UNESCO's headquarters in Paris, where the Palestinians were granted full membership on Monday, allowing them to register important sites on the World Heritage List. Photo by Matthias Ripp.

On Monday, the United States earned two dubious distinctions. First, it became one of only 14 nations (out of 173) to vote against Palestinian admission into UNESCO – the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Second, it became one of only two nations (Canada being the other) to vindictively punish UNESCO for admitting Palestine as a full member by immediately cutting off U.S. funding, which comprises 22 percent of the organization’s budget, or $70 million annually.

This funding cut was made due to U.S. legislation, over 15 years old, mandating a “complete cutoff of American financing to any United Nations agency that accepts the Palestinians as a full member.” However, those who have attempted to defend America’s move based upon a 15-year-old legal trigger – particularly when new legislation can always be written – fail to acknowledge the damage America is inflicting upon itself as it presses forward with an unbalanced foreign policy approach via-a-vis the Israelis and Palestinians.

As Daniel Levy notes in Foreign Policy:

America’s objections to the Palestinian move ring hollow across much of the world, and especially the strategically vital Middle East region. Its withholding of UN payments…is nothing short of a combination of the absurd and the vindictive. As former Senator Tim Wirth has pointed out this will be sapping to America’s soft power capacity. And if it continues, there may be more practical consequences, for instance, in regards to loss of American influence at the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Intellectual Property Organization.

With the Knesset set to reconvene, and with the Occupy Wall Street protests reverberating from America, tens of thousands of protesters marched in cities across Israel, reigniting their struggle for social and economic justice.

Over 20,000 gathered in Tel Aviv's Rabin Square to demand social and economic justice, with many echoing refrains now heard at Occupy Wall Street protests.

Protesters railed against a host of social and economic injustices, including the growing gap between the rich and poor in Israel, with many protesters echoing refrains now heard at Occupy Wall Street protests in America. Many held signs that read “We are the 99 percent,” and several protesters mirrored the occupation language that has become synonymous with Occupy Wall Street. One particularly poignant sign read “Occupy Tel Aviv, Not Palestine.”

The rallies across Israel were held against the backdrop of tragic escalations of violence in the southern portion of the country. Rockets fired by Islamic Jihad in Gaza struck several southern cities, killing one Israeli civilian, and an Israeli bombing raid in Gaza killed at least seven Palestinians. In spite of the intense security situation, remarkably, approximately 20,000 people gathered in Tel Aviv, another 5,000 in Jerusalem and thousands more in locations across the country.

In the midst of such a tragic and emotional security event, these types of numbers would not have showed up for a protest of this nature in the past. The security situation – rockets falling in southern Israel – would have likely trumped all else. However, as is the case in countries throughout the world, difficult economic conditions precipitated by government corruption and corporate greed are changing the game.

Several days ago, I described how Occupy Wall Street is approaching – or has reached – its Tipping Point. However, there’s a much more subversive, and equally interesting, way to view the manner in which Occupy Wall Street is quickly being embedded into the American consciousness. And that is by thinking about the movement’s progression in consumerist terms.

The chart below illustrates the general way in which a new technology or inventive product becomes firmly entrenched in the marketplace:

First you have the inventors, those who create a product and launch it into the marketplace.

In the case of Occupy Wall Street, the inventor – the creator of the idea to occupy Wall Street as a Tahrir-style tactic – would be Adbusters magazine and the 700 brave souls who marched to Zuccotti Park on September 17. (An argument could be made to include those who began to increase that initial encampment in its first week, as well as those who have begun occupations in different cities around the country.)

Next, you have the early adopters, those souls who choose – at a very early stage – to try out a product before it catches mainstream appeal and sales. (These are your iPad cheerleaders, for example.)

In the case of Occupy Wall Street, this is many of us on the progressive left (myself included) – those who immediately latched onto the idea of occupation as a way to protest the corrupt control the wealthiest one percent have maintained over our political system.

And here is where things get exciting: the early majority. See that graph above? Notice the peak? According to polls released in the past several days, Occupy Wall Street appears to have reached the early majority stage, if we are to subvert this consumerist concept and apply it to the world of principles and ideas.

Malcolm Gladwell defines a tipping point as a “moment of critical mass” in which an idea or movement spreads virus-like through the repetition of small, meaningful moments.

In his book, The Tipping Point, he describes it as a threshold moment; a liminal moment. The moment when an idea – pushed to the precipice by untold numbers of tiny, concussive shoves – finally loses its footing and plummets uncontrollably into the hearts and minds of millions.

United States Marine Corps. Sgt. Shamar Thomas confronts the NYPD after scenes of police brutality in Times Square.

Over a five week period, we have witnessed in our country the coalescence of thousands of small, meaningful moments that comprise an ever-expanding movement: The Brooklyn Bridge; Zuccotti Park’s canceled eviction; Times Square.

However, while there have been ongoing occupation events in hundreds of municipalities across the country – and while recent polls show increasing favorability trends – the movement has remained on the outside of mainstream America looking in. (Roughly a third of Americans currently view the movement favorably.) This is due, in part, to the way in which Occupy Wall Street has been portrayed by the corporate media as a disorganized, muddled mass. More importantly, though, has been its marginalization by certain politicians and media outlets as an anti-American, dangerous force.

The surest way to dull a popular movement is to brand it as dangerous to America. And with scenes of arrests and confrontations between police and protesters filling living room television screens (no matter that the police are often to blame), such branding has been made all too easy.

However, the moment such branding can be fractured and utterly torn asunder is the moment Occupy Wall Street will reach its tipping point. And I believe it’s now standing on the precipice, ready to make the mainstream plunge as both military veterans and even active duty police officers begin to stand in opposition against those forces intent on ending the Occupy movement.

The tent city along Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv stretched for over a mile this summer.

This summer, thousands of social justice protesters built tent cities across Israel, occupying public spaces in dozens of cities. Taking inspiration from Cairo’s Tahrir Square – and enraged by skyrocketing costs of living and the growing economic divide between the country’s wealthiest elite and everyone else – protesters fought against what they viewed as corrupt economic systems by being perpetually present, by sleeping.

This seemingly simple form of civil disobedience – sleep – is fittingly what awoke within Israel a slumbering populace and brought them, marching and chanting, into the streets.

Sound familiar?

-§-

After one month, the Occupy Wall Street movement has remarkably mirrored what occurred in Israel this summer. Occupations have sprung up in public parks and squares across the country as protesters rage against the nation’s wealthiest one percent and the corrupt influence many have over economic policy-making. And these occupations, while executed by a relatively small number of activists, have sparked marches and rallies in nearly one hundred American cities.

On October 15, in solidarity with the Global Day of Change, thousands gathered in countless municipalities across America, with some marking the beginning of additional occupations, signaling Occupy Wall Street’s continued expansion. (Pittsburgh, where 3,500 participated in the city’s first Occupy Pittsburgh march – and which now has 150 people camping in Mellon Bank’s green space – serves as a prominent example.)

And yet, as winter approaches – as brutal weather awaits some of the nation’s most critical occupations, including those in New York and Boston – being physically present, at least outdoors, may reach a point of being unsustainable.

Which begs the question: how will the movement continue its momentum? Or more simply: what next?

Israel’s social justice protesters may be offering an answer.

On Saturday, over 1,000 Jews gathered for Occupy Yom Kippur in New York City – for a Kol Nidre service held near Zuccotti Park in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street that was simultaneously subversive and transformational.

Occupy Sukkot - raising our fists with a lulav. Graphic by Daniel Sieradski.

That moment, sparked by media entrepreneur and activist Daniel Sieradski, has given birth to a burgeoning expansion of Occupy Wall Street participation within the Jewish community that is quickly coming to be known as Occupy Judaism thanks, in large part, to the grassroots marketing work of Sieradski.

And the next initiative? Occupy Sukkot.

Already, activists in six cities are preparing to construct a sukkah as part of their local occupation protest, and have created Facebook pages to announce such construction: New York City, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Boston and Washington, D.C. However, it is the first one, being organized by Sieradski and a host of social-justice-minded Jews of multiple stripes in New York, that is most-visibly providing a real-time example of the intersect currently occurring between Jewish activism and civil disobedience. Sieradski writes of the pop-up sukkah activists plan to construct this afternoon:

This is a protest action. We do not have a permit for our sukkah. We expect confrontation with the NYPD and cannot guarantee our sukkah will stay standing all week. We have received generous guidance from NYC Council member Brad Lander as to permit regulations, however we cannot promise that the police will accept our arguments and allow the sukkah to stay standing. We therefore need volunteers to be present all week long, around the clock, to help us ensure our sukkah stays up and to document any potential physical encounters with the police.

There is currently a strongly-enforced rule against building structures in Zuccotti park. We are working with the organizers at Occupy Wall Street to ensure that this protest builds the larger movement. We will use consensus to adapt and respond to challenges from the NYPD as necessary, and we will work to ensure that our protest does not put others at Occupy Wall Street at greater risk.

Social justice protesters chant in anger as police and city officials tear down tents on Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv.

Tel Aviv’s iconic tent city on Rothschild Boulevard – where Israel’s social justice protest movement was born three months ago – was demolished today by municipal authorities and police amidst the anguished cries of those being evacuated and the angered chants of activists.

Many of the evicted, who were homeless and have nowhere else to go, had found refuge in the tent city. They had also taken solace in the movement’s efforts to fight for economic justice on their behalf and on behalf of millions of lower- and middle-class Israelis struggling to survive as the gaps between the rich and the poor grow.

Oren Ziv, a photojournalist for Activestills – a collective of independent photographers in Israel – witnessed the eviction of protesters and the homeless from their tents, and captured these powerful images:

Israeli activists march in favor of Palestinian statehood in Tel Aviv on September 24, 2011.

As the Obama administration aggressively works behind the scenes to derail Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ statehood bid at the U.N., The Independent is reporting that Congress has been involved in its own secret, targeted assault on the Palestinians.

In what can only be described as a form of collective punishment against the Palestinian people for the PA’s multilateral efforts at the U.N., Congress has blocked nearly $200 million earmarked for USAID by the Obama administration. The funding was designated for a multitude of humanitarian, educational and infrastructure projects in the West Bank and Gaza, including food aid programs for the poor, health care initiatives and pre-school Sesame Street workshops.

High school students in Tel Aviv's tent encampment discuss social issues after the largest protest in Israel's history on September 3, 2011.

As the initial phase of Israel’s social justice protest movement climaxed this summer – with tent encampments dotting nearly every municipality in the country and massive street rallies shaking Israel’s major cities – many progressives in America looked on from the sidelines in awe, cheering Israel’s youth-driven movement.

In a diverse array of online venues, people marveled at the protesters’ success and identified closely with many of their central demands – bolstering social welfare programs, strengthening workers’ rights and reforming those capitalist systems that have served to widen the gaps between the rich and the poor. However, while cheering from the sidelines, many in this country who longed for such a movement to sweep through the United States also expressed feelings of envy. Time and again, the following refrains echoed on news sites, blogs and in social media: it can’t happen here. America is too big. The geography makes a replication impossible.

It was a refrain voiced by those who viewed New York City and Washington, D.C. as the necessary focal points for mass protests, and who thus seemed frustrated by the prohibitive burden of long-distance travel. And to be fair, with the September 17 Occupy Wall Street initiative scheduled to take place in New York City, such frustrations had practical weight, for who among us can travel from Denver to New York to engage in prolonged protests?

That said, it was also a refrain I found perplexing as I watched Israelis – inspired by what they had seen in Tunisia and Egypt – set up tent encampments in their own cities, in their own neighborhoods, on their own streets, knowing that the same type of activism could happen here in America, knowing that geography was not the stumbling block preventing us from creating our own populist movement.

In a Ramallah grocery store, watching Abbas' speech before the U.N. General Assembly.

The word was only supposed to be spoken once. Enough. In a prepared speech, upon the printed page, it was typed just once. Enough.

And yet, by the time Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had neared the conclusion of his historic speech on Friday before the United Nations General Assembly – as throngs chanted in the West Bank and his English translator choked back tears – Abbas couldn’t say it just once. For the word embodied the essence of Abbas’ speech, the essence of the Palestinians’ U.N. bid for statehood, the essence of a decades-old struggle for legitimacy and self-determination. And so he paused on the word and intoned it thrice. Enough. Enough. Enough.

The word represented both a personal and a collective yearning – the need for years of occupation to end and for independence, for a Palestinian Spring, to begin. Just after repeating this word, Abbas said:

The time has come for our men, women and children to live normal lives, for them to be able to sleep without waiting for the worst that the next day will bring; for mothers to be assured that their children will return home without fear of suffering killing, arrest or humiliation; for students to be able to go to their schools and universities without checkpoints obstructing them. The time has come for sick people to be able to reach hospitals normally, and for our farmers to be able to take care of their good land without fear of the occupation seizing the land and its water, which the wall prevents access to, or fear of the settlers, for whom settlements are being built on our land.

On Tuesday, September 20, the Palestinian Authority unveiled a large, blue chair in Ramallah representing Palestine's seat at the U.N. Photo by Joseph Dana.

According to a report from Haaretz, the Obama administration is engaged in behind-the-scenes efforts to delay voting on recognition of Palestine as an independent state in both the General Assembly and the Security Council.

A “silent agreement” is reportedly in place between several Western countries to postpone the U.N. votes through a number of bureaucratic stalling tactics, the use of which are being promoted by Washington.

On Friday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is scheduled to present an official request to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon which will specify the Palestinians’ desire to seek full U.N. membership through the Security Council. While a vote on the request could take place by early October, sources indicate that the potential exists for such a vote to be postponed by months.

According to Shlomo Shamir, there are several options available to the Obama administration for postponement of voting in the Security Council, including the use of closed-door consultations:

If the Palestinian request does go ahead on Friday, the United States can refer the request to a debate inside the framework of informal consultations that Security Council members hold behind closed doors – a procedure that could last weeks or months…a month ago, France distributed a draft resolution that included sanctions against Syria. The draft has not yet reached a discussion because Russia, with the support of China, has been delaying discussions of the draft at the Security Council.

Some suggest that Abbas might actually be interested in such a delay, for it would give him more time to make diplomatic progress. However, activity in the West Bank seems to run counter to such claims, for the PA is planning a massive rally on Wednesday in Ramallah in support of the U.N. statehood initiative. The Palestinians are hoping for tens of thousands to march in the streets, and anticipation for the vote is growing. According to Joseph Dana:

Schools will close early so that students can take part in large rallies in support of statehood. Roughly 80,000 government employees will be given time off as [Abbas] taps all of the resources that his governing Fatah party have in the West Bank to ensure mass turn out.

Additionally, the Palestinians are busy whipping votes on the Security Council to try and secure a majority, which would force the U.S. to use its veto – something the Obama administration is desperately working to avoid given the irrevocable damage such a vote would do to America’s already-shaky standing in the Middle East. Indications are that the African nation of Gabon, which is still undecided on the matter, may end up determining whether the Palestinians achieve a majority in the Security Council.

If the votes fall the Palestinians’ way, look for the Obama administration to begin utilizing procedural stalling tactics as a way to buy more time as Washington frantically works to derail the Palestinians’ U.N. bid.

If, like myself, you are a progressive who supports both the Palestinian initiative as well as the realization of two, self-determining states for two peoples, I urge you to add your voice to Tikkun’s petition for the recognition of Palestine by the U.N.

President Obama plans to veto the Palestinians' statehood bid in the Security Council. Photo by Elizabeth Cromwell.

On Friday, after much speculation, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas officially announced that the Palestinians would seek full U.N. membership by going directly to the Security Council, setting the Palestinian Authority on a diplomatic collision course with the United States.

The Obama administration, which has vowed to veto any such efforts by the PA, has been engaged in frantic attempts to avert this move by the Palestinians. Why? Vetoing a Palestinian statehood bid at the Security Council will significantly damage one of President Obama’s main foreign policy goals: to cast the U.S. as a champion of Arab freedom and democracy in a turbulent and shifting Middle East.

This is why Washington has initiated last-minute talks with Abbas, trying to convince him to forgo the Security Council. The Obama administration understands that rejecting the Palestinians’ statehood bid on what will no doubt be a highly-dramatized world stage will do significant damage to this central foreign policy goal, and will likely further erode America’s already-shaky standing in the Middle East.

And this is precisely why Abbas is gambling with a move that is almost certain to fail. The Palestinians will force America to demonstrate to the world, once and for all, what most have known for some time – that the U.S. cannot be looked upon as the dominant brokering power in Middle East peace efforts.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas speaks at the 2007 World Economic Forum during a session entitled "Enough is Enough - Israel and the Palestinian Territories." Photo by the World Economic Forum.

According to a classified cable obtained by Haaretz, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, has informed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that Israel has no chance of preventing the U.N. General Assembly from recognizing Palestine as a state.

Prosor’s assessment is consistent with what has been observed for some time: that only a handful of U.N. member states plan to vote against the Palestinian initiative in the General Assembly, with an expected 130-140 countries voting in favor. And among Western nations, only five so far have pledged to vote against recognition of a Palestinian state: Italy, Germany, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and the United States.

Of those five countries, which nation stands alone in refusing to consider changing its voting stance if the Palestinians include language indicating a continued commitment to peace talks with Israel in its U.N. bid? The United States.

America’s isolation is stunning. But it gets worse.

The United States is the only country currently standing in the Palestinian Authority’s way in its push to attain full U.N. member status for Palestine. In order to become a full U.N. member state, the Palestinians must go through the U.N. Security Council (UNSC), which consists of 15 nations, five of which have veto powers. One of those five nations, China, recently stated publicly that it would vote in favor of Palestinian statehood in the UNSC. However, the Obama administration has made clear that it intends to veto any efforts by the PA in the UNSC, effectively blocking any chance for Palestine to become a state according to international law. (For U.N. resolutions dealing with statehood to be legally binding, they must first be passed by the UNSC.)

A protester holds a sign reading "In Solidarity with the South (Israel) & Gaza."

On Saturday evening, with rockets falling upon southern Israel and bombs falling on Gaza – with the innocent dying on both sides – approximately 10,000 social justice protesters convened in Tel Aviv for a silent march. The gathering, which intended to both recognize the violence occurring and to remind government officials that social justice reforms cannot be jettisoned with the security situation intensifying, was mostly silent at first, with thousands carrying signs and torches while marching to the sea.

However, not long into the march, an Arab-Jewish group (Hadash) began chanting, “Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies.” The chant was picked up by a large contingent, but it was also met with heated rhetoric, particularly from a group Ami Kaufman in 972 Magazine described as “right-wing racists.” The situation was tense, particularly in the shadow of the tragedy that occurred that afternoon, in which a rocket fired from Gaza hit a home in Beer Sheva, killing one Israeli citizen and injuring many more.

On a frigid evening in February, during the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama stood before a gathering of the Wisconsin Democratic Party and gave what, at the time, was an iconic and momentous address.

Responding to Hillary Clinton’s critique that Obama’s candidacy was principally built upon pretty speeches that lacked substantive policy commitments, Obama offered this:

Don’t tell me words don’t matter. “I have a dream” — just words? “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” — just words? “We have nothing to fear but fear itself” — just words? Just speeches?

It was an address in which Obama forcefully championed several policies that have since been abandoned or put on hold, an address in which he went on to say, “I know good intentions are not enough when not fortified with political will.” As a progressive Democrat, it is a speech I now find mildly difficult to watch.

President Obama delivers a speech at Cairo University on June 4, 2009. Photo from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

But my mild disappointment is nothing when one considers the speech that Palestinians would find difficult to watch, though few today would likely admit to having actually watched it, much less have been moved by it. I am referring to the moment when, in 2009, Obama symbolically stood before the Middle East in Cairo and said, regarding the Palestinians:

For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations — large and small — that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

On Wednesday in Holon – a city situated just south of Tel Aviv – municipality inspectors arrived at a protest tent encampment in the Jesse Cohen neighborhood. There, they informed protesters that a demolition order had been issued, and that residents had 24 hours to break down the camp and vacate the premises.

The response? Enraged, many protesters refused the order, with some taking out their intense frustration by burning tires and furniture in the street and blocking traffic.

Protesters burn tires in Holon. Photo by Moti Milrod for Haaretz.

See, many of the protesters in Holon’s tent city are homeless, a fact that no doubt contributed to their anger. (Some threatened to simply sleep in front of police headquarters if the camp was destroyed, having nowhere else to go.) The episode is disturbing enough when viewed on ethical grounds alone. Consider: the authorities engaged some of Holon’s homeless, who are protesting specifically for (among other things) affordable housing, by evicting them from their tents.

Demolishing tent encampments set up by some of Israel’s weakest, most vulnerable citizens should be condemned on humanitarian grounds. When homeless protesters band together and add their voices to the cacophony of calls demanding that the government care for them as they have the multinational corporations holding much of Israel’s wealth, such protesters must be afforded the freedom to gather. They must also be afforded the same dignity being given to those currently crowding the enormous tent city along Rothschild Boulevard’s swank strip.

The largest protest in Israel’s history overwhelmed the senses on Saturday evening, with over 300,000 citizens – spanning nearly all ages and political affiliations – swarming the country’s streets and squares, the throngs largely united around a host of economic issues.

To put this number in perspective, approximately 4 percent of the country’s population took to the streets, which in the United States would equal approximately 12 million.

Such numbers clearly have unnerved Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his cabinet. The first response heard from the prime minister’s camp in the wake of the protests was to downplay the numbers, to deny that those counting heads had done an accurate job.

Netanyahu’s initial response was not only tone deaf, its reflexiveness revealed just how concerning the protests have become to Israel’s governing class, for downplaying the force of the protests that occurred on Saturday is akin to standing in a burning building and downplaying how hot it is. It was a moment of denial, a moment of panicked desperation.

The massive tent protests currently sweeping Israel, originally triggered by the country’s young, urban middle class over unsustainable housing costs, have morphed into a movement representing a multitude of social justice issues. In fact, during rallies now, one of the most frequent chants is “האם דורש צדק חברתי” – “The People Demand Social Justice.”

On Tuesday, protest leaders officially championed a vast array of social justice causes when they presented Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu with an expansive list of demands – among them lower taxes, health care reforms and the broadening of free, public education.

The popular protests now engulfing Israel, originally spurred by a housing crisis, have quickly morphed into an amalgamation of economic and social demands, leaving many in Israel’s progressive left to wonder exactly how broad these protests now threatening to paralyze Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s leadership will become.

150,000 Protesting near Tel Aviv, Israel. Credit: Avivi/Creative Commons

Make no mistake; these protests, begun in Tel Aviv by Israel’s young, left-leaning middle class, are awakening the voices of many sectors that have long-been dormant. There is a social reordering underfoot — the 150,000 Israelis who took to the streets in 11 different cities across the country on Saturday, directing their anger squarely at Netanyahu, are a testament to this. (To understand the scope of these protests, approximately two percent of Israel’s population swarmed the country’s streets and public squares, which in the United States would be around 5.5 million.)

While a lack of affordable housing is the rallying cry around which protesters throughout the country began mobilizing, a deeper discontent has been fomenting. Netanyahu’s championing of anti-democratic laws aimed at squelching criticism of the State coupled with continuing economic policies that have widened gaps between the rich and the poor have angered citizens — so much so that they are now symbolically rejecting both by aiming their protests squarely at their leader.

But many in Israel’s left see a disconnect in what’s occurring; how can Israelis protest housing prices without mentioning the settlements? How can Israel’s young progressives demand social justice without mentioning the occupation?