Zachary Levenson

@grundrza.bsky.social

Sociology prof @ Florida International University, senior research associate @ University of Johannesburg, author of Delivery as Dispossession (Oxford UP, 2022), editor of Spectre, deputy editor of City & Community

On May 27, join us for an interactive session, where attendees will have the opportunity to engage S4P organizers directly on issues including boycott logistics, tactics and strategy, and support of junior scholars. Let’s show ASA what democracy looks like! TINYURL.COM/5RTW5EKX

AGAINST GENOCIDE
WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?
A Conversation with Sociologists for Palestine

In this interactive session, attendees will have the opportunity to engage S4P organizers directly on issues including boycott logistics, tactics and strategy, and support of junior scholars.

Though the panelists will provide brief preliminary remarks on why they joined S4P and support the boycott, the emphasis will be on a collective give and take. In doing so, we hope to create a space that prefigures the kind of democratic association we want the ASA to be.

Cedric De Leon
Heba Gowayed
Zachary Levenson
Roi Livne

MAY 27
8:30AM1-10AM (PDT) | 10:30AM-12PM (CDT) | 11:30AM-1PM (EDT)
ZOOM RSVP:
TINYURL.COM/5RTW5EKX
Read our #BoycottASA FAQ:
sociologiststorpalestine.org/asa-boycott
S4P

An important reminder: The proposed resolution is NOT a boycott of individual Israeli academics. Per our FAQs, it does not target individual academics, nor does it prevent academics working at Israeli institutions from attending the ASA's annual meeting."

Zachary Levenson@grundrza.bsky.social · 5mo ago

I’m wondering if your post is in reference to the proposed ASA resolution, which is explicit that it is targeting Israeli institutions rather than individual scholars. The folks involved work closely w/ critical Israeli scholars — no ban is proposed. This is from the @soc4pal.bsky.social website:

Wildest to me about FL removing sociology from gen ed is their rationale: citing a Guardian article, Chancellor Rodrigues claims faculty are willfully subverting the law. But no one quoted makes that claim. Did he really only read the headline, which wasn't written by faculty in any case?