward in Syria also comes to mind.
Mainstream outlets never afforded that type of framing to Hamas. DropSite is a lesser known news outlet but has been in direct contact with Hamas & published an interview with a senior Hamas official. The evidence & substance is there and they're still dismissed.
Artist are extremely influential and they should all speak up.
As always, thank you for documenting... well, too much. I had to skip some parts - although i will look, eventually.
Mainstream media and European politicians are subtly shifting their tone... So quietly, so carefully, so cowardly... And yet, although it's too little, too late, I am grabbing onto this barest shred of hope that the unravelling of their relationship with a genocidal government will begin, at last. No more arm shipment, no more intelligence sharing, maybe? As a start?
As for Thom Yorke... he's been hailed as a genius forever, it's not much of a surprise that he's, really, not. I still love Ocean Bloom, it's a beautiful composition.
As always I appreciate your words and level of knowledge on this topic.
My only personal issue with this write-up is to condemn someone who is posing a question as "having no idea idea what you're talking about" (albeit as a quote from his song to wrap up your article).
Most people will know 99% less than you on this topic - when we've had personal conversations on this you know I'm always open minded and receptive.
With all difficult topics, we have to be open to 'making mistakes' when sharing our points of view. I've learned this over the past few years when talking about race and gender identity. I'd be too scared of saying the 'wrong thing' so I wouldn't say anything at all.
I just think the most productive way of talking about I/P is to respectfully disagree with patience - if you told me 'you don't know what you're talking about' (whether that's true or not) I'd shut down pretty quickly.
One of my favorite Radiohead songs is Optimistic (Kid A, 2000):
"You can try the best you can
You can try the best you can
The best you can is good enough"
My issue isn’t his ignorance—it’s the way he pairs it with a tone that suggests everyone else is petty, misinformed, or callous, while he alone has the moral clarity to ask the tough questions. Had he taken a more humble tone, I don’t think I’d have felt the need to write all this.
I would argue that he has had plenty of time to inform himself.
I do fully agree though, that we have to allow people the freedom to make mistakes (feel free to speak their minds) as they learn abut something. Questions and perspectives are welcome and important. That is if someone is being genuine. Is he?
It's so disappointing!