This thesis explores the ideological work of the intellectuals involved in the Palestinian Resistance, and the Palestinian Liberation Organization more specifically, from 1967 to 1974. In particular, it sets out to answer the following question: What were the changing roles of the intellectuals involved in the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) from 1967 to 1974, particularly in relation to anti-colonial politics, and why did they change? Being a particularly fertile time in Palestinian resistance history, many of those involved in the movement had the opportunity to explore new ideological possibilities for resistance and worked to link their movement ideologically to revolutionary resistance movements taking place globally at that time. The 1967 defeat was particularly poignant for Palestinian and Arab intellectuals, as it demonstrated to them that the work of the Ba'thists and Arab nationalists during the 1950s and 1960s had not created the necessary changes to liberate Palestine and, in their opinions, to liberate the entire society. Such changes, the intellectuals had hoped, would bring forth a larger revolution for the Arab world. With criticisms of local regimes, the intervention of external governments, and Zionism itself, they worked to reshape Palestinian resistance and reimagine Arab liberation. Yet due to fractured relationships and general disunity, it became difficult to create the type of resistance they had imagined. Three factors have seemed constraining: the shortcomings of the intellectuals, external factors, and problems in the ideas they developed for their society.
Along with presenting the research question and hypothesis and defining key terms, the Introduction provides a literature review. The rest of the thesis chapters are arranged thematically and chronologically. Chapter One provides historical links between this newer generation of intellectuals and the older generation at the end of the Ottoman Empire and the beginning of the Mandate period. In Chapter Two, the initial reactions to the 1967 Defeat and the unique opportunity the PLO and its leaders had following it are analysed. Chapter Three considers the factionalism that took place within the PLO and the various ideological streams that were born of this. Chapter Four explicates the particular reasons why the ideologies they developed were troubled from the start, as well as some of the fundamental ironies within them. In addition to the possibility that their ideas did not suit the needs of the population in part because they did not have mass support, Chapter Five raises the notion that the efforts of the PLO's intellectuals may have been overly quixotic, as some have argued. The Conclusion suggests that, in many ways, the period ends as it begins, with their dreams of revolution as dreams and their criticisms of the society and each other as they were after soon after the Defeat
