hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
1hr ago
There's nothing interesting to that objection. It's the equivalent of stating that a labrador and a border collie can not both be dogs since they're not exactly the same.
hanikrummihundursvin
2hr ago
The argument following those admissions is that either Israel is an apartheid state because they don't intend to ever return sovereignty to the Palestinians. Which is what has been the de facto state of affairs for decades. And no one has any reason to believe otherwise.
Or Israel is placing Palestine under a prolonged illegal occupation. Be that the discrimination, illegal settlements and de facto annexation or whatever else. In either case there is nothing positive for Israel here.
But that's the argument: Its not apartheid, it's illegal occupation. Fine, say that. But the argument is not 'actually it's not apartheid when we do it because we rewrote the laws so the words don't line up 1:1 with South African law'.
hanikrummihundursvin
12hr ago
I'm sure we can all appreciate the real world difference between the Russian owned coal mining outpost of Barentsburg, hosting a population of ~300 that operates on Norwegian land, and Palestine.
Or appreciate that refugees from the Israeli Palestine conflict are not the same as Palestinians living on their own land.
Pretending that no one understands what apartheid means is just annoying wordplay. Israel occupies land and legally distinguishes between the populations within using various criteria and discriminates accordingly to maintain control for the designated ethnicity, just like SA did. They employ de facto separate voting rolls, just like SA. They even deploy the same alleged tokenism SA did. It's as close as you can get to the original to the point of parody. But regardless of that, the practical effect is the same.
The Israelis as they exist today never intend to relinquish any relevant representative control over the explicitly racially defined jewish state of Israel to anyone other than jews. They define themselves ethnically. They define their state ethnically. It is not possible for Israel to exist without jews. It's not possible for the state to be jewish without jewish sovereignty.
But when you live on the same land as a population group that is not jewish then you either make your bed as an apartheid state to maintain your ethnosupremacy over the land or you let everyone vote. There's no argument for why West Bank jews can vote in Israeli elections but West Bank Palestinians can not that is not de facto apartheid driven.
hanikrummihundursvin
18hr ago
Outside of the oil sheiks, all of them are already either in open conflict, proxy conflict or cold wars against the US. I don't think it's selective at all to go after Israel given the US is already going after everyone else. Outside of the oil sheiks, of course. But they, despite everything, managed to play the PR game better than Israel so it's hardly a mystery why their heads are not on the lefty chopping block first.
hanikrummihundursvin
18hr ago
If we care about doling out equal punishment to all at the same time based on nothing but moral intuition then the same logic applies. Doubly so if we pretend we are not human beings with agency and capacity for strategy and understanding of context but instead mindless automatons that have to follow every possible strand of 'logic' to its conclusion or our heads blow up. But that's obviously not the case so no.
The current issue being focused on is Israel. The current strategy is aimed at disrupting and ultimately stopping the regime. If the power of anyone relevant can be leveraged to that end in any relevant way then that should obviously be done so long as it's beneficial to the cause. To that extent everything that's going on with this political theater is 'logical'. Mamdani has to demonstrate ill intent towards zionists at the behest of his electorate. And if you asked the NYC electorate if risking the sanctity of the UN was worth disrupting the Israeli government that is terrorizing Palestinians then the answer would be yes.
Unlike the many zionists and jewish people I've interacted with online over the years who continuously argue against ethnocentrism, national security and sovereignty for people who are not jewish, I'm supportive of all nations having a secure homeland.
More options
Context Copy link