The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a long-standing, profoundly complex, and nuanced topic characterized by both external and internal disagreements regarding conflict resolution. Nonetheless, we should fundamentally agree that this does not justify genocide. Personally, I don’t agree with many of the actions of the Netanyahu government, and am not alone as the majority (52%) of Israelis share this stance. However, it is imperative to understand that this does not render the recent terrorist attack by extremist group Hamas justifiable and laudable. You can believe Palestinians have been treated like second-class citizens while not endorsing the heinous nature of Hamas’ terrorist attack on children, women, and elders in Israel. I am a strong believer in freedom of speech, yet I detest the acceptance of ignorance.

Following recent events in Israel, my family and friends there have found themselves huddled in horror, fearing for their lives. Thousands of miles away, within the comfort of an elite institution, I see my educated and rational classmates engrossed in threads on social media; they are rightfully emphasizing the occupation of Palestine that has happened over the past decades. Interestingly enough, the surge of pro-Palestinian sentiments coincides with the bloodiest day for Jews since the Holocaust. In a hopeful effort to engage in dialogue, I offered one of these students a link to a reputable comprehensive guide to the basic elements of the conflict, and, dishearteningly, my attempt fell on deaf ears.

I chose Wesleyan for its reputation of fostering a student body that emphasizes respectful intellectual discourse. My first month here has found this to be unequivocally true, with in-class debates followed by friendly conversations at lunch. Yet this commitment to fostering an inclusive space does not appear to always extend to social media, where many who post infographics and threads on their stories display a lack of understanding of the issues at hand, and subsequently ignore or block dissenting voices.

Though President Michael Roth ’78 made a blog post in response to the violence, the silence from the Wesleyan leadership in failing to send out a school-wide email to single out the unconscionable actions of Hamas runs the risk of failing to condemn an utterly heinous human rights violation. Silence speaks volumes, and by failing to call out the terrorist attack, administrators run the risk of creating an environment that comes across in a similar manner as Trump’s comments following violence in Charlottesville, when he stated there were “very fine people on both sides.”

I am perplexed as I contemplate how people watch the same videos as I have, and instead come to the conclusion that these Israelis deserve such violence. Videos of Hamas joyfully killing, mutilating, and raping vulnerable citizens are somehow seen as commendable. The celebration raises necessary questions about the ethics of applauding terrorists for inhumane acts, and prompts an inquiry: At what point did the act of remembering the victims of terrorist attacks become ensnared in controversy?

While my life experience has inevitably shaped my perspective, likely leading to innate biases, I struggle to converse with people who won’t consider Hamas’ attack as one that all of humanity should abhor. We should engage in honest debate about many topics on various aspects of this conflict, and I encourage both you and myself to read, openly discuss, and consider alternative sentiments. Yet I strongly believe that there is absolutely nothing to be debated on the terrorist act this past Saturday. As humans, we should universally condemn vulnerable individuals being dragged from their houses and slaughtered. If we are not careful, our echo chambers will foster unjustified love and hate towards individuals. We must foster an environment that encounters and retains opposing viewpoints.

Much of the debate remains extremely complicated, and individuals have been trying to find a solution for decades. I am open to discussing the tragic and complex situation of Palestinians because universities are supposed to be an environment that fosters academic debate, but there comes a point where moral distinctions between right and wrong must be expressed. Ultimately, equating the mistreatment of Palestinians with justification for terrorism is wrong.

Charlie November can be reached at cnovember@wesleyan.edu.