3 ms·

How is it a settler colonial project when even the name 'Jew' is derived from Judea - which is a kingdom that existed where Israel exists today. The US, Canada

How is it a settler colonial project when even the name 'Jew' is derived from Judea - which is a kingdom that existed where Israel exists today. The US, Canada, Australia, NZ can be considered settler's colonies much more than Israel since the europeans who settled there had anything whatsover with those places.

foota 5y ago
It's a fucking region with no relation to the modern state of Israel.
- Protostome 5y ago
  Well, that's simply not true. Judea is the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel. The region was named after the tribe, not the other way around
mclightning 5y ago
Are you saying Israelites that relocated to Israel today are ethnogenetically closer to the region than the Arabs that lived there? I would suspect most of the Israelites that moved there are actually western/european descent, whereas I would not be surprised if a lot of the Arabs there had actual ancient Jewish genes. All that aside, are we really discussing who can claim ownership to a land based on ancient history, rather than human impact of change of ownership?
- rafi25 5y ago
  Actually, most Israelies came from Arab countries. The rest are from Asia (Russia) and east Europe. Less than 5% are from Western countries.
  - candiodari 5y ago
    And most Palestinians are recent (2-3 generations at most) immigrants into Palestine. They also mostly come from Arab countries. Ethnically there is no real difference, to the point that a disguised Jew or Muslim, provided they know the other language well, can blend in without any problem, even for longer periods. Which is a big problem for catching terrorists. And it's even the case that when it comes to habits, even religious habits, there's a lot shared between Jews and Muslims that does not actually date back to ancient Judaism or come from Islam, but are for example not-that-old Iraki or Yemeni customs.
clavicat 5y ago
“It’s not colonialism, it’s racial revanchism!” probably does not sound as sympathetic as you think. And why can’t it be both? It is also true that Xinjiang was once peopled by the Han thousands of years ago, before the Uighers arrived, but that does not at all affect my understanding of the relationship between the Han and Uighers today. Why should it? It doesn’t change the fact that one side is extending its dominance over the other.

foota 5y ago

It's a fucking region with no relation to the modern state of Israel.

Protostome 5y ago
Well, that's simply not true. Judea is the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel. The region was named after the tribe, not the other way around

mclightning 5y ago

Are you saying Israelites that relocated to Israel today are ethnogenetically closer to the region than the Arabs that lived there? I would suspect most of the Israelites that moved there are actually western/european descent, whereas I would not be surprised if a lot of the Arabs there had actual ancient Jewish genes. All that aside, are we really discussing who can claim ownership to a land based on ancient history, rather than human impact of change of ownership?

rafi25 5y ago
Actually, most Israelies came from Arab countries. The rest are from Asia (Russia) and east Europe. Less than 5% are from Western countries.
- candiodari 5y ago
  And most Palestinians are recent (2-3 generations at most) immigrants into Palestine. They also mostly come from Arab countries. Ethnically there is no real difference, to the point that a disguised Jew or Muslim, provided they know the other language well, can blend in without any problem, even for longer periods. Which is a big problem for catching terrorists. And it's even the case that when it comes to habits, even religious habits, there's a lot shared between Jews and Muslims that does not actually date back to ancient Judaism or come from Islam, but are for example not-that-old Iraki or Yemeni customs.

clavicat 5y ago

“It’s not colonialism, it’s racial revanchism!” probably does not sound as sympathetic as you think. And why can’t it be both? It is also true that Xinjiang was once peopled by the Han thousands of years ago, before the Uighers arrived, but that does not at all affect my understanding of the relationship between the Han and Uighers today. Why should it? It doesn’t change the fact that one side is extending its dominance over the other.