[RD] The Israel/Palestine Quarantine Thread

[Lexicus]

It took me a little to figure out that this is, literally, a parody, and if there are specific cases where the media makes a mountain out of a molehill it would perhaps help you to link these, instead of satire. I don't mind you linked it, but it's like me wandering into the US Election 2020 thread with something from The Hard Times or similar.

I've looked at that satire and I'm not at all certain that it's making the point Mouthwash wants us to think it's making. It seems more likely to me that it's a parody of the general way that media coverage fixates on trivial symbolic issues instead of reporting on the substantive issues.

More generally I'm always annoyed when anyone treats the Palestinian authority as particularly representative of the Palestinians. Of course, it's not like there is no historical precedent for imperial powers setting up dysfunctional kleptocratic puppets to mediate their rule and then pointing to that very dysfunction as proof that the conquered people cannot manage their own affairs (thus the empire is a necessary evil or even benevolent).

 

[Mouthwash]

If you replaced "Arabism" with "Zionism" in that sentence you'd be called an anti semite.

Zionism is about giving a group of people their self-expression. Arabism is about telling other groups of people who and what they are. Turnabout's fair play, it seems to me.

I've looked at that satire and I'm not at all certain that it's making the point Mouthwash wants us to think it's making. It seems more likely to me that it's a parody of the general way that media coverage fixates on trivial symbolic issues instead of reporting on the substantive issues.

No, the intention is to mock Palestinian propagandists. The guy has a Twitter; he's perfectly clear about it.

More generally I'm always annoyed when anyone treats the Palestinian authority as particularly representative of the Palestinians.

The PA is far less violent and irredentist, yes.

Of course, it's not like there is no historical precedent for imperial powers setting up dysfunctional kleptocratic puppets to mediate their rule and then pointing to that very dysfunction as proof that the conquered people cannot manage their own affairs (thus the empire is a necessary evil or even benevolent).

No, no one here cares if the Palestinians collapse into anarchy. But the way they deal with that anarchy is by focusing on Israel (same with Lebanon and Syria).

 

[Gorbles]

The claim is that Israel is being disproportionately criticized. Even if you thought all of those criticisms were valid, it's hard to see why Turkey, China or Iran aren't getting more.

To opine about China for a moment, because they're a lot better at not letting people know what's going on. And no, that's not me praising them. "better" in this case is not good. It took a lot of reporting to get the horrific treatment of the Uyghurs into the mainstream. These issues are massively complicated, and often fall along political and ideological lines (i.e. bias). That said, you're not going to find leftists defending China in this regard, nor are you going to infer sinophobia when people talk about it. This is why you raising these examples are a classic red herring - it doesn't matter if the UN, or myself in this thread, endlessly speaks out against these examples you keep throwing out. What matters is you consider action against Israel in this context to either be laughable, unworthy of serious thought (as you've already referred to the UN, earlier in the thread), or inferred to be antisemitic.

The rest of your reasoning boils down to "Palestinians bad", which is entirely reductive (and racist). I mean, it fits with what you post, and I don't believe you're being disingenuous with it. I believe that is what you believe, and that follows through to all of your arguments I've argued against in this thread. I believe I understand where you sit on this, and I disagree with it emphatically.

 

[Traitorfish]

It's just strange that someone with anarchist leanings would care about Jews settling in an uninhabited area.

You surely appreciate that there is a difference between settling in an uninhabited area, and that settlement being used as a pretext for a state to annex its neighbours lands?

If the settlers went through the Palestinian courts trying to claim some sort of homesteader's rights, the conversation would be very different.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Look Arabism is bad and evil and groups a bunch of people together whilst Zionism is good and moral and groups a bunch of people together but they're jewish and mainly from the west so that's ok

 

[AmazonQueen]

Zionism is about giving a group of people their self-expression. Arabism is about telling other groups of people who and what they are. Turnabout's fair play, it seems to me.and irredentist, yes.

And yet if Jewish people don't toe the party line they get called self-hating. So much for self-expression.

 

[Mouthwash]

You surely appreciate that there is a difference between settling in an uninhabited area, and that settlement being used as a pretext for a state to annex its neighbours lands?

If the settlers went through the Palestinian courts trying to claim some sort of homesteader's rights, the conversation would be very different.

In what sense do the Palestinian courts have any greater right to uninhabited stretches of land than Israeli courts? A nationalist would say that their right comes from the state having held that land before being conquered, but there has never been a Palestinian state. It's questionable that a Palestinian national identity even existed prior to 1967.

Look Arabism is bad and evil and groups a bunch of people together whilst Zionism is good and moral and groups a bunch of people together but they're jewish and mainly from the west so that's ok

Israeli Jews are not mostly from the West.

And yet if Jewish people don't toe the party line they get called self-hating. So much for self-expression.

Jews could meaningfully be called a community, unlike the combined populations of Arabia, the Levant, and the entire northern section of the African continent.

Jews weren't forced to become 'Israelis' at gunpoint either, unlike them. We simply exist, and want a home for ourselves. I'm tired of having to excuse my existence.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Except you kicked other people out of theirs, prevented them from returning, forced them into ever smaller areas and then act surprised when they respond with aggression, throwing up your hands and writing them off as savages uniquely incapable of living peacefully

 

[Gorbles]

I'm tired of having to excuse my existence.

Your existence is self-evident. You're here posting on a web forum, nobody's asking you to excuse anything. Nobody's denying you exist.

But likewise, you have a home for yourself. It's not a matter of "wanting" one. You already have one. If you want more land, that land comes from somewhere else. It doesn't just magically appear when you want it.

 

[Samson]

In what sense do the Palestinian courts have any greater right to uninhabited stretches of land than Israeli courts? A nationalist would say that their right comes from the state having held that land before being conquered, but there has never been a Palestinian state. It's questionable that a Palestinian national identity even existed prior to 1967.

International law. Israel captured the west bank in war, and are barred from population movements into the captured land. Whether anyone was living on the exact bit of land is irrelevant.

 

[Mouthwash]

Your existence is self-evident. You're here posting on a web forum, nobody's asking you to excuse anything. Nobody's denying you exist.

Arab nationalists and left-wing antisemites believe that the Jews are not a people.

But likewise, you have a home for yourself. It's not a matter of "wanting" one. You already have one. If you want more land, that land comes from somewhere else. It doesn't just magically appear when you want it.

Poland was not a Jewish homeland, nor is America.

International law. Israel captured the west bank in war, and are barred from population movements into the captured land. Whether anyone was living on the exact bit of land is irrelevant.

The West Bank has never been part of any recognized sovereign state. Essentially it's still part of Mandatory Palestine.

Also, the Oslo Accords are, as I've pointed out, a recognition of the legality of Israeli settlements in the area.

 

[Gorbles]

Arab nationalists and left-wing antisemites believe that the Jews are not a people.

You're not defending yourself to these people here in this thread. If you're tired of something you're subject to outside of CFC, nobody here can help with that, nor is it relevant when discussing this with us. It's your personal life experience in that case, and while completely anecdotal, nobody can argue with it.

Poland was not a Jewish homeland, nor is America.

Nor did I say either of those were. Israel exists. It already exists. The entire context of this recent discussion is taking more land than Israel already has sovereignty over.

 

[Mouthwash]

Nor did I say either of those were. Israel exists. It already exists. The entire context of this recent discussion is taking more land than Israel already has sovereignty over.

I was talking to AmazonQueen and Cloud_Strife.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I was talking to AmazonQueen and Cloud_Strife.

Which of us claimed Poland or the US was a Jewish homeland?

 

[Traitorfish]

In what sense do the Palestinian courts have any greater right to uninhabited stretches of land than Israeli courts? A nationalist would say that their right comes from the state having held that land before being conquered, but there has never been a Palestinian state. It's questionable that a Palestinian national identity even existed prior to 1967.

The uninhabited stretches of land are internationally recognised as being situated in Palestine, and not in Israel, and the Palestinian Authority is internationally recognised as having jurisdiction in Palestinian territory. That the new inhabitants are citizens of Israel is neither here nor there; if a Bengali citizen decided to take up residence in a patch of barren Canadian tundra, that tundra is not transmuted into Bengali territory. Lack of habitation does not turn territory into terra nullis.

 

[Mouthwash]

Which of us claimed Poland or the US was a Jewish homeland?

I misinterpreted what he said (he really wasn't being clear).

The uninhabited stretches of land are internationally recognised as being situated in Palestine, and not in Israel,

No, there is no universally recognized State of Palestine.

and the Palestinian Authority is internationally recognised as having jurisdiction in Palestinian territory.

A complete falsehood. They have jurisdiction in Area A and partial jurisdiction in Area B.

That the new inhabitants are citizens of Israel is neither here nor there; if a Bengali citizen decided to take up residence in a patch of barren Canadian tundra, that tundra is not transmuted into Bengali territory. Lack of habitation does not turn territory into terra nullis.

That's not what I said. The entirety of the West Bank has no sovereign state, and therefore it has a similar status to Mandatory Palestine. You can still criticize Israeli settlers for taking land that actually belongs to Palestinians or for intruding upon Palestinian society, but neither of those criticisms apply when the area is uninhabited.

 

[Mouthwash]

I wonder how Omar/Tlaib apologists will respond to this one, or this one. You don't retweet this sort of thing without at least being fairly comfortable around antisemitic material.

 

[Senethro]

Do you want them to stop struggling with your boot on their neck or what?

 

[Mouthwash]

Do you want them to stop struggling with your boot on their neck or what?

I'll bring up your complaint at the next Elders' meeting.

 

[Senethro]

What is it that you want though? Your nation is de facto occupying theirs, so you have to expect they're going to get slightly peeved about it.