• Hurbledurp

    “in recognition of the debate among Brooklynites about the central role played by segments of the borough’s population in the settler movement in Palestine”

    Feels like there should be ((())) around “segments of the borough’s population,” as that’s clearly the implication.

    The first six points fit well with a unified, actionable goal specific to the institution and its mission. #7 is a diversion into unnecessary, jingoistic shit that other orgs (pro-BDS) already handle.

    • Thank you for your comment. I had the same question actually, but that issue has come for debate before between the museum and the surrounding community. The movement opposes all forms of settler colonialism, including those they say are taking place on the west bank. Further, in 2016, the museum hosted an exhibition focused on the Israeli/Palestinian region called This Place. DTP had this to say about the exhibit hosted by the Brooklyn Museum:
      “It normalizes and aestheticizes illegal Jewish-only colonies in the West Bank. It renders invisible the daily violence experienced by Palestinians living under occupation, and the ongoing dehumanization of Palestinians who live in Israel. It conveniently says nothing of the Gaza Strip, currently enduring the tenth year of a brutal siege. This Place is the agit-prop of the oppressor.”
      (See https://decolonizethisplace.wordpress.com/ for more explanation.)
      As I mentioned in the article, they’re not opposing just specific actions like the hiring of a white curator or the staging of a dehumanizing exhibit. DTP asks for a reexamination of the museum’s lens and position, of which both actions are examples.
      Hope that helps!