Perhaps, and this is very cynical of me, they are thinking, how can we make folks feel bad against the writers and actors?
price hike and people pay for it: They blame the writers and actors for the price hike.
price hike and people do not pay for it and leave, Netflix and people can blame the writers and actors as well. ("see!!! those demands are just not accepted by people!!! ")
I think Netflix would simply see that as a nice extra benefit. But the main reason is to “stick it” to the writers/actors. Without incurring the wrath of customers for the price hike themselves, they will just point their finger…
To be fair, Spotify’s recommendation system is the only algorithmic content feed that I feel actually gets me the kind of stuff I want rather than just exploiting my psyche, so I wouldn’t be surprised if Spotify’s AI integration is likewise the only of it’s kind that has real benefit.
… nothing, because people on the internet complain about everything. Every time. I mean, this service isn’t even out yet, so there hasn’t even been a chance to evaluate their music discovery algorithm.
I understand and relate with the frustration regarding the whole “more streaming services, higher fees” thing that’s still continuing in the industry, though. I mean, $20 a month for just music?! There are competing services that offer lossless audio at a lower price. But yeah—streamflation sucks!
Even that’s a fairly new standard for calling something AI. Video Game enemy algorithms have always been called AI, for instance, regardless of their underlying technologies. That’s part of why people tend to use ML (Machine Learning) as an alternative term: AI has meant a lot of things over the years and the term is so general that using it to refer to e.g. LLMs (Large Language Models) is just confusing
IDK I think it’s pretty cool to have a voice that knows my name and tells me the theme of the next few tracks. I really wish I could give it some more feedback but as it is it’s a small but nice addition sometimes that isn’t possible without the recent AI advancements. I wouldn’t pay more for it though.
There’s way too much emphasis on a few songs from each artist that seem to make them more money, or are otherwise pushed by the record companies. AI or not, if it gets me deeper tracks in my daily mixes and artist radios, I’ll pay the extra for that and lossless.
I used to really enjoy the Discover Weekly lists but for the past few years it just pushes what sounds like AI generated music. It’s like a bunch of covers of popular music done by people I’ve never even heard of (who probably cost Spotify less $ per play). I’ve had better luck with stuff like Spot-a-like recommending new/similar music that I actually might like.
There’s a lot of commotion about how so many Jazz tracks that pop up in Spotify playlists come from clearly made up bands with one or two songs, millions of views, and no internet presence anywhere outside of Spotify.
As if Spotify wasn‘t bordering bloatware territory already. Just give me a music subscription service without the dozenth of functions I will never use or „recommendations“ that are clearly just paid ads and don‘t fit my taste at all.
The big thing is the Hamas attack wasnt the start of all this. It wasnt Israel minding their own business and Hamas invading for the glory of Islam. The warning cries of a humanitarian crisis were going off long before this recent war, from international humanitarian agencies like Unicef. Gaza was being militarily oppressed by Israel, blocking humanitarian aid, international trade, even denying access to their own waters for fishing.
Civilians were dying off already as a result of Israel, and Israel ignored the warnings, the international community ignored the warnings, and then its shocked pikachus all around as a dying people fight back for survival.
Because Israel will never let them back in if they leave. That is not hypothetical; it happened to thousands of Palestinians during the 6-day war, and their families are still stuck in Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon today.
It’s also because Hamas has its origins in the Muslim Brotherhood which for obvious reasons means that Egypt is very leery of accepting Palestinians from Gaza.
I’m not defending their position, just explaining it; Egypt is basically a military dictatorship at this point and the Muslim Brotherhood is enemy number one for them.
@FaulerFuffi assuming that's a genuine question there are a bunch of reasons and one is they don't want to open themselves up to being attacked by Israel.
Except jews, christians and muslims lived pretty much peacefully together during ottoman rule. The violence worsened when britian controlled palestine and then became a lot worse during the nakba and israeli occupation. It’s not about ‘having clean hands’. It’s about stopping genocide and understanding that occupation and colonialism leads to violent pushback. It always has and always will.
The Ottomans took control of palestine after a war with the Mamluk empire. Palestine hasn’t been and independent country for much of it’s history. It’s still a form of occupation but if you were muslim, christian or jewish you still had access to certain rights (unless you were a slave). Mostly if you were muslim.
I dont know anything about this. We’re they all living in the same neighborhoods or we’re they in different neighborhoods in the same city or like different towns in the same Provence?
Just curious how closely bound their networks were. In my home town folks of different faiths are neighbors and mostly go to the same schools and share a government. There’s not much segregation at all. Sure, there’s racism among all groups, but it gets much weaker and much less frequent with each generation.
Oh yeah and fuck the ole British state. Bunch of tossers meddling all about so they can exploit everyone’s resources. Their emancipated colony, all-grown-up now, isn’t much better.
Mostly it goes back to the 1940's. There was more history of Zionism beforehand, Jewish settlers gradually coming in to live in the holy land. But after WW2 was the large influx and big push for a Jewish ethnostate. Aaand the people living there already opposed it from the start. And since then it's been very apparent why, because Israel pushes beyond the borders they were already given from Palestinian land, and militarily occupy the Palestinian land they dont yet claim.
This issue has nothing to do with Jews. It has to do with Zionism.
Jews have lived there peacefully, yes. They did so without stealing their neighbors land. Its the Zionists that formed Israel and stole ~40% of Palesines land that caused the war.
There have always been Jews opposed to Zionism since the idea was first thought up.
After the Nazi shit and the reluctance of the West to accept refugees I can understand why.
And look at the rise of cookers who think we live on a flat earth run by a cabal of Jewish shape-shifting lizards from the planet Nibiru. I do not think social progress by humanity is inevitable anymore.
After the Nazi shit and the reluctance of the West to accept refugees
Zionism starts in the 1800s, well before the Nazi shit. The 1940’s One Million Plan actually got amended after the Holocaust by stirring up a civil war so more Jews from Arab countries would flee in fear of prosecution in order to meet the Zionist numbers, precisely because “too many” Western countries were accepting (or got forced to accept) Holocaust refugees, who were nowhere as many as previously expected (by the Zionists).
Nazi Germany could really happen again
Not exactly. Genocides have been going on all the time, just the countries and ethnicities have been changing. So you could say it’s been happening all along… while the chance of the same exact combination repeating, is quite low.
I used to resent that Jews had a special word just for them: “antisemitism”. But now I see it might be warranted because although every migrant group gets racist pushback, it is Jews who are the target of crazy conspiracy theorists. It is Jews who are said to secretly run the world.
I am not joking about the shape-shifting lizards from the planet Nibiru. That is from David Icke who says our world leaders are those lizards.
It is thought that he is using it as a dog-whistle for Nazis (to mean Jews). Certainly there is a disproportionate crossover between Nazis and Icke supporters.
Icke also championed the 5G conspiracies, is an anti-vaxxer and thinks the moon is a hollow spaceship used by aliens to spy on us from. I can’t even…
I used to resent that Jews had a special word just for them: “antisemitism”
“Antisemitism” is technically a BS word, just like the “Semitism” word it comes from. It was invented in the 1800s by some proto-Nazis, adopted in the 1900s by Nazis after the concept was already debunked, and continued in the 2000s by neo-Nazis. Nothing to be either jealous or proud of.
Jews who are said to secretly run the world
Somewhat ironically, not so secretly, and not a conspiracy.
Since 70CE, all Jews have been required to both read and understand the Torah, while other religions relied on priests “interpreting” the sacred texts for uneducated peasants, leading to Jewish literacy levels of 70% or more in countries with otherwise a 3% or less during the Middle Ages. At the same time, both Christians and Muslims were forbidden from “usury”, or charging interest on loans (Muslim banking still is), but guess who wasn’t: Jews. And who’d guess it, the Diaspora meant there was one or a dozen Jews pretty much in every city. As commerce grew all over the world, merchants used to go to literate Jews, like the ones sitting on the bench (“banca”) in Florence, asking for loans and generally to do what nobody else was either capable or allowed to do, like letting them carry bank notes instead of coffers full of gold, redeemable at other “branches”. Big surprise, some centuries later, you can trace most of the financial world back to Jews, both the concepts and ownership.
Also not a coincidence there have been so many famous Jewish artists, scientists or inventors. Anyone who’s got a problem with that, can thank their own religious ancestry for the cultural suicide.
dog-whistle for Nazis (to mean Jews)
…but of course it’s easier to blame the guys who got it right, while spreading further conspiranoic BS to dig an even deeper hole for one’s own culture. 🤦
Thanks. Your summary is great copypasta I will be using in future.
I learned all about that from my Jewish friend (who is afraid to let people know. I used to think it was paranoid but after the rise of the cookers and Nazis, I now appreciate his caution).
The only AI I fear is Augmented Idiocy. Covid will subside but the declining language and science literacy and numeracy is just getting worse. Flat earthers are on the increase FFS.
“Antisemitism” is technically a BS word, just like the “Semitism” word it comes from. It was invented in the 1800s by some proto-Nazis, adopted in the 1900s by Nazis after the concept was already debunked, and continued in the 2000s by neo-Nazis.
BS or not the racist extremists, from what you tell us, made up the word Semitism so surely that warrants legitimate pushback with the term Antisemitism?
Both words were made by the same people, claiming a racial difference between those descending from semitic cultures and those who were not (this was already debunked by the 1920s). “Semitism” was intended as a pejorative, with “Antisemitism” being the idea of “cleansing” the society from the negative influence of “semitism”.
It’s a made up Boogeyman used as an excuse to have something to push back against… and of course you can unite people around those ideas.
As a freakishly recent example, right now I’ve been watching the news on TV here in Spain. There is a problem around choosing a president, with the opposition using every strategy they can to discredit the incumbent.
One of the arguments they just decided to get up in arms about, is the incumbent just revealed agreed to forgive 15B€ of fiscal debt from one of the regions, which the representative of another region was being shown Live heavily criticizing, going on about how it should be all regions negotiating together, yadda yadda… and just then a news ticker goes by, stating that the incumbent has also agreed to forgive another 12B€ to the region of the guy just speaking Live. So much for “negotiating all together”!
Boogeyman created, and debunked Live. Wish I had recorded it. 😄
But wait, there’s more!
Just then, they switched to the speaker for the opposition party, also Live, who started criticizing the incumbent for trying to agree on which days are going to be holidays and which work days, to fit in the voting calendar… news ticker goes by: opposition party, with majority in the Senate, tries to urgently pass a law change to delay the votes so they fall on holidays and the incumbent runs out of time.
Seriously!? Two in the span of less than 10 minutes! 🔔🔔
Speaking of dodgy politicians: this ex lawyer-soldier pointed out how Australian military commanders were behaving illegally in Afghanistan and only acting to please politicians who in turn were only concerned with their own popularity (measured by polling).
Nothing he said was untrue, but instead of investigating the war crimes the government is trying to throw him into jail for the rest of his life because, according to them, his whistleblowing compromised national security.
Clearly I need to read up more on the Antisemitism. You have inspired me.
Your TV sounds like comedy. Yes it is indeed a shame you didn’t record it. Two in a short period of special but in future even if you could capture don’t individual occurrences it would make for a wonderful compilation. Perhaps they people running the ticker are hoping someone like you will do just that?
They were never given a vote. The UN voted to take away the Palestinians’ land, and the actual people living there weren’t given a single fucking vote in the issue.
1948 - A day before Britain’s retreat, Israel claims all the land
A day later, Arab countries attack Israel in order to "push the Jews into the sea"
Israel wins most of the land, except Gaza and Cisjordania
Jews were given the land
Well… kind of, but not really, not exactly that land, and the result wasn’t truly agreed upon by anyone.
the 6 day war
That’s in 1967. Israel wasn’t “given” any land there, it used a provocation by Egypt in order to claim all of it (and have Egypt give thanks for not claiming all of Sinai too… for now).
Well… kind of, but not really, not exactly that land, and the result wasn’t truly agreed upon by anyone.
They were given the land by UN at the start of the partition. I want discussing whether it was just.
the 6 day war
That’s in 1967.
Yep, just as I said.
Israel wasn’t “given” any land there
Didn’t say it was dune in 1967. It was given by UN straight after WW2. I was being as brief as possible.
It seems we agree on everything except the following. Hopefully you can clarify for me please…
1948 - A day before Britain’s retreat, Israel claims all the land
Not explicitly AFAIK. This is my understanding…
Arabs were not OK with the UN partition but Jews were. Jews therefore understood that would mean Arabs would annul the partition as soon as the Brits exited so they declared independence from the day of the exit but I cannot find any borders mentioned. Then the Arabs really did attack.
Do you know of any borders mentioned by Jews then? Did they state “we want to be observed of the Arab partitions?” Certainly that is how it ended up but was that the plan on Independence Day? Wikipedia is vague.
Although Ben-Gurion had told the audience that he was reading from the scroll of independence, he was actually reading from handwritten notes because only the bottom part of the scroll had been finished by artist and calligrapher Otte Wallish by the time of the declaration (he did not complete the entire document until June)
Because there was no time to spare, the Declaration was read from a mimeographed sheet, and the 37 signatories – members of the Provisional Council of State – signed their names to a blank parchment sheet. The official copy of the Declaration was later inscribed by an artist.
THE STATE OF ISRAEL is prepared to cooperate with the agencies and representatives of the United Nations in implementing the resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the economic union of the whole of Eretz-Israel.
The UN resolution called for an economic union of “Israel and Palestine”, which would imply that “Eretz-Israel” was supposed to mean the whole land of the “Mandatory Palestine”.
Prior to that:
ACCORDINGLY WE, MEMBERS OF THE PEOPLE’S COUNCIL, REPRESENTATIVES OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF ERETZ-ISRAEL AND OF THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT, ARE HERE ASSEMBLED ON THE DAY OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER ERETZ-ISRAEL AND, BY VIRTUE OF OUR NATURAL AND HISTORIC RIGHT AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL.
The British mandate was over the whole “Mandatory Palestine”… but the declaration talks about the State of Israel being “in Eretz-Israel”, without specifying any explicit borders.
The “spirit” of the text can be interpreted as intended to follow the borders of the UN resolution… maybe.
Since the resolution clearly was not accepted by the Arab states, it would require some further analysis whether that means Israel is supposed to prioritize establishing an economic union of the whole land, or strictly follow the resolution.
So it sounds like the UN presumed the states would form a union (like the EU) without caring if the member states wanted it.
Arabs I think were not happy even with the initial borders since Israel were a smaller population but handed a larger land area than Arabs. Maybe some anti-semitism too but that disparity must have stung.
Israel was happy with the allotment and even with the union as long as they were the masters of the union. Islamophobia too perhaps.
Chicken and the egg. Each side had a reason to distrust the other and it has just been spiralling ever since.
Seems like Britain should have stayed on a few more years but were probably too tired after WW2.
I am mainly learning only now. Are you also researching as we go or have you already familiarized yourself with much of the detail? Either way I appreciate having someone who is polite to discuss this with.
Indeed, the UN expected a sort of conjoined two-state arrangement.
The problem with the Declaration of Independence, is that, not only it was signed before getting written, rising the question of whether should the notes, the speech, or the document crafted after the fact to be considered the “official” one… but also Israel still lacks a proper Constitution; it has a set of Basic Laws, the last one of which got approved in 2018, but it’s expected more should follow, so it can still be seen as a “not fully established” state, making stuff up on the go.
Are you also researching as we go
Some of this stuff I’ve double checked, but most had already looked up before. One thing it would be interesting to know more about, are the nuances in the Hebrew text of the Declaration of Independence… but my knowledge of Hebrew barely goes as far as realizing that the English version is not a word for word translation.
Maybe by reading multiple translations you can at least narrow down to which the problematic passages are so then you could concentrate on them with a fluent Hebrew speaker.
I know one but it is hard to get him to stop once he gets started and he is right wing (I am left) so I don’t want to listen to his preaching. Nevertheless if you give me a specific question I will ask.
Why do i keep hearing it described like losing a game? Zionists invaded, murdered, and exiled palestinians from their land, that should "win" them nothing but opposition from the international community, same as happening with Russias invasion of Ukraine.
Why do i keep hearing it described like losing a game?
What do you mean by “it”?
I thought we were talking specifically about changes to the borders of what was given to them (irresponsibly?) by the Allies after WW2.
The 6 day war in 1967 was initiated by surrounding Arab countries. Israel won that war and expanded into the Sinai and Gaza (Egypt), Golan Heights (Syria), West Bank and East Jerusalem (Jordan). They didn’t initiate the expansion. They then returned the Sinai to Egypt.
Admittedly after that they did take more without provocation. The chipping away with settlements is happening to this very day.
I just rewatched the above video in order to spell out the details. It is all new to me. Have a look yourself if you are genuinely interested in discussing the conflict. It really is well made and easy to follow (I dunno if there are errors though).
Nothing was ever given to them, only taken. They were living there already. They did not consent to being murdered and evicted from where they lived, and predictably they fought against it. That they lost against a much larger, internationally backed army invading their land doesnt exactly persuade me that they should lose their right to living there.
Who is “them”? I was talking about the land given to Jews by the colonisers: England and France.
The 6 day war had a larger army on the Arab side. I dunno how much financial backing Israel had from USA or how it compared with the backing (if any) by the Arab oil states and I doubt you know or care either.
I am trying to learn here, but you just insist on lazy mud slinging. Blocking you.
Yeah, but siding with Israel here is the logical equivalent of siding with Andrew Jackson and supporting the Indian Removal Act as he committed genocide against the native people.
The power imbalance and how Israel has used it is what makes it imperative that Israel be held accountable by the international community.
I’m glad you bring up the power imbalance. The “both sides have been doing horrible stuff” only works if both sides have equal footing, which they clearly do not. This does not negate the crimes commited by Hamas, but extremism doesn’t come from nowhere and Israël has a responsibility in that.
I do agree the Hamas attack wasn’t the start of this. However tactically it was incredibly silly, honestly what did they think would happen?
They gave Netanyahu, who was finally fumbling at the reigns after almost thirty years aan excuse to execute his wet dreams and all of Israel uniting behind him.
I see no way how they could have thought the attack would benefit their cause.
I dont think people are appreciating the context of Gazans dying off. It wasnt a stable situation that was fine to continue as it was going, imagine youre locked in a room with a lunatic with a knife trying to kill you. Youre not likely to beat the lunatic, but youre gonna try, you dont have any other options.
Waiting didnt work, protests didnt work, pleading with the international community didnt work, they cant leave. Everyone keeps saying they shouldnt have fought back, but what should they have done? Nothing is not available as an option.
I appreciate that and I have equated the current war to the Warsaw ghetto uprising. I’m not an apologist.
However, as Sun Zu said, you must not interrupt your enemy when he’s making a mistake. Netanyahu’s might was failing. Israeli youth was rising up against him.
It’s not like they absolutely needed to do this right now, and they could’ve quite easily understood what the response would be (maybe not the entire extent).
“Rising up” insomuch as they were protesting his proposed changes, not in that they were contemplating actually removing him from power, or even trying to oust/disband/etc Likud.
Don’t you think that, however small, some action must take form?
When I was small there were two conflicts that dividend public opinion and were sure to last centuries, those bring the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Irish one.
I think that disengaging the murder spiral makes things better. Both the resentment of the Israeli youth against their more and more fascist government was an incredibly worthwhile step.
Hamas and Likud alle don’t like any two state proposals, that’s why this is happening.
If I came into your house and drove you by force into the garage, I don’t think you’d want a “2-house solution” that allows you to live there, either.
And no, I don’t think that essentially saying, “why don’t the Palestinians wait around being killed quietly, to see if the youths protesting today will massively change Israel’s trajectory when they get into politics in 20 years?” is a reasonable, measured, or humane stance.
What authority was netanyahu losing? Or are you just referring to there being some chance of him losing an election? Because Gaza did wait and see for several elections. He was just reelected in 2022. So apparently he's not being voted out.
Sure, but it wasn’t saving any Palestinians lives in the process OR the goal. Most Israelis weren’t opposing Netanyahu because they were against the Israeli genocide of Palestinians, they just didn’t like what he was doing to prevent punishment for his corruption. They wanted to replace him, but it would just be with another genocidal guy.
I don’t know. I remember both Rabin and Sharon, who briefly gave some hope in the nineties. It never materialized but it’s hope I must cling to. Just like the Irish managed to put their para military ways aside.
The sad part of this attack is that that hoe is pushed back even further.
So call me naive or a fool, but I keep hoping for a new generation that distances itself from the spiral of violence. It’s a feint hope, that got even more so due to this new horrible episode.
It all started when Israel showed up on the block and forcibly removed 700000 Palestinians from their homes. There’s no history before that worth discussing as it is archeological records, not history.
Areas that were once 90% Palestinian, suddenly became 90% Jewish. Those people are still fighting to get their homes back, and Israel is continuing to evict Palestinians daily.
The first step to a solution is to recognize that Israel’s goals are to ethnically cleanse the area and then work from there.
They did a little more than simply “fight back.” They also engaged in widespread and utterly gratuitous acts of violence and torture in ways that can only have been calculated to trigger an overreaction on the part of Israel. They knew exactly what they were doing and what would happen. They obviously don’t give a fuck about their own people.
John Amann told NBC News he bought $2,200 worth of Trump Bucks and other items over the past year only to discover they were worthless when he tried to cash them in at his local bank.
Oh man I want video of him trying to cash them in at a real bank so bad.
Jesus, imagine being the teller who had to explain to an adult without an apparent intellectual disability that paper with Trump’s face on it is not legal tender even if they paid thousands of dollars for it.
I’m from Vancouver, Canada. Waaaaaay back, the Canadian dollar was up on the American, and the local classic rock dj called a Walmart in Texas to ask if he could buy a bbq with Canadian dollars. The lady on the line’s response was basically this. I think I remember it verbatim, but I could be off a bit:
Honey, we only take American dollars here…so why don’t you go back to Canadia and exchange your fake money for real ones, come on back and you can get a bbq.
Yeah. I don't expect to use USD in the middle of nowhere France or Germany when Euros exist. The exchange rate doesn't really matter: the store isn't equipped to take that currency.
Exactly. If you look at the big picture, Israelis have killed WAY more Palestinians over the years, as well as apartheid and stealing Palestinian land.
I’m not taking sides, but the one sided coverage gross.
The problem with this conflict in particular is that taking the side of Palestine has become synonymous with taking the side of Hamas, or with simply being antisemitic. It’s essential if you want to express any support for Palestine that you also painstakingly lay out exactly what you support and what you don’t, otherwise… Well, the onion said it best.
I don’t think articulating a concern for any civilians on any side is taken poorly, and I don’t think that the majority of the media has skewed any calls for humanitarian aid and adherance to international warfare rules as anti-semitism. In fact, the new york times has published both investigative and opinion pieces that are very sympathetic to Palestinian civilians, and calling out Israeli disproportionate response.
I think part of the problem in discussing the issue is that the events of today are inextricably woven into the events of the
1948 founding of Israel by the UN at the end of the British mandate.
the invasion of the five armies and the 1949 armistice.
the six day war, and the loss of the Sinai peninsula.
the eventual recognition of borders by Egypt and Jordan.
the results of the shelling of Beirut after the Hezbollah attack in 2006.
But that is a lot of history, but the back and forth of tragedies, including disproportionate response is driven by these events.
When most people online seem to confuse the history of Gaza with that of the West Bank, or conflate Hamas and Hezbollah, it is no wonder that discussion breaks down.
Unfortunately I was in a debate elsewhere on the fediverse where the other person said there is no legitimate response to the Hamas attack for Israel because Israel’s existence is the source of the problem.
That sounds like the Hezbollah general who yesterday called this a “war of existence” in that either Israel exists or the Arab alliance exists. So how do you reason with that position, and how many people objecting to Israel’s use of force are really all that knowledgeable of the history?
I also think that people underestimate how you reason with allies. If Biden hadn’t shown solidarity with Israel, then his visit today wouldn’t have resulted in the opening of humanitarian aid. You influence allies by showing solidarity publicly, and having frank conversations on private.
Anyway, sorry for the long post. Have a great evening!
It doesn’t matter who killed more. That’s why this never ends. “My tragedy is worse than your tragedy” is never productive. It just serves as an (incorrect) argument for why it’s permissible for one group to keep committing atrocities while the other group has to suffer it and be the first to bury the hatchet. Then the script flips and everyone does it again from their respective positions. It never ends.
It’s terrible that some civilians immigrated to Israel for the sole purpose of becoming settlers and pushing Palestinians out.
It’s terrible that some civilians immigrated to Gaza for the sole purpose of having as big a family as possible to use their own children and grandchildren as human shields against Israeli settlers.
It’s terrible that dual-citizenship people on both sides are asking “their” [other] countries to evacuate them, after having spent decades there on purpose.
It’s terrible that Israel is willing to watch millions of civilians starve… that Egypt doesn’t want to let refugees in… and Hamas doesn’t want to let them out.
There has been some uproar this week because there are over 10,000 Spanish citizens in Israel and Gaza, but the government only decided to fleet 2 military planes to evacuate 500 of them. Turns out, they were only evacuating the “tourists and people on business trips”… meaning the rest are not; they’re people who decided to immigrate there. Following that, different reporters got hold of people “left behind”, both in Israel and Gaza.
One of those people, was a lady who immigrated to Gaza 40 years ago, “to settle right next to the Israeli border”, and now kept repeating how the Spanish consulate is ignoring her request for evacuating her 19-people family, with many children among them.
It’s estimated that 50% of the population of Gaza are underage, meaning they’re people born in the last 18 years, into a conflict that’s been going for 70 years, from way before this lady decided to immigrate there 40 years ago and contribute to the population growth.
Both sides are engaged in a long term (100+ years) strategy of trying to out-number each other, with sympathizers of each side migrating there to increase the numbers for the conflict. Since immigration into Gaza and Palestine is more restricted than into Israel, the former have been trying to churn out as many “new residents” (aka kids) as quickly as possible… who are now being used by Hamas as a humanitarian crisis bargaining chip.
Notice how even with a steady emigration of about half the population of Palestine every year, the total population keeps growing, along with a steady immigration rate of around 200K/year:
You do realize that poorer regions have much higher fertility because of much higher child mortality rates and much lower average lifespans, right? Fertility is inversely proportional with wealth and access to healthcare.
This isn’t unique to Gaza. It’s true in Africa, India, and pre-communist China.
Notice how the sharpest decline in Palestine’s demographic pyramid appears between 14 and 34 years old, or about when people realize what’s going on and decide to GTFO, and how that fits the constantly increasing emigration, while the increasing population —despite higher child mortality, lower lifespans, and extreme emigration— fits the profile of adapting fertility to and ideological parity with Israel’s immigration rates.
I’d recommend you take a look at the demographic pyramids of countries in Africa. Mortality is steepest in the 14-34 range because that’s when most people die.
That’s nonsense. Feel free to investigate the demographics of the World, Africa, Niger, Ukraine, China, or the US, to get a feel for “infant mortality” or “when most people die”.
A spokeswoman for Intuit, Tania Mercado, criticized the direct file project as a “half-baked solution” and a waste of taxpayer money. “The direct file scheme is a solution in search of a problem,”
That’s rich coming from a company that created a problem so they can sell their solution.
Either way, there are better software than Intuit, like FreeTaxUSA.
I liked that quote. Intuit being the biggest waste of money claiming direct filing is a waste of money. Like you said, FreeTaxUSA is at least reasonable.
Hard to argue that having a dozen companies developing IT software and systems to file taxes is more efficient them the organization that specifies the filing requirements do it once. The current system is more like a welfare program for the tax companies.
He bought $2,200 worth of Trump Bucks and other items over the past year only to discover they were worthless when he tried to cash them in at his local bank
“Now I’m questioning whether he is aware of this,” Amann said of Trump.
I’m not anti-China, I genuinely wish the best for the people of China. I’m anti-CCP.
I don’t think China will really be able to engage or cooperate with a world community in any meaningful way until the CCP is out of the picture. There’s simply zero trust there from anyone.
The government of the United States is also highly untrustworthy, but plenty of other nation’s governments engage and cooperate with the US. This isn’t whataboutism, it’s evidence that there must be other factors.
In some ways, yes, certain factions within the US government have been untrustworthy. However, I think people do not understand that China is still on a completely different level. There’s a reason that the US is broadly trusted by its allies (or was, largely, up until the recent decade of overt campaign of internal sabotage).
To compare the US and China is like comparing Kent State to Tienanmen Square. Were they both violations of fundamental human liberty? Yes. Are they at all comparable as reflections of the viability of each respective state’s potential to sustain human liberty? No.
The US is in a conflict with itself, between far-right, corporate factions and those groups that actually defend some semblance of democratic liberty. This fact is the proof of the difference, that some meaningful element of democracy does exist in the US. The US has the ability to course correct. In China rule has been consolidated under a single man, unchallenged now, who has created hundreds of prison camps and a surveillance state unmatched even by the US. He ran literal execution vans in his run up to power.
Convincing people that the crimes committed by China against its own people and those they’ve colonized are normal is a way of lessening the seriousness with which those crimes are regarded. You have to ask yourself if that’s really the goal you want to be serving. You’re not required to sing the praises of the US, but acknowledging the meaningful degree of difference is critical to preventing the world sliding further into an authoritarian paradigm.
certain factions within the US government have been untrustworthy.
between far-right, corporate factions and those groups that actually defend some semblance of democratic liberty.
This just sounds like a whole lot of liberal US apologia. It isn’t actually far off from regressive phrases like MAGA or A Few Bad Apples. There was no golden time when the US has been a bastion of freedom and human welfare and it mostly shows signs of getting worse, and you cannot fix the US by removing a few politicians.
Are they at all comparable as reflections of the viability of each respective state’s potential to sustain human liberty? No.
I don’t see what the point is of picking two specific events when we are discussing nations and governments as a whole. Taken in totality the US does not and has not ever shown signs of sustaining liberty as you put it. The law and order system is a joke, human welfare is a joke, safety is a joke, education is a joke, foreign policy is a joke. A lot of these fundamental issues are completely ignorable for the privileged, and the last one ignorable if you live in the US itself, but I am not looking to have liberty for some and not others.
You’re not required to sing the praises of the US, but acknowledging the meaningful degree of difference is critical to preventing the world sliding further into an authoritarian paradigm.
I disagree. I think what you’re doing right now is what strengthens authoritarianism in “Western” countries. Always framing Western countries, especially the US, as the lesser of two evils just justifies nationalism and militarism and downplays the need for radical change. What’s the point of this liberty you speak of if we don’t use it to criticize our own governments, and why stop at just criticism? The truth is you’ll only realize how thin your liberty actually is when you actually pose a threat.
But I’m not sure how we got on this tangent. I was simply responding to the notion of geopolitical trust and how that relates to the US and China. The US reneges on international agreements all the time or simply does not adhere to them. The government also partakes in the manipulation of foreign governments, extrajudicial murders in foreign countries in “times of peace”, and sabotages countries with embargos. All of this should make the US untrustworthy, but the unspoken part is that when we talk about trust we are taking about among Western countries. These nations have some shared geopolitical goals and because the US’s violations aren’t against these nations but against ones where say the common religion is different or the people have a darker average complexion they can be ignored.
What’s the point of this liberty you speak of if we don’t use it to criticize our own governments, and why stop at just criticism? The truth is you’ll only realize how thin your liberty actually is when you actually pose a threat.
You’re conflating a comparison with an endorsement.
One can say the US is unquestionably better than China while still acknowledging the US has issues.
I’d challenge you to find any country that’s truly “trustworthy.” That doesn’t mean I think it’s impossible, I just think historically humans suck at governorship.
As for what’s different between the US and China, your original point, I think a lot of it is just what’s available/who has the better deal. The US historically has the better innovations, the better weaponry, and in the case of Europe, bidirectional cultural influences, and there’s just a lot more history with the US as a partner and a lot more families with folks in both locations.
This is an important difference that always gets left out in these articles.
Of course people will be anti-China when the CCP is making the movies (edit, I meant “moves” but movies works too haha). It’s one thing to ask for companies to make a version of media specifically for your country, but using your weight to make that the version? That is an insanely big red flag when Tencent has roots in everything and also goes by the whim of the party.
On the flip side, my friend from college moved to China a couple years after we graduated and he’s been doing really, really well. He loves it there. Ironically he ended up getting a job with Tencent and is a pretty big part of their last released Synced. So I’m glad he’s doing well, but it’s also been weird talking about certain topics with him. It was also weird when I was asking about how he was talking with me and he’s like “oh I just have to get on a VPN and etc so I that’s why I’m not around much, but it’s cool lol.” Kinda freaky when I also just see the articles about a company getting fined for using a VPN. I’m sure he’ll be fine but it’s still slightly worrying.
Which ultimately kind of sums up the situation. My friend loved his experience in China so much so that he moved back there seemingly permanently and set himself up with a nice life with the culture seeming to be a big part of that. And then there’s the actions of the government. Many of the same criticisms can absolutely be held toward the U.S. regarding housing and towards a not-so-small portion our political actions, however it seems the difference is that we don’t have a knitted corporate government quite yet. I dunno, the sway of Apple, MS, whoever else just doesn’t have the same weight as the CCP and Tencent. That generally seems to be peoples issue
I dunno, the sway of Apple, MS, whoever else just doesn’t have the same weight as the CCP and Tencent.
The fact that you name Apple and Microsoft makes me think there is a blind spot here. If you are taking about big tech with it’s tendrils in US policy I’d go for Google and Facebook. Big pharma and the military industrial complex are even bigger issues. These industries don’t just undermine the US but harm the global community as well. Then you have think tanks, often funded by capital, shaping narratives and foreign policy.
I more just didn’t want to list more than 3 companies, hence “whoever else”. You’re right that Google and Facebook are closer to the tendrils of Tencent than MS or Apple, or well, Apple at least.
Yes, and this is why the experience of individuals can’t be taken as an indication of whether there is or isn’t a problem.
China is a huge country with a long history and cultures of its own, the people there are like anywhere else mainly concerned with just living their day to day life. But we learned from the middle of the last century that people can be living a relatively normal life directly adjacent to some of the most heinous crimes against humanity our species has ever seen.
There’s a lot of value that the people of China could contribute, culturally and economically, if they were in a position to actually freely and openly engage with the rest of the world in an honest way. Some incredible cinema, for example, came out of China prior to the new age of censorship and hyper-aggressive information control brought in by Xi. I just wish that the CCP was out of the picture so that could happen again, China has so much more to offer.
Of course Israel knows this is not possible, but it’s a nice statement to point at every time they get caught killing civilians. “Look we told them to leave, nothing we can do after that.”
The problem is that they are based on two false assumptions.
The IDF today dropped leaflets over Beit Lahia in the Gaza Strip calling on people to leave their homes and go to shelters
There are no bomb shelters in Palestine or place to run to. If there were, Hamas would take them over. They are literally sardines. Unless Egypt will take refugees, so far that looks like a no.
The leaflet does not specify humanitarian corridors or how they can flee.
So I just heard about this whole thing last night. What is the preferred Israeli response to this?
To me it looks like Hamas using occupied buildings as places to attack from, the Israel being told they aren’t allowed to hit back at people using human shields.
Your response seems to be equivalent to “never defend yourself against someone holding an innocent hostage.”
To clarify, I’m not sure what response doesn’t result in more innocent people dying.
I don’t really care about this specific conflict more than any other. And morally I don’t care for the lives of one side more than the other. And morally I don’t care who lived in what cities 100 years ago (note: unless those specific people are involved).
My confusion seems to be that the ‘right’ response people seem to want to this is no response.
Israel definitely is well within their rights to retaliate against Hamas, it would be foolish to claim otherwise. It’s the exact way they are doing it that is the issue, they are behaving nearly as poorly as their enemy. You can’t just tell the world “look at the barbarity of Hamas slaughtering innocent civilians just out there kibbutzing” and then turn around and bomb civilian hospitals, completely disregard rules of engagement around medical aid killing humanitarian volunteers you were aware of, shutting off all power, water and closing food supply to the Gaza strip, and then act like it’s somehow better than that.
Hamas absolutely sucks and Israel has every right to defend themselves from terrorism, but the Palestinian children buried under rubble didn’t deserve any of this. (Neither did the Israeli citizens who were slaughtered and kidnapped for that matter.)
Israel has the technology, the troops, and the tactics to be far more precise and surgical in their retaliation, but their response has been punitive and brutal, and seems to almost maximize collateral damage. Of course that’s what Netanyahu and his thugs will all but directly say they want given the opportunity to speak. I do not believe that properly represents the citizens of Israel who are generally much more sympathetic to the people of Palestine.
Both the citizens of Israel and Palestine have been failed by their leadership. Agree or disagree, at this point, I just had to write that down somewhere. I know people from both Palestine and Israel, wonderful people, all this is heartbreaking.
War is hell, even if you play by the rules, why make it even worse?
Thanks. It’s hard for me to judge tactics from video, as I can’t really tell what is accidental collateral damage vs purposeful. The statements by Israeli leadership definitely supports the view that they are purposefully being punitive… which is monstrous.
Stop the occupation of Palestine, stop the settlement of the West Bank, and stop the apartheid status of Palestinians in Israel. Then either allow Palestine to be an independent country in the UN, responsible for their own security and economy. Or give all Palestinians voting rights in Israel as a one state solution. After that is set and done set up an independent criminal court to judge on all war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in this region, this will of course also include Hamas.
Israel used to occupy Gaza the same way it currently does the West Bank; there were even Jewish settlers living there. The IDF withdrew in 2005 as a token of goodwill towards peace and a future Palestinian state, evicting all Jewish residents as well. Gaza then elected Hamas, whose founding charter calls for the extermination of all Jews, and started lobbing rockets. Israelis aren't exactly keen to see a repetition of that.
I really get wanting to believe that this would be a solution, but the fact of the matter is that there are very real security concerns; a not-small number of Palestinians believe that the state of Israel should be destroyed by violently removing all Jews from the land, as we saw last weekend. You can say that that anger and resentment is somewhat justified - hell, I'd largely agree - but Israel is under no circumstances going to allow its existence to be threatened. The fundamental purpose of Israel existing is to provide a safe homeland for Jews, and Israel will stop at nothing to ensure that.
Giving all Palestinians full voting rights is not going to happen so long as there's such a complete lack of trust between the two groups. Israelis, probably correctly, fear that they'd quickly become a minority within their own state and ultimately be subjected to government persecution or expulsion. You have to keep in mind that a huge chunk of Israelis come from Arab countries that forcibly seized their assets and expelled them. Israelis will not accept the possibility of their own government doing the same.
Idealism simply is not applicable in this situation. If Israel fully withdrew from the West Bank, they have no reason to believe that it wouldn't simply be a repeat of the Gaza fiasco from 2005, with the situation being even worse since attacks out of the West Bank could threaten Jerusalem. Any analysis of the situation must begin and end with the immutable fact that Israel will prioritize its own security above anything else, including Western condemnation.
None of this is to excuse the many unjustifiable travesties that Israel does commit against the Palestinians, which are numerous, nor does it excuse settlements in the West Bank at all, which are disgusting abominations that actively serve to make peace even more impossible than it already is. But fundamentally, Israel is never going to make any kind of withdrawals or concessions unless it feels its security remains guaranteed, and any proposal that doesn't accept this is doomed.
I'm gonna nitpick here, but:
stop the apartheid status of Palestinians in Israel
Statements like this really need to be more clear, because they can otherwise severely muddy the waters of an already extremely messy situation. What exactly are you referring to here by "Israel"? Arab citizens of Israel, Palestinian or otherwise, have full rights. Palestinians within the West Bank and Gaza are severely restricted and oppressed a lot, and sure, you can make an apartheid analogy if you want. But is it not our entire fundamental premise that the West Bank is not Israel, but rather is Palestine? Palestinians do not live under any kind of apartheid within Israel, unless you are including the West Bank as part of Israel, which no one but the most extreme Israeli nationalists would ever do. So either Palestinians live under apartheid and the West Bank is a legitimate part of the state of Israel, or Palestinians live in Palestine under a strict foreign military occupation and not under an apartheid in Israel.
Not going to get into an argument about Hamas vs Isreali tactics, but you should be aware that it is far, far from the case that Palestinians inside of Israel let alone in OPT have the rights you think they do:
In your statement you are completely disregarding the security concerns of the Palestinians, calling the current state of the Gaza strip a ‘token of good will’ is absolutely ludicrous. If you really believe this I would invite you to read the wikipedia article on the great march of return: en.wikipedia.org/…/2018–2019_Gaza_border_protests.
And finally it is not stupid idealism to want to end the current status quo in Israel, I think it has become clear over the last few days that it is not possible to suppress a population without some kind of response: an apartheid state is a state of violence. And I hope we can all agree (at least if you are not an ethnonationalist) that the current state of South Africa is much much better than it was during apartheid.
The Palestinians absolutely have legitimate security concerns. They are also, in no universe, ever going to be able to resolve them by violently overthrowing the Israelis, and no amount of winning the moral argument will change this fact. This notion of establishing a Palestinian state through violent resistance must be abandoned - no matter how righteous it may or may not be - because Israel will defend itself down to the last Jewish life before allowing another Jewish diaspora, and it will win. If Egypt, Jordan, and Syria were all defeated in 1967 in six days, it is simply not in the realm of possibility that some loosely organized Palestinian resistance is going to be re-taking Jerusalem.
There is a plausible, though still mostly confined to dreams, path to peace that involves the Palestinians de-militarizing, Israel abandoning all settlements and withdrawing to the 1967 borders, the establishment of a joint security force between Israelis and Palestinians that has zero tolerance for nationalistic violence, and a gradual opening of economic and cultural integrations over time. There'd probably need to be some land-swaps, and Jerusalem would probably need to be governed by some kind of joint administration as well, but there does exist a framework where peace is imaginable.
Key to this, though, is that Israel stops settlements and that Palestinians completely abandon any consideration of violence. Under no circumstances will Israel make any steps towards peace if it feels its security is threatened, and seeing as they're the ones with the guns, anyone hoping to see peace simply must accept this fact. So long as aggressive violence is seen as a way to solve the conflict, there will never be peace.
The West Bank has seen minimal Palestinian-initiated conflict, and in exchange, Israel has built more settlements, let them burn fields, and kicked people out of their homes. It’s not security that drives the settlement projects. They want the land.
Where is that smile coming from? Is this a funny online game of words for you?
Israel has to defeat Hamas decisively and Hamas just tries to save their own sorry asses by telling the civilian population to stay where the israelian ground offensive will start. It is a deliberate plan by Hamas that civilians get killed. They want those pictures to drum up their support in Arab states.
Obama changed the military’s criteria for civilian deaths so he could pretend his numbers were lower.
I don’t know that I’d call it an opinion. Civilian deaths are an eventuality we have no choice but to accept, especially here in the US, where we’re making war in six, seven, or eight countries at once and it’s normal.
The fact that people don’t understand the differences in style and purpose between fact-based reporting and opinion pieces is a travesty. There is no way this can be anything other than an opinion piece because of its topic and tone. Whether you agree or disagree or find its position to be self-evident is irrelevant. It simply does not meet the standards of traditional fact-based reporting. Which people today don’t seem to understand the value of.
The travesty is how many people are unable to say this out loud. Everyone is stuck in their black & white tribalism, making them blind for their own sides atrocities.
You can be pro Palestine and still condemn Hamas. You can be critical of the Israeli government and still grief for all the innocent Hamas victims. It's not actually that hard to be a decent human being.
I can be pro-palestinian people and still think that after several decades of not being able to suppress the violent factions inside their nation, they should completely bail off from that general area.
All nations are built and maintained by violence, either directly or by threat of it.
It’s a core component of sovereignty. To be able to call your government sovereign you must have the capacity to resist both external and internal actors from being able to overthrow you.
You must also be willing and able to use violence against those under your rule who disobey your laws (i.e, arresting a murderer).
That’s probably the norm. Finland, the posterboy of peace, started its independence with a civil war and continued by joining the Nazis in WW2 against Soviet Union.
Seems to me that there are two kinds of nations on this planet: dead ones and those that were at some point based on violence.
The travesty is how many people are unable to say this out loud. Everyone is stuck in their black & white tribalism, making them blind for their own sides atrocities.
Personally I don’t want to say it out loud because I’m just so mentally exhausted from the screaming. I know (like know, not just feel) that if I say this out loud in a more public space then somebody is gonna scream at me over it. And I just don’t want that anymore. I feel in this instance it’s better to just keep silent because I just hate it when people get so uppity at me over this kind of thing.
This is a false equivalence. Most of the rhetoric I’ve seen about Hamas is that it’s an inevitable consequence of Israel’s treatment of restricting the Palestinian people to an open-air prison. Saying “We can’t support either Hamas or Israel” ignores the fact that most people in favor of Palestine are in favor of the civilians, the people who did nothing and are still bombed and tortured and executed. Not to say that Hamas deserves to be bombed and tortured, they’re citizens as well that shouldn’t be in this situation in the first place, but the large majority of support is in favor of the Palestinian people more broadly that are just unfortunate enough to be adjacent to the conflict and are forced to deal with the consequences of Israel’s bloodlust
to be clear: I do think Palestinians have a right to fight for their own freedom. But with the amount of disinformation at play here i don’t know how many atrocities are actually committed by Hamas and how many are the result of Israeli misinformation campaigns. But the amount of any of that doesn’t change how I feel – Innocent civilians should never die in a conflict like this. I don’t care if Hamas is doing it [edit: or not. The purpose of this statement is to show that I don’t care if Hamas is doing something abhorrent and Israel isn’t, or vice versa because it’s irrelevant to the broader point. Just to clarify, my language was unclear], Israel is very clearly ALSO doing it, and it’s abhorrent and gross no matter who. But in terms of the conceptual “high ground” the west likes to bandy around, Palestinians have a right to fight for its freedom from an occupying colonial force.
Hamas also killed children and fires at Israel, so is Libanon. That children die is a consequence of the bombing. People pretend as if Israel is explicitly targeting groups of children to throw bombs at them. What you are saying is that people should not be at war and I agree.
“Your honor, I know it might seem oddly coincidental that I mostly shoot at criminals that are standing next to schools, but I assure you that the large number of child casualties is not my intent. In fact, it’s the kids’ fault that they let the criminals stand next to them!”
Ok, so if I just take quite exactly your argument and say: I don’t care if Israel is doing it, but Hamas is using violence, and THAT is abhorrent. Then what?
Sorry, but this abstraction and contextualisation is exactly wrong. This conflict is never ever going to be resolved if people do obviously wrong things for some abstract justification from A past they conceive.
Also your conspiracy take which makes you simply discard large chunk of information based on your gut feeling is just crazy. I find it quite audacious to say stuff like that and still fake a reasonable argumentation.
I don’t care who is doing it because it’s abhorrent from both ends, regardless of the frequency or scale. It’s bad no matter what.
But the ends don’t justify the means in either case, so in stead we need to evaluate what’s being fought for in the first place for context, because both sides are commiting atrocities on various scales so you can try to one up whichever side you disagree with so we need to look at the context of the fight and what’s being fought for. Under that lens, israel is an occupying colonial force by any metric and was given it’s current territory by other colonial, imperial forces. It’s claim to the state of Palestine is tenuous at best and isn’t even consistent with the Jewish faith, where Jews see themselves as perpetually in exile until their Messiah comes. Israel leverages it’s position as a colonial ethnostate to make people correlate support of the Jewish faith with support of their apartheid ethnostate, which is also a false equivalence. None of this is a conspiracy theory, it’s rooted in fact and also agnostic to which side is committing more atrocities. I’m not saying Hamas is doing nothing wrong, I’m saying relative to this point it doesn’t matter if they are or not. Hamas are Palestinians that had their homes robbed from them, Israelis are not.
Your view, if I’m parsing this correctly, is that because Palestinians were wronged 75 years ago by the creation of Israel, the Israeli state should not exist - and that while violence is wrong, Palestinians inherently have a more legitimate right to violence - is that an accurate framing of your view?
If I have that right, is there a point in time, or a number of generations of living on the land, that grants Israelis rights or determination or legitimacy to the land, in your view?
No, there’s no point in time that would grant Israel legitimacy. The same way America/Canada has to confront their colonial past over Native Americans, or Australia with the Aboriginiees, or any other number of colonial nations, despite the time that’s passed since. I’m sympathetic to the plight of Israelis that were born into an apartheid system and now feel they have a claim to the land and a life there, but by saying they have equal claim by nature of being born there you let time erode the culture and heritage of the Palestinian people that were also born into that space, but into a different and much more unfair system. That concept of time granting increasing legitimacy to Israel as a state is exactly what Israel needs, the longer it’s able to commit these atrocities to enable further existence of the state of Israel, the more and more ridiculous “why not just give it back?” Seems as an argument.
Palestinians do have more of a right to violence, but I don’t think that violence should be directed at those of whom don’t have power within that system (civilians). Violence is a tool of the oppressed to fight back against the oppressor. The child who was born into Israel and hasn’t even been able to grow enough to form an opinion on the system they were born into isn’t an oppressor in the same way the Israeli government is, the same way the idf is, the same way other facets of the system that serve to squash Palestinians are, and as a result should not be a target of that violence. That’s abhorrent. But Palestine’s very existence, these people’s lives are at stake if they don’t fight back. Ignoring how unfair a two state solution even is to people whose homes were robbed from them in 1947, Israel hasn’t even been so much as willing to come to the table regarding that solution, so Palestine needs to fight for its continued right to exist outright, and that’s a natural consequence of Israel trying to weaponize the passage of time to further legitimize it’s existence as a state, and giving them that is dangerous for the lives of those Israel has a vested interest in murdering.
You got a lot wrong about how Israel and Palestine were created. And it was Palestine which refused a two state solution several times. That’s the sole reason why they are still not a state. Perhaps they want that now, after they saw that Israel will just continue to grow and snatch land from them. But at least Hamas will only accept if Israel is gone completely.
Israel and Palestine did not exist before and “Palestinian” was an ethnonational name for some of the Arabic people living there, mixed with all the other groups like Jews, other Arabic people like the Bedouins, some Christians, etc.
Since Arabic countries also exiled and killed Jews and of course World War 2, the British Empire thought it would be a good idea to create an official state for Jewish people. And the area (at that time called Transjordan) is the only place with native Jewish people. There were also growing conflicts already then, between Arabs and Jews (and Christians, but they were just moving away I guess).
To find a supposedly fair solution for both major groups in the area the British Empire in their infinite wisdom did what was totally hip at the time and tried to divide the land into to countries: Palestine and Israel.
But you had Arabs on one side who didn’t want an influx of Jews to the area, they wanted all the land and have a Muslim state. And on the other hand you had more and more Jewish refugees and of course Zyonists coming there who wanted all the land and have a Jewish state.
At that time Palestine refused multiple times to agree to the two-state-solution out of greed. And Israel started stealing land out of greed.
Out of guilt and because there are really few Jews on earth the west equipped Israel with weapons to defend against the Arabic countries who didn’t want them there. Israel flourished and some of the Arabic countries thought: how nice to have a rich neighbour in the area. And totally forgot about the not so rich neighbour which were the Palestinians, still hoping to somehow get a better deal for a country.
it was Palestine which refused a two state solution several times.
I thought there was a trial period of the 2SS but it failed because the PLO leadership was corrupt - Palestinians shamed two ministers into quitting but Arafat refused to quit.
That was my takeaway from the Wikipedia entry anyhow.
However I did watch a documentary once about Shin Bet (interviewing many ex Shin Bet leaders) which gave the impression that the 2SS failed because of Jewish religious zealots who assassinated one of the 2SS architects: Rabin.
Except Hamas aren’t solely fighting for freedom, they specifically want ALL of Israel gone and ALL Jews killed, they literally want a theocratic dictatorship under Islam. And they won’t stop until they get it.
IDF and netanhayu are real dirty here, but Hamas and the (maybe) majority Palestinians that support them are like the anti thesis to a free society. Plus they’re violent homophobes that stone LGBTQ people to death.
That tips me to Israel’s side in this, minus the far right Jewish extremists that literally killed an Israeli prime minister because he was succeeding in brokering peace.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.