I find it difficult to understand how people would expect an improvement in minority rights in a place where majority rights are inexistent. Look around the world, do societies evolve starting with minority rights or do they get to that gradually after majority rights are granted & strengthened? People criticizing the Palestinians for not working on improving the rights of minorities like those of African descent, homosexuals & all other minority groups in the population demonstrate a seriously distorted logic. Societies & their cultures can only evolve positively once normal & decent living conditions are afforded to their populations, & in the case of the Palestinians, these conditions are obviously non-existent. One of the by-products of living under occupation & segregation is a loss of progressive cultural evolution & an atmosphere of conservatism. Asking the Palestinians to therefore focus on minorities when, as a majority, they are persecuted & humiliated each day is seriously misguided & demonstrates a lack of understanding of how it is that societies evolve in the first place. I should also note that when black Palestinians are treated better than other Palestinians by Israelis, it's precisely because they are presumed to be non-Palestinian, which although mentioned in the article you refer to, is not explored in relation to anti-Palestinian racism. I'd expect people everywhere to press hard in their demand for equal rights for Palestinians & an end to their colonization & segregation so that they could live in a society that could naturally evolve to a point where minorities could enjoy understanding & full-inclusion. Criticisms such as yours would be constructive when that reality materializes. But until then, such criticisms, even if accompanied with support for the Palestinian cause, are incredibly narrow-sighted and portray a lack of understanding of the conditions that the Palestinians live in & how these conditions affect their society on all levels.

I was pleased to see Alice Walker's mame among those who signed this petition.

Of course, it wouldn't have been easy to say to her hosts, to their face, "sorry, but I have changed my mind". However, it is the kind of guts one would expect an activist to have.

"The morning after I left on my journey I received an email from a friend and colleague. He asked me to reconsider my trip. This was the first I learned of the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel. I was puzzled at this request at such a late hour because this colleague had known of my plans to go to Tel Aviv for while."

Why was it the colleague's responsibility to ask her to respect the boycott,
and not Harjo's responsibility to know about the boycott?

Can we really believe she is a solidarity activist?

anyone who knows Joy and her work, who isn't trying to make her a pawn for their cause or a lightning rod to bring attention to their organization(s), will know that she walks her own path. any artist, any poet, worthy of their art, follows their heart. Joy's words will serve as a mirror to her audience, reflecting back what they have become and the atrocities they commit. what better poet to stand in the eye of the storm and speak the truth than one whose people's history parallels the isolation and obliteration taking place right now at the hands of the israelis? bringing up the subject of financial gain is a joke to anyone who calls themselves a poet. the vast majority of us live paycheck to paycheck, if we're lucky. for those who scoff at the power of poetry to influence change for the better, then why the big stink over her visit? apparently you don't give much credit to the arts (unless we're a big money making name act like U2 or Stevie Wonder.) our impact is dismissed, but still worthy of your censure? what would Mahmoud Darwish do? look the enemy in the eye and speak the truth, or jump on the bandwagon and let you dictate to him how he should conduct himself as a poet, an artist?