Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Exile to expression: how Lina Soualem’s film challenges colonial narratives
Céline Semaan and filmmaker Lina Soualem explore the deeply personal and political dimensions of Lina’s latest film, Bye Bye Tiberias (2023). The documentary tells the story of Lina’s mother, renowned Palestinian actress Hiam Abbass, and the experiences of four generations of women in their family. It traces Abbass’ departure from Tiberias, Palestine, in the 1980s, as she pursued a career in acting, and reflects on the generational trauma, resilience, and displacement faced by Palestinian women.
In the interview, Lina discusses the complexities and contradictions of navigating life in exile, while exploring her family’s story. The film draws from personal archives and interviews to offer a broader reflection on Palestinian history and the ongoing impact of colonialism. Lina emphasizes the role of art in challenging political narratives, giving voice to stories often silenced or erased.
‘Artists are meant to question and challenge the system, even if they navigate within it.’ —Lina

CÉLINE: Your film Bye Bye Tiberias: Why is it so important for you to have this film understood, seen, witnessed by an American audience?
LINA: The film has been shown in the US, which I wasn’t expecting, but we were nominated to represent Palestine at the Oscars. This generated a lot of interest from the US, which is not easy with auteur films and documentaries, especially Arab and Palestinian narratives. It was amazing to share the film there because of the large immigrant and diasporic population.
Many people in the US come from exilic or diasporic backgrounds, allowing the story to resonate on multiple levels, not just the Palestinian experience but the broader diasporic experience. This is significant because it allows us to be seen on a human level, beyond the stigmas often attached to Palestinians. I want to quote Karim Katan, who co-wrote part of the voices in the film. He says that we often talk about Palestinians being “dehumanized,” but that’s not even accurate because we were never truly humanized in the first place. We’ve never been allowed to exist as equals, as fully human in the eyes of others.
So, it was powerful to be able to exist and exchange with people who understood, particularly those from immigrant backgrounds. My goal wasn’t to address white Americans but those who could connect with the diasporic experience. Of course, if others relate to the film, that’s incredible too—it allows us to be part of the world in a meaningful way.
CÉLINE: In your film, you focus on existing—not performing identity or pain. There are moments that simply capture life, what you called a “proof of life.” You said it’s not about dehumanization but about never being humanized, and being purposefully erased. How do you see the role of documenting and archiving as a way to present this proof of life to the world?

LINA: For us, existing through our images and stories is essential. There’s always this fear of disappearing—our families have faced this through the Nakba, through displacement. And that threat is very real today, whether in Gaza, the West Bank, or even inside the 1948 occupied state where Palestinian identity is constantly suppressed.
Whenever I filmed, I felt that any moment could become an archive. You never know if you’ll see the same place again, if you’ll be able to return, or what you’ll find when you do. Many places our families knew are gone, and when they still exist, we’re often erased from them. For me, it was crucial to immortalize our presence, our stories, especially the stories of the women in my family. These are not just personal stories but part of our collective memory, which has never been formally written down. It’s built from our intimate memories, and we all have a responsibility to preserve them.
It’s like we have to constantly prove to ourselves that we exist, every day. This inner struggle is a consequence of colonization, as Fanon wrote about. Colonization erases not just land and property but also identity and the language to define yourself. Through film, we create a new language, one that allows us to tell our own stories and push back against stigmatization. In the media, Palestinians are often only seen through violence, destruction, and death. But for me, resistance is also in the everyday—living, not just surviving. Celebrating our culture, birthdays, weddings—this too is resistance, and it’s at the heart of the film.
I grew up with memories of Palestine that were so different from how we are portrayed. I wanted to show our truth, to exist in our truth. It’s surreal that the film was released during the war on Gaza, in the midst of genocide. I finished it in August 2023 after six years of work, and the first screenings were in September. After October 7, the film took on an even deeper meaning, but the mission remains the same. I’ve always been speaking about the need to exist and resist dehumanization. For me, it was about the intensity and the need, like I was on a mission and had to keep going.
CÉLINE: Yes, because it didn’t really begin in October. This is your second film, right? I haven’t seen the first one, but I was talking to someone yesterday who mentioned that it was about your father’s side of the family. There seems to be a big contrast with your mother’s side. Could you talk about the two projects side by side?
LINA: Yeah. My father is from Algeria, and the first film was about my paternal grandparents, Aisha and Mabruk, Algerian immigrants who came to France in the 1950s. They separated when they were 80, and I filmed their story, retracing their life and exile. I come from two histories of colonialism, and the difference between my Algerian and Palestinian families is stark.
The Algerians stayed silent to survive. After Algeria’s independence, they buried themselves in silence to cope with the trauma of colonization. In the first film, I had to break that silence to understand our story, my connection to my grandparents’ homeland, and France, the colonial country where I was born. I needed to put them back into history, because growing up, it felt like my grandparents had no history. Even in school, they never taught us colonial history.
The difference with my Palestinian side is that, instead of silence, we had to tell our stories in order to survive. There were always stories, but they were fragmented. Many family members we’ve never been able to see again—some are refugees, some stayed in ‘48. So, the goal of Bye Bye Tiberias wasn’t to break silence, but to piece together the scattered stories, like putting together a puzzle. Colonization breaks linearity, so this was about reconstructing that.

CÉLINE: Absolutely, I relate. My book is non-linear for that very reason. The act of remembering, itself, isn’t linear. In your film, there are moments within moments, like Russian dolls—layers of moments. As you open one, you find another. There are these peaceful moments, pockets of peace, joy, and laughter. Even in the dramatized scene, when your mother goes back to the theater—what’s it called?
LINA: Hakawati Theater.
CÉLINE: Right, Hakawati. When she relives that moment, it’s incredibly powerful. Just talking about it now makes me emotional, because in those moments, we get to witness our humanity, which has been robbed from us.
‘We are actively fighting for liberation. In the process of liberation, we should allow freedom for everyone. Pointing fingers contradicts the goal of liberation. We are free to be who we are while fighting for that freedom.’ —Lina
LINA: Yes, and you know, I have a friend, a Palestinian from Jerusalem, who saw the film in Europe last fall, at a time when she couldn’t go back home. She told me, “Thank you for reminding us of the beauty of our culture and our country.” It’s hard because when you constantly see negative representations of yourself in the media, even if you know it’s not true, it still affects you. It’s so important to remind ourselves of who we truly are.
For me, it wasn’t something I had to force. It felt natural. I just put the camera in front of my aunts and my mother, and the humor was there. Humor is such a typical part of our culture, a way to cope with reality. We come from a tradition of literature and poetry—as Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians— and we’ve lost so much of that because they’ve destroyed our archives and erased some of our thinkers.
While making the film and writing poetry for it, I discovered that my family was writing poetry too—my mother, my grandfather—and I had no idea! It felt like these pieces were coming together, and I realized I was part of something much bigger than myself. I wasn’t starting from scratch; I was continuing a legacy that was passed down to me. It was incredibly moving, like I was part of a process that I couldn’t escape, even if I wanted to.
CÉLINE: It’s like weaving resistance from past generations to the present. People often misunderstand resistance, thinking it’s about bearing arms or fighting. Even the language we use can be violent—like “fighting back.” But so much of our resistance is soft resistance, about building, remembering, preserving, and protecting our culture.
In your film, there’s so much softness. The term “soft power” comes to mind—it’s a concept that keeps reemerging. How do you reconcile the contradictions between softness and strength? People often think softness is weakness.
LINA: First of all, I wanted the women in my family, and in the film, to exist in their full complexity. They have vulnerabilities, contradictions, and strengths, but they are also women in a patriarchal world. Their ways of fighting aren’t always in the foreground; sometimes it’s through passing down love and values like forgiveness to their children. That’s a powerful form of resistance. It’s almost a miracle that they’ve not only transmitted these things to us but also raised us with love, allowing us to want to share that love with the world. When you come from violent histories, you’d expect people to be stuck in cycles of violence, but what Palestinians have become is truly miraculous.
I don’t like the term “resilience” because the West often uses it to box us in, as if we’re simply resilient people. For me, it’s a life force, something beyond resistance. It’s like the Algerians who kept living in France, the colonial country that treated them as subjects. The fact that they lived, educated their children, and we, their descendants, were born and raised in France with the same tools as the settlers, is a miracle. That’s what we should highlight—not the extremes of violence and revenge, but the quiet resistance through language, survival, and a desire to keep our culture alive, to educate our children, and fill them with hope and dreams. Both forms of resistance can coexist, and there are many ways to struggle.
CÉLINE: There’s a lot of misunderstanding in the West. Maybe it’s because we have the privilege of being able to return to our lands, which softens our fight and our resistance. There’s this notion that we have to “toughen up,” that we need to detach from our humanity to exist here. Lately, I see fewer people in my culture celebrating—fewer posts about weddings, birthdays, or joy. People tell me they feel guilty about celebrating. But if we feel guilty for our joy, hasn’t the colonizer and its war machine already won? It’s like we’re internalizing the pain in the form of guilt, which is dangerous.
LINA: Yes, it’s normal to feel guilty. I don’t think we can escape it. But we have to respect that everyone copes in their own way. We shouldn’t judge those who continue to celebrate life or those who withdraw and choose to be more discreet. The diversity in how we deal with things is what makes us culturally rich. It’s dehumanizing when the West tries to essentialize us into one thing, whether as Palestinian women or Arabs in general. It’s so important to claim our complexity because that’s who we are, especially as Palestinians, and it’s who we will continue to be.
We are actively fighting for liberation. In the process of liberation, we should allow freedom for everyone. Pointing fingers contradicts the goal of liberation. We are free to be who we are while fighting for that freedom.
CÉLINE: Exactly. Liberation and complexity go hand in hand. It’s a dance, and in this dance, we embrace contradictions. For example, your film shows your mother wanting to leave Palestine to follow her dream, which she couldn’t pursue while she was there. That’s a contradiction, but it’s real. The film invites the viewer to accept that two opposing things can coexist. The West struggles with this idea. How do you think controlling our own media and narratives could help teach the West about embracing contradictions?
LINA: This is the thing, they don’t allow us to be complex because when we are complex, we become equal. They want to control the narrative about us and define us on their terms. But when we use our language, art, and literature to define ourselves, it gives us the power to invent new ways of seeing ourselves—ways that aren’t new at all but were erased.
For example, I think of Mouloud Feraoun, an Algerian writer and fighter against colonialism. He wrote Les Moutons de Guerre in French, and he used that language as a force against colonization. Edward Said said exile is the greatest tragedy a person can face, but at the same time, it’s a way to reinvent yourself in the margins. This diasporic experience allows us to transform memory and create new language, reconnecting with how our ancestors defined themselves when they were free.
This is crucial because it gives us a history when they’re trying to erase it, trying to rewrite our history through their lens. Building bridges between the past and present is necessary. Even in France, as an Algerian, when I talk about colonization, they say, “That’s the past. Move on.” But we are still living in a neo-colonial world. The French are always talking about their identity and ancestors from centuries ago, yet we’re told to forget ours. We will never stop connecting with our ancestors because they constitute who we are.
As immigrants, or children of immigrants, we will always ask, “What if they hadn’t colonized us? What if I had been born there?” Imagining that is powerful. Decolonization isn’t just tangible; it’s also about our imaginations. It’s about envisioning what we could have been and what we can be, in many diverse ways.
That’s why all forms of expression—art, activism, journalism— are valid in the process of liberation. They are what build nations and societies. And we have the right to that.
CÉLINE: Yes, absolutely. Building on that, politics is fundamentally about bringing back into focus what is often pushed aside. When people say some topics are too political to discuss, it’s often because these issues are simplified or purified in ways that overlook our contributions to culture and the larger movement of international solidarity. It’s not a one-sided endeavor; it’s about embracing plurality. Sometimes, we may not have a clear way to conclude with a sense of permission, especially when we’re often discouraged from creating freely. What wisdom would you offer young creatives who see the world as it is, don’t necessarily want to be politicized, but find that their work naturally becomes political?
LINA: Art is inherently political. I’ve never considered art as something separate from politics. Art is a way of asserting your existence and your voice, and when you come from our histories and stories, everything we create or say becomes political. It’s a privilege to view art as non-political because for us, it’s always tied to our lived realities. I believe artists are meant to question and challenge the system, even if they navigate within it. You don’t always have to foreground the political message—let it emerge naturally, in subtle ways if you wish. What’s most important is to follow and trust your instincts, because in creating, you are searching for your unique language.
For example, with my first film, I was often told in France that it wasn’t a “universal” story, that no one would care about two Algerians and their story of exile. I had to fight to trust my instincts, to believe that people could connect with our stories. It wasn’t easy, especially as a woman, because we are often asked to second-guess ourselves or set aside our feelings. But it’s crucial to try, even if it doesn’t work right away. You try again and again until you find your voice. And if one path doesn’t work, you adapt and try another way. But today, I believe it’s necessary to be active in that sense—art and activism go hand in hand.
CÉLINE: The personal is indeed universal in so many ways. That’s what politics is about—being able to connect. Thank you so much, Lina, for the beautiful gift of this film, and for sharing your thoughts. We’re excited to have you as part of EIP. Thank you!
‘It’s dehumanizing when the West tries to essentialize us into one thing, whether as Palestinian women or Arabs in general. It’s so important to claim our complexity because that’s who we are, and it’s who we will continue to be.’ —Lina

Topics:
Filed under:
Location:
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Exile to expression: how Lina Soualem’s film challenges colonial narratives",
"author" : "Céline Semaan, Lina Soualem",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/lina-soualem-exile-to-expression",
"date" : "2024-11-01 13:43:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/lina-soualem-thumb.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Céline Semaan and filmmaker Lina Soualem explore the deeply personal and political dimensions of Lina’s latest film, Bye Bye Tiberias (2023). The documentary tells the story of Lina’s mother, renowned Palestinian actress Hiam Abbass, and the experiences of four generations of women in their family. It traces Abbass’ departure from Tiberias, Palestine, in the 1980s, as she pursued a career in acting, and reflects on the generational trauma, resilience, and displacement faced by Palestinian women.",
"content" : "Céline Semaan and filmmaker Lina Soualem explore the deeply personal and political dimensions of Lina’s latest film, Bye Bye Tiberias (2023). The documentary tells the story of Lina’s mother, renowned Palestinian actress Hiam Abbass, and the experiences of four generations of women in their family. It traces Abbass’ departure from Tiberias, Palestine, in the 1980s, as she pursued a career in acting, and reflects on the generational trauma, resilience, and displacement faced by Palestinian women.In the interview, Lina discusses the complexities and contradictions of navigating life in exile, while exploring her family’s story. The film draws from personal archives and interviews to offer a broader reflection on Palestinian history and the ongoing impact of colonialism. Lina emphasizes the role of art in challenging political narratives, giving voice to stories often silenced or erased.‘Artists are meant to question and challenge the system, even if they navigate within it.’ —LinaCÉLINE: Your film Bye Bye Tiberias: Why is it so important for you to have this film understood, seen, witnessed by an American audience?LINA: The film has been shown in the US, which I wasn’t expecting, but we were nominated to represent Palestine at the Oscars. This generated a lot of interest from the US, which is not easy with auteur films and documentaries, especially Arab and Palestinian narratives. It was amazing to share the film there because of the large immigrant and diasporic population.Many people in the US come from exilic or diasporic backgrounds, allowing the story to resonate on multiple levels, not just the Palestinian experience but the broader diasporic experience. This is significant because it allows us to be seen on a human level, beyond the stigmas often attached to Palestinians. I want to quote Karim Katan, who co-wrote part of the voices in the film. He says that we often talk about Palestinians being “dehumanized,” but that’s not even accurate because we were never truly humanized in the first place. We’ve never been allowed to exist as equals, as fully human in the eyes of others.So, it was powerful to be able to exist and exchange with people who understood, particularly those from immigrant backgrounds. My goal wasn’t to address white Americans but those who could connect with the diasporic experience. Of course, if others relate to the film, that’s incredible too—it allows us to be part of the world in a meaningful way.CÉLINE: In your film, you focus on existing—not performing identity or pain. There are moments that simply capture life, what you called a “proof of life.” You said it’s not about dehumanization but about never being humanized, and being purposefully erased. How do you see the role of documenting and archiving as a way to present this proof of life to the world?LINA: For us, existing through our images and stories is essential. There’s always this fear of disappearing—our families have faced this through the Nakba, through displacement. And that threat is very real today, whether in Gaza, the West Bank, or even inside the 1948 occupied state where Palestinian identity is constantly suppressed.Whenever I filmed, I felt that any moment could become an archive. You never know if you’ll see the same place again, if you’ll be able to return, or what you’ll find when you do. Many places our families knew are gone, and when they still exist, we’re often erased from them. For me, it was crucial to immortalize our presence, our stories, especially the stories of the women in my family. These are not just personal stories but part of our collective memory, which has never been formally written down. It’s built from our intimate memories, and we all have a responsibility to preserve them.It’s like we have to constantly prove to ourselves that we exist, every day. This inner struggle is a consequence of colonization, as Fanon wrote about. Colonization erases not just land and property but also identity and the language to define yourself. Through film, we create a new language, one that allows us to tell our own stories and push back against stigmatization. In the media, Palestinians are often only seen through violence, destruction, and death. But for me, resistance is also in the everyday—living, not just surviving. Celebrating our culture, birthdays, weddings—this too is resistance, and it’s at the heart of the film.I grew up with memories of Palestine that were so different from how we are portrayed. I wanted to show our truth, to exist in our truth. It’s surreal that the film was released during the war on Gaza, in the midst of genocide. I finished it in August 2023 after six years of work, and the first screenings were in September. After October 7, the film took on an even deeper meaning, but the mission remains the same. I’ve always been speaking about the need to exist and resist dehumanization. For me, it was about the intensity and the need, like I was on a mission and had to keep going.CÉLINE: Yes, because it didn’t really begin in October. This is your second film, right? I haven’t seen the first one, but I was talking to someone yesterday who mentioned that it was about your father’s side of the family. There seems to be a big contrast with your mother’s side. Could you talk about the two projects side by side?LINA: Yeah. My father is from Algeria, and the first film was about my paternal grandparents, Aisha and Mabruk, Algerian immigrants who came to France in the 1950s. They separated when they were 80, and I filmed their story, retracing their life and exile. I come from two histories of colonialism, and the difference between my Algerian and Palestinian families is stark.The Algerians stayed silent to survive. After Algeria’s independence, they buried themselves in silence to cope with the trauma of colonization. In the first film, I had to break that silence to understand our story, my connection to my grandparents’ homeland, and France, the colonial country where I was born. I needed to put them back into history, because growing up, it felt like my grandparents had no history. Even in school, they never taught us colonial history.The difference with my Palestinian side is that, instead of silence, we had to tell our stories in order to survive. There were always stories, but they were fragmented. Many family members we’ve never been able to see again—some are refugees, some stayed in ‘48. So, the goal of Bye Bye Tiberias wasn’t to break silence, but to piece together the scattered stories, like putting together a puzzle. Colonization breaks linearity, so this was about reconstructing that.CÉLINE: Absolutely, I relate. My book is non-linear for that very reason. The act of remembering, itself, isn’t linear. In your film, there are moments within moments, like Russian dolls—layers of moments. As you open one, you find another. There are these peaceful moments, pockets of peace, joy, and laughter. Even in the dramatized scene, when your mother goes back to the theater—what’s it called?LINA: Hakawati Theater.CÉLINE: Right, Hakawati. When she relives that moment, it’s incredibly powerful. Just talking about it now makes me emotional, because in those moments, we get to witness our humanity, which has been robbed from us.‘We are actively fighting for liberation. In the process of liberation, we should allow freedom for everyone. Pointing fingers contradicts the goal of liberation. We are free to be who we are while fighting for that freedom.’ —LinaLINA: Yes, and you know, I have a friend, a Palestinian from Jerusalem, who saw the film in Europe last fall, at a time when she couldn’t go back home. She told me, “Thank you for reminding us of the beauty of our culture and our country.” It’s hard because when you constantly see negative representations of yourself in the media, even if you know it’s not true, it still affects you. It’s so important to remind ourselves of who we truly are.For me, it wasn’t something I had to force. It felt natural. I just put the camera in front of my aunts and my mother, and the humor was there. Humor is such a typical part of our culture, a way to cope with reality. We come from a tradition of literature and poetry—as Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians— and we’ve lost so much of that because they’ve destroyed our archives and erased some of our thinkers.While making the film and writing poetry for it, I discovered that my family was writing poetry too—my mother, my grandfather—and I had no idea! It felt like these pieces were coming together, and I realized I was part of something much bigger than myself. I wasn’t starting from scratch; I was continuing a legacy that was passed down to me. It was incredibly moving, like I was part of a process that I couldn’t escape, even if I wanted to.CÉLINE: It’s like weaving resistance from past generations to the present. People often misunderstand resistance, thinking it’s about bearing arms or fighting. Even the language we use can be violent—like “fighting back.” But so much of our resistance is soft resistance, about building, remembering, preserving, and protecting our culture.In your film, there’s so much softness. The term “soft power” comes to mind—it’s a concept that keeps reemerging. How do you reconcile the contradictions between softness and strength? People often think softness is weakness.LINA: First of all, I wanted the women in my family, and in the film, to exist in their full complexity. They have vulnerabilities, contradictions, and strengths, but they are also women in a patriarchal world. Their ways of fighting aren’t always in the foreground; sometimes it’s through passing down love and values like forgiveness to their children. That’s a powerful form of resistance. It’s almost a miracle that they’ve not only transmitted these things to us but also raised us with love, allowing us to want to share that love with the world. When you come from violent histories, you’d expect people to be stuck in cycles of violence, but what Palestinians have become is truly miraculous.I don’t like the term “resilience” because the West often uses it to box us in, as if we’re simply resilient people. For me, it’s a life force, something beyond resistance. It’s like the Algerians who kept living in France, the colonial country that treated them as subjects. The fact that they lived, educated their children, and we, their descendants, were born and raised in France with the same tools as the settlers, is a miracle. That’s what we should highlight—not the extremes of violence and revenge, but the quiet resistance through language, survival, and a desire to keep our culture alive, to educate our children, and fill them with hope and dreams. Both forms of resistance can coexist, and there are many ways to struggle.CÉLINE: There’s a lot of misunderstanding in the West. Maybe it’s because we have the privilege of being able to return to our lands, which softens our fight and our resistance. There’s this notion that we have to “toughen up,” that we need to detach from our humanity to exist here. Lately, I see fewer people in my culture celebrating—fewer posts about weddings, birthdays, or joy. People tell me they feel guilty about celebrating. But if we feel guilty for our joy, hasn’t the colonizer and its war machine already won? It’s like we’re internalizing the pain in the form of guilt, which is dangerous.LINA: Yes, it’s normal to feel guilty. I don’t think we can escape it. But we have to respect that everyone copes in their own way. We shouldn’t judge those who continue to celebrate life or those who withdraw and choose to be more discreet. The diversity in how we deal with things is what makes us culturally rich. It’s dehumanizing when the West tries to essentialize us into one thing, whether as Palestinian women or Arabs in general. It’s so important to claim our complexity because that’s who we are, especially as Palestinians, and it’s who we will continue to be.We are actively fighting for liberation. In the process of liberation, we should allow freedom for everyone. Pointing fingers contradicts the goal of liberation. We are free to be who we are while fighting for that freedom.CÉLINE: Exactly. Liberation and complexity go hand in hand. It’s a dance, and in this dance, we embrace contradictions. For example, your film shows your mother wanting to leave Palestine to follow her dream, which she couldn’t pursue while she was there. That’s a contradiction, but it’s real. The film invites the viewer to accept that two opposing things can coexist. The West struggles with this idea. How do you think controlling our own media and narratives could help teach the West about embracing contradictions?LINA: This is the thing, they don’t allow us to be complex because when we are complex, we become equal. They want to control the narrative about us and define us on their terms. But when we use our language, art, and literature to define ourselves, it gives us the power to invent new ways of seeing ourselves—ways that aren’t new at all but were erased.For example, I think of Mouloud Feraoun, an Algerian writer and fighter against colonialism. He wrote Les Moutons de Guerre in French, and he used that language as a force against colonization. Edward Said said exile is the greatest tragedy a person can face, but at the same time, it’s a way to reinvent yourself in the margins. This diasporic experience allows us to transform memory and create new language, reconnecting with how our ancestors defined themselves when they were free.This is crucial because it gives us a history when they’re trying to erase it, trying to rewrite our history through their lens. Building bridges between the past and present is necessary. Even in France, as an Algerian, when I talk about colonization, they say, “That’s the past. Move on.” But we are still living in a neo-colonial world. The French are always talking about their identity and ancestors from centuries ago, yet we’re told to forget ours. We will never stop connecting with our ancestors because they constitute who we are.As immigrants, or children of immigrants, we will always ask, “What if they hadn’t colonized us? What if I had been born there?” Imagining that is powerful. Decolonization isn’t just tangible; it’s also about our imaginations. It’s about envisioning what we could have been and what we can be, in many diverse ways.That’s why all forms of expression—art, activism, journalism— are valid in the process of liberation. They are what build nations and societies. And we have the right to that.CÉLINE: Yes, absolutely. Building on that, politics is fundamentally about bringing back into focus what is often pushed aside. When people say some topics are too political to discuss, it’s often because these issues are simplified or purified in ways that overlook our contributions to culture and the larger movement of international solidarity. It’s not a one-sided endeavor; it’s about embracing plurality. Sometimes, we may not have a clear way to conclude with a sense of permission, especially when we’re often discouraged from creating freely. What wisdom would you offer young creatives who see the world as it is, don’t necessarily want to be politicized, but find that their work naturally becomes political?LINA: Art is inherently political. I’ve never considered art as something separate from politics. Art is a way of asserting your existence and your voice, and when you come from our histories and stories, everything we create or say becomes political. It’s a privilege to view art as non-political because for us, it’s always tied to our lived realities. I believe artists are meant to question and challenge the system, even if they navigate within it. You don’t always have to foreground the political message—let it emerge naturally, in subtle ways if you wish. What’s most important is to follow and trust your instincts, because in creating, you are searching for your unique language.For example, with my first film, I was often told in France that it wasn’t a “universal” story, that no one would care about two Algerians and their story of exile. I had to fight to trust my instincts, to believe that people could connect with our stories. It wasn’t easy, especially as a woman, because we are often asked to second-guess ourselves or set aside our feelings. But it’s crucial to try, even if it doesn’t work right away. You try again and again until you find your voice. And if one path doesn’t work, you adapt and try another way. But today, I believe it’s necessary to be active in that sense—art and activism go hand in hand.CÉLINE: The personal is indeed universal in so many ways. That’s what politics is about—being able to connect. Thank you so much, Lina, for the beautiful gift of this film, and for sharing your thoughts. We’re excited to have you as part of EIP. Thank you!‘It’s dehumanizing when the West tries to essentialize us into one thing, whether as Palestinian women or Arabs in general. It’s so important to claim our complexity because that’s who we are, and it’s who we will continue to be.’ —Lina"
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "On Bedouin Burger, Beirut, & Beyond: Lynn Adib x Collis Browne",
"author" : "Lynn Adib, Collis Browne",
"category" : "interviews",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/lynn-adib-bedouin-burger",
"date" : "2025-11-21 09:10:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/SK-Lynn-25-Film-9.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "COLLIS BROWNE:Thank you for this conversation. It feels fitting to be doing it in Beirut. Both of us have a long-standing connection to Beirut, even though neither of us lives in Beirut. I know that you’re originally from Syria. When did you come to Beirut? What’s the connection?LYNN ADIB:I grew up in Syria until 2009, then I moved to Paris, where I lived for nine years. When the war in Syria stopped in 2018, I decided to leave France and go back to Syria. I went to Damascus and soon realized that it was going to be difficult for me to do the project I wanted to do in Damascus. Then I met Zeid Hamdan [the other half of duo Bedouin Burger], who was living in Beirut. I decided to go to Beirut because there was a lot happening there. I also have a lot of friends in Beirut. It’s crazy… it felt like destiny. It’s like Zeid and I needed to meet each other at that time in our lives. The project was created so organically… it was me and him just hanging out all the time. I was singing the tunes in the studio; he was working on them. Even the name of the band was a joke between me and him. It was a blessed period of our lives, even though Beirut was going through such a hard time. It was maybe the worst year in Lebanon since the war. It was 2019, a few months before Covid. Covid allowed us to be very creative. We had so much time, because time stopped… We had nothing to do but take refuge in the studio and work. This is one of the rare things I really miss about CCovid… our relationship to time.The name of the band came from the feeling of being like Bedouins, meaning that I really don’t feel I have a place I can call home, and every place is kind of my home. “Home” is where I meet beautiful people who nourish my soul. And I have found so beautiful people here in Beirut. The idea of home is related to this project… the notion of home has to change for us to survive.COLLIS:I love the idea of home as movable, or as a place tied to the people more than the land. I think it’s an idea that, especially in the region here, everyone kind of has to adopt. I think it’s a survival mode also… There is a long and complicated relationship between Syria and Lebanon, because historically these two countries share a very similar kind of culture. It was the same land. The border was drawn by the French. But in modern history, there are times when Syria has occupied Lebanon… But I’m interested in the Syrian perspective. Tell me more about this.LYNN:I don’t know where to start, because it’s such a broad conversation, but I’m just going to say what I felt when I came to Beirut as a Syrian. I did feel that speaking Arabic all the time was not a very good thing in a lot of settings. I was feeling that I had to use my French or English to fit into the society somehow. In Syria, it’s completely the opposite. When you speak French or English, people think you are just pretending to be on a higher social level, and they don’t really like that. So Arabic proficiency is something that is very respected in Syria. I am proud of the fact that I speak Arabic well, and it is something that I’ve missed here in Beirut. I’m privileged as a Syrian here because of my French education. I see other Syrians struggle… they take the jobs that Lebanese people don’t want to take. It is very hard for me to accept.Even yesterday… we went to a restaurant and all the servers were Syrian. I knew that from their accent. I’m very disappointed by what happened after the regime fell. I’m also very optimistic about Syria, about Lebanon, about the region, even though we know that the danger is nearby… but I still feel that this area is so blessed. I feel that I touch life when I’m in Beirut and in Damascus… that I can see what life looks like. I’m optimistic, also, because there are so many young people now in Damascus and Syria, and they’re trying to move things forward. We take as an example what happened in Lebanon, where Lebanon is culturally… there are so many things that are not working well here, and there is so much chaos, but in so many ways it’s very inspiring. I love that.COLLIS:We’re based in New York, so we were seeing the Syrian regime fall from afar… I guess at that point, you went back and visited family…LYNN:Yeah, I put on a concert there that was incredibly powerful for me, because I’d never sung in Syria. I mean, not after I left the choir, because I grew up singing in a choir… but under my name… this was the first official concert for me in Syria. It was a tiny concert, but it was incredibly powerful for me. We allowed ourselves to be happy for a while. I understand why people were also alarmed, especially people who were living there. I have so many friends who never wanted to leave Syria during the revolution, who are all thinking about leaving now. It seems that there is a plan for Syria to be fragmented… and it’s happening within the Syrian society, unfortunately, by the creation of chaos and uncertainty and instability…COLLIS:It’s absolutely fueled by the external forces. It’s the colonial divide and conquer. That’s the story of Lebanon. Can music be a force to affect all of this?LYNN:It’s a question I always ask myself: does art really change things? I think it can when it really reflects the artist’s vision, purely and without any filter. Ziad Rahbani [Lebanese composer and son of legendary singer Fairuz], who passed just recently in July 2025, is one of the rare artists in the world who was so true to what he said that he suffered personally from it. He was alone. And this can change things. It can change something within people’s souls. But it’s very rare that we encounter this kind of art. It’s very rare. Authenticity; that’s what I’m getting at. We are in an era of over-consumption in general, including over-consumption of art and music. This is because of social media… We want to hear new things all the time. We want the artist to produce new material all the time. The artist doesn’t have time to be true to themselves and think about what’s going on and do something true to who they are, which actually can move things forward.We are consuming so much information all the time that we don’t have time to just stand still. This is what I feel is missing. Dictators and presidents and wars come and go, but culture and songs remain if they are authentic. They remain in our memory more than anything else, more than war.I do believe that at the end, it’s life that wins over death and darkness… and music is part of life, true music, beautiful music, authentic music is part of life, and it always wins. I don’t think it stops war right away. It doesn’t save a child in Gaza. But this is what’s crazy about life; our relationship to death is so fragile that sometimes, even if we die, it’s not that we really die. There’s something that remains and will change things later on.COLLIS:Are you creating new things as Bedouin Burger, that reflect the times?LYNN:In this album, Zeid and I were reflecting on the moment we met during the revolution here in Lebanon. All the songs were either songs that we love singing because they are traditional songs, or compositions of mine that I proposed to Zeid, or compositions we created together. “Nomad” was a song that was co-written by me and Zeid when we were both in France. It reflects on the feeling of living in exile. We kind of stopped time by doing this project. Thankfully, I have Zeid in my life who understands that I need to breathe, to do something different than Bedouin Burger, to go back a to something that’s personal. I’m really blessed that Zeid understands."
}
,
{
"title" : "Engineering for Genocide at MIT",
"author" : "MIT Coalition for Palestine",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/engineering-for-genocide-at-mit",
"date" : "2025-11-19 14:00:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Two years into the genocide in Gaza, universities across the United States are still exposing their role as collaborators in state violence. Among the most complicit is the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). As documented in the 83 page report MIT Science for Genocide, MIT aids and abets genocide in Gaza through its engagements with the Israeli military and its arms suppliers. At least $3.7 million have flowed into MIT through these channels, and MIT corporate partners include the Israeli state-owned weapons giant Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).",
"content" : "Two years into the genocide in Gaza, universities across the United States are still exposing their role as collaborators in state violence. Among the most complicit is the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). As documented in the 83 page report MIT Science for Genocide, MIT aids and abets genocide in Gaza through its engagements with the Israeli military and its arms suppliers. At least $3.7 million have flowed into MIT through these channels, and MIT corporate partners include the Israeli state-owned weapons giant Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).The MIT community and global public have challenged MIT on its complicity, notching victories over the Institute’s ties to Israeli arms makers and forcing MIT professors to cancel Israeli military grants. These efforts build on our history and broad popular support. But our work is not finished.We call on people of conscience everywhere to challenge MIT over its unethical research. Click here to send an email to MIT officials or grab the copy from here.IMOD AND GENOCIDAL APPLICATIONSThe Israeli government enters the MIT research funding structure through the Institute’s historic war nexus. From 2017 to 2021, 60% of MIT revenue came from the federal government, and 17.4% came from the now re-named Department of War. The department provides Israel with billions of US tax dollars in the form of yearly Foreign Military Financing grants. The Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD) then uses these funds to sponsor laboratory research at MIT of interest to its affiliates and their military objectives. MIT has accepted some $3.7 million through this channel since 2015. According to MIT audit files, the connection extends back to 2008 at least, and MIT approves the contracts on an ongoing basis. In a July 2025 report to the UN Human Rights Council, UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese named MIT a “sustaining Israel’s settler-colonial project” through its IDF-funded research.What kind of research does the Israeli military sponsor? **One example is Daniela Rus, director of MIT’s Computer Science and AI laboratory. She led a recent project “Coreset Compression Algorithms,” which received $425,000 in direct sponsorship from the Israeli government since 2021, according to MIT’s annual reports tracking the flow of external funds into MIT. Rus’ research program develops AI algorithms for applications like “city-scale observation systems” and “surveillance and vigilance”. **The goal is to teach drones to track and pursue targets with increased autonomy.Another example is Christopher Voigt’s lab in the MIT department of Biological Engineering. Voigt programs “sentinel bacteria” to respond to human DNA sequences. The Israeli Ministry of Defense funds his lab and provides soil samples for testing. In another of Voigt’s papers, sentinel bacteria are “used to detect diverse signals in the environment,” including landmine detection. Between two grants labeled “Field-Capable Bacterial Biosensors” and “Effects of Oxidizing Environments on Carbon-Based Materials”, Voigt has taken over $850,000 in IMOD-sponsored contracts. This technology (if it ever works) is poised to enable the Israeli military to clear land for settlements or invade ‘hostile territory’.MIT’S PARTNERSHIPS WITH MERCHANTS OF DEATHFirms that sell and transport weapons to Israel also recruit from MIT and enter institutional collaborations with the university – Lockheed Martin, Maersk, Boeing, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, Caterpillar, General Dynamics, and L3Harris. One firm, Liquid AI, co-founded by an MIT professor sponsored by the Israeli military, attempts to build autonomous fighter jets. Together, these firms recruit MIT researchers into genocidal activity and bias scientific research agendas toward belligerent instead of life-affirming applications.MIT also goes beyond ordinary corporate relations to pursue institutional commitments with the Israeli arms industry itself. An egregious example is Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), a corporation owned wholly by the Israeli government. IAI makes weapons used in the Gaza genocide. **According to the CEO, their Heron drone has played “a pivotal role” in the war on Gaza. The state-owned company also makes the Harop suicide drone, used to bomb refugee tents, as well as autonomous armored bulldozers. In the past two years, **IAI missile systems have bombed Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran.After October 2023, MIT began a new institutional engagement with IAI through its CSAIL Alliances and Quantum Science and Engineering Consortium (QSEC). In June 2025, as the Israeli government starved Gaza, MIT welcomed IAI executives to campus in order to deepen institutional collaboration in quantum computing and artificial intelligence. Guests included IAI North America’s CTO, CEOs, and an Israeli missile factory director. These partnerships give IAI access to MIT scientists, influence on research projects, and a recruitment pipeline.ENDING TIES TO ELBIT SYSTEMS**Our movement has made some progress against companies at MIT. **Elbit Systems, for instance, is one of Israel’s largest weapons manufacturers, supplying an estimated 85% of Israel’s drone arsenal. It is also a central provider of white phosphorus, cluster munitions, and flechette projectiles to Israel. We know Elbit Hermes 450 drones were used in the 2024 World Central Kitchen massacre in Gaza. Elbit also abets oppressive regimes globally, selling weapons to assist the Azerbaijani occupation of Nagorno Karabakh, as well as the Indian occupation of Kashmir and Bastar.Despite its direct, material support for human rights abuses, Elbit was a member of the MIT Industrial Liaison Program (ILP) from 2017 until late 2024. Through this program, Elbit monitored MIT research developments, advised on research sponsorship and technology licensing opportunities, and linked with MIT-connected startups. In 2021, Elbit Systems and Elbit’s medical subsidiary KMC announced a new “innovation center” in Cambridge that hoped to recruit MIT and Harvard graduates into the company.Through an organized pressure campaign, this did not come to fruition. **In August 2024, following protests from Boston-area community activists in BDS Boston, Elbit Systems vacated its Cambridge office. Then BDS Boston and MIT activists turned attention to MIT’s Industrial Liaison Program. In spring 2025, MIT and BDSB announced that the ILP program had ended its engagement with Elbit Systems after global pressure. **We need a similar campaign to succeed in ending MIT’s ties with IAI.DIVESTMENT IS TRIED AND TESTEDThe wins against Elbit highlight that although divestment is sometimes framed as a political taboo, it has a long history at MIT. The school’s Fluid Mechanics Laboratory shifted to civilian research and funding in 1966 under pressure from the anti-war movement. In May 1970, MIT activists pushed the Institute to acknowledge atrocities committed by US forces in Vietnam and divest its Draper Laboratory, which worked on guidance systems for the Poseidon missile. MIT also ended a Taiwan Program in 1976 following concerns over ballistic missile proliferation. In the 1980s American student movements, including the original MIT Coalition Against Apartheid, led divestment campaigns against South African apartheid.The MIT Coalition for Palestine builds on this legacy as well as a recent history of divestment. In 2007, MIT declared the Darfur Genocide “abhorrent” and pledged to divest its endowment. The MIT Energy Initiative cut ties with Saudi Aramco in 2021 following the state murder of a Saudi journalist. In 2022, MIT ended its Skoltech collaborations in Russia following the invasion of Ukraine. Following mass protests in solidarity with Palestine, Lockheed Martin left a program managed by MISTI-Israel and chose to not renew it. An MIT professor recently cancelled an Israeli military grant after student pressure.When invoking our past, MIT activists draw on a wellspring of moral tradition. As MIT students in 1937 wrote in a petition against the Institute sending a delegate to the Nazi festival in Göttingen, MIT’s participation would “condone the acts and practices of the forces now controlling Germany”. Similarly, MIT’s contracts with the Israeli military condone the acts and practices of Israeli forces. Academic freedom does not protect such ties. As the anti-war student leader Ira Rubenzahl told our student newspaper in 1969 during the Vietnam War: “One doesn’t have the right to build gas chambers to kill people.”CONCEALMENT AND CALL TO ACTIONIn defiance of the mandate handed to them by the public, MIT officials conceal and misdirect over the institution’s complicity. In summer 2025, MIT revoked access to tools for the MIT community to understand its research funding sources, such as the annual Brown Books, which track the flow of external funds into MIT. It also barred us from using the university’s Kuali Coeus grant-tracking website, which MIT researchers use to better understand our external grants. They have further engaged in a campaign of persecution against student activists, as detailed by a May 2025 letter of UN rapporteurs to the MIT President.**MIT’s actions are antithetical to the Institute’s supposed motto “Mind and Hand” for the “betterment of humankind.” **Instead, MIT’s minds and hands are engineering for genocide — a damning moral stain on the Institute. Majorities of MIT students demand that the Institute cut ties with the Israeli military, as confirmed by three separate campus votes in 2024 and 2025 as well as our Scientists Against Genocide encampment in spring 2024.We call on people of conscience to challenge MIT to end its unethical science.\Send an email here to MIT officials or grab the copy from here."
}
,
{
"title" : "Skims, Shapewear, and the Shape of Power: When a Brand Expands Into Occupied Territory",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/skims-shapewear-and-the-shape-of-power",
"date" : "2025-11-17 07:13:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Skims_Israel.jpg",
"excerpt" : "On the evening of November 11, Kris Jenner celebrated her 70th birthday inside the fortified sprawl of Jeff Bezos’s $175 million Beverly Hills compound, hidden behind hedges so tall they violate city regulations, a rule he bypasses with a monthly $1,000 fine that functions more like a subscription fee than a penalty. The theme was James Bond, black tie and martini glasses, a winking acknowledgment of Amazon’s new ownership of the 007 franchise. Guests surrendered their phones upon arrival, a formality as unremarkable as valet check-in. Whatever managed to slip beyond the gates came in stray fragments: a long-lens photograph of Oprah Winfrey stepping out of a black SUV, Mariah Carey caught mid-laugh on the curb, Kylie Jenner offering a middle finger through the window of a chauffeured car. The rest appeared hours later in the form of carefully curated photos released by an official photographer, images softened and perfected until they resembled an ad campaign more than documentation. Nothing inside was witnessed on anyone’s own terms.",
"content" : "On the evening of November 11, Kris Jenner celebrated her 70th birthday inside the fortified sprawl of Jeff Bezos’s $175 million Beverly Hills compound, hidden behind hedges so tall they violate city regulations, a rule he bypasses with a monthly $1,000 fine that functions more like a subscription fee than a penalty. The theme was James Bond, black tie and martini glasses, a winking acknowledgment of Amazon’s new ownership of the 007 franchise. Guests surrendered their phones upon arrival, a formality as unremarkable as valet check-in. Whatever managed to slip beyond the gates came in stray fragments: a long-lens photograph of Oprah Winfrey stepping out of a black SUV, Mariah Carey caught mid-laugh on the curb, Kylie Jenner offering a middle finger through the window of a chauffeured car. The rest appeared hours later in the form of carefully curated photos released by an official photographer, images softened and perfected until they resembled an ad campaign more than documentation. Nothing inside was witnessed on anyone’s own terms.The guest list felt less like a party roster and more like an index of contemporary American power. Tyler Perry arrived early, Snoop Dogg later in the evening, Paris Hilton shimmering in a silver column that clung like liquid metal. Hailey Bieber drifted past in a slinky black dress, while Prince Harry and Meghan Sussex appeared in images that were quietly scrubbed from the family grid a day later. Nine billionaires circulated among the luminaries, their combined wealth brushing toward $600 billion. Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan joined Bill Gates at the poker table, while Bezos himself wandered through the party with Lauren Sánchez, doing the kind of effortless hosting that comes with having $245B in the bank.Jenner, dressed in red vintage Givenchy by Alexander McQueen, floated from conversation to conversation. She paused for a warm embrace with Perry, raised a glass with Hilton, and eventually made her way to the dance floor with Justin Bieber. At 70, she remains the family’s central command center, equal parts mother, manager, strategist, and brand steward. The celebration functioned as a kind of coronation, a reaffirmation that the Kardashian-Jenner empire is not stagnating but expanding, stretching itself into new sectors and new narratives with the same relentless ease that has defined its last decade.Just two weeks earlier, on a bright Monday in late October, a very different scene unfolded at the SKIMS flagship on the Sunset Strip. That morning, the boutique had been cleared to host Hagiborim, the Israeli nonprofit that supports children of fallen IDF soldiers and orphans of the October 7 attacks. Around a dozen girls wandered the store, laughing among themselves, perusing tank tops, and snapping selfies before assembling outside with those unmistakable beige SKIMS shopping bags. The images of the visit were sparse and easily missed unless one went searching; they appeared only on Hagiborim’s Instagram highlights. The event took place on October 28, less than a week before news began to circulate about SKIMS’s upcoming entry into the Israeli market.The launch itself unfolded with clinical precision. On November 10th in partnership with Irani Corp, SKIMS went live on Factory 54’s Israeli website, with in-store boutiques planned for December and ten to fifteen standalone stores projected to open across Israel by 2026. The company’s official language remained on brand, warm and relentlessly forward-looking. It spoke of “inclusivity,” of “community presence,” of broadening the global market. Nowhere did it acknowledge the war in Gaza, though the border sits just over an hour away and the headlines that week were filled with rising casualty counts and allegations of cease-fire violations, an entirely different reality unfolding parallel to the brand’s expansion.Hours after the SKIMS launch, Kardashian’s Instagram shifted into overdrive. She posted a carousel of herself in a gray bikini, captioned with a single emoji racking up millions of likes. The images came just two days after news of her fourth unsuccessful attempt at the California Bar had broken, a reminder that in the Kardashian ecosystem, social media momentum often outweighs any setback.Beneath the SKIMS machine which just raised $225M in funding is a quieter network of capital. Joshua Kushner, Jared’s younger brother, the polished, soft-spoken investor whose firm helped seed Instagram, owns a 10 percent stake and a board seat in SKIMS, a detail that surfaces only in required filings and the occasional business-page profile. The Kushner family’s ties to Israel run far deeper than the brand’s marketing conveys: long-standing real-estate ventures in Tel Aviv, and a family foundation that has funneled at least $342,000 to Friends of the IDF and another $58,500 to West Bank settlement groups and yeshivas in places like Beit El and Efrat. Jared Kushner’s diplomatic work on the Abraham Accords carved geopolitical corridors that SKIMS now moves through. The brand may position itself as apolitical, but the infrastructure of its Israel expansion is built on deeply political ground.Fashion media, however, showed little interest in any of this. A wide sweep through the archives of Business of Fashion, WWD, and Vogue Business yields nothing, not a single headline, not even a line buried in a retail digest. The launch through Factory 54, the long-term plan for as many as fifteen stores, the philanthropic event with Hagiborim, all of it passed in silence in the sector that usually treats Kardashian business moves as reliable traffic drivers.Instead, their coverage was devoted wholly to Kris Jenner’s birthday. Harper’s Bazaar published three separate pieces. W Magazine dubbed it “the Kardashians’ own Met Gala.” Vogue broke down the night with a dutifully detailed recap that leaned heavily on Harry and Meghan’s brief presence, clearly recognizing their value as SEO gold.The Kardashians operate with a level of intentionality that has outpaced many political campaigns. They understand the choreography of public-facing narratives better than any other family in American media. The Hagiborim visit, girls only, modest branding, no Kim in sight, served as a small preemptive gesture, a way to soften potential critique before the Israel launch rolled out. While the party dominated the feed, the expansion passed unnoticed and the charity event remained strictly confined to the margins, a calculated sequence, not chaos, the kind of PR mastery we’ve come to expect from Kris Jenner.The same instinct shapes their political signaling. On Inauguration Day 2025, as Donald Trump took the oath of office for a second term, Kim posted a silent Instagram Story of Melania Trump stepping out in a navy ensemble and wide-brimmed hat. She offered no caption, no endorsement, no framing. The image disappeared within 24 hours, but not before sparking a brief firestorm. It is the same familiar pattern, presence without explanation, the kind of ambiguity that allows the public to fill in the blanks while the family remains insulated.Beyond their insulated world, the conflict continues. Inside the bubble, the champagne is crisp, the Hulu cameras are rolling and the narrative is intact. What remains for the public is the split-screen: Kris Jenner blowing out seventy candles beneath a ceiling of crystals, surrounded by some of the wealthiest people alive; and Kim Kardashian posing in a studded bikini, eyes locked on the lens, hinting at the next product drop. Between the two lies a series of transactions, commercial, political, and moral, that the audience is never invited to examine.As for Kris Jenner’s birthday, it will be remembered. The launch will fade. The girls who posed with their new SKIMS pajamas will grow older; the war will either end or shift into some new phase. And the Kardashian-Jenner machine will keep moving, calculating every image, every post, every angle, ensuring the story that matters most is always the one they control."
}
]
}