3 ms·

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 s

by 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.
  - austin-cheney 10mo ago
    Please don’t try to distract by changing the subject. Secondly, I hate on Israel all the time but I have never said anything remotely negative about Jewish persons or the Jewish religion.
    - mhb 10mo ago
      So you're grooving on the Palestinian discriminatory laws he cited but sidestepping that whole issue because it's inconvenient? Or, let me guess, what-about-ism?
    - spwa4 10mo ago
      I'm not changing the subject, I just pointed out that your description of apartheid really fits the people you claim are victims here. Somehow I think you do not wish to discuss what your definition means about them. Because, well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: you checked ... and found that I'm right about at the very least the contents and existence of those laws. And of course that those laws, both the Palestinian ones and the islamic laws are racist and frankly inhumane. That they both violate human rights and are far worse than anything you've mentioned ... and that they are directly related to the subject.

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.
- austin-cheney 10mo ago
  Please don’t try to distract by changing the subject. Secondly, I hate on Israel all the time but I have never said anything remotely negative about Jewish persons or the Jewish religion.
  - mhb 10mo ago
    So you're grooving on the Palestinian discriminatory laws he cited but sidestepping that whole issue because it's inconvenient? Or, let me guess, what-about-ism?
  - spwa4 10mo ago
    I'm not changing the subject, I just pointed out that your description of apartheid really fits the people you claim are victims here. Somehow I think you do not wish to discuss what your definition means about them. Because, well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: you checked ... and found that I'm right about at the very least the contents and existence of those laws. And of course that those laws, both the Palestinian ones and the islamic laws are racist and frankly inhumane. That they both violate human rights and are far worse than anything you've mentioned ... and that they are directly related to the subject.