The real apartheid state.

[Tahuti]

What is so "fair" about even mentioning that instead of the mass exodus which occurred immediately before and after the state of Israel was founded?

I was referring to the 1920s and 30s.

 

[Masada]

I was using the term to describe groups that advocate for a black state nation state, which is essentially what Ghana has and was what the article seemed to be doing. I don't think the term has to necessarily mean what you say it does, if not, I apologize for the misuse.

They're not advocating for a black nation state though because the Liberians sure as hell don't want to include all blacks just Liberian ones. It's simply Liberian nationalism which has a racial component.

Two thousand years later? Yeah, you hit the statute of limitations a little while ago on claim to that land being "Yours". And the people who have been living in the land since you left have a pretty huge claim to the land being theirs, if they've been there for 1000+ years.

It's worse than that. Palestinians didn't move in, they converted from Christianity and Judaism to Islam.

If we're going to go by this logic, the native people of Australia, by C_H's logic, should be able to evict him out of his land/house and force him to live elsewhere. Ancestral home and all that!

The argument is also way stronger because Europeans only arrived a short while ago.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I was referring to the 1920s and 30s.

Sorry. I don't see any mass deportations or ethnic cleansing mentioned in the Wiki article during that period. Source?

 

[Tahuti]

Sorry. I don't see any mass deportations or ethnic cleansing mentioned in the Wiki article during that period. Source?

There weren't any mass deportations. However, I was responding to JollyRoger. There may however have been small scale evictions of Arabs (and Jews) performed by the British Mandate, similar to how the Israeli army now destroys Palestinian homes.

It's worse than that. Palestinians didn't move in, they converted from Christianity and Judaism to Islam.

I believe you that this is largely true, but you sure there wasn't anyone from the Arabian Peninsula?

 

[mrdab]

I love how majority of posters here defend those who start a war and break international law.

 

[ParkCungHee]

"My long gone ancestors lived in these lands two thousand here ago, now I have the right to return here in sufficient number to make this my land" is pretty much insane troll logic.

Damnit, I'm entitled to my 3 and half square feet of land that is the due right of every son of Eire!

 

[Formaldehyde]

I love how majority of posters here defend those who start a war and break international law.

You mean like the Suez Crisis, and not even trying to fulfill the part of that agreement to create a separate state for Palestinians?

 

[useless]

The argument is also way stronger because Europeans only arrived a short while ago.

So the real question in this thread is; Why haven't you given up your home yet C_H and "returned" back to Europe? If you think this is unfair and wrong of us to ask you this, why do you expect palestinians who have lived most if not all of their lives to suddenly "return" back to the surrounding arab countries?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

If we're going to go by this logic, the native people of Australia, by C_H's logic, should be able to evict him out of his land/house and force him to live elsewhere. Ancestral home and all that!

I considered making that comparison, as a matter of fact.

Yes, I suppose it is nonsense.

But it's a common enough notion. And people do, mistaken though they might be, feel some ties to certain pieces of land.

And, after all, you are what you eat and drink; so in a kind of literal sense people are the product of the land they live on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terroir

Sure it's a sensible enough notion. And there's nothing wrong with the Jews wanting to return to the land of their ancestors, either! That's fine and dandy. If that were the issue by itself, I would tell the Arabs to just get over it. But it was so much more than that. Israel was always seen by the Zionist ideologues not merely as a homeland, but a national homeland; that is, it was their land, and no one else's. It's no different from nationalist attitudes in other countries; Poland behaved similarly toward Belorussians and Germans in its borders in the Interwar Period, as did Romania toward Hungarians, and there are many other examples as well.

The strange thing is, in the 19th century European Jews were the only ones who consistently thought internationally. Edmund Wilson gives this as the reason for their ability to contribute so many minds toward the creation of socialism and communism, and explains that phenomenon by noting that everywhere in Europe Jews were not regarded as truly "of" any country, because of that ethnic nationalism at work. And in the interwar period, this phenomenon was taken to the extreme. It even managed to influence Soviet policy through the creation of korenizatsiya, and they were supposed to be all about rejecting those things. Nazism is ethnic nationalism taken to its most insane extreme. And yet after the Second World War, as the rest of the world was just getting over all this ethnic nationalism fever, is precisely when the Jews decide that giving ethnic nationalism a go is the best idea. They were light-years ahead of the rest of the Europe for so long, and now they've descended into the maddening barbarism of the ideology which nearly cost their race its existence. I don't understand it.

 

[mrdab]

You mean like the Suez Crisis, and not even trying to fulfill the part of that agreement to create a separate state for Palestinians?

I always thought it was Egypt and Jordan who controlled Gaza Strip and West Bank respectively in 1948-1967 (with short intervals).
In related note Gaza is nowadays de facto independent (not ruled by Israel) and PA could have gotten control over about 90% of West Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit - but for some reason its leaders found it's not enough and soon after started an uprising because Israeli politician visited holiest site of Judaism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada

 

[Goodfella]

They're not advocating for a black nation state though because the Liberians sure as hell don't want to include all blacks just Liberian ones. It's simply Liberian nationalism which has a racial component.

Right, but I was thinking more in lines with the first sentence of the wiki for black nationalism: "Black nationalism (BN) advocates a racial definition (or redefinition) of national identity." Not that it's an Israel for blacks, but that in order to be a citizen of Liberia, you need to be black, which is basically a racial definition of Liberian citizenship. But either way, I was simply using the word to describe this:

Liberian nationalism which has a racial component

 

[Formaldehyde]

I always thought it was Egypt and Jordan who controlled Gaza Strip and West Bank respectively in 1948-1967 (with short intervals).

It doesn't matter who controlled it during whatever period because, according to the agreement you think is "international law" and hence apparently inviolate, anything green or pink should now be Palestine, as it should have been in 1948.

In related note Gaza is nowadays de facto independent (not ruled by Israel) and PA could have gotten control over about 90% of West Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit - but for some reason its leaders found it's not enough and soon after started an uprising because Israeli politician visited holiest site of Judaism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada

There is invariably some excuse that the Palestinians are solely to blame.

And I'm sure those who live in Gaza will be extrememly pleased to know they are now free to go wherever they wish, while importing and exporting anything of their choosing, being so "independent" of Israel and all...

 

[classical_hero]

Don't forget that Egypt has blockaded the Gazans also.

@uesless, I have never seen you once complain about the treatment of Jews in Arabic lands, after they were ethnically cleansed from those lands.
The difference is that the Jews have always been in the lands before the Arabs come in. There has been a continued presence in the land, so they always has a link to the land.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Don't forget that Egypt has blockaded the Gazans also.

@uesless, I have never seen you once complain about the treatment of Jews in Arabic lands, after they were ethnically cleansed from those lands.
The difference is that the Jews have always been in the lands before the Arabs come in. There has been a continued presence in the land, so they always has a link to the land.

Yes, the entire Middle East belongs to the Jews because like three dozen Jews lived in that village over there before the Ay-rabs

 

[AdamCrock]

Well than let it be done to You, sure go ahead , why not ? I have seen what ... communism can do to You... I have seen what it can do - You do not want to "it" be done to You ? .... oh You want to ? Sure -> Go ahead let it be done hehe... just don't say I did not warn You

 

[timtofly]

I considered making that comparison, as a matter of fact.
Sure it's a sensible enough notion. And there's nothing wrong with the Jews wanting to return to the land of their ancestors, either! That's fine and dandy. If that were the issue by itself, I would tell the Arabs to just get over it. But it was so much more than that. Israel was always seen by the Zionist ideologues not merely as a homeland, but a national homeland; that is, it was their land, and no one else's. It's no different from nationalist attitudes in other countries; Poland behaved similarly toward Belorussians and Germans in its borders in the Interwar Period, as did Romania toward Hungarians, and there are many other examples as well.

The strange thing is, in the 19th century European Jews were the only ones who consistently thought internationally. Edmund Wilson gives this as the reason for their ability to contribute so many minds toward the creation of socialism and communism, and explains that phenomenon by noting that everywhere in Europe Jews were not regarded as truly "of" any country, because of that ethnic nationalism at work. And in the interwar period, this phenomenon was taken to the extreme. It even managed to influence Soviet policy through the creation of korenizatsiya, and they were supposed to be all about rejecting those things. Nazism is ethnic nationalism taken to its most insane extreme. And yet after the Second World War, as the rest of the world was just getting over all this ethnic nationalism fever, is precisely when the Jews decide that giving ethnic nationalism a go is the best idea. They were light-years ahead of the rest of the Europe for so long, and now they've descended into the maddening barbarism of the ideology which nearly cost their race its existence. I don't understand it.

It is called survival of the fittest.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Don't forget that Egypt has blockaded the Gazans also.

Don't forget they stopped doing so when our puppet dictator was removed from office.

 

[Gucumatz]

If we're going to go by this logic, the native people of Australia, by C_H's logic, should be able to evict him out of his land/house and force him to live elsewhere. Ancestral home and all that!

Well why not ?

But I think Mouthwash is confusing the ability of Israel to do the things that it does with what is morally right. Might does not make right. Kind of a shocking thread to be honest though, but interesting reading Mouthwash's opinion.

 

[Masada]

I believe you that this is largely true, but you sure there wasn't anyone from the Arabian Peninsula?

Yeah, there were. The Byzantine Empire accepted quite a few Christian Arabs into the Empire. The Ghassanids being the most notable. But Arabic migration to the Holy Land preceded that on a smaller scale. We have IIRC Arabic names on graves going back quite early. Arabic migration also continued under Islamic rule. But I don't believe it was all that large, especially given that Christians still represented a significant part of the population well into the 1800s. Had migration been large this wouldn't have been the case. Interestingly, Jews were a fairly small minority in the Holy Land under the Romans and during the period of Muslim rule. The former notably banned them from visiting Jerusalem except on Tisha B'Av (?) when they were allowed to come and reflect on the destruction of the Temple.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

It is called survival of the fittest.

Yeah, um...anyone voicing social darwinism is gonna have a tough time with this one.