Oh you mean "anti-semites" like ... — 180 Proof

I don't agree with all the names on that list, but there were blacks who opposed the civil rights movement & supported racial segregation. Being a member of X group doesn't preclude one from antagonism towards that group or opposing rights for that group due to other reasons.

All Zionism is is support for Jewish self-determination in the land of Israel/Palestine.

More non sequiturs & special pleading bullshit. :shade:

The fact that you mentioned the "apartheid" in Gaza means you simply don't understand the facts about this conflict. Nor does it matter that Jews can be oppose Zionism (some do for purely religious reasons). To oppose Zionism is to support a reversion to the old order where Jews were at the mercy of foreign powers and could be stripped of statehood and butchered. No thank you.

More ahistorical non sequiturs & special pleadings from an apartheid-war crimes apologist. Who tf cares? :mask:

There's no apartheid. Nor do I think you know what a war crime is. Until you learn the facts about the two sides consider yourself ignored. :mask:

consider yourself ignored. — BitconnectCarlos

:sweat: Of course, ignored again by the willfully ignorant ...

https://inthesetimes.com/article/jewish-anti-zionism-israel-palestine-colonialism-annexation-apartheid

"The wrong type of Jew?" ~zionfascists

:fire:

Ariel Sharon: "occupation"
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-may-27-fg-mideast27-story.html

re: documentary – "The Gatekeepers" (2012)
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/856307

'Collective punishment' (e.g. domicide¹) and 'disproportionate retaliatory slaughter' of a several decades-long captive population for "October 7th" by (US client-state) Israel are, at least, ongoing war crimes. — 180 Proof

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-04/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/amid-israeli-destruction-in-gaza-a-new-crime-against-humanity-emerges-domicide/0000018c-d585-d751-ad8d-ffa5965e0000 [1]

https://fnl.mit.edu/january-march-2024/domicide-the-mass-destruction-of-homes-should-be-a-crime-against-humanity/ [1]

Nor do I think you know what a war crime is. — BitconnectCarlos

I assure you that everyone is very aware of what a war crime is, with the only exception of Netanyahu. Although they are constantly threatening us*, we will keep defending the resistance and using diplomacy—not like Israel—we will try to do the best we could in our limitations and possibilities to end this bloody conflict.

* We are outraged and saddened that Spain has become a paradise to sow hatred and incite to the destruction of Israel.

Masar Badil, an organization linked to terrorist groups such as the PFLP and Samidoun, has chosen Madrid for its annual international congress and the demonstration, set for today, to celebrate the brutal massacre of October 7th.

It is unacceptable that a democratic society allows the glorification of terrorism and the celebration of crimes against humanity perpetrated by Hamas. - Israel Foreign Ministry. Holy cow :yikes:

Unfortunately Israel cannot negotiate with those who seek to indiscriminately murder its citizens and take its land in the name of Islam. There already was a cease fire on October 6th of last year.

7Oct24 :fire:

DEAR GOD,

FREE PALESTINE
FREE ISRAEL

FROM THE PARTIES OF GOD. NOW!

Anti-zionism is effectively anti-semitism. — BitconnectCarlos

:lol:

There's no apartheid. — BitconnectCarlos

:rofl:

Magnificent. :ok:

Israel is but the tip of a might US dick that penetrates the Middle East from behind. If the penis goes limp can the tip stay in? — boethius

I love how in this metaphor the Islamic middle east is likened to an abused asshole. The greatest & most brutal settler-colonial project in history -- Islamic rule -- is really just a poor helpless orifice used and abused by the US and Israel. But by all means continue as an apologist for brutal authoritarianism and Islamic religious fanaticism. I guess you're one of those "anything to see the West fall" types.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/F9PEbHStcXY

The greatest & most brutal settler-colonial project in history -- Islamic rule — BitconnectCarlos

Somebody is a bit exaggerating here. :snicker:

I think the colonization of a whole large continent would still count as the greatest settler-colonial project in history.

And I'm not talking about Australia.

It's interesting to compare. In any case, yes North America was colonized, but it also underwent large-scale decolonization. The idea of decolonizing Muslim lands (e.g. Zionism) is met with mass protests and violence around the world including on college campuses. The West is largely apologetic over its imperialist past, not so with the Muslim world.

. In any case, yes North America was colonized — BitconnectCarlos

Don't forget South America, Central America and the Caribbean. The Continent of America isn't just the US.

but it also underwent large-scale decolonization. — BitconnectCarlos

?

You mean Latin America and North America got Independent? Especially when population transfer (meaning settlers coming in), American Continent comes to mind as the example. And of course with Islam people converted to the religion, so the people weren't replaced, but conquered. There weren't so many Arabs actually at the time of Mohammad.

The idea of decolonizing Muslim lands (e.g. Zionism) — BitconnectCarlos

You're really serious? New interpretations for Zionism. Besides, without going to Biblical times, it was the Romans and Emperor Hadrian, that started rooting out Jews from their land (for example banned Jews from Jerusalem) and settling other people to the land, so that's a bit earlier than the Muslims. Like half a millennium earlier or so.

Zionism has long been understood as a decolonization movement. Both the Romans and Muslim powers were colonizers of Israel. Under Roman rule there were revolts to establish a free independent Jewish state (as had existed prior) so Zionism is nothing new.

And yes, Mexico is no longer controlled by Spain, Haiti no longer French, etc.

Under Roman rule there were revolts to establish a free independent Jewish state — BitconnectCarlos

And that worked out really well for the Jews.

This is a bold lie. The history of Zionism has nothing to do with decolonisation. The idea of Jews returning to their ancestral homeland has biblical precedents, with the Torah describing the Exodus from Egypt and journey to the Land of Israel. Throughout history, small numbers of Jews made pilgrimages or moved to Palestine, motivated by religious devotion.

Modern political Zionism developed in the late 19th century in response to growing antisemitism in Europe:

• The Hovevei Zion ("Lovers of Zion") movement formed in 1881, promoting Jewish settlement in Palestine.
• The First Aliyah, a wave of Jewish immigration to Palestine, began in 1882.
• Theodor Herzl is considered the founder of modern political Zionism. After witnessing antisemitism in France during the Dreyfus Affair in 1895, he concluded Jews needed their own state.

He considered several places other than Palestine before that so claiming it's a decolonisation movement is just bullshit. Zionism has more commonly been viewed as a form of settler colonialism - and rightfully so. It's only been recently that some Zionist advocates have attempted to reframe the narrative by claiming Zionism as a decolonization or indigenous rights movement. This is a relatively new and controversial perspective that is not accepted by historians or scholars.

Nice to see you are radicalising right in front of our noses. :vomit:

Zionism has long been understood as a decolonization movement. — BitconnectCarlos

?

This is quite funny, or as Benkei puts it, false.

As Benkei said, Zionism started in the 19th Century is linked to 19th Century nationalism. Also the term "decolonization" is also a very modern term not used to depict events happening in Antiquity.

For example, we can call the expansion of Rome, of Ancient Egypt or even the actions of the Mongol Horde as "Imperialism", yet with imperialism we mean expansionist policies of far later period. For example there of course is similar thinking in ancient times as "imperialism" and what we would now call "nationalism". Yet with nationalism we mean a specific ideology and thinking that came only far later.

The history of Zionism has nothing to do with decolonisation. — Benkei

Tell that the Jews who fought the Romans in the 1st and 2nd centuries in order to re-establish an independent Jewish kingdom in the land of Israel. Is that not the basic idea of Zionism?

Whether it's hertzl dreaming of decolonizing Israel from the Ottomans or bar Kokhba's followers dreaming of decolonizing Israel from the Romans it's the same basic idea. Hertzl was just a relatively (secular) revival of the idea.

The Serbs tried to justify their violent ethno-nationalism in exactly the same way during the Balkan wars. Netanyahu is literally a Jewish Milošević.

Tell that the Jews who fought the Romans in the 1st and 2nd centuries in order to re-establish an independent Jewish kingdom in the land of Israel. Is that not the basic idea of Zionism? — BitconnectCarlos

Is that decolonization, really? What's the Roman colony that they wanted to decolonize? Actually those colonial efforts of Rome came later when the revolts were put down. The Jewish diaspora into Europe started during those times, so Jews have been part and parcel of Europe for a really long time.

And you simply seem not to get it. Decolonization is a historical term. And anyway, a revolt against Romans, especially when it fails, is hardly decolonization.

For example, we don't talk about the social media of Antiquity, the bourgeoisie or the middle class in ancient Mesopotamia. Was there some class of people that could be related to them? Perhaps, but it's not correct to use such terms as the class isn't what we now call "the middle class".

Yet the other way around historical similarities or links are much used. When faced a threat, people look for similar events in history and willingly link the present to ancient history to give importance to the present. A common link, a common goal shared by generations apart sounds very nice. And people don't want to hear any historian saying that things two millennia ago were actually different.

The Serbs tried to justify their violent ethno-nationalism in exactly the same way during the Balkan wars. Netanyahu is literally a Jewish Milošević. — Tzeentch

I would say Netanyahu is far more capable and better politician than Milosevic.

Yet for example the battle of Kosovo Polje, battle of Kosovo in 1389, where after ancient Serbia lost the war to the Ottoman, even if they managed to kill an Ottoman Sultan, is very important for Serbs. Just that the place where the battle was in Kosovo made Kosovo important to Milosevic. And likely the ethos that it's a similar fight now as then:

In Serbian folklore, the Kosovo Myth acquired new meanings and importance during the rise of Serbian nationalism in the 19th century as the Serbian state sought to expand, especially towards Kosovo which was still part of the Ottoman Empire. In modern discourse, the battle would come to be seen as integral to Serbian history, tradition and national identity. Vidovdan is celebrated on June 28 and is an important Serbian national and religious holiday as a memorial day for the Battle of Kosovo.

Some say the speech that Milosevic gave in the 600th anniversary at the battlefield was a starting cry for the collapse of Yugoslavia and first step on road to civil war:

Rome was the hegemon who controlled Judea & Samaria from the 1st century BC onwards. The land was previously ruled by Jewish powers. I don't see why the success or failure of rebellions against Rome should matter regarding the idea of Zionism -- those revolts were an attempt to re-establish independent Jewish rule in the region.

That vision has existed before and after Roman rule. It a Jewish constant. Whether it's Hertzl or bar Kohkba (or others in between), the goal is 1) Remove foreign hegemons from the land and 2) Re-establish Jewish self-rule. The technology differs, the foreign powers differ, but it's the same essential idea. It comes down to control and dominance. If you would like to educate me about why the Roman empire was not a colonizer then I'm all ears. Even if Rome doesn't fit the exact "modern" sense of colonizer, it remained the hegemon -- the undisputed dominant power in the region.

So Israel’s goal of reducing most of Gaza and southern Lebanon to rubble will undoubtedly be achieved, guaranteeing a stronger Hamas and Hezbollah in the future and prolonging the conflicts for decades more.

Missing accomplished.

That vision has existed before and after Roman rule. It a Jewish constant. Whether it's Hertzl or bar Kohkba (or others in between), the goal is 1) Remove foreign hegemons from the land and 2) Re-establish Jewish self-rule. — BitconnectCarlos

Right.

But in truth Judea was a vassal of the Seleucid Empire, then become a client state of the Roman Republic, then a client state of the Parthian Empire, then came back to be a client state of the Roman Republic and later Roman Empire. It had little room to wiggle when Romans were fighting each other and then was put into line once the Romans themselves got their act together. Judea was as late as 6 AD annexed to Rome and became a Roman province, so the glorified vision of Jewish eternal resistance, always removing foreign hegemons is the likely propaganda. Of course this was before the Bar Kohkba revolt. There likely is very many of the "Quislings", which a vassal / client state tells us.

Yet patriotic history is actually quite similar anywhere: the thread of history becomes what enforces and validates our current views at the present. Many things that don't tell this narrative aren't simply "important".

A vassal of the Seleucids up until the Maccabees revolted in ~160 BC leading to the creation of an independent Jewish state under the Hasmoneans from around 150 BC - 37 BC. This is the event behind of Hanukkah. From 37 BC the Jews have their "Quislings" -- the Roman-backed Herodians. The Hasmoneans were no Quislings.

We can go back further. Between ~1000 BC - 586 BC Israelite/Jewish independence was realized up until the Babylonian exile. Even given a sober view of the historical record the history of proud Jewish resistance holds. Israelites fought off Philistines and Assyrians among others to secure their independence. I'm happy to call out propagandistic bullshit when it's present, but I can't in this case.

edit: from 63 bc onwards the hasmoneans are roman vassals.

You shouldn't engage this insanity. The most moral army commits war crime after war crime. Only Jews shall have self-determination (in a place they didn't live in for centuries) and settler colonism is now decolonization. Also, that idea existed for a very long time even if it hasn't.

Instead of learning from his interlocuters here, who aren't exactly dumb, he chooses to drink right wing Israeli cool aid.

Arguments about what belongs to who have no other purpose than to justify apartheid and/or ethnic cleansing, and don't need to be taken seriously from either side.

The only real solution here is equal rights for Palestinians, and for Israel to become a normal, modern state where multiple ethnicities can coexist.

And it's Israel's only option for survival too. It cannot solve any of its problems with the sword, and attempting to do so is just going to ensure its adversaries will treat Israel in kind once the pendulum swings.

The only real solution here is equal rights for Palestinians, and for Israel to become a normal, modern state where multiple ethnicities can coexist. — Tzeentch

:100: :up:

Instead of learning from his interlocuters here, who aren't exactly dumb, he [@BitconnectCarlos] chooses to drink right wing Israeli cool aid. — Benkei

For the millionth time, Israel doesn't make the laws or grant the rights in Gaza or parts of the West Bank. Saying "Israel needs to give equal rights to the Palestinians" is like saying the US needs to give equal rights to the Mexicans.