5 ms·

At least as many Jews were displaced in surrounding countries as Palestinians were displaced. How does this get resolved ? Who is the guarantor that this new I

At least as many Jews were displaced in surrounding countries as Palestinians were displaced. How does this get resolved ? Who is the guarantor that this new Israel will not simply turn into another Lebanon/Syria/etc where the minority (Jews) are oppressed ?

runarberg 2y ago
This is a false dilemma, you don’t need an ethnostate to protect your rights. Having an ethnostate by definition your privileges comes at the cost of other people’s civil rights. Jewish civil rights should be protected by the same democratic institutions as everyone else’s. If you have a fear of a certain ethnic group gaining equal political rights, what does that say about you? Regarding the right of return for the Jewish people displaced from the countries surrounding Israel, sure, I’m in favor. As far as I know, the discriminatory laws which pushed a lot of the exodus have long since been repealed and families who fled to Israel don’t face nearly the same level of discrimination as Palestinians wanting to return to their homeland. (Reparations still need to be payed and Iraq could probably step up their game and re-issue citizenships to their emigrants). That said, the tit-for-tat mentality is not helpful here. Yes, the Jewish emigrants (particularly from Iraq) deserve reparations for passed wrongs, but whether they get that or not should not affect whether Palestinians are granted their basic right of return, and the dismantling of all Israels’ ethnocratic policies.
- tptacek 2y ago
  Nobody is getting reparations, Mizrahim Israelis do not want a right of return to Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia, and Yemen, nor would they be welcome there (Ansar Allah's first "official" action was to expel Jewish people from Sa'dah), and Israel itself is premised on being a homeland for the Jewish people. Maybe we're just kibitzing, and that's fine, but if we're being serious we should probably give some consideration to our actual constraints. Is Israel an ethnostate (or an ethno-religious state, if that's your jam)? It rhymes with one, for sure. But if that's the case, so is Japan. I have never once seen a protest in North America against Japanese ethnocentrism. At least I understand why Israel is structured this way (it was founded within 1-2 Kendrick Lamar album release dates of the liberation of the concentration camps). There's some innuendo in your post --- "what does that say about you" --- are you prepared to field the same kind of innuendo directed back at you? Because Israelis and Jewish supporters of Israel in the west notice and point out that Israel is held to a different standard. A reasonable answer to that is that Israel has spent 20 years working to prevent a 2-state solution, and effectively occupying Gaza while slowly colonizing the West Bank. That's fair! But criticism of Israel's modern day activities have a tendency --- as they did here --- to bleed into critiques of the premise of Israel itself.
  - runarberg 2y ago
    The standards here are proportional to the crimes. Japan does not have a policy of racialized demography. They have not e.g. expelled the Ainu from parts of Hokkaido, prevent the Ryukyu people from moving to Honshu (though there is plenty of historic wrongs here that needs addressed; and yes, Japan is criticized for that). Japanese Americans which want to immigrate to Japan need to go through the same immigration process as Korean Americans, etc. The demographic policies of Israel are way worse than any other democracy, which is why people criticize Israel harder, and why anti-Zionism is a global political movement. People protested Apartheid South Africa for the same reasons, and is the reason why anti-Apartheid became a global political movement. Understanding why Israel maintains their ethnocratic policies is no justification for it. I’m sure you can also understand why F.D. Roosevelt ethnically cleansed the West Coast of Japanese Americans during World War 2. But that was still a human rights disaster. Thankfully, that policy was reversed and the victims were given the right of return. Palestinians were not so lucky. Anti-Zionists like my self want Palestinians to get that minimum level of justice. If there was still a Japanese exclusion zone on the West Coast, I would for sure be protesting that. There is a Palestinian American living in my community, she would like to at least visit the birthplace of her grandparents. But she cannot, Israel’s ethnocratic policies won’t let her. If Israelis are uncomfortable living in a place which gives her racial group equal rights, then I’m just gonna say it, they are racists, and they should not be given an ethnostate to keep their comforts.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      I don't think you're correct about this. I think Japan is both much more racist than you think it is, and Israel less (both are deeply problematic in this regard, though it should be clear by now that I have far more sympathy for Israel [within its 1967 borders] than Japan). Have you talked to an American long-term resident of Japan about this? I've heard stories that knocked me on my ass. There's nothing practical to be said about this stuff. Everybody in the world is racist. It is a strength of the west, and of the US in particular, that we pay so much attention to it. There's no "should" about Israel, only "is". Israel is a nuclear-armed state with a thriving, self-sustaining economy and one of the world's better regarded militaries. If you want to call it an ethnostate, that's fine (I will then call Japan an ethnostate as well). I don't like ethnostates either. But it is what it is: the history and purpose to which Israel --- which, unlike Japan, at least nominally proscribes racism! --- is designed is profound. It's not going anywhere. I'm fond of pointing out that you'd have a stronger argument that Texas be returned to the Coahuiltecans. Texan settlers hadn't just survived the Holocaust. There was no large scale exchange of populations, with Tamaulipecan tribes somehow finding reservoirs of Germans and Czechs to expel from Nuevo Leon. But, again: nobody is protesting this. I would say my position is this: to litigate the existence of Israel itself is to surrender any hope, at least rhetorically, of self-determination for Palestinians on any Palestinian land.

runarberg 2y ago

This is a false dilemma, you don’t need an ethnostate to protect your rights. Having an ethnostate by definition your privileges comes at the cost of other people’s civil rights. Jewish civil rights should be protected by the same democratic institutions as everyone else’s. If you have a fear of a certain ethnic group gaining equal political rights, what does that say about you? Regarding the right of return for the Jewish people displaced from the countries surrounding Israel, sure, I’m in favor. As far as I know, the discriminatory laws which pushed a lot of the exodus have long since been repealed and families who fled to Israel don’t face nearly the same level of discrimination as Palestinians wanting to return to their homeland. (Reparations still need to be payed and Iraq could probably step up their game and re-issue citizenships to their emigrants). That said, the tit-for-tat mentality is not helpful here. Yes, the Jewish emigrants (particularly from Iraq) deserve reparations for passed wrongs, but whether they get that or not should not affect whether Palestinians are granted their basic right of return, and the dismantling of all Israels’ ethnocratic policies.

tptacek 2y ago
Nobody is getting reparations, Mizrahim Israelis do not want a right of return to Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia, and Yemen, nor would they be welcome there (Ansar Allah's first "official" action was to expel Jewish people from Sa'dah), and Israel itself is premised on being a homeland for the Jewish people. Maybe we're just kibitzing, and that's fine, but if we're being serious we should probably give some consideration to our actual constraints. Is Israel an ethnostate (or an ethno-religious state, if that's your jam)? It rhymes with one, for sure. But if that's the case, so is Japan. I have never once seen a protest in North America against Japanese ethnocentrism. At least I understand why Israel is structured this way (it was founded within 1-2 Kendrick Lamar album release dates of the liberation of the concentration camps). There's some innuendo in your post --- "what does that say about you" --- are you prepared to field the same kind of innuendo directed back at you? Because Israelis and Jewish supporters of Israel in the west notice and point out that Israel is held to a different standard. A reasonable answer to that is that Israel has spent 20 years working to prevent a 2-state solution, and effectively occupying Gaza while slowly colonizing the West Bank. That's fair! But criticism of Israel's modern day activities have a tendency --- as they did here --- to bleed into critiques of the premise of Israel itself.
- runarberg 2y ago
  The standards here are proportional to the crimes. Japan does not have a policy of racialized demography. They have not e.g. expelled the Ainu from parts of Hokkaido, prevent the Ryukyu people from moving to Honshu (though there is plenty of historic wrongs here that needs addressed; and yes, Japan is criticized for that). Japanese Americans which want to immigrate to Japan need to go through the same immigration process as Korean Americans, etc. The demographic policies of Israel are way worse than any other democracy, which is why people criticize Israel harder, and why anti-Zionism is a global political movement. People protested Apartheid South Africa for the same reasons, and is the reason why anti-Apartheid became a global political movement. Understanding why Israel maintains their ethnocratic policies is no justification for it. I’m sure you can also understand why F.D. Roosevelt ethnically cleansed the West Coast of Japanese Americans during World War 2. But that was still a human rights disaster. Thankfully, that policy was reversed and the victims were given the right of return. Palestinians were not so lucky. Anti-Zionists like my self want Palestinians to get that minimum level of justice. If there was still a Japanese exclusion zone on the West Coast, I would for sure be protesting that. There is a Palestinian American living in my community, she would like to at least visit the birthplace of her grandparents. But she cannot, Israel’s ethnocratic policies won’t let her. If Israelis are uncomfortable living in a place which gives her racial group equal rights, then I’m just gonna say it, they are racists, and they should not be given an ethnostate to keep their comforts.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    I don't think you're correct about this. I think Japan is both much more racist than you think it is, and Israel less (both are deeply problematic in this regard, though it should be clear by now that I have far more sympathy for Israel [within its 1967 borders] than Japan). Have you talked to an American long-term resident of Japan about this? I've heard stories that knocked me on my ass. There's nothing practical to be said about this stuff. Everybody in the world is racist. It is a strength of the west, and of the US in particular, that we pay so much attention to it. There's no "should" about Israel, only "is". Israel is a nuclear-armed state with a thriving, self-sustaining economy and one of the world's better regarded militaries. If you want to call it an ethnostate, that's fine (I will then call Japan an ethnostate as well). I don't like ethnostates either. But it is what it is: the history and purpose to which Israel --- which, unlike Japan, at least nominally proscribes racism! --- is designed is profound. It's not going anywhere. I'm fond of pointing out that you'd have a stronger argument that Texas be returned to the Coahuiltecans. Texan settlers hadn't just survived the Holocaust. There was no large scale exchange of populations, with Tamaulipecan tribes somehow finding reservoirs of Germans and Czechs to expel from Nuevo Leon. But, again: nobody is protesting this. I would say my position is this: to litigate the existence of Israel itself is to surrender any hope, at least rhetorically, of self-determination for Palestinians on any Palestinian land.