Yes, the people of Tibet should have their own country if they want one, just like the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza should have their own country. That’s pretty consistent.
No, that’s not what you said. Here is what you said:
“One land should have one state. Not just a special jewishy one and it’s little captives.”
to which I replied with fairly significant detail on the spuriousness of the claim that this was necessarily “one land,” since it was not considered to be “one land” by anybody other than the “European Zionist colonizers and their British supporters.”
We’ve been writing a lot, and it’s perfectly reasonable to err in your recollections, but you did seem to be making a point about connecting this particular geographic entity to some political entity, and historically, this was not seen as distinct geographic entity.
Well, we agree at least on the genetic links between Jews and Palestinians–someone on this site has made the argument that Ashkenazim have no link to the Middle East.
The Tibetans don’t want to go anywhere. They are home. They don’t want to be part of China. Or be colonized by China.
The Palestinians want to go home. Their Home that they were evicted from and claimed by Israel. Colonized by Euro-American colonists.
Very different - In that you support the colonizers and I support the colonized.
I’m no expert on the genetic makeup of Ashkenazim, but I do know that Yasser Arafat made it quite clear that he accepted the common lineage of many of the locals.
I’m not saying people don’t have a “right” to be there. I’m saying they all have to learn to share or its never going to end. Putting up walls is not sharing.
Spurious, indeed. Since I made no such claim. Are you mistaken in what I wrote? I believe so.
Aha, I see now. Your are apparently confused between the past and the present. See, as an American, I am the institutional if not genetic heir to a bunch of “colonizers.” As I assume, are you. I am not, however, a colonizer.
Israel has millions of people, relatively few of whom can be called “colonizers,” because they had nothing to do with the events of 1948-49.
The Palestinians, for the most part, don’t want to go “home.” An Israeli born in Safed has more right to call it “home” than a Palestinian Arab born in Damascus whose grandfather fled Safed in 1949. And the Israeli born in Safed 30 years ago is no more a colonizer than you or I, just as the Palestinian Arab born in Damascus 30 years ago is not among the “colonized.”
Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are certainly entitled to a state. That would be the Palestinian state. The injustice of the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs in 1948-1949 is not going to be rectified by the injustice of displacing millions of Jews today, any more than one is going to displace tens of millions of Poles and Czechs for the descendants of expelled Germans, or dispel tens of millions or hundreds of millions of Pakistanis and Indians for the descendants of expelled Hindus and Muslims.
So when I say justice requires borders built around demographics of where people are now, I mean just that. Some Jews will have to be displaced, some Arabs may have to be displaced, but the ideal compromise will be one that sees as few children driven from their homes as possible. Or do support making up for one injustice by another one?
I’m willing to admit I may have been mistaken, but I do think it fair to say that since you wrote
“One land should have one state”
It was reasonable for me to have concluded that you mean that this should be considered “one land.” But what exactly are you objecting to? I’m not trying to be snarky, I just don’t understand. You do consider this to be one discrete, indivisible piece of land, don’t you?
There is [quote=“uberjude, post:88, topic:6947”]
The injustice of the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs in 1948-1949 is not going to be rectified by the injustice of displacing millions of Jews today,
[/quote]
Yes it will.
Of course it is. It is part of the material plane.
As for the current colony of Israel and its policies of expansion – which include the wholesale Israeli terror tactics used in Gaza today – people will not forget them and will not feel too bad when the Zionist experiment fails.
Which is the exact quote you would expect to hear from someone who thinks his side is winning.
Your team will fail in the long run and all this death and destruction will go down as another example of European and American hubris.
I’m objecting to a racially based colony being imposed upon the world.
Not a colony, a country. And if memory serves me right, isn’t the PA attempting to create a “Palestinian state” which, according to various PA officials, will ban Jews?
Not really a team so much as a country with about 7 million people.
So the entire world is pretty much part of the same land then, isn’t it? Which means that the Jews aren’t interlopers, since they were simply moving to another part of the material plane.
so basically, you don’t want justice, you want revenge. At least you’re open about it. Now, does that simply mean Jews in the West Bank, or are you looking for the expulsion of Jews from the state of Israel as well?
“I’m not saying people don’t have a “right” to be there.”
Wow, that’s quite a stretch from “A ‘Jewish state’ is the problem and it should never exist.”
Hmmm