zompist bboard

a congress of convoluted conworldery
It is currently Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:26 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:38 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 9:01 am
Posts: 1795
Location: Hamburg, Tüsclan
Whether the apartheid comparisons make sense or not depends on what, exactly, you mean by apartheid. The internationally most famous aspect of apartheid, and the thing most people probably think of first when they see or hear the word, were the infamous "Europeans only" signs on beaches, bathrooms, and so on. Those, of course, don't have any counterparts in Israel or the Palestinian territories, which is why Israelis and their supporters usually feel honestly offended when they get accused of practicing apartheid.

However, the larger point of apartheid was to ensure rule of one group of people over another group of people. And that clearly has parallels in Israel and the Palestinian territories.

It should be noted that Israelis and Israel advocates who strongly reject the comparisons often show, in the process, that they don't know much about South African history. For instance, they love to point to individual Palestinian citizens of Israel in specific positions - cops, army officers, doctors, professors, judges, and so on - as "proof" that they don't practice apartheid. Which would be more convincing if the old South Africa wouldn't have had a tradition of trying the same trick by pointing to individual black (or otherwise non-white) South Africans in specific positions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:12 pm 
Šriftom
Šriftom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:00 am
Posts: 7623
Location: a.s.l. p.l.s.
mèþru wrote:
Of course, the corrupt Palestinian leaders win because this shows that they have successfully garnered international support for the cause. Never mind that this support is hurting their economy, because men like Abu Mazen and Haniyeh don't care for their people any more than Assad or Sisi do.

If you really want to support the "Palestinian cause" (as if there is a united cause or that you can't be both Zionist and pro-Palestinian), BDS is a horrible way to go about it. There's other things you can do instead. Maybe pressure Arab countries to treat Palestinian refugees better? Or even their own citizens? Arabs have more rights in Israel than they do in any Arab country. You can help Holocaust educators such as the Arab Muslim Mehnaz Afridi teach Arabs a history that they deny happened or never heard about?

The corrupt PA leaders may be corrupt but that doesn't make the cause any less just, if by 'cause' we mean independency for Palestine. I'd imagine the Kurds can have better leaders than they currently do, but I'd still vote with both hands for them to have their own independent state. I doubt Haniyeh, Assad, Sisi, and Mahmoud Abbas are somehow unique amongst world leaders in not caring for their own people.

No doubt Palestinian refugees can get better treatment, no doubt Arab leaders use the IL-PL conflict to distract attention from the shitty way they treat their own people, so here's an idea: Israel being the true and only democracy in MENA, the one shining example of respect for human rights and having the the world's most moral army can take away that powerful weapon and excuse from the hands Arab leaders and allow all Palestinian refugees who desire so to return to their homes and demonstrate how democratic nations treat refugees. (I think Eritreans and Sudanese might have a word or two to say on the matter too)

And what do I care about Holocaust educators or those who deny it? By now it's fucking ancient history and history has seen worse genocides happening, namely those that completely eliminated whole nations without a trace let alone have the ability to blackmail others with Samson options. Holocaust survivors have campaigned against acknowledging as equal the suffering of non-Jews who went through the Polish death camps, because it's so fine and dandy to be as obnoxious as to claim that Jewish suffering was super unique and Jews suffered more than others for simply being Jews. I suppose being G-d chosen can go a long way, innit.

mèþru wrote:
There's plenty of ways to go about helping without harming anyone. Also, do you really want to take out your anger against Bibi on innocent Israelis, most of whom hate him (even most of the people who voted him into office hate him). What did they do? (If your answer is "being slaves to the machine of oppression" or "accomplices to the destruction" or "collateral damage, I will retroactively claim my question is rhetorical.)

I don't quite follow, I thought the poor and disadvantaged Arabs are the ones being harmed, how are suddenly the Israelis suffering my wrath at Bibi? Why would people vote for someone they detest? I'm totally lost. I understand protest voting when people make irrational choices to punish the incumbent but what sort of upfuckery does it take to vote back in power someone you hate?!

mèþru wrote:
As long is at is marked that it was made in Israeli administrated territory, I suppose that I don't care if it is marked Made in Judea & Samaria (it wouldn't make sense in context to use the neutral term).

Which would be the neutral term since Judea and Samaria clearly isn't the one?

mèþru wrote:
Annexing the West Bank can't be done due to a whole host of issues, and I think Israel would be better off with an independent Palestine (although Palestinians would probably be economically better off in Israel and would also have more freedom in Israel than in their own country, because an independent Palestine would be a dictatorship).

Yeah, there's the minor inconvenience of millions and millions of Palestinians, how unfortunate indeed. Israel isn't going to expel them, not just yet anyway, that's why they've merely resorted to fencing them off in their city-state ghettos, completely cutting their access to Area C, strangling them in any way possible and then they have the nerve to point to the Palestinian Authority controlled mini-Bantustans and say "tsk, just look how bad they are at governing themselves, imagine if they actually had a state!"

Indeed, I don't doubt Palestine would be anything short of dictatorship and it really baffled me just how much disdain the Christian Arab Israelis I met in Nazareth feel for Israel and how incredibly detached they feel from it because I couldn't imagine them being as free to go out, drink, and party as they were but hey that's why people are ready to fight, defend, and die for their freedom.

mèþru wrote:
You actually are. The low wages they are given are better than being unemployed, as the unemployed in China have few benefits if any. I actually agree with Trump that it would be a great idea to make tariffs on China, except for the part about doing it in the present. Tariffs on China today would just wreck both American and Chinese economies. They should have installed tariffs before or during the rise of the Chinese cheap export industry.

Screwing over the people that a cause is supposed to be helping in order to hurt the rich would make me feel bad. As I mentioned, there are other things that you can do that will harm no one and benefit people.

Yeah... allow me to question just how much you're familiar with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:17 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:34 am
Posts: 1127
Location: Paris
Io wrote:

And what do I care about Holocaust educators or those who deny it? By now it's fucking ancient history and history has seen worse genocides happening, namely those that completely eliminated whole nations without a trace let alone have the ability to blackmail others with Samson options.



Sigh... It's not ancient history. As for worse genocides happening: well, citation needed.
Anyway, yes, some of us do care about holocaust denial. Hint: people do not deny huge parts of recent history without an hidden agenda.

Quote:
Holocaust survivors have campaigned against acknowledging as equal the suffering of non-Jews who went through the Polish death camps, because it's so fine and dandy to be as obnoxious as to claim that Jewish suffering was super unique and Jews suffered more than others for simply being Jews. I suppose being G-d chosen can go a long way, innit.


And that makes Holocaust denial acceptable I suppose?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:26 am 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 11492
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Патее ңу, кȢ ньыбай сȢ, хȢңы сае чѣ ром. МȢтии чѣ гуꙓ, кенн чѣ выңгѣд, коех ньыбай коех жымай.

_________________
R.Rusanov wrote:
immediately grandchild! an yogurt

Śēus yantəŋ arēyāgliŋ drabuhai džōnnu tańćiburāit.
Nairu džōnnufin kųkus wirklēyuhai śiwai thāt.
Khai. Khai. Khai. Khai. Khai. Khai. Khai.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:05 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:05 pm
Posts: 1113
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
@Io — Protip: Belittling the Holocaust while simultaneously mocking Jews' supposed "choseness" makes you sound like an anti-Semite.

Io wrote:
Israel being the true and only democracy in MENA, the one shining example of respect for human rights and having the the world's most moral army can take away that powerful weapon and excuse from the hands Arab leaders and allow all Palestinian refugees who desire so to return to their homes and demonstrate how democratic nations treat refugees. (I think Eritreans and Sudanese might have a word or two to say on the matter too)

No democratic country would or even could accept such a huge population of refugees, claimed at around 5 million. Palestinian refugees and their descendants returning to Israel would lead to a cataclysmic civil war, and as usual, more Palestinians would die than Israelis.

The most logical, most humane and most actionable solution to the Palestinian refugee problem is to allow them the full rights of citizenship in the countries where they reside. They speak the same dialect of the same language, practice the same religions, and have similar cultures and belief systems, so as far as refugees go, they are well-placed to integrate into their host countries if afforded the chance. But right now in Lebanon, for example, they live in squalorous conditions on the margins of society, denied access to housing, education and work.

The people who profess to care for the Palestinian refugees must certainly hate Israel more than they actually care about Palestinians, because the Palestinian "right of return" is the least workable solution to a totally solvable problem. The longer the Arab League and pro-Palestinian activists keep pushing it as the only "just solution," the longer actual Palestinians will suffer, because it's a complete non-starter. If this kind of national suicide is what's expected of Israel as part of a peace deal, well then, I guess we'll just have to forgo peace.

Io wrote:
Which would be the neutral term since Judea and Samaria clearly isn't the one?

This is kind of funny, because the term "West Bank" was invented by the Jordanians at the start of their own illegal occupation, whereas the region has been known as Judea and Samaria for thousands of years. There's even a people from Samaria who call themselves Samaritans, who are even more indigenous-er than the Arabs! It's kind of hard to claim that Jews have no title whatsoever to a territory that's named after them, though, so I think that's why "West Bank" is suddenly the "neutral term."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:52 am 
Šriftom
Šriftom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:00 am
Posts: 7623
Location: a.s.l. p.l.s.
Ars Lande, it was 80 years ago but you hear about it as if it happened a decade ago whereas when the genocide in Darfur was in full force hardly anyone was paying attention to it. Worse genocides are those who lead to the complete extermination of peoples, just an example:

[NSFW image]
Julius Popper during a manhunt of the Ona people. In the late 19th century estancieros and gold prospectors launched a campaign of extermination against the indigenous peoples of Tierra del Fuego.

I don't see what relevance should an event that happened (very past tense) on the European continent have to the people of the Levant given the turmoil the region is currently in. Holocaust denial is on the same level as «there are no gays in Iran» and «gays cause earthquakes», it's just absurd nonsense and again I don't see why opinions on events from the past should be part of the discourse of the Arab-Israeli relations, as if they don't have enough of other stupid shit from the history books to argue about. The present shouldn't be a hostage to the past, look at the Greek-Macedonian row over the name of the country and all that idiotic stuff they argue over, Greece will continue blocking EU/NATO accession until MKD chooses a name that doesn't contain the word Macedonia as if they somehow have any trademark rights on it, but of course that won't stop Greeks from controlling large swathes of the MKD economy.

Ars Lande wrote:
And that makes Holocaust denial acceptable I suppose?

Obviously that's not what I said? There are cunts on both sides of the argument, that's all.

Ziz, I'm not belittling it, I merely see it for what it is id est a historic event that happened long ago. I'd mock any day and time any notion of supremacy, why not?

Well, it's easy to profess what other countries should do to do the people you expelled and won't ever let back in. Let's see, the most logical would be asking those refugees where they'd like to go/stay, the most humane would be the one that leads to them living freely, in dignity and prosper economically, so ship them off to Norway and deposit a $1m in their bank accounts, the most actionable would be for all Jews to pack up and leave for the USA/Canada... like I said it's easy to profess. And have you thought of asking what the Lebanese might have to say on the matter? They're now hosting over a million of Syrian refugees too, why should such a tiny country with limited resources absorb such large numbers of foreigners?!

More broadly what should the Europeans be doing with the fugees coming from all over? Are Poland and Hungary right not accept them? Is Italian coastguard right to pick them up from their dingies off the coast of Africa?

The whole «right of return» notion is kind of funny isn't it? Any convert from any part of the world with no actual relation to the Levant can «return» not just to Israel but to the occupied territories too but those who actually do have a real «birthright» can't.

«West Bank» is a shitty term, it sounds like «yeah over there on the left side of the street» but it's what everybody calls it unless they're Jewish/Israeli nationalists who insist on calling it Yehuda ve Shomron.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:39 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4144
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
So far I have refrained from commenting on the Israel/Palestine issue, but now I shall say a few words.

First, the way Israel treats the Palestinians may be injust and disgusting, but that is no excuse for antisemitism or Holocaust impiety. The government of Israel is not the same as the worldwide Jewish community. Also, it is no excuse for terrorism or Hitler fanboyship, neither for Palestinians nor for anybody else. NOTHING is. Israel has, like any nation, a right to peace.

Second, the immense suffering the Jews took in World War II is no excuse for the Israeli government to deprive the Palestinians of their human rights. Again, Israel has a right to peace and safe boundaries, but so have the Palestinians, and such boundaries can NEVER be ones forced onto the other side. If Israel wants peace, they have to treat the Palestinians with the due respect they deserve.

I don't think there is much more to say on this.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:57 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2248
Io wrote:
mèþru wrote:
Of course, the corrupt Palestinian leaders win because this shows that they have successfully garnered international support for the cause. Never mind that this support is hurting their economy, because men like Abu Mazen and Haniyeh don't care for their people any more than Assad or Sisi do.

If you really want to support the "Palestinian cause" (as if there is a united cause or that you can't be both Zionist and pro-Palestinian), BDS is a horrible way to go about it. There's other things you can do instead. Maybe pressure Arab countries to treat Palestinian refugees better? Or even their own citizens? Arabs have more rights in Israel than they do in any Arab country. You can help Holocaust educators such as the Arab Muslim Mehnaz Afridi teach Arabs a history that they deny happened or never heard about?

The corrupt PA leaders may be corrupt but that doesn't make the cause any less just, if by 'cause' we mean independency for Palestine. I'd imagine the Kurds can have better leaders than they currently do, but I'd still vote with both hands for them to have their own independent state. I doubt Haniyeh, Assad, Sisi, and Mahmoud Abbas are somehow unique amongst world leaders in not caring for their own people.

No doubt Palestinian refugees can get better treatment, no doubt Arab leaders use the IL-PL conflict to distract attention from the shitty way they treat their own people, so here's an idea: Israel being the true and only democracy in MENA, the one shining example of respect for human rights and having the the world's most moral army can take away that powerful weapon and excuse from the hands Arab leaders and allow all Palestinian refugees who desire so to return to their homes and demonstrate how democratic nations treat refugees. (I think Eritreans and Sudanese might have a word or two to say on the matter too)

And what do I care about Holocaust educators or those who deny it? By now it's fucking ancient history and history has seen worse genocides happening, namely those that completely eliminated whole nations without a trace let alone have the ability to blackmail others with Samson options. Holocaust survivors have campaigned against acknowledging as equal the suffering of non-Jews who went through the Polish death camps

The death camps were created by the Nazis. Nazi party was led by Adolf Hitler, who was an ethnic Austrian. Therefore, these camps were Austrian, not Polish.

As a person of Austrian descent, I can't bear misattributing to Poles what's ours, Austrian.

_________________
Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to- OH WAIT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:57 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2796
Location: Brittania
I thought Io meant "the death camps in Poland" - though there were still a lot of camps not in Poland.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:12 am 
Šriftom
Šriftom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:00 am
Posts: 7623
Location: a.s.l. p.l.s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/world ... .html?_r=0


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:07 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2248
KathTheDragon wrote:
I thought Io meant "the death camps in Poland" - though there were still a lot of camps not in Poland.

I know, I was just parodying the standard reaction.

_________________
Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to- OH WAIT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:30 am 
Boardlord
Boardlord

Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 8:26 pm
Posts: 10327
Location: In the den
Sal locked the thread because of the image (and the tenor of the discussion). It's basically atrocity porn, don't do that. I replaced the image with a link with an NSFW warning.

For everyone: Israel discussions rarely go well anywhere, and if the mods feel that it's just making a mess, we'll cheerfully get rid of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:38 am 
Šriftom
Šriftom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:00 am
Posts: 7623
Location: a.s.l. p.l.s.
I'm really sorry, I didn't think the image could be seen as such, there's no gore and it comes from Wikipedia not Orgish/Liveleak or something like that, although admittedly you can find plenty of NSFW stuff on W.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Random Thread
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:00 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 2407
Ziz wrote:
No democratic country would or even could accept such a huge population of refugees, claimed at around 5 million. Palestinian refugees and their descendants returning to Israel would lead to a cataclysmic civil war, and as usual, more Palestinians would die than Israelis.

The most logical, most humane and most actionable solution to the Palestinian refugee problem is to allow them the full rights of citizenship in the countries where they reside. They speak the same dialect of the same language, practice the same religions, and have similar cultures and belief systems, so as far as refugees go, they are well-placed to integrate into their host countries if afforded the chance. But right now in Lebanon, for example, they live in squalorous conditions on the margins of society, denied access to housing, education and work.

The people who profess to care for the Palestinian refugees must certainly hate Israel more than they actually care about Palestinians, because the Palestinian "right of return" is the least workable solution to a totally solvable problem. The longer the Arab League and pro-Palestinian activists keep pushing it as the only "just solution," the longer actual Palestinians will suffer, because it's a complete non-starter. If this kind of national suicide is what's expected of Israel as part of a peace deal, well then, I guess we'll just have to forgo peace.


This is straight out of Labor Zionist propaganda. I'm no proponent of the right of return, but this is pretty disingenuous analysis and one-sided finger-pointing. It's practically the "LOL welp we have no partner for peace, LOL, let's build more settlements LOL, we can only make peace when they stop hating Israel more than caring about their children LOL."

Nobody believes 5 million refugees should or will return to Israel. It's just a card to play in negotiations. And to play a card, you gotta talk the talk. But in 2007, behind the scene negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority demonstrated that the Palestinians were ready to agree on something like 100,000 returnees, and some further compensation from Israel. The Arab League, meanwhile, is ready to accept virtually any deal that the Palestinians agree to.

You also seem to assert it should just be easier for Jordan, Lebanon, and the Gaza Strip to just integrate their huge numbers of refugees than it would be for Israel to do so. Yet Israel has far more resources to handle refugees than any of these places -- especially given the Syrian refugee crisis and Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, the majority of whose residents are refugees. This is also based on the racist myth that Israel pushes that all Arabs are the same. In fact, you're pushing the idea right here. And showing your ignorance too. Did you know a majority of Lebanese, for example, do not even share religious tradition with virtually any Palestinian? It would be a bit like claiming Russians and Germans share religious traditions, although the Germans are probably more ecumenical than any of the religious traditions in Lebanon or Palestine. Are you at all aware of any cultural differences between Lebanon and Palestine? Are you at all aware of what makes up national identities, or how important national identities are in today's world, over ethnic identities? Are you at all aware of significant differences in histories between Lebanon and Palestine? Are you at all aware of the level of prejudice and discrimination that Palestinians face in Lebanon? While Lebanon legally discriminates less against Palestinians than Israel does, on the level of individual interactions, it can get as bad in Lebanon for Palestinians as it does in Israel.

While integrating refugees might work for Gaza, which at least shares a common national identity, Jordanians and Lebanese have clearly different identities and communities that exclude Palestinians. The Palestinian refugee problem was a major factor in the Lebanese civil war, and has been a huge issue causing social tensions in Jordan. Note that Jordan is the only Arab country that tried to integrate Palestinians, but it's now even gradually revoking the citizenship of Palestinians.

I'm not saying integrate 5 million refugees into Israel, but if these countries must integrate their refugees, Israel can certainly take in a good million or more itself. It's not easy to do, but it's not easy for anyone else either.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:22 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:05 pm
Posts: 1113
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said anything about settlements.

Nor did I say that "all Arabs are the same." As racist as I might be, nothing about what you said really detracts from my argument. It's pretty obvious that from every point of view, Israel is the least ideal place for Palestinian refugees to resettle.

And what racist myth is there? Is it racist for an Israeli to make the observation that, for as different as Arabs are from one another, they have far more in common with each other than any of them have with Israeli Jews? Non-Palestinian Jordanians and Palestinian Jordanians have a manufactured hatred for each other, so... maybe Palestinians should move en masse to Israel? In any case, will Israelis vote for the party that proposes to accept and pay for resettlement for a million Palestinians inside Israel proper, while also creating a Palestinian failed state in the West Bank and Gaza? Not a chance. Maybe Israel can bankroll the construction of proper settlements in the countries where Palestinian refugees currently reside, but anything beyond that stretches credulity.

If we're talking about supposedly insurmountable cultural differences, and how inevitable it is that 70 years on, there are still Palestinian refugees:

Why are there now 5 million Palestinian refugees, whereas there are 0 Jewish refugees in Israel? Israel accepted Jews from every corner of the globe, from India to Yemen to Morocco. Don't tell me that racist lie that "Jews" are all the same. What does an assimilated Dutch Jewish family from Amsterdam have in common with the Black Jews of Cochin? Did you know that Lithuanian misnagdim and Hasidim would hardly break bread at one another's table? And don't tell me you think "Syrian Jew" is any kind of useful term — are you even aware how different even the Kurdish, Halabi and Shami communities are from one another?

The Arabs and the Jews exchanged roughly equal populations of refugees, yet nowadays only Palestinian refugees remain. The Arab countries conspire to manufacture a never-ending refugee crisis, and Israel should foot the bill?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:06 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 2407
Ziz wrote:
It's pretty obvious that from every point of view, Israel is the least ideal place for Palestinian refugees to resettle.

Only if you're a Zionist Israeli, intent on preserving Jewish supremacy in a country that is only 2/3 Jewish in the first place.

Quote:
And what racist myth is there? . . .

The racist myth is the implication that Palestinians would seamlessly integrate into other Arab countries without much trouble. European Jews certainly weren't content living in Europe, with whom even today they still have at least as much cultural similarity as the Palestinians do with the Lebanese and the Jordanians.

You're right that the Palestinians are culturally closer to some Arabs than they are to Israeli Jews, but you're wrong to insist that that makes it much easier to integrate them in other countries than into Israel. Oh, Israel would have some trouble, there's no denying that. But, again, so would Lebanon or Jordan. Israel has many great advantages in integrating large numbers of refugees, that Lebanon, Jordan, etc., do not. Among them:
1) Money, to absorb them and provide the assistance and attention needed in reintegration
2) Very strong Law & Order and security apparatus, to deal with social tensions
3) Huge chunks of territory that are 100% Palestinian, where they could center reintegration programs

Quote:
In any case, will Israelis vote for the party that proposes to accept and pay for resettlement for a million Palestinians inside Israel proper, while also creating a Palestinian failed state in the West Bank and Gaza? Not a chance. Maybe Israel can bankroll the construction of proper settlements in the countries where Palestinian refugees currently reside, but anything beyond that stretches credulity.

I like that what Israel will be willing to accept trumps what other countries will be willing to accept. That sort of attitude is what tempts people into the obviously losing battles of throwing crappy bombs into Israel and stabbing Israelis with kitchen knives. If Israel is going to be a strongman in negotiating, without considering the needs of the other parties, then you gotta fight the strongman by raising the stakes.

Quote:
Why are there now 5 million Palestinian refugees, whereas there are 0 Jewish refugees in Israel? Israel accepted Jews from every corner of the globe, from India to Yemen to Morocco. Don't tell me that racist lie that "Jews" are all the same. What does an assimilated Dutch Jewish family from Amsterdam have in common with the Black Jews of Cochin? Did you know that Lithuanian misnagdim and Hasidim would hardly break bread at one another's table? And don't tell me you think "Syrian Jew" is any kind of useful term — are you even aware how different even the Kurdish, Halabi and Shami communities are from one another?

The Arabs and the Jews exchanged roughly equal populations of refugees, yet nowadays only Palestinian refugees remain. The Arab countries conspire to manufacture a never-ending refugee crisis, and Israel should foot the bill?

Do you really think this is a real argument against Israel taking in the refugees it displaced? If anything, it's an argument that Israel should be able to handle taking them in.

It would have been great had the resourceful State of Palestine... oh... wait...

Anyway, sorry for that "LOL, etc." quote. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, I was just trying to mock your line of thinking and place it on par with other propaganda points Zionist Israelis try to push. But it was a bit unnuanced and inglorious.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:19 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:05 pm
Posts: 1113
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Tiramisu wrote:
Only if you're a Zionist Israeli, intent on preserving Jewish supremacy in a country that is only 2/3 4/5 Jewish in the first place.
"Supremacy" is a totally inflammatory, non-NPV word for "demographic majority."

Right now, France is 9/10 ethnic French. What percentage of them, even among Mélenchon voters, do you think would throw open their doors and have the ethnic ratio of French : non-French dip below 1/2?

Israel is the nation state of the Jews. France is the nation state of the French. Latvia is the nation state of the Latvians.
Everybody in the world except for the Muslim states recognize the rights of Jews to have a country of their own in Israel, where they have "supremacy."

And funny thing about Latvia — 12% of its population are non-citizen Russians, who live and were even born in Latvia yet have limited political and civil rights. Latvia privileges the hell out of ethnic Latvians, to a far greater degree than Israel legally if not culturally privileges Jews, but no one the world over has anything to say about Latvian supremacy.

On the other hand, Israeli Arabs (Palestinians citizens of Israel, if you must) face a fair amount of discrimination but more or less have legal equality with Jews, including the right to vote. The Arab coalition in Israel finished 3rd in the last elections. They may be very unhappy about the fact that their passports say "ISRAEL" on them, and they may feel totally alienated from the State because of differing identities, but a very substantial degree of political and civil rights they do exercise.

Tiramisu wrote:
1) Money, to absorb them and provide the assistance and attention needed in reintegration
2) Very strong Law & Order and security apparatus, to deal with social tensions

You must realize these are moot points. Can you really envision a successful binational state? Can you really see a million Palestinians, many of whom hate Israel with every fiber of their being, getting along tomorrow with Jews, who in many cases hate them back just as much?

Tiramisu wrote:
I like that what Israel will be willing to accept trumps what other countries will be willing to accept.
Israel is an apartheid state with the minor addendum that everybody in Israel can vote. If you can't sell the deal to the Israeli people, it won't happen. The fact that Israel won't accept a deal that its population can't countenance is hardly the reason for Palestinian political violence, though. Maybe in Dublin or Stockholm or Berkeley, people buy the excuse that Palestinians are just so desperate in the face of unprovoked Israeli aggression that they can't help themselves, but Palestinian media in Arabic is utterly dripping with incitement to murder Jews on ethnic or religious grounds.

Tiramisu wrote:
Do you really think this is a real argument against Israel taking in the refugees it displaced? If anything, it's an argument that Israel should be able to handle taking them in.
I think you're deliberately missing the point. Israel can't take in refugees for reasons made plain above. It's not an argument that Israel can't take in refugees; it's an argument that Arab countries can, whatever their religio-culturo-ethnic differences with the Palestinians, and have refused to do so. Not any mere refusal, but a refusal even in callous disregard for the Palestinians' own best interests, just in order to further their vendetta against Israel. The Arab countries don't give a damn if Palestinians suffer, so long as they remain a bargaining chip in the fight against Israel.

Tiramisu wrote:
It would have been great had the resourceful State of Palestine... oh... wait...
Oh... wait...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:49 pm 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 2407
Ziz wrote:
tiramisu wrote:
only 2/3 4/5 Jewish

74.7%; 3/4. I thought it was about 70%, and rounded down. Certainly not 4/5, though. But if you want to get sticky about demographics, then let's do a little comparison between "the Jewish state" and the United States.

"The Jewish State":
74.7% Jewish

United States:
76.0% Christian

"The Jewish State":
74.7% Jewish
20.8% Palestinian, excluding Palestinians of the West Bank or Gaza

United States:
72.4% White
12.6% Black

As you can see, Israel is about as Jewish as America is Christian or white. Yet, even in Trump's America, there are few people overall who want national identity to be connected to Christianity or whiteness, let alone having laws that explicitly dictate the social relations of non-whites or non-Christians.

The point is, Israel has already lost at the argument that it can be a "Jewish state" without being socially exclusive. Becoming less Jewish demographically isn't going to change that.

Quote:
"Supremacy" is a totally inflammatory, non-NPV word for "demographic majority."

Jewish supremacy is written into the laws of "the Jewish state," and isn't simply just written into the social fabric by sheer number of bodies. I suppose you could make an argument about "separate, but equal," but it's pretty common knowledge these days that in the United States, "separate, but equal" was just a way to keep black people out (and to give them less equal arrangements in reality).

Quote:
Right now, France is 9/10 ethnic French. What percentage of them, even among Mélenchon voters, do you think would throw open their doors and have the ethnic ratio of French : non-French dip below 1/2?

Israel is the nation state of the Jews. France is the nation state of the French. Latvia is the nation state of the Latvians.
Everybody in the world except for the Muslim states recognize the rights of Jews to have a country of their own in Israel, where they have "supremacy."

Are you saying Jews can't be French?
Why can't Israel be the nation state of the Israelis (whether Jewish or not)?
(Do you have a list of countries that "recognize Israel as a Jewish state"? I'm not finding one, and I would be surprised if virtually every country in the world recognized Israel "as a Jewish state.")

Quote:
On the other hand, Israeli Arabs (Palestinians citizens of Israel, if you must) face a fair amount of discrimination but more or less have legal equality with Jews, including the right to vote. The Arab coalition in Israel finished 3rd in the last elections.

Ah, here's a "separate, but equal" argument.

You forgot to mention that the Arab coalition doesn't share an ideology, but some 6 or so different Arab parties united as one single party because the Knesset passed a law raising the threshold for representation -- it's pretty well-known that the intent was to get rid of the Arabs in the Knesset.

Meanwhile, while the Arab coalition has the 3rd largest representation in the Knesset, it's completely locked out of legislation. It has no power to do anything. During the election, the left-wing parties united into one party, "The Zionist Union," and campaigned on a promise that they would never, ever join in coalition with the Arab party. Wow. No Jewish supremacy at all.

Quote:
You must realize these are moot points. Can you really envision a successful binational state?

You're arguing for a binational state in Lebanon and Jordan.

Quote:
I think you're deliberately missing the point. Israel can't take in refugees for reasons made plain above. It's not an argument that Israel can't take in refugees; it's an argument that Arab countries can, whatever their religio-culturo-ethnic differences with the Palestinians, and have refused to do so.

You're deliberately missing the point--
my point is that Lebanon and Jordan cannot take in all the refugees they already have, and that Israel can take in a large number of refugees. Israel could even take in a large number of refugees without sacrificing a Jewish majority. Even a million refugees wouldn't come close to breaking that majority.

The only common truth in all of your arguments is the simple unwillingness to dilute any Jewishness. It's completely fine to be a Zionist and a nationalist, but don't pretend like everyone else should be willing to throw Palestinians lives under the bus on the premises of a Jewish nationalism that we don't accept.

The only real solution is found in the post-Zionism movement. Accept that both Jews and Palestinians are there to stay, and make Israel the "Israeli state." Get to work on an "Israeli" national identity which includes both Jewish and Palestinian heritage as essential components of the Israeli nation. It won't happen over night, but the seeds are there, with some of its biggest and most willing proponents in the Israeli Palestinian community. With the sheer size of the Palestinian people, already surrounding you and living right next door, the only alternative is ethnic cleansing.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:16 pm 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:05 pm
Posts: 1113
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Israel and America are apples and oranges.

The foundation of American peoplehood in modern America is not any commonality in religion or ethnicity or any other category, but a shared belief in certain principles of government. Other countries like Japan and Greece have had many different kinds of government but have retained a sense of common identity because of a language, history, culture and ethnic identity that a majority of people in those countries have shared. Modern democracies may revolve around a core ethnicity while minority ethnicities' rights are respected. Greece, for instance, has Albanian, Slavic, Romance and Turkic minorities whose identities are not embodied by the State, but it protects their rights, and this is accepted as a matter of course. I imagine that Muslims in Greece do not feel particularly well represented by Greece's cross-bearing flag, but the cross is poignant enough to ethnic Greeks to remain as a symbol of the nation.

In short, you're singling out Israel for criticism in this regard but your issue must be with all nation states, because they all fail your standard of... social inclusivity? What is the relevance of the demographics, by the way? Thailand is only 74% Thai; does it fail at being a "Thai state"?

Tiramisu wrote:
Jewish supremacy is written into the laws of "the Jewish state," and isn't simply just written into the social fabric by sheer number of bodies. I suppose you could make an argument about "separate, but equal," but it's pretty common knowledge these days that in the United States, "separate, but equal" was just a way to keep black people out (and to give them less equal arrangements in reality).

Citation? Israeli Arabs have full legal equality. The Supreme Court regularly strikes down discriminatory legislation, and Arabs regularly win cases against Jews. They have the right to vote, the right to protest, the right to work, the right to study, the right to practice their religions and the right to educate their children in their own language and traditions. On the other hand, Arabs who want to send their children to Jewish schools have every right to do so, and it sometimes happens.

The only Jewish "supremacy" is that Israel defines itself as Jewish; in the same breath, it guarantees equal civil rights regardless of religion or ethnicity. In a way, even Scandinavian countries do the same thing, and take it one step further. Denmark establishes the Danish language and the Church of Denmark as the state language and religion, and both of these enshrine the centrality of ethnic Danes to the state, as they are symbols of Danish ethnic identity. Israel has two official languages, Hebrew and Arabic, and Judaism isn't even the state religion. You might point out the Law of Return as a particularly discriminatory piece of legislation, but many European countries offer a similar deal.

Arabs do face ample discrimination by Israeli Jews, and have reason to conclude that the state is not sufficiently invested in their well-being. None of this stems from any legal handicap, but a culture of mutual animosity that has existed for more than a hundred years.

Tiramisu wrote:
You forgot to mention that the Arab coalition doesn't share an ideology, but some 6 or so different Arab parties united as one single party because the Knesset passed a law raising the threshold for representation -- it's pretty well-known that the intent was to get rid of the Arabs in the Knesset.

Meanwhile, while the Arab coalition has the 3rd largest representation in the Knesset, it's completely locked out of legislation. It has no power to do anything. During the election, the left-wing parties united into one party, "The Zionist Union," and campaigned on a promise that they would never, ever join in coalition with the Arab party. Wow. No Jewish supremacy at all.

It's called a cordon sanitaire. Some of their MKs say things that are so reprehensible and borderline treasonous that Zionist parties cannot possibly ally with them. Haneen Zoabi and Masud Ghnaim (for example) justify terrorism against Israelis, proclaim support for Israel's enemies, and state themselves to be working for the destruction of the state (and all the calamities that would cause). Despite views that are repugnant to the majority of Israelis, they have been neither prosecuted nor expelled from the Knesset (even despite attempts to remove them!).

Meanwhile, there are Arab MKs elected for Zionist parties, even right-wing ones. Would you call them self-hating Arabs?

Tiramisu wrote:
You're arguing for a binational state in Lebanon and Jordan.

Lebanon already has more than two nations. Half of Jordan is Palestinian. Will a Jew-free Palestinian state and two binational Jewish-Arab and J. Arab-P. Arab states do the trick?

Tiramisu wrote:
You're deliberately missing the point--
my point is that Lebanon and Jordan cannot take in all the refugees they already have, and that Israel can take in a large number of refugees. Israel could even take in a large number of refugees without sacrificing a Jewish majority. Even a million refugees wouldn't come close to breaking that majority.

The only common truth in all of your arguments is the simple unwillingness to dilute any Jewishness. It's completely fine to be a Zionist and a nationalist, but don't pretend like everyone else should be willing to throw Palestinians lives under the bus on the premises of a Jewish nationalism that we don't accept.

I've said it a thousand times. Israel can take many measures to help Palestinians. Integrating refugees inside Israel is not one of them. It just can't happen. We're going in circles here. No one would benefit from a million Palestinians suddenly appearing in Israel. It just can't happen. Maximally, Israel could settle a million Palestinians in the area between the pre-'67 lines and Nazareth, and cede that area to a future Palestinian state.

Tiramisu wrote:
The only real solution is found in the post-Zionism movement. Accept that both Jews and Palestinians are there to stay, and make Israel the "Israeli state." Get to work on an "Israeli" national identity which includes both Jewish and Palestinian heritage as essential components of the Israeli nation. It won't happen over night, but the seeds are there, with some of its biggest and most willing proponents in the Israeli Palestinian community. With the sheer size of the Palestinian people, already surrounding you and living right next door, the only alternative is ethnic cleansing.

It's a nice idea. If all tribal animosities between Jews and Palestinians disappeared tomorrow, and we all agreed to a state (maybe some kind of confederation) that is democratic, secular, and simultaneously Jewish and Palestinian, I might be in favor of that plan. I'm skeptical it could ever happen, though. So much of Israeli Jewish and Palestinian Arab identity is built upon othering the other group.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:16 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:34 am
Posts: 1127
Location: Paris
Ziz wrote:
Tiramisu wrote:
Only if you're a Zionist Israeli, intent on preserving Jewish supremacy in a country that is only 2/3 4/5 Jewish in the first place.
"Supremacy" is a totally inflammatory, non-NPV word for "demographic majority."

Right now, France is 9/10 ethnic French. What percentage of them, even among Mélenchon voters, do you think would throw open their doors and have the ethnic ratio of French : non-French dip below 1/2?

Israel is the nation state of the Jews. France is the nation state of the French. Latvia is the nation state of the Latvians.
Everybody in the world except for the Muslim states recognize the rights of Jews to have a country of their own in Israel, where they have "supremacy."


I'd be curious to see how you define "ethnic French". Also why is 9/10th "ethnic French" is acceptable and 1/2 is not? Where exactly do you draw the line?
For that matter, there are those who feel 10% is already too much, and a more acceptable figure is around 1%. Charming people, I'm sure, you'd love them.

I don't see why any ethnicity should have the right to their own ethnic states. We spent the early 20th century under the impression that such a right existed; it didn't exactly work out, did it?
Nation states don't work out; ethnicity and identity are too complex for that.

Even so, your analogy doesn't work. Imagine that France had been a British protectorate, with a majority Protestant German population until an "ethnic French" state is established in relatively recent history. Would France still have a right to be 90% French?

And even then, if Jews have a right to a Jewish states, how come Palestinians don't have that right?

It's no good crying over spilt milk and I agree with you that any solution needs the support of the Israeli people. What both Israel and Palestine need is a practical and workable solution - and that includes a majority Jewish state.

But there is no such thing as the right to have an ethnic nation states. Even assuming current conditions continue to apply, Israel could end up with an Arab majority. What happens then?
(I like mèþru''s idea about non-territorial nations - but we're still far from making that work!)


Ziz wrote:
What Jews have in Israel is agency on a national scale. When Jews are confronted with antisemitism in Israel, it doesn't engender the same kind of fear because all of society is deeply invested and will rise up to counter it. Anywhere else, Jews just have to hope that being serious about fighting antisemitism is still politically expedient.


That, on the other hand, is a fairly sad truth.
Ziz wrote:
Actually, antisemitism doesn't even need to be mainstream! Deadly anti-Semitic attacks happen in France, to the degree that Jews feel unsafe wearing visible signs of their Jewishness, and synagogues and schools have to be guarded.


As for the schools being guarded, that was more a case of that well know line of reasoning: something must be done, this is something, ergo this must be done. They stopped doing it (or, at least, they stopped guarding the Jewish school in my neighborhood). I still see people wearing kippas, and sukkot on the balconies.
Statistically speaking, I believe it's safer to be Jewish in France than to live in Israel.

But to be entirely honest, I'm not entirely sure I wouldn't consideraliyah if I was Jewish. There has been a growing undercurrent of antisemitism, since I think 2002, and even more so since 2008.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:56 am 
Šriftom
Šriftom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:00 am
Posts: 7623
Location: a.s.l. p.l.s.
Ziz wrote:
And funny thing about Latvia — 12% of its population are non-citizen Russians, who live and were even born in Latvia yet have limited political and civil rights. Latvia privileges the hell out of ethnic Latvians, to a far greater degree than Israel legally if not culturally privileges Jews, but no one the world over has anything to say about Latvian supremacy.

And the really funny thing is that the natives in the Baltics were exiled and Russian colonizers moved in, that's exactly how Crimea became majority Russian. The EU used to make some not very loud noises about how Russians are treated in the Baltics but after Georgia 2008 and especially Ukraine 2014 I doubt very much they'd do again.

The Russians in Latvia were born in the USSR which no longer exists and its successor is the Russian federation, what's more the US never recognised the occupation of the Baltic states:
Quote:
President Bush. My position on that issue is very clear and has been clear about the occupation. And the position of my country has been clear about the occupation ever since the occupation took place. We proudly flew the flags of independent nations above your Embassies in Washington, DC, and the statement was clear: We never recognized nor accepted the occupation that did take place.

Putin once clarified what he meant that the dissolution of the USSR was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century namely it was the dozens of millions of Russians left abroad. Latvia with population of under 2 million and 62.0% Latvians would of course privilege the hell out of ethnic Latvians. The former colonists and their descendants have the choice to become full citizens and stop being a 5th column if they wish so. By the way just days ago a new anti-Little-Green-Men law came into force in Finland. The fear is strong.

There may not be Jewish refugees in Israel without Israeli citizenship waiting to go back to Morocco or Yemen or whatever but there's lots of Israelis having or in the process of acquiring citizenship from the countries in Europe their (grand-)parents left.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:55 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2060
Location: suburbs of Mrin
I'm not really interested in joining the conversation with Io and Ziz (I'm somewhere between a middle perspective and Ziz's)
Ars Lande wrote:
I'd be curious to see how you define "ethnic French".
Even the French can't agree on that. There's a similar problem in Israel regarding the nature of a Jewish state and who is a Jew. Do they go by Jewish law (if your mother is a Jew, you are a Jew. If you convert, you are still ethnically Jewish but your descendants are an open question), older Jewish law (before Medieval times, if your father was a Jew then you are a Jew) or the laws used to oppress Jews (if you are Jewish enough to be persecuted then you are Jewish enough to emigrate. The most commonly stated laws used by those who are in favour are the Nuremburg laws)? Do Reform and Conservative congregations (which barely exist in Israel, which has totally different religious divisions in the community (Datim, Masortim, Hilonim)) count as Jews?
Ars Lande wrote:
I don't see why any ethnicity should have the right to their own ethnic states. We spent the early 20th century under the impression that such a right existed; it didn't exactly work out, did it?
I think that Jews are an exception to that because of their persecution, and I feel other widely persecuted groups can also serve as exceptions (Roma for example).
Ars Lande wrote:
And even then, if Jews have a right to a Jewish states, how come Palestinians don't have that right?
I feel that Palestinians are welcome to have their own state, but not until there is a situation in which it is safe for Israel to grant such a state. Also, Israel hasn't reached an agreement yet with anyone that could serve as an interim government of an independent Palestine.
Ars Lande wrote:
any solution needs the support of the Israeli people
I actually disagree. No peace deal will actually work if subjected to a referendum in Israel because everyone who doesn't want a two state solution will vote against it and everyone who wants a different (even slightly different) two state solution would also vote against it. On the other hand, I feel like all land-swaps should be subject to referendum in and only in the actual land being ceded.

Now the really interesting bit, since I've been thinking about this a lot since about the time I joined the ZBB:
Ars Lande wrote:
non-territorial nations
In this I was inspired by the millet system. Basically, each planet/moon with humans as the sole sentient inhabitants (okay, fine Earth is the only actual one, but I think it could serve as a model of government for high population colonies on other planets or on moons) has a world government which is limited in scope to enforcing rule of law in its sub-units, directing the militaries of national governments, conducting diplomacy (which national governments can also do), planetary defense against asteroids (with the only legal stockpile of nuclear weapons), establishing laws for people without citizenship in any nation on that planet, environmental affairs and other issues which may concern the entire world (the entire system described here is enshrined by a constitution which is amended by a world congress). Within this government are any number of nations, which are non-territorial governments that establish laws that can only affect citizens and property that either that government owns or that which is owned by its citizens. Local governments (such as counties and municipalities) also make their own laws. All of these sub-global governments can establish common citizenship, economic agreements, congresses, etc. with each other. In fact, you can make copies of most countries' governments by associations between a nation (citizenship and national congress) and local governments. Federations and confederations would essentially be associations between associations of the type described in the previous sentence. The associations can even limit the powers of its members. It cannot, however, limit any local or national government or any association of these from unilaterally withdrawing from an association. In fact, local governments or associations having territory can even unilaterally secede from the world government (but the world government can immediately declare war if the newly seceded country is committing abuses). Under this model, everyone has the right to live under whichever kind of government they want. Even a fascist totalitarian one. But a nation can't pass laws on non-citizens. Everyone gets to choose or change their citizenship as long as they meet conditions for acquiring citizenship in that nation. All residents are considered citizens for the purpose of law in local government.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:37 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:34 am
Posts: 1127
Location: Paris
mèþru wrote:
Now the really interesting bit, since I've been thinking about this a lot since about the time I joined the ZBB:
Ars Lande wrote:
non-territorial nations
In this I was inspired by the millet system. Basically, each planet/moon with humans as the sole sentient inhabitants (okay, fine Earth is the only actual one, but I think it could serve as a model of government for high population colonies on other planets or on moons) has a world government which is limited in scope to enforcing rule of law in its sub-units, directing the militaries of national governments, conducting diplomacy (which national governments can also do), planetary defense against asteroids (with the only legal stockpile of nuclear weapons), establishing laws for people without citizenship in any nation on that planet, environmental affairs and other issues which may concern the entire world (the entire system described here is enshrined by a constitution which is amended by a world congress). Within this government are any number of nations, which are non-territorial governments that establish laws that can only affect citizens and property that either that government owns or that which is owned by its citizens. Local governments (such as counties and municipalities) also make their own laws. All of these sub-global governments can establish common citizenship, economic agreements, congresses, etc. with each other. In fact, you can make copies of most countries' governments by associations between a nation (citizenship and national congress) and local governments. Federations and confederations would essentially be associations between associations of the type described in the previous sentence. The associations can even limit the powers of its members. It cannot, however, limit any local or national government or any association of these from unilaterally withdrawing from an association. In fact, local governments or associations having territory can even unilaterally secede from the world government (but the world government can immediately declare war if the newly seceded country is committing abuses). Under this model, everyone has the right to live under whichever kind of government they want. Even a fascist totalitarian one. But a nation can't pass laws on non-citizens. Everyone gets to choose or change their citizenship as long as they meet conditions for acquiring citizenship in that nation. All residents are considered citizens for the purpose of law in local government.


I've played with similar ideas myself for an SF setting. It's not entirely unlike some libertarian ideas - actually I took it from Neal Stephenson, who himself was inspired by various libertarian literature.

It's good SF, but that's not going to happen in our lifetimes, to say the least.

It feels like an easy and elegant solution to many problems: want an all-white reactionary totalitarian state? an Islamic theocracy? Well, pick up some volunteers, go do that, and quit bothering the rest of us.
Except, of course, if you're an authoritarian, then of course you feel you have a right to a specific portion of territory, to boss people around, and of course you know what people want better than they do. Having environmental policy at your 'world state' level is fine, except people won't pay for it - not, when, just as happen today, you can just claim there are no environmental problems.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:59 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 2407
mèþru wrote:
I feel that Palestinians are welcome to have their own state, but not until there is a situation in which it is safe for Israel to grant such a state.

There cannot be a situation in which there is a Palestinian state and where Israelis feel "safe." That's why it's such a convenient excuse for neither offering citizenship to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, or giving them a state. Pretend you want to give them their own state so you don't have international pressure to give them rights before the law, but then hold back on giving them a state with the excuse of national security.

Quote:
Also, Israel hasn't reached an agreement yet with anyone that could serve as an interim government of an independent Palestine.

The Oslo Accords? It guaranteed a state by 1999, and established the Palestinian Authority as its government. Israel is still a party to the treaty.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Israel stuff
PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 4:14 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2060
Location: suburbs of Mrin
I have no delusion that my ideas will be acceptable in the recent future. I think it's a better system than today.

(this is regarding world government not Israel)

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group