3 ms·

> It was characterised by an authoritarian political culture based on baasskap (lit. 'boss-ship' or 'boss-hood'), which ensured that South Africa was dominated

> It was characterised by an authoritarian political culture based on baasskap (lit. 'boss-ship' or 'boss-hood'), which ensured that South Africa was dominated politically, socially, and economically by the nation's minority white population.[4] Under this minoritarian system, white citizens held the highest status, followed by Indians, Coloureds and black Africans, in that order. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid Israeli settlers living in the West Bank fall under a different legal code than the non-Israeli citizens living there. Israelis fall under Israel's civilian legal code while the occupied non-citizens fall under a harsher military occupation system without due process. That system of segregation and separated legal codes is the very nature of apartheid. One class of people has less protections than the other without a means of redress. That distinction in practical terms is that people in the citizen status are rarely held to account for violent crimes against the people in the non-citizen class while the people in the non-citizen class are severely punished for extremely minor offenses. For example there are cases were IDF soldiers commit first degree homicide on video and yet still receive lighter penalties than minors of the non-citizen class for throwing stones. By the way, the US used to have a less formalized system of apartheid system as well called separate but equal, but it was eliminated in 1954.

dlubarov 10mo ago
> Israelis fall under Israel's civilian legal code while the occupied non-citizens fall under a harsher military occupation system without due process. Every country treats citizens and non-citizens differently. Apartheid is about discrimination based on race, not based on citizenship.
- austin-cheney 10mo ago
  You are incorrectly commingling the concepts of legal status and legal system. People can have different status assignments and still fall under the same legal system, which is how most countries work, but not Israel.
  - dlubarov 10mo ago
    Sure it may be somewhat unusual; that doesn’t make it apartheid. The legal system one falls under is still based on citizenship, not race. US service members sometimes fall under a different legal system; that’s likewise not apartheid because they’re not a race.
    - austin-cheney 10mo ago
      It does make it apartheid when one group imposes separate legal systems to intentionally advantage one party over another. That is the most essential nature behind the term apartheid. In both cases of South Africa and Israel the primary motivation is to transfer land from the disadvantaged party without their consent.
      - dlubarov 10mo ago
        It’s like saying that border control with Mexico is apartheid because the main motivation is racism against Mexicans. There’s a grain of truth (racism exists), but it’s not really the reason we have border control, and even if it was it still wouldn’t be apartheid. To see why Israel ended up with the current system, we have to consider a bunch of possible alternatives (eg giving citizenship to all residents), each of which runs into legal and/or security problems.
        austin-cheney 10mo ago
        Its not like that. The US does not occupy Mexico in any capacity.
      - spwa4 10mo ago
        Wow, if this is how you think, you must really hate Palestine and even Islam ... after all that is exactly what Islam as a religion proscribes, and the Palestine government applies those laws and makes them worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi, note the laws on ownership and inheritance. That is definitely taking advantage of one party. And, of course, it's muslims taking advantage. But Palestine, of course, has actually gone further, and has done exactly what you say makes a system apartheid, alter laws to transfer land from a disadvantaged party without consent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_land_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_land_laws So now we pretend you see your mistake and you don't just change what was never your opinion on apartheid, just to keep hating Jews? I mean I expect you to call me a racist for pointing out that you're making up excuses for hating Jews, but I keep getting told to expect the best from people.

dlubarov 10mo ago

> Israelis fall under Israel's civilian legal code while the occupied non-citizens fall under a harsher military occupation system without due process. Every country treats citizens and non-citizens differently. Apartheid is about discrimination based on race, not based on citizenship.

austin-cheney 10mo ago
You are incorrectly commingling the concepts of legal status and legal system. People can have different status assignments and still fall under the same legal system, which is how most countries work, but not Israel.
- dlubarov 10mo ago
  Sure it may be somewhat unusual; that doesn’t make it apartheid. The legal system one falls under is still based on citizenship, not race. US service members sometimes fall under a different legal system; that’s likewise not apartheid because they’re not a race.
  - austin-cheney 10mo ago
    It does make it apartheid when one group imposes separate legal systems to intentionally advantage one party over another. That is the most essential nature behind the term apartheid. In both cases of South Africa and Israel the primary motivation is to transfer land from the disadvantaged party without their consent.
    - dlubarov 10mo ago
      It’s like saying that border control with Mexico is apartheid because the main motivation is racism against Mexicans. There’s a grain of truth (racism exists), but it’s not really the reason we have border control, and even if it was it still wouldn’t be apartheid. To see why Israel ended up with the current system, we have to consider a bunch of possible alternatives (eg giving citizenship to all residents), each of which runs into legal and/or security problems.
      - austin-cheney 10mo ago
        Its not like that. The US does not occupy Mexico in any capacity.
    - spwa4 10mo ago
      Wow, if this is how you think, you must really hate Palestine and even Islam ... after all that is exactly what Islam as a religion proscribes, and the Palestine government applies those laws and makes them worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi, note the laws on ownership and inheritance. That is definitely taking advantage of one party. And, of course, it's muslims taking advantage. But Palestine, of course, has actually gone further, and has done exactly what you say makes a system apartheid, alter laws to transfer land from a disadvantaged party without consent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_land_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_land_laws So now we pretend you see your mistake and you don't just change what was never your opinion on apartheid, just to keep hating Jews? I mean I expect you to call me a racist for pointing out that you're making up excuses for hating Jews, but I keep getting told to expect the best from people.