Opinion of this quote

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[TNF]

And in the same page TNF:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Strange you forget to mention that.

The "two state solution" recognizes and legitimates the state of Israel. That's not exactly a progressive position, if you ask me. You're either on the side of those who forced the Palestinians off their land and into an open air prison, or you're on the side of those demanding their freedom.

[TNF]

TNF, what would you advocate doing with the current population of Israel? (Not counting the Arab minority which I assume you'd say can stay where they are.) Legitimately curious.

I support a one-state solution. A democratic, unified, and secular Palestine for all its inhabitants, with protections for the civil rights of all.

[TNF]

TNF, what would you advocate doing with the current population of Israel? (Not counting the Arab minority which I assume you'd say can stay where they are.) Legitimately curious.

I support a one-state solution. A democratic, unified, and secular Palestine for all its inhabitants, with protections for the civil rights of all.

So it's Israel's character as a Jewish (and by implication exclusionarily so) polity that you oppose, rather than the presence of its Jewish population in the area as such?

Yup.

[TNF]

I don't actually disagree with anything in it, tbh. It doesn't change the fact the Israeli government is a bunch of morons and assholes and at this point bear most of the responsibility for the failure of peace talks.

Most? I would say they bear all of the responsibility for the failure of peace talks in the region, given that, you know, they pushed the Palestinians off their land 66 years ago and stripped them of their civil rights.

[TNF]

I support a one-state solution. A democratic, unified, and secular Palestine for all its inhabitants, with protections for the civil rights of all.

Yeah, that's gonna happen. You might as well replace "Palestine" with "World".

Not with that attitude it won't. But I'm sure similar things were said about a racially neutral South Africa in the 1970s or 1980s.

[TNF]

The rewriting of history by the anti-Israel crowd is just shameless. 

The land Israel sits on is the Jewish homeland.  That area was conquered by Assyrians, Seleucid Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Mamluk Turks.  Jews didn't leave Israel by choice for the most part.  They were mostly sold in slavery in the Roman Empire and forced to flee at various points.  That's not to say that Israel belongs to Jews.  I don't think any land belongs to any one national group per se.  But, the land of Israel is not an ancestral Arab territory.  So, there's that.

Why was Israel created?  The places where Jewish people did live between the 1880s and 1940s were none to hospitable.  What instigated the two great migrations to Israel?  You have the horrible persecution in the Russian Empire by Alexander III and the holocaust. (Do the Israel haters have a problem with Jews escaping to Argentina or the United States?  Isn't that colonizing in your book?) Well, all that came to a head in the holocaust and you had a horrible refugee problem.  What were Jews supposed to do post-holocaust?  Stay in Poland?  Jews had been prevented from moving anywhere and when they stayed put, people killed millions of them and oppressed them.  So, if you give Jews an opportunity to have their own state, they're going to see it as a singular chance to find a place to live in peace and security.  Whose fault is that?  Not the Jews clearly, that's the fault of Russia and Germany.

Would it have been better if Jews were all allowed to immigrate to the US?  I think so.  But, that didn't happen.  What happened was that Jews took that singular chance and founded their own state.  Was that a majority Arab state?  No.  Israel in 1948 was majority Jewish in population.  Did Jewish people steal land?  Maybe some did, but most bought land from Arabs.  So, before Israel was invaded by the entire Middle East, Israel was being as fair as possible and not creating their state using mass violence.  Once Israel was invaded, Israel needed defensible borders and you had the logical insanity of war.  One side does something bad, the other retaliates and so on.  That's what wars are like, it's never nice or fair.  Every war like that has refugees.  But, Israel has no reason to apologize for winning for its survival.   

Once you get to that point, what's the solution?  Kill the Arabs with kindness?  Refuse to defend yourself because, who really deserves to have a state anyway?  Israel could have been better, sure.  But, just imagine if the roles were reversed.  Wouldn't the Palestinians just start an outright genocide?  That's the moral difference here.  God bless Elizabeth Warren for realizing that and defending the Jewish people.  That's the liberal, progressive thing to do.  Israel is a convenient target because they actually listen to critics and they're a "white" western, powerful country.  But, just as might doesn't make right, might doesn't make wrong. 

Your racism is showing.

[TNF]

I dunno, the assumption that the Palestinians would attempt to 'start a genocide' were the roles reversed in the region seems a tad racist, given you know, no support for that proposition in real life and given your distaste for those that have the guts to fight for the land they're being pushed off of.

[TNF]

I dunno, the assumption that the Palestinians would attempt to 'start a genocide' were the roles reversed in the region seems a tad racist, given you know, no support for that proposition in real life and given your distaste for those that have the guts to fight for the land they're being pushed off of.

If having that opinion makes me racist against Arab people, by the same token, you're an anti-Semite. 

But, I don't think you're an anti-Semite.  I think you're just a dude who wants to take the position that offers him the most leftist street cred.  You're not interested in having a understanding of this issue, you want want to have a position that demonstrates your anti-imperialist/pro-third world stance.  And, I guess I'm a jerk or capitalist stooge or something for disagreeing with you and therefore also racist.  OK, noted.

I don't understand you doubting the of my sincerity in taking up the cause of the oppressed in Palestine. This isn't a position I adopted overnight because I was commanded to do so by some secretive central committee somewhere. It's a position I held even before I identified as a Marxist, and it has less to do with me being a Marxist than it has to do with me not identifying with a nation that expelled the Palestinians from their homes and now forces them to live in an open-air prison, which they regularly bomb when one of those prisoners have the guts to fight back against their oppression.

I called you a racist precisely because that's what you are and that's what your sentiments convey. The idea that the Palestinians, if given the chance, would gladly massacre the Israelis because reasons (that you give no support for) is a corollary to your dominant worldview, which is that the Israelis have a right to that land, the Palestinians do not, and Israel is in the right and the Palestinians in the wrong. We must preserve the Jewish state as a Jewish state is basically how that (and all Zionist arguments on the subject) goes. I don't understand how you can plausibly argue that preserving a state entirely on the basis that is for only certain kinds of people is not racist or exclusionary. That same argument didn't work for South Africa, and it certainly should not work for a nation engaging in the same shameful disregard for human rights.