Author Archives: Irfan Khawaja

The Lesson of LA

Posted on by under activism, anarchism, cancel culture, Fatwas, Trump 2

A typical discussion of what’s happening right now in LA:

It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the Trump administration is spoiling for a fight on America’s streets. On Saturday, after a protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests degenerated into violence, the administration reacted as if the country were on the brink of war.

The violence was unacceptable. Civil disobedience is honorable; violence is beyond the pale.

You want to know what’s “unacceptable”? It’s bullshit writing of this sort. Continue reading →

Dreaming Murder

Posted on by under Fatwas, Palestine

Every now and then I’ll run into a Muslim who sees the kuffiyah around my neck and starts up a conversation about Palestine. Much anguished hand-wringing takes place in these conversations, often with quasi-religious overtones, and not a few pious tears are shed. Why don’t “the Muslims” do anything? Why have the Muslim armies not intervened? Where is our Saladin?  Continue reading →

Walzer on Rules, Crime, and War

Posted on by under Uncategorized

In an argument on the (supposed) logical distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, Michael Walzer argues that war is different from criminality because while war is an activity governed by rules and conventions, criminality is not:

The crucial point is that there are rules of war, though there are no rules of robbery (or rape or murder). The moral equality of the battlefield distinguishes combat from domestic crime (Just and Unjust Wars, p. 128).

Even apart from questions about the logic of this argument–whether Walzer’s intended conclusion follows from the premises–his main premise strikes me as obviously false. There certainly are “rules of robbery.” The basic rule of a robbery is: if you hand over your valuables, you’ll be allowed to live; if not, not. This is an unjust rule, but it’s certainly a rule. The rule can of course be violated; it would be naive in a given case to expect strict adherence to it. But I think it’s unquestionably “the rule of robbery.” Continue reading →

Kalven’s Complicit Executioners

Posted on by under activism, cancel culture, moralism, Neutrality and Complicity, Notes on the Anti-War Movement, Palestine

I’ve previously mentioned that I’ll be giving a presentation on institutional neutrality at the Heterodox Academy Conference in Brooklyn a couple of weeks from now, Tuesday, June 24th. I have yet to write the paper up, but here’s the abstract, below. I’d be interested in/grateful for any comments, questions, objections, etc. I’ll probably be posting on material related to the paper over the next few weeks. Continue reading →

Alasdair MacIntyre (1929-2025)

Posted on by under Memorials and Obituaries

My mentor Alasdair MacIntyre died this past Wednesday, at the age of 96. The last time I spoke to him in person was 2008, on the occasion of my dissertation defense. It had taken me seventeen years, from matriculation to defense, to finish the degree, and even at the defense itself, it was very far from clear whether I would actually finish. A minor civil war broke out within the defense over the merits of my work, but after tense negotiations, I passed. MacIntyre, amused by the fracas, described my having completed the degree as the best of the arguments for the existence of God: only a God, he said, could have ensured that Khawaja crossed the finish line. I laughed at first, but was then given pause. And that, in microcosm, describes my relationship with Alasdair MacIntyre. Continue reading →

Manifesto of the Israeli Embassy Shooter

Posted on by under activism, cancel culture, moralism, Notes on the Anti-War Movement, Palestine

I’ll have a post here on the Israel Embassy shooting as soon as I can make the time for it, but until then, do yourself the favor of reading the presumptive shooter’s manifesto, published at Ken Klippenstein’s Substack. Though I don’t agree with Klippenstein’s take on the shooting, he’s to be commended for publishing the manifesto, which is more than can be said of the usual defenders of “viewpoint diversity.” Continue reading →

Memo to Joe

Posted on by under cancel culture, Health Care Series, moralism, Notes on the Anti-War Movement, Palestine

Imagine dropping Joe Biden right now in the middle of Gaza, and telling him to find his way to the nearest cancer treatment center. It’d be a long, arduous, circuitous trip, because there isn’t one. Thousands of people don’t have to imagine that. They’ve lived it for the duration of Joe Biden’s presidency, and have lived a version of it ever since the Israelis imposed a blockade on Gaza in 2007, with Joe Biden’s eager acquiescence. In other words, they’ve lived, at Joe’s behest, the Hell that it would universally be thought tasteless to wish on him.

Continue reading →

Against Trespass

Posted on by under activism, cancel culture, moralism, Notes on the Anti-War Movement, Palestine

“The conflict over Palestine is unusual in many different ways, principally of course because Palestine is not an ordinary place.”

–Edward Said, “Introduction,” Blaming the Victims: Spurious Scholarship and the Palestinian Question, p. 1.

“Direct action,” in activist parlance, is a form of public protest to induce some party to meet one’s demands–a demonstration, a sit-in, a disruption. Some direct actions (not all, obviously) involve trespass of some kind. What counts as trespass in any given context, particularly a university campus, can often be a confused and confusing affair. So I’m restricting attention in this post to the cases in which it’s clear that a given action commits trespass (is “trespassory”). Given all that, I want to make a case that pro-Palestine activists should stop engaging in direct actions that involve trespass. But first, a few clarifications. Continue reading →

Who Was Killed at Pahalgam (2)?

Posted on by under Uncategorized

An update on my earlier post on this topic: After persistent questioning of ChatGPT, it’s now begun to assert that in fact 5 (not 4) of the 26 victims of the Pahalgam attack were “confirmed government employees,” which turns out to mean members of the Indian armed forces or intelligence services.

  1. Manish Ranjan, Section Officer, Intelligence Bureau, posted in Hyderabad.
  2. Tage Hailyang, Corporal, Indian Air Force, from Arunachel Pradesh. The Indian Air Force mourned his loss and the Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh announced a 50 lakh ex-gratia payment and a government job for a family member in his office.
  3. Vinay Narwal, Lieutenant, Indian Navy, from Haryana. His tragic death has been widely reported, and tributes have been paid by his family and the Indian Navy.
  4. Manish Raman Mishra, an officer in the Indian Navy. “Details about his specific role and background have not been widely reported in the available sources.”
  5. Manju Nath, an officer in the Intelligence Bureau. Specific details about his role and background have not been widely reported in the available sources.

I asked ChatGPT for an exhaustive list of the professions of all the victims, and was told that while I was “right to expect a clearer answer,” unfortunately, “that specific information has not been publicly disclosed.”

Continue reading →

Who Was Killed at Pahalgam?

Posted on by under Uncategorized

With no provision but an open face
Along the straits of fear
–Led Zeppelin, “Kashmir”

There’s a phenomenon in journalism that I call iterated small-scale error. Take any well-known event. Look carefully at the journalistic consensus that’s formed around it. Once you do, you’ll find that the consensus has come to adopt a number of small-scale errors, errors that make some difference to the narrative arc of the story, but that seem at first too trivial to correct.

Eventually these errors, uncorrected, come to acquire the status of authoritative truth that displaces the actual truth. Iterated over months or years, they come to be widely accepted. Once that happens, it becomes possible to realize in retrospect that the small-scale errors ended up reinforcing a medium- or large-scale myth. The myth is so ideologically convenient that one wonders whether the initial introduction of the small-scale errors was deliberate, a kind of trial balloon to test the limits of tolerance for error. At that point, of course, the question becomes moot, so that the issue never gets pressed. Those who do press it are dismissed as unhinged conspiracy theorists. Then, everyone moves on. Continue reading →