If you want to challenge them then how are b) and c) prerequisites? Where’s the challenge when it’s already there? If you want to be challenged then are you ready to be challenged in areas other than that? What if someone wants you to challenge to b) eat healthy home-made food every day and c) develop the grace and skill to tame a social situation with smalltalk, instead of insisting that every verbal utterance be a philosophical dissertation?
Now I can’t read body language through text but maybe she had an assumption, that got destroyed, therefore she looked confused? It doesn’t mean that she didn’t know the lyrics or the man. Also do you enjoy being needlessly cryptic.
I don’t know what to do with confused disengagement.
Engage by reassuring, or changing the topic? Cracking a joke? (“Also, I’m way too lazy to colour-match”). Whatever.
“Withdrawal” can be really misleading, here, because it was very much not disengagement aka leaving Gaza alone: The moved the prison guards from inside the strip to the wall surrounding it and then closed the gate and enacted a blockade, for 16 years straight now. About 50% of Gazans are 18 or under, growing up under those conditions, 80% are reliant on humanitarian aid.
You can certainly make arguments that an arms blockade is warranted. But concrete? Starving the city of water? Yeah that’s very much not leaving people alone.
But you all would rather blame Israel than the militants
Israel is militarily, technologically, and economically far superior. That means you have options that Palestinians who want to de-escalate don’t have, thus the ball is in your court. Or, well, practically all of the balls that can be played towards de-escalation are in your court. That’s not a special yardstick we carved just for you, it’s not about “who started it” or “who did worst” but “who is in a better position to end this”.
Also y’all speak English and are on the internet. I could rant to you about Fatah corruption but what good would that do.
How do we remove dictators like Hamas from power?
Hamas has more than one wing, all dependent on each other, and one of them you can right-out supplant. Heck it even meshes with security concerns: Instead of saying “Gaza can’t have concrete because Hamas” say “We’re going to donate concrete but because of Hamas we’re going to do the pouring, tell us where you want those houses”
More generally speaking: You will need to be able to take a punch while showing that you can be an asset to your region of the world meaning internally, you’ll have to make sure that forces who right-out enjoy having an external enemy to fuel their eternal war have absolutely no influence. Doesn’t even need much, all the civil society needs to do is to be receptive enough to understand that Kahanites and Nazis are the same shit with a different coat of paint so that the Israeli Antifa will come back out of exile – Berlin, I know, of all places. It’s an excuse for a city they could’ve at least chosen Hamburg but I digress.
It won’t be easy and it won’t be quick, trust isn’t built in a fortnight. There’s no quick solutions, there’s only approaches which breed resentment and those who don’t, and one kind is perpetuating hatred, the other isn’t. I know this kind of stuff can sound like platitudes but it really isn’t. Being disciplined in that regard is the only way.
More concretely, right now, don’t fucking blow the Saudi Arabia deal. If you need to stop the offensive to do that, do it.
You’re the one who’s naive if you hadn’t thought that through.
What about handing the cement over to Palestinians you can trust (and you know very well they do exist), or international aid organisations, and watching the whole thing with drones?
You seem to be keen on using your creativity and imagination to show how things can’t work. That’s not bad, that’s providing security. Where it becomes a problem is when it replaces thinking of ways how it can work.
Indulge me, suspend your disbelief for a couple of minutes and apply yourself to coming up with something that can be done. Hamas is using pipe sections to build rockets? Fine, tank trucks and canisters exist. Logistically inefficient? Yes. Unviable? Hell no. Then you can say “because of Hamas you now have to carry your water”, not “because Hamas you now have no water”. In one of those two you come across as guarded, but friendly, in the other as heartless.
If Israel does less, it will be perceived by militants
Who the fuck cares about the perception of militants. Worry about the perception of the rest. Worry about Palestinians seeing Israel as the bigger problem than Hamas, worse, as a fucking ally of Hamas.
I do know that continuing to blame the entirety of blame and responsibility of Israel doesn’t move us closer to any sort of resolution.
And blaming everything on Hamas and demanding the impossible – that fascists magically deradicalise – is moving us closer to resolution? That’s the absolutely least likely scenario, yet you declare it to be the only possibility when you say “the ball is in Hamas court”.
Maybe, in this all, we’re looking too far ahead. Would you oppose a Smolanim government that would not giving up on passive security, but stop all the antagonising? The settlements, the turning of PLO territory into Swiss cheese, the “fund Hamas because Fatah is too reasonable” approach? Because if anything should come out of this then it’s wide understanding that the right’s approach to security failed even more than the left’s. Yes maybe Rabin was too naive, people were too hopeful back then (I certainly was), that doesn’t mean that moving to annex the west bank will bring security.
Every restriction is an attempt to reduce violence and terrorism.
Every restriction also breeds resentment and thus increases violence and terrorism.
There’s one question I want to ask here, and it’s not an easy one, and Israel will take a long time to come to a national consensus on it: Was it just money that Israel funnelled to Hamas to weaken the PLO, or also fighters?
Once you understand how you created that monster you’ll also understand how to starve it. Minds can be changed, the mechanics of conflict and conflict resolution can’t.
If only it were that simple. Hey, let’s present Hamas with official Israeli workers to kidnap and kill.
Who the fuck said anything about neglecting security and being naive?
Hamas and all of the other extremist militant groups have the crucial ball though. They’re the ones who are in the only position to end this.
No. That’s an excuse to avoid being creative and if you’d reflect about it you’d see it. It’s social conditioning saying “we’re the victims, always”.
What’s your plan for the future? Continue the Otzma Yehudit way of “antagonising until they give up”? That’s what got you into this position in the first place. It’s the reason the IDF wasn’t near Gaza and Hamas saw an opening because the IDF was busy in the west bank backing settlers harassing Palestinians. Realise that there’s portions of the Israeli society who want this to continue, whether they admit it or not, because it is convenient for them, because a scared populace can be way more easily convinced to vote for them. Don’t be complicit in that.
Hasn’t evolutionary psychology been heavily debunked at this point?
No. On the most basic level it shouldn’t really be terribly contentious that evolution has an impact on psychology, on a more detailed level, well, they have their hits and misses just as every other field.
Patriarchal conditioning makes way more sense than
…case in point “everything is socially constructed” is just as bonkers a position as “everything is biologically predetermined”. Why do people have to universalise their specialised area of investigation and “caveman brain HATE competing with woman!” is a rather cartoonish take on evolutionary psychology. If anything it’d be “young male annoyed he can’t hunt for shit while female age-peer can because he wouldn’t be able to provide for her while heavily pregnant”. Note that not being annoyed in that case doesn’t require better hunting skills, only sufficient ones, and “annoyed” can lead to “will work harder on his skills” or “is going to lash out” or “becomes depressive and walks into the desert” or “is going to look around, see all those capable hunters, and focus on hut building instead”. There’s a fuckton of behavioural flexibility left there.
Bad social conditioning then comes into that and shapes tendencies into caricatures of themselves, or good social conditioning comes in and, well, does good things. It’s not an either/or thing, pretty much everything is both nature and nurture.
Germany keeps good statistics on it, the tl;dr is early loss of virginity peaked around the turn of the millennium, and has been steadily going down since then. The sexual revolution never got questioned in Germany once it was through (sadly, you can’t annoy reverends by kissing in front of their church, any more), no “abstinence only” sex “education” to be found anywhere. The by far overwhelming reason kids cited is “didn’t yet find the right one”, only exception being girls with immigrant background, there it’s “am still too young”, though that number is falling towards “didn’t yet find the right one”.
Not on that page but when being given a couple of choices saying “which of these things would be a calamity for you right now, and how bad” something like 99% of girls respond with “pregnancy would be the worst”. Teen abortion rates are still very low (at least for a country not caught up in Catholic morals) but that’s due to low pregnancy rates in the first place combined with extensive support thrown at teen couples.
In Singapore, a certificate to own a car now costs $106,000 (www.reuters.com)
[REPOST] Reddit's API protest just got even more NSFW (mashable.com)
Stereotypes are wrong and bad (lemmy.world)
Few Good Options as Israel Weighs a Ground Assault on the Gaza Strip (www.bloomberg.com)
Get gud (lemmy.zip)
Gen Z is turned off by onscreen sex, wants no-mance over romance, a new study finds (www.latimes.com)
Linux user (infosec.pub)