Wednesday, September 23, 2026

Review of One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This by Omar El Akkad

This book review was written by Eugene Kernes   

Book can be found in: 
Book Club Event = Book List (11/21/2026)
Intriguing Connections = 1) Biographies: Auto, Memoir, and Other Types


Watch Short Review


Excerpts

“One of the hallmarks of Western liberalism is an assumption, in hindsight, of virtuous resistance as the only polite expectation of people on the receiving end of colonialism.  While the terrible thing is happening – while the land is still being stolen and the natives still being killed – any form of opposition is terroristic and must be crushed for the sake of civilization.  But decades, centuries later, when enough of the land has been stolen and enough of the natives killed, it is safe enough to venerate resistance in hindsight.” – Omar El Akkad, Chapter 1: Departure, Page 19-20

 

“There’s always been a contradiction at the heart of this enterprise.  In the modern, well-dressed definition, adhered to in one form or another at almost every major newspaper, the journalist cannot be an activist, must remain allegiant to a self-erasing neutrality.  Yet journalism at its core is one of the most activist endeavors there is.  A reporter is supposed to agitate against power, against privilege.  Against the slimy wall of press releases and PR nothing-speak that has come to protect every major business and government boardroom ever since Watergate.  A reporter is supposed to agitate against silence.” – Omar El Akkad, Chapter 2: Witness, Page 37

 

“How long a society can function under such a journalistic model before deteriorating into something unsalvageable is an open question.  But the entire notion of reporter as referee/announcer/scorekeeper, even if it has any merit, requires the game on the field to be played in accordance with some set of rules.  It has no capacity to deal with players who kneecap their opponents in the locker room, who have no interest in the rules or even the game itself.  Listing one position and then the other and letting the reader make up their own mind fails entirely in the face of plain bad faith.” – Omar El Akkad, Chapter Two: Witness, Page 39


Review

Is This An Overview?

To defend civilization, atrocious crimes are committed.  Crimes of the uncivilized sort.  As most people within a society are not bloodthirsty, most people need special language to be used to prevent them from becoming upset about the atrocities committed for their benefit.  To protect people’s emotions, living has become the aberration.  The bloodthirsty do not need such language.  Acts that create condition of having to choose leaders and groups based on the lowest benchmark, of whom is less monstrous than the other monsters.

 

While land is being stolen and people are being killed, any form of opposition becomes an act of terrorism.  Those resisting atrocities need to be crushed for civilization to survive.  After the terrible events have happened, the prior resistance becomes virtuous.  The resistance becomes venerated in hindsight. 

 

As all adults of the opposition become perceived as responsible for the resistance, dead children become a method of justifying resistance.  After a genocide, there is no controversy of calling a genocide by what genocide is, a genocide.  But during the genocide, there is controversy as the resistance becomes considered terrorists who cannot be politically defended.  After the killings, people will try to forget what happened as a form of psychological self-defense. 

 

Journalists are caught in conflict of interest.  Newspapers want neutral journalists, but journalism is an active endeavor to agitate power.  To agitate against silence.  The incentives involved in presenting information, prevents providing readers with different positions to make up their own mind.  Journalists need to make an income, and therefor focus on what incites rage and fear as that draws attention of readers to buy products from the advertisements provided in the newspapers.  Journalists cannot protect laws, when various opponents of journalism do not care for rules or violence against journalist. 

 

Caveats?

This is a memoir, primarily about journalism.  Meant more as a means to vent the frustration of being an activist against various violence acts and the culture of violence.  Not meant to provide comprehensive information on the various topics referenced.  


Questions to Consider while Reading the Book

•What is the raison d’etre of the book?  For what purpose did the author write the book?  Why do people read this book?
•What are some limitations of the book?
•To whom would you suggest this book?
•What was the author’s book club experience?  
•What about a bomb kills?
•What is needed to prevent barbarism?
•What is the purpose of language? 
•Who does the author represent? 
•What happened in Egypt during the 1980s?
•Why did the author’s father leave Egypt?
•How is resistance perceived?
•What did the Israel govern do circa 2023?
•Why are children referenced during killings?
•Who should assimilate? 
•What training do journalists receive when going to an unstable region?
•What working conditions and incentives do journalists receive? 
•Are journalists neutral?
•What is the difference between how journalists are perceived when persecuted by Russia and Israel?
•Are journalists referee/announcer/scorekeeper?
•By what benchmark should politicians be judged by?
•What is Guantanamo Bay military courtroom?
•What is the author’s stand on violence?  From whom and by whom?

Book Details
Publisher:               Alfred A. Knopf [Penguin Random House]
Edition ISBN:         9780593804155
Pages to read:          140
Publication:             2025
1st Edition:              2025
Format:                    eBook 

Ratings out of 5:
Readability    5
Content          2
Overall          2