6 ms·

i never mentioned words ethno state or state. i was talking purely about self determination. un charter International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (I

by tguvot 3y ago

i never mentioned words ethno state or state. i was talking purely about self determination. un charter International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) refer to right to self determination belonging to people. not to nations, religions, etc like you try to imply all the time. but to people. it also doesn't say about where this self determination can take place neither limits it (actually millenium act or something puts sovereignty of state above right of self determination iirc). hence was my question, can jewish people in your opinion exercise universal right of self determination in territory of judea and samaria (it's not vague territory, it's very specific territory) ?

tptacek 3y ago
Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank, territory annexed during the 1967 war? And, by "Jewish people", do you mean citizens of Israel? Seems like the answer there is an easy "no", right? The 2-state strategy implies Palestinian control and self-determination within the West Bank and Gaza.
- tguvot 3y ago
  west bank is a new speak. it was annexed by jordan till 1967. in 1967 it was liberated and jordan renounced it's rights to this territory in 1980 or 1988. not citizens of israel but jews. 2-states strategy not really in un charter or ICCPR or ICESCR. right to self determination of people is, without limits or definition where this right can be exercised. so, you say, that you oppose "universal right of self-determination" ? or you think that some people have more right to do it and some less ?
  - tptacek 3y ago
    I didn't support the right of the Branch Davidians to create a theocratic state in Waco, TX, and I don't support the right of neo-Kahanists to do the same thing in the West Bank.
    - tguvot 3y ago
      i am not talking about neo kahanists. i am talking about jews in general. and lets say samaritans. can they exercise right to self determination ?
      - runarberg 3y ago
        > The Samaritans (/səˈmærɪtənz/; Samaritan Hebrew: ࠔࠠࠌࠝࠓࠩࠉࠌ‎ Šā̊merīm; Hebrew: שומרונים Šōmrōnīm; Arabic: السامريون as-Sāmiriyyūn), or the Samaritan people, are an ethnoreligious group originating from the Hebrews and Israelites of the ancient Near East.[2] They are indigenous to Samaria, a historical region of ancient Israel and Judah that comprises the northern half of today's West Bank. They are naturally adherents of Samaritanism, an Abrahamic, monotheistic, and ethnic religion that developed alongside Judaism, although the two differ in a number of important aspects in spite of sharing a common foundation in Yahwism. > As of 2022, the Samaritan community is estimated to number around 874 people, split almost evenly between Israel (some 460 in Holon) and the Israeli-occupied West Bank (some 380 in Kiryat Luza). > All Samaritans in both Holon and Kiryat Luza are Israeli citizens, but those in Kiryat Luza also hold Palestinian citizenship. > Much of the local Palestinian population of Nablus is believed to be descended from Samaritans who converted to Islam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans Sorry, but I don’t think you are talking about the Samaritans. And if you are, they are totally irrelevant to our conversation. But the short answer would be, they should have the rights of an indigenous or a religious minority within a broader region.
        tguvot 3y ago
        yes, i am talking about samaritans who live in samaria. can you explain why they have right of minority but not right to self determination as palestinians ? according to un this right is universal for all people.
      - tptacek 3y ago
        Not in the West Bank, which is outside the 1967 boundaries of the state of Israel and is the homeland of the Palestinian people, who have a right to self-determination within their own land.
  - khokhol 3y ago
    In 1967 it was [occupied by Israel] and Jordan renounced it's rights to this territory in 1980 or 1988. Which by no means conveys any rights to Israel, as Jordan's occupation of the territory was also illegal and unrecognized from the very beginning. *So, you say, that you oppose "universal right of self-determination"?* No one has a right to "self-determine" themselves on land to which they hold no legal claim.
runarberg 3y ago
So perhaps this was (thankfully) a misunderstanding on my part. The right of self-determination which the UN general assembly is talking about is that of the Palestinan nation, which belong to an international nation state with defined borders. When you asked about the right of self determination of the Jewish people, I answered based on the same level as that which the UN General Assembly was talking about. I was trying to be very clear on that. When you then talk about Judea and Samaria, which are indeed historic territories, and indeed vague compared to the specific territories the UN General Assembly is talking about. Judea and Samaria existed as an actual territory of nations which were at some point independent, colonies, then occupied, then ethnically cleansed, regions of empires, etc. The boarders over the thousands of years have shifted significantly. The people living in these territories have shifted religion, language, national affiliations, etc. many times over. And the people living inside these territories haven’t called it by those names for like 1500 years at least. But more importantly, neither Judea nor Samaria are UN recognized territories, with any special status what so ever. Now there is a subdivision within Israel which is named Judea and Samaria Area. This is not internationally recognized subdivision (not even by nations which recognize Israel as a state). Within the UN this area is called The West Bank and is internationally recognized to be a Palestinian territory occupied by Israel. When you talk about the self determination of the Jewish people in that area, within the context of decolonization efforts by the UN, and when you use the name of its colonizers of this area, it does sound like you are talking about excluding this right of the actual nation state which already lives there and is internationally recognized owner of. This is an oft cited prospect of ethno-facists within the Israeli government, to ethnically cleanse the territory of its internationally recognized inhabitants (the Palestinians) and reserve it for Jews alone. This might not be your intention, but this is what I heard.
- tguvot 3y ago
  general assembly talks a lot of shit. i am talking un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR which are "international law", if you may say so. i am not excluding anybody or anything. I am just asking you if jewish people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ? I am just asking you if samaritan people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ? I am just asking you if palestinian people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ?

by tguvot 3y ago

tptacek 3y ago

Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank, territory annexed during the 1967 war? And, by "Jewish people", do you mean citizens of Israel? Seems like the answer there is an easy "no", right? The 2-state strategy implies Palestinian control and self-determination within the West Bank and Gaza.

tguvot 3y ago
west bank is a new speak. it was annexed by jordan till 1967. in 1967 it was liberated and jordan renounced it's rights to this territory in 1980 or 1988. not citizens of israel but jews. 2-states strategy not really in un charter or ICCPR or ICESCR. right to self determination of people is, without limits or definition where this right can be exercised. so, you say, that you oppose "universal right of self-determination" ? or you think that some people have more right to do it and some less ?
- tptacek 3y ago
  I didn't support the right of the Branch Davidians to create a theocratic state in Waco, TX, and I don't support the right of neo-Kahanists to do the same thing in the West Bank.
  - tguvot 3y ago
    i am not talking about neo kahanists. i am talking about jews in general. and lets say samaritans. can they exercise right to self determination ?
    - runarberg 3y ago
      > The Samaritans (/səˈmærɪtənz/; Samaritan Hebrew: ࠔࠠࠌࠝࠓࠩࠉࠌ‎ Šā̊merīm; Hebrew: שומרונים Šōmrōnīm; Arabic: السامريون as-Sāmiriyyūn), or the Samaritan people, are an ethnoreligious group originating from the Hebrews and Israelites of the ancient Near East.[2] They are indigenous to Samaria, a historical region of ancient Israel and Judah that comprises the northern half of today's West Bank. They are naturally adherents of Samaritanism, an Abrahamic, monotheistic, and ethnic religion that developed alongside Judaism, although the two differ in a number of important aspects in spite of sharing a common foundation in Yahwism. > As of 2022, the Samaritan community is estimated to number around 874 people, split almost evenly between Israel (some 460 in Holon) and the Israeli-occupied West Bank (some 380 in Kiryat Luza). > All Samaritans in both Holon and Kiryat Luza are Israeli citizens, but those in Kiryat Luza also hold Palestinian citizenship. > Much of the local Palestinian population of Nablus is believed to be descended from Samaritans who converted to Islam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans Sorry, but I don’t think you are talking about the Samaritans. And if you are, they are totally irrelevant to our conversation. But the short answer would be, they should have the rights of an indigenous or a religious minority within a broader region.
      - tguvot 3y ago
        yes, i am talking about samaritans who live in samaria. can you explain why they have right of minority but not right to self determination as palestinians ? according to un this right is universal for all people.
    - tptacek 3y ago
      Not in the West Bank, which is outside the 1967 boundaries of the state of Israel and is the homeland of the Palestinian people, who have a right to self-determination within their own land.
- khokhol 3y ago
  In 1967 it was [occupied by Israel] and Jordan renounced it's rights to this territory in 1980 or 1988. Which by no means conveys any rights to Israel, as Jordan's occupation of the territory was also illegal and unrecognized from the very beginning. *So, you say, that you oppose "universal right of self-determination"?* No one has a right to "self-determine" themselves on land to which they hold no legal claim.

runarberg 3y ago

So perhaps this was (thankfully) a misunderstanding on my part. The right of self-determination which the UN general assembly is talking about is that of the Palestinan nation, which belong to an international nation state with defined borders. When you asked about the right of self determination of the Jewish people, I answered based on the same level as that which the UN General Assembly was talking about. I was trying to be very clear on that. When you then talk about Judea and Samaria, which are indeed historic territories, and indeed vague compared to the specific territories the UN General Assembly is talking about. Judea and Samaria existed as an actual territory of nations which were at some point independent, colonies, then occupied, then ethnically cleansed, regions of empires, etc. The boarders over the thousands of years have shifted significantly. The people living in these territories have shifted religion, language, national affiliations, etc. many times over. And the people living inside these territories haven’t called it by those names for like 1500 years at least. But more importantly, neither Judea nor Samaria are UN recognized territories, with any special status what so ever. Now there is a subdivision within Israel which is named Judea and Samaria Area. This is not internationally recognized subdivision (not even by nations which recognize Israel as a state). Within the UN this area is called The West Bank and is internationally recognized to be a Palestinian territory occupied by Israel. When you talk about the self determination of the Jewish people in that area, within the context of decolonization efforts by the UN, and when you use the name of its colonizers of this area, it does sound like you are talking about excluding this right of the actual nation state which already lives there and is internationally recognized owner of. This is an oft cited prospect of ethno-facists within the Israeli government, to ethnically cleanse the territory of its internationally recognized inhabitants (the Palestinians) and reserve it for Jews alone. This might not be your intention, but this is what I heard.

tguvot 3y ago
general assembly talks a lot of shit. i am talking un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR which are "international law", if you may say so. i am not excluding anybody or anything. I am just asking you if jewish people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ? I am just asking you if samaritan people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ? I am just asking you if palestinian people per "un charter, ICCPR and ICESCR" which declare "that people have universal right of self determination" can exercise this right in judea in samaria ? yes or no ?