this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Political Humor

3307 readers
2 users here now

Post politically charged comedy here, but be respectful!

Rules

founded 4 years ago
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It does get complicated when Hamas claims to want the death or displacement of all the Jews in Israel. Both peoples have been failed by their leadership. You can't fight back against one genocide with a different genocide and expect anything to improve.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

You want it to be complicated given you're citing a claim from the last century that has been withdrawn, and Hamas has undergone a massive shift since. Moreover, no matter how bad Hamas is, it does not excuse genocide. So no, it is not complicated when we identify a genocide.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Hamas is a creation of Israel's genocide and aparthied. Eliminate the genociee and aparthied, and Hamas is forced to either change character or crumble.

This is an unequal conflict in every measure, equalizing the sides is genocide denial.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure where you see any evidence of Hamas needing to change if they theoretically won the conflict. They absolutely would inflict a genocide of given the chance. To deny this is naive at best but most certainly just dishonest.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Why do you believe Hamas has this stance?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

History.

I would like you to honestly state that you believe Hamas would not delete Israel and all the Jews there if given the chance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

What specifically? "History" is vague as fuck.

I believe that if you gave Hamas a "delete Israel" button right this second they would press it, because Israel is committing a genocide and intends on continuing said genocide with approval from the US.

I believe that if Israel were to cease genocide and reverse their apartheid policies, and Israel were abolished and replaced with a secular democratic state, they would be fine.

Do you think that German Jews after the Holocaust tried to genocide the rest of Germany?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying anything is equal, I'm saying it's complicated. Absolutely Israel must end the genocide and apartheid, but I really don't think that's all it would take to end hostilities. There needs to be a rebuilding, both of infrastructure and trust. I don't see how that can happen under Israel or Gaza's governments, they are being failed by their leadership.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Any government of Palestine will be radically against Israel. It doesn't matter who is in charge, the people of Gaza are dying rapidly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I condemn the genocide. I'm just saying that it's also a complex issue; lasting peace will take positive and nuanced action, simply ending the invasion and apartheid of Gaza is only the beginning.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yep, a secular one state solution is the only viable long term solution.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I've been thinking a nation of states might work. Like Gaza, West Bank, and Israel could all have their own local governments and constitutions, but the federal government would be made up of representatives from each. With the current populations, Israelis would have a supermajority in any all-in-one state vote, but as a nation of states they would have to compromise.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

There would have to be minority protections. Treating it like a group of ethnostates would perpetuate their current issues, it must be an equal state.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Hmm, that's a good point. I was thinking that a unitary government would be paralyzed by conflict around religious laws. A hijab is part of the school uniform for Palestinian girls, but would likely be opposed by large numbers of present day Israelis (just as an example); I was thinking that having states/provinces that could set their own policies could help alleviate some of those pressure points.

Though admittedly as an American I'm sure I have some level of bias for federated states, it just seems natural to me.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Largely, much of this hyper-religious policy comes from a lack of material development and mass industrialization. Advancing mode of production generally results in a more secular society with more progressive laws.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

That's true. Though some of the most economically prosperous nations still prefer to live with Islamic laws. The UAE has a higher per capita GDP than the US and still bases their legal system heavily on sharia law. I think sometimes it comes down to cultural differences more than material ones. Oman and Saudi Arabian also score very high on the human development index, but still prefer many 'hyper-religious' policies.

In general I think the trend is towards secular society with improved material conditions, but it can get dicey to try and prescribe a secular state on people who aren't ready for it.

Regardless of the civil structure, if even just a fraction of what is currently spent on the IDF could go towards reparations and reconstruction, it would be amazing to see how quickly material conditions improve.