![A mother’s taweez and the Cape’s interfaith traditions [+ video]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Michael-Weeder-Book-Launch-9May26-360x180.webp)
In an era where free speech is venerated as a pillar of democratic values, its application often reveals a disturbing selectivity—especially when it comes to discourse on Palestine. MAHMOOD SANGLAY exposes the double standards of neoliberal values on the subject.
THE globalisation of the movement to liberate Palestine is bringing some intellectual vermin to light. It’s the hypocrisy of neoliberals who pretend to care about free speech—including the right to offend religious sensibilities—but recoil at the thought of discourse on Palestine.
Such hypocrisy is starkly illustrated by recent efforts in South Africa to censor the children’s book, From the River to the Sea. The colouring book is an educational publication that introduces the Palestinian narrative to children through a series of powerful illustrations. Illustrator, Nathi Ngubane offers insight into the history and culture of Palestine and the key issues underlying Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation. Zionist efforts to censor the book not only exposes the frailty of free speech advocacies but also underscores the ongoing challenges faced by those who seek to bring Palestinian narratives to the fore.
Neoliberal champions of free speech herald it as a bastion of individual liberty and public discourse, often using it as a shield to defend against perceived governmental overreach or cultural homogeneity. However, this advocacy tends to falter when the discourse in question challenges entrenched Israeli narratives of the occupation of Palestine. The attempted suppression of From the River to the Sea is a direct contradiction of the free speech values that many claim to hold dear, revealing a disconcerting willingness to sideline these principles when politically expedient.
Ngubane, has been targeted for presenting a perspective that diverges from the Israeli narrative—depicting the Palestinian struggle against occupation. With over 3 000 copies sold and even more donated to educational institutions, the book’s influence and reach are undeniable. Yet, the calls for its censorship, notably by prominent Zionist organisations, underscore an alarming trend of silencing historical narratives that are deemed inconvenient or unsettling by Zionists.
The Nakba as Legal Concept
Adding depth to this discourse, legal scholar Rabea Eghbariah introduces the concept of Nakba as a foundational legal framework in his article, “Toward Nakba as a Legal Concept.” Eghbariah argues that Nakba encompasses the systematic oppression and displacement of Palestinians, transcending the historical confines of the 1948 events to reflect a sustained structure of apartheid and genocide. This scholarly perspective is crucial, yet it faces significant opposition in academic and public forums where Palestinian subjugation is often minimized or outright denied.
Rabea Eghbariah’s article presents a groundbreaking legal analysis that seeks to contextualize the Nakba—traditionally understood as the catastrophic displacement of Palestinians during the creation of the state of Israel in 1948—as an ongoing legal concept rather than merely a historical event. Eghbariah proposes that the Nakba be recognized within legal discourse as a distinct form of systemic oppression that encompasses genocide, apartheid, and colonialism, yet remains analytically unique.
Click here to download the pdf version of Eghbariah’s article.
South Africa’s historical battle against apartheid offers a poignant backdrop for the emergence of Ngubane’s book. Our own journey from systemic racial oppression to a legal framework centered on equality and justice provides a unique lens through which the Palestinian narrative can be assessed. Moreover, South Africa’s current legal actions against Israel, taking it to the International Court of Justice over plausible genocidal policies in Gaza, further highlight the global significance of recognizing and resisting efforts to suppress historical and ongoing injustices.
The struggle against the book’s censorship in South Africa and against Eghbariah’s article are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of stifling Palestinian voices globally. Institutions that yield to pressure to censor such narratives betray their mandate to foster a robust and inclusive discourse. Academia and the media are particularly culpable when they fail to challenge prevailing political agendas that seek to mute complex discussions on public interest topics like Palestine.
You may also want to read
By advocating against the censorship and suppression of activists we challenge the sanitised narratives that dominate mainstream discussions about Israel and Palestine. The true test of our commitment to free speech lies in our collective response to its suppression. Upholding free speech means supporting all voices, especially those that are politically marginalised and suppressed.
As advocates for justice and truth, we must support and engage with materials that offer diverse perspectives, particularly those under threat of being silenced. In doing so, we not only enrich our own understanding but also uphold the fundamental principles of justice, freedom, and equality. Let us ensure that voices like those in From the River to the Sea are heard loud and clear, contributing to a more comprehensive and truthful discourse on global issues.
Mahmood Sanglay is the CEO of Muslim Views.
