Imagine inheriting a piece of land passed down through generations, where you cultivate olives and dates, content with the simplicity and satisfaction it brings.
This land, cultivated by your forefathers, represents not just sustenance but a connection to history, culture, and a lifestyle you value over the urban rush of corporate jobs and mortgages. You are grateful, grounded, and connected to a slower, more meaningful way of life.
However, this contentment soon faces an existential threat from those who view your traditional lifestyle as outdated and who pressure you to “modernise,” questioning your value to the nation’s progress.
When you resist this ideology, they brand you as unpatriotic, anti-progress, and ultimately strip you of your land and your right to live as you choose, dismissing you as an “inferior” being obstructing the path of “superior” progress.
This fictional tale, while sounding archaic, is hauntingly similar to countless colonial and neocolonial narratives.
The oppression faced by indigenous people across continents under colonial regimes, and today, the ongoing struggle of Palestinians against occupation, reflects a similar pattern.
History repeats itself as the powerful advance their agendas under the guise of civilization, modernity, and superiority, backed by rhetoric that dehumanises those who resist.
Winston Churchill, often lauded as a hero in Western narratives, openly stated that he saw no harm in what colonial powers did to indigenous populations: “I don’t admit that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians, black people of Australia. Nothing wrong has happened. A higher-grade race has come in and taken its place.”
He also referred to Indians as “animals,” dismissing their suffering and heritage as inferior.
Such statements exemplify the colonial mindset: cultures and lives were viewed as expendable if they stood in the way of Western advancement (Marshall, The Meaning of Colonialism, 2018).
Churchill’s callous policies led to the Bengal Famine of 1943, where his decisions caused the deaths of an estimated 2.5 million Indians. The British administration diverted food supplies away from starving Indian citizens, prioritising resources for their war efforts.
Historian Madhusree Mukerjee’s Churchill’s Secret War documents how Churchill’s administration ignored pleas for famine relief, disregarding the immense suffering of Indians as inconsequential.
This policy of indifference echoes the racial hierarchy that colonial powers historically justified as the “natural order” of superiority over inferiority.
In Palestine, since the early 20th century, the same colonial ideologies have taken new forms.
As Jewish immigrants fleeing Europe sought refuge, leaders like Churchill dismissed Palestinian resistance, framing their displacement as necessary for progress.
In a 1937 address, he openly favored colonization over Arab rights, promoting a narrative that legitimised the oppression of Palestinians.
The West’s historical indifference to indigenous voices has continued in Palestine, justifying land dispossession and human rights abuses under the rationale of Israeli “superiority” in economic and military strength.
In modern discourse, the terminology may shift—terms like “self-defense,” “security,” and “counter-terrorism” are now used—but the foundational belief remains eerily similar: the existence of an “inferior” population obstructing the path of a “superior” one.
As documented in The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by historian Ilan Pappé, Palestinian lands have been systematically appropriated, while narratives of Palestinian “backwardness” and Israeli “civilizational superiority” are wielded to justify the ongoing occupation.
Israel’s advancement—military, economic, and technological—has been bolstered significantly by Western financial and political support, especially from the United States.
The powerful influence of lobbying groups and Western governments has ensured Israel’s impunity, as documented in The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt.
They argue that without this external support, Israel’s unchecked expansion and militarized dominance in the region would not have been feasible.
In this context, the comparison of Palestinian resistance to terrorism and the labeling of Palestinians as obstacles to regional stability follow the same colonial template of delegitimizing indigenous rights. The portrayal of Palestinians as “inferior” aligns disturbingly well with past colonial rhetoric, reflecting a lingering colonial exercise that treats Palestinians not as equals but as impediments to a Western-aligned order.
Palestine stands as a critical flashpoint in this enduring legacy of colonialism.
The Palestinian resistance symbolises a broader struggle for freedom against an unyielding structure of oppression, exploitation, and dehumanization—a reminder of humanity’s repeated failure to learn from history’s brutal lessons.
The story of a peaceful farmer displaced from his ancestral land, ridiculed and cast aside as an “inferior” being, is not just a fictional account but a symbolic retelling of countless real-life stories.
With the international community increasingly desensitised to Palestinian suffering, the world faces a moral crisis: Will we continue to rationalise this oppression under the guise of modernity and progress, or will we finally recognize that the right to self-determination, dignity, and freedom transcends any narrative of superiority?
In the end, as history and Islamic eschatology warn, oppression can only be sustained for so long. The Palestinian resistance is not just a local struggle but a testament to human dignity that refuses to be erased—a symbol of freedom that, as predicted in religious texts, will prevail against all odds.
Comments