4 ms·

The ADL article does no such thing. While true that the Israeli oppression of its Arab and Muslim minorities within its internationally recognised borders is n

The ADL article does no such thing. While true that the Israeli oppression of its Arab and Muslim minorities within its internationally recognised borders is not exactly the same as South African apartheid, the analogy credibly holds. The oppression of the Arab population under its occupation and the consistent collective punishment visited upon those captive populations outside its internationally recognized borders is a whole other kettle of fish. That Israel is an ethno-nationalist state that has many laws that privilege people of a given religion over another is fact [1]. Whether the level of state discrimination at this point constitutes apartheid is arguable. That one can make the argument is not antisemitic. You can disagree about the extent, but it's stifling free speech to lump it under antisemitism and say you cannot bring it up. So credible, that a variety of Israeli leaders have warned against the very thing.[2] And it is relevant. If you believe that South Africa during apartheid should be called out for its apartheid, then it IS relevant to bring it up. If the murder of Khashoggi by the Saudis tars their economic achievements, why shouldn't this? Funnily enough, South Africa under apartheid was a plucky little country that withstood much indigenous aggression and had a world leading economy. [1] https://www.adalah.org/en/content/view/7771 https://www.adalah.org/en/content/view/7771 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy#Government_responses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analo...

hedgehogbear 8y ago
The analogy holds in the same manner as claiming that Roosevelt is like Hitler because they both had a mustache. The superficial similarities between the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and South African apartheid are precisely those which aren't exclusive to any definition of Apartheid. There is no racial segregation in Israel, but an ongoing occupation and conflict between two separate and distinct political entities. It's no more of an "apartheid" than any other occupation in human history. As for the "many laws that privilege people of a given religion over another": a. Religion has nothing to do with it. The word you are looking for is ethnicity. Some laws favouring the Jewish ethnicity do naturally exist in Israel, as the whole idea behind its creation was to provide a national home for the Jewish people in order to insure their preservation. Similar laws exists in many European (and other) countries as well [1]. b. The majority of laws mentioned in your link have nothing to do with this. Let's look at the list of "discriminating laws" from one of the linked files: > Law imposing a mandatory minimum sentence on convicted stone-throwers > Law revoking child allowances from parents of children convicted of security offenses > Law imposing fines on the parents of stone-throwers and others > New NGO “funding transparency” bill And others of similar nature. Claiming that those laws are discriminating against the Palestinians is like claiming that homicide laws in the US are discriminating against racial groups that are disproportionately more likely to commit homicide. That this nonsense is considered a sound argument by supposedly intelligent people is a good indication of the amounts of irrational bias surrounding any discussion of Israel. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality_law#Provisions_to_simplify_immigration_of_favored_ethnic_groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality_law#Provisions_to_...

hedgehogbear 8y ago

The analogy holds in the same manner as claiming that Roosevelt is like Hitler because they both had a mustache. The superficial similarities between the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and South African apartheid are precisely those which aren't exclusive to any definition of Apartheid. There is no racial segregation in Israel, but an ongoing occupation and conflict between two separate and distinct political entities. It's no more of an "apartheid" than any other occupation in human history. As for the "many laws that privilege people of a given religion over another": a. Religion has nothing to do with it. The word you are looking for is ethnicity. Some laws favouring the Jewish ethnicity do naturally exist in Israel, as the whole idea behind its creation was to provide a national home for the Jewish people in order to insure their preservation. Similar laws exists in many European (and other) countries as well [1]. b. The majority of laws mentioned in your link have nothing to do with this. Let's look at the list of "discriminating laws" from one of the linked files: > Law imposing a mandatory minimum sentence on convicted stone-throwers > Law revoking child allowances from parents of children convicted of security offenses > Law imposing fines on the parents of stone-throwers and others > New NGO “funding transparency” bill And others of similar nature. Claiming that those laws are discriminating against the Palestinians is like claiming that homicide laws in the US are discriminating against racial groups that are disproportionately more likely to commit homicide. That this nonsense is considered a sound argument by supposedly intelligent people is a good indication of the amounts of irrational bias surrounding any discussion of Israel. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality_law#Provisions_to_simplify_immigration_of_favored_ethnic_groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality_law#Provisions_to_...