|
My Imaginary GF posted:Does BDS accept the right for a Jewish state to exist in the mideast, yes or no? Being Jewish isn't a right and if in the I/P conflict made-up rights are your main concern rather than, for instance, all the horrific and terrible violations of actual rights and international military laws, then it just shows your priorities are messed up. BDS has no problems with a country which is predominantly Jewish and in a two-state solution which the majority of BDS constituents support the outcome is going to be two states (as has already been shown), one of which would have a Jewish majority and and a large geographic basis on the historical Jewish kingdom of Israel. What they do not accept is that a country can maintain it's racial purity by committing ethnic cleansing or that a country can discriminate against its citizens based on their religion/ethnicity.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 11:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:I don't think it is reasonable to assume a nation-state must be entirely multicultural and divorced from any historical, cultural, religious or ethnic focus. Most states are not. Requiring Israel to be so seems highly impractical. Nobody's saying that. However, having a historical, cultural, religious, or ethnic focus does not make it acceptable to engage in state-sponsored discrimination, population transfers, deliberate policies of disenfranchising particular groups, and so on in order to preserve that ethnic focus for a group losing its grip on the political domination that allowed them to set that focus in the first place. It's also generally accepted to be unacceptable to create this culturally-focused state by forcibly expelling members of other cultures. The state's focus should reflect the population, rather than forcibly manipulating the population to privilege those who match its focus. For example, it's acceptable for Germany to be a German state, whose official language is German and which maintains state-sponsored museums of Germany history and teaches German history in school. It's not okay for Germany to ban the speaking of non-German languages or to ban private museums to other cultures. It's also not okay for Germany to restrict government benefits to non-Germans, arbitrarily confiscate their land, deprive them of political power or voting rights, or outright expel them. Multiculturalism is a simple acknowledgement of the fact that you do have minorities and its not okay to treat them like poo poo for the sake of cultural or ethnic supremacy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:I don't think it is reasonable to assume a nation-state must be entirely multicultural and divorced from any historical, cultural, religious or ethnic focus. Most states are not. Requiring Israel to be so seems highly impractical.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Watermelon City posted:That's a great argument for genocide. Like the kind BDS whitewashes of middle eastern Jews from all nations but Israel?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
It's all just a distraction anyway. When the government makes a big public fuss over Palestinians, they're just trying to keep the headlines distracted from their own work at destroying Israel. After all, there is one sector of the population that's growing even faster than Israeli Arabs: the ultra-Orthodox "Haredim", who pride themselves on being the Jewishest of Jews. They're so devout, in fact, that they don't believe in employment, military service, learning science, or women's rights - they believe the only things a truly devoted Jewish man should do with their life are studying the Torah and having as many children as possible, they oppose the very idea of a state as a secular entity, and because they often play a critical role in government coalitions, they've been able to wrangle a number of special privileges and treatments from the government. Generous welfare payments are available to haredi so they don't have to work, they're exempted from required military service, they have their own separate (state-funded) school system that replace subjects like "math" and "science" with "Torah study" and "more Torah study", and since they tend to congregate together in tight-knit communities (and utterly reject dissenters) local businesses openly cater to them even when it means breaking laws against things like segregations. They hate the very secular state apparatus that supports and funds their lifestyles, and attempt to contribute as little as possible to it while pursuing what they consider to be the ultimate Jewishness. And most importantly, they make up ten percent of the population and are the fastest-growing demographic in Israel, thanks to their extremely large families combined with a system of indoctrination and a useless school system that deliberately avoids teaching haredi children useful real-world skills so that they have little choice but to remain haredi. Haredi Jews' poverty rate is on par with that of Israeli Arabs, with over half of both demographics living below the poverty line. This is a load that Israel can't tolerate forever, considering that Israeli has one of the worst poverty rates in the West, second only to Mexico, with one in five Israelis living in poverty. But who needs a functioning economy? The Bibi-sitter campaigned on protecting children from the bloodthirsty masses, unlike those limp-wristed leftists who'd invite Arabs over for tea while discussing pansy-rear end shot like "economic reforms", and his coalition depends on the Haredi parties since he'd rather let them be the kingmakers than the left-leaning or Arab parties. The biggest threat to Israel isn't external, but its own internal radicals - the hilltop youth, the expansionist settlers, and the radical haredi. The Israeli radical right is a band of borderline-anarchists and borderline-fascists who literally don't believe in a government that doesn't follow their ideology exactly. While the Shin Bet is going around terrorizing Bedouins, the IDF is roughing up Palestinians, and Mossad is loving with Iran, the Israeli security establishment has essentially turned a blind eye to Jews like Meir Ettinger who believe that the current Israeli state isn't actually "Jewish" at all and needs to be destroyed by terrorism and civil war in order to make way for a true Jewish state to arise. They're giving out generous handouts to groups that threaten armed rebellion against the military every time government policy doesn't go their way, who appear to be about as loyal to the government as British colonists in 1774. Government members themselves even go so far as to delegitimize their own government and implicitly encourage Jews to take the law into their own hands in the name of Jewishness. The end of Israel as a Jewish state, if it comes, will be at the hands of devout Jews who declare that it was never Jewish enough in the first place. But there's no political will for dealing with those groups; it's just so much easier to blame the ongoing undermining of the Israeli state on people who aren't allowed to vote!
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Like the kind BDS whitewashes of middle eastern Jews from all nations but Israel? Even accepting your premise "they did it too" isn't an excuse for genocide.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:Even accepting your premise "they did it too" isn't an excuse for genocide. Where would those refugees go if BDS destroys the Jewish state of Israel?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Like the kind BDS whitewashes of middle eastern Jews from all nations but Israel?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Watermelon City posted:This sentence is a doozy but yes Jews have faced persecution and repression in middle eastern states. That's not a point of contention. Why doesn't BDS demand compensation for those refugees rather than arguing that their economic prosperity should be further infringed?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
If Israelis do not like how the BDS movement is impacting their economy, they are free to pursue policies that won't make them the target of international boycotts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Like the kind BDS whitewashes of middle eastern Jews from all nations but Israel? All Middle-Eastern nations? To be clear, which definition of "Middle East" are you using here? I've also never heard of BDS "whitewashing" the exodus of Middle Eastern Jews to Israel - the only entities whose participation in that is regularly whitewashed are the Jewish Agency and the state of Israel, which spent decades convincing countries in the surrounding area to send them their Jewish populations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Why doesn't BDS demand compensation for those refugees rather than arguing that their economic prosperity should be further infringed? 1) Because that's not the focus of the organisation, any more than raising money for cancer research, fighting Yazidi discrimination or helping the Syrian refugees fleeing the crisis are things that they could be doing but aren't. 2) Because the situation for Jewish refugees isn't comparable to the situation of Palestinian refugees and the latter are the ones obviously in dire need, living in great suffering with Israel regularly committing war crimes against them. 3) Because compensation for Jewish refugees is only going to happen in the context of a broader settlement where it will be offset against the larger compensation for the greater amount of Palestinian refugees so even if they wanted to help Jewish refugees they'd need to do it by putting pressure on Israel as they're the biggest roadblock to peace for everyone involved. My Imaginary GF posted:Where would those refugees go if BDS destroys the Jewish state of Israel? It's already been explained how ridiculous this idea is over the last page in this thread. team overhead smash fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Dec 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
quote, not edit
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The entire idea behind liberalism as a political ideology is that individual people have rights, not abstract collections or classifications of people. Ethnic groups do not have the right to an exclusive state, and the idea that they do is about as anti-liberal as it gets Actually many if not the majority of liberal democracies has such a policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis . Rights based in part on ethnicity is a pretty common policy world-wide. I don't think anyone is arguing for an exclusive ethic state, there are many Jewish ethnicities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:It turns out allowing people into your country of one ethnicity as part of your policy of racial purity, ethnic cleansing and war crimes isn't the same thing as allowing people of one ethnicity into your country as part of a commitment to egalitarianism, following international law and reversing the effects of war crimes. "We should preferentially allow people of the _____ ethnic group citizenship rights in this country" a) Jewish - You are secretly Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS. b) Palestinian - You have a shining commitment to egalitarianism and justice, you paragon of moral virtue. team overhead smash posted:It's already been explained how ridiculous this idea is over the last page in this thread. Does this mean you are going to insist on enforceable protections for the rights of a Jewish minority in not-Israel? Why don't you share them with us then. Maybe some sort of power-sharing political arrangement? Or is it the old "Get hosed Zionists, you've got this coming"? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:Actually many if not the majority of liberal democracies has such a policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis . Rights based in part on ethnicity is a pretty common policy world-wide. Jus sanguinis is not the same as rights based on ethnicity. And no, outside of affirmative action schemes rights based on ethnicity are not particularly common in developed countries, because it's an illiberal far-right policy
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:"We should preferentially allow people of the _____ ethnic group citizenship rights in this country" c) Why are you insisting we discriminate?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
OzyMandrill posted:c) Why are you insisting we discriminate? Because he's unable to process the idea of equality before the law and universal human rights, or of racial and ethnic groups not being in a hierarchy of superiority to each other (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Jewish extremists.txt These people have nukes 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:"We should preferentially allow people of the _____ ethnic group citizenship rights in this country" "'Committing ethnic cleansing and war crimes' and 'stopping ethnic cleansing and war crimes' are exactly the same thing because they both contain the words 'ethnic cleansing' and 'war crimes'" - The Insect Court, TYOOL 2015. You also ignored me pointing out how your entire scenario is fantasy that you've concocted in your head and that if BDS got exactly what they want there would be precisely 0 people preferentially allowed into Israel because of their ethnicity, although a minority of Palestinians would have the right to return based on their internationally recognised status as refugees regardless of their ethnicity. quote:Does this mean you are going to insist on enforceable protections for the rights of a Jewish minority in not-Israel? Why don't you share them with us then. Maybe some sort of power-sharing political arrangement? Or is it the old "Get hosed Zionists, you've got this coming"? What is "not-Israel" and why is there a Jewish minority there that needs special protections? Actually, scratch that. Why are you so concerned about the potential human rights abuses in some bizarre alternate reality that you've concocted in your head rather than - say - the actual real, wide-scale human rights abuses and war crimes that are being committed right now by Israel against the Palestinians?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Israeli intransigence is making the eventual imposition of a one-state solution more likely and making the two-state preservation of the Jewish state less likely basically the Israeli right is accelerationism for anti-Zionists y'all should be happy
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:You also ignored me pointing out how your entire scenario is fantasy that you've concocted in your head and that if BDS got exactly what they want there would be precisely 0 people preferentially allowed into Israel because of their ethnicity, although a minority of Palestinians would have the right to return based on their internationally recognised status as refugees regardless of their ethnicity. If you're going to insist that anti-Zionism has nothing to do with Jews and that you simply reject entirely the idea of the nation-state then you're going to have to do a better job coming up for an excuse for why you want to see the despised Jewish state replaced by a Palestinian state. Or is this going to be one of those horseshoe theory moments and you're going to insist there are no such thing as the Palestinian people, so a Palestinian right of return doesn't favor a particular ethnic-national group? quote:Actually, scratch that. Why are you so concerned about the potential human rights abuses in some bizarre alternate reality that you've concocted in your head rather than - say - the actual real, wide-scale human rights abuses and war crimes that are being committed right now by Israel against the Palestinians? If you must know, I merely wished to illustrate the near total indifference of many anti-Zionists to the rights of Jews in a post-Zionist, post-Right of Return post-Israel where they are a minority. And you performed as expected by indicating that you simply don't care. This is a D&D I/P thread you know, it's a safe space if you just want to come out and say that any Zionists who stick around will get what's coming to them if that's what you believe, and I doubt it will be an unpopular position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
There is a risk that Jews would be persecuted by Palestinians if they were freed, just like how everyone remembers the genocide of Afrikaners in South Africa. Because of this hypothetical risk in a hypothetical future, it is important to keep the status quo. No actual, current, on-going injustice will ever be as bad as the hypothetical future injustice that can easily be prevented from happening in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
 Gaza engaged in a ceasefire that was extremely effective prior to Cast Lead. The IDF started violating it and then got pissy when rockets started back up. Gaza, and others on Gaza's behalf have tried the non-violent route with Israel and it tends to just get them killed and beaten, including boats from NATO nations in international waters. You're also faultily assuming that non-violence alone is even viable in general in the first place. Traditionally unless your movement has a threat of violence or a separate 'faction' that is threatening violence, non-violence is a pretty poor strategy. The largest non-violent movements people think of were typically heavily aided by a violent one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If you're going to insist that anti-Zionism has nothing to do with Jews and that you simply reject entirely the idea of the nation-state then you're going to have to do a better job coming up for an excuse for why you want to see the despised Jewish state replaced by a Palestinian state. Or is this going to be one of those horseshoe theory moments and you're going to insist there are no such thing as the Palestinian people, so a Palestinian right of return doesn't favor a particular ethnic-national group? Are you capable of arguing against any point people have actually made? Nobody has demanded that Israel should be replaced by a Palestinian nation-state, let alone one founded on ethnic supremacy. You're a thread regular; you know this much. What purpose does tilting at this ridiculous straw man serve?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 08:24
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:There is a risk that Jews would be persecuted by Palestinians if they were freed, just like how everyone remembers the genocide of Afrikaners in South Africa. Because of this hypothetical risk in a hypothetical future, it is important to keep the status quo. No actual, current, on-going injustice will ever be as bad as the hypothetical future injustice that can easily be prevented from happening in the first place. If I mention Zimbabwe will you give a real answer or just dodge the question again? As I've said, it's a D&D I/P thread, do you really think people are going to criticize you for an answer that's essentially "Whatever happens to them, happens"? Kajeesus posted:Are you capable of arguing against any point people have actually made? Nobody has demanded that Israel should be replaced by a Palestinian nation-state, let alone one founded on ethnic supremacy. You're a thread regular; you know this much. What purpose does tilting at this ridiculous straw man serve? I'm well aware anti-Zionists who like to suggest they see nationalism as the supreme evil and Jewish nationalism as the worst example possible don't like to own up to the irony of their advocating for an ethnically based nation-state in what is currently Israel. It's right up there with playing coy and pretending a one-state solution with an unrestricted right of return isn't basically a more polite 'Death to Israel'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The entire idea behind liberalism as a political ideology is that individual people have rights, not abstract collections or classifications of people. Ethnic groups do not have the right to an exclusive state, and the idea that they do is about as anti-liberal as it gets Luckily, hardly anyone here gives a crap about liberalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
I think it would be a lot more fruitful to argue whether or not israeli policies are liberal or illiberal rather than argue with T.I.C. Different i/p thread, same tired rear end whataboutist arguments and flights of fancy utterly divorced from what people are actually discussing. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Luckily, hardly anyone here gives a crap about liberalism. Well, it would save everyone a lot of trouble if the pro-Israel people just came out and said they're in favor of fascism, apartheid, and racial/ethnic supremacism, but they won't do that, so here we are icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 11:15 on Dec 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If I mention Zimbabwe will you give a real answer or just dodge the question again? As I've said, it's a D&D I/P thread, do you really think people are going to criticize you for an answer that's essentially "Whatever happens to them, happens"? Because obviously the situation in a Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation scenario wouldn't be closely monitored by western powers, especially the USA. Also you can't defend a country that systematically evicts Palestinians from their land in order to build more illegal settlements and take offense with what's happening in Zimbabwe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If you're going to insist that anti-Zionism has nothing to do with Jews and that you simply reject entirely the idea of the nation-state then you're going to have to do a better job coming up for an excuse for why you want to see the despised Jewish state replaced by a Palestinian state. Or is this going to be one of those horseshoe theory moments and you're going to insist there are no such thing as the Palestinian people, so a Palestinian right of return doesn't favor a particular ethnic-national group? The sentences you're quoting literally don't contain the words "jew" or "anti-zionism" or anything about how anti-zionism has nothing to do with Jews, which isn't even relevant to the discussion, once so I have no idea what argument you are strawmanning but it's nothing to do with what was actually written. Let me re-iterate: You also ignored me pointing out how your entire scenario is fantasy that you've concocted in your head and that if BDS got exactly what they want there would be precisely 0 people preferentially allowed into Israel because of their ethnicity, although a minority of Palestinians would have the right to return based on their internationally recognised status as refugees regardless of their ethnicity. You are making some ridiculous comparison which absolutely ignores all context of things like "Is this promoting or stopping ethnic cleansing" but also ignores the fundamentals of the situation. You're arguing against some situation where Palestinians are all allowed into israel based on their nationality through the Right of Return. This isn't what the right of return is, which is instead ethnicity neutral and based entirely on status as refugees - according a minority of Palestinians the same rights as any people would have in this situation. You're trying to draw a really awful comparison and it's not even one that is based in reality. quote:If you must know, I merely wished to illustrate the near total indifference of many anti-Zionists to the rights of Jews in a post-Zionist, post-Right of Return post-Israel where they are a minority. And you performed as expected by indicating that you simply don't care. This is a D&D I/P thread you know, it's a safe space if you just want to come out and say that any Zionists who stick around will get what's coming to them if that's what you believe, and I doubt it will be an unpopular position. It's not an indifference to the rights of Jews, it's an indifference to your fan-fiction. A one-state solution is only a minority position that isn't being pushed by anyone with serious influence in the Israel/Palestinian negotiations. The default is still a two-state solution which would have a Jewish majority state, albeit one where they would hopefully stop their discrimination against non-Jewish majorities within Israel and their war crimes against people outside of their territory (Two actual problem that are really happening). I honestly do not care about the unspecified problems you've invented in your head for an unspecified group of Jews you've also invented in your head which will happen in the event of an also unspecified peace process which is, yet again, entirely invented in your head. It's not because I don't care about Jews, I believe in racial and religious equality, merely because I don't care about your make-believe. Hell, because you haven't even actually given any details about what they supposedly need protection from, there's no way I could possibly answer even if I wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
My god. Not Zimbabwe. I well remember the white genocide that took place on the ascension of ZANU-PF. Seriously, if the worst that could be expected from the Palestinian Right of Return is some expropriation and a brief outburst of violence, even given all the magic involved in making that happen...
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:My god. Not Zimbabwe. I well remember the white genocide that took place on the ascension of ZANU-PF. There was an ethnic cleansing of whites in Zim after Mugabe no longer needed whites to support his regime, effectronica. It is a legitimate fear that Palestinians, who feel they are entitled to something from Israel which Israelis will not provide aliens, may engage in actions contrary to Israeli values were these aliens to be admitted en masse. Nations have values and shared culture for a reason; all Palestinians, like the peoples of all the worlds' nations, have the option to immigrate to Israel, they need only make aliyah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
If it's a legitimate fear it's only because of what Israel continues to do to them though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If I mention Zimbabwe will you give a real answer or just dodge the question again? As I've said, it's a D&D I/P thread, do you really think people are going to criticize you for an answer that's essentially "Whatever happens to them, happens"? First off, no one is advocating for an unrestricted right of return. If you actually look at survey data a small minority of Palestinians would actually want to exercise their right of return: quote:1. Return to Israel and become (or not become) an Israeli citizen - 10% Secondly, in your hypothetical scenario where Jews will definitely be disenfranchised once there's an Arab majority, that presupposes that Israel's institutions are currently incapable of protecting the rights of minorities. Which I'm sure plenty of people here would agree with, in fact that's one of BDS's stated goals: quote:Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; If we addressed this goal now, we would actually be helping people right now (and I guess a hypothetical future Jewish minority). So why don't we discuss a solution for the current minorities in Israel who by your own supposition do not enjoy adequate protections. Why don't we start with this proposal: Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People posted:Sections 1–2 of the bill detail the principles for which the law was established: "Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people in which the Jewish people fulfill their ambition to self-determination according to their cultural and historical legacy." I see a lot of this as at odds with respecting the rights of minorities, which parts can we keep to make Israel a Jewish state and still protect minorities?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:If it's a legitimate fear it's only because of what Israel continues to do to them though. Assigning blame is not productive in international relations with repeat players. It is either a legitimate fear, which must be addressed, or an illegitimate fear, which will then be ignored in ongoing negotiations and peacetalks. I think that, what Israel offered to international refugees, should be lauded as a model for other nations in the region to follow through on with refugees within their administrative jurisdictions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I think that, what Israel offered to international refugees, should be lauded as a model for other nations in the region to follow through on with refugees within their administrative jurisdictions. Australia is interested, but thinks it'd be too expensive to bomb Nauru every two years if they do not get their munitions paid for by the USA.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Ethnic or religious groups shouldn't be oppressed, disenfranchised, or discriminated against, regardless of the ethnic or religious makeup of the state. Just as I oppose Israeli oppression of Palestinians under both formal and de facto Israeli control, I would oppose any similar oppression of Jews by hypothetical future Israeli Palestinians. I would dearly hope that this is not a controversial statement, and that everyone in this thread could agree on at least that much. (and if anyone disagrees, please kindly get the gently caress out) However, it is absolutely unacceptable to oppress and discriminate against an ethnic group for fear that, if they were not oppressed and disenfranchised, they might gain enough power in the government to reverse those policies back against their former oppressors. It's just a thin excuse to justify racism as "necessary", no different from Confederate slavemasters who claimed that slavery (and later Jim Crow) was necessary to protect whites from the retribution of ex-slaves. The proper answer is to have a strong state with effective checks and balances which prevent the state from discriminating against any minority group, regardless of which one it is. And, in all honesty, a one-state solution would be pretty close to that already! Most abuses against Palestinians are either extralegal, illegal, or governed by an alternate legal framework (mostly military law or immigration law). A one-state solution would neatly end the applicability of the military laws responsible for most of the abuse in the Palestinian territories and the residency laws used to threaten East Jerusalem Palestinians, without giving any opportunity for those same laws to be applied against Jews. The extralegal abuse wouldn't be stopped by a one-state solution, but its institutional nature heavily insulates it from population shifts so there's no need to worry about turnabout from Palestinians there either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Ethnic or religious groups shouldn't be oppressed, disenfranchised, or discriminated against, regardless of the ethnic or religious makeup of the state. They shouldn't. It would be nice if they wouldn't. But, they will be if they declare themselves enemies of that state and repeatedly collaborate with foreign invaders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:They shouldn't. It would be nice if they wouldn't. But, they will be if they declare themselves enemies of that state and repeatedly collaborate with foreign invaders. Oh, I didn't know you were Jordanian.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 19:47
|
|