4 ms·

Complete nonsense. The Palestinian National Charter doesn't restrict citizenship to only Arabs, it explicitly keeps citizenship for pre-Israeli Jews and you can

Complete nonsense. The Palestinian National Charter doesn't restrict citizenship to only Arabs, it explicitly keeps citizenship for pre-Israeli Jews and you can bet a million dollars that it wouldn't restrict the Afro-Palestinians, Turkmen or any other groups. The only restriction in the charter for citizenship is for Jews that moved there after the formation of Israel.

weatherlite 2y ago
Israel doesn't restrict citizenship to only Jews, it is probably more heterogenous than Palestine. Israel is 20% Arab. The Palestinian 'right of return' is meant for Palestinian and no one else (perhaps unsurprisngly). I don't see how this isn't the will to create an ethnostate, it's a mirror image of Zionism.
- racional 2y ago
  Israel doesn't restrict citizenship to only Jews, But its laws extend greatly preferential treatment to (certain kinds of) Jews, of course. "Jews" (or those deemed as such by certain disputed criteria) may naturalize, but with onerous requirements: demonstrating proficiency in Hebrew being one of them (that "other" indigenous language, Arabic, or other common languages of pre-1947 inhabitants such as Armenian just won't cut it). Also, if you're a citizen and you marry a non-national, citizenship is automatically granted -- unless that person that person has the misfortune of being an inhabitant of the West Bank or Gaza (which includes many descendants of people expelled from what is now Israel in 1947-1949 and afterwards of course). Israel probably more heterogeneous than Palestine. Given the 517k or so non-indigenous squatters (nearly all of them fit in this category, anyway) in Area C, and the 240k or so non-Arab residents of illegally occupied (that is to say, "still Palestine" per international law) East Jerusalem -- this is a highly untenable statement to make. I don't see how [the Right of Return] isn't the will to create an ethnostate, it's a mirror image of Zionism. In human terms, one could also look it as an attempt to restore basic dignity and liberty to these folks, more or less on par to what is provided to prospective citizens of Jewish ancestry via the Law of Return.
  - weatherlite 2y ago
    > In human terms, one could also look it as an attempt to restore basic dignity and liberty to these folks, more or less on par to what is provided to prospective citizens of Jewish ancestry via the Law of Return. I agree. So then I don't get the demonization against Zionism. Sometimes ethnostates make sense due to special circumstances in history and in the present.
    - racional 2y ago
      I don't see most critiques of Zionism as "demonization", though I would agree they are sometimes misinformed and involve lousy choices of wording and phrasing. Many of most serious (and highly informed) of these critiques come from Jewish and Israeli sources, BTW.
      - weatherlite 2y ago
        I don't know if just because someone is Israeli or Jewish it makes his opinion that much more valid - especially when people cherry pick the views that already conform to their opinion and ignore all the rest (e.g if the person is an Israeli anti zionist they will listen to him, if he's an Israeli Zionist they will cancel him). As for the criticism itself, too much of the time (imo) it focuses on Israel as a uniquely colonizing and evil entity in the world and is completely one sided. One side is totally evil (the Israeli side), has no business existing and should self dismantle or get help from the world in dismantling. The other side (the Palestinian side) can pretty much do no wrong.
        racional 2y ago
        If I may simplify what you're saying to what seems to be the gist: [The criticism] focuses on Israel as a uniquely colonizing entity In essence the criticism seems to boil down to this: Israel indisputably maintains the longest-running military occupation in the world, at present. Which it is aggressively expanding in both the West Bank and Gaza, as we speak. Its attitude towards the Arab population has been ineluctably colonial from the very start of the movement. As expressed in most every piece of Zionist writing you will find, and the recorded statements from basically everyone involved. And then the large-scale massacres and violent displacements starting in 1947. In a supposedly post-colonial world, there are very few countries with an analogous situation or history. Is this the criticism you're referring to?
- someotherperson 2y ago
  I personally never said Israel is an ethnostate, but a Palestinian state is definitely not a mirror image of Zionism. It was never historically monoethnic and issues with Jews is a post-Israeli thing. Not to discount pre-Israel antisemitism or the Arab nationalism movement, but national identity was always tied to a pan-ethnicity rather than religion or bloodline. Maybe a simple example of this is Armenians (Christian, non-Arab) who would receive full citizenship in Palestine but are still stateless today in Israel[0]. [0] https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem-armenian-community-land-lease-controversy-c9126c0a159cd9a285f2bcfd31d67a5b https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem-armenian-community-land...
  - weatherlite 2y ago
    Palestinians aren't an ethnicity then? But Jews are?
    - someotherperson 2y ago
      I'm a bit confused by the response, but 'Palestinian' is not an ethnicity, no. 'Jews' are an ethnoreligious group.
      - weatherlite 2y ago
        I'm a bit confused by your response as well, Palestinians are an ethnic group.

weatherlite 2y ago

Israel doesn't restrict citizenship to only Jews, it is probably more heterogenous than Palestine. Israel is 20% Arab. The Palestinian 'right of return' is meant for Palestinian and no one else (perhaps unsurprisngly). I don't see how this isn't the will to create an ethnostate, it's a mirror image of Zionism.

racional 2y ago
Israel doesn't restrict citizenship to only Jews, But its laws extend greatly preferential treatment to (certain kinds of) Jews, of course. "Jews" (or those deemed as such by certain disputed criteria) may naturalize, but with onerous requirements: demonstrating proficiency in Hebrew being one of them (that "other" indigenous language, Arabic, or other common languages of pre-1947 inhabitants such as Armenian just won't cut it). Also, if you're a citizen and you marry a non-national, citizenship is automatically granted -- unless that person that person has the misfortune of being an inhabitant of the West Bank or Gaza (which includes many descendants of people expelled from what is now Israel in 1947-1949 and afterwards of course). Israel probably more heterogeneous than Palestine. Given the 517k or so non-indigenous squatters (nearly all of them fit in this category, anyway) in Area C, and the 240k or so non-Arab residents of illegally occupied (that is to say, "still Palestine" per international law) East Jerusalem -- this is a highly untenable statement to make. I don't see how [the Right of Return] isn't the will to create an ethnostate, it's a mirror image of Zionism. In human terms, one could also look it as an attempt to restore basic dignity and liberty to these folks, more or less on par to what is provided to prospective citizens of Jewish ancestry via the Law of Return.
- weatherlite 2y ago
  > In human terms, one could also look it as an attempt to restore basic dignity and liberty to these folks, more or less on par to what is provided to prospective citizens of Jewish ancestry via the Law of Return. I agree. So then I don't get the demonization against Zionism. Sometimes ethnostates make sense due to special circumstances in history and in the present.
  - racional 2y ago
    I don't see most critiques of Zionism as "demonization", though I would agree they are sometimes misinformed and involve lousy choices of wording and phrasing. Many of most serious (and highly informed) of these critiques come from Jewish and Israeli sources, BTW.
    - weatherlite 2y ago
      I don't know if just because someone is Israeli or Jewish it makes his opinion that much more valid - especially when people cherry pick the views that already conform to their opinion and ignore all the rest (e.g if the person is an Israeli anti zionist they will listen to him, if he's an Israeli Zionist they will cancel him). As for the criticism itself, too much of the time (imo) it focuses on Israel as a uniquely colonizing and evil entity in the world and is completely one sided. One side is totally evil (the Israeli side), has no business existing and should self dismantle or get help from the world in dismantling. The other side (the Palestinian side) can pretty much do no wrong.
      - racional 2y ago
        If I may simplify what you're saying to what seems to be the gist: [The criticism] focuses on Israel as a uniquely colonizing entity In essence the criticism seems to boil down to this: Israel indisputably maintains the longest-running military occupation in the world, at present. Which it is aggressively expanding in both the West Bank and Gaza, as we speak. Its attitude towards the Arab population has been ineluctably colonial from the very start of the movement. As expressed in most every piece of Zionist writing you will find, and the recorded statements from basically everyone involved. And then the large-scale massacres and violent displacements starting in 1947. In a supposedly post-colonial world, there are very few countries with an analogous situation or history. Is this the criticism you're referring to?
someotherperson 2y ago
I personally never said Israel is an ethnostate, but a Palestinian state is definitely not a mirror image of Zionism. It was never historically monoethnic and issues with Jews is a post-Israeli thing. Not to discount pre-Israel antisemitism or the Arab nationalism movement, but national identity was always tied to a pan-ethnicity rather than religion or bloodline. Maybe a simple example of this is Armenians (Christian, non-Arab) who would receive full citizenship in Palestine but are still stateless today in Israel[0]. [0] https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem-armenian-community-land-lease-controversy-c9126c0a159cd9a285f2bcfd31d67a5b https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem-armenian-community-land...
- weatherlite 2y ago
  Palestinians aren't an ethnicity then? But Jews are?
  - someotherperson 2y ago
    I'm a bit confused by the response, but 'Palestinian' is not an ethnicity, no. 'Jews' are an ethnoreligious group.
    - weatherlite 2y ago
      I'm a bit confused by your response as well, Palestinians are an ethnic group.