|
This isn't a good response:Ultramega posted:shut the gently caress up forever and this: Xander77 posted:Stop signing your posts. Ultramega posted:When you stop insisting on making the same username on every single internet service you utilize. is a slapfight that shouldn't be pursued further.
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
I apologize. It was childish. Back on topic, EI wrote a piece challenging the details of the recent shooting of a 19-year old woman at a checkpoint who allegedly tried stabbing a soldier. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/israeli-forces-shoot-palestinian-woman-west-bank-150922070049785.html https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/video-palestinian-woman-shot-left-bleed-israeli-soldiers
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:I don't know how (say) Armenian nationalism works, but does it posit that the Armenian diaspora belongs entirely within historical Armenian borders, and will forever be persecuted elsewhere? Ideologically, that's usually a fundamental assumption of nationalism, but how much it comes to the surface depends a lot on the individual group's modern situation - a narrative like that usually rises to the surface when the new nation really wants a large amount of immigration or is very concerned about losing connection with the diaspora. Both those things are a major concern for Israel, where both demographics and total population have been major factors since 1948, and the religious aspect of Jewish national identity leads to immense cultural differences between the country and the diaspora. Armenia, on the other hand, doesn't really have those same kind of concerns, and therefore Armenian nationalism focuses on different priorities reflecting Armenia's own situation - particularly border tensions with Turkey (which still refuses to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide even today) and Azerbaijan (Armenia is still engaged in military occupation of Azerbaijani territory following a primarily ethnic war two decades ago, though they are not attempting to settle it).
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Real Zionism has a minimalist definition. Anyone who doesn't think the state of Israel should be instantly destroyed is a Zionist in some form.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Ideologically, that's usually a fundamental assumption of nationalism
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:No. There's a difference between "a state for Russians" and "a country for all Russians everywhere who don't belong anywhere outside the borders of said country". Even the closest analog in terms of possessing an extensive diaspora doesn't work that way. Depends on the specific situation that that particular ethnicity, state, and diaspora are in. It's not uncommon for nationalist states to conquer neighboring territory that contains a lot of people from that ethnic group; for example, that border war and military occupation involving Armenia I mentioned earlier mostly comes down to Armenia wanting a chunk of Azerjiban that has a majority-Armenian population. And it's funny you should mention Russia, actually; between South Ossetia and Ukraine, it seems like having a lot of Russians near your border with Russia is practically an invitation for nationalistic invasion on the grounds that all those Russians should be in Russia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Real Zionism has a minimalist definition. Anyone who doesn't think the state of Israel should be instantly destroyed is a Zionist in some form. What do you mean by the "State of Israel" in this case? The governmental apparatus or the people in it? Because I think many states in the world, including Israel, absolutely need to be instantly destroyed but I don't mean physically destroying the territory controlled by that state or the people in that territory.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:What do you mean by the "State of Israel" in this case? The governmental apparatus or the people in it? Because I think many states in the world, including Israel, absolutely need to be instantly destroyed but I don't mean physically destroying the territory controlled by that state or the people in that territory. There arn't really any other definitions when it comes to obliterating a nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:There arn't really any other definitions when it comes to obliterating a nation. Then "everyone who doesn't think State of Israel should be instantly destroyed" makes a lot of people who don't believe that Israel should be a Jewish state Zionists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
The minimum requirement for Zionism in accordance to Herzl and the first Zionist Congress was believing that Jews should have a safe haven where they enjoy equal rights, some religious/cultural autonomy and legal protection against persecution , later congresses and the Balfour declaration take this concept of a safehaven and posit that it must be within the territories of mandatory palestine. If you go a little earlier than that to the definitions of the christian proto-zionists (or a bit later to the definitions of Isaac Kook and the nationalist-religious zionist movement) it would seem that the requirement is to believe that the jews ought to be able to found a theocratic state and re-introduce the pilgrimages and animal sacrifice on the temple mount. It's funny to define a minimalist understanding of zionism that is defined through the 'indestruction of the state of Israel' when the original meaning of the word was all about attempts to provide a safe haven for jews, it seems to me like you could imagine a form of zionism that is actually completely agnostic toward the existing state of Israel, after all, Herzl himself was partial to the idea of founding the jewish safe haven in Uganda and not in Palestine, and the state being "Jewish" was never a requirement, only it offering Jewish the protection to form their own autonomous communities and have full democratic representation. emanresu tnuocca fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:There arn't really any other definitions when it comes to obliterating a nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 11:44
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Real Zionism has a minimalist definition. Anyone who doesn't think the state of Israel should be instantly destroyed is a Zionist in some form. What if someone thinks that the state of Israel should be progressively and gradually destroyed to leave place to a truly democratic society which does not favor certain ethnic or religious groups over others? It's still Zionism, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
That's easy; that would make them an antisemite.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 12:42
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Real Zionism has a minimalist definition. Anyone who doesn't think the state of Israel should be instantly destroyed is a Zionist in some form. Does "State of Israel" mean an inherently Jewish-Supremacist state?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:The minimum requirement for Zionism in accordance to Herzl and the first Zionist Congress was believing that Jews should have a safe haven where they enjoy equal rights, some religious/cultural autonomy and legal protection against prosecution, later congresses and the Balfour declaration take this concept of a safehaven and posit that it must be within the territories of mandatory palestine. If you go a little earlier than that to the definitions of the christian proto-zionists (or a bit later to the definitions of Isaac Kook and the nationalist-religious zionist movement) it would seem that the requirement is to believe that the jews ought to be able to found a theocratic state and re-introduce the pilgrimages and animal sacrifice on the temple mount. I intentionally did not link my definition to Herzl's. computer parts posted:Does "State of Israel" mean an inherently Jewish-Supremacist state? I've always argued that Israel should treat all of its citizens with full equality. There's a distinction between Israeli Nationalism and Jewish Nationalism. In the former, the Druze are proud citizens and the Haredim are a dangerous fifth column. Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 13:42 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
Israeli nationalism is made somewhat hard by the fact that the government doesn't recognize such a concept as an Israeli nationality...
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:The minimum requirement for Zionism in accordance to Herzl and the first Zionist Congress was believing that Jews should have a safe haven where they enjoy equal rights, some religious/cultural autonomy and legal protection against persecution , later congresses and the Balfour declaration take this concept of a safehaven and posit that it must be within the territories of mandatory palestine. If you go a little earlier than that to the definitions of the christian proto-zionists (or a bit later to the definitions of Isaac Kook and the nationalist-religious zionist movement) it would seem that the requirement is to believe that the jews ought to be able to found a theocratic state and re-introduce the pilgrimages and animal sacrifice on the temple mount. The minimum requirement of zionism is actually to express a stong cultural bond to Jerusalem/the holy land. At least if you want to relate the concept to the word, neither of which political Zionism owned or invented.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Svartvit posted:The minimum requirement of zionism is actually to express a stong cultural bond to Jerusalem/the holy land. At least if you want to relate the concept to the word, neither of which political Zionism owned or invented. Lots of Arab Christians/Muslims/Armenians have a strong cultural bond to Jerusalem/the holy land.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:There arn't really any other definitions when it comes to obliterating a nation. Destruction of the state isn't the same as destroying a nation, which is why no one calls radical Haredim anti-semitic for wanting to destroy the modern Israeli state and replace it with a true theocracy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:There arn't really any other definitions when it comes to obliterating a nation. It might be helpful to distinguish between "state" and "nation" in this context. Perhaps in the case of a nation what you say is true, but it is certainly not true of states. Governmental continuity is not necessary for people to be healthy and for them to live in what they consider their homeland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
When people change their nationality, they are killed and replaced by a vat-grown clone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
XMNN posted:You can think that the state of Israel as it currently exists ought to be dismantled and replaced without thinking that all the Jews ought to be driven into the sea and the earth salted. I agree, there are many anti-Zionist and anti-semites who favor what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish population of Israel without explicitly supporting their physical extermination. DarkCrawler posted:Because I think many states in the world, including Israel, absolutely need to be instantly destroyed but I don't mean physically destroying the territory controlled by that state or the people in that territory. I'm sure you'll get around to all the others nation-states once Israel is destroyed, presumably you focused on it because you pulled the name out of a hat. And no doubt you and other anti-Zionists will display the same intensity of loathing when crusading against those evil Tamils, Kurds, Tibetans, Scots, and French Canadians who want their own states. Not to mention the various nation-states formed after anti-colonial struggles. Thank you, however, for clarifying you do not support the literal physical destruction of the Mediterranean coastal plain and the Negev Desert, presumably by disintegrator rays.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 00:47
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I agree, there are many anti-Zionist and anti-semites who favor what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish population of Israel without explicitly supporting their physical extermination. So, can the whole "de facto bars Arab political parties from joining coalitions" thing be resolved or does that constitute ethnic cleansing too? Are you, in fact, ethnically cleansing all of us with your posts right now?
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I agree, there are many anti-Zionist and anti-semites who favor what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish population of Israel without explicitly supporting their physical extermination. As has probably been mentioned a million times now, the main reason Israel comes up so frequently is that there's no counter-argument to people saying something like "Saudi Arabia is a bad country and it would be better to replace it with a better country." There's not really any discussion to be had there, since hardly anyone on these forums (and in broader Western society for the most part) is actively pro-Saudi Arabia. The rationale with Israel is the exact same as the rationale with any other bad country; it just ends up being debated about far more often because there's actually two sides to the debate (with the "pro" side actually being far larger in America as a whole; these forums are not representative of the whole population). (To be clear, there are certainly a hell of a lot of people who focus on Israel due to antisemitism. I wouldn't even be surprised if it was a significant portion, like 50% or something. But, contrary to what you seem to believe, that is not a valid argument against people who say "Israel is a bad country that does bad things.")
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:As has probably been mentioned a million times now, the main reason Israel comes up so frequently is that there's no counter-argument to people saying something like "Saudi Arabia is a bad country and it would be better to replace it with a better country." There's not really any discussion to be had there, since hardly anyone on these forums (and in broader Western society for the most part) is actively pro-Saudi Arabia. This is an incoherent response. Saudi Arabia reviled and rejected entirely by the West? You can't actually believe that, can you? You may be shocked to learn that Saudi Arabia has economic, political, and military ties with several western nations! Your argument about the total support for the destruction of Saudi Arabia being signified by the more or less total indifference displayed to its abuses is just as sensible. The whole "those evil Zionists are trying to pretend they're like us civilized Europeans!" has always struck me as more anti-Arab(and obliquely white supremacist) than antisemitic. There's something profoundly disturbing about the barely implicit suggestion that 'those people' just can't be held to the same standards, that brutal human rights records are somehow more "authentic" to some Orientalist notion about how Arab(or Persian or African, etc.) societies ought to be organized.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:There's something profoundly disturbing about the barely implicit suggestion that 'those people' just can't be held to the same standards, that brutal human rights records are somehow more "authentic" to some Orientalist notion about how Arab(or Persian or African, etc.) societies ought to be organized. I'm probably just reading too much into this but where are you going with this line of reasoning? By extension wouldn't you be forced to allow that the treatment of palestinians in the occupied territories be classified under anti-arab sentiments? Take for example how, during the 1982 lebanon invasion, the excuse an IDF officer gave to David Shipler of the NYT* when asked why the IDF were bulldozing houses where women and children were evicted from recently; "They are all terrorists." That right there is the most baldfaced admission of the IDF attitude toward the populace of the occupied territories; a vicious excuse that allows the targetting of even noncombatants simply because they are arabs. That goes leaps and bounds beyond any 'barely implicit suggestion'. I mean come the gently caress on dude, another canned response to journalists during the early 80's who inquired into abuses in lebanon by the IDF were simply "arabs exaggerate". Your ability to turn reason on it's head continues to amaze me. You're like a sponge that just lets all the water pass through it. * http://www.nytimes.com/1982/07/03/world/piles-of-rubble-were-the-homes-of-palestinians.html?pagewanted=2 Ultramega fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Sep 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I agree, there are many anti-Zionist and anti-semites who favor what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish population of Israel without explicitly supporting their physical extermination. Does US policy for regime change in North Korea involve wholesale genocide of the north korean people, or even "just" ethnic cleansing in favor (of south koreans, I guess)?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:This is an incoherent response. Saudi Arabia reviled and rejected entirely by the West? You can't actually believe that, can you? You may be shocked to learn that Saudi Arabia has economic, political, and military ties with several western nations! Do these Saudi ties go as far as having western nations pass laws banning the boycott of Saudi products?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:So, can the whole "de facto bars Arab political parties from joining coalitions" thing be resolved or does that constitute ethnic cleansing too? Are you, in fact, ethnically cleansing all of us with your posts right now? He never responds to posts like this, but we can infer from earlier accusations of anti-Semitism that he does indeed believe that any action against ethnic supremacist policy is openly anti-Semitic. The Insect Court posted:This is an incoherent response. Saudi Arabia reviled and rejected entirely by the West? You can't actually believe that, can you? You may be shocked to learn that Saudi Arabia has economic, political, and military ties with several western nations! Your argument about the total support for the destruction of Saudi Arabia being signified by the more or less total indifference displayed to its abuses is just as sensible. You're misrepresenting his argument. Obviously wealthy nations have ties regardless of gross human rights violations; we could hardly have international diplomacy, otherwise. How often do you encounter people who argue that Saudi Arabia is an egalitarian democracy where women aren't discriminated against and thieves don't have their hands chopped off, or that an Islamist dictatorship with heavy gender segregation and corporeal punishment is in no way objectionable? The Insect Court posted:The whole "those evil Zionists are trying to pretend they're like us civilized Europeans!" has always struck me as more anti-Arab(and obliquely white supremacist) than antisemitic. There's something profoundly disturbing about the barely implicit suggestion that 'those people' just can't be held to the same standards, that brutal human rights records are somehow more "authentic" to some Orientalist notion about how Arab(or Persian or African, etc.) societies ought to be organized. This is an argument against a paraphrased quote, and a non-sequiteur from your previous paragraph.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
Where's anti Saudi BDS?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Where's anti Saudi BDS? I think Bill Maher runs it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Where's anti Saudi BDS? It's called "not driving a car". I don't think there is much else to boycott then oil and good luck getting that to work. The Insect Court posted:I'm sure you'll get around to all the others nation-states once Israel is destroyed, presumably you focused on it because you pulled the name out of a hat. And no doubt you and other anti-Zionists will display the same intensity of loathing when crusading against those evil Tamils, Kurds, Tibetans, Scots, and French Canadians who want their own states. Not to mention the various nation-states formed after anti-colonial struggles. If the other nation states are apartheid colonialist states, sure. Did you forget this is the Israel thread again? DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 13:05 on Sep 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:It's called "not driving a car". I don't think there is much else to boycott then oil and good luck getting that to work. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_Holding_Company It ain't nothing
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Not getting in to emirate-owned stuff, either Say what you will any Israel, but they don't have widespread slavery
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
Haha right, I forgot about globalism for a second. poo poo. BDS is doomed to fail though either way for much for the same reasons, Israel's economy is just more diversified on the surface. The effort needs to be state led and that won't happen in decades. WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Not getting in to emirate-owned stuff, either Saudi-Arabia is certainly much worse then Israel. The thing is, you won't find anyone who disputes this and isn't Saudi-Arabian or loving insane.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:
 but that's not really an excuse to not BDS (hell, there isn't even any momentum to boycott the world cup for gently caress's sake)
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Saudi-Arabia is certainly much worse then Israel. The thing is, you won't find anyone who disputes this and isn't Saudi-Arabian or loving insane. Or Gazan. I mean, they'd be wrong if you look at the bigger picture, but you can see why they might have a skewed perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
The 2022 WC will be in Qatar. Anyway, it is my personally biased opinion that claiming that Israel is 'singled out' because all of these other countries are indisputably worse and so there's no point talking about them is... not true at all. The pro-palestinian crowd, particularly those in arab speaking countries, seems to generally believe that Israel is the worst violator of human rights since Hitler. Rarely you do see commentators in AJE and the such who let slip something like "Israel bad sure but jfc Assad can't you take a queue from them and at least pretend the wholesale butchery of civilians is not your primary military objective?". We've had several posters ITT who thought it was 'absurd' to claim that Assad has a worst human rights record than Bibi, even though the very comparison itself is laughable. To clarify things, as an Israeli I believe that the occupation must end pronto and that there's no excuse for the biennial butchery in Gaza, but I do think it's fair pointing out that there are much worse human rights violators out there no one bothers boycotting (or talking about boycotting, as things actually stand). Not that this is enough to delegetamize the BDS movement as Israel is indeed a human rights violator and if the boycotts could encourage Israel to lay off the Palestinians it would be a blessed outcome regardless of whatever less-than-ideal motives some of the groups' adherents seem to espouse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Or Gazan. Well they're all malnourished and probably like triple-PTSD'd by now so it kind of falls on the loving insane part Like there isn't a single generation left who hasn't been completely miserable their entire lives. emanresu tnuocca posted:To clarify things, as an Israeli I believe that the occupation must end pronto and that there's no excuse for the biennial butchery in Gaza, but I do think it's fair pointing out that there are much worse human rights violators out there no one bothers boycotting (or talking about boycotting, as things actually stand). Not that this is enough to delegetamize the BDS movement as Israel is indeed a human rights violator and if the boycotts could encourage Israel to lay off the Palestinians it would be a blessed outcome regardless of whatever less-than-ideal motives some of the groups' adherents seem to espouse. Sure but that's because in many cases boycotting them would lead into worldwide economic collapse. Or they're not a very important part of the world economy or isolated enough that it's hard not to boycott them by just existing. Israel is small and isolated, like South Africa was. And multiple worse human rights violators have received actual crippling sanctions too. Really, other then the absolutely massive or absolutely wealthy countries, it's hard to recall ones that haven't been sanctioned or whose leaders haven't been put under international arrest warrants or who haven't been toppled by armed invasions or who aren't so insignificant, messed up or poor that you actually have to give them money so they don't starve to death (North Korea, the worst human rights violator in the world for example, shitload of African countries). DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Sep 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
Ytlaya posted:As has probably been mentioned a million times now, the main reason Israel comes up so frequently is that there's no counter-argument to people saying something like "Saudi Arabia is a bad country and it would be better to replace it with a better country." There's not really any discussion to be had there, since hardly anyone on these forums (and in broader Western society for the most part) is actively pro-Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is close allies with a number of Western countries, including the US. Certainly Saudi Arabia's reputation isn't stellar among people who know anything at all about it, but it's not universally reviled in the West either. Cat Mattress posted:Do these Saudi ties go as far as having western nations pass laws banning the boycott of Saudi products? The US has no law banning the boycott of Israeli products specifically, either. The law typically cited for this bans participating in a boycott initiated by a foreign nation without US government approval. In practice, this mostly only applies to Israel (boycotts of Israel are considered by the USG to be part of the Arab League boycott of Israel), but this is in large part because there aren't a whole lot of foreign-initiated boycotts going on that American companies are likely to participate in despite US government approval. People are prone to a whole lot of hyperbole in this thread, though, so I'm not surprised perspectives here are a bit skewed!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 15:49
|
|