|
Orange Devil posted:Do you believe that in order to have a democratic society all people ought to have equality before the law? I haven't said it's desirable! I'm for Hillary Clinton/Goldman Sachs-style universal open borders. How many states don't have privilege? How is it fair that I, as an American, have a right to citizenship, and a random poor person in another country does not? What about some European? Because their ancestors colonized some other people thousands of years ago? Privilege sucks, but there's no good argument about Israel's traditional privileges uniquely bad or distinct. The least worst way to solve this is give the Palestinians a state so they'd have their own privilege. It's a lovely solution, but it's what's been repeatedly used throughout the past century, so there's plenty of precedent. Main Paineframe posted:Like most things about the two-state solution, that's nothing more than a convenient fantasy used as an excuse to dismiss real solutions. A Jewish state and Palestinian state on equal terms might have been possible back in 1948, but today, the idea is as ridiculous as claiming that white Americans and black Americans were on equal terms in 1966. But I don't support Netanyahu's weakened state minus, I think they should have continuous territory and a full military. A one state solution is "convenient fantasy" as you put it because Israel will never accept it, and no one has actually attempted to flesh out how it could theoretically work beyond the underpants gnome level. The actual reason why mainstream Zionists support a two state solution is because they actually support it in good faith, and see one state as utterly impossible. You can't have it both ways. Either we talk about what people actually believe and support, or we discuss the implications of what their theoretical ideas actually look like in practice. Two states was tried it in the 90s and made great progress before extremists on both sides torpedo'd it.
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:58 |
|
|
It's bad that everyone on earth isn't a citizen of the United States, therefore it's not a problem if they don't have equality before the law in their own country?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:How many states don't have privilege? Kim Jong Il posted:The actual reason why mainstream Zionists support a two state solution is because they actually support it in good faith Two-state solution is only possible with a complete and total evacuation of all illegal Israeli settlers from the West Bank, and an end to the occupation. If you're not for that, you're not supporting a two-state solution in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:I haven't said it's desirable! I'm for Hillary Clinton/Goldman Sachs-style universal open borders. Why would anyone keep reading your bullshit after this sentence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:I think Israel's Arabs and Muslims are great. I was not making a normative statement. If millions of Palestinian refugee citizens gained citizenship, do you for a second think they want to live in a Jewish state with Jewish privilege? Of course not - the state would no longer exist. The further implications of what would happen in that case are a separate discussion. Kim Jong Il posted:I haven't said it's desirable! I'm for Hillary Clinton/Goldman Sachs-style universal open borders. lol i KNEW fishook theory was real 
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:But I don't support Netanyahu's weakened state minus, I think they should have continuous territory and a full military. A one state solution is "convenient fantasy" as you put it because Israel will never accept it, and no one has actually attempted to flesh out how it could theoretically work beyond the underpants gnome level. The actual reason why mainstream Zionists support a two state solution is because they actually support it in good faith, and see one state as utterly impossible. You can't have it both ways. Either we talk about what people actually believe and support, or we discuss the implications of what their theoretical ideas actually look like in practice. Two states was tried it in the 90s and made great progress before extremists on both sides torpedo'd it. Even if an independent Palestine doesn't have severe restrictions on their military, the IDF outclasses anything they could possibly muster unless they get support from a global superpower that's willing to stand up for them if they get invaded. And if Palestinians had that, we'd already have an Israel/Palestine peace deal. If you want to see the future of an independent Palestine, just look at Gaza. Turns out it's way easier to justify occupying and shooting at foreign territory than it is domestic territory (which is why Israel refuses to officially annex Palestinian territory). A one-state solution is really easy. Just give everyone full citizenship and equal rights to vote, exert international pressure to stop Israel from just outlawing all Arab parties, post election observers to keep an eye out for intimidation and vote-rigging, and the rest will sort itself out. Israel won't accept it, no, but they don't accept a two-state solution either. It turns out that "in a dedicated apartheid state, the ruling racial group doesn't want to dismantle the apartheid system and give equal privileges to the racial groups they hate" isn't a good reason to declare that apartheid must remain in place. The fact that two-state hasn't gotten anywhere in literal decades suggests that no, it's not actually the easy and realistic solution you portray it as.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
Yo - does anyone know any Israeli-Arabs (East Jerusalem residents in particular) aged 18-21 who have, like, money and time? https://lawoffice.org.il/en/israeli-citizenship-for-permanent-residents-aged-18-21/ I really thought I was onto something there - a contribution to the national discussion about Israeli citizenship, maybe a landmark supreme court case... But nobody even asked. And not because they refuse to submit to the cruel Zionist occupier etc - we have a lot of queries from people interested in obtaining citizenship. I guess anyone who wants to obtain citizenship doesn't want to become the focus of a media story?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2019 08:05
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Privileges of the "you need to be this ethnicity and religion so as to be considered a human being" kind? Pretty much most of them. I think you're in denial about most countries. It's depressing how xenophobic and nativist western countries are. I loving love immigrants and think the more of them, the better, no caveats needed. It would be great if we had massive levels of immigration and doubled the US population over the next 50 years. quote:If they did, then they wouldn't vote for parties that are pushing for continuously accelerating the pace of building illegal settlements in occupied territories. If they had any actual good faith, they'd refuse to back the Likudniks. But the Likudniks always get a majority coalition, which proves that the Israeli mainstream is not at all in good faith about this. Likud keeps winning by really thin margins. It's a divided country where Likud received fewer votes than Kadima in 2009 at the start of its most recent reign in power. Israelis vote Likud because they're scared and Likud is good at convincing them, and partly due to the legacy of anti-Mizrahi racism that they blame Ashkenazim/Labor for. quote:Two-state solution is only possible with a complete and total evacuation of all illegal Israeli settlers from the West Bank, and an end to the occupation. If you're not for that, you're not supporting a two-state solution in good faith. I support the Taba/Olmert/Kerry maps (re: almost all of area C and land swaps) and an end to the occupation and Gaza blockade. Clearly Netanyahu and Likud do not. Main Paineframe posted:Even if an independent Palestine doesn't have severe restrictions on their military, the IDF outclasses anything they could possibly muster unless they get support from a global superpower that's willing to stand up for them if they get invaded. And if Palestinians had that, we'd already have an Israel/Palestine peace deal. Isn't that pretty much the USSR from the 50s onwards? Although, they probably were far more interested in using anti-Zionism to justify treating Jews like poo poo than the actual plight of Palestinians. quote:If you want to see the future of an independent Palestine, just look at Gaza. Turns out it's way easier to justify occupying and shooting at foreign territory than it is domestic territory (which is why Israel refuses to officially annex Palestinian territory). You're presuming Likud is in charge forever and their hand is forced. I think they'll get full independence and turn into a some mix of Iraq (best case) and Syria (worse), but it'll be a real state. Sadly, one day I thought they'd be more like Lebanon. quote:A one-state solution is really easy. Just give everyone full citizenship and equal rights to vote, exert international pressure to stop Israel from just outlawing all Arab parties, post election observers to keep an eye out for intimidation and vote-rigging, and the rest will sort itself out. How do you handle ancient land claims on both sides? What do you do about settlers? What do you do with refugees? The answers I've heard on the latter are: They'll mostly choose to return to the West Bank and Gaza OR, they'll mostly return to depopulated villages, both versions of they'll voluntarily self-segregate. Or, a genuine belief that Israel is Algeria and all Jews will instantly leave. If it's the former, there needs to be a concrete policy proposal, not hand waiving. Because no one's actually tried to sit down with someone like Reuven Rivlin and actually tried to work this out, it's all baked into BDS which guarantees that Israel will never take it seriously. Literally they can't return to their homes if an airport is sitting on it, or Iraqi Jews and Russians were moved in. The two state solution is realistic because A) we have multiple examples of Israel withdrawing from territory, and we don't know what could have happened in the West Bank if Sharon lived, and even Netanyahu was in negotiations with Assad before the latter decided to commit genocide. And B), it's not getting rejected wholesale, the anti-two state forces keep barely winning. The only real apt comparison to South Africa (and the USA sadly) is that both Trump and the National Party were able to get into office as flukes without mandates and wreck societal norms in horrific ways, and Likud in 2009 is the same. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 04:05
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:How do you handle ancient land claims on both sides? That's some cool sleight of hand right there. What "ancient" land claims do Palestinians have, exactly? Being forced out of your home in living memory is not quite the same as believing that you have a right to land based on a holy book or descent from people who lived there two thousand years ago. Do you view those as equivalent "ancient" claims?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 05:27
|
|
|
Racism exists in other Western countries, therefore Jim Crow was fine
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 08:12
|
|
|
nm
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 09:24
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:I think you're in denial about most countries. It's depressing how xenophobic and nativist western countries are. "If you think about it, having to get a greencard to visit another country is just like having an occupation army destroying your village so that people of the superior ethnicity can build an illegal settlement for themselves. Naturalization procedures requiring you to prove you have lived at least five years in the country you want to be a citizen of is exactly the same as having the laws of the nation forbidding you from ever buying a house because you're not the right ethnicity to be allowed ownership." Stop it with the false equivalences already. Kim Jong Il posted:Likud keeps winning by really thin margins. It's a divided country where Likud received fewer votes than Kadima in 2009 at the start of its most recent reign in power. Israelis vote Likud because they're scared and Likud is good at convincing them, and partly due to the legacy of anti-Mizrahi racism that they blame Ashkenazim/Labor for. Kim Jong Il posted:What do you do about settlers? Either they stay and become citizens of Palestine; or they leave. Their choice. Simple. Likewise for the right of return of Palestinians: either they stay wherever they currently are, or they return and become citizens of Israel. Their choice. Simplicity itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 09:54
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Either they stay and become citizens of Palestine; or they leave. Their choice. Simple.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 10:29
|
|
|
Frankly since Israel's the party that established all the illegal settlements I feel like it should be their responsibility to figure out what to do with the settlers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 10:35
|
|
|
Flayer posted:The issue with this solution is that, as nice and logical as it sounds, its just hand waving away the biggest issue affecting reconciliation. Where do returning Palestinians and Israeli's go? Is the plan to throw millions of Israelis out of their current homes to repatriate Palestinians and Israeli settlers? There's somewhere around 4 million Palestinians still living as refugees in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon - there is no solution that involves relocating them or dealing with citizenship in their host countries that could ever be described as "simple". If the house they were expelled from still exists, then it is only natural they get it back, and the current occupants being relocated elsewhere. Otherwise, they are compensated with by being given a new home. In either case, it's an opportunity to build new habitations, using modern and eco-friendly standards to support a high density of population without impacting the environment too much. It's not a problem, it's a chance to improve their construction sector's competitiveness by leaps and bounds. Also money is no object because everything will be funded by the USA, as usual. Besides, it's a great deal for them too since it means they won't have to keep spending billions of dollars every year to prop up a fascist apartheid regime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 10:54
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Frankly since Israel's the party that established all the illegal settlements I feel like it should be their responsibility to figure out what to do with the settlers. Israel uses negotiations as a delaying tactic to increase the size of settlements in the West Bank so this is their problem. This is also why they do now want an internationally-imposed solution. After the 1991 Madrid negotiations, former Israeli premier Yitzhak Shamir said: "I would have conducted negotiations on autonomy for 10 years and in the meantime we would have reached half a million people" in the West Bank. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/27/world/shamir-is-said-to-admit-plan-to-stall-talks-for-10-years.html The New York Times posted:Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was quoted in a published interview today as saying he wanted to drag out peace talks with the Palestinians for a decade while vastly increasing the number of Jewish settlers in Israeli-occupied territories. Why should we give Israel leeway for the settlement problem when they are admitting to stalling negotiations for the purpose of increasing settlements? Israel has conducted "negotiations" for over 20 years now and has far surpassed Shamir's goal in populating the West Bank with Jewish settlers. Israel has also vetoed all the decisions by the Middle East Peace Quartet since 2001 and ceases to continue building settlements. This is why the Palestinians must take their case to the international community. No one told the Zionists in 1947 that they must negotiate with the natives for a year before going to the UN, so what makes the Palestinians drive to use the UN any different than what the Zionists did in 1947? One might contend that the international landscape was different in 1947, but 20 years of negotiations while the Palestinians watch their land being gobbled up by settlements is long enough. While it is an unfortunate problem for the Israeli settlers, when we have Israeli leaders admitting they are only stalling negotiations so they quickly get more settlements in makes it their sole responsibility to remove the settlements.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 11:47
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Likud keeps winning by really thin margins. It's a divided country where Likud received fewer votes than Kadima in 2009 at the start of its most recent reign in power. Israelis vote Likud because they're scared and Likud is good at convincing them, and partly due to the legacy of anti-Mizrahi racism that they blame Ashkenazim/Labor for. That's because it's a parliamentary system where power lies with the governing coalition, not the individual party with the most votes. Likud remains powerful in spite of their thin margins because there's a ton of small-to-medium far-right parties that soak up a lot of votes. The USSR hasn't been around since before Oslo. Kim Jong Il posted:How do you handle ancient land claims on both sides? What do you do about settlers? What do you do with refugees? The Palestinians and Israeli Jews can work that out in a post-integration Knesset with roughly 50% Arab delegates. There's no need for everything to be included in a peace deal negotiated under the current extremely unequal conditions. Trying to push them as issues that need to be solved in the initial agreement is just a way to take them off the table by insisting that they be solved under the current power imbalance and then ruled permanently off-limits before political equality can be granted. Since both the settlements and the dispossessed land will all be under the control of a one-state Israel, it can be tackled at any time, without the sovereignty issues that would make them essentially unchangeable under a two-state solution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Don’t engage with KJI
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Actually do. Because we are all who we pretend to be so force him to keep being the apartheid supporter. That's his punishment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Actually do. Because we are all who we pretend to be so force him to keep being the apartheid supporter. That's his punishment. Engaging endlessly with an extremely bad faith arguer is like stepping in dog poo poo and smearing it endlessly around your house. It accomplishes jack poo poo, and only gives further air to his rank rear end non-arguments.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Isn't that pretty much the USSR from the 50s onwards? Although, they probably were far more interested in using anti-Zionism to justify treating Jews like poo poo than the actual plight of Palestinians. oh shut the gently caress up dude. anti-semitism would get you literally expelled from the communist parties in eastern bloc states.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
I support a two-state solution, oh but also if a settler blew up a Palestinian home 5 seconds ago they get to keep it and that land is part of Israel, oh weird Palestine isn't territorially viable as a country, nothing to be done! Maybe eventually a two-state solution will work (when all Palestinians have been exterminated)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
Viscardus posted:That's some cool sleight of hand right there. What "ancient" land claims do Palestinians have, exactly? Being forced out of your home in living memory is not quite the same as believing that you have a right to land based on a holy book or descent from people who lived there two thousand years ago. Do you view those as equivalent "ancient" claims? I meant pre-dating 1948. That was my fault for being sloppy with my wording, but I was more intending to cover the "absentee Ottoman landlords" issue. VitalSigns posted:Racism exists in other Western countries, therefore Jim Crow was fine Go ahead and mischaracterize as the complete opposite of what I said because you don't have an actual argument. quote:I support a two-state solution, oh but also if a settler blew up a Palestinian home 5 seconds ago they get to keep it and that land is part of Israel, oh weird Palestine isn't territorially viable as a country, nothing to be done! If you don't agree with my points, ignore them or argue them, don't mischaracterize them. Enough of this chapo bullshit of treating moderates like they're Hitler. This is the actual map I've said I support as the basis for a final settlement, although I'd go further than this and concede Ariel. Likud indeed does that. Israel as a whole does not. Main Paineframe posted:That's because it's a parliamentary system where power lies with the governing coalition, not the individual party with the most votes. Likud remains powerful in spite of their thin margins because there's a ton of small-to-medium far-right parties that soak up a lot of votes. But my point was about the coalitions. There are parties like Kulanu that are up for grabs with whoever gets the most votes. In terms of their core coalition blocs, Likud is not winning by gigantic margins. The problem with what you're saying is any plan not fleshed out would never be accepted by the Israeli public or the Knesset without guarantees on issues like that. Grape posted:Engaging endlessly with an extremely bad faith arguer is like stepping in dog poo poo and smearing it endlessly around your house. It accomplishes jack poo poo, and only gives further air to his rank rear end non-arguments. That is loving bullshit. Claiming that someone you disagree with is arguing in bad faith is a pathetic cop out. I care about this issue and that's why I post. if you want to read a site that exclusively gives one POV, they exist. I'm arguing for the position that's the overwhelmingly popular one in the US on this topic, and is the position of most western governments. Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Jan 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
lol look at this PR firm rear end response from our resident bad faith arguer. This is the response of a paid man.Kim Jong Il posted:That is loving bullshit. Claiming that someone you disagree with is arguing in bad faith is a pathetic cop out. I care about this issue and that's why I post. if you want to read a site that exclusively gives one POV, they exist. I'm arguing for the position that's the overwhelmingly popular one in the US on this topic, and is the position of most western governments.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 04:05
|
|
|
And as we all know, historically what has been popular in the US has always been what is right
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
Ultramega posted:oh shut the gently caress up dude. anti-semitism would get you literally expelled from the communist parties in eastern bloc states.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:I meant pre-dating 1948. That was my fault for being sloppy with my wording, but I was more intending to cover the "absentee Ottoman landlords" issue. I don't think Ottoman landlords are an issue in 2019, actually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 10:09
|
|
|
Grape posted:Engaging endlessly with an extremely bad faith arguer is like stepping in dog poo poo and smearing it endlessly around your house. It accomplishes jack poo poo, and only gives further air to his rank rear end non-arguments. It's pretty useful to lurkers like me, please keep engaging KJI, it's fun and educative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 10:20
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:If you don't agree with my points, ignore them or argue them, don't mischaracterize them. Enough of this chapo bullshit of treating moderates like they're Hitler. This is the actual map I've said I support as the basis for a final settlement, although I'd go further than this and concede Ariel. There's nothing "moderate" about a map like this, which not only maintains current borders but also annexes large chunks of land east of the separation barrier. It's a common fallacy in two-state proposals: treating the 1967 lines as a neutral, equal starting point (rather than the result of a unilateral seizure by one side, complete with ethnic cleansing) and then acting as though Israel annexing "just" a few more percent of the West Bank's populated territory is no big deal. Kim Jong Il posted:But my point was about the coalitions. There are parties like Kulanu that are up for grabs with whoever gets the most votes. In terms of their core coalition blocs, Likud is not winning by gigantic margins. Kulanu is a spin-off of Likud, run by a career Likudnik, whose stated policy on Palestine is essentially identical to Netanyahu's. And most of all, they've literally never joined a coalition that wasn't led by Likud. If they wanted the left to be in power, the left would already be in power - their ten seats are what put Bibi's coalition over the threshold. It's more accurate to say that after excluding the votes of all the minorities in territory under Israeli control who have been denied citizenship to ensure their continued legal and political inferiority, the voters who remain would not vote to give up their privileged status unless all issues that might threaten their dominant status are resolved in their favor before the vote. And that's just an especially wordy variant of "shocker: the people running an apartheid system for their own benefit don't want to vote to give up their apartheid system".
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:Quite possibly the dumbest and least true thing I've read in this (iteration of this) thread. You lived in the soviet union so can I get your take?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Ultramega posted:You lived in the soviet union so can I get your take? Have you tried Google? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Soviet_Union
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
Nebalebadingdong posted:Have you tried Google? Counter revolutionary take, comrade. Have you got anything from Grover Furr? I feel like for some people no amount of evidence that the USSR was a repressive right wing pyramid scheme like any other place would be enough evidence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
Your Parents posted:Counter revolutionary take, comrade. Have you got anything from Grover Furr? Grover Furr is really easy to mock until you actually read something he's written. Also gently caress off with the wikipedia articles. Someone who actually lived in the soviet union posts here semi-regularly and I'd be an idiot not to listen to them. Anyway sorry for the derail, I don't mind being proven wrong but jesus christ put some effort into it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
He's even easier to mock after you have. He makes up sources or just doesn't cite anything or anyone. His books are essentially fiction and should be considered on the level of Holocaust denial literature.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
Ultramega posted:Anyway sorry for the derail, I don't mind being proven wrong but jesus christ put some effort into it. you made a very broad and unsubstantial claim about "eastern bloc communist parties" and then complain that the most basic google search shows that you're incorrect. i mean i know its wikipedia but its going to be more informative than what you posted
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
Your Parents posted:He's even easier to mock after you have. He makes up sources or just doesn't cite anything or anyone. His books are essentially fiction and should be considered on the level of Holocaust denial literature. what have you read exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
Ultramega posted:You lived in the soviet union so can I get your take? Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_Soviet_Union Xander77 fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Jan 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
uh, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
I wasn’t aware this was the Soviet history thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:58 |
|
|
Is that real? Can we have one of those?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 19:44
|
|
