|
Woozy posted:Remind me again what the danger is in "cheapening comparisons to Nazi Germany"? What does that even look like? Just answer clearly and explicitly what the absolute worst case scenario is that takes place when the comparison is permitted to stand. You can see it right in front of you in this very thread in stupid derails about whether or not the comparison is apt, and people rightly taking offense to having policies of their country spuriously equivocated with the actions of people who aimed to annihilate them as a race. It makes it even less likely that any kind of sensible discussion be made. Cat Mattress posted:"As long as there are knit kippot, the throne is not whole. That’s Amalek. When will the throne be whole? When there is no knit kippah." --Rabbi Shalom Cohen I'll be sure to probate him if he ever posts here like that.
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:19 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I would think a bigger problem with comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is that it's not even remotely accurate. There isn't some kind of magic immunity field Israel gets from Nazi comparisons because of the Holocaust, it's just a plain bad analogy. If you're trying to make that analogy, it's because "I think you are bad, I think the Nazis are really bad, so I'm going to hyperbolically compare you to Nazis to demonstrate how bad I think you are". Only insofar as comparisons between Nazis and most things are prima facie not even remotely accurate. Yet everything is compared to Nazis because it's a basic anchor point. CF the shrill hysteria over Iran in Israel and the US. Yet take for example, illustrations of routine humiliations of Jews shown in popular films about the Holocaust. Schindler's List - German guards finding it hilarious to match up odd combinations of people and force them to dance or The Pianist, the protagonist's father being beaten for not doffing a cap and then forced to walk in a gutter. The crimes get worse and worse from there but drawing a comparison between those racist humiliations and what Palestinians have faced at checkpoints for decades isn't something I'd call 'not remotely accurate'. In an ideal world, the similarities would be immediately obvious to the perpetrators, who should know better, yet here we are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Hong XiuQuan posted:Only insofar as comparisons between Nazis and most things are prima facie not even remotely accurate. Yet everything is compared to Nazis because it's a basic anchor point. CF the shrill hysteria over Iran in Israel and the US. That doesn't make it not stupid, though. One would hope that D&D would be above the level of teenagers crying that their dad is worse than Hitler because he only lets them play video games three hours a day. quote:Yet take for example, illustrations of routine humiliations of Jews shown in popular films about the Holocaust. Schindler's List - German guards finding it hilarious to match up odd combinations of people and force them to dance or The Pianist, the protagonist's father being beaten for not doffing a cap and then forced to walk in a gutter. The crimes get worse and worse from there but drawing a comparison between those racist humiliations and what Palestinians have faced at checkpoints for decades isn't something I'd call 'not remotely accurate'. I'd certainly call it "not remotely accurate"! I haven't heard of anything even close to that level of abuse happening at checkpoints. If you've got instances of Israeli guards forcing random Palestinians to dance for their amusement at gunpoint, or beating them up solely for fun just to humiliate them, then feel free to post them. Otherwise, can we stick to complaining about things that actually happen? The oppression of Palestinians is bad enough already that we don't need to make poo poo up for the sake of hyperbole.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
There's this thing from a few months back where a Palestinian youth told a soldier at a checkpoint "Have a nice day" where in return the soldier smashed him the face with the butt of his rifle while shouting at the Palestinian "Am I your buddy that you would wish me a nice day?!?", which yeah. Well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:You can see it right in front of you in this very thread in stupid derails about whether or not the comparison is apt, and people rightly taking offense to having policies of their country spuriously equivocated with the actions of people who aimed to annihilate them as a race. It makes it even less likely that any kind of sensible discussion be made. Sensible discussion takes place between groups that already agree on at least one thing. Rhetorically, the problem with saying "the policies of Isreal share many disturbing similarities with other colonialist apartheid states" as opposed to "Isreali leaders are a pack of loving Nazis currently engaged in what most authorities on the issue think of as genocide" is that most people can happily stomach a little colonialist apartheid, and besides which Isreal's defenders react with the same level of indignation to the weaker claim. There are neo-fascist groups and parties in every corner of the world and they're rightly referred to as jackbooted Nazis by their sincere critics. I don't see why the fact that Isreal's happen to actually be in power should disqualify them from that particular criticism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Even avoiding the undeniable abuse of being subjected to military checkpoints because of your race, this is the first non-wikipedia link from googling "Palestinians abused at checkpoint" http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/four-israeli-border-policemen-convicted-of-abusing-young-palestinian-boy-at-checkpoint.premium-1.503581 Here's another article that popped up: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18597-2004Nov28.html There's no humane or moral way for these checkpoints to exist. They have a specific purpose - to subjugate and subdue people because of their race and ethnicity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
I know this whole "Israel=Nazi?" question is kind of a shitstorm of a topic, but here goes my 2 cents anyway. I think one point that's important to underline is the ways in which Israel and her political allies abroad have used the Holocaust not only to justify illegal, brutal and jingoistic actions like the invasion of Lebanon in 82 but also the moral legitimacy of the state itself(and by extension the Nakba). Look at the way for instance that Yad Vashem is built barely a mile away from the site of the Deir Yassin massacre and how the exhibit ends on a triumphant note with the establishment of Israel at the expense of roughly a million ethnically cleansed Palestinians. The message is clear: the Holocaust justifies what we did to the Palestinians. I think that if Israel uses the Holocaust in such a way, it's perfectly acceptable to politicize the Holocaust in order to point out how immoral and abject Israel's behavior has been. Whether doing so is a mistake in terms of tactic is of course a completely separate matter. Secondly, what exactly are we talking about when we compare Israel to Nazi Germany? Has Israel done anything close in magnitude to the enormity of the Holocaust? No, of course not. But then again, neither had the Nazis of the early 30s. And I think there's a lot more of a sustained comparison to be made between the current rightward trend in Israel and the rightward trend in 1930s Germany. There's a continued, violent assault on the Israeli left and center. It's not just the persecution and repression of Arab politicians and political parties(which is nothing new), but it's now reaching even the once-prestigious liberal-Zionist sphere. Look at the campaign of violent intimidation against even centrist human rights organizations like the New Israel Fund or the way that hundreds of even Jewish intellectuals have had to flee Israel for Europe or America as a result of the reigning and constantly worsening anti-democratic and anti-intellectual fervor. The right wing has pledged to both purge the judiciary of disloyal(read: non-reactionary) elements and to block its ability to overturn laws on the grounds of human rights or democratic ideals. It's a country that has passed law after law targeting dissidents and minorities for persecution. This is a country where it's not uncommon to see gangs of skinheads marching down the streets shouting "Death to Arabs! Death to leftists!" as the police look on nonchalantly, where non-Jews are referred to as "infiltrators" or "demographic threats" by their own government, where Knesset ministers can, with impunity, work a crowd of neo-Nazis into a frenzy with a speech including the line "This is a white man's country" and then watch with a satisfied grin as the crowd of skinheads goes on to attack African-owned businesses and beat up any Africans they encounter. Even committed Zionists are starting to see the parallels between today's Israel and the growth of hatred, jingoism, paranoia and violence that characterized the run-up to the Nazis' seizing of power. And while Israel has not yet done anything nearly as bad in scope as the Holocaust, it's not an impossibility. What happens when Bennett or Lieberman or worse is PM and Israel is no longer satisfied with a low-grade campaign of oppression punctuated by the occasional 4-figure massacre and starts killing Palestinians by the tens or hundreds of thousands? Edit: Main Paineframe posted:I haven't heard of anything even close to that level of abuse happening at checkpoints. If you've got instances of Israeli guards forcing random Palestinians to dance for their amusement at gunpoint, or beating them up solely for fun just to humiliate them, then feel free to post them. Otherwise, can we stick to complaining about things that actually happen? The oppression of Palestinians is bad enough already that we don't need to make poo poo up for the sake of hyperbole. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/29/israel http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18597-2004Nov28.html Or just read some of Gideon Levy's dispatches from the OT. FreshlyShaven fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Sensible discussion takes place between groups that already agree on at least one thing. So you're saying we should use irrelevant hyperbole because it packs a stronger punch? That's exactly the problem with cheapening this comparison, especially since people have been making the Israel=THE REAL NAZIS comparison for ages, it means that when you say it now, when it may be say a bit truer than 10 years ago, people who were not originally invested in anti-Israeli rhetoric will say "oh, you always say that." It's the boy who cried "wolf".
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Sensible discussion takes place between groups that already agree on at least one thing. Rhizzone.net is not 'most authorities", neither is the Ayatollah regime in Iran. I'd love to see something that demonstrates this worldwide support for the notion that Israel is actively engaged in genocide against the Palestinian people. heck, I'd love to see even one serious scholar who says anything to this effect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That doesn't make it not stupid, though. One would hope that D&D would be above the level of teenagers crying that their dad is worse than Hitler because he only lets them play video games three hours a day. My friends who manned the checkpoints regularly came home and gloated about that sort of stuff, including stealing candy from a shop owner etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:I'd love to see something that demonstrates this worldwide support for the notion that Israel is actively engaged in genocide against the Palestinian people. heck, I'd love to see even one serious scholar who says anything to this effect. Woah woah woah, hang on.There is plenty of reason to support the idea that they ARE engaging in genocide through siege and oppression. Its not an active genocide so much, but they are very much making it difficult to believe that they have the Palestinian survival in their interests, especially considering the comments of multiple high ranking Israeli politicians, religious leaders, and military members. Ethnic cleansing? I don't know, either way the apartheid level of oppression they push combined with a slowly crawling settlement pogrom, its about as close to genocide as you can get without straight up starting to send around death squads.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Woah woah woah, hang on.There is plenty of reason to support the idea that they ARE engaging in genocide through siege and oppression. Its not an active genocide so much, but they are very much making it difficult to believe that they have the Palestinian survival in their interests, especially considering the comments of multiple high ranking Israeli politicians, religious leaders, and military members. Words have meaning, I know this sucks cause sometimes we want to use one word but it just doesn't procrastinate with the meaning we're trying to convey (see what I did there?), but that's life. Did the US and the coalition commit genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan? Cause if you wanna talk about poo poo that is uncannily reminiscent of genocide, I'd look to the places with the tallest piles of bodies. Does Assad engage in genocide against his own people? Cause I rarely even see that accusation get thrown around. In anyway, this is not a discussion I'm interested in having right now, I'm interested in seeing any sort of proof of the fact that "most authorities" on the subject of genocide are in consensus that Israel is actively engaged in genocide. I'm pretty sure that it's gonna be pretty hard to produce this sort of proof.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Words have meaning, I know this sucks cause sometimes we want to use one word but it just doesn't procrastinate with the meaning we're trying to convey (see what I did there?), but that's life. Assad is committing genocide: the guy literally has death camps surrounding the capital and we have satellite images of mass graves. We most certainly committed war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, but it still pales in comparison to the nearly 60+ years of the Israelis have done in their own back yard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
You could compare it to the subjugation, erosion of rights and ongoing genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar, but that isn't a topic commonly found in discourse. (Which I think is absolutely horrific considering their situation but this isn't the thread for that). Also Genocide does not just mean Killing All The People.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Assad is committing genocide: the guy literally has death camps surrounding the capital and we have satellite images of mass graves. Yet you've erected far more massive shrines to the skull god than Israel ever did. And while I think that Assad is a genocider I don't see this rhetoric appear almost anywhere. Yet I do see people accuse ISIS of genocide even though their death toll is much lower. Perhaps this has something to do with ISIS genuinely attempting to rape and kill an entire ethnic/cultural group while all of the previously mentioned actors don't seemingly have such an intention. What Israel is doing is horrible and has to end because it will eventually escalate into either a full regional war or indeed into actual genocide, when that happens we'll all know cause there will be hundreds of thousands of dead people. Anyway, again, let's refrain from having a discussion based on something quite as meaningless as my opinion. An extraordinary claim was made, the burden of proof is not on me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Yet you've erected far more massive shrines to the skull god than Israel ever did. And while I think that Assad is a genocider I don't see this rhetoric appear almost anywhere. What is the specific definition of genocide that you are using?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Yet you've erected far more massive shrines to the skull god than Israel ever did. And while I think that Assad is a genocider I don't see this rhetoric appear almost anywhere.  Because ISIS IS committing genocide. What the gently caress. They are specifically targeting cultures to wipe them out including mass graves, murdering entire villages, and disgusting rituals.Holy loving christ. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to doubt that ISIS is currently enacting a campaign of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Anyway, again, let's refrain from having a discussion based on something quite as meaningless as my opinion. An extraordinary claim was made, the burden of proof is not on me. It would be useful to have some evidence of this wide academic consensus, if only to add it to the OP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Remind me again what the danger is in "cheapening comparisons to Nazi Germany"? What does that even look like? Just answer clearly and explicitly what the absolute worst case scenario is that takes place when the comparison is permitted to stand. When you argue a case with hysteric hyperbole you weaken the entire argument. Also anyone comparing Israel with Nazi Germany is revealed to be an instant moron but I suppose that is a worst case scenario just for that person. Israel is an militaristic apartheid state engaging in colonialism. Not a genocidal totalitarian one-party dictatorship industrially murdering people. When you resort into Nazi Germany comparisons you basically argue that the actual poo poo happening on it's own isn't bad enough. Try this, how about arguing about dumb Nazi poo poo, ask a person (assuming you are an American) if it would be OK that only Christians or white people were drafted in the military. Real world contrasts that show that there is something deeply wrong with Israel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Israel is an militaristic apartheid state engaging in colonialism. Not a genocidal totalitarian one-party dictatorship industrially murdering people. When you resort into Nazi Germany comparisons you basically argue that the actual poo poo happening on it's own isn't bad enough.  Colonialism tends to to often take genocidal methods, even if the methods are not so industrial in its methods.Nearly every colonial movement resulted in genocide of one sort or another, directly or indirectly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
FreshlyShaven posted:I know this whole "Israel=Nazi?" question is kind of a shitstorm of a topic, but here goes my 2 cents anyway. I think that this post sums it up pretty well. Including the shitstorm part.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
You misunderstood my point. My point was exactly that: it seems like accusations of genocide are for the most part only invoked when an attempt to eliminate an entire ethnic\cultural group takes place. Perhaps with this clarification my post will make more sense and less psyducks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:You misunderstood my point. I'm gonna ahead and say that the Palestinians count as a cultural group, especially considering the levels that the Israeli government has gone to push Arabs out of Israeli cities. CommieGIR posted:
Again, it might not be considered genocide now (the Trail of Tears wasn't considered genocide in its day) but its got all the hallmarks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:Even avoiding the undeniable abuse of being subjected to military checkpoints because of your race, this is the first non-wikipedia link from googling "Palestinians abused at checkpoint" FreshlyShaven posted:http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/29/israel Thank you. I'll freely admit to not knowing everything about I/P, since it's an enormous conflict with so many aspects, so it's always nice when someone sources their information. And drat, I knew about general jerkness of checkpoint guards, the time cost to Palestinians of passing through them, and the risks of being denied, but I didn't think the guards had the time or freedom to pull poo poo like that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:What is the specific definition of genocide that you are using? I am not going into the legalese, the definition for the crime of genocide is broad enough for it to be applicable in pretty much half of the world's conflicts. I was questioning why certain acts of mass murder constitute genocide while others generally don't in an attempt to demonstrate that "being a really lovely oppressive regime that uses disproportionate violence to quell resistance among a subjugated ethnic group" makes for an extremely broad and generally unconventional definition for genocide. CommieGIR posted:I'm gonna ahead and say that the Palestinians count as a cultural group, especially considering the levels that the Israeli government has gone to push Arabs out of Israeli cities. Alright, so, by your estimates, at the current rate of genocide, when do you expect Israel to be done with the palestinians and wipe them from the face of the earth (or at least from greater Israel). I think you're intentionally misconstruing my posts because I'm arguing a pro-Israeli talking point, but if that's the case than this discussion has no basis cause you are not really making an effort to respond to what I say.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Alright, so, by your estimates, at the current rate of genocide, when do you expect Israel to be done with the palestinians and wipe them from the face of the earth (or at least from greater Israel). Again, please help me understand why the Israeli Colonialism and Settlement system is any less genocidal than any other Colonial system, of which nearly every one was considered genocidal, regardless of the expediency of their methods. Why is what the Israelis do to the Palestinians through Settlement building any different from the Indian Removal Act, which is widely considered to be genocidal? I am not misconstruing your posts. I'm questioning why the only acceptable definition of 'genocide' is one involving full on death camps rather than slow and methodical oppression and theft of land, which is also widely considered genocide. Wait, wait, they don't have gas chambers and death squads, can't be genocide yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:So you're saying we should use irrelevant hyperbole because it packs a stronger punch? That's exactly the problem with cheapening this comparison, especially since people have been making the Israel=THE REAL NAZIS comparison for ages, it means that when you say it now, when it may be say a bit truer than 10 years ago, people who were not originally invested in anti-Israeli rhetoric will say "oh, you always say that." It's the boy who cried "wolf". Well, I mean for one thing people who are trained in debate and study rhetoric and persuasion as a discipline would see this as a bit backwards. The rule is typically that you lead with your strongest card. Surely one can see, for example, how a long history of various officials bodies refusing to name the Gaza occupation a "genocide" has damaged the credibility of the claim today. But what I'm saying is that in order to take seriously the notion that this or that equivocation can be "cheapened" through overuse, we have to accept basically a whole host of really weird facts about how language actually works. I mean, is the reverse claim a possibility? Is there some risk of raising to an intolerable level the bar for what actually qualifies as being "an awful lot like what Nazis did" by abstaining from current equivocation? This actually seems like a stronger claim. People already wrongly believe that Nazism is all Death's Heads and black trenchcoats, after all. Does anyone actually weigh the validity of such claims based on how they've historically been deployed? I kind of doubt it. Is there a risk that some future neo-fascist organization will successfully rise to power because the necessary language for debating them was all used up? It seems absurd, right? This just reminds me of the way people are warned against labeling various sorts of lesser, pettier discrimination "full-blown racism". Like, oh, be careful! Don't go calling just anything racism! When the real racism comes around no one will believe you!
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
What about efforts to shut down discussion of Israel's actions wrt genocide by claiming that Palestinians aren't a distinct ethnic group?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Well, I mean for one thing people who are trained in debate and study rhetoric and persuasion as a discipline would see this as a bit backwards. The rule is typically that you lead with your strongest card. Surely one can see, for example, how a long history of various officials bodies refusing to name the Gaza occupation a "genocide" has damaged the credibility of the claim today. So you're agreeing with me, then? quote:But what I'm saying is that in order to take seriously the notion that this or that equivocation can be "cheapened" through overuse, we have to accept basically a whole host of really weird facts about how language actually works. I mean, is the reverse claim a possibility? Is there some risk of raising to an intolerable level the bar for what actually qualifies as being "an awful lot like what Nazis did" by abstaining from current equivocation? This actually seems like a stronger claim. People already wrongly believe that Nazism is all Death's Heads and black trenchcoats, after all. Does anyone actually weigh the validity of such claims based on how they've historically been deployed? I kind of doubt it. Is there a risk that some future neo-fascist organization will successfully rise to power because the necessary language for debating them was all used up? It seems absurd, right? I've actually seen this happen in Israel with people talking about fascist government for so long that the general populace ignores literal fascist movements popping up. quote:This just reminds me of the way people are warned against labeling various sorts of lesser, pettier discrimination "full-blown racism". Like, oh, be careful! Don't go calling just anything racism! When the real racism comes around no one will believe you! Well, you seem to be living under the misapprehension that all of the things I am talking about are hypothetical, when they have in fact happened: so much so that Godwin's law was actually originally invented in the 1990's on USENET.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Ahead of his Monday meeting with Obama, their first in more than a year, Bibi appoints a right-wing idiot who called Obama an anti-Semite as his chief of public diplomacy. Bibi really doesn't understand alienating half the USA is against Israels interests does he?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Bibi really doesn't understand alienating half the USA is against Israels interests does he? Isn't he the one that basically said that the US is just a 'benefit' that they don't need because he sees Israel as another superpower that can stand without help?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Bibi really doesn't understand alienating half the USA is against Israels interests does he? No, he understands that no matter what he or anyone in Israel says or does the US will back them 100%, regardless of what their leader says.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Isn't he the one that basically said that the US is just a 'benefit' that they don't need because he sees Israel as another superpower that can stand without help? It's possible that he actually thinks that, but my guess is that it's just bullshit red meat that he throws to his base.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
What Israel is doing does not compare in any way shape or form to the word "genocide" as it is understood by 99% of the world population, making it another needless term that just causes more dumb semantics and distracts from the evil things Israel has no way of dodging - apartheid and colonialism. The settlers are there, the racist laws are in the books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Again, please help me understand why the Israeli Colonialism and Settlement system is any less genocidal than any other Colonial system, of which nearly every one was considered genocidal, regardless of the expediency of their methods. Colonial regimes were rarely genocidal. Brutal, cruel, and exploitative, yes, but genocide was typically the exception, not the rule. As for the Indian Removal Act, that rather straddles the line; the law itself would be ethnic cleansing, but the implementation certainly qualifies as genocidal. Yes, there is a difference between ethnic cleansing and genocide, and yes, it is a significant distinction. Oppression and theft of land, by itself, is ethnic cleansing, not genocide, although it can very easily cross the line into genocide depending on the implementation
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Colonial regimes were rarely genocidal. Brutal, cruel, and exploitative, yes, but genocide was typically the exception, not the rule. As for the Indian Removal Act, that rather straddles the line; the law itself would be ethnic cleansing, but the implementation certainly qualifies as genocidal. Yes, there is a difference between ethnic cleansing and genocide, and yes, it is a significant distinction. Oppression and theft of land, by itself, is ethnic cleansing, not genocide, although it can very easily cross the line into genocide depending on the implementation Fair enough, and to be fair, this is the definition showing the distinction from the International Criminal Court: quote:In reviewing the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Bosnian Genocide Case in the judgement of Jorgic v. Germany on July 12, 2007 the European Court of Human Rights quoted from the ICJ ruling on the Bosnian Genocide Case to draw a distinction between ethnic cleansing and genocide. By that definition, what the Israeli's do does straddle the lines of genocide, since its arguable their methods via siege and displacement cut close to the intentional destruction of a group of people. DarkCrawler posted:What Israel is doing does not compare in any way shape or form to the word "genocide" as it is understood by 99% of the world population, making it another needless term that just causes more dumb semantics and distracts from the evil things Israel has no way of dodging - apartheid and colonialism. The settlers are there, the racist laws are in the books. Would you say that Israel conducts ethnic cleansing? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Nov 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:So you're agreeing with me, then? I don't think so? quote:I've actually seen this happen in Israel with people talking about fascist government for so long that the general populace ignores literal fascist movements popping up. Okay but is that what's actually happening? Someone "cried wolf"? You can't possibly believe that "literal fascist" movements are the result of... what, even? Name calling? The general populace of Israel have plenty of good reasons to look the other way or indeed gleefully indulge reactionary politics, not least of which is the fact that they have been enormously profitable for the general populace of Isreal. What a strange coincidence that such politics have been carefully insulated from the obvious criticisms--those which have occurred naturally to so many people that, as you point out, there's a whole law on the internet dedicated to it. I mean, you're the expert here. Tell me, how does the average Isreali react to the claim that Isreal is "merely" a settlerist apartheid state with a few "disturbing parallels" to other monstrous regimes like South Africa that still enjoy a certain of sympathy amount the world's reactionaries? Is this really a more tolerable argument to anyone who might actually be persuaded? Is it actually less agreeable now that the N-word is on the table? It seems more likely to me that any criticism of Isreal that is not sufficiently weak as to be justifiable by historical mistreatment of Jews and their modern "security" needs all falls into the same unhearable category of "hysterical hyperbole".
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Again, please help me understand why the Israeli Colonialism and Settlement system is any less genocidal than any other Colonial system, of which nearly every one was considered genocidal, regardless of the expediency of their methods. I don't know what to tell you dude but you are just making a series of logical fallacies and inventing an academic consensus on certain subjects where such a consensus doesn't exist. Colonialism is not the same as genocide, this is the first fallacy, you are conflating concurrency with equivalency. It is undeniable that colonialism is often the precursor to genocide and that colonial regimes are among the chief enablers of genocide in history, but this does not mean that these two crimes are one and the same, which means that asking me to explain why Israeli colonialism is itself unique in that it's not genocidal while all other colonial regimes were is well, bullshit that has no bearing on reality. If you're seriously going to argue that the crime of colonialism is one and the same as the crime of genocide you're already trying to paint the world in much broader strokes than most people are willing to so I'm not gonna bother arguing with you about your definition, I'm just gonna point out that it is not one that enjoys any sort of wide consensus. So, your second fallacy is conflating the crime of genocide, which is more of a framework under which a collection of crimes against a specific group are committed in an attempt to exterminate said group (in whole or in part), with all of those crimes that may occur in the course of a genocide the totality thereof comprise of the genocide itself. So for instance, while ethnic cleansing may occur during a genocide, this does not mean that ethnic cleansing may only occur during a genocide or that ethnic cleansing in itself constitutes a genocide, so while the trail of tears is a part of a campaign of genocide, the ethnic cleansing of ethnic-germans from east europe following WWII is not generally understood to be an act of genocide In fact, your definition of genocide is so off that you're missing out that the 'intent to destroy, in whole or in part' thing is a part of the formal definition of the crime of Genocide. and, once again, you are fabricating a consensus where one doesn't exist. So no, this isn't a "they don't have an auschwitz so it ain't genocide" argument, that's just a strawman people often come up with in these discussions to cover their asses after the "genocide apologists" they argue against point out that words do in fact have meaning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:19 |
|
|
I'm not sure what the intent could be in regards to the people of Gaza other than to destroy them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:54
|
|