6 ms·

It is hard to say Israel has less right to the land it took over than say New Zealand. The main difference is how long ago the settling happened.

by xupybd 5y ago

2939223 5y ago
Except Pakeha aren't carpet-bombing Maori in droves.
DoctorNick 5y ago
Yes, that's correct.
crooked-v 5y ago
New Zealand is a bad example to use, given that it's one of the few cases where settlement was based on a non-coerced treaty intended to actively integrate the native people as equal citizens with the settlers. While the NZ government later spent about a hundred years ignoring the treaty and treating the Maori badly, the treaty itself, the process that led to it, and the actions of the settler leaders at the time of its signing had a legitimacy that most other cases of colonization and settlement (including that of Israel) have generally lacked.
- refurb 5y ago
  Israel has a lack of legitimacy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Pla...
let_me_ask_this 5y ago
In that case Israel should follow New Zealand's example and allow all Palestinians to become citizens, with full rights, stop being an ethnostate for Jews, stop with the racism and start behaving like the progressive country they pretend to be.
- 2939223 5y ago
  Such behaviour conflicts with a core tenet of Judaism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    No it doesn't. > In Judaism, "chosenness" is the belief that the Jews, via descent from the ancient Israelites, are the chosen people, i.e. selected to be in a covenant with God. > This view, however, does not always preclude a belief that God has a relationship with other peoples—rather, Judaism held that God had entered into a covenant with all humankind, and that Jews and non-Jews alike have a relationship with God. Biblical references as well as rabbinic literature support this view: Moses refers to the "God of the spirits of all flesh",[4] and the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) also identifies prophets outside the community of Israel. Based on these statements, some rabbis theorized that, in the words of Nethanel ibn Fayyumi, a Yemenite Jewish theologian of the 12th century, "God permitted to every people something he forbade to others...[and] God sends a prophet to every people according to their own language."(Levine, 1907/1966) > The Mishnah continues, and states that anyone who kills or saves a single human, not Jewish, life, has done the same (save or kill) to an entire world. The Tosefta, an important supplement to the Mishnah,[5] also states: "Righteous people of all nations have a share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Which part of this is about racial supremacy?
    - 2939223 5y ago
      Chosenness by definition is divisive. From antiquity to the present, the idea of being divinely chosen has had powerful and often pernicious effects. If only one group has been divinely chosen then others have not been, and that justifies subjugating them and taking their land. Such rationalization has been used repeatedly, in the most virulent forms of anti-Semitism, in the enslavement and even extermination of aboriginal peoples, and in the confiscation of land by force from those not chosen—be they Canaanites, Jews, Muslims, Africans, Native Americans, Palestinians, and too many others.
- deleted 5y ago
smsm42 5y ago
There's a little difference though... There wasn't an English state in New Zealand since about 10th century BCE.
- xupybd 5y ago
  If we say you can claim land your people held in the 10th century the globe is in trouble.
  - smsm42 5y ago
    "in" and "since" is somewhat different. Do Chinese have a claim on China? Do Japanese have a claim on Japan? Are Spaniards OK to live in Spain? Are Jews ok to live in Judea? Looks like for all of these questions the answer is "duh, yes for sure" - except for the last one. I wonder...
    - xupybd 5y ago
      The Romans destroyed the Jewish state and renamed the area. I don't celebrate that but I'm sure that there has not been a Jewish state since the 10th century. That is the difference.

It is hard to say Israel has less right to the land it took over than say New Zealand. The main difference is how long ago the settling happened.

by xupybd 5y ago

It is hard to say Israel has less right to the land it took over than say New Zealand. The main difference is how long ago the settling happened.

2939223 5y ago

Except Pakeha aren't carpet-bombing Maori in droves.

DoctorNick 5y ago

Yes, that's correct.

crooked-v 5y ago

New Zealand is a bad example to use, given that it's one of the few cases where settlement was based on a non-coerced treaty intended to actively integrate the native people as equal citizens with the settlers. While the NZ government later spent about a hundred years ignoring the treaty and treating the Maori badly, the treaty itself, the process that led to it, and the actions of the settler leaders at the time of its signing had a legitimacy that most other cases of colonization and settlement (including that of Israel) have generally lacked.

refurb 5y ago
Israel has a lack of legitimacy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Pla...

let_me_ask_this 5y ago

In that case Israel should follow New Zealand's example and allow all Palestinians to become citizens, with full rights, stop being an ethnostate for Jews, stop with the racism and start behaving like the progressive country they pretend to be.

2939223 5y ago
Such behaviour conflicts with a core tenet of Judaism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  No it doesn't. > In Judaism, "chosenness" is the belief that the Jews, via descent from the ancient Israelites, are the chosen people, i.e. selected to be in a covenant with God. > This view, however, does not always preclude a belief that God has a relationship with other peoples—rather, Judaism held that God had entered into a covenant with all humankind, and that Jews and non-Jews alike have a relationship with God. Biblical references as well as rabbinic literature support this view: Moses refers to the "God of the spirits of all flesh",[4] and the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) also identifies prophets outside the community of Israel. Based on these statements, some rabbis theorized that, in the words of Nethanel ibn Fayyumi, a Yemenite Jewish theologian of the 12th century, "God permitted to every people something he forbade to others...[and] God sends a prophet to every people according to their own language."(Levine, 1907/1966) > The Mishnah continues, and states that anyone who kills or saves a single human, not Jewish, life, has done the same (save or kill) to an entire world. The Tosefta, an important supplement to the Mishnah,[5] also states: "Righteous people of all nations have a share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Which part of this is about racial supremacy?
  - 2939223 5y ago
    Chosenness by definition is divisive. From antiquity to the present, the idea of being divinely chosen has had powerful and often pernicious effects. If only one group has been divinely chosen then others have not been, and that justifies subjugating them and taking their land. Such rationalization has been used repeatedly, in the most virulent forms of anti-Semitism, in the enslavement and even extermination of aboriginal peoples, and in the confiscation of land by force from those not chosen—be they Canaanites, Jews, Muslims, Africans, Native Americans, Palestinians, and too many others.
deleted 5y ago

smsm42 5y ago

There's a little difference though... There wasn't an English state in New Zealand since about 10th century BCE.

xupybd 5y ago
If we say you can claim land your people held in the 10th century the globe is in trouble.
- smsm42 5y ago
  "in" and "since" is somewhat different. Do Chinese have a claim on China? Do Japanese have a claim on Japan? Are Spaniards OK to live in Spain? Are Jews ok to live in Judea? Looks like for all of these questions the answer is "duh, yes for sure" - except for the last one. I wonder...
  - xupybd 5y ago
    The Romans destroyed the Jewish state and renamed the area. I don't celebrate that but I'm sure that there has not been a Jewish state since the 10th century. That is the difference.