6 ms·

Yeah it is very peculiar how the British elites was able to establish the Mandate for Palestine to give Jewish people their own state but haven't been able to e

Yeah it is very peculiar how the British elites was able to establish the Mandate for Palestine to give Jewish people their own state but haven't been able to establish something giving British people their own state even after it was explicitly requested.

withoutboats 7y ago
Mods: This user's posting history makes clear they are an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. Why have you not banned them? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20972062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20972062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20918028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20918028
- scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
  Please assume good faith and discuss the topics directly. What is it that you find debatable about my comment? I've always made good faith efforts at productive conversation whether someone agrees or disagrees with me on something
  - erikpukinskis 7y ago
    “Assume good faith” doesn’t mean “ignore evidence of bad faith”.
    - scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
      What evidence of bad faith are you referring to? Interesting how you and "other people" going through my comments have no actual objections to the content of what I say. Hard to have a productive conversation when all you have are dismissive remarks and insults.
      - erikpukinskis 7y ago
        Sure, I will try to unpack my thoughts. You go after Jewish people as a class, rather than specific institutions controlled by Jewish people, which I think is bad faith argumentation. If you criticized Israel, for example, or some specific set of banks I would be ok with that. I admit I would not have the same reaction against another person criticizing “white people” as a class. But I believe I am justified in that because whiteness is not an ethnicity, it is the practice of denial of ethnicity. That makes it a specific institution not a group of people. I am vulnerable also to accusations of hypocrisy because I sometimes criticize men as a class. Maybe that should be out of bounds, (probably is out of bounds on HN) as men are clearly a real biological group and not a concept. However, masculinity (as opposed to manhood) is not a biological reality, it is a system of identity constructed to hold childbearing women in a sex class (i.e. submitting to control of their bodies). So to the extent that men identify with masculinity as opposed to just having a penis and some hormones, I would say we are also open to being attacked as a class, and lose our protected status as an actual “tribe” of people. Although as a side note, I do suspect that when masculinity was originally invented it was quite possibly an identity constructed for the protection of men as an actual ethnographic class of underserved people. Pregnancy does confer actual power and patriarchy I suspect was invented to counterbalance that. However I don’t believe it functions that way today. I suppose you could argue that Jewishness has crossed that rubicon but I don’t see how you could credibly do without getting into holocaust denial which I would also put in the bad faith category. Serious apologies to any Jewish people reading this who may feel by engaging these questions I am being blasé about the threat of antisemitism. I really don’t want to do that, but I also want to hold a hand out for people who are having a hard time understanding the reasoning behind the rules of liberal discourse.
        squiggleblaz 7y ago
        With respect, and despite being completely off topic: > But I believe I am justified in that because whiteness is not an ethnicity, it is the practice of denial of ethnicity. I fundamentally do not understand what that means. Surely I don't have a choice but to be white? What am I denying? It's true that whiteness is not an ethnicity, since Russians and white Americans are surely ethnically distinct - more so, I think, than white and Asian Americans or white and Asian Russians. But beyond that I can't make sense of your sentence. I wonder if it depends on a particular national interpretation of "white" that cannot be accessed by all people who might want to describe someone as "white". But it seems opaque to me.
    - lostjohnny 7y ago
      let it go. HN mods are not here for justice, they'll never admit they are wrong.
      - scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
        >HN mods are not here for justice Is the polite and free discussion of ideas not justice?
- dang 7y ago
  Because we didn't see any of this. We can't moderate what we don't see. That's why the site guidelines ask you to flag comments that shouldn't be on HN, and in egregious cases to email hn@ycombinator.com. To flag a comment, click on its timestamp to go to its page, then click 'flag' at the top. (You need karma > 30 before flag links appear.) Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003570 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003570 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003591 for more.
  - withoutboats 7y ago
    Thankyou.

withoutboats 7y ago

Mods: This user's posting history makes clear they are an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. Why have you not banned them? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20972062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20972062 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20918028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20918028

scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
Please assume good faith and discuss the topics directly. What is it that you find debatable about my comment? I've always made good faith efforts at productive conversation whether someone agrees or disagrees with me on something
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  “Assume good faith” doesn’t mean “ignore evidence of bad faith”.
  - scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
    What evidence of bad faith are you referring to? Interesting how you and "other people" going through my comments have no actual objections to the content of what I say. Hard to have a productive conversation when all you have are dismissive remarks and insults.
    - erikpukinskis 7y ago
      Sure, I will try to unpack my thoughts. You go after Jewish people as a class, rather than specific institutions controlled by Jewish people, which I think is bad faith argumentation. If you criticized Israel, for example, or some specific set of banks I would be ok with that. I admit I would not have the same reaction against another person criticizing “white people” as a class. But I believe I am justified in that because whiteness is not an ethnicity, it is the practice of denial of ethnicity. That makes it a specific institution not a group of people. I am vulnerable also to accusations of hypocrisy because I sometimes criticize men as a class. Maybe that should be out of bounds, (probably is out of bounds on HN) as men are clearly a real biological group and not a concept. However, masculinity (as opposed to manhood) is not a biological reality, it is a system of identity constructed to hold childbearing women in a sex class (i.e. submitting to control of their bodies). So to the extent that men identify with masculinity as opposed to just having a penis and some hormones, I would say we are also open to being attacked as a class, and lose our protected status as an actual “tribe” of people. Although as a side note, I do suspect that when masculinity was originally invented it was quite possibly an identity constructed for the protection of men as an actual ethnographic class of underserved people. Pregnancy does confer actual power and patriarchy I suspect was invented to counterbalance that. However I don’t believe it functions that way today. I suppose you could argue that Jewishness has crossed that rubicon but I don’t see how you could credibly do without getting into holocaust denial which I would also put in the bad faith category. Serious apologies to any Jewish people reading this who may feel by engaging these questions I am being blasé about the threat of antisemitism. I really don’t want to do that, but I also want to hold a hand out for people who are having a hard time understanding the reasoning behind the rules of liberal discourse.
      - squiggleblaz 7y ago
        With respect, and despite being completely off topic: > But I believe I am justified in that because whiteness is not an ethnicity, it is the practice of denial of ethnicity. I fundamentally do not understand what that means. Surely I don't have a choice but to be white? What am I denying? It's true that whiteness is not an ethnicity, since Russians and white Americans are surely ethnically distinct - more so, I think, than white and Asian Americans or white and Asian Russians. But beyond that I can't make sense of your sentence. I wonder if it depends on a particular national interpretation of "white" that cannot be accessed by all people who might want to describe someone as "white". But it seems opaque to me.
  - lostjohnny 7y ago
    let it go. HN mods are not here for justice, they'll never admit they are wrong.
    - scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
      >HN mods are not here for justice Is the polite and free discussion of ideas not justice?
dang 7y ago
Because we didn't see any of this. We can't moderate what we don't see. That's why the site guidelines ask you to flag comments that shouldn't be on HN, and in egregious cases to email hn@ycombinator.com. To flag a comment, click on its timestamp to go to its page, then click 'flag' at the top. (You need karma > 30 before flag links appear.) Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003570 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003570 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21003591 for more.
- withoutboats 7y ago
  Thankyou.