On February 25th of 2024, Aaron Bushnell walked to the Israeli embassy in Washington D.C. wearing his air force fatigues, poured a liquid over his body, shouted “free Palestine”, and lit himself on fire. Bushnell was just twenty-five years old.
Bushnell live-streamed his immolation on Twitch so that the whole world could watch his protest. And watch we did.
The video quickly went viral, as Bushnell may have hoped. The overwhelming response was that of shock, anger, disbelief, and calls-to-action in honor of his legacy. Bushnell’s sacrifice was a shot heard across the world in the struggle against genocidal regimes. The message was loud and clear.
Self-immolation has been used as a form of political protest for centuries, but its modern iteration took shape as a means to protest American aggression in Vietnam. Immediately Bushnell was compared to Thích Quảng Đức, the Vietnamese Monk most associated with the famous photograph of himself being serenely engulfed in flames. Although it is a common misconception that Đức’s display was a commitment to anti-war politics, in reality it was done as a protest against the religious persecution of Buddhists under South Vietnamese President Ngô Đình Diệm. A better parallel might be Norman Morrison, a peace activist and quaker that doused himself with kerosene and self-immolated in front of the Pentagon in 1965, or perhaps a more modern example is Malachai Ritscher, whose self-immolation near downtown Chicago to protest the invasion of Iraq went largely unreported in the mainstream media.
One reaction to Bushnell’s sacrifice is hope that widespread coverage of this incident would incite a shift in public perception, that this would incite the American public to awaken from a complacent slumber. Indeed, one of the only true reactions after viewing such a scene is to be jolted out of complacency. But whether this incident will receive the coverage it deserves is yet to be seen. For instance, it was only through researching Bushnell that I learned a similar case of self-immolation occurred only a few months earlier in front of the Israeli Consulate in Atlanta. In that case we still don’t know if the person survived or not. Hell, the person’s name has not even been publicly identified yet.
Like in the case of Malachai Ritscher, the media has a vested interest in implicit blackouts of anti-war protest. We’ve already seen the widespread and systematic suppression of pro-Palestinian protestors in the US, the firings, demotions, and discrediting of sympathetic voices in the media, and the litany of state legislation aimed at criminalizing any public demonstrations for Palestine. There have been witch hunts against largely benign figures like the former Harvard President and the doxing of hundreds of pro-Palestine protestors at that same institution. Not only is there an active genocide occurring in Gaza, but the American political establishment is hellbent on waging war at home, stifling dissent and portraying an image of “business as usual.”
Bushnell’s actions will likely shake some people from their negligent normality and open their eyes to the atrocities being committed, but the mainstream media and popular right-wing actors will do everything they can to suppress the message the Bushnell ignited. And when they can’t suppress the truth, they will distort his vision.
Already the mission has been taken up to discredit Bushnell by any means necessary. He’s been called mentally ill, deranged, a traitor to his country, antisemitic, a Hamas supporter, and a whole range of other nonsense. Washed up propagandist and Julius Streicher wannabe Laura Loomer was one of the first to take this position, writing on Twitter, “This is what mental illness looks like … Fuck him. He is a traitor to his country.” The rabble of genocidal Zionists followed suit with similar accusations. Law Professor David Greenfield justified this “mental illness” position by citing the Werther copycat effect used to describe mass-shooters that emulate other mass shooters. One headline from the Washington Post read, “Airman who set self on fire grew up on religious compound, had anarchist past.” And when not actively trying to discredit him, the media can ignore his reasonings, like the NYT article whose headline leaves a mystery as to why exactly Bushnell self-immolated in front of the Israeli Embassy.
Among the supposedly “political left” a host of other accusations have been thrown around. Some have taken up the mantle of accusing mental illness or obstructively debating the social benefit of Bushnell’s actions. Others have been more creative, describing Bushnell as an individualist devoid of proletarian consciousness, or an adventurist seeking infamy. A select group of very wise “anti-imperialists” have taken the route of condemning Bushnell for being a member of the armed forces, or even going as far to say that Bushnell’s actions were part of a government psyop.
The cowards peddling this nonsense truly have no shame, and one can only hope that with time they’ll come to terms with how detestable these claims are. This was not merely an act of suicide resulting from depression or other mental ailments, and whether Bushnell suffered from any mental illness is entirely irrelevant. This was a revolutionary suicide done by a man disgusted by his country’s complicity in an ongoing genocide. It was both an act of desperation and one of intense hope for a better future. It is not selfishness or ego, but one of true care and principle. As the Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh one said, we must “try to understand those who have sacrificed themselves … it is done to wake us up.”
While recording himself walking to the Israeli Embassy, Bushnell remarked, “I’m about to engage in an extreme act of protest. But compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine at the hand of their colonizers, it’s not extreme at all. This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.” The ruling class sets the parameters for what protests are acceptable and which are not. Marches and pickets are begrudgingly tolerated, as are sit-ins and other peaceful demonstrations. Even the right to burn the American flag has been legally upheld as legitimate protest. But as of late the American ruling class have initiated an all-out assault against peaceful pro-Palestine protestors, as previously mentioned.
These kinds of protests, while largely symbolic, do show some amount of appetite for revolt on the part of those demonstrating, and as the political elite have shown an unwavering support for Israel’s genocide regime, more “radical” displays have begun to emerge in the form of road blockades, media-intensive public disruptions, and some limited cases of direct action. This is what Bushnell meant when he said this is “what the ruling class has decided will be normal.” The traditional avenues of change have clearly been barricaded, so what are we left with? As JFK, the famous war criminal, once remarked “Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
This is why I find the discussions around the “efficacy” of Bushnell’s actions not only in poor-taste but also unproductive. Whether self-immolation is a viable strategy for social change is irrelevant. Instead, we should be discussing what his actions mean for the movement fighting for a free Palestine. The death tolls are rising every day, over 30,000 Palestinians have been murdered since October and counting, almost 13,000 of those being women and children. Food, water, and medical aid are being systematically denied to Palestinians, all while Zionists make a mockery and celebrate these facts. Those of us in the Western world with two eyes and a beating heart can no longer idly sit by. Desperation is growing. The center cannot hold, for long. Bushnell could no longer stand by and be complicit, and this sentiment will only grow more widespread as the genocide continues.
We may or may not see a growing number of self-immolations, but this is not to affirm the bogus “copycat” allegations made by some. Instead, Bushnell’s actions will mark a watershed moment in the movement, one that disposes of traditional means of protest, one that embraces the urgency of the moment. Bushnell’s act was a sacrificial demonstration, but it was also one of violence. Self-directed and inward, but violence nonetheless. If marches are a symbolic gesture towards revolt, then self-immolation symbolizes the generalized appetite for violence. Reactionaries and genocidal Zionists have watched with horror as public highways during rush-hour are blockaded by protestors, and they have the nerve to call that terrorism. But if the genocide in Gaza continues unabated then the appetite for violence will only grow with it. And in those cases, the violence won’t be self-directed.
Besides seeing those witnesses that heeded Aaron’s call to action, the most humanity-affirming aspect of this is the overwhelmingly positive response Aaron has received from Palestinians and the broader Arab world. He has rightly been described as a martyr, with many favorably comparing Aaron’s bravery to the timidity shown by some Arab leaders that merely feign support for Palestine. While so many in the West rushed to paint unfair accusations against Bushnell, international communities immediately recognized his righteousness.
Aaron Bushnell, like Christ on the cross, committed a truly selfless act of sacrifice for the betterment of humanity. We must not forget him or his message. He will be slandered, there will be attempts to discredit him, but he won’t be forgotten. The same rage that Aaron felt will be burning bright in the heart of every protestor, every demonstrator, and every freedom fighter struggling for a liberated Palestine. There is no time for mourning, there is no time for monuments. To carry on Aaron’s legacy there is only time for action.
Rest in Power.
2/25/2024