|
The few younger Jews I've discussed Palestine with have been mixed on the issue. I'd say about half were indifferent and the other half were incredibly racist and reactionary. I would broadly describe all of them as "liberal" outside if this issue though.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I was under the impression based on poll numbers that younger American Jews (say <35) were more likely to be moderate or pro-Palestinian. Do you have any data? No, I do not. That was completely anecdotal. I'm a bit older so I'm mostly talking about family and older family friends. I do not live in an area with a large population of Jewish people, and since I'm not the religious type, I'm not exposed to new Jewish people. Except for the small number of people in my leftist circles, who yeah, are generally younger. I wouldn't disagree with your premise, though. That's almost certainly true. But I've known younger people who move to Israel to join the IDF, so... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
Gregoriev posted:Any one-state solution that both sides agree to would presumably not disenfranchise the Palestinians. I don't see how it would approximate 1945, given a Palestinian voting bloc with voting rights would outnumber the White Jewish vote. That doesn't resolve your second point, which is obviously an issue, but that realistically isn't resolved with a two state solution between the two sides as they exist now either. So even if you could manage to create a single binational state, given the two nations as they exist now, you would simply be building a tinderbox that would reignite sectarian/ethnic strife and division at the slightest spark. The advantage of the two state solution is that it bypasses the staggeringly difficult questions of shared governance, economic disparity, and managed coexistence. I'm not optimistic about any "good" outcome for the I/P conflict, but I think both sides segregating themselves to opposite sides of a mutually recognized border and not killing each other for a few decades would be a decent start.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/IfNotNowOrg/status/983368040082558977
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
British press trying to tear down Corbyn by plastering Jewdas all over the headlines may be a huge blessing in disguise. More young jews seem to be coming to the idea that we can challenge Israel without forfeiting our Jewishness. I hope its true, it would be a powerful shift. If Not Now in the states is doing great work, too
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The Palestinian Arabs outnumbered the Palestinian Jews in 1945, by a much larger margin than exists now. But no one in Mandatory Palestine had the franchise unless you count bombing British administrative centers as voting. I guess I didn't understand what was meant by having a single state being a reset to 1945, given that 1945 Mandatory Palestine was a majority of land owning Arabs with a small minority of Jews being overseen by a state entity that was explicitly in favor of eventually handing over the state to the minority group, if at all. Dead Reckoning posted:As PM noted, the Palestinians were a majority in 1945. Even if we could remove a bunch of obstacles and get both sides to agree in principle to the notion of a one state solution, there is no way the Israelis are going to turn over the reins of the Mossad and IDF to a government of Palestinian ministers. You'd have to have some sort of power sharing arrangement like Northern Ireland that gives Jewish Israelis an undemocratic and disproportionate veto power over popular initiatives. Even assuming you manage all that, you end up with (former) Israelis as a minority upper class that owns most of the land and controls most of the money and a massive permanent underclass of (former) Palestinians who are impoverished and have little ability to compete in a modern services/tech/tourism based economy. The Israeli side will never agree to more than symbolic reparations, because why on earth would they agree to impoverish themselves for the sake of their enemies? Those are all completely fair criticisms of a one state solution cobbled out of the current situation. However, "mutually recognized border" is as much of an insane pipe dream given Jerusalem, not to mention the geographical distribution of Israel's Jewish and Arabic populations. edit: regarding young jew chat, between me and my Jewish friends and acquaintances in their younger to mid 20s, there's about a 50-20-30 split between reactionary support for Israel, general apathy towards the situation, and sympathy/support for Palestine. That being said, I live in a fairly conservative political environment so that might be skewing the distribution. ATribeCalledKvetch fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Apr 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
Nebalebadingdong posted:British press trying to tear down Corbyn by plastering Jewdas all over the headlines may be a huge blessing in disguise. More young jews seem to be coming to the idea that we can challenge Israel without forfeiting our Jewishness. I hope its true, it would be a powerful shift.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The pro-Israeli groups are doing the Jewish people a great disservice, in that they are always crying ‘anti-Semitism’ against any criticism of Israel’s actions. This then gives the actual anti-Semites cover because the smear has been overused in the wrong way. https://twitter.com/netanyahu/status/983358790547492865
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
I mean, it's pretty intentional isn't it? They're so pro-Israel they want Israel to be the only home for Jewish people. Even if it means fanning the flames of anti-semitism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Gregoriev posted:Those are all completely fair criticisms of a one state solution cobbled out of the current situation. However, "mutually recognized border" is as much of an insane pipe dream given Jerusalem, not to mention the geographical distribution of Israel's Jewish and Arabic populations. The two state solution & mutual border has a ton of obstacles, but all those obstacles are present in the one state solution, as well as a ton more issues. The only things the one state solution skips are having to divide up Jerusalem and deal with the settlers, which frankly are the least intractable obstacles of the intractable obstacles to peace.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Argas posted:I mean, it's pretty intentional isn't it? They're so pro-Israel they want Israel to be the only home for Jewish people. Even if it means fanning the flames of anti-semitism. When I was a teen, I read conspiracy theories (I think from the anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews) peddling that rabbis conspired with Germany over the shoa for precisely this reason. I discounted them because I didn't think enemies in this way could ever work together, but I guess I was wrong. I discount the theories, still, but would be interesting if anyone has better reading material about them. Nebalebadingdong posted:British press trying to tear down Corbyn by plastering Jewdas all over the headlines may be a huge blessing in disguise. More young jews seem to be coming to the idea that we can challenge Israel without forfeiting our Jewishness. I hope its true, it would be a powerful shift. I long for the day when "Pro-Israel" means kicking out hawks and kleptocrats from government. Much in the same how the iraq war-era republicans, tea party, alt-right stole the banner of American patriotism*. Protesting the Jerusalem move earlier this year, counter-protesters were chanting "USA" at us. We also started chanting "USA" and that sure shut up the counter-protestors for a moment. *No small part played by democrats a la Kreider's cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
Argas posted:I mean, it's pretty intentional isn't it? They're so pro-Israel they want Israel to be the only home for Jewish people. Even if it means fanning the flames of anti-semitism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:As PM noted, the Palestinians were a majority in 1945. Even if we could remove a bunch of obstacles and get both sides to agree in principle to the notion of a one state solution, there is no way the Israelis are going to turn over the reins of the Mossad and IDF to a government of Palestinian ministers. You'd have to have some sort of power sharing arrangement like Northern Ireland that gives Jewish Israelis an undemocratic and disproportionate veto power over popular initiatives. Even assuming you manage all that, you end up with (former) Israelis as a minority upper class that owns most of the land and controls most of the money and a massive permanent underclass of (former) Palestinians who are impoverished and have little ability to compete in a modern services/tech/tourism based economy. The Israeli side will never agree to more than symbolic reparations, because why on earth would they agree to impoverish themselves for the sake of their enemies? I'm not sure why "it won't work because Israeli Jews refuse to make any meaningful concessions toward real equality" is a problem that only applies to the one-state solution. Every "two-state solution" Israel proposes is more like a one-and-a-half-state solution, with Israel making slight territorial concessions to a nominally-independent Palestinian state that is essentially under Israeli control anyway. It didn't fool anyone when South Africa tried it, so I wouldn't place much hope on that working. The fact of the matter is that no solution is possible until Israel changes their mindset. Talking about whether it's one-state or two-state or three-state is pointless when Israel refuses to concede anything more than slightly rearranging the deck chairs on the current status quo. guidoanselmi posted:When I was a teen, I read conspiracy theories (I think from the anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews) peddling that rabbis conspired with Germany over the shoa for precisely this reason. Recall that the Nazi ethnic cleansing policies started out focusing on removal, not slaughter. They started by trying to force Jews to emigrate using blatantly draconian laws and policies in the early 30s, and then transitioned to resettlement and straight-up deportation in the late 30s. The Nazis didn't shift to a policy of outright extermination until the early 40s. It's certainly true that some Zionist groups did deal with the Nazis in the 1930s, but although Germany was virulently racist against Jews at the time, the horrors of the Holocaust that are most remembered today hadn't really gotten going yet. Germany was very obviously trying to force Jews out and was willing to explore some pretty unorthodox ways of doing so (at one point, Nazi officials seriously debated the idea of sending all European Jews to Madagascar). Meanwhile, Zionist groups wanted to encourage Jewish immigration to Palestine and were particularly happy to aid Jews in getting out from under Nazi rule. As a result, in the early 1930s, some Zionist groups were in fact willing to deal with the Nazis, who were also more willing to deal since they hadn't fully consolidated their power yet and were nervous of things like international boycotts. This led to stuff like the Haavara Agreement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
mostly thanks to lehi's leader at the time being sure israel and nazi Germany were united eternally by their undying hatred of the British. guy was not what we in the business call a big picture thinker
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Recall that the Nazi ethnic cleansing policies started out focusing on removal, not slaughter. They started by trying to force Jews to emigrate using blatantly draconian laws and policies in the early 30s, and then transitioned to resettlement and straight-up deportation in the late 30s. The Nazis didn't shift to a policy of outright extermination until the early 40s. this is true, but it should be clear that the policy of forced emigration they discussed was understood by all involved to be a gradual death sentence in the same way that people being sent to siberia by stalin weren't technically being sentenced to death. the destination like madagascar floated by nazi higher ups were so remote and the infrastructure so limited that the millions of people shipped there would never survive more than a handful of years at best. the shift to mass murder by the eitzengroupen and then industrial mass murder of the camps was the result of squabbling between regional leaders and additionally nazi administrators getting a sense of the massive logistics involved with eliminating an entire people, not a change in their overall intentions
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I'm not sure why "it won't work because Israeli Jews refuse to make any meaningful concessions toward real equality" is a problem that only applies to the one-state solution. Every "two-state solution" Israel proposes is more like a one-and-a-half-state solution, with Israel making slight territorial concessions to a nominally-independent Palestinian state that is essentially under Israeli control anyway. It didn't fool anyone when South Africa tried it, so I wouldn't place much hope on that working. The fact of the matter is that no solution is possible until Israel changes their mindset. Talking about whether it's one-state or two-state or three-state is pointless when Israel refuses to concede anything more than slightly rearranging the deck chairs on the current status quo. A good thing they did, too, otherwise those people would likely be dead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:A good thing they did, too, otherwise those people would likely be dead. it is neat that the foundation of the state of Israel is, without irony, the statement "the Nazis had some good ideas"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:it is neat that the foundation of the state of Israel is, without irony, the statement "the Nazis had some good ideas" I'm sorry the Nazis weren't able to kill as many Jews as they wanted, but instead some damnable Zionists were able to help a certain amount of them escape, some through dealing with them, others through supporting partisans. I'm sure you'd be way happier with more of them choosing the Bundist route of being slaughtered in the Holocaust and in the various Communist purges.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I'm sorry the Nazis weren't able to kill as many Jews as they wanted, but instead some damnable Zionists were able to help a certain amount of them escape, some through dealing with them, others through supporting partisans. I'm sure you'd be way happier with more of them choosing the Bundist route of being slaughtered in the Holocaust and in the various Communist purges. it's like Bibi says, when was the last time allying with far-right european regimes turned out to be a bad idea for what it's worth, the scholarship on what the nazis intended is superficially exonerative and ultimately far, far more damning; the goal genuinely appears to not have been extermination, to start. you've got figures as high as Goebbels on record in internal party communications saying killing them would be an unacceptably "asiatic" approach. and a host of early policies designed to facilitate emigration in the hopes that they'd all just go away. in an event that ought to have had a PREVIEW OF COMING ATTRACTION sticker slapped on it, it came as a massively unwelcome surprise to high command that when they annexed the sudetenland they got back an awful lot of the jews they'd convinced to emigrate, and from there the story goes as you know. it would be easier to dismiss the horrors of the holocaust as a one-off if a uniquely evil bunch of people had gotten into power, but the data do not bear that out. a bunch of loving idiots incapable of planning two steps ahead got into power, panicked, and did something phenomenally evil in response. in unrelated news, hey look, kids with tires. probably terrorists in disguise. weapons free, boys!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:this is true, but it should be clear that the policy of forced emigration they discussed was understood by all involved to be a gradual death sentence in the same way that people being sent to siberia by stalin weren't technically being sentenced to death. the destination like madagascar floated by nazi higher ups were so remote and the infrastructure so limited that the millions of people shipped there would never survive more than a handful of years at best. the shift to mass murder by the eitzengroupen and then industrial mass murder of the camps was the result of squabbling between regional leaders and additionally nazi administrators getting a sense of the massive logistics involved with eliminating an entire people, not a change in their overall intentions Yeah, a successful mass deportation would have been a Trail-of-Tears-esque tragedy of deliberate negligence at the hands of the Nazis carrying out the deportation, and the Nazis were definitely interested in maintaining long-term influence over whereever their deportees ended up so that they could oppress the population whenever they wanted with things like blockades and random attacks - part of the Nazi interest in places like Madagascar was that having all of Europe's Jews in one place would make it very easy to control and isolate the Jewish population at any time. Although the Nazis didn't appear to have outright extermination in mind at the time, a Nazi-controlled Jewish Madagascar probably would have made the current Gaza situation look prosperous and comfortable by comparison. However, due to logistical difficulties, problems with finding a destination willing to take the deportees, and the fact that it wasn't really planned out all that well in the first place, the Nazis were never really able to carry it out in any organized and large-scale way. Once the war got started, closed borders and blockades and such essentially ended their ability to send deportees anywhere outside their land, and on top of that, they were invading and conquering areas where many of the emigrated German Jews had fled to in the first place. Ze Pollack posted:it is neat that the foundation of the state of Israel is, without irony, the statement "the Nazis had some good ideas" Think of it more as "making the best of it". The Nazis were going to engage in ethnic cleansing regardless, but had problems finding places willing to take the deportees. Meanwhile, some Zionist groups (it was hotly debated at the time, and many factions opposed the cooperation) actively wanted to bring in as many Jewish immigrants as possible, and thought that it would be a win-win for the deportees: the deportees would get subsidized trips to Jewish communities in Palestine instead of fleeing penniless to Poland or Madagascar or whatever, and Zionists in Israel would get the influx of Jewish immigration and resources they desired.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:it's like Bibi says, when was the last time allying with far-right european regimes turned out to be a bad idea The real inevitable tragedy was that the Nazis had two big goals regarding their territory that clashed. 1. No Jews. 2. All that nice elbow room out east. And y'know, annexing Poland and eventually the former Pale of Settlement meant the Nazis came into control of shitloads of Jews.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:The pro-Israeli groups are doing the Jewish people a great disservice, in that they are always crying ‘anti-Semitism’ against any criticism of Israel’s actions. This then gives the actual anti-Semites cover because the smear has been overused in the wrong way. It's unlikely that I'm the only Nordic to have that happen, though Iceland is a bit different, what with having more Palestinian refugees than Jewish people in the country~
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
Grape posted:The real inevitable tragedy was that the Nazis had two big goals regarding their territory that clashed. you could do a solid series of ludicrously dark historical comedy sketches bookended by the German for "in retrospect, this was really avoidable"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:it is neat that the foundation of the state of Israel is, without irony, the statement "the Nazis had some good ideas" I know it's a real sophomoric take, but to this day, I am still baffled that the immediate response to nazi atrocities was to establish an ethnostate in a densely populated region in the Middle East.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:I know it's a real sophomoric take, but to this day, I am still baffled that the immediate response to nazi atrocities was to establish an ethnostate in a densely populated region in the Middle East. The Zionist project was WELL on its way by the later 1930s, it just got a massive shot in the arm from A) refugees and B) post-war international sentiment. also there wasn't really another credible option for "Jewish majority future state" at the time, so there wasn't really any competition if you accept that Jewish self-determination was a reasonable thing for a subset of post-war Jews to demand well, other than Glorious Soviet Jewish Autonomous Oblast
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 06:04
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:It didn't fool anyone when South Africa tried it, so I wouldn't place much hope on that working. Why not? South Africa did not have the indefectible support of the world's greatest power, because the fundamentalist loonies running said greatest power didn't believe that the existence of a state of South Africa was a necessary precondition for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Israel can do (and assuredly does) whatever it wants without ever facing repercussion, because they are instrumental in ushering in the Apocalypse according the clumsy theology of American fuckwits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 13:12
|
|
|
Grape posted:The real inevitable tragedy was that the Nazis had two big goals regarding their territory that clashed. Well, they had a solution for this. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 13:35
|
|
|
Time for some comic interlude: Israel fails to expel Dublin Lord Mayor Michael Mac Donncha after misspelling his namequote:Efforts by the Israeli government to prevent Lord Mayor Michael Mac Donncha from entering the country failed because officials spelled his name incorrectly, it has emerged. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 14:15
|
|
|
With all the events in the press recently and the typical responses I've seen on social media, I'd like to posit that you should consider yourself or what you say as antipalestinian and racist, if you suggest or say: 1) Pallywood - the idea that Palestinians organise to fake deaths and injuries at scale - and the use of hollywood implies an industrial scale - to implicate innocent Israeli soldiers, is a fundamentally racist trope 2) Palestinians put themselves in harm's way for money - the idea that Palestinians simply want to be shot so they or their families can get a few shekels. Soldiers don't want to do it, it's really the Palestinians forcing them to do it. 3) Assuming that a dead or wounded Palestinian brought it on himself - healthy skepticism is good. When your assumptions are that there must be another explanation - you are assuming that Israeli soldiers must be innocent by virtue of being Israeli and that Palestinians must have somehow brought it on themselves 4) Well, they did elect Hamas - this is not a death sentence. Nor is it an obstacle to peace. Israelis have elected and dealt with various unsavouries in the past. Assuming that a Palestinian loses his or her innocence because Hamas exists is racist. 5) They don't love their children - don't even think it. Sure sign of a racist. 6) There's two sides to this - there's no parity. The Palestinians' land is occupied, the Palestinians' have a separate code of justice applied to them. There is no equality of arms here. If you follow hearing every Israeli crime with 'but the Palestinians instigated it', you're probably a racist. 7) The Palestinians are itching to destroy us/Israelis if they have a chance - the Palestinians have plenty to be aggrieved about. Assuming they all want to murder you is, simply, racist. There's plenty more to think about but it's a start.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:As PM noted, the Palestinians were a majority in 1945. Even if we could remove a bunch of obstacles and get both sides to agree in principle to the notion of a one state solution, there is no way the Israelis are going to turn over the reins of the Mossad and IDF to a government of Palestinian ministers. You'd have to have some sort of power sharing arrangement like Northern Ireland that gives Jewish Israelis an undemocratic and disproportionate veto power over popular initiatives. Even assuming you manage all that, you end up with (former) Israelis as a minority upper class that owns most of the land and controls most of the money and a massive permanent underclass of (former) Palestinians who are impoverished and have little ability to compete in a modern services/tech/tourism based economy. The Israeli side will never agree to more than symbolic reparations, because why on earth would they agree to impoverish themselves for the sake of their enemies? "A one-state solution can't work because Israelis don't conceive of Palestinians as human beings with rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness equal to their own" is the same reason a two-state solution can't work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Goddamit I really don't need to see Netanyahoo speak of the Holocaust and Iran to deflect attention from the situation at home. E: it's Holocaust memorial Day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:"A one-state solution can't work because Israelis don't conceive of Palestinians as human beings with rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness equal to their own" is the same reason a two-state solution can't work. We just can’t find a workable solution in South Africa, because white South Africans won’t feel safe. We just can’t find a workable solution to segregation in America, because white Americans won’t feel safe. Etc, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
In my idle moments I wish for some empire to form over all of the Levant, many people will die but the current regimes are just that bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
I'm sure more empires is the answer to the problems in the Middle East.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:We just can’t find a workable solution in South Africa, because white South Africans won’t feel safe. vitalsigns is right in the sense that if the two state solution was viable it would've happened decades ago (it hasn't because israel never acts in good faith).
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I'm sure more empires is the answer to the problems in the Middle East. That is why it's just an idle dream, more violence will not reduce the level of repression.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:vitalsigns is right in the sense that if the two state solution was viable it would've happened decades ago (it hasn't because israel never acts in good faith). Oh I was making fun of DR, not VS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
oh yeah my b my b.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:oh yeah my b my b. Nah that's my bad, I didn't want to quote DR because he's a disingenuous shitheel and smarter people than I have him on ignore. For actual content, IfNotNow is going really hard right now, it's pretty awesome. https://twitter.com/IfNotNowOrg/status/984127621037547522
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:We just can’t find a workable solution in South Africa, because white South Africans won’t feel safe. Hong XiuQuan posted:4) Well, they did elect Hamas - this is not a death sentence. Nor is it an obstacle to peace. Israelis have elected and dealt with various unsavouries in the past. Assuming that a Palestinian loses his or her innocence because Hamas exists is racist. Hong XiuQuan posted:6) There's two sides to this - there's no parity. The Palestinians' land is occupied, the Palestinians' have a separate code of justice applied to them. There is no equality of arms here. Hong XiuQuan posted:7) The Palestinians are itching to destroy us/Israelis if they have a chance - the Palestinians have plenty to be aggrieved about. Assuming they all want to murder you is, simply, racist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2018 19:57
|
|