- Supreme Court's decision entrenches racial segregation; 434 small communities in Israel, or 43% of all residential areas, will be allowed to close their doors to Arab citizens of the state [of Israel].
- [Leila Farsakh, associate professor of Political Science at University of Massachusetts] notes that settlers [in the west bank] continued to be governed by Israeli laws, and that a different system of military law was enacted "to regulate the civilian, economic and legal affairs of Palestinian inhabitants."
- Status
I'll provide an example for you.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181210-knesset-approves-200-communities-where-arabs-are-banned/
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,210
we hear there was a lot of joy when a tree caught fire on the hill ... lsn't that the same mindset that there should be a new temple erasing all before it ?
also the perfect place to ask , now that ı will star studying Kabala or anything like that but our "Muslims" claim there is a 74 year limit after the beginning of lsrael and there is no realization by next year , you people will never be able to rule the world ; which explains the accelaration ?
also the perfect place to ask , now that ı will star studying Kabala or anything like that but our "Muslims" claim there is a 74 year limit after the beginning of lsrael and there is no realization by next year , you people will never be able to rule the world ; which explains the accelaration ?
Absolution
King
Racial segregation is such a twist of what it really is. I opened your link, downloaded the specific court ruling and read through it. Nothing in the original law nor in the ruling states that Arabs are not allowed to any community.
The state (parliament or court) does not segregate againt anyone based one faith or ethnicity, in this case.
The law allows certain small communities to not accept a person who seems unfitting to their lifestyle.
The court rejected a petition and decided to keep the law open for interpretation by the communities themselves. Thus, effectively allowing some cases of refusal on a basis of nationality.
A major reason for the reject of the petition was, if you read the ruling - that the law had yet to be enforced in a way that harmed anyone. The president of the supreme court actually invited the petitioners to petition again in the future when there will be a conrete issue to discuss. In short - the petition is theoretical, come back at a later time when you have a live example.
If the above reason seem questionable to you - in the ruling they claim that this logic is based on Americam law, and they refer to some sources, among them:
Laurence H. Tribe, AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 338 (3rd ; ed. 2000)
Anyway, according to the discussed law, the refused person could actually be gay, ultra-orthodox, arab, jew, or just a fan of a rival football team, it doesn't matter.
All of these are equal in front of this law.
The state does not segregate based on ethnicity or faith.
Some communities can indeed be accused of racism. Many of those may be accused of segregating Arabs.
But maybe the other way around also happens if Jews opted to live in Arab villages? I don't think it has been tried however...
The case of ultra orthodox Jews' attempts to move into mostly secular towns is also discussed in the Israeli public.
That is for now, I'll come back later to address your other example.
Last edited:
Yeah, but how frequently is it used to exclude Jews compared to Arabs?
There are plenty more examples here.
Absolution
King
While I have no data, it seems fair to assume that it is more often enforced against Arabs.
But it is also fair to assume that fewers Jews ever tried to move into an Arab village.
Thus the difference can also just be proportional. But again, I have no data here.
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,859
citing American constitutional law as precedent is not a good look since we managed both a massive scale genocide and chattel slavery under those same laws.
Absolution
King
What does it have to do with genociding?
It is about juriridical logic.
I get it if it's just a cynical sidenote, but if not, then it seems that you all keep taking insignificant parts of my comments and only challenge those in response, instead of getting the major point that has been dicussed -
Israeli law does not defer between citizens of different ethnic or religious backgrounds.
Can you marry a Palestinian and help them get Israeli citizenship through that marriage? How does that compare to marrying a non-Palestinian to do the same?
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,859
Your nation is committing slow motion genocide with the help of a bias and illogical legal system, so using our system as precedent actually does make sense, since we did the same thing. I'm assuming the judicial logic is that until there is an effected party there is no room for litigation, the "must have standing" to be a plaintiff kind of rule. Except in this case it seems that the discrimination is constant and largely unspoken, ie cultural discrimination. Anyways Idc what you do with your hateful little state, I jsut want to stop propping it up with my tax dollars.
Also you ignored my questions about Netanyahu in particular and your nation's long term vision more broadly. So I'm jsut going to assume your goal here is to pick the parts of the conversation you like and feel empowered to address and then ignore anything more "uncomfortable".
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,060
I don't think you can get an answer out of anyone there, they are too defensive even while aware of the situation. There is no long-term vision. I mean, the PM there just deliberately escalated a land theft into a shooting war by ordering violent repression directed against people at the al-aqsa mosque, a guaranteed way to start a small war. All so he could hope to remain in power and escape conviction for bribery.
There is no national strategy in Israel, It's a decomposed political system, going on on inertia. Same old combo with no end in sight: ethno-state discrimination, colonial land-grab with half the population made up of disenfranchised "natives", are together incompatible with the current world situation and morals, hence Israel cannot execute the only strategy that would be a "win": exterminating the unwanted palestinians as so often has been done in the past to unwanted groups. Cannot genocide the palestinians, cannot back off from the colonial land grab, and cannot quit the ethno-state thing either. It's either a future of slow rot or external shock forcing the abandonment of one of those two incompatible aims.
There is no national strategy in Israel, It's a decomposed political system, going on on inertia. Same old combo with no end in sight: ethno-state discrimination, colonial land-grab with half the population made up of disenfranchised "natives", are together incompatible with the current world situation and morals, hence Israel cannot execute the only strategy that would be a "win": exterminating the unwanted palestinians as so often has been done in the past to unwanted groups. Cannot genocide the palestinians, cannot back off from the colonial land grab, and cannot quit the ethno-state thing either. It's either a future of slow rot or external shock forcing the abandonment of one of those two incompatible aims.
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,859
I completely agree with the first part, I'm not sure how else an honest broker to parse this transgression. Essentially even if you blame hamas for firing first, it was Netanyahu who opened the door for them very happily.
The second part I think is more mixed. Both sides wanted a state and the Jewish side won the initial fight back in the 30s and continued fights increased their position and made peace and stability more impossible as time went on. . . Both sides are now guilty of reckless violence and death spiral politics constantly now. Its unbearable to watch and even more unbearable to finance, even if my part is pennies or less.
Absolution
King
Sorry, I've been asked a little too many questions here, and had no enough time or energy to address all.
It is not about content though. I'd be glad to discuss various issues that you all bring up.
So I guess you refered to the following commet of yours
Do you believe that hamas started this recent escalation?
No.
Before we get into who started it, we first have to determind how it started, or what the starting point is.
This issue was a big debate in Israel in the past few weeks, and it still is. My impression is that the situation was just too complex and gradual to tell.
A bit of what I can pull quickly from my memory of the past month or two:
- Fatah leadership acts to cancel the upcoming elections for the PA. It is assumed that fear of a possible Hamas victory was the cause.
- Two religious-Zionist tutors are attacked in Jaffa. The event brings wide public attention to a very complex situation which had up until then been quite hidden from public attention -
In recent years, several groups of religious-Zionists are acting to increase Jewish presence in Jaffa. It is deriven from the same motives that drive religious settlers to Hebron or Shechem. But simply not in an internationally disputed territory, so it gets less attention.
Many local Arabs are expectedly against such a process, fearing of a Judified Jaffa. The policy of many of those religious-Zionist activist is to spot some Arabs who are in financial troubles, and buy their real estates in an overpriced sum. Those specific two tutors were attacked during a real estate survey, on their way to see a place, so was reported. This event ignited a short wave of protests and minimal clashes between Arabs and religious-Zionists in Jaffa. - A new Tic-Toc trend of Arabs in Jerusalem - hit an ultra-orthodox Jew and post the video. I don't know how popular these videos really were, but they were talked about in TV at the time, and contributed to the general atmosphere.
- Eviction of residents from real estates in Shimon HaSadiq / Sheikh Jarrah in Jerusalem. This is according to a court rule which states that these real estates were historically owned by Jews who escaped Palestine following the Jordanian conquest in 48'-49'. The court ruled the current residents as illegal residents (who live there without permission of the owners). The seemingly civil disputed is long ago a national one in practice, since those illegal residents are Arabs. Religious-Zionist activists see this encounter in the same way that those in Jaffa did - a struggle to Judify important areas of the land of Israel. Some local riots started following these events as well.
- New Israeli MP moves his office to this very neighbourhood of Shimon HaSadiq. Worth noting that it is an extreme right wing politician, the most radical right-winger in the Knesset for years. His recent induction into the Knesset was very controvesial in Israeli society, regardless of the recent events. This action of him didn't help pacifiying the situation, to say the least....
- Israeli police limits access to Muslim holy sites towards the end of Ramadan. The already existing tension in Jerusalem and the traditional sensitivity of the end of Ramadan caused the police to increase its presence in sensitive areas and to limit access to Al-Aqsa mosque to 10,000 people. This action, along with further blazing by radical Muslim preachers (including some Hamas activity), led to much wider riots throughout Jerusalem, between Muslims and police forces.
- Jerusalem Day - an annual national day of Israel, which happened to take place this year right in the midst of this whole mess. For this reason, police and the governments considered measures of limitations on the traditional flag march in Jerusalem. The march did reach the Western Wall however, leading to the infamous photo of Israeli nationalists allegedly celebrating a fire at the al-Aqsa moque. In reality they were traditionally celebrating Jerusalem Day, with the fire in the background being just a tree caught in fire by a firecracker lauchned during the Muslim riots. The photo, however, did no good to reduce tension...
- Hamas in Gaza sees this as an opportunity to present itself as the Saviour of al-Aqsa. With the controversy over the elections in the PA - an escalation is in their favour. Rocket launches gradually increase, eventually reaching Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, with an unprecedented amount of longer-range launches at one evening.
- Israel launches an air-strike operation in Gaza, lasting 11 days. With all the good old stunts - massive rocket launchings, Iron Dome at work, buildings collapse in Gaza, anti-tank attack against a patroling IDF vehicle by the borderline, Hamas militants reportedly buried alive in a bombed undergrouns tunnel-system. You know.
Who started it? Very hard to tell. In this complex situation, I guess the question is irrelevant, anyway.
What do you believe the long term peace should look like?
What does "should" mean?
One that I am pleased with? Or one that is least likely to collapse?
Or am I just expected to reflect Israeli public view?
Personally I can't quite see a long standing peace that appeases both sides.
While in the short term it may be Arab Islamists (such as Hamas) that are unlikely to be satisfied witht the existence of Israel; in the long term I see the Jewish and Zionist dream of the hearland of Israel that could be a problem.
I mean - our goal in this Zionist dream is to live in the traditional Jewish or Israeli lands - which are centrerd around Judea (see the attached file). This is, sadly, among the most problematic areas for a Jewish state in terms of current demography. Unless a mutual exchange of population is made, I can not see the Zionist dream really appeased.
Regarding Arab nationalism or Islamism - I understand the lands of roughly 67' Israel as of less real traditional importance to them (compared to the traditional Jewish view), so I guess in the long term, Israel's existence can be somewhat accepted by them. And hopefully Hamas and the likes' aspiration to remove the whole of Israel off the map will decrease with time if peace and prosperity exist. Quite similiar to what happened between Israel and the Emirates.
But back to the shorter term, and the pragmatic peace ideas - I think that many Israelis will accept a greater form of Arab sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, if it brings peace.
As for now - that one condition makes sense in the West Bank, but does not in Gaza Strip.
Hence, my opinion is that peace in the near future can only be achieved if we split the Palestinian cause into two.
The West Bank - They seem quite ready for running a state. Personally I would give them an altered version of the traditional West Bank borders for a fully independent state. One sided withrawal, with IDF and America providing security asistance to them, in order to cut off potetntial terror. IDF's response to every border provocation should be stiff though. The old city of Jeruslame will remaine under Israeli legal control, in any scenario, in mine and vast majority of Israelis' view.
Two issues about the Jewish settlements, that may be in a danger of immediate slaughter once IDF withraws:
- The altered borders will opt to give Israel legal control over Jewish population centres that are somewhat along the border of the West Bank. Ariel as the greatest example. In exchange, Arab settlements on the other side of the border could be added to the new state. But this must be volluntary, after a local referandum in each one of those, as we should not just kick out citizens who wish to remain with us.
- Deep Jewish settlements should be given the option to return to legal Israel with government housing funds, or to become citizens of the new state. Israeli security forces be stationed and patrol in these settlements where Jews chose to say, for a starting period, as part of the agreement. IDF would be very sensitive to any harm to these Jews.
Now that Trump's crazy gifts to Israel are over, time is possibly once again on their side.
The same claim could be said againt Netanyahu though, but the discussion here is in a theoretical scenario in which I plan Israel's strategy, and not him. And I am not willing to explain the policy of a leader that I am actively protesting against.
Anyway, as mentioned above - I am really not conviced that the Arab population of the West Bank will be pleased with the solution in the short term, and thus it is highly expected that their state will collapse early due to anti-Israel (or even anti-Fatah) violence, that leads to IDF's invasion, and end of the dream.
The Gaza Strip - Here, in my view, the only way towards peace passes through a heavy war. Possibly with greater international aid after a peace is achieved in the West Bank, Israel must eradicate any Hamas miltary ability and kill all of its leaders. A success would be something like opetaion "Defensive Shield" of the West Bank. Hopefully with minimal casualties, but it seems unlikely due of they way Hamas is deliberatley rooted inside the population.
Afterwards, I have no idea how to make sure that the Fatah or any other friendly regime manages to hold the Gaza Strip. It will have to be worked out with Arab and international diplomatic aid.
Alternativley, to avoid war, Israel may be able to use great international pressure to bring down Hamas' rule in Gaza once peace is achieved in the West Bank. But if they survive the blockade, it seems unlikely that any kind of pressure brings them down.
Either way, after a more friendly rule is set up in Gaza, the blockade will be lifted. After some reparation years, a state could be established in there. They may merge with the state of West Bank, if they wish to.
It has become increasingly clear that Arab Israelis are going to be a tiny and very low rank class citizen
I repreat my stance, that this is an absolute nonsense.
Social cautiousness and discrimination do exist.
But the state of the law do not segregate, other then various anecdotal claims that may need to be addressed, or are sometimes untrue.
Social discrimination is not going to make the second class citizens. Actually they enjoy some level of affirmative actions in academy and few workplaces. A recent political movement by Mansur Abbas is aiming to improve Arab particiaption in political life in Israel in order to reduce crime and povery in the Arab society.
There are many reasons for optimism, and hope that the recent event won't ruin everything.
Attachments
Last edited:
You are more optimistic than I am. 
of course, America has an equal protection clause under the law too, so institutional racism is done and over
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/21/arab-guilty-rape-consensual-sex-jew
Absolution
King
I'm not. I do not think any of these initiatives can happen, if any of the forseeable contenders become prime ministers.You are more optimistic than I am.
They are all too soft people, not brave strategists.
Lexicus
Deity
I notice this story ignores evictions of Palestinians from East Jerusalem and the little pogroms that were going on against Arab-owned business there...
Absolution
King
Did you bother to reach number four?
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Face it, you live in the worlds biggest clusterfudge
There are no good solutions, just an endless cycle of attack and retaliation.
There are no good solutions, just an endless cycle of attack and retaliation.
Lexicus
Deity
Must've gone right by it. I admit, I was looking closer to the start of the list for that item, as I assumed you were presenting them in chronological order.
The beatings will continue until morale improves, eh?
The Jim Crow laws in the United States rarely ever said anything explicitly about black people either, yet are widely regarded as a textbook example of de jure racial segregation.
If you don't understand that a law can create racial segregation without mentioning race, you have some learnin to do.
- Status
Similar threads
