When conquest cannot be completed by force, it continues through administration—until subjugation is accepted as peace, and a people can no longer name its condition or imagine its liberation.
I completely agree with this perspective. What has long been advanced under the language of necessity and security has, in reality, served to normalize dispossession and make injustice permanent. When borders are deliberately left undefined and emergency is treated as a constant condition, the aim is clearly not peace but the continuation of domination. Unless this cycle is openly acknowledged and challenged, it will keep repeating itself under new names.
“… as though resistance to colonization were madness, and subjugation the cure…”
Thank you for writing in real time about what’s actually happening on the ground with a clear unambiguous understanding of what happens in Gaza will be exported.
This names the reality many try to hide: occupation dressed up as security, expansion sold as stability. Thank you for refusing the language of erasure.
It perfectly aligns with historical and political reality; sometimes the domination of a people doesn’t happen solely by force, and systematic administration makes it so that people can no longer even define their condition or imagine freedom.
In a world where force replaces justice, time does not heal wounds but becomes a tool for entrenching oppression. What begins as temporary if not confronted by moral and historical resistance, hardens into normality and then into an imposed truth. Occupation is not merely the seizure of land; it is the seizure of meaning ,where borders are drawn not by justice, but by the unanswered persistence of violence
This text correctly shows that the Palestinian question is not a momentary “conflict” but a continuous logic of power; a logic in which occupation does not require final victory, since continuity itself is the form of victory. What is called “security” is not an end but a means; a language that, rather than ending violence, normalizes it and makes it permanent.
The important point of the text is that it shows how colonialism has survived in the postcolonial era: not by declaring conquest, but by gradually managing surrender. Borders are no longer declared, because their incompleteness is an advantage. Ceasefires become established lines, and each “reality on the ground” is a springboard for the next reality. This is not a failure of diplomacy, but a success of strategy.
More important than the ground is the narrative of occupation. When history is told from a place where occupation has been eliminated, resistance always appears to be “initiative,” and structural violence is transformed into a defensive response. In this context, the Palestinian is deprived not only of his home, but also of his language, of his time, and of the right to define himself.
This text reminds us that the most dangerous stage of colonialism is not when it is carried out by force, but when it becomes so normal that it cannot even be named. And in such a situation, peace no longer means justice, but rather the acceptance of injustice as the natural state of the world.
what looks like “administration” or “normalization” can function as a slower form of domination, reshaping memory, language, and political possibility until occupation feels permanent and resistance feels illegible. Whether one agrees with every claim or not, the core warning is clear: when emergency becomes routine, power redraws the map without ever admitting it.
When Israel has forcibly occupied Palestinian land and homes, how can it be expected to set boundaries and abide by the laws? Like thieves who go to rob a bank or a house, how can they be expected to abide by the laws when they are criminals and break the law?
When occupation is “normalized,” peace is no longer a possibility but becomes a tool of oppression. This text is outstanding.
I completely agree with this perspective. What has long been advanced under the language of necessity and security has, in reality, served to normalize dispossession and make injustice permanent. When borders are deliberately left undefined and emergency is treated as a constant condition, the aim is clearly not peace but the continuation of domination. Unless this cycle is openly acknowledged and challenged, it will keep repeating itself under new names.
“… as though resistance to colonization were madness, and subjugation the cure…”
Thank you for writing in real time about what’s actually happening on the ground with a clear unambiguous understanding of what happens in Gaza will be exported.
This names the reality many try to hide: occupation dressed up as security, expansion sold as stability. Thank you for refusing the language of erasure.
When conquest cannot be completed by force, it continues through administration. The way power drives many people is like a car on auto pilot.
🖤🖤🖤
👍💯
💎💯
This statement is very profound and accurate. 👏
It perfectly aligns with historical and political reality; sometimes the domination of a people doesn’t happen solely by force, and systematic administration makes it so that people can no longer even define their condition or imagine freedom.
Thank you for this excellent concise piece, translated in French with pleasure here : https://zanzibar.substack.com/p/lexpansion-par-dautres-moyens-lorsque
In a world where force replaces justice, time does not heal wounds but becomes a tool for entrenching oppression. What begins as temporary if not confronted by moral and historical resistance, hardens into normality and then into an imposed truth. Occupation is not merely the seizure of land; it is the seizure of meaning ,where borders are drawn not by justice, but by the unanswered persistence of violence
This text correctly shows that the Palestinian question is not a momentary “conflict” but a continuous logic of power; a logic in which occupation does not require final victory, since continuity itself is the form of victory. What is called “security” is not an end but a means; a language that, rather than ending violence, normalizes it and makes it permanent.
The important point of the text is that it shows how colonialism has survived in the postcolonial era: not by declaring conquest, but by gradually managing surrender. Borders are no longer declared, because their incompleteness is an advantage. Ceasefires become established lines, and each “reality on the ground” is a springboard for the next reality. This is not a failure of diplomacy, but a success of strategy.
More important than the ground is the narrative of occupation. When history is told from a place where occupation has been eliminated, resistance always appears to be “initiative,” and structural violence is transformed into a defensive response. In this context, the Palestinian is deprived not only of his home, but also of his language, of his time, and of the right to define himself.
This text reminds us that the most dangerous stage of colonialism is not when it is carried out by force, but when it becomes so normal that it cannot even be named. And in such a situation, peace no longer means justice, but rather the acceptance of injustice as the natural state of the world.
what looks like “administration” or “normalization” can function as a slower form of domination, reshaping memory, language, and political possibility until occupation feels permanent and resistance feels illegible. Whether one agrees with every claim or not, the core warning is clear: when emergency becomes routine, power redraws the map without ever admitting it.
It is well
Wow
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
When Israel has forcibly occupied Palestinian land and homes, how can it be expected to set boundaries and abide by the laws? Like thieves who go to rob a bank or a house, how can they be expected to abide by the laws when they are criminals and break the law?