> From my understanding Ben Gvir(who has very little overall support in Israel from the population at large) getting elected is more of a consequence of Israel having nationwide proportional representation which allows extremists to get elected.
The existence of the support for those extremists has the same root cause that I stated in my original message: the artificial and strategic neocolonial state propped up by outside financial support with the expressed goal of establishing an ethnostate that eventually and inevitably led to apartheid.
> So most states in the middle east should be dissolved? It's not clear what you're actually advocating for in practice.
You can't unscramble an egg. Dissolution of dysfunctional but non-anarchic states is obviously a hyperbolic solution that I think you're aware brings nothing to the table as a suggestion.
What I'm advocating for in practice is quite clear in my original post, but I'll state it again: we need to denounce artificial states, neocolonialism, ethnostates, and apartheid. Much in the same way that we denounce war crimes, sex trafficking, and slavery.
> So we should dissolve most states including the United States due to flawed founding principals?
Again, you're bringing nothing to the table here with hyperbole. But in a way, yes, during Reconstruction a more heavy-handed approach should have been used to eliminate with great fury and prejudice the cultural desire for an apartheid state in the South, and maybe prevented or softened 150 years of suffering for black people and their descendants.
> The existence of the support for those extremists has the same root cause that I stated in my original message: the artificial and strategic neocolonial state propped up by outside financial support with the expressed goal of establishing an ethnostate that eventually led to apartheid.
Do you attribute Palestinian support for extremism to a similar root cause? Opinion polling indicates the extremism problem is far worse on the Palestinian side, Israeli extremism trends tend to be fairly reactionary to Palestinian extremism(i.e. Second Intifada) historically.
> What I'm advocating for in practice is quite clear in my original post, but I'll state it again: we need to denounce artificial states, neocolonialism, ethnostates, and apartheid. Much in the same way that we denounce war crimes, sex trafficking, and slavery.
So you're just advocating just for more virtue signalling instead of actual concrete actions? I don't see how that would meaningfully change the situation on the ground as I don't see how denouncing the right for Israel to exist is going to do anything except push Israel towards a more extreme position.
> But in a way, yes, during Reconstruction a more heavy-handed approach should have been used to eliminate with great fury and prejudice the cultural desire for an apartheid state in the South, and maybe prevented or softened 150 years of suffering for black people and their descendants.
Are you suggesting Israel also take a more heavy handed approach when it comes to eliminating the widespread practice of teaching of hate and antisemitism[0] to Palestinians?
> Do you attribute Palestinian support for extremism to a similar root cause?
Defending your home and against genocide is not "extremism". Anyone who's familiar with the history of Palestine will understand why they fight for their homelands and families:
> Defending your home and against genocide is not "extremism".
The Nakba is not genocide, it might be considered ethnic cleansing but that's not remotely the same as genocide. It also wasn't just one side doing ethnic cleansing either, Israel has a large Arab minority population with full citizenship while the same is not true for Jews in other Arab countries or Palestinian controlled territories(i.e. Area A in the west bank).
Massive amounts of Jews were driven from their homes around the same time as the Nakba throughout the middle east and they are not fighting to take back their original homes. This idea that everyone can somehow go back to their original homes or ancestors homes only serves to perpetuate the conflict.
People flee from wars, sometimes that's simply the least bad option, I have ancestors that have lost their homes due to their home country losing a war of aggression but I am certainly not about to go fight to try and take back my ancestors homes. That's all settled history at this point.
> Anyone who's familiar with the history of Palestine will understand why they fight for their homelands and families
There's much more to it than just the Nakba, it's also the many years of Palestinians being used as a tool by Arab countries to fight Israel.
Keep in mind the UNRWA(UN agency which is in charge of Palestinian refugees) unlike the UNHCR(UN agency in charge of non-Palestinian refugees) does not have a mandate to resettle refugees which deliberately perpetuates the conflict. Arab countries also coordinated a refusal to grant Palestinian refugees or their descendants citizenship as a way to perpetuate the conflict.
Then there's the coordinated antisemitic terrorist propaganda taught to Palestinian children as well.
> The Nakba is not genocide, it might be considered ethnic cleansing but that's not remotely the same as genocide
It was absolutely an ethnic cleansing and the killing never stopped. Israel has been murdering Palestinians (and it's Arab neighbors), since its inception.
All of the things you're saying have been said by Zionists a million times, and presumably are being pumped out by the think tank in the OP to flood the internet with trainable propaganda. It will not work though, the truth is known by too many people.
> Do you attribute Palestinian support for extremism to a similar root cause?
Yes. But we typically don't call oppressed peoples "extremists". For example, I wouldn't call those who rebelled in the Warsaw Ghetto "extremists". I wouldn't call a 14 year old boy who has only known struggle his whole life under apartheid an "extremist". Apartheid also has had a lasting effect on oppressor / oppressed dynamics in South Africa in a sad and complicated way. There is a wrinkle that Muslim extremists fund Palestinian groups, but I view this as yin to the yang of Israeli settlement funding (also extremist). Two sides of the same apartheid coin.
> So you're just advocating just for more virtue signalling instead of actual concrete actions?
Calling everything one disagrees with "virtue signalling" is a tired trope. There is no solution that will occur in our lifetimes, because there is no benevolent and omnipotent authority that can snap their magic finger and cease the suffering that's occurring because of this apartheid ethnostate.
With my suggestion, I'm trying to prevent the next ethnostate disaster. Ideally, I would want our descendants to recoil in disgust when thinking of the concept of funding an ethnostate in the same way that we recoil in disgust at the concept of funding a sex trafficking ring. I will teach my children, and my children's children, that "A State for [] People" is disgusting, no matter what [] is - unless it is "A State for All People".
> I don't see how that would meaningfully change the situation on the ground as I don't see how denouncing the right for Israel to exist is going to do anything except push Israel towards a more extreme position.
It's not that Israel doesn't have a right to exist, you're putting words in my mouth. South Africa was once an apartheid state, and it continues to exist. Similarly, ethnostates need to find ways to transition away from being ethnostates. Being an ethnostate can only lead to crimes against humanity.
> Are you suggesting Israel also take a more heavy handed approach when it comes to eliminating the widespread practice of teaching of hate and antisemitism[0] to Palestinians?
If only I could trust the state of Israel to actually design a "heavy handed approach" that wasn't rape, pillage, murder, and terrorize. The Union could be trusted, but only barely. The Union famously allowed black women to testify against the Union soldiers who raped them. I could never imagine the state of Israel allowing a Palestinian to testify against an Israeli soldier who raped them. Not yet, at least.
> But we typically don't call oppressed peoples "extremists".
Many groups are oppressed to various degrees for various reasons but restoring to terrorism(especially against civilians) is arguably an extremist response. The two are not mutually exclusive.
> For example, I wouldn't call those who rebelled in the Warsaw Ghetto "extremists".
They were being exterminated. I don't recall there being much terrorism targeting German civilians during that rebellion either.
> I wouldn't call a 14 year old boy who has only known struggle his whole life under apartheid an "extremist".
It's not oppression that would make one an extremist, it would be for example holding extremist views such as the supporting of terrorist attacks against civilians. One can teach extremist views to a 14 year old boy, in fact it's often much easier to teach extremist views to children than to adults.
> Calling everything one disagrees with "virtue signalling" is a tired trope.
Advocating for more condemnation without proposing actual solutions is rather pointless unless your end goal is endless war.
> There is no solution that will occur in our lifetimes, because there is no benevolent and omnipotent authority that can snap their magic finger and cease the suffering that's occurring because of this apartheid ethnostate.
So we should just give up and advocate for policies that will clearly never lead to peace? Also an occupation is not the same as apartheid. Apartheid is race based discrimination while the situation with Israel/Palestine falls mostly under the category of citizenship based discrimination(which most countries practice to various degrees).
> With my suggestion, I'm trying to prevent the next ethnostate disaster. Ideally, I would want our descendants to recoil in disgust when thinking of the concept of funding an ethnostate in the same way that we recoil in disgust at the concept of funding a sex trafficking ring. I will teach my children, and my children's children, that "A State for [] People" is disgusting, no matter what [] is - unless it is "A State for All People".
The middle east is full of ethnostates, compared to most states in the region Israel does reasonably well at protecting the rights of minority ethnicity citizens.
> South Africa was once an apartheid state, and it continues to exist.
Sure, but I don't think black South Africans were advocating for the destruction of South Africa as a state during apartheid.
> Similarly, ethnostates need to find ways to transition away from being ethnostates.
How do you propose states do that? Israel is clearly never going to give Palestinians full citizenship when the Palestinians at large do not believe in equal rights.
> If only I could trust the state of Israel to actually design a "heavy handed approach" that wasn't rape, pillage, murder, and terrorize.
So should a different country or organization be trying to de-radicalize Palestinians?
> I could never imagine the state of Israel allowing a Palestinian to testify against an Israeli soldier who raped them. Not yet, at least.
Israel has allowed for testimony from Palestinians in cases to some degree AFAIU but I don't think simply being allowed to give testimony is really the main issue here. The real issues are more tied to the way justice is administered, systematic double standards and the way military law is applied to non-citizens. The lack of any sort of final peace agreement between Israel and Palestine is what perpetuates this system however.
Think we're done here. I don't see a cohesive theme that deserves a response in between your responses to very specific pieces of my argument rooted in deflection and whataboutism. I feel I've expressed my viewpoint sufficiently. I don't feel like debating the definition of "terrorism", "extremist views", "race", "South Africa", etc.
Thank you for holding your ground here. As frustrating as it can be to wade into these threads, pushing back brings some much-needed sanity to a conversation that otherwise gets drowned out by propaganda (or at least the one i'm used to as consumer of regular western media). Beyond the main points, this exchange is a useful case study in Hasbara and bad-faith debate tactics.
(whataboutism, shifting goalposts, and semantic traps designed to derail the discussion; demanding an immediate, comprehensive policy solution just to validate a basic moral critique is a funny double standard given that the Israelis themselves offer no peaceful policy solution or path toward equal rights)
Kudos for calling out these rhetorical games in the open
Well you are implying Israel should be dismantled , in the most optimstic scenario that still involves a large chunk of Israeli Jews finding another place to live.
The existence of the support for those extremists has the same root cause that I stated in my original message: the artificial and strategic neocolonial state propped up by outside financial support with the expressed goal of establishing an ethnostate that eventually and inevitably led to apartheid.
> So most states in the middle east should be dissolved? It's not clear what you're actually advocating for in practice.
You can't unscramble an egg. Dissolution of dysfunctional but non-anarchic states is obviously a hyperbolic solution that I think you're aware brings nothing to the table as a suggestion.
What I'm advocating for in practice is quite clear in my original post, but I'll state it again: we need to denounce artificial states, neocolonialism, ethnostates, and apartheid. Much in the same way that we denounce war crimes, sex trafficking, and slavery.
> So we should dissolve most states including the United States due to flawed founding principals?
Again, you're bringing nothing to the table here with hyperbole. But in a way, yes, during Reconstruction a more heavy-handed approach should have been used to eliminate with great fury and prejudice the cultural desire for an apartheid state in the South, and maybe prevented or softened 150 years of suffering for black people and their descendants.