I wanted to write a very long essay on ‘What is really happening between Israel and Gaza?’ I put together a storyline and started drafting the sections but then I changed my mind and decided: let me talk from my heart (even though it never ends in a good way).

In this essay, I want to address not what is happening on the ground. The wars happening on the ground are terrible. There is no such thing as a good war by definition. They are either bad or very bad. Wars have been always happening and will be always happening for many reasons including the game of being a superpower and pure business reasons. But this is outside of scope for now.

Instead, I want to talk about the image of the war in our minds. And suggest some alternatives to how we picture this image today.

This will be a rough approximation but very often the narrative of ‘the war’ converges to the idea of colonialism or in other words ‘some reach and powerful people having power over lives of poor and powerless people’ including taking over their identity, historical heritage, the feeling of self-worth, freedom of choice and other things.

Which when written on the paper objectively looks like a very bad thing. So whenever I meet young Americans and Europeans complaining about colonialism as a very bad thing I can relate to it in the context of dissecting the idea of colonialism in laboratory conditions. The problem is… it is easy. While trying to understand all the layers of the idea in the environment of the world as it is in 2025 – it is hard. Because how do you know what is right and what is wrong? 

A thought experiment: a young white product manager born and based in Paris on a salary of $150k per month tweeting how bad colonialism is. Because of that, according to them, Israel should stop all the wars and withdraw from everywhere, the US, the UK, and Europe should have the open border policy, minorities (those who are branded as minorities not real minorities) should get the freedom of self-expression while white people should shut up and listen. And all of that, in the mind of the young white product manager born and based in Paris will lead to peace in the world and prosperity for all.

This worldview has a couple of issues:

• Problem one: The conflict doesn’t end when one party withdraws voluntarily. The conflict ends when there is an agreement of how it is resolved where both parties are eager to take the option. If one party withdraws from the conflict – another party will take everything that was given up voluntarily and then everything that is possible to take over by force. To understand how the conflict can be resolved meeting mutual interests – think about the incentives. But not those declared in the media publicly, think what are the real incentives. 

• Problem two: Branded as minorities and being minorities is not the same. If someone is ‘branded’ as minority and their interests are aggressively amplified on the media – think who is paying for it and who is the real stakeholder in this campaign.

I have two groups of friends who have changed their mind this year. They stopped seeing colonialism as a main threat to humanity, both in private and in public. The first group – friends from the UK experiencing the results of illegal immigration affecting their personal (wealthy and comfortable) life in London. The second group are European friends living close to Hungary and Poland whose borders were ‘occasionally’ crossed by Russian drones. I’ve met dozens of people who told me that the first military drone / missile flying over their head changed their perception of the world 180 degrees. 

Opinions change drastically when one’s interests are at stake. And on the opposite, when there is nothing at stake – it is very easy to talk. So when you see someone talking, it is always good to ask: what are their personal stakes in the subject?

We live in the post-truth world. Which means that even the smartest, most thoughtful and high-integrity people often do not know if something is true. At the same time, in 2025, we source most of our world understanding from media resources. Which makes it very tricky to see what is true and to shape personal opinions of what is right. It puts way higher responsibility on everyone to hold opinions, to meet contrarian and even adversarial takes, to stay thoughtful, respectful, and open-minded towards other opinions and sides. 

If I wanted to look critically at holding strong position on colonialism in the modern world, I would go this way:

What are the personal stakes and incentives of the one who is holding the position? 

The one who is there

If the one talking is currently living in the colonialised country and personally feels the pain of this reality – this is one thing. And this position should get a lot of weight. 

The one who knows someone who has been there

If it is a person whose grandma or grandpa has experienced the reality of life in a colonialised country while they personally have never met it face to face – I would take the weight of 10% (compared to the previous case). Because it is very often ego-driven. 

The one who is formally unrelated 

If someone is not formally affiliated but is holding a very strong opinion about colonialism oppressing the poor and suppressed – it can be everything behind the reason. So think of their incentives and personal experience: maybe they made serious research and came to this conclusion on their own, maybe this is the position their social bubble holds so they need to hold it as well if they want to stay a part of this bubble, maybe it gives them the feeling of being proper and standing on the right side of the world, maybe they also feel poor and suppressed by rich and powerful (often happens to artists) and genuinely connect to the problem, maybe something else. 

The one whose career depends on online engagement

This is the most dangerous trap (out of all described). Many people live from the position of ‘I want’ and ‘I need’. And they do not think about how their actions affect the world around them. Not because they are stupid or have bad intentions – it just never came to their mind. And you can’t blame anyone that the thing didn’t come to their mind. 

If the analytics platform says that tweeting ‘Islamofobia’ or ‘Free Palestine’ doubles their engagement they will go for it. They could also fight for dolphins’ rights to be fed LSD or any other matter. It’s just important for their career and their career is important for them.

We prefer to live in the world with clarity. We like to know what is true, what is false, who is good, who is bad, whom to support, whom to condemn. But this is a very childish position. The real world when we meet face to face is complex. You meet a person, they can be incredibly good and kind with their family, and a complete asshole with their colleagues. They can throw Molotov cocktails at the window of the school because they genuinely believe that it will make the world better. They can give out a friend as a political spy to the governments saving their family because once someone convinced them that family is more important than friends. 

There is no clarity in the world. The world is driven by superpowers competing for staying superpowers. And wars are their tool to survive. 

Today, it’s everyone’s personal responsibility to be thoughtful and conscious about what we believe in, who we support, what we contribute to. And not to be afraid to admit being wrong, because the media are driving the world nuts.  

People say ‘check sources’ but then the ‘sources’ are media which have their stakeholders and serve their interests. Today, as never before, we need to be able to read between the rows, hold unpopular opinions, stand for our opinions, and build things that by design make wars impossible. It’s a very hard ask, but this is the only way – personal responsibility. 

There are many things to be said about colonialism and maybe one day I will write that long essay I wanted to write, but now, for a moment, let’s think about a couple of common questions from an adult and mature worldview:

The country is not a noble prize and not a Christmas gift. It’s neither deserved nor is it gifted. As we can see from history, whoever can found a country – can have a country. And whoever can hold a country – can have a country for a long enough period. But if one wants to have a country – they have to make it work: to found it, to create institutions, to make other countries consider their country a country, to place it on the world economic, cultural, and geopolitical landscape, to make it attractive for people to want to be citizens of this country, etc. No one gets a country for being a nice person or a poor person. People get a country because they have enough capabilities to found a country. 

The real answer is sometimes they do. Both organizations were founded with very noble and humanitarian intentions. However, what really matters is how they function, and not what is written on the paper. Whatever can be exploited – will be exploited. Because human nature is to see a resource in everything that can be used as a resource. 

NGOs are often exploited as a resource. I won’t drop here dozens of examples, it can be easily found on the internet. But I will say that unfortunately, most of the branches of the UN and the Red Cross serve non-humanitarian interests. So donating to them doesn’t really make the world a better place. It is more reasonable to donate to small locally organized initiatives with clear goals, stakeholders, and execution. Luckily today we have cryptocurrencies that allow donations to parts of the world that can’t accept direct bank transfers or particular currencies.

Finding these organizations takes more time and effort, but here is the question: do I really want to help or do I want to get a feeling that I am helping? 

I see a lot of people saying ‘stop the war’. I go to social media and I see people calling (whom?) to stop the war. And I also know some beautiful stories when the wars were stopped by peaceful protests. Furthermore, I’ve been in the shoes of someone who believes in it. Unfortunately, most of the wars can’t be stopped by asking to stop them, and most terrorists won’t put down the bombs because people have asked them on twitter. The wars end when both parties’ optimal strategy is not to continue the war. It is about ‘business’ and most of the time it’s about survival (as a group, an organization, or a country). And when the stake is survival – believe me you want to survive. Even if some people on twitter will say you are very not kind. 

Colonialism is a very speculative matter, and a very consumable matter, because it clearly divides people into good and bad. And it makes it very easy to stand with the good people. But it’s a trap.

The world is driven by superpowers. Who does everything that will allow them to stay superpowers. And such a category as ‘being good’ does not exist on their balance sheet. 

My opinion on what to do in this situation and the world we got to live in – is to stay thoughtful, conscious, and take full responsibility for our opinions and mistakes. When I want to stand for something, either in an internal conversation with myself, in a DM with a friend, or publishing something on social media – I ask myself why do I want to stand for it right now? Do I believe in it? Am I sure of it? How sure am I of it? And when I say something and form my opinion, I try to say not only what but also why I believe in it, why I stand for it, and why I think it is important.

I am writing this essay, because I see how the topic of colonialism on social media actually puts people who used to collaborate to different sides of what is right. And while holding different opinions is a fruitful thing for our future, breaking the bridges because of what someone (who maybe was paid for it) posted on social media – is stealing our future. 

We got the world as it is. But it’s on us how it will be when we give it to the next generation and generation of our children. And for the world to be a less violent, and more fruitful place with more opportunities – we need to stay together, to build together, to talk to each other, and not to be afraid of holding different opinions because those opinions are respected (even if challenged). And I genuinely believe that we have all chances for it.

Thank you for reading. You are welcome to share your thoughts and argue with me here: lisaakselrod@gmail.com

I wanted to write a very long essay on ‘What is really happening between Israel and Gaza?’ I put together a storyline and started drafting the sections but then I changed my mind and decided: let me talk from my heart (even though it never ends in a good way).

In this essay, I want to address not what is happening on the ground. The wars happening on the ground are terrible. There is no such thing as a good war by definition. They are either bad or very bad. Wars have been always happening and will be always happening for many reasons including the game of being a superpower and pure business reasons. But this is outside of scope for now.

Instead, I want to talk about the image of the war in our minds. And suggest some alternatives to how we picture this image today.

This will be a rough approximation but very often the narrative of ‘the war’ converges to the idea of colonialism or in other words ‘some reach and powerful people having power over lives of poor and powerless people’ including taking over their identity, historical heritage, the feeling of self-worth, freedom of choice and other things.

Which when written on the paper objectively looks like a very bad thing. So whenever I meet young Americans and Europeans complaining about colonialism as a very bad thing I can relate to it in the context of dissecting the idea of colonialism in laboratory conditions. The problem is… it is easy. While trying to understand all the layers of the idea in the environment of the world as it is in 2025 – it is hard. Because how do you know what is right and what is wrong? 

A thought experiment: a young white product manager born and based in Paris on a salary of $150k per month tweeting how bad colonialism is. Because of that, according to them, Israel should stop all the wars and withdraw from everywhere, the US, the UK, and Europe should have the open border policy, minorities (those who are branded as minorities not real minorities) should get the freedom of self-expression while white people should shut up and listen. And all of that, in the mind of the young white product manager born and based in Paris will lead to peace in the world and prosperity for all.

This worldview has a couple of issues:

• Problem one: The conflict doesn’t end when one party withdraws voluntarily. The conflict ends when there is an agreement of how it is resolved where both parties are eager to take the option. If one party withdraws from the conflict – another party will take everything that was given up voluntarily and then everything that is possible to take over by force. To understand how the conflict can be resolved meeting mutual interests – think about the incentives. But not those declared in the media publicly, think what are the real incentives. 

• Problem two: Branded as minorities and being minorities is not the same. If someone is ‘branded’ as minority and their interests are aggressively amplified on the media – think who is paying for it and who is the real stakeholder in this campaign.

I have two groups of friends who have changed their mind this year. They stopped seeing colonialism as a main threat to humanity, both in private and in public. The first group – friends from the UK experiencing the results of illegal immigration affecting their personal (wealthy and comfortable) life in London. The second group are European friends living close to Hungary and Poland whose borders were ‘occasionally’ crossed by Russian drones. I’ve met dozens of people who told me that the first military drone / missile flying over their head changed their perception of the world 180 degrees. 

Opinions change drastically when one’s interests are at stake. And on the opposite, when there is nothing at stake – it is very easy to talk. So when you see someone talking, it is always good to ask: what are their personal stakes in the subject?

We live in the post-truth world. Which means that even the smartest, most thoughtful and high-integrity people often do not know if something is true. At the same time, in 2025, we source most of our world understanding from media resources. Which makes it very tricky to see what is true and to shape personal opinions of what is right. It puts way higher responsibility on everyone to hold opinions, to meet contrarian and even adversarial takes, to stay thoughtful, respectful, and open-minded towards other opinions and sides. 

If I wanted to look critically at holding strong position on colonialism in the modern world, I would go this way:

What are the personal stakes and incentives of the one who is holding the position? 

The one who is there

If the one talking is currently living in the colonialised country and personally feels the pain of this reality – this is one thing. And this position should get a lot of weight. 

The one who knows someone who has been there

If it is a person whose grandma or grandpa has experienced the reality of life in a colonialised country while they personally have never met it face to face – I would take the weight of 10% (compared to the previous case). Because it is very often ego-driven. 

The one who is formally unrelated 

If someone is not formally affiliated but is holding a very strong opinion about colonialism oppressing the poor and suppressed – it can be everything behind the reason. So think of their incentives and personal experience: maybe they made serious research and came to this conclusion on their own, maybe this is the position their social bubble holds so they need to hold it as well if they want to stay a part of this bubble, maybe it gives them the feeling of being proper and standing on the right side of the world, maybe they also feel poor and suppressed by rich and powerful (often happens to artists) and genuinely connect to the problem, maybe something else. 

The one whose career depends on online engagement

This is the most dangerous trap (out of all described). Many people live from the position of ‘I want’ and ‘I need’. And they do not think about how their actions affect the world around them. Not because they are stupid or have bad intentions – it just never came to their mind. And you can’t blame anyone that the thing didn’t come to their mind. 

If the analytics platform says that tweeting ‘Islamofobia’ or ‘Free Palestine’ doubles their engagement they will go for it. They could also fight for dolphins’ rights to be fed LSD or any other matter. It’s just important for their career and their career is important for them.

We prefer to live in the world with clarity. We like to know what is true, what is false, who is good, who is bad, whom to support, whom to condemn. But this is a very childish position. The real world when we meet face to face is complex. You meet a person, they can be incredibly good and kind with their family, and a complete asshole with their colleagues. They can throw Molotov cocktails at the window of the school because they genuinely believe that it will make the world better. They can give out a friend as a political spy to the governments saving their family because once someone convinced them that family is more important than friends. 

There is no clarity in the world. The world is driven by superpowers competing for staying superpowers. And wars are their tool to survive. 

Today, it’s everyone’s personal responsibility to be thoughtful and conscious about what we believe in, who we support, what we contribute to. And not to be afraid to admit being wrong, because the media are driving the world nuts.  

People say ‘check sources’ but then the ‘sources’ are media which have their stakeholders and serve their interests. Today, as never before, we need to be able to read between the rows, hold unpopular opinions, stand for our opinions, and build things that by design make wars impossible. It’s a very hard ask, but this is the only way – personal responsibility. 

There are many things to be said about colonialism and maybe one day I will write that long essay I wanted to write, but now, for a moment, let’s think about a couple of common questions from an adult and mature worldview:

The country is not a noble prize and not a Christmas gift. It’s neither deserved nor is it gifted. As we can see from history, whoever can found a country – can have a country. And whoever can hold a country – can have a country for a long enough period. But if one wants to have a country – they have to make it work: to found it, to create institutions, to make other countries consider their country a country, to place it on the world economic, cultural, and geopolitical landscape, to make it attractive for people to want to be citizens of this country, etc. No one gets a country for being a nice person or a poor person. People get a country because they have enough capabilities to found a country. 

The real answer is sometimes they do. Both organizations were founded with very noble and humanitarian intentions. However, what really matters is how they function, and not what is written on the paper. Whatever can be exploited – will be exploited. Because human nature is to see a resource in everything that can be used as a resource. 

NGOs are often exploited as a resource. I won’t drop here dozens of examples, it can be easily found on the internet. But I will say that unfortunately, most of the branches of the UN and the Red Cross serve non-humanitarian interests. So donating to them doesn’t really make the world a better place. It is more reasonable to donate to small locally organized initiatives with clear goals, stakeholders, and execution. Luckily today we have cryptocurrencies that allow donations to parts of the world that can’t accept direct bank transfers or particular currencies.

Finding these organizations takes more time and effort, but here is the question: do I really want to help or do I want to get a feeling that I am helping? 

I see a lot of people saying ‘stop the war’. I go to social media and I see people calling (whom?) to stop the war. And I also know some beautiful stories when the wars were stopped by peaceful protests. Furthermore, I’ve been in the shoes of someone who believes in it. Unfortunately, most of the wars can’t be stopped by asking to stop them, and most terrorists won’t put down the bombs because people have asked them on twitter. The wars end when both parties’ optimal strategy is not to continue the war. It is about ‘business’ and most of the time it’s about survival (as a group, an organization, or a country). And when the stake is survival – believe me you want to survive. Even if some people on twitter will say you are very not kind. 

Colonialism is a very speculative matter, and a very consumable matter, because it clearly divides people into good and bad. And it makes it very easy to stand with the good people. But it’s a trap.

The world is driven by superpowers. Who does everything that will allow them to stay superpowers. And such a category as ‘being good’ does not exist on their balance sheet. 

My opinion on what to do in this situation and the world we got to live in – is to stay thoughtful, conscious, and take full responsibility for our opinions and mistakes. When I want to stand for something, either in an internal conversation with myself, in a DM with a friend, or publishing something on social media – I ask myself why do I want to stand for it right now? Do I believe in it? Am I sure of it? How sure am I of it? And when I say something and form my opinion, I try to say not only what but also why I believe in it, why I stand for it, and why I think it is important.

I am writing this essay, because I see how the topic of colonialism on social media actually puts people who used to collaborate to different sides of what is right. And while holding different opinions is a fruitful thing for our future, breaking the bridges because of what someone (who maybe was paid for it) posted on social media – is stealing our future. 

We got the world as it is. But it’s on us how it will be when we give it to the next generation and generation of our children. And for the world to be a less violent, and more fruitful place with more opportunities – we need to stay together, to build together, to talk to each other, and not to be afraid of holding different opinions because those opinions are respected (even if challenged). And I genuinely believe that we have all chances for it.

Thank you for reading. You are welcome to share your thoughts and argue with me here: lisaakselrod@gmail.com