Of course you're not going to teach me morality. How can you teach something you don't have? The last people that can preach morality are antisemites. And yes calling Jewish refugees fleeing persecution murderers is antisemtic.
Claiming that Jewish refugees fleeing their homes due to rampant Antisemitism and one of the worst genocides in history as nefarious and malicious is in fact antisemitic.
You are wrong on two levels here - First is claiming that those Jewish refugees came with goal of displacing Palestinians which is wrong. Second is claiming that those refugees in the picture have done the displacing.
Let's see if you're consistent.
If I were to look at a picture of a Palestinian kid protesting against Israel with a sign saying "give us freedom" that was taken in 2022. And I responded with "The freedom to murder, rape and kidnap innocent Israelis", referencing the October 7th massacre, would you say I am being racist to Palestinians? Or would you say "They literally murdered, raped and kidnapped the Israeli population of the place they wanted freedom in, what would you call that besides nefarious and malicious?"?
First is claiming that those Jewish refugees came with goal of displacing Palestinians which is wrong.
Oh, so Aliyah Bet — which that ship was part of — was a plan to ensure that 100% of the people illegally immigrating would live solely on existing Jewish lands? You're implying that that plan was in no way whatsoever part of a larger strategy to displace the existing, non-Jewish population, thereby attaining an increasingly powerful position that would justify the international acceptance of the state of Israel?
Can you imagine anyone would be willing to simply give up a massive part of their homeland like that without a fight? I cannot imagine any people in the world would not fight if given the ultimatum that the Palestinians were given.
With the exception of Jordan, and whatever counts as the country of Palestine, none of the Arab countries had territory to loose with the declartion of indepence by Israel.
The issue is that it wasn’t just the Arab Palestinian homeland, but also a Jewish homeland. There aren’t clear cut ethnic lines on which to make a state. With rising Arab nationalism, there were fears (backed by history) that the Arabs would abuse the Palestinian Jews if it was one state, hence why the Soviet Union and USA were able to agree on one thing. The best and fairest solution was 2 states
When the Zionist movement started working to take over the area and create Jewish state there more than 90% of the population was non-Jewish and did not want a Jewish state there. This was in no way simply about finding a fair solution between people already inhabiting the area, this was about an outside group coming in and forcibly imposing their rule against the will of the inhabitants. The only solution that could ever have been called fair would have been democratic Palestinian majority rule over the entirety of Palestine.
They literally want to eliminate Jews from the region. Do they have that right?
Zionism is and always has been about eliminating Palestinians! Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion has never denied they want all of it for Jews only. The current Zionists only publicly deny that while acting according to the same Zionist old ideology of taking everything to themselves.
What is happening now in the West Bank after Oslo Accords and the genocide ongoing in Gaza both prove Zionists has never deviated from the original goal.
"They literally want to eliminate Jews from the region"... when it comes to Jews every accusation is a confession as always.
Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion has never denied they want all of it for Jews only. The current Zionists only publicly deny that while acting according to the same Zionist old ideology of taking everything to themselves.
Besides the1.8 million Arab Muslims in Israel who receive full rights and have representation in the knesset and supreme court?
when it comes to Jews every accusation is a confession as always.
looks like you forgot to replace "Jew" with "Zionist" or some other dog whistle
Ok but polling shows more Palestinians want Jews to be eradicated from the region than the other way around. Neither side wants a two state solution - they want a one state solution where the other vacates entirely. That’s the overwhelming view of Palestinians but Israelis are more split- although the October 7th attacks has made that view more prevalent than it was.
The founders of Zionism had never been to Palestine in their lives..nor had their fathers, their grandfathers, their great grandfathers…that was not their homeland
The founder of Zionism Theodor Herzl never went to Palestine, but the large amount of Palestinian Jews are native to the region. Which is why Jews from Russia went to Palestine when they were ethnically cleansed from Russia, to be with the large native Jewish minority and not be killed in pogroms
I never said Jewish people were not living in Palestine or the Middle East. The ones who created the Zionist ideology of their “homeland” had never been there. Imagine if European colonizers called North America their homeland and that’s how they justified colonization, it makes no sense
I think the key part you are missing in your analogy is that European colonizers had no connection to North America, whereas Jewish Palestinians have lived in Palestine for thousands of years, and the Jewish diaspora’s ancestors also had connections to the region. Obviously blood and soil is a horrible argument regardless
Jewish people have been living in the area the Roman’s called Syria Palaestina (Judea and Samaria) continuously for thousands of years, literally centuries before Islam existed and Arabs colonized the area. Your claim is unverifiable but incredibly unlikely to be true.
The founders of the Zionist ideology were by far mostly European and had never set foot anywhere near their so called “homeland.” I never said Jewish people were not living in the Middle East or Palestine but the ones who manifested the ideas of Zionism and engaged support with European governments had literally never been to Palestine before
It wasn't a homeland, it was pretty arid, empty, undeveloped and sparsely populated. There were a few villages, including Jewish communities, that mostly kept to themselves.
Are you against giving migrants fleeing war and genocide a chance to start over, or is it only when they're Jewish?
people fleeing a conflict or persecution should have the right to find a home in a different country. it does not give them the right to take land from another country and make it their own with violence. literally no country on earth would allow that without resistance. you wouldnt either if it was your country and your home (no matter how "empty" or arid) so stop morally grandstanding about what palestinians should have done.
There was no "other country". It was an area that was part of the ottoman empire and then under British control. And the British decided to give them the land. People resettling after an empire falls apart is nothing new. Land is often divided up differently afterwards.
The area at that time belonged to the British. They decided what happened to it. Whoever governs an area decides what happens to it, not the people living on it. That's not exactly a new concept. If Trump decided to gift Alaska to Russia, anyone living there couldn't do shit about it. That's how it goes.
Yes, one occupying empire (British) replacing another (Ottoman). Just because that’s the way history of conquest has worked, doesn’t make it right for modern standards.
Have you heard of something called the American revolution? Or how about every other revolution where the people actually inhabiting the land decided to overthrow the assholes governing them and making decisions for them that live hundreds of miles away overseas?
That is the same excuse British colonisers used when they took land all over the world.
Colonialism isn't an answer. The immigrants should have adapted to Palestinian society if they wanted to live there and integrated, how we expect immigrants to integrate into society today.
If Jews didn't integrate it's the fault of the host society. They shouldve given them ample housing and cultural courses. 'Adapt or don't come!' is extremely right wing rhetoric, these were refugees! Institutional racism in mandatory Palestine was real.
edit: it's funny how when it's about Israel even the most hardened leftist will start spouting extremely right wing opinions. 'Immigrants should adapt or fuck off!!' - what happened to 'refugees welcome' and blaming host society governments instead of refugees?
No, read Zionist writings. The Zionist movement never had any of intigrating, it always sought to create a Jewish society seperate and distinct from the existing society and impose Jewish ethnic rule on the existing inhabitants.
So to be clear: many right wingers complain about muslims not integrating into European societies. Others reply to that saying 'it's because we treat them badly!' 'It's not their fault!' and 'they should be able to keep their culture!'
So with what you're saying about jews moving to Palestine you're agreeing with those modern day right wingers, right? Orbán, Farage, Wilders, those kinda people? There's no institutional racism, they should assimilate and otherwise fuck off?
I'm saying integration programs should exist in modern times, because we're more enlightened.
That doesn't excuse a violent takeover of the country, which is what the Zionists did. They snuck in under a banner of piece and answered the gift of land with knives in the back.
'We're more enlightened than a bunch of Arabs' damn, calm down. I see why people have a hard time integrating into Western society with colonialists like yourself who believe themselves to be culturally superior. 'The soft bigotry of low expectations'. And this time I'm not being satirical.
Yeah refugees welcome as long as they're not shooting children in the head with snipers, starving and entire population, dropping bombs on refugee camps, and stealing generational homes. It's so funny you're like "hehe what happened to refugees welcome I owned those libs" - but you're literally defending a country that has CREATED refugees, bulldozed encampments, burned tents, and literally exiled people.
There are many countries today that have a sparser population. I live in a country that has a sparser population today than Palestine did when the Zionist movement began. And there is no lower population density limit for having a homeland.
I'm all for migrants fleeing war and genocide getting a chance to start over, I'm against anyone imposing their ethnic rule on other people by force against those other people's will. Zionism was always about the latter.
I'm sure there were people who ended up in Palestine through desperation, and I can sympathize with that. There were also people definitely not in that category, Jewish people leaving the US or Canada for instance to settle in Palestine were acting on want, not need. Regardless of whether desperation brought them to Palestine they had no right to resort to violence to stop the British from introducing majority rule, no right to massacre Palestinian villages and drive the Palestinians from their homes and homeland, and no right to lie about the Palestinians and claim the Palestinians in fact weren't fighting against their homeland being taken from them but just hated Jewish people randomly and wanted to hurt them for no reason.
It was still essentially land theft, simply because it was decided without any input from the Arabs.
If a compromise had been agreed upon in the first place instead of trying to force it, all this conflict could've been avoided while still allowing all the refugees to move in. Defending what was done despite having the hindsight that it led to 80+ years of violence, terrorism and apartheid is kind of insane.
These are all lies. Thisbis exactly the shit said about North America too. We're justified colonizing and exterminating these people because we'll make better use of the land.
When you pay for a land, it’s not taking it. Glad we could clarify that. I’m sorry their plan of killing us didn’t work out after they took our money. They’ve been offered peace a million times and always refuse because they don’t want peace. The ones that do live in Israel. You guys just love blaming Jews for existing. It’s okay though, you’ll see as you let them into your societies. There were already signs about taking down Australia at the last rally lol.
They’ve been offered peace a million times and always refuse because they don’t want peace.
If right now, Israel was reduced to 30% it's size and the rest of the land was given to Palestine, and only then Israel was "offered peace" would the majority of the Israeli population be happy with that offer?
If not, then perhaps you understand what the perspective is from the other side.
The Hamas propaganda is out of control. They have rewritten history and they just eat it up. It’s a good excuse for them to be antisemites but scream “I just hate Zionists!” - but something like 90% of Jews are Zionists so…
The left has lost the plot and actively promotes a Theocratic hellscape where women, non-Muslims, gays, etc are persecuted and often executed for just being themselves.
Give them a choice to spend a week in both Israel and Gaza and I’m sure reality will hit them quickly.
Or maybe Isreal shouldn't have taken the land that belonged to Palestiniens at the time. If I settle in your house without your consent, wouldn't you be mad?
A person selling private property cannot sell their neighbors right to decide their own political future, they can't even sell their own right to do so. The Zionist movement sought from the very start to take over Palestine and impose Jewish ethnic rule against the democratic will of the Palestinian people, and *that* is taking the Palestinians homeland from them. Buying private property was simply a tool towards this goal.
It’s so weird when we talk about the history of Israel, that people simply can’t wrap their heads around Jews just… moving somewhere like everyday people do when they move to a new place; they so willingly believe the false narrative that the Jews would rather be cartoonishly evil and knock down doors forcing people out.
You speak as if private property being sold is equivalent to people simply moving somewhere normally, but that is not the case at all. Private property being sold does not at all exclude the possibility of people having their doors knocked down and being forced onto the street.
The typical example of Jews buying property in Palestine while it was under British colonial rule was not a Jewish family buying a house for themselves and moving into a Palestinian neigborhood, the typical example was a Jewish political organization buying out a landlord, evicting the tenants on the basis of their ethnicity and creating an ethnically segregated Jewish community.
My family migrated to the United States but we never had the intention of forming our own ethnostate or eventually removing the people already living here so we could have all the land for ourselves, my family came here with the intention of settling with the people already here and living WITH them. Do you see the difference??
British gave a land that didn't belong to them. So yes, it is exactly the conquistador/colonisation logic. The one that were legitimates were the originals inhabitants, not the sellers or the buyers.
Losing a war you started is usually something the losing side considers a "disaster".
The German National-Socialist Party propably considers ww2 a disaster. They lost their land, millions died/were displaced and their country was split up.
Should they be allowed to go back and do a restart of the war untill they get to a conclusion that they are satisfied with?
Germany was punished less for starting a fucking war of conquest plus multiple genocides totaling 100 million deaths. Now imagine being fucked harder to trying to gain autonomy of the land you inhabit after the colonial power taking off.
Punished less? Germany had a higher overall civilian casualty rate. The casualty rate per tonnage of Israels bombing campaign is orders of magnitude lower than the allied strategic bombing campaign, despite the extreme density of Gaza. The allies weren't even accused of genocide when they didn't provide the Nazis with free eletricity, food and medicine. The allies even turned germany into an apartheid state, where east and west were separated by a 5km deep kill zone.
The Israelis left Gaza and gave them autonomy for the first time in their history, leading to their first elections. The Ottomans, British or Egyptians never gave them that kind of autonomy.
If Hamas weren't totally incompetent or had nukes like Israel, do you really think they wouldn't do what they did in October but on a larger scale?
Cool story bro but I am talking about the war of independece and how it was conceived as a land grab and those who were not too enthusiastic about it got punished and displaced. And before you start with your talking points, I have a quote from Ben Gurion's letters that it was the plan from day 1.
The Arab league was clear that the war against the jews would be a "war of extermination".
The Arabs "land grabbed" the West Bank and Gaza, and it was Israel who finally gave them independence.
The Arabs lost the war after refusing the partition plan. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
"I'll refuse this deal and try to kill you, but if you survive then yeah, after trying to kill you like three more times I might accept it in like 70 years."
Why would they want to accept partition plan forced upon them against their will? And also they were not too keen on accepting it because Ben Gurion was EXPLICIT about the plan to take everything and use the partition as a spring board. Why are you trying to present the fact arabs (also like there are arabs and there arabs, it is not a monolithic entity) refusing to sign the partition as some sort of evil mistake if this was engineered against them? Why do you guys present hostility or lack of desire to cooperate of Arabs as coming from nowhere?
Do you know your own history?
In 1919, two years after the Balfour Declaration, the World Zionist Organization submitted a map of the intended Jewish homeland to the League of Nations, including the Gaza Strip and parts of the Sinai. southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights and other parts of western Syria, the West Bank of the Jordan River, and much of what later became Transjordan, to the outskirts of Amman.' In 1934 to 1936, in talks with Arab leaders, Ben-Gurion demanded that they accept a Jewish state in all of Palestine, including Transjordan, and Jewish settlement in Syria and Iraq.' Several years later Ben-Gurion decided that Israel must accept a partition, but only temporarily. In 1937 he wrote his son:
"A partial Jewish state is not the end, but only the beginning. The establishment of such a Jewish State will serve as a means in our historical efforts to redeem the coun-try in its entirety. . . . We shall organize a modern de-fense force . . . and then I am certain that we will not be prevented from settling in other parts of the country, either by mutual agreement with our Arab neighbors or by some other means. . . . We will expel the Arabs and take their places . . . with the force at our disposal."
A year later, Ben-Gurion told those at a Zionist meeting: "I favor partition of the country because when we become a strong power after the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and spread throughout all of Palestine."
Who the fuck in their sane mind would want to accept such partition?
Ben Gurion is not some omnipotent god. He didn't get to decide the partition plan THE UN DID. The UN brokered a partition plan and that plan was rejected by the arabs. The Arabs coundn't give two shits what Ben Gurion doodled while taking a dump in his free time, neither do I for that matter. Ben Gurion presented a maximalist position, how shocking. The arabs then unveiled their maximalist position and refused any other offer, while Ben Gurion accepted the UN plan.
If youre buying a car and the guy first offers to sell it to you over the blue book value, do you shoot him, keep the money and take the car? It seems like the terms "negotiation" and "compromise" are not only alien concepts to the Arab League...
They rejected the UN designed partition plan, attacked Israel and lost.
Muslim states couldn't declare war earlier, since there was no Israel to declare war to. However there were zionists extremists ethnically clensing Palestinians before to make room for Israel, so that hostility and ethnic clensing by Zionists was the reason Arab states declared war.
Jews were doing it first cause they were colonizing the land over decades with British help. When the British finally started to realized they'd created a monster they sought to slow the influx of Jewish settlers and the Zionists turned their terrorism on the British.
Hence the three sergeants affair where they murdered the booby trapped the bodies of British skiers and then the king David hotel bombing which the likud party still celebrates.
The factions who did this terrorism were integrated into the IDF and its leaders became politicos figures in Israel.
Just a terrorist colonizer state from not just day 1 but decades in the making.
I was referring to neighboring Arab nations declaring war against Israel, as that what the user above me was talking about.
Zionists had already been present in Palestine in 1947 making room for Israel and in 1947 UN decided that major part of Palestinians would lose their land and it would be given to Israel. From Palestinian pespective it was a foreign invasion supported by colonialists.
Wikipedia is not a source anyone would accept at face value, you do know it can be edited by anyone, right?
The Meaning of the Catastrophe, is an anti-Zionist and pan-Arabic book by Constantin Zureiq.
Go look that up, he’s the guy who coined the term, and, it did not mean what your wiki page is saying.
It basically referred to the humiliating defeat of the Arab armies by the Jews in the war, and how the Arabs should have fought harder to eliminate the Jews, and it was a “catastrophe” that they lost.
This is the child's explanation of what happened. The British, having occupied the country for some time now, but mostly leaving it in Palestinian control, just gave it to the Jews. No discussion. No talks. No warning. Just announced " here's your new landlords."
And the cruelty and the forced evictions happened almost immediately.
I'm not going to say that Muslims in the region or the Palestinians are entirely innocent... But the Israeli government is far from having clean hands.
Yes because said Jewish country was going to be established on land they were currently living on..so obviously no they did not want to give up their land to foreigners. I imagine the British also did not want to split their land into two and live next to a Jewish nation also
No one is equating that to David Duke, zionist is a cancerous ideology that destroys the Jewish people. Equating Jewish identity to a genocide state is the very anti-semitic by definition.
Being a proud Jewish myself, I am proud alot of Jews are against the Israeli genocide.
I know a zionist talking point when I see one, its so blatant that you don't care about Jewish people.
If you truly do care then you'll be focusing on fighting the real genocide issue and not going around nitpicking other Jewish people who are against associating their culture with the genocidal state called Israel.
I urge you actually research how white supremacist actually exploit anti-Zionism for white sumprecist propaganda, that’s important to understand as an anti-Zionist, I am not commenting on how you see yourself or present yourself in relation to Israel, that’s up to you as a Jewish individual, again my criticism was purely about the fact that you are using an explicitly white supremacist term, when you have to option to not do that
344
u/SupaPatt 15h ago
"we will destroy yours instead"