3 ms·

Which part do you disagree with? Both sides host and support people that will readily lie to defend their own entrenched position. I'll agree any day of the wee

Which part do you disagree with? Both sides host and support people that will readily lie to defend their own entrenched position. I'll agree any day of the week that Hamas has the more draconian social policy, but that's not an excuse to write off Gazan journalism. Israel's flaw is theocracy, which does not inherently equate them to their enemies but tragically condemns them to a similar path. Their army is stocked with religious adherents and their population is seeded with nationalist migrants. They're bankrolled by a foreign power that ensures their competency but one that doubts their altruism when acting independently. In effect it's a proxy war of chicken, with hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian lives caught in the middle. That part I hate. The only thing I'd be willing to concede is that journalists are being suppressed domestically, even though journalist casualties in Gaza suggest a staggeringly different story. In lieu of direct evidence I'll shelf that, but still contend the rest.

tptacek 3y ago
I'm not writing off Gazan journalism. I am making a narrow point about the lack of equivalence between journalistic institutions in Hamas-controlled Gaza and in Israel. Aside from that: Israel is not, in reality, a theocracy (it has theocratic forces in the same way the US and parts of Europe do). Nor is Israel is not "bankrolled by a foreign power"; it would be the preeminent military power in the region were foreign aid completely cut from it.
- talldayo 3y ago
  > I am making a narrow point about the lack of equivalence between journalistic institutions in Hamas-controlled Gaza and in Israel. I am arguing that the distinction doesn't matter when both sides field individuals that behave with equal vitriol. Hamas-controlled Gaza is a neverending humanitarian trainwreck, comparing the strength of it's legitimized institutions to the country pillaging it is a farce. I'll admit that you're right about a lack of Hamas Times newspaper, if that's what you need to be happy. > it has theocratic forces in the same way the US and parts of Europe do Does it field serious non-theocratic armed forces? There are none that I'm aware of, but maybe Google is hiding something from me.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    I don't understand the question. The current most important internal rupture in Israeli civil society is that the most theocratic cohort of Israeli citizens has exempted itself from military service altogether.
  - azernik 3y ago
    The founding ideology and the one held by the secular-to-traditional mainstream is secular nationalism, not theocracy.
- dtornabene 3y ago
  In no way is the ability to get citizenship via religious conversion comparable to anything in the US, and as far as I am aware, neither in Europe. You are indeed "writing off Gazan journalism" when saying "Hamas-controlled Gaza", which at this point is ludicrous given that Hamas controls literally nothing in Gaza, and certainly didn't control the Al-jazeera reporters, reuters reporters, Washington post reporters, and so on who have been killed by Israeli airstrikes so far. Also pretty weird argument to make when Israel is one of the only "democracies" in the world whose press operates under military censorship laws and has for decades.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    To the extent you believe there is (or was) a meaningful institution of journalism that operates apart from Hamas in Gaza, we just don't have anything to argue about. Almost the only issue I personally have with any of these discussions is that the tend to back out into some notion of Hamas being comparably legitimate (or, more often, comparably illegitimate) to Israel. This is why I keep saying that the argument I've made here is very narrow. If it simplifies things for you: rewind the clock to October 6th. Israel has some measure of state control over the media. So does Hamas. Israel and Hamas are not comparable: Hamas is far, far worse. That's it, that's the whole argument. That this argument doesn't prove a bunch of other points (like, "Israel is therefore a liberal democracy") doesn't matter: I'm not making those points, and probably don't believe them. I understand how message boards work but you're really going to have to take my word for it that this isn't some elliptical way to lay the groundwork for an argument that legitimizes Israel's current occupation of the Gaza Strip.
    - runarberg 3y ago
      You say you are making a narrow argument, but how? You cannot shape the reality of the argument such that it conveniently fits the narrative. The world is complex, and if there is an important nuance to be added, we cannot just ignore it because the initial argument is narrow. That is not how debating works. Like, we cannot just rewind to October 6th and ignore everything since then. There is important context in events that have unfolded since. You say: “Hamas is far, far worse” but how? Israel has litterally just banned al Jazeera, I’m not aware that Hamas has e.g. banned the BBC. If your earlier point was that there was no Haaretz operating in Gaza, but how? Gaza is under occupation and a sever blockade, any media operation is bound to suffer under such circumstances. Free journals without state subsidies are hard in most economies, in impoverished regions like Gaza, much more so. And even if such press could thrive, Israel has been targeting journalists in Palestine even before Oct 7, this includes detention and even assassinations. The state control which Hamas imposes upon journalism in Gaza is minute next to the state control which Israel imposes upon the same population. Hamas’s control is negligible. Yes they operate their own TV station and Radio. But they do not target journalists operating in Gaza, they do not detain and assassinate journalists, they do no not bomb offices of foreign media operators, they do not ban international media from broadcasting in their territory. Israel does all these things.

tptacek 3y ago

I'm not writing off Gazan journalism. I am making a narrow point about the lack of equivalence between journalistic institutions in Hamas-controlled Gaza and in Israel. Aside from that: Israel is not, in reality, a theocracy (it has theocratic forces in the same way the US and parts of Europe do). Nor is Israel is not "bankrolled by a foreign power"; it would be the preeminent military power in the region were foreign aid completely cut from it.

talldayo 3y ago
> I am making a narrow point about the lack of equivalence between journalistic institutions in Hamas-controlled Gaza and in Israel. I am arguing that the distinction doesn't matter when both sides field individuals that behave with equal vitriol. Hamas-controlled Gaza is a neverending humanitarian trainwreck, comparing the strength of it's legitimized institutions to the country pillaging it is a farce. I'll admit that you're right about a lack of Hamas Times newspaper, if that's what you need to be happy. > it has theocratic forces in the same way the US and parts of Europe do Does it field serious non-theocratic armed forces? There are none that I'm aware of, but maybe Google is hiding something from me.
- tptacek 3y ago
  I don't understand the question. The current most important internal rupture in Israeli civil society is that the most theocratic cohort of Israeli citizens has exempted itself from military service altogether.
- azernik 3y ago
  The founding ideology and the one held by the secular-to-traditional mainstream is secular nationalism, not theocracy.
dtornabene 3y ago
In no way is the ability to get citizenship via religious conversion comparable to anything in the US, and as far as I am aware, neither in Europe. You are indeed "writing off Gazan journalism" when saying "Hamas-controlled Gaza", which at this point is ludicrous given that Hamas controls literally nothing in Gaza, and certainly didn't control the Al-jazeera reporters, reuters reporters, Washington post reporters, and so on who have been killed by Israeli airstrikes so far. Also pretty weird argument to make when Israel is one of the only "democracies" in the world whose press operates under military censorship laws and has for decades.
- tptacek 3y ago
  To the extent you believe there is (or was) a meaningful institution of journalism that operates apart from Hamas in Gaza, we just don't have anything to argue about. Almost the only issue I personally have with any of these discussions is that the tend to back out into some notion of Hamas being comparably legitimate (or, more often, comparably illegitimate) to Israel. This is why I keep saying that the argument I've made here is very narrow. If it simplifies things for you: rewind the clock to October 6th. Israel has some measure of state control over the media. So does Hamas. Israel and Hamas are not comparable: Hamas is far, far worse. That's it, that's the whole argument. That this argument doesn't prove a bunch of other points (like, "Israel is therefore a liberal democracy") doesn't matter: I'm not making those points, and probably don't believe them. I understand how message boards work but you're really going to have to take my word for it that this isn't some elliptical way to lay the groundwork for an argument that legitimizes Israel's current occupation of the Gaza Strip.
  - runarberg 3y ago
    You say you are making a narrow argument, but how? You cannot shape the reality of the argument such that it conveniently fits the narrative. The world is complex, and if there is an important nuance to be added, we cannot just ignore it because the initial argument is narrow. That is not how debating works. Like, we cannot just rewind to October 6th and ignore everything since then. There is important context in events that have unfolded since. You say: “Hamas is far, far worse” but how? Israel has litterally just banned al Jazeera, I’m not aware that Hamas has e.g. banned the BBC. If your earlier point was that there was no Haaretz operating in Gaza, but how? Gaza is under occupation and a sever blockade, any media operation is bound to suffer under such circumstances. Free journals without state subsidies are hard in most economies, in impoverished regions like Gaza, much more so. And even if such press could thrive, Israel has been targeting journalists in Palestine even before Oct 7, this includes detention and even assassinations. The state control which Hamas imposes upon journalism in Gaza is minute next to the state control which Israel imposes upon the same population. Hamas’s control is negligible. Yes they operate their own TV station and Radio. But they do not target journalists operating in Gaza, they do not detain and assassinate journalists, they do no not bomb offices of foreign media operators, they do not ban international media from broadcasting in their territory. Israel does all these things.