Paper details
| Paper authors | Rita Giacaman |
| In panel on | Revisiting the Nexus Between Human Rights and Humanitarianism |
| Paper presenter(s) will be presenting |
|
Abstract
The notion of resilience as applied to Palestinians (and others) is a problematic concept. It comes from engineering and implies going back to where you were instead of also resisting violation and injustice. The term is alien to the language of Palestinians, where there is no agreement on the term’s translation to Arabic. It is described as part of the Western theory of suffering and part of neoliberal ideology, implying that the problem is in the person, not the system, and that the responsibility for recovery from poverty, trauma or other violations is placed on the person. It is devoid of the notion of collective rights, and there is no emphasis on the need to address injustice politically, instead only personally or at the level of community rather than a matter of citizen’s rights.
In the Palestinian case, resilience is also over rated, and used by governments, universities, NGO’s and Journals often to maintain the status quo. It is used as a way of avoiding acknowledging and addressing the issue of justice to Palestinians, with humanitarian and international support divorced from the calls for justice. It generally disqualifies and subjugates the Palestinian alternative knowledge, and our narrative of dispossession and dispersion.
Yet, despite this predicament, we continue to decolonize knowledge production by deconstructing western approaches, knowledge and methodologies and reconstructing them by conducting research from the ground up, beginning in and prioritizing people’s understanding of their own lives and health. This is why my alternative to the notion of resilience - which stems from the Palestinian experience is what I would call:
The capacity to endure and resist, personally and collectively.
