3 ms·

How would you envision the end of the state?

choo-t 2mo ago
Depend of the state, could be internal turmoil (revolution), peaceful change with new constitution and ideal, or external force imposing change (like Germany post-WW2, being split between alors).
- modo_mario 2mo ago
  No i mean like. How do you picture the end result?
  - choo-t 2mo ago
    I would hope for a truly secular state with a multicultural population, paid reparation to displaced Palestinian families and farmers and a memory duty (museum, memorial, documentaries and school teaching) to counter the years of propaganda. And mass prosecution of head of State and army top brass.
    - modo_mario 2mo ago
      Truly secular states simply don't exist anywhere in the middle east so it seems wild to expect it there of all places and a multicultural population simply means barelling towards a monocultural future for much of the israelis I think. aka Lebanon's drastic demographic shift (https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20161105_MAC127.png https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e...) but much worse for various reasons. And it's not like that rapidly decline of their share of the population (which let's be real is somewhat incompatible with an at least a temporarily required Millet system or something like lebanon's gov sectarianism) necessarily means they get a managed peacefull decline. Not a single minority in the wider region has actually gotten that. Kurds, copts, fur, zaghawa, masalit, azeris, asyrians. None. It's all a slow managed decline with gov discrimination and occasional brutalisation or outright killings. Druze might be the only expception to it but they don't relate to power or the rest of islam in quite the same way. I believe they're very much aware of this. (especially the mizrahi who are more adverserial to the palestinians) So given that they're never going to willingly accept or roll with it if forced....they'll either bail the country faster than the christian lebanese have been doing and/or fight to the death prior. edit: I think it's with that in mind that one has to look towards a reasonable or semi desirable end result. Chances are there isn't a happy or even fully acceptable ending for both sides. Outside long term enforcement might be best but the brits were already having trouble keeping the lid on that pot well before israel came to be as a state and when the population was a fraction of the current one so it'll not necesarily be all nice either.
jabron 2mo ago
Similar to apartheid South Africa's with more returning of ancestrally owned land I reckon.
- modo_mario 2mo ago
  The thing is nobody wants to be South Africa. Decline, corruption, sectarian parties and a general bleak long term outlook for the population who gave up control. The jews in this picture would likely see a much bleaker fate due to their current standing of having brutalised the palestinians in a repeating game of mutual retaliation and escalation but also the diaspora and sheer prevalence of arabs around them. Think how Lebanon went from a christian country to a muslim one in no time with hezbollah calling a deceptive amount of the shots but... worse. >with more returning of ancestrally owned land I reckon. A huge part of the black population of SA wasn't there before the boers so the sins of the father or 'blood and soil' rethoric makes a lot more sense for the palestinians. I think it's a valid feeling but also one that cuts on both sides. However the biggest growing group in israel and a big part of the later migration and thus settlement are the mizrahi who have defined a lot of the current hard line stance and to them this western/christianity morality idea of atonement makes no sense. They'd be giving up this land the most but also wouldn't be given their ancestrally owned land back and are also the most adversarial to the palestinian population.

Depend of the state, could be internal turmoil (revolution), peaceful change with new constitution and ideal, or external force imposing change (like Germany post-WW2, being split between alors).

modo_mario 2mo ago
No i mean like. How do you picture the end result?
- choo-t 2mo ago
  I would hope for a truly secular state with a multicultural population, paid reparation to displaced Palestinian families and farmers and a memory duty (museum, memorial, documentaries and school teaching) to counter the years of propaganda. And mass prosecution of head of State and army top brass.
  - modo_mario 2mo ago
    Truly secular states simply don't exist anywhere in the middle east so it seems wild to expect it there of all places and a multicultural population simply means barelling towards a monocultural future for much of the israelis I think. aka Lebanon's drastic demographic shift (https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20161105_MAC127.png https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e...) but much worse for various reasons. And it's not like that rapidly decline of their share of the population (which let's be real is somewhat incompatible with an at least a temporarily required Millet system or something like lebanon's gov sectarianism) necessarily means they get a managed peacefull decline. Not a single minority in the wider region has actually gotten that. Kurds, copts, fur, zaghawa, masalit, azeris, asyrians. None. It's all a slow managed decline with gov discrimination and occasional brutalisation or outright killings. Druze might be the only expception to it but they don't relate to power or the rest of islam in quite the same way. I believe they're very much aware of this. (especially the mizrahi who are more adverserial to the palestinians) So given that they're never going to willingly accept or roll with it if forced....they'll either bail the country faster than the christian lebanese have been doing and/or fight to the death prior. edit: I think it's with that in mind that one has to look towards a reasonable or semi desirable end result. Chances are there isn't a happy or even fully acceptable ending for both sides. Outside long term enforcement might be best but the brits were already having trouble keeping the lid on that pot well before israel came to be as a state and when the population was a fraction of the current one so it'll not necesarily be all nice either.

jabron 2mo ago

Similar to apartheid South Africa's with more returning of ancestrally owned land I reckon.

modo_mario 2mo ago
The thing is nobody wants to be South Africa. Decline, corruption, sectarian parties and a general bleak long term outlook for the population who gave up control. The jews in this picture would likely see a much bleaker fate due to their current standing of having brutalised the palestinians in a repeating game of mutual retaliation and escalation but also the diaspora and sheer prevalence of arabs around them. Think how Lebanon went from a christian country to a muslim one in no time with hezbollah calling a deceptive amount of the shots but... worse. >with more returning of ancestrally owned land I reckon. A huge part of the black population of SA wasn't there before the boers so the sins of the father or 'blood and soil' rethoric makes a lot more sense for the palestinians. I think it's a valid feeling but also one that cuts on both sides. However the biggest growing group in israel and a big part of the later migration and thus settlement are the mizrahi who have defined a lot of the current hard line stance and to them this western/christianity morality idea of atonement makes no sense. They'd be giving up this land the most but also wouldn't be given their ancestrally owned land back and are also the most adversarial to the palestinian population.