5 ms·

> It is not a colonist by any standard definition. Yes they are. It's true that before the British Mandate of Palestine the population of Syria Palaestina was

• edanm 2y ago
  > It's true that before the British Mandate of Palestine the population of Syria Palaestina was 3-11% Jewish (Mizrahi Jews) but most of the Jewish population of Israel is not indigenous to that region of the world (like how the Ashkenazi Jews are from Europe and Eastern Russia). Firstly, Jews are originally indigenous to that part of the world, they were ethnically cleansed from that area by Rome. This is not even disputed. Of course Palestinians are also indigenous to the land! Many of them more recently. And of course, multiple generations have Israelis have now been born and lived their entire lives in that land. But none of this really matters. The standard colonial pattern is of a country sending its population to colonize a new land. That is just emphatically not what happened. Israel was largely founded by refugees who were fleeing persecution, or by Jews ethnically cleansed from their homes. That is just not what most people are thinking of when thinking of colonialism. Hence the standard outcome that happens in colonies is that the people leave and return to the land they are "from", which is just irrelevant here, because the children of refugees have nowhere else to "return" to. > It isn't, Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch recognize it is Apartheid. As do Ireland and South Africa (countries who have both been victim to Colonist Apartheid violence). Yes, and many groups disagree with this, including the US and EU iirc. Human Rights Watch in particular is a very problematic organization that has a lot of complaints against it of being biased against Israel. That said, I'm pretty sure that what I said is consistent with what they say in their report - there's a plausible case for apartheid in the Occupied Territories. They think it has now crossed the line to being legally apartheid, others disagree. This is relevant for the OT but not the rest of Israel. Israel has a lot of discrimination and other issues with its Israeli Arab population, but it's almost entirely not legal discrimination. > Israel literally has a two tiered society, Israeli Arabs do not have the Right To Return like Jewish Israelis do. That is actually a very untrue example. Right of Return is a right of citizenship, the fact that some people have a right of return and others don't is not a discrimination against existing citizens. I don't have the right to become a British citizen, that doesn't mean Britain is discrimination against me. It is just doing what every state does - defining who its citizens are via some metric, usually by being born to parents who are citizens, though different states define this differently. Israel is doing similarly. > 50% of Arab Israelis are under the poverty line because of wage discrimination and other factors. Wage discrimination does not prove apartheid or any systemic discrimination. Let's remember that Israeli Arabs can vote, can be any profession they want, a large percentage of the doctors in Israel are Arabs, there are Israeli-Arab supreme court judges, members of the Israeli Congress, etc. > Nobody is asking for them to be deported. I mean obviously people like Yaakov Fauci would have to give back the houses they literally stole but a "1 state solution" does not require the deportation/killing of the Israelis. That is exactly what Hamas is asking for. Deportation and/or killing of all Israeli-Jews. A one state solution is a ridiculous idea that is not what anyone in the region wants, not what anyone who has ever seriously considered what to do in the region that has had any power has advocated, and would almost certainly lead to the death of one or both of the ethnic groups in the region. Even if not, what country would ever agree to double its voting population with a population that is completely culturally different? What do you tell Israeli members of the LGBT community, that it's totally ok to have a one state solution by adding 100% more voters that come from a society that wants to make homosexuality illegal? Do you think they should agree to that idea? > Elsewhere in this thread I linked the Oslo Accords, I suggest you read about them, peace is possible. Great! I'm in favor. Like any other serious solution, this process aimed to create two states for two people. As I said elsewhere, this process largely died, in my opinion, because sincere efforts of the Israelis were met with refusal to sign an actual deal from the Palestinians, and then met with violence and terror attacks. And the last ~17 years have seen Israelis completely convinced that there is no partner for peace and never will be, while ignoring that Israel itself is causing the conditions for there being no partner for peace! Both sides have to just accept the fundemantal reality - there are 7 millions Jews and 7 million Arabs on this land, neither is going anywhere, the only solution is to reach a peace agreement. This will not happen through violence, only through a negotiated deal.
  • hmcq6 2y ago
    > Firstly, Jews are originally indigenous to that part of the world No, that's not how this works. My 23&Me says my family came from Africa (as did all people), then southwest Asia then Europe but that doesn't give me the right to go to one of those countries and claim land. > The standard colonial pattern is [...] That is just not what most people are thinking of when thinking of colonialism. Man, you can't quote me talking about the British Mandate of Palestine and then say they're not colonizers. Literally before the Holocaust Britain was arming Jews to go colonize Palestine. Yes, Jews fleeing the Holocaust did find refuge in Palestine but fleeing an ethnic cleansing of their own doesn't make the colonization that was already ongoing more legal. I'm not even gonna address the rest of this point by point, you're just insisting that a 2 state solution is the only way because a 2 state solution is legalized perpetuation of the colonization. A 2 state solution is not the only way, it is colonization. No, Hamas does not want the death/expulsion of all Jews, that's simply a lie.
    • edanm 2y ago
      > No, that's not how this works. My 23&Me says my family came from Africa (as did all people), then southwest Asia then Europe but that doesn't give me the right to go to one of those countries and claim land. You brought up indigeneity. In what way are Jews not indigenous? I agreed with you that it's irrelevant right after. I don't think it automatically gives anyone right to claim any land. > Yes, Jews fleeing the Holocaust did find refuge in Palestine but fleeing an ethnic cleansing of their own doesn't make the colonization that was already ongoing more legal. Who exactly were the colonizers? The Jews who legally immigrated to that land under the Ottoman Empire? The Jews who legally immigrated to that land under British rule? The 90% of the Jews who came to Israel because they literally had no where else to go after being in DP camps after WW2 and the UN voting for them to move to that land? I'm not sure who are these mythical colonizers who came in and violent expelled Palestinians from the land. Most of the Jews either came legally through immigration or were refugees. > A 2 state solution is not the only way, it is colonization. This is literally the first time I've ever heard this claim. A two state solution is the stated goal of the PA, the representative of the Palestinian people. It was the goal of Arafat. Are you seriously saying that their goal, had it been reached, was a continuation of colonization? I really don't know what to make of this argument. Two people live on a land and don't want to be part of the same state, for good reason. Both have reasonable reasons to consider that land theirs (certainly at this point) and nowhere else to go. What can be more sensible than splitting up that land?