Act

In the age of social media, some information is best available from non-traditional sources such as independent commentators, podcasts, and online communities. We are best informed if we broaden our media diet to include these sources.

However, in the current climate, where dishonesty seems to carry few consequences, it is crucial that all sources of information, whether established or independent, are evaluated critically. No source merits blind trust, regardless of its status, authority, or past reliability. Every claim should be evaluated on its own merits, whether it confirms our existing beliefs or challenges them.

Looking inwards, we should also question our assumptions and prejudices. When we catch ourselves applying a double-standard, it is sometimes a sign of a culturally enforced bias that has thus far escaped our notice. Overcoming such biases, particularly in relation to certain religions or communities, requires sustained reflection and intellectual honesty.

As we learn more about Israel/Palestine, it is easy to become overwhelmed by competing historical claims, political arguments, and emotionally charged rhetoric. Such situations often expose the complexity of our own moral frameworks, revealing values that overlap, compete, or even come into tension with one another.

We can respond by becoming more conscious of the different parts of our moral framework and learning to identify its pillars—the non-negotiables, the core values that hold up secondary ones. We can then use that knowledge to determine how we engage with issues.

For example, many of us have found our sympathies for the Palestinian cause challenged with the perplexing accusation that we deny the right of Israel to self-defence. With a fuller understanding of our moral framework, we might recognize that although self-defence has moral weight, it is constrained by more fundamental principles such as protection of innocent life, fairness, and universality.

Equipped with such insights, we will better recognize when a discussion has drifted away from the issues that matter most. Rather than becoming mired in a quagmire of pitfalls and trip-wires, we can return to the important questions we were originally pursuing.

In time, these challenges become less threatening. Instead, they are opportunities for us to test, refine, and strengthen the moral footing that holds up our actions and beliefs. As a result, we grow more confident in navigating difficult conversations without being diverted from what matters most.

For those of us who believe that a live-streamed genocide is grinding on before our eyes, our lived experience is highly destabilizing, especially when it’s met with rejection, indifference, or hostility from our institutions and communities. The result feels like a form of gaslighting that can be unbearable.

At the same time, there’s often a painful awareness of limited agency. Many available actions feel inadequate or ineffective, and sustained engagement can feel exhausting rather than constructive.

It is critical that we tend to our mind, body, and spirit if we are to sustain our presence in this space. We must find ways of coping with discomfort and replenishing our energy.

Helpful strategies include:

• setting boundaries
• managing commitment levels
• recognizing how small actions contribute over time
• engaging with supportive communities
• finding joy, love, and reward in this space