When culture is defined by race, isn’t that just racism by a different name? If someone started saying they weren’t racist, they were just pro-white “culture”, they would be racist, really, right?
Let’s put it this way: Arabs attacking people because they are Jewish is racism. Jewish people attacking Arabs because they are Arabs is racism. So when you discriminate down those lines its racism, right? I mean they wouldn’t be “cultural” attacks, would they?
So if you say your country is for Jews, or for non-Jews, you are being racist, right? At the very least you can’t criticise Arabs for not being happy with that definition of the country they live in.
Depending on who is speaking, you could be correct.
marxeil
3203
The fear predates the British mandate and goes back to much earlier times.
Except that’s not what I said. Point me to the Jews living under the PA today.
And you keep apparently throwing around racism as your default stance for Jews. Zionism has never been a purely religious issue - indeed, many of the initial Zionists were hardline secular communists, and Meretz today is the party of their ideological descents. (They’re the party which joined with Rabin to get the Oslo accords…)
marxeil - Actually, the Jews did better under Islamic rulers than under Christian ones for 1300 years. Not perfectly, certainly, but better - there were never any Arab equivalents of the Hapsburgs, or the Inquisition. The Arab-Jewish conflict…is of quite recent genesis, and is tied directly to the British and French encouragement of Arab Nationalism as a weapon against the Ottomans at the start of the 20th century. It worked. Too well.
I don’t think racism is the default stance for Jews, but sure is common. It’s probably fair to say the Arabs are more passionately anti-jew than the Jews are passionately anti-arab, but this is definitely damning with faint praise.
Except that’s not what I said. Point me to the Jews living under the PA today.
Show me Jordanians living in the PA. Who would choose to live there?
Although there are plenty of Jews living in the PA, just not with the Palestinians…
You seemed to be making the point that Jews couldn’t live with Arabs because they are Arabs, if you weren’t making that point… fair enough.
And you keep apparently throwing around racism as your default stance for Jews. Zionism has never been a purely religious issue - indeed, many of the initial Zionists were hardline secular communists, and Meretz today is the party of their ideological descents. (They’re the party which joined with Rabin to get the Oslo accords…)
I don’t think Jews are by default racist - that’s as ridiculous and unfair as me claiming you think all Arabs are Jew haters. But if you make your country FOR one group of people that’s bigotry at best. If you can muddy the argument by claiming those people are a “culture” you can deflect accusations of racism, but you’re not fooling many people. If you can reverse the roles and call it racism, it’s racism if you do it yourself.
marxeil
3207
i wasn’t alluding specifically to Islamic nations.
marxeil
3208
Its doesn’t and shouldn’t be used to justify the occupation of another nation, but there was a perfectly good reason for making a country for Jews.
I think you are confusing “creating a safe haven for a persecuted people”, which clearly is a good idea on its own, with defining your country as “only for those people” and forcing the people who you took land from to accept that or else continue to be live in the world’s biggest open prison. That’s clearly not a good idea.
So that then IS your default stance. Right. Sorry, not interested in your evasions.
And again, show me the Jews living under the PA. Having problems finding them?
Oops… there he goes again, sliding into incomprehensibility.
Yes, how dare I ask a simple question.
The incomprehensible statement came before you asked the simple question that had already been answered, a question which seems to be in service of a pissing contest about whether it’s Jews or Arabs who are MORE racist. Ugh.
You haven’t answered it, you’ve posted an evasion. And no, it remains a simple question. You may see it as a “pissing match” that Israel has plenty of Arab Citizens, and yet the PA doesn’t have Jewish Citizens, and yet you’re only throwing the racist tag at one side. In reality, you’re using stereotyping - and dismissing pro-peace Jews. I’m not sure how you think this HELPS the peace process.
I’m sure you’ll just claim this is “incomprehensible” again.
What does your ridiculous question tell us? That Jews would rather live in Israel than in the prison camp it has created in the West Bank and Gaza? That it’s dangerous for Jews to even visit the West Bank because of half a century of oppressive military occupation?
And no racism isn’t the “default stance” for Jews because not all Jews believe that Israel is a country only for Jews, and just because you show support for that a racist law doesn’t make you a racist by default. You may accept the law as important while disagreeing with it ideologically. A South African could support Apartheid out of a fear that the country would collapse, while still believing that all races are equal and working towards a future status of equality. Supporting a racist law while pretending it isn’t racist, though, that would just make you willfully ignorant.
Now answer my question: If Israel was instead called Palestine and was 80% Arab and 20% Jewish, would it be racist to constitutionally define the country as Arab (or Islamo-Christian) and definitely not Jewish?
Ah right, it’s “ridiculous”. No, it tells us about the nature of the PA.
And no. It wouldn’t. But it wouldn’t happen - it would be 100% Arab. You might chose to ignore this… (and you call others “willfully ignorant”)
I am not confusing anything. I started my argument by saying that it does not justify the occupation of the west bank. If you are referring to Israeli Arabs, at least on paper they are full fledged citizens so comparison to open prisons is quite wrong.
Gav
3218
I think the problem is that it’s hard to have the one without the other. Otherwise, what’s to stop Palestinians from deciding that Israel/Palestine is no longer a Jewish safe haven? This is the unfortunate paradox behind trying to be a democratic state that’s also a Jewish homeland.
[edited to add]: Just in case anyone doesn’t know my posting history, I am not remotely saying here that Israel shouldn’t exist, just that it’s a hard problem.
and forcing the people who you took land from to accept that or else continue to be live in the world’s biggest open prison. That’s clearly not a good idea.
Assuming you’re talking about the post-'67 occupation, I’ll agree with you.
Israel insists on the Palestinians accepting that Israel is a Jewish nation before they will even begin talks that will end their occupation.
Exactly. I understand the needs of the Jewish people for a homeland, but that doesn’t change the negative implications of that. There are another people in the region who suffer because of this choice.
