PTK
Paul Kegan
The Gaza Strip is not actualy in Israel, or though it is controlled by Israel.
Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion
- Thread starter PR1Berske
- Start date
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Yeah, and in a similar bit of riffing... I think I keep bringing up the Nakba in these kinds of discussions, which might get repetitive but I think if you're going to oppose Zionism (which you should!) then it's worth understanding Zionism, not just the obviously repugnant and disgusting Zionism of 2023 but the relatively attractive Zionism of 1947 or 1948. And to me, if nothing else, thinking about Zionism in 1948 shows that you can't just go "this group of people don't have a state to protect them, therefore them having a state would automatically be a good development, no matter what".
ska invita
back on the other side
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I would not agree with Zionism in 47/ 48 being relatively attractive. Compared to now.
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
For me it's that in 1947/8 there was the potential, the possibility of making a place where there would be justice and equality for all. It may have been a delusion in the first place, or maybe with more effort it could have happened a better way - we can never know because all that's left of that potential now is ashes and pain.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Well, there had just been this really big event that had made it seem necessary. It certainly made the argument in its favour rather more compelling even if it we still recognise it as wrong.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
What's happening now is a direct result of all those nice progressive zionists from 1948 waging their own campaign of ethnic cleansing. There have been no massive left turns in the history of Israel, Netanhayu is just finishing what Ben-Gurion and pals began.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
e2a: Probably not worth posting that.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Zionism pre dated WW2 holocaust.
Surviving Jews in displaced peoples camp were not being welcomed to other countries.
The UN partition plan was a disaster. To point where at one point US was thinking of putting it on hold.
So no holocaust did not necessarily mean it had to happen this way.
Plus this had been long term plan of Zionists from its early days. Removal of Palestinians in some way
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
How? Those Labour Zionists like David Ben Gurion were not interested in justice and equality for Palestinians
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Yes, I am fully aware of all that, thanks. But it does not alter the fact that following the Holocaust made support for Zionism at that time far more understandable for many people. I'm not talking about the rationale of political elites, but of people.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Depends on what people you are talking about.
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
And it still is for a lot of people. I saw something yesterday that described the 1967 borders as "Auschwitz borders." My first thought was that this was a disgusting exercise in the exploitation of a gross crime. . . and I still think that. But it's also an exercise that will have traction with a lot of people, and this is where you reach the limits of "Israel is a settler colony." There was no Rhodesian Auschwitz. The Boers did get put in concentration camps, but those didn't have gas chambers.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Not in 1948
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Just read this excellent piece from US liberal mag The Nation
Israel, it argues, is losing the political war - and I think it will lose. The question is, what happens then? An international pariah state whose only friend is the United States, a superpower which may well be going the way of Britain before it?
Israel, it argues, is losing the political war - and I think it will lose. The question is, what happens then? An international pariah state whose only friend is the United States, a superpower which may well be going the way of Britain before it?
PTK
Paul Kegan
The words of shame.
"Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza."
www.gov.uk
"Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza."
We call for further and longer pauses to get aid to Palestinians: UK statement at the UN Security Council
Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
As pointed out at the march today, since the end of the last pause, Israel's daily murder rate has been 40 per cent higher than it was pre-pause. Fuck 'pauses'.The words of shame.
"Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza."
We call for further and longer pauses to get aid to Palestinians: UK statement at the UN Security Council
Explanation of vote by Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza.
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Today's Financial Times had a slightly weird story about the Bank of Palestine rescuing its cash reserves from bombed-out northern Gaza and bringing them in a convoy to the south of the strip, where a handful of banks and ATMs are still working.
I say this is slightly weird because this was (apparently) done with Israeli cooperation. Not sure what the angle is there, tbh.
I say this is slightly weird because this was (apparently) done with Israeli cooperation. Not sure what the angle is there, tbh.
Cid
Proper break this time
Haaretz analysis by Yagil Levy (sociology prof at open university of Israel) on the high proportion of civilians casualties. 61%, using what I think most on here would say are fairly conservative estimates (it only analyses the air attacks from 7th-26th Oct, allows 10% casualties for Hamas misfires etc). As the graun (from which I obviously got the link) points out; 'The ratio is significantly higher than the civilian toll in all the conflicts around the world during the 20th century, in which civilians accounted for about half the dead'. That comparison has its flaws of course, but isn't the main thrust of the article. Which comes to the conclusion that this all seems very deliberate. The author uses the bleak phrase 'collateral benefit'; i.e the deaths of militants are the happy outcome of the slaughter of civilians. Also gives a quiet hint that pilots should probably mutiny. Have only skimmed the article itself as got things to do:
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
In a timeline we don't have access to, in which my imagination writes reality.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Stephen Sizer the C of E vicar who is banned from ministry until 2030, following a complaint against him by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, says this:
"Lord Shaftesbury argued for a greater British presence in Palestine and saw this could be achieved by the sponsorship of a Jewish homeland on both religious and political grounds. British protection of the Jews would give a colonial advantage over France for the control of the Middle East; provide better access to India via a direct land route; and open up new commercial markets for British products.
In 1839, Shaftesbury wrote an anonymous 30 page article for the Quarterly Review, entitled ‘State and Restauration (sic) of the Jews.’ In it Shaftesbury advocated a Jewish national homeland with Jerusalem the capital, remaining under Turkish rule but with British protection. Shaftesbury predicted a new era for the Jews:
‘ … the Jews must be encouraged to return in yet greater numbers and become once more the husbandman of Judea and Galilee … though admittedly a stiff-necked, dark hearted people, and sunk in moral degradation, obduracy, and ignorance of the Gospel … [They are] … not only worthy of salvation but also vital to Christianity’s hope of salvation."
Clearly Sizer, who is a Christian fundamentalist is inclined to conspiracy style reasoning (extrapolating God's wishes - in somewhat similar style to Zionists actually) - is totally opposed to Christian Zionism - which he claims is supported by 40 million American Christian Zionist voters (vs Jewish American voters less than 8 million). Mike Pence is a classic Christian Zionist. Billy Graham was anti Christian Zionist, Jerry Falwell had an executive jet loaned to him by Menachem Begin.
Fully expecting to get shot down for posting this - but personally I would lay the blame for what has happened with Zionism on the Protestant Reformation followed by the Great Awakening - a succession of religious revivals in UK and USA particularly, culminating in the Zionist movement. The first World Zionist Congress was held in 1897, some years before Nazism was invented - although admittedly there had been pogroms in Russia in the 1880s, which no doubt would have been a factor.
Edited to remove 4 dead links
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Which is why I think using historical term like settler colonialism and international legal defined terms like ethnic cleansing are applicable to State of Israel.
As Ilan Pappe said settler colonialism is a big subject. It differs depending on local factors.
Using these definitions is also way of not being anti Semitic. It's saying that this has happened across the world by different systems.
As Ilan Pappe said one of the things about Zionism is that it's settler colonialism came historically late in the day
It also helps point way out of the conflict which would, as Pappe says, involves accepting what actually happened. Decolonising Israel to place where Jews and Palestinians can live together in one country.
The idea of settler colonialism put forward by Pappe and other historians was at odds against the history he was taught when growing up in Israel.
So I'd say it's important and relevant definition. That's not about expelling Israeli Jews. But a different sort of country
It's also preferable imo to using terms like genocide or the frequent comparison with Nazis. Which are politically loaded considering Jewish history.
Last edited:
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
This is the result of the timeline I imagine, that I mentioned above. Sadly I think there's less chance now of it becoming reality than there even was in 1947
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Look on twitter, and you'll see a lot of wankers think the answer is to expel the Israelis back to Europe . . . I don't know who these people think they're helping, but it's not the Palestinians.
Which is another problem with a lot of current "decolonial" chatter, and not only in relation to Israel/Palestine - the opportunity to strike a radical posture is more important than actually thinking through what the concrete realities of the situation are.
A lot of Israelis are fleeing, apparently, emigrant numbers are exceeding those for immigration - but that's going to leave the hard core behind, the unreconstructed bitter-enders.
As Israel becomes more and more isolated over the next few years, you can see the die-hards deciding that the other lot can die harder.
Which is another problem with a lot of current "decolonial" chatter, and not only in relation to Israel/Palestine - the opportunity to strike a radical posture is more important than actually thinking through what the concrete realities of the situation are.
A lot of Israelis are fleeing, apparently, emigrant numbers are exceeding those for immigration - but that's going to leave the hard core behind, the unreconstructed bitter-enders.
As Israel becomes more and more isolated over the next few years, you can see the die-hards deciding that the other lot can die harder.
_Russ_
Never not Knowingly Misunderstood
I doubt those fleeing as you put it will be a significant enough number to change the demographic significantly.
Isolation is also a bt of a non problem for Israel, the major political powers continue to back them and I honestly don't see that changing.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Israel is run by die hards now. I don't see how it can get much worse for Palestinians
Says that emigration rise/ looking into emigration by getting EU passport pre dated Hamas attack. It was due to rise of right in Israel. And the subsequent protests. Not directly the Palestine issue.
Getting an EU passport was a good insurance back up.
So its not the fault of "decolonial chatter" making life in Israel so untenable that people feel they need to leave
"Decolonial chatter" You are mixing up twitter with the work of respected Israeli Jewish and Palestinian historians.
They have studied the concrete reality of what happened and how it effects today.
I dont read much Twitter as its not helpful.
Historically people have left Israel before. In 60s when there was economic downturn.
A younger generation might see an Israel run by hard right as not somewhere they want to live. Like my Polish friends who came here. Preferred living in UK than a Poland run by socially conservative governments.
I dont see Israel being isolated in sense of political and military aid. US and UK plus some EU countries support Israel in various ways. I do not see this ending soon. So no I do not see Israel being isolated any time soon in a practical sense. World public opinion yes due to the bombing of Gaza.
Last edited:
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
No idea who’s behind this but it’s being shared a bit on Twitter. Seems a little privileged to me to expect people who can’t afford it to not leave the house on Monday…
Similar threads
