@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
The reason I put the term "the Jews" in parenthesis is because of the simplism of the idea of Jews being a monolithic entity, much like the simplism of considering Muslims to be a monolithic entity, which is employed for political expediency . The state of Israel and the Zionists do not speak for all of the Jews of the world, however much their rhetoric serves to further their agenda.
Fair enough.
Quote:I object to Israel’s status as a Jewish State based on my aversion to ethnocentricity and the oppression of the Palestinians that is necessary to maintain that ethnocentricity of the state of Israel in the name of a demographic majority of Jews. I’m averse to theocracies as well because they also tend to be oppressive.
But you acknowledge, don't you, that Israel is not a theocracy?
I don't see how oppression of Palestinians is necessary to maintain Israel as a "Jewish State." Not granting the Right of Return is not an act of oppression, and, conceivably, a settlement could be worked out that would provide the Palestinians with the majority of their requirements with the continuance of a "Jewish State." Assuming this is possible would you still call for an end (peacefully) to the Jewish State?
One can have an aversion to ethnocentricity without looking to see it rid from the face of the earth, while such an aversion might lead you to oppose the notion of a Jewish State, is it so strong that you feel compelled to call for an end to it?
Quote:Ethnocentricity in a state tends to be undemocratic when there are other ethnicities that reside in that state, regardless of what form of government they claim to have. With Israel, democracy is implemented to a certain degree in regard to the Arabs living within the green line, but its very own Or Report published at the beginnings of the Second Intifada found that discrimination against the Israeli Arabs was systematic within the Israeli government. This systematic discrimination isn’t surprising considering Israel’s self-designation as "the state for the Jews."
There are many other nations where one ethnicity is in the majority. European nations in particular. Do you consider Sweden or the Netherlands, for example, to be undemocratic? Most nations have difficulties of one sort or the other with ethnic minorities, and, typically, these minorities complain (whether justified or not) that they are suffering in some sense due to their minority status. The fact of the matter is that there are Arab Israelis in the Israeli government and by demographics alone one would not expect them to wield significant influence but they certainly can link with other factions to form blocs. If there is any substantive discrimination, it can, and should, be rectified without changing Israel's status as a Jewish State. It is a
Jewish State, not a
State Only For Jews.
Quote:Yeah, the Palestinians can also improve their democratic political structures. Their attempts to reconcile their two major political factions is an indication of this improvement.
I'm not sure I agree with you on this point that the "unification" represents a reform of their government or an improvement. There is literally bad blood between Hama and Fatah, and I don't see the blood feuds that surely resulted from the purging of Fatah in Gaza; by Hamas, to fade away because of an attempt at unification. This is not intended to cast aspersions on Palestinians as a people, (i.e.
They are scheming perfidious race) but I can't imagine that the unification attempt is much more than an effort by Fatah to serve ulterior motives, and likewise for Hamas. They still haven't pulled if off though, so we'll see.
Quote:Not all lobbying efforts are bad, though, regardless of who is lobbying or for whom it’s being done. I object to the lobbying that’s done in the name of Israel to perpetuate its existence as an ethnocentric state that in order to exist necessarily oppresses the Palestinian people.
It all boils down to what you believe to be oppression of the Palestinian people. I would think that the rest, lobbying, ethnocentricity etc is primarily objectionable to you as a means or motivation to oppress Palestinians, and so I return to my previous question, can't Israel exist as a Jewish State without oppressing Palestinians? And this leads to a second question: How specifically does the oppression manifest? What needs to be stopped or started, in your mind, to end it?
I'm for the Kurds having their own independent state as well, but wouldn't that be an ethnocentric "Kurdish State?" Unless, however, the Kurds are willing to forego inclusion in their nation of that part of Kurdistan than lies on the other side of the Turkish border, it is unlikely that they will have their Kurdish State anytime soon. In any case, they effectively have it right now, and came out of the Iraq War in fine shape. I'm sure they don't, for a minute regret that the US invaded and toppled Saddam.
Quote:If you’re alluding to some scenario of mass genocide of the Jews in Israel were the Right of Return granted to the Palestinian people, yours is a gross non sequitur. It’s based on the smearing of the Palestinians with stereotypes of Islamist bloodlust. You need to get over your prejudices.
You need to calm down. I am not alluding to anything like a bloodbath. If granted the Right of Return tomorrow, the Palestinians wouldn't be in a position to accomplish such a thing even if they all wanted to follow the desires of Hamas and equally bloody minded extremists. As their population grew, however, to a point where they obtained sufficient political power within a democratic framework, the tables would be turned and I seriously doubt that they will be inclined to go to much effort to protect the rights of a Jewish minority. Aside from a sense that there were old scores to settle, and whatever influence the hardliners of today might continue to possess in the future, Muslim States of today are far less inclined to tolerate religious minorities than the one and only Jewish State. I don't think it is exceptionally insulting to the Palestinians as a people to assume that their nation would not be terribly different from other Muslim States in regard to religious tolerance, and since they seem to tolerate undemocratic governance now, I'm not sure why we should expect that they will become enlightened democrats merely by returning to Israel.
Once Palestinians gained political control over Israel, the "Jewish State" would cease to exist, and most of the remaining Jews living there would leave. It would be essentially bloodless but the goal of driving the Jews out of the region will be accomplished.
Quote:What exactly do you mean by Israel remaining a Jewish State if not the maintenance of a Jewish majority there?
Your response seems to indicate you believe that should the Right of Return be granted, it is a foregone conclusion that Jews will (eventually) no longer be in the majority. I agree which is why I suggested it was an impossible hypothetical, but was just trying to gauge the extent of your antipathy to the concept of a "Jewish State."
Finn dAbuzz wrote:I really don't believe that all critics of Israel are anti-Semites, not even all of the rabid ones that greatly exaggerate Israel's errors and misdeeds, while greatly minimizing and excusing those of the Palestinians. I suspect that you will acknowledge that at least some segment of Israel's critics are motivated by bigotry though, and that they enjoy the ability to join others in slamming Jews, and getting to feel morally superior while doing so.
Ok.
Finn dAbuzz wrote:But I can't read your mind, only your comments and, as I wrote, I remain uncertain as to your motivation.
Not that you should care.
Quote:Well, you certainly care enough to question my motivation for criticizing the state of Israel, and the ideology behind it, certainly, I should care enough to respond to these doubts especially when you bandy about suspicions of racial hatred as being my motivation.
I guess I "care" enough to have made the original comment, but I assure you that it's not something that weighs on my mind, my only reason for ending my post with "Not that you should care," was to put my uncertainty in its proper perspective, and not assume some ridiculous position as your judge.
Obviously you "cared" enough to ask me why I was uncertain of your motivation and I tried to seriously and respectfully respond. I think you've done the same which goes to show we can have very different views on this issue and remain civil in our discussion. Perhaps there's hope for the Israelis and Palestinians
Not that you should care...but I am no longer uncertain about your motivation for criticizing Israel.
