Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: ally, ☭☭☭, bebsi bolitics, carlos latuff, gaza, israel, not-trot, palestine, passport privilege, semantics, solidarity, we are all, we are all german jews

What does it mean to say ‘we are all Palestinian’, or ‘we are all Gaza‘? (And for many now, ‘we are all Hamas‘ – is this a popular semantic de-bantustanising?) Because we’re not. I really don’t know what I understand by the concept of solidarity anymore. There’s different forms and gradations, sure, ranging from statements and Facebook updates, to protests, boycotts and direct action, perhaps all the way to using your passport privilege to plant yourself in front of an Israeli or Mexican tank or bulldozer. And not to knock or denigrate that in any way, but I wonder if there can be real solidarity until you’re standing at either end of a gun? Or perhaps solidarity must instead be defined by its very passive nature – of relative privilege and thus allyship – always in solidarity but never in the struggle? (With an emphasis on the relative as opposed to absolute, tied to [blank] oppression – there’s of course cross-solidarity between differently oppressed peoples).
Maybe this is stemming from frustration, at being in Dubai-not-DC tomorrow, at lacking the aforementioned passport privilege and protection that my decidedly not navy blue passport will never afford. (If you’re not Rachel Corrie, that is). Thinking of the ‘we are all’ standard phrasing though, where does it come from? I can’t seem to find out, though there are suggestions of it coming from Paris 1968, with the denizens of the Quartier Latin’s slogan, “We are all German Jews” in solidarity with the banned Daniel Cohn-Bendit. Or maybe it comes from anti-Nazi peace activist Rev. Martin Niemöller’s famous statement?
![]() |
![]() |
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: blow by blow, blue cross, classism, cricket, dctors, fair wage, healthcare, HMO, immigration, insurance, medicare, pay, semantics, single payer, tufts, tufts medical center, universal healthcare

This new mural in Salamanca, Spain is pretty sick. And there’s more sickness – of the not so positive kind – brewing in Boston, where Tufts Medical Centre will break with Blue Cross, the state’s largest insurance provider, over doctor pay. That is, Tufts says that Blue Cross refuses to pay their doctors a “reasonable rate”. My first thought is – how much more can they want? I don’t know specific wage breakdowns, but doctors presumably already earn a whole lot more than the average person, who most likely can’t even afford insurance in the first place. Those left in the lurch by this announcement meanwhile have a couple of weeks to scramble, and choose between changing hospitals or changing providers. If they can even afford to keep their insurance going these days, that is. It’s a little hard to reconcile with wanting to support fair wages – yet do these even exist for doctors?















