Acclaimed Author Sparks Controversy with Comments Comparing Hamas Attack to Nat Turner’s Uprising

Acclaimed Author Sparks Controversy with Comments Comparing Hamas Attack to Nat Turner’s Uprising

Edited by:  Fern Sidman

Ta-Nehisi Coates, the acclaimed author and anti-racist commentator, recently sparked controversy with his reflections on the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led massacre in Israel. In a candid conversation on Trevor Noah’s podcast “What Now,” Coates raised the provocative question of whether he would have been “strong enough” to resist participating in such an attack had he grown up in Gaza, an area he described as a “giant open-air jail.” According to a report in The New York Post, Coates, a MacArthur “Genius” Grant recipient, delved into the moral complexities that arise when individuals are raised in conditions of poverty, oppression, and violence, such as those faced by Palestinians in Gaza.

Coates, who has long been a vocal critic of systemic racism and colonialism, emphasized that the dire living conditions in Gaza—coupled with a life under Israeli occupation—could push individuals to extremism. “Were I 20 years old, born into Gaza… and I grew up under that oppression and that poverty and that wall comes down—am I even strong enough… where I say, ‘This is too far’?” Coates pondered. As reported by The New York Post, this reflection seemed to express empathy for those who participated in the October 7 massacre, during which more than 1,200 civilians were brutally and sadistically massacred and 250 others, including babies and elderly Holocaust survivors, were kidnapped by Hamas terrorists.

In his conversation, Coates offered a window into his understanding of the human toll that living under such oppressive conditions can have, recounting the challenges faced by Gazans daily. He spoke of the dangers that everyday Palestinians face, from fishermen who risk being shot by Israeli patrols for venturing too far into the sea, to families unable to access medical care for their children due to strict permit restrictions. As The New York Post highlighted, Coates’s comments offered an unflinching portrayal of the harsh realities of life in Gaza, though his empathy for the October 7th perpetrators drew sharp criticism.

Coates did not shy away from calling the massacre a “great horror,” acknowledging the brutality of the attack. Yet, he framed it as a response to what he sees as an unbearable Israeli system of apartheid. He explained that understanding the motivations behind the violence could provide a broader context, despite the obvious moral dilemma. “If you start asking why [the attack happened], then you really, really start to get into trouble,” Coates said, as quoted by The New York Post. This comment underlined his point that to grapple with such events requires facing uncomfortable truths about the causes of violence and the prolonged suffering of the Palestinian people.

One of Coates’s more controversial statements concerned the broader framing of human life and its value, suggesting that human life should be valued equally, whether on October 7, 6, or 5. He seemed to imply that the international community’s attention on Palestinian suffering often falls short in the days and months leading up to significant violent episodes. The New York Post reported that Coates argued that while the October 7 attacks shocked the world, the conditions leading up to such violence had been largely ignored, particularly the day-to-day reality for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Coates, who has previously held positions as a professor at New York University and CUNY, is currently promoting his new book, “The Message.” In the podcast discussion, he further criticized those who justify Israel’s treatment of Palestinians as necessary to combat terrorism, calling such justifications a form of “apartheid.” His comments, as The New York Post noted, position Coates within a broader discourse about the ethics of violence and resistance, particularly in the context of long-standing geopolitical conflicts.

Coates is also under fire for recent comments in which he likened the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel to the Nat Turner slave rebellion of 1831. In his provocative remarks, Coates drew parallels between the violent tactics used by Hamas and the violent resistance of enslaved Africans during Turner’s revolt, an uprising that resulted in the deaths of 55 people, including children. According to the report in The New York Post, Coates, whose works include the National Book Award-winning “Between the World and Me” and contributions to Marvel’s Black Panther comic series, stated, “I think killing babies in the crib is wrong, but that doesn’t justify slavery.”

These comments, made amid his broader critiques of systemic oppression, have ignited intense backlash, particularly for their perceived moral relativism. Coates’s argument seemed to center on the idea that the oppressive conditions faced by Palestinians in Gaza, much like the conditions of slavery in the American South, could drive people to commit acts of extreme violence. “Either you think there are good reasons for segregation, Jim Crow, apartheid, or you don’t,” Coates asserted, as reported by The New York Post, framing his commentary as a critique of the systemic inequalities faced by Palestinians under Israeli occupation.

Coates’s remarks were met with immediate and sharp criticism online. Thomas Chatterton Williams, a professor at Bard College, took to X (formerly Twitter) to voice his dismay, saying, “When your moral clarity leads you to this, my god,” as was indicated in The New York Post report. He also added, “I cannot imagine killing innocent people and eating the food out of their refrigerators in front of their crying children,” referring to the brutality of the Hamas attacks on October 7, which included the murder of civilians and the kidnapping of over 250 people.

Shai Davidai, a business professor at Columbia University, took his critique even further, explicitly calling out Coates’s framing of the violence. “Ta-Nehisi Coates is not above raping young women at a music festival in the name of ‘resistance,’” Davidai wrote, according to The New York Post report.

This online backlash reflects a broader discomfort with Coates’s comparison of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to historical instances of violent resistance against systemic oppression. For many, the parallels Coates drew between Nat Turner’s rebellion and Hamas’s actions were seen as a step too far, particularly given the brutality of the October 7 attacks, which left over 1,200 people dead, including civilians, children, and the elderly.

 The comparison of Hamas’s attack to the Nat Turner slave rebellion carries significant weight. Turner’s 1831 revolt was one of the most notable instances of violent resistance to slavery in American history, and it has long been a point of both reverence and controversy. As noted in The New York Post report, Coates’s invocation of Turner’s rebellion is likely intended to highlight the desperation that arises from systemic oppression, suggesting that, much like Turner and his fellow rebels, Palestinians in Gaza are acting out of a sense of powerlessness and rage against what he perceives as an oppressive Israeli regime.

However, as The New York Post report said, Coates’s comments about the morality of such violence have drawn criticism not only from white intellectuals but also from within the Black community. Coates has long been an outspoken critic of white supremacy and has built a career around critiquing the systemic racism that continues to pervade American society. His most famous work, “Between the World and Me,” is written as a letter from a father to his son, explaining the legacy of racial injustice in the United States. Yet even within this framework, his comments on the Gaza conflict have touched a nerve.

Coates’s comments also bring into focus long-standing tensions between him and other Black intellectuals, particularly Cornel West. Known for his fiery critiques of Black elites and intellectuals, West has been critical of Coates in the past, accusing him of being disconnected from the lived realities of Black Americans. In 2017, West told The New York Times Magazine, “Who’s the ‘we’? When’s the last time he’s been through the ghetto, in the ‘hoods, to the schools and indecent housing and mass unemployment?” West’s critique underscores a sentiment that Coates, despite his prominence, may be seen by some as disconnected from the very communities he writes about.

The New York Post report also said that this disconnect may also explain part of the backlash to Coates’s recent comments. While Coates frames his analysis as a critique of apartheid and systemic violence, many critics see his remarks as morally ambiguous or insensitive, particularly given the nature of the Hamas attack, which involved the targeting of civilians, including women and children.

Despite the controversy, Ta-Nehisi Coates remains a towering figure in contemporary discourse on race, systemic oppression, and colonialism. His books, including “We Were Eight Years in Power,” a collection of essays penned during the Obama administration, have cemented his status as a leading voice in critiques of white supremacy. His work on Marvel’s Black Panther comic series also extended his influence into popular culture, further expanding his reach and impact.

However, Coates’s comments on the Gaza conflict may mark a turning point in how his ideas are received by the public. As The New York Post reported, the backlash to his remarks reflects a broader discomfort with drawing direct parallels between resistance to historical slavery and the violent tactics of modern-day terrorist groups such as Hamas. The criticism from both academic and online communities sheds light on the complexities of discussing violence in the context of resistance, particularly when the violence in question involves innocent civilians.