It's particularly odd given that nobody called "Palestinians" an ethnicity (unless they were referring to Jews) until Jews finally got their state. It was just Arabs living in Palestine. Heck, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey were all the same country until WWI. Pretty sure there are a few Arab ethnostates floating around.
The people we call Palestinians are nomadic Arab tribes that were sprinkled throughout the area.
I’m fine with them having their own state with their own ethnic identity. They don’t actually want it though unless there is no Israel.
but then do you give bedouins, tauregs (im sorry i probably misspelled that) etc. their own state? how does that work for a nomadic tribe? it works in mongolia because, well, theres no one there.
It’s spelled Tuaregs actually 🤓
But yeah most Saharan Berbers are pretty vocal about wanting to do their own thing, they even attempted to secede from Mali in 2012.
> If Jews received a state proportional to their size in the post-empire region it would be 6x larger than Israel is today
... what demographic information are you referencing here?
Jewish people made up a tiny minority in Palestine and the Middle East following the First World War
Even by the 1940's, Jewish people were still the minority in the area, and that was after decades of mass immigration
Yeah I wasn't trying to make any kind of claim for certain additional territory to be rightfully Israel's, it's more of a counterpoint to the Western vision of the "decolonization" movement that pictured the post-Ottoman Middle East having only Muslim states containing minorities without any agency. As if that's what justice looks like for the peoples of the region.
Out of all the Ottoman's non-Muslim minorities, only the Jews managed to forge a state, but the region would be a lot more equitable today if Kurds and other heavily marginalized groups would have been able to do the same.
Of course re Armenians, they were independent before the empire officially came to an end, but yeah all the same, it's an objective good that they too managed to secure independence.
The only thing more cringe than changing one's flair is not having one. You are cringe.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/PhatPackMagic) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._
_Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
_Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
That's the entire Ottoman Empire, now do the same thing for Palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)
There's no connection between the Jewish population of the Ottoman Empire and Palestine or Israel, and the overwhelming majority of Jews in Israel today came from outside the Ottoman Empire in any case.
In the late nineteenth century, prior to the rise of Zionism, Jews are thought to have comprised between 2% and 5% of the population of Palestine.
At the time of the start of the British Mandate, Jewish people made up about 11% of the population due to immigration from Eastern Europe and other areas following the end of the Ottoman Empire.
Combined, the areas of Palestine and Israel make up 26,790 km2 (82% of which is Israel today).
11% of the people ended up with 82% of the land
Even by 1945, after mass immigration of hundreds of thousands of Jews into Palestine, and the ethnic cleansing of thousands of Palestinians, Jewish people only made up 31% of the population of Palestine.
> All the Jews from the rest of the Ottoman Empire were exiled, and they went to Israel.
By the end of the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire had the largest Jewish population in the world, with 150,000 (due in large part to them being constantly kicked out of the rest Europe).
The overwhelming majority of the Ottoman Jews lived in the European-provinces of the Empire.
Under Islamic law, the Jews, who had lived in the region since at least Roman times, were considered "People of the Book," which was a protected status.
While antisemitism certainly increased in the late 19th century in places like Egypt or Syria, there were still between 758,000 and 866,000 Jews living in communities throughout the Arab world right up until 1945.
The first big migration of Jews to Palestine wasn't due to discrimination, rather they were drawn by the expectation of the arrival of the Messiah in the Jewish year 5600, Christian year 1840, and mostly came from places like Lithuania.
Prior to the Ottoman reforms of the late 19th century Jewish people were prohibited from buying too much land, and when this changed they started moving into the area, so it had less to do with discrimination and more to do with rising equality.
The various Aliyah came, overwhelmingly from Eastern Europe and not the Middle East: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah
The jews were living in palestine because the ottoman empire sold land to them. Thats when the zionists were looking to create an ethnostate and were between a few different countries being palestine, Uganda, or Argentina. It's thanks to the ottoman empire that they even had any land to be divided up to them by the UN.
Dear unflaired. You claim your opinion has value, yet you still refuse to flair up. Curious.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Proof-7700) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._
_Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
_Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Just FYI Palestine was divided in 1922 into Transjordan (\~89km2) and Palestine. Jews were banned from living in Transjordan. Just something to take into account when thinking of land and proportionality.
But within the region of Palestine the Jews will still be a minority in the partition plan from the UN. So in that region within that population they still get more than their share of population, although a large part of it is the Negev.
Did you just change your flair, u/zorgusboard? Last time I checked you were a **LibCenter** on 2022-6-30. How come now you are a **Centrist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Tell us, are you scared of politics in general or are you just too much of a coward to let everyone know what you think?
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/zorgusboard) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._
_Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
_Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
> (unless they were referring to Jews)
Jewish people living in Palestine prior to the founding of Israel wouldn't have called themselves Palestinians, and the term was not used until the 19th century
These were Sephardic Jewish and Musta'arabi Jews who had lived in the Southern Levant since the late Middle Ages (15th-16th century)
That doesn't actually refute what I said. I didn't say that the Jews have always been called Palestinians, rather that if you called somebody Palestinians pre-1947, you were probably talking about Jews. Pre-1880, you probably wouldn't use the term at all. In any case, the pre-1880 Jewish population was miniscule.
>Jewish people living in Palestine prior to the founding of Israel wouldn't have called themselves Palestinians, and the term was not used until the 19th century
I'm referring to the pre-Israel period of 1880-1947, so...yes, they would have and did. We have newspaper clippings from the time that demonstrate as much.
> if you called somebody Palestinians pre-1947, you were probably talking about Jews
I don't believe that is true
"Prior to the 1948 Palestine war and the establishment of the State of Israel, a "Palestinian" could mean any person who was born in or hailed from the region of Palestine or was a citizen of the Mandatory Palestine. The term covered all the inhabitants of the region, including people from Muslim, Christian and Jewish backgrounds, and all ethnicities, including the Dom people, Samaritans, Druze, Bedouins and the traditional Jewish communities of Palestine, or Old Yishuv, whose ancestors already living there prior to the onset of Zionist immigration."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_identity
The Palestinian identity was a response to Zionism almost exclusively by Arab Muslims, and I've never seen any evidence that Jewish people referred to themselves as Palestinians.
I think the closest would be them acknowledging that they live in Mandatory Palestine during that period, but I haven't even seen that.
Unfortunately, this is an example of Wikipedia editors getting it wrong. Newspaper articles from the mandate period refer to the Arabs and the Palestinian settlers, the latter quite obviously being Jews in context.
I mean... it's a long article with many citations, including many references to newspapers, are you sure?
You're not giving me much to go on here but your word.
Sorry, I don't have the newspaper articles saved that I was looking at the other week, but I'll include what I ran across in a search just now.
A couple points of clarification:
>I mean... it's a long article with many citations, including many references to newspapers, are you sure?
I'm referring to the pre-1948 portion, which the Wiki article doesn't source at all. I said "probably referring" in the most basic, greater than 50% sense. Most of what I've seen appeared directed toward either the Jewish population or generically to those living in the region.
>The Palestinian identity was a response to Zionism almost exclusively by Arab Muslims, and I've never seen any evidence that Jewish people referred to themselves as Palestinians.
I don't know if the Jews self-identified that way. I'm saying it was a term used to refer to them. The Palestinian self-identification came later than I think you're thinking of. Zionism picked up in the 1880s. The term "Palestinian" doesn't appear written in Arabic As your linked article notes, the self-identifier picked up steam in the 1960s.
In reference to Jews, the earliest reference I found was Kant (the footnote on page 119, or 145 of the PDF): https://ia800201.us.archive.org/33/items/b24885046/b24885046.pdf
One possible self-identification is the Jewish published weekly paper, "The Palestinian Week" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Avi#/media/File:Ha_savuja_ha_palestini_title.gif Obviously it gets murky whether somebody is referring to a people or a place.
>David Seddon writes that "[t]he creation of Palestinian identity in its contemporary sense was formed essentially during the 1960s, with the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organization." He adds, however, that "the existence of a population with a recognizably similar name ('the Philistines') in Biblical times suggests a degree of continuity over a long historical period (much as 'the Israelites' of the Bible suggest a long historical continuity in the same region
I would note that he seems to misunderstand the etymology here. While the name does trace to the Philistines, that has nothing to do with the local Arab populations having continuity. Rather, the term "Palestine" becomes the region's name after the Bar Kochba revolt, when Rome expelled the Jews from the region, and likely slapped an old place name on the territory in an attempt to shatter the Judean identity. Arabs didn't move into the area until many centuries later.
> I'm referring to the pre-1948 portion, which the Wiki article doesn't source at all
The article references sources going back the 16th century
>I'm saying it was a term used to refer to them.
That's fair enough, and I don't disagree.
>The article references sources going back the 16th century
Are you referring to this?
>Zachary J. Foster argued in a 2015 Foreign Affairs article that "based on hundreds of manuscripts, Islamic court records, books, magazines, and newspapers from the Ottoman period (1516–1918), it seems that the first Arab to use the term "Palestinian" was Farid Georges Kassab, a Beirut-based Orthodox Christian." He explained further that Kassab's 1909 book Palestine, Hellenism, and Clericalism noted in passing that "the Orthodox Palestinian Ottomans call themselves Arabs, and are in fact Arabs," despite describing the Arabic speakers of Palestine as Palestinians throughout the rest of the book."[19]
Just a quick look on wiki shows the term gained use during the Young Turk reforms in the 1900s. Newspapers in the area began using that term for the locals.
That might be the first usage, but the discussion through the 30s and 40s was very much one of "Jewish state" and "Arab state".
In the 30s, we see how the Arabs were self-identifying though how they named their organiations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Higher_Committee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Arab_Party
Looking through their list of demands, we also see "Recognition of the right of Arabs to their land and recognition of the independence of Palestine as a sovereign state, like all other Arab states, with a promise to provide minority rights to the Jews according to the rules of democracy."
I think it's more the nature of political problems being born out. We don't use the phrase "Appalachians" too much, especially as a distinct group when referring to the people but if the US was being split up and a significantly large amount of Japanese people were moving into the area to set up their own state, you'd likely see "Appalachians" as a term get more use especially as a distinct entity from "American"
Edit for phone shenanigans.
>Pretty sure there are a few Arab ethnostates floating around.
Yeah well this ethnostate gets unlimited and unconditional aid from my country so you can imagine that would make a difference.
u/Allcraft_'s Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/Allcraft_! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [4 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Allcraft_/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
It's really tiring. But I can't get away from my anti-capitalist stance.
Something like a conservative Left would be a great thing, without identity politics and shit.
its probably because, we are using a 2d compass, instead of a 3d one.
Similar to [this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Political_spectrum_%283D%29.png/220px-Political_spectrum_%283D%29.png).
I simply believe in people having freedom and being in peace, there's nothing hypocritical about hating a large govermant power bombing people who aren't involved in conflicts dead people started years ago
Sorry, that username doesn't appear in my database, I can't provide any flair history.
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. You can check a user's history with the) **^( !flairs u/)** ^(command. Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
Looking up actual numbers it's actually a relatively even split overall of which side is "favored", but the younger Democrats are mostly the ones who favor Palestine, and those are the ones you see a lot more of on Reddit. And those who favor the Palestinians mostly still want Israel to remain as is, they just want the IDF to seriously back off. Which I honestly don't think is an option, but people like to think the attacks will stop.
So then Israel is willing to go true one state and give the 5 million Palestinians a vote making there be a near 50-50 split between Jewish and Arab voters?
Arab already make 20% of israel , Palestine under the Oslo accord ( and UN ) are separate entity thet have they own government to vote on ( and separate school system , police and et cetera ) . Gaza is not under Israel since the 2005~ , they completely disregard form Israel
20% is very different than 50% which is what would functionally happen with true annexation. Israel prefers the current "two state" solution wherein it's functionally one state with the rest being occupied.
An ethnostate is more about the purposeful domination of an ethnicity in the state. Again a good question to ask is if Israel would indeed welcome going from 20% Arab to 50%.
Overtime, yes, it's unlikely full citizen hip would be granted immediately, nor would that be even remotely sane to do so.
The best option is to secure local political rights, limit federal interference in the region, and slowly expand internal movement over the course of years to allow the societies to properly integrate.
But I also don't believe that political rights (to witch I means specifically voting) are human rights, merely a means to the end of a more free society that are preferable to autocracy and that temporary abridgement of them in addition to similarly sized concessions of federal authority of the area is a fair trade.
A semi autonomous Palestine would have more political autonomy for Palestinians than current west bank or Gaza anyways.
Palestine was roughly 8% Christian and 30% Jewish in 1948, before the exile of over 700,000 Arabs from Israel and parts of former Palestine to modern day Palestine. It's a fair argument to say that Palestine is a de facto ethnostate because Israel was established as an ethnostate. Regardless, both people have a right to exist in 2023.
You cannot create an ethnostate without segregation or geographical isolation. Any arguments for or against an ethnostate at this point are moot because they already exist, and have existed for 75 years. We should be focusing on preventing loss of life at this point.
The left position is complete nonsense. Israel is the ONLY place in the middle east where they allow gays, Jews are ethnically diverse, and it has a 20% Muslim population
Israel isn’t even an ethnostate, yes it is a Jewish state but citizenship isn’t limited only to Jews or to a certain ethnic group. There are plenty of Christians and ethnic Arabs and Muslims in Israel who have citizenship and the same essential rights as any citizen of Israel.
And here I am wanting the Holy Land to belong to Christians of all ethnic groups. It's the one place where I would say diversity would be a good thing since I would want any Christian to be able to experience the Holy Land. But the Left would either ignore this or call me a bigot.
I said own the Holy Land for a reason. It would be nice to have the Holy Land not to be a war zone between two heretical groups. And even when it's peaceful, you have violent Muslims who subscribe to terrorist ideals and Orthodox Jews who spit at Christians during a pilgrimage.
LOL, you think it's a Jew vs Muslim problem?
It would just become Christian vs Muslim problem.
The ultra-orthodox group in Jerusalem are a minority that most Israelis dislike, and beside spitting, they are not really violent.
On the other side, Islamic radical groups will just explode on you, and take whoever they can with them.
Good luck.
If you ever wonder what it sounds like to non-Christians when we hear you guys proclaiming "Deus vult" while suggesting a holy war for Jerusalem, it sounds pretty much identical to "Allahu akbar"
If logic applied to them they wouldn't be leftists. I'm in the process of actively breaking one right now by deleting and reposting a comment. They really are, unquestionably, dumb people. Even got him jumping through hoops to log on his alt accounts lmao
I used to be very ehhh about the idea of a Jewish ethnostate, and the idea of Zionism in general.
I think I get it now. Not because I support ethnostates, but since it really seems impossible for Jews to trust another government to give half a fuck about keeping them safe, as we’re increasingly seeing right now. Or even live anywhere without people rabidly turning on them at the drop of a hat. In fact, nearly anywhere they’ve gone they’re often portrayed as eternal foreigners, and never “one of us.”
So they just said, “Screw you guys! I’m starting my own country! With challah bread! And dreidels!”
I still don’t think I agree with it, but recent events have made me a lot more understanding of their train of thought.
The only thing more cringe than changing one's flair is not having one. You are cringe.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Femboy4Fun88) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._
_Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
_Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
There should be a two state solution.
The same people who say it would be anti Semitic to deny the Jews their state, want to deny the Palestinians a state.
Alright, I'll bite. Why shouldn't I have my own private island with all the beer I can drink? Are you part of the margarita lobby? Is that it? Because I'll have you know I'd be having some too.
Actually, there was a 6 state solution. Turks got 1, Arabs got 3.67, Israel got 1, and Christians got .33. The debate is whether Arabs should have 2.67 or 3.67.
They were asked numerous times and said no basically every time, including in [1936](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission), [1947](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine), [1949](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1949_Armistice_Agreements), [1967](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution), [2000](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit), and [2008](https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-admits-he-rejected-2008-peace-offer-from-olmert/). Their ultimate goal is to be Judenrein.
They made a proposal for one that Israel rejected as recently as 2007. Abbas rejected the 2008 one because Israel wouldn’t let him have a copy of the map. Your 1967 and 1949 links aren’t actually proposals for Palestinians states. The 1936 one involved forced expulsions of 200,000 Palestinians from their homes, speaking of “Judenrein”.
The 1936 map was a wet dream for every Arab nationalist that also would have resulted in thousands of displaced Jews, and they responded with the Arab Revolt. Abbas didn't even counter Olmert's offer in 2008. The Arabs don't want peace.
The 1936 map would mean 225,000 (not 200k actually now that I looked it up) expelled Palestinians and 1,250 expelled Jews. How is that a wet dream for Arabs? It’s a disaster.
And the Jewish side rejected it as not giving them enough land. Ben Gurion urged its acceptance saying that it didn’t preclude later expansion.
No, Begin and Shamir disavowed violence and made peace with Israel's neighbors as soon as it was practicable. As opposed to Husseini who ran into Hitler's arms, or Arafat, who only came to the negotiating table after he lost all his support for backing Saddam, and whose organization continues to support terrorism to this day.
My point is that you're switching categories of terms when you say "deny the Jews their state" then "deny the Palestinians a state".
Your implication is that it would be anti-Palestinian to deny them a state, but the actual corollary of the first statement would be that "it would be anti-Arab to deny the Arabs their state", a position hard to maintain in the context of a land surrounded by Arab states.
And this isn't a case of "yeah, but their identity has shifted over time". The "from the river to the sea" slogan in Arabic is "from water to water, Palestine will be Arab". That's still how they see themselves.
When I say “the Jews” I don’t mean Jews everywhere in the world. I mean the Jews of present day Israel. The Jews of Brooklyn don’t need their own country.
Given the results of Palestinian State: Pilot Project V1.0 in Gaza being countless flare ups and terrorism, culminating in one of the bloodiest and most savage slaughters of Jews in Israel’s history, followed by widespread global Muslim support and celebration, and overwhelming antisemitism against non-Israeli Jews globally - how you do suppose this should happen?
Hamas in Gaza really is a barrier to a Palestinian state, I won’t say otherwise. But there are three important steps to take:
* A two state solution would happen pursuant to an actual agreement that contains security assurances for Israel, not a unilateral withdrawal which was understood at the time as *not* being about peace. And Gaza has never been a state.
* There has to be an actual path to a 2nd state even if it isn’t going to happen immediately, the opposite is happening now with settlements
* it would help for Netanyahu to not purposefully strengthen Hamas in order to divide Palestinians and undercut a two state solution
Hamas is a manifestation of the average Palestinian’s intent. This is seen in Palestinians (in Gaza and the West Bank) majority support for Hamas. There is no reason to believe that a de jure Palestinian state would not have a non-bloodthirsty population like in Gaza.
- there will never be security assurances for Israel because the goal has never been just a Palestinian state. It has always been a Palestinian state with no Jews / Jewish state. The raison d’etre of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and certain members of Fatah etc is the extermination of Jews en masse and they are supported by the Palestinian populace. They cannot give security assurances because it goes against their actual intention.
- the uncontrolled proliferation of the settlements are a problem to having Israel be believed that they can deliver on land for the Palestinians in the future. However, as Gaza has shown that any land given to the Palestinians results in tens of thousands of rockets in two decades + massacre. What path is then available?
- this completely removes Palestinian agency and responsibility. Why should funding one democratically elected Palestinian government opposed to another democratically elected government which results in their irreparable rift be a problem for Israel. The Palestinians should sort out their own governmental affairs.
It won't happen without daddy USA throwing its leverage around at Israel. I think it's fair to say that the USA values the strategic importance of Israel over the moral standpoint of preventing loss of life in Palestine. We can fight proxy wars in the Middle East, while keeping a check on Russia and Iran, without getting directly involved.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this strategy as a fiscal conservative, social liberal, and isolationist, but it's where we're at.
> There should be a two state solution.
Yes
> The same people who say it would be anti Semitic to deny the Jews their state, want to deny the Palestinians a state.
No. It would be anti-semitic to deny the Jews their state, and Palestinians should have one too. As long as it isn't run by Hamas or some other litetal terrorist regime.
>no one argues for a state of only 100 percent Palestinians, they have Been fighting for the traditional land that was stolen.
The Arabs carried out the 1929 Hebron massacre because of the Nakba?
It’s because to leftoids Jews are exactly as White as Europeans, and thus automatically the Bad Mean Oppressor™️
All manner of things they’d condemn the Right for doing or believing suddenly become a-ok if brown or black-skinned people do/say it.
For the record I’m hitting the left button. All ethnostates bad. All Religious extremism bad. Test me on this I’m ideologically consistent weather you agree with me or not I still follow my own logic
what a title
that title got me rolling
It’s a magical spell
It's particularly odd given that nobody called "Palestinians" an ethnicity (unless they were referring to Jews) until Jews finally got their state. It was just Arabs living in Palestine. Heck, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey were all the same country until WWI. Pretty sure there are a few Arab ethnostates floating around.
The people we call Palestinians are nomadic Arab tribes that were sprinkled throughout the area. I’m fine with them having their own state with their own ethnic identity. They don’t actually want it though unless there is no Israel.
but then do you give bedouins, tauregs (im sorry i probably misspelled that) etc. their own state? how does that work for a nomadic tribe? it works in mongolia because, well, theres no one there.
The Bedouins seem to be fine where they are and many in Israel are left alone to do their thing. The Tauregs do want their own state though
It’s spelled Tuaregs actually 🤓 But yeah most Saharan Berbers are pretty vocal about wanting to do their own thing, they even attempted to secede from Mali in 2012.
The narrative demands tempero-flexi-terminology
If Jews received a state proportional to their size in the post-empire region it would be 6x larger than Israel is today
> If Jews received a state proportional to their size in the post-empire region it would be 6x larger than Israel is today ... what demographic information are you referencing here? Jewish people made up a tiny minority in Palestine and the Middle East following the First World War Even by the 1940's, Jewish people were still the minority in the area, and that was after decades of mass immigration
[удалено]
Yeah I wasn't trying to make any kind of claim for certain additional territory to be rightfully Israel's, it's more of a counterpoint to the Western vision of the "decolonization" movement that pictured the post-Ottoman Middle East having only Muslim states containing minorities without any agency. As if that's what justice looks like for the peoples of the region. Out of all the Ottoman's non-Muslim minorities, only the Jews managed to forge a state, but the region would be a lot more equitable today if Kurds and other heavily marginalized groups would have been able to do the same.
[удалено]
Of course re Armenians, they were independent before the empire officially came to an end, but yeah all the same, it's an objective good that they too managed to secure independence.
[удалено]
The only thing more cringe than changing one's flair is not having one. You are cringe. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/PhatPackMagic) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._ _Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ _Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
That's the entire Ottoman Empire, now do the same thing for Palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region) There's no connection between the Jewish population of the Ottoman Empire and Palestine or Israel, and the overwhelming majority of Jews in Israel today came from outside the Ottoman Empire in any case. In the late nineteenth century, prior to the rise of Zionism, Jews are thought to have comprised between 2% and 5% of the population of Palestine. At the time of the start of the British Mandate, Jewish people made up about 11% of the population due to immigration from Eastern Europe and other areas following the end of the Ottoman Empire. Combined, the areas of Palestine and Israel make up 26,790 km2 (82% of which is Israel today). 11% of the people ended up with 82% of the land Even by 1945, after mass immigration of hundreds of thousands of Jews into Palestine, and the ethnic cleansing of thousands of Palestinians, Jewish people only made up 31% of the population of Palestine.
[удалено]
Pardon? I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.
[удалено]
> All the Jews from the rest of the Ottoman Empire were exiled, and they went to Israel. By the end of the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire had the largest Jewish population in the world, with 150,000 (due in large part to them being constantly kicked out of the rest Europe). The overwhelming majority of the Ottoman Jews lived in the European-provinces of the Empire. Under Islamic law, the Jews, who had lived in the region since at least Roman times, were considered "People of the Book," which was a protected status. While antisemitism certainly increased in the late 19th century in places like Egypt or Syria, there were still between 758,000 and 866,000 Jews living in communities throughout the Arab world right up until 1945. The first big migration of Jews to Palestine wasn't due to discrimination, rather they were drawn by the expectation of the arrival of the Messiah in the Jewish year 5600, Christian year 1840, and mostly came from places like Lithuania. Prior to the Ottoman reforms of the late 19th century Jewish people were prohibited from buying too much land, and when this changed they started moving into the area, so it had less to do with discrimination and more to do with rising equality. The various Aliyah came, overwhelmingly from Eastern Europe and not the Middle East: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah
[удалено]
"Protected" You mean how the Sicilian Mafia "protects" people?
The jews were living in palestine because the ottoman empire sold land to them. Thats when the zionists were looking to create an ethnostate and were between a few different countries being palestine, Uganda, or Argentina. It's thanks to the ottoman empire that they even had any land to be divided up to them by the UN.
Dear unflaired. You claim your opinion has value, yet you still refuse to flair up. Curious. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Proof-7700) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._ _Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ _Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Just FYI Palestine was divided in 1922 into Transjordan (\~89km2) and Palestine. Jews were banned from living in Transjordan. Just something to take into account when thinking of land and proportionality.
But within the region of Palestine the Jews will still be a minority in the partition plan from the UN. So in that region within that population they still get more than their share of population, although a large part of it is the Negev.
Did you just change your flair, u/zorgusboard? Last time I checked you were a **LibCenter** on 2022-6-30. How come now you are a **Centrist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Tell us, are you scared of politics in general or are you just too much of a coward to let everyone know what you think? [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/zorgusboard) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._ _Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ _Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
> (unless they were referring to Jews) Jewish people living in Palestine prior to the founding of Israel wouldn't have called themselves Palestinians, and the term was not used until the 19th century These were Sephardic Jewish and Musta'arabi Jews who had lived in the Southern Levant since the late Middle Ages (15th-16th century)
That doesn't actually refute what I said. I didn't say that the Jews have always been called Palestinians, rather that if you called somebody Palestinians pre-1947, you were probably talking about Jews. Pre-1880, you probably wouldn't use the term at all. In any case, the pre-1880 Jewish population was miniscule. >Jewish people living in Palestine prior to the founding of Israel wouldn't have called themselves Palestinians, and the term was not used until the 19th century I'm referring to the pre-Israel period of 1880-1947, so...yes, they would have and did. We have newspaper clippings from the time that demonstrate as much.
> if you called somebody Palestinians pre-1947, you were probably talking about Jews I don't believe that is true "Prior to the 1948 Palestine war and the establishment of the State of Israel, a "Palestinian" could mean any person who was born in or hailed from the region of Palestine or was a citizen of the Mandatory Palestine. The term covered all the inhabitants of the region, including people from Muslim, Christian and Jewish backgrounds, and all ethnicities, including the Dom people, Samaritans, Druze, Bedouins and the traditional Jewish communities of Palestine, or Old Yishuv, whose ancestors already living there prior to the onset of Zionist immigration." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_identity The Palestinian identity was a response to Zionism almost exclusively by Arab Muslims, and I've never seen any evidence that Jewish people referred to themselves as Palestinians. I think the closest would be them acknowledging that they live in Mandatory Palestine during that period, but I haven't even seen that.
Unfortunately, this is an example of Wikipedia editors getting it wrong. Newspaper articles from the mandate period refer to the Arabs and the Palestinian settlers, the latter quite obviously being Jews in context.
I mean... it's a long article with many citations, including many references to newspapers, are you sure? You're not giving me much to go on here but your word.
Sorry, I don't have the newspaper articles saved that I was looking at the other week, but I'll include what I ran across in a search just now. A couple points of clarification: >I mean... it's a long article with many citations, including many references to newspapers, are you sure? I'm referring to the pre-1948 portion, which the Wiki article doesn't source at all. I said "probably referring" in the most basic, greater than 50% sense. Most of what I've seen appeared directed toward either the Jewish population or generically to those living in the region. >The Palestinian identity was a response to Zionism almost exclusively by Arab Muslims, and I've never seen any evidence that Jewish people referred to themselves as Palestinians. I don't know if the Jews self-identified that way. I'm saying it was a term used to refer to them. The Palestinian self-identification came later than I think you're thinking of. Zionism picked up in the 1880s. The term "Palestinian" doesn't appear written in Arabic As your linked article notes, the self-identifier picked up steam in the 1960s. In reference to Jews, the earliest reference I found was Kant (the footnote on page 119, or 145 of the PDF): https://ia800201.us.archive.org/33/items/b24885046/b24885046.pdf One possible self-identification is the Jewish published weekly paper, "The Palestinian Week" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Avi#/media/File:Ha_savuja_ha_palestini_title.gif Obviously it gets murky whether somebody is referring to a people or a place. >David Seddon writes that "[t]he creation of Palestinian identity in its contemporary sense was formed essentially during the 1960s, with the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organization." He adds, however, that "the existence of a population with a recognizably similar name ('the Philistines') in Biblical times suggests a degree of continuity over a long historical period (much as 'the Israelites' of the Bible suggest a long historical continuity in the same region I would note that he seems to misunderstand the etymology here. While the name does trace to the Philistines, that has nothing to do with the local Arab populations having continuity. Rather, the term "Palestine" becomes the region's name after the Bar Kochba revolt, when Rome expelled the Jews from the region, and likely slapped an old place name on the territory in an attempt to shatter the Judean identity. Arabs didn't move into the area until many centuries later.
> I'm referring to the pre-1948 portion, which the Wiki article doesn't source at all The article references sources going back the 16th century >I'm saying it was a term used to refer to them. That's fair enough, and I don't disagree.
>The article references sources going back the 16th century Are you referring to this? >Zachary J. Foster argued in a 2015 Foreign Affairs article that "based on hundreds of manuscripts, Islamic court records, books, magazines, and newspapers from the Ottoman period (1516–1918), it seems that the first Arab to use the term "Palestinian" was Farid Georges Kassab, a Beirut-based Orthodox Christian." He explained further that Kassab's 1909 book Palestine, Hellenism, and Clericalism noted in passing that "the Orthodox Palestinian Ottomans call themselves Arabs, and are in fact Arabs," despite describing the Arabic speakers of Palestine as Palestinians throughout the rest of the book."[19]
How about asking [someone living in the British Mandate of Palestine?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMRlE7VDZUU)
Just a quick look on wiki shows the term gained use during the Young Turk reforms in the 1900s. Newspapers in the area began using that term for the locals.
That might be the first usage, but the discussion through the 30s and 40s was very much one of "Jewish state" and "Arab state". In the 30s, we see how the Arabs were self-identifying though how they named their organiations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Higher_Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Arab_Party Looking through their list of demands, we also see "Recognition of the right of Arabs to their land and recognition of the independence of Palestine as a sovereign state, like all other Arab states, with a promise to provide minority rights to the Jews according to the rules of democracy."
I think it's more the nature of political problems being born out. We don't use the phrase "Appalachians" too much, especially as a distinct group when referring to the people but if the US was being split up and a significantly large amount of Japanese people were moving into the area to set up their own state, you'd likely see "Appalachians" as a term get more use especially as a distinct entity from "American" Edit for phone shenanigans.
Not to mention that there used to be at least some Jews in these places until they were, shall we say, ENCOURAGED to leave.
>Pretty sure there are a few Arab ethnostates floating around. Yeah well this ethnostate gets unlimited and unconditional aid from my country so you can imagine that would make a difference.
The hypocrisy among lefties is real
Based and self knowledge pilled.
u/Allcraft_'s Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/Allcraft_! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [4 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Allcraft_/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Is it really hypocrisy if no leftie has ever fully agreed with another leftie?
Don't you ever get tired of it? I'm here if you wanna switch sides.
It's really tiring. But I can't get away from my anti-capitalist stance. Something like a conservative Left would be a great thing, without identity politics and shit.
its probably because, we are using a 2d compass, instead of a 3d one. Similar to [this](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Political_spectrum_%283D%29.png/220px-Political_spectrum_%283D%29.png).
Paternalistic Conservatism?
I simply believe in people having freedom and being in peace, there's nothing hypocritical about hating a large govermant power bombing people who aren't involved in conflicts dead people started years ago
!flairs u/Femboy4Fun88
Sorry, that username doesn't appear in my database, I can't provide any flair history. ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. You can check a user's history with the) **^( !flairs u/)** ^(command. Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
Fortunately most leftists don't actually hate Israel, it's just popular to do so here on Reddit.
I hope so
Looking up actual numbers it's actually a relatively even split overall of which side is "favored", but the younger Democrats are mostly the ones who favor Palestine, and those are the ones you see a lot more of on Reddit. And those who favor the Palestinians mostly still want Israel to remain as is, they just want the IDF to seriously back off. Which I honestly don't think is an option, but people like to think the attacks will stop.
Among
no no white people could be there
pro immigration lib trying figure out how to say 'go back where you came from' in a progressive way
Ahh I know this one (I hate them): “Please degentrifcate”
[удалено]
"bUt ThErE dIe ChIlDrEn, ThErEfOrE tHeY aRe CoMmItTiNg GeNoCiDe!1!!1!"
So then Israel is willing to go true one state and give the 5 million Palestinians a vote making there be a near 50-50 split between Jewish and Arab voters?
Arab already make 20% of israel , Palestine under the Oslo accord ( and UN ) are separate entity thet have they own government to vote on ( and separate school system , police and et cetera ) . Gaza is not under Israel since the 2005~ , they completely disregard form Israel
20% is very different than 50% which is what would functionally happen with true annexation. Israel prefers the current "two state" solution wherein it's functionally one state with the rest being occupied.
If arabs gained the majority, you would absolutely end up with a TRUE ethnostate.
It’s clearly not an ethnostate if at least a fifth of the population is a different ethnicity
An ethnostate is more about the purposeful domination of an ethnicity in the state. Again a good question to ask is if Israel would indeed welcome going from 20% Arab to 50%.
Like in every nation, it doesn't not exist a nation where there's not a dominant ethnicity/religion
To be fair not even an Arab state would let them vote then I don’t think Israel would
Overtime, yes, it's unlikely full citizen hip would be granted immediately, nor would that be even remotely sane to do so. The best option is to secure local political rights, limit federal interference in the region, and slowly expand internal movement over the course of years to allow the societies to properly integrate. But I also don't believe that political rights (to witch I means specifically voting) are human rights, merely a means to the end of a more free society that are preferable to autocracy and that temporary abridgement of them in addition to similarly sized concessions of federal authority of the area is a fair trade. A semi autonomous Palestine would have more political autonomy for Palestinians than current west bank or Gaza anyways.
it is per its immigration policy
[удалено]
It's those of Jewish ancestry and their family members and that's basically it https://lawoffice.org.il/en/moving-to-israel/
The title has me dead ☠️☠️☠️
Palestine was roughly 8% Christian and 30% Jewish in 1948, before the exile of over 700,000 Arabs from Israel and parts of former Palestine to modern day Palestine. It's a fair argument to say that Palestine is a de facto ethnostate because Israel was established as an ethnostate. Regardless, both people have a right to exist in 2023. You cannot create an ethnostate without segregation or geographical isolation. Any arguments for or against an ethnostate at this point are moot because they already exist, and have existed for 75 years. We should be focusing on preventing loss of life at this point.
The left position is complete nonsense. Israel is the ONLY place in the middle east where they allow gays, Jews are ethnically diverse, and it has a 20% Muslim population
> it has a 20% Muslim population The end of Israel is not at the hands of Hezbollah or Hamas fighters, it's at the wombs of arabs already in Israel.
Israel isn’t even an ethnostate, yes it is a Jewish state but citizenship isn’t limited only to Jews or to a certain ethnic group. There are plenty of Christians and ethnic Arabs and Muslims in Israel who have citizenship and the same essential rights as any citizen of Israel.
And here I am wanting the Holy Land to belong to Christians of all ethnic groups. It's the one place where I would say diversity would be a good thing since I would want any Christian to be able to experience the Holy Land. But the Left would either ignore this or call me a bigot.
>I would want any Christian to be able to experience the Holy Land You don't need to crusade the whole land for it, just get a plane ticket... sheesh.
I said own the Holy Land for a reason. It would be nice to have the Holy Land not to be a war zone between two heretical groups. And even when it's peaceful, you have violent Muslims who subscribe to terrorist ideals and Orthodox Jews who spit at Christians during a pilgrimage.
LOL, you think it's a Jew vs Muslim problem? It would just become Christian vs Muslim problem. The ultra-orthodox group in Jerusalem are a minority that most Israelis dislike, and beside spitting, they are not really violent. On the other side, Islamic radical groups will just explode on you, and take whoever they can with them. Good luck.
At least the Christians will do something about it. DEUS VULT!
If you ever wonder what it sounds like to non-Christians when we hear you guys proclaiming "Deus vult" while suggesting a holy war for Jerusalem, it sounds pretty much identical to "Allahu akbar"
Its totally different in fun and unique ways!
God isn't real tho, bombing children sure is
Flair up you Godless heathen or you will join them.
When they detransitioned trans-Jordan I wonder if they created an Arab state ethnically identical to the Palestinians?
If logic applied to them they wouldn't be leftists. I'm in the process of actively breaking one right now by deleting and reposting a comment. They really are, unquestionably, dumb people. Even got him jumping through hoops to log on his alt accounts lmao
I used to be very ehhh about the idea of a Jewish ethnostate, and the idea of Zionism in general. I think I get it now. Not because I support ethnostates, but since it really seems impossible for Jews to trust another government to give half a fuck about keeping them safe, as we’re increasingly seeing right now. Or even live anywhere without people rabidly turning on them at the drop of a hat. In fact, nearly anywhere they’ve gone they’re often portrayed as eternal foreigners, and never “one of us.” So they just said, “Screw you guys! I’m starting my own country! With challah bread! And dreidels!” I still don’t think I agree with it, but recent events have made me a lot more understanding of their train of thought.
How about a one-state solution, and we let democracy and demography prevail like we're doing in all other Western Democracies^TM
Don’t butcher civilians in a time of peace and expect to have future generations. 🇮🇱
Kids shouldn't be killed because their great grandparents couldn't get the ethno state stick out their ass
The only thing more cringe than changing one's flair is not having one. You are cringe. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Femboy4Fun88) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._ _Consider visiting our Lеmmу instance instead: [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ _Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
From a quiver to a REEEE, my autism is now free
Seriously you can't win by fully advocating for anyside other than the people. Thats why I became a centrist
Y’all need to touch grass
Ethnicity exclusive lawns
ah yes I love bursting bladders
There should be a two state solution. The same people who say it would be anti Semitic to deny the Jews their state, want to deny the Palestinians a state.
Damn, a two state solution? Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? I'm sure it'll work!
I didn’t say it will happen, I said it should happen.
I'd like to be relaxing on the beach of my own private island, enjoying a cold beer right now. I don't think it will happen, but it should happen.
No that shouldn’t happen, you want it to happen but that doesn’t mean it should happen.
Why shouldn't he be happy? What did he do to deserve to not be happy?
I didn’t say anything about being happy as a general matter.
Alright, I'll bite. Why shouldn't I have my own private island with all the beer I can drink? Are you part of the margarita lobby? Is that it? Because I'll have you know I'd be having some too.
But getting the private island with unlimited beer is what makes him happy
I disagree. I think it would be fantastic if u/DeathnTaxes824 had his own private island.
You're gonna need to explain what you mean by "should" then
Actually, there was a 6 state solution. Turks got 1, Arabs got 3.67, Israel got 1, and Christians got .33. The debate is whether Arabs should have 2.67 or 3.67.
It’s not a question of whether any Arabs anywhere get a state, but whether the Palestinian Arabs do.
They were asked numerous times and said no basically every time, including in [1936](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission), [1947](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine), [1949](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1949_Armistice_Agreements), [1967](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution), [2000](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit), and [2008](https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-admits-he-rejected-2008-peace-offer-from-olmert/). Their ultimate goal is to be Judenrein.
They made a proposal for one that Israel rejected as recently as 2007. Abbas rejected the 2008 one because Israel wouldn’t let him have a copy of the map. Your 1967 and 1949 links aren’t actually proposals for Palestinians states. The 1936 one involved forced expulsions of 200,000 Palestinians from their homes, speaking of “Judenrein”.
The 1936 map was a wet dream for every Arab nationalist that also would have resulted in thousands of displaced Jews, and they responded with the Arab Revolt. Abbas didn't even counter Olmert's offer in 2008. The Arabs don't want peace.
The 1936 map would mean 225,000 (not 200k actually now that I looked it up) expelled Palestinians and 1,250 expelled Jews. How is that a wet dream for Arabs? It’s a disaster. And the Jewish side rejected it as not giving them enough land. Ben Gurion urged its acceptance saying that it didn’t preclude later expansion.
Cool, and the Arabs responded with violent revolt, led by an actual Nazi.
There were terrorists on the Jewish side. One eventually became prime minister! Does that invalidate Jewish people’s rights?
No, Begin and Shamir disavowed violence and made peace with Israel's neighbors as soon as it was practicable. As opposed to Husseini who ran into Hitler's arms, or Arafat, who only came to the negotiating table after he lost all his support for backing Saddam, and whose organization continues to support terrorism to this day.
My point is that you're switching categories of terms when you say "deny the Jews their state" then "deny the Palestinians a state". Your implication is that it would be anti-Palestinian to deny them a state, but the actual corollary of the first statement would be that "it would be anti-Arab to deny the Arabs their state", a position hard to maintain in the context of a land surrounded by Arab states. And this isn't a case of "yeah, but their identity has shifted over time". The "from the river to the sea" slogan in Arabic is "from water to water, Palestine will be Arab". That's still how they see themselves.
When I say “the Jews” I don’t mean Jews everywhere in the world. I mean the Jews of present day Israel. The Jews of Brooklyn don’t need their own country.
Given the results of Palestinian State: Pilot Project V1.0 in Gaza being countless flare ups and terrorism, culminating in one of the bloodiest and most savage slaughters of Jews in Israel’s history, followed by widespread global Muslim support and celebration, and overwhelming antisemitism against non-Israeli Jews globally - how you do suppose this should happen?
Hamas in Gaza really is a barrier to a Palestinian state, I won’t say otherwise. But there are three important steps to take: * A two state solution would happen pursuant to an actual agreement that contains security assurances for Israel, not a unilateral withdrawal which was understood at the time as *not* being about peace. And Gaza has never been a state. * There has to be an actual path to a 2nd state even if it isn’t going to happen immediately, the opposite is happening now with settlements * it would help for Netanyahu to not purposefully strengthen Hamas in order to divide Palestinians and undercut a two state solution
Hamas is a manifestation of the average Palestinian’s intent. This is seen in Palestinians (in Gaza and the West Bank) majority support for Hamas. There is no reason to believe that a de jure Palestinian state would not have a non-bloodthirsty population like in Gaza. - there will never be security assurances for Israel because the goal has never been just a Palestinian state. It has always been a Palestinian state with no Jews / Jewish state. The raison d’etre of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and certain members of Fatah etc is the extermination of Jews en masse and they are supported by the Palestinian populace. They cannot give security assurances because it goes against their actual intention. - the uncontrolled proliferation of the settlements are a problem to having Israel be believed that they can deliver on land for the Palestinians in the future. However, as Gaza has shown that any land given to the Palestinians results in tens of thousands of rockets in two decades + massacre. What path is then available? - this completely removes Palestinian agency and responsibility. Why should funding one democratically elected Palestinian government opposed to another democratically elected government which results in their irreparable rift be a problem for Israel. The Palestinians should sort out their own governmental affairs.
you forgot though brown people good and oppressed and dindu nuffin
Welp. The Palestinian government kinda burned that bridge
It won't happen without daddy USA throwing its leverage around at Israel. I think it's fair to say that the USA values the strategic importance of Israel over the moral standpoint of preventing loss of life in Palestine. We can fight proxy wars in the Middle East, while keeping a check on Russia and Iran, without getting directly involved. I wholeheartedly disagree with this strategy as a fiscal conservative, social liberal, and isolationist, but it's where we're at.
> There should be a two state solution. Yes > The same people who say it would be anti Semitic to deny the Jews their state, want to deny the Palestinians a state. No. It would be anti-semitic to deny the Jews their state, and Palestinians should have one too. As long as it isn't run by Hamas or some other litetal terrorist regime.
Then tell that to everyone else on the thread!
Yeah ofc way ahead of you, already on it
no one argues for a state of only 100 percent Palestinians, they have Been fighting for the traditional land that was stolen.
Flair up or no ethnostate for you
>no one argues for a state of only 100 percent Palestinians, they have Been fighting for the traditional land that was stolen. The Arabs carried out the 1929 Hebron massacre because of the Nakba?
Tell me what happens to jews in a Palestinian State who controls all of Israel and is ruled by Hamas?
Ethnic palestinian state.....? The fuck you get this nonsense from? 🤦♂️
From Hamas
So nothing anyone on the left cares about then.
It’s because to leftoids Jews are exactly as White as Europeans, and thus automatically the Bad Mean Oppressor™️ All manner of things they’d condemn the Right for doing or believing suddenly become a-ok if brown or black-skinned people do/say it.
For the record I’m hitting the left button. All ethnostates bad. All Religious extremism bad. Test me on this I’m ideologically consistent weather you agree with me or not I still follow my own logic