• Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    What matters isn’t who came first. What matters is that no one has the right to expel a human from a land they’re living in. That is the core of the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

    I am pro Palestine, but have no issue with the increase of Jewish migrations in the 19th century. The problem is not Jewish migration. It is the fact that Israel expelled Palestinians from their homes, murdered them, suffocated them, and made their lives miserable.

    And this is the same thing that was done to the native people of the modern day Americas.

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      This is an honest question, is Wikipedia just wrong on that? Because there they write that Palestine also expelled all Jews and that they moved to Israel for that reason (because they weren’t allowed in Palestine). And also they write that Hamas specifically want all Jews to be gone.

      If Wikipedia is wrong, where do you get your information from?

      • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Wikipedia is kind of wrong in the sense that there’s always been Palestinian Jews.

        The issue is that due to Zionism, a ton of European Jews moved into the region starting at the turn of the last century and accelerating following the Holocaust.

        Said Jews then set about building a thriving western-style industrialized democracy that was opposed at every turn by an Arab and Islamic population that opposed its very existence on what can only be thought of as religious grounds.

        All of which can only be taken as an indication of how deeply corrupting and counter-progressive are virtually all forms of institutionalized organized religion.

        Fuck all of them. Organized religion sucks ass and should rightly be seen as a vestige of the past.

        • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Said Jews then set about building a thriving western-style industrialized democracy that was opposed at every turn by an Arab and Islamic population that opposed its very existence

          I am pretty sure that they were concerned about being expelled from their homes and massacred, and not because they hated “thriving industrialized democracy”.

    • ThatFembyWho@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Didn’t Arabs and Palestinians just flat out refuse to coexist with a Jewish state from the start? The international community proposed a solution and they refused to accept it.

      Certainly if they chose to fight, and lost, then they have to face the consequences which might include losing their land.

      That’s hardy unprecedented, the very city I live in was largely founded by seizing lands from the British during the American war of independence, because they lost…

      I would say while yes it’s “wrong” to kick someone off their land, both parties have to at least be reasonable and willing to compromise when you have a complex ethnic and religious issue. Otherwise conflict is inevitable.

      None of which is to excuse any war crimes committed by either side. I just think it’s more nuanced than “israel bad apartheid state”.

      • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Didn’t Arabs and Palestinians just flat out refuse to coexist with a Jewish state from the start?

        “coexist with a Jewish state” is a bit of a contradictory statement. Arabs coexisted with Jews fine prior to the Zionist project. A Jewish state is by definition a state exclusive to Jews. That’s the opposite of coexistnece by definition, and yes that is exactly why Arabs (Muslims and Christians alike) refused it.

        Certainly if they chose to fight,

        Resist*. they chose to resist occupation, expulsion from their homes, massacre and genocide.

        fight, and lost, then they have to face the consequences which might include losing their land.

        Ahh, so if someone fights you for your land, destroys your home and genocides your people, then they’ve earned it?? Well I should not be surprised that someone who lives in a nation founded on genocide thinks this is okay.

        yes it’s “wrong” to kick someone off their land, both parties have to at least be reasonable and willing to compromise

        “hey man, I know I just took over your home and burned your family alive in front of your eyes. But you gotta be reasonable here and be willing to compromise!”

        What more of a compromise do you need beyond coexistence? That’s all Palestinians have asked for, and Israel continues to deny them basic rights, no matter how peaceful they are.

        And I end with: Israel bad apartheid state. It is truly that simple.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    What Israel is doing to Palestine today is exactly what America did and is doing to their indigenous population. Why do you think they’re allies?

    • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean, the US sucks, but they don’t just support settler colonial states for its own sake. They support Israel because it’s strategically useful to have a US friendly state in the middle east that’s small enough that they will basically do what we say (unlike Saudi Arabia). Also a significant portion of Republicans in congress think that Israel/Palestine being controlled by Jews is a necessary precondition for the Rapture. The US is more indifferent to the genocide of the Palestinians than anything, which imo is just as bad, but it’s important to look at the material causes for things instead of just saying “these two countries have similar ideologies so they’ll be allies”.

      • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        All of that is true AND they have an ideological solidarity. Think of it like this: If there was a genuine landback movement and the Illegal Occupation of Palestine was seen as what it is, then people are going to start looking at the Americas and noticing similarities. For a country that was built on the same settler colonial genocide, claims to be democratic when it’s clear they’re not, and subjugation of minorities. Oops.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I wouldn’t say that. The Democrats at least are pissed at the continued encroachment of Israeli settlers into the West Bank, which is making any sort of peaceful resolution more and more difficult. And anyone with familiarity in the situation knows that is by design of the genocidal and ethnic cleansing settler movement.

          • Catradora-Stalinism☭@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            I wouldn’t say that. The Democrats at least are pissed at the continued encroachment of Israeli settlers into the West Bank

            their billions of dollars they give each year to israel says otherwise

  • NKVDawg@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Completely different things. 'Muricans captured that land in a fair fight, so it’s theirs now by the right of conquest.

    • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      An outspoken supporter of genocide and colonialism? Yeah that’s a ban from me.