Israel gotta go : memes

[-] Wootz@lemmy.world 56 points 6 months ago

No.

Netanyahu gotta go. Don't condemn the population of a country because of the actions of its leader.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 31 points 6 months ago

Netanyahu will just be replaced with another genocider in a long line of genociders, stretching back to the Nakba. If you try letting up on the genociding like Yitzhak Rabin, you’ll just get whacked and replaced.

[-] BluJay320 24 points 6 months ago

Israel exists as a terrorist state residing on stolen land.

Condemning the state’s existence isn’t condemnation of its citizens any more than condemning Amazon is condemning all Amazon employees.

Israel needs to go.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 21 points 6 months ago

Israel is a settler colony and an ethno state. It doesn’t have a “population”, but a settler regime.

[-] sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

[removed by mod]

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 14 points 6 months ago

I don’t care about the religion of the oppressors and settlers. Israelis are oppressor and settlers who are living in stolen Palestinian land. Israel is an illegitimate settler colony that the UN has condemned since its inception and creation by antisemites who believed that Jews had no place in Europe and wanted to get rid of them. The majority of Jews condemn Israel. Israelis do no represent Jews and thinking so is antisemitic.

[-] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago

So, first of all - I basically agree with you and will be playing devil's advocate a little bit here. But some things I want to point out:

The majority of Jews condemn Israel. Israelis do no represent Jews and thinking so is antisemitic.

Definitely not all Jews or Israelis support the Israeli government as it is. But over 40% of Jews in the world live in Israel, which makes it not the majority, but a very big chunk of Jews. While they might condemn the current government, it is difficult to argue that they condemn the idea of Israel when they are living there. However, a second point follows right from here:

Israelis are oppressor and settlers who are living in stolen Palestinian land. Israel is an illegitimate settler colony that the UN has condemned since its inception and creation

Yes. But also it was created a long time ago. Not too long ago, but long enough so that there are generations of people who have been born into this state as innocent people.

Basically, I dislike the idea of how Israel was created and claiming some birthright to return to a land. Depending on how far you want to go you can always find different peoples living in any region. No one would reasonably argue that we should evacuate Manhattan and return it to Native Americans. And this analogy works in both ways: evacuate Israel to give the land back to Palestine as well as evacuating the region of Palestinians to create Israel. Shlomo Sand once said he is a post zionist because the mess has already been created, maybe that is the take I most agree with, although really, there is no fair or "right" solution to this. Which is why it makes this conflict so complicated and frustrating.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 months ago

The fair and right solution is to give the land to the people who have been living there for thousands of years and let them decide what to do. The West has no right to tell them what to do after all it has giving them is colonialism (UK) after colonialism (USA and Israel) . It is as simple as that.

And many people want also to give the Americas back to the natives who have been living there for tens of thousands of years. However, this is a more difficult endeavor. Israel is the first one that needs to be abolished.

[-] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago

I don't think this is what you mean, but it sounds a lot like you want to replace one ethno state with another ethno state by pushing out all the Jews that have migrated to Israel during the last 80ish years as well as their descendants.

I doubt this is what you would want, but I just want to point this out, because it sounds dangerous and might be taken like this.

My guess is that you, just as most people, would not want the "migrants" displaced, but not in power and especially not suppressing the rights and targeting the people who lived there and are still living there. We all basically want them to be a big happy secular family who don't care about each other's background and see the person. (Which is the big problem because this family hates one another.) Yes, a lot of Israel's population has come to Israel somewhat unlawfully, but again: the mess has already been created. Telling a 17 year old whose grandparents migrated Israel from Hungary to please fuck off and go back to Hungary would be not more rightful than displacing Palestinians back in 1948.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

Palestine has always been a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic place, so no, it never was and will never be an ethno state. Also, I cannot make decisions for what the Palestinians decide to do with the settlers, but they have in the past given asylum to the Jews who faced persecution in Europe. There has always been Jews living in Palestine. Israel should be abolished and whoever wants to be part of Palestine can go through the nationalization process. Westerners have no right to dictate how the Palestinians handle the settler-colonial problem, that is for the native people to decide, and they have that right given to them by international law. This is the right of self determination.

[-] Belastend@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

If your solution to ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleansing, that solution might suck.

[-] LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

You got a source for "the majority of Jews condemn Israel"? Idk what that means but Im sure it doesn't mean "the majority of Jews think Isreal has to go"

[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 11 points 6 months ago

I hoping the OP means the state of Israel "has to go," and not necessarily the population. I.e. a "one-state solution."

[-] colonelp4nic@lemmy.world 39 points 6 months ago

[removed by mod]

[-] grte@lemmy.ca 55 points 6 months ago

Strange take. Presumably if Israel was replaced with a non-ethnostate, Jewish citizens of that state would get the same rights and treatment as every other citizen.

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 6 months ago

Exactly.

If the USA tried to again be a White/European ethnostate and allow anyone with Caucasian heritage to immigrate and barred everyone else from immigrating, then no one today would accept that.

And if they went full on apartheid and started putting natives and minorities in locked down ever-shrinking reservations, people would really lose their shit.

When white nationalists try to advocate for such policies, they are rightfully criticized for being racist.

I can never understand why Israel gets special treatment in that regard.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 10 points 6 months ago

Native Americans are still getting the shaft, so the US is still a settler-colonial state. It’s also the sole global neocolonial empire*, and Israel is its unsinkable aircraft carrier in West Asia. As Biden has said for decades, “Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interest in the region.”

*It’s funny how NATOpedia tries to project debt-trap diplomacy onto China. The US has over 750 foreign bases around the world, while China has one anti-piracy port in Djibouti.

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interest in the region.

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[-] Microw@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

But literally no one with power in the current situation wants a non-ethnostate.

[-] Guydht@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Tell that to 1930s european jews Or 1950s arab jews

People just hate jews, man.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 27 points 6 months ago

This is a Hasbara take on things. The white people from South Africa didn’t disappeared after the apartheid state got dissolved. There were Jewish people in Palestine before Israel was established. Palestinian people have never had an issue treating Jewish people as equals. The only apartheid state in the region has always been Israel.

[-] nevemsenki@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

The white people didn't disappear alltogether, but a lot of them did emigrate. Jewish people are kind of unique in the way that they face hostility everywhere outside Israel, so that's not really an option for them.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 10 points 6 months ago

This is not true. Many of them have emigrated back to their country of origin since October 7th, 2023. Many of them have more than one citizenship and were not even born in Israel, and many of them are new converts. The IOF has been enlisting new converts like there is no tomorrow from all over the world since October 7th. The ones who have no place to go are the Palestinians who are also currently being genocide.

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

[removed by mod]

[-] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

Being entitled to equal rights doesn't mean they actually get them. It also doesn't account for the fact that many Palestinians are denied citizenship or remain in occupied territories controlled by Israel and explicitly not guaranteed equal rights

The comprehensive report, Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime against Humanity, sets out how massive seizures of Palestinian land and property, unlawful killings, forcible transfer, drastic movement restrictions, and the denial of nationality and citizenship to Palestinians are all components of a system which amounts to apartheid under international law. This system is maintained by violations which Amnesty International found to constitute apartheid as a crime against humanity, as defined in the Rome Statute and Apartheid Convention.

source

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.de 25 points 6 months ago

Vatican City is sweating...

[-] jaspersgroove@lemm.ee 26 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Along with basically every Asian and middle eastern country, several European and African countries, and a few South American countries. There are a lot of ethnostates in the world.

In fact, I’d say most countries outside of the EU/the anglosphere are a lot closer to being ethnostates than they are to being any sort of cosmopolitan melting pot.

But most of them have been that way for a long time so people just accept it.

[-] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

An ethnostate isn't just a country with a majority ethnic group.

It has to explicitly give legal preference to one group over another.

[-] jaspersgroove@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago

I’m well aware, and stand by my original comment.

[-] Thief_of_Crows@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Very few countries, if any, give legal preferance to one ethnicity except for israel. China is almsot entirely chinese people, but if a white person moves there they are not discriminated against by the government.

[-] Microw@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Yeah there are a lot of ethnocracies. Turkey being one of the most obvious examples. Even within the EU you have countries like Latvia or Estonia who have been labelled that in the past.

[-] halvar@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Nuh-uh. Organic/long established ethnostates may be frowned upon, but if they close off their borders to preserve their identity, that's their right, since I belive in the self-determination of peoples.

It is arguable though, whether these even exist right now, or are there only nation-states and some wannabe ethnostates.

Trying to violently establish an ethnostate is of course something I cannot agree with.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

close off their borders to preserve their identity

If your ethnicity is your identity, you're by definition a xenophobic bigot.

since I belive in the self-determination of peoples.

Except for people who want to move to the ethnostates you support, of course 🙄

Trying to violently establish an ethnostate is of course something I cannot agree with.

You literally can't establish and maintain an ethnostate without the use of a lot of violence and oppression against people of other ethnicities. That's just how the world works.

[-] halvar@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Ethnicity totally can be part of an identity, but that doesn't mean you have to hate anyone.
Don't misunderstand "closing off borders". Making the people stay is not okay. Not letting the people that left back is also not okay. Not letting in a different ethnicity? Arguably racist, but I wouldn't count not letting them into your country as oppression. I'm a christian, so I can't visit Mecca, yet I don't feel oppressed.
That's why I said "long established" and that's why I pointed out that those aren't many. I don't think the violence you'd have to use to establish an ethnostate is in any way acceptable. If the ethnostate already stands though, you may use certain tools to preserve it, which are not many and are usually "not enough".

My take wasn't that ethnostates are good, but that they are not inherently bad either, it's just the tools usually used to establish and preserve them that we must condemn.

Memes

Rules: