• RGB3x3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      124
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      No country or government has a “right” to exist. They’re given that ability to exist by the people they’re supposed to serve. If the system is not serving the people, it shouldn’t exist.

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Supreme executive power is derived from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical electoral ceremony.

        If I declared myself chancellor because a bunch of my friends voted for me they’d put me a way.

        • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          The problem is, it’s a practical impossibility for the masses to mandate anything. There are way over 300 million people in the U.S. (for example), there is no practical way for a majority of them to mandate anything without going through channels put there by those in power which limit the scope of conversation as well as choices.

          Anyone claiming a mandate from the people is really claiming successful control of oppressive systems.

          • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            Totally agree. Government starts getting worse the bigger a population it tries to govern.

            But if I say “who wants pizza” and an entire kindergarten class says “Me!” then I’d call that a mandate from the masses.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Agreed. The United States is doing a piss-poor job serving the people, and while that may be due how the country was shaped during colonialism, it is not due to its ongoing colonialism. It’s a totally different situation than Israel.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          you mean paper backed by the might of a whole country vs expensive and poluting scam coins?

          • Fishbone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Now you listen here! I may have lost part of my brain in a wolverine attack, but… I know one thing and one thing’s for sure, and that is the block chain is the future of currency. You think- oh, “fiat currency”? You th- what, “state backed dollars”? What could be better than a completely unaccountable system of absolute strangers and con artists, assembled together in a bizarre crypto fascist commune?

      • Milksteaks [he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I was watching the falcon and winter soldier and I was thinking the flag smashers had a good point and were doing good for the world. They wanted no borders and no more nationalism. At one point they randomly had the flagsmashers kill some innocents to make them the antagonists

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Propaganda is everywhere. Especially in super hero movies where they can remove ambiguity by writing actions that make bad guys unambiguously bad. They justify the heroes with these clear cut good and evil situations. Like in Batman when he kidnaps the guy from Hong Kong because Joker is making his points using grand displays that kill a bunch of people. Or in 24 when they carefully craft a situation where torture looks sensible (and maybe even pays off? It’s been a long time, I can’t remember if they show torture as a “justifiable” but ultimately useless act, or if they portray torture as an effective way of obtaining information when the tortured knows they only have to hold out for 24 hours).

          The Boys does a better job with this by making the idea of heroes saving the day itself the villain and highlighting the corruption that would likely go along with such power and reputation.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Just finished watching “Death and other Details.” Same thing happened. Victor Sams did nothing wrong. 😑

        • jsomae
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          This kind of argument is like those anti-communist arguments “would you want to have to share your iPod with strangers?”

          • creation7758
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Big government is coming to take your toothbrush

        • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          No one’s saying you shouldn’t have a safe place to sleep, and if they are then I would like to have a discussion with them

        • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          maybe if you think really hard you can imagine some kind of differences between national borders, and the boundaries of personal living space…

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          buddy it used to be absolutely standard for people to invite complete and utter strangers into their homes, offer them food and a place to sleep, and not expect any sort of payment beyond maybe them telling some stories and news.

          maybe research the past before saying laughable things as if they’re some amazing “gotcha”

    • optissima
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Big difference between nowhere and no state.

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        No I’m not. Anarchism keeps getting stupider and less likely to ever be a workable solution to anything the more I look into it. It’s at best a nice thought experiment.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          “Hey look at that disorganized group of people, I bet if we organized we could take them over”

    • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s the state that has no right to exist, not the people or the place.

      Now what is a state?

      Look it up, but it’s basically a formalized group of people who believe themselves entitled to power and claim they can use violence to get their way and you are not allowed to defend yourself against it.

      The state is a cultural pandemic, this is the real mind virus, our species existed for like 200,000 years in complex societies without the state, 500 years with ubiquitous state (look up enclosure acts that forced everyone into a state) is all it’s taken to destroy the entire planet.

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        By your definition of “state”, states have existed for all of human history. The only thing that has changed over the years is that human population and areas of control have expanded to encompass the whole planet, instead of having huge areas that are outside of anyone’s control.

    • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      They have the “right” to exist but no mandate to exist. They’re allowed to exist and just as allowed to collapse and dissolve

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Moreso it’s a contradiction in the original meme.

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      That’s just not true. You just never learned what a nation is. Before there were nation-states, there were city-states. City-states were states that were confined to a city, geographically. So what is a nation then? It’s not, as people think, an arbitrary border, a nation is a people with a shared history. French is a nation-state, a state that emerges from the nation of the French people, people who have a long history of being born in the same location, sharing the same language, and sharing many many cultural aspects.

      America is not a nation, but it is a state. There are no American people. The land was inhabited by 100s of nations that did not organize themselves into states. That land was given the name of an Italian (Amerigo), and then a bunch of people of different nationalities invaded and occupied it. Same with all of the “Latin American” states, Australia, Canada, and the rest of the colonial world. There is no Australian nation, there is an Australian state populated by people of many different nations (the English nation, the Italian nation, the German nation, etc).

      As far as I know, there are no nationless-states that aren’t violent genocidal colonial projects. All of these states are illegitimate, based only on dominance with absolutely no other foundation.

      All states should ultimately be dismantled, but the colonial states will need to go first, because otherwise the colonial states, history’s most violent states, will be empowered by the dismantling of other states. There is an order to these things.

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Everywhere on the planet has the right to exist, with the possible exception of Fresno, ca. And anywhere named after the political entity it exists in(new York city since the name change, California city, etc)

      The regimes terrorizing the people into obedience, however; largely do not.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Iran, India, China and Egypt have had historical settlement for a good 5,000 years

        I think that’s kind of a common misconception that occurs when you’re implementing ideas like race, nationality, or ethnicity to historical people who didn’t really know them or understand them in the same way.

        In regards to China, are we talking about the ethnic han? Well they displaced and settled land from other Chinese ethnicities. If we’re just talking about the ethnicity held within a single nationality. Well, see there’s a place in China called Inner Mongolia…

        In regards to Egypt, it’s not an ethnicity, it’s a nationality. You obviously have the ptolemeic dynasty, who were just some Greeks. You had the Persian dynasty for a while, then the nubian, then the meshwesh(Libyan), you even had the Hyksos who were proposed to be from the Levant. It’s all over the place.

        My point being that the ancient world was more connected than most people originally think, and ethnicities tended not to stay in one place for thousands and thousands of years.

        • makyo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You may know better but continuing to use China as the example - weren’t they also repeatedly conquored and resettled by steppe people? Like, not only have they not had a 5000 year historic settlement but they have had as chaotic history of conquest and resettlement as just about anyone in history.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            You may know better but continuing to use China as the example - weren’t they also repeatedly conquored and resettled by steppe people?

            Eh, I guess it depends on who you consider to be Chinese, and what period of history you’re talking about?

            For the most part the steppe people like the Turkic or the Mongolians did the majority of what we consider conquering in China in the 13th-14th century.

            Before that they didn’t really comprise a large threat unless you are going much further back in history. If we are examining the Han dynasty, who shares a piece of history around the same time as the Romans, then yes. We don’t exactly have a bunch of primary sources, but we can tell a lot by the distribution of dna and language that they historically occupied large aspects of northern China, and are related to modern Manchu people’s, and those who hail from Manchu people like the modern Koreans.

            Like, not only have they not had a 5000 year historic settlement but they have had as chaotic history of conquest and resettlement as just about anyone in history.

            If we are speaking of the migration and conquest carried out by the Han, it’s not even really been hundreds. In the 19th century during the Taiping rebellion the Han started a civil war/genocide that killed around 30 million people. You get some pretty contextual quotes that kind of put into perspective the ethnic conflict native to China "“China is the China of the Chinese. We compatriots should identify ourselves with the China of the Han Chinese.”

              • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                The Mongols ruled China during the Yuan Dynasty. The Manchu ruled China during the Qing Dynasty

                The Manchu people also known as the Jurchens, are descendents of the mongol and Turks.

                Xianbei and Xiongnu ruled parts of China for periods

                Yes… Which were both tribes of steppe people from the eastern han dynasty, which is what I claimed in my post.

                the Warring States

                The Qin dynasty is a bit more complicated as it was multi ethnic, but was originally founded by people who would one day consider themselves Manchu. But this is prior to the han dynasty and really before conflict in the area stratified into mostly ethnic based conflicts.

                Taiping Rebellion

                I already covered the Taiping rebellion in a separate reply.

                China is drastically more complicated than our eurocentric perspective suggests

                Lol, I’m Korean, a descendent of the Manchu people.

                I think the problem you are having is that in Europe transitioned away from classical imperialism much sooner than Eastern Asia. So most you tend to have a hard time separating nationality with ethnicity, as that is typically how you guys divided empire into nation states

                So when you use vernacular like mongol, you don’t realize that it’s interchangeable with things like steppe people, Manchu, or Jurchen depending on what era or dynasty you are talking about.

      • Gnugit@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Except most of China was colonised by the Han people after the fall of Mongolia…

        • beardown@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          This is ahistorical. If the “fall of Mongolia” refers to the Yuan Dynasty, then the Han very obviously ruled China both prior and after that.

          If that isn’t what you mean, then you really don’t know what you’re talking about

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            If the “fall of Mongolia” refers to the Yuan Dynasty, then the Han very obviously ruled China both prior and after that.

            It depends on how they are interpreting Mongol. There are a couple ways to interpret Mongol depending on how exacting you wish to be. The most specific is just the Mongol empire, the period prior to the establishment of the yuan dynasty. The mongol dynasty which includes the yuan dynasty and the rest of the kaganates. Or the most general, the modern vernacular for tribal steppe people.

            If they are just talking about ethnic groups originating in Manchuria then they are correct. The Qin dynasty was the first dynasty of imperial China, and it originated from the Manchu people prior to the Han Dynasty. These are ethnically the same people who would eventually establish the Yuan and Qing dynasties .

            I don’t think you understand exactly how long the beef between Manchu and Han goes back, or the modern and contemporary attempts by the Han to obscure their ethnic contributions via historical revisionism.

            Modern Han chauvinism has been recognized as a problem for the leaders of China since the Taiping rebellion where you start to hear quotes like “China is the China of the Chinese. We compatriots should identify ourselves with the China of the Han Chinese.”

      • WldFyre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        How long do you have to wait before it’s okay to live somewhere?

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        You think that having an indigenous population means that everything was sunshine and roses, and no group of humans was killing other groups of humans over that particular chunk of land? You might need to brush up on your history lessons.

        • jsomae
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re making a utilitarian argument that doesn’t account for the value of sovereignty.

      • vorbixol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        All those countries came about by conquering tribes. They were all empires at one time or another. China never stopped being an empire. Tibet & Taiwan would like a word with you…

        • StalinIsMaiWaifu@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Considering Taiwan’s population is primarily (~95%) Han and by their own constitution they still claim the old RoC borders (including tibet and mongolia) I think Taiwan might want to have a word with you

  • TheLastHero [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    The zionist entity really loves that argument that “they are held to an unfair standard” and all that, and I will admit there is a small nugget of truth to that. They’re jealous of the European powers who got to slaughter and plunder the rest of the world centuries ago but they don’t even get to do it to the “savage natives” in their much smaller slice of conquered land.

    Only problem is that since then an international framework of law and human rights was developed and agreed to by nearly the entire world condemning atrocities like that. (Ironically this was spurred on by the Nazi genocides and warmongering) Obviously it’s still not very well enforced, but it’s at least agreed that aggressive conquest and genocide is ‘not good.’

    Yet the zionist entity still wants to apply 18th century attitudes to the 21st century then also act outraged that people hate them for it. Yeah, more powerful states than you got away with it back then, but the unfairness isn’t that YOU can’t slaughter anymore, the real injustice was what happened to the VICTIMS of those massacres. And they have the gall to talk like this while they perpetuate more massacres and create hundreds of thousands of more victims. Not to mention they literally are getting away with it anyway, the imperial hegemon is delivering them weapons right now, and no one is stopping them except the glorious axis of resistance.

    may Palestine be liberated from the river to the sea isntrael

    • Rinox@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      9 months ago

      I was with you until the last sentence. Removing the Israeli state “from the river to the sea” as you say, would mean another genocide. I guess at the end of the day, it’s always ok to commit a genocide, but only if it’s your side committing it, eh?

      The real solution is to create two states, one for the Jews, one for the Palestinians, create a well-defined border and stop it with the holy wars, stop it with the persecutions, stop it with the genocides, stop it with the forced resettlement, stop it with terror attacks, stop it with the bombings and stop it with religions altogether.

      Everyone has the right to live, so just live and let live

      • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Removing the Israeli state “from the river to the sea” as you say, would mean another genocide.

        You’re really telling on yourself with that sentence. Zionist delusional fears have always been pure projection.

      • CindyTheSkull [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Removing the Israeli state “from the river to the sea” as you say, would mean another genocide.

        No it fucking wouldn’t. Completely dismantling the STATE of Israel, a terroristic settler-colonizer project, would not necessitate a genocide in any way and by pretending it does, you’re doing the propaganda work for the actual genocidaires.

        I guess at the end of the day, it’s always ok to commit a genocide, but only if it’s your side committing it, eh?

        Stfu with your false equivalency bullshit. Let’s use the stolen house analogy that was used elsewhere in this thread because it is apt. If a group of armed assholes comes into your house and starts killing off your family, claiming your house as their own, your doing everything within your power to get them back out of your house is not committing a crime at all, let alone one that is equivalent to the crime they are currently perpetrating against you.

        The real solution is to create two states, one for the Jews, one for the Palestinians, create a well-defined border

        Consider again the analogy above and ask yourself if the real solution is letting those who came in your house and killed your family have their own kitchenette, bathrooms, and bedrooms in your house, just with new walls. When they’ve been saying the whole time (as they were killing your family) that that’s all they actually wanted to do.

        The following is from: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/ which you should read in full.

        Is the two-state solution the only viable solution?

        Viable for whom and for what?

        The two-state solution is inadequate to right historical wrongs, as it focuses on the pre-1967 borders as a starting point, which are in themselves a product of the colonization of Palestine, and not the root cause of it. It is thus preoccupied with finding solutions to symptoms, rather than dare address the root cause, which is Zionist settler colonialism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

        This automatically means that Palestinians must relinquish any rights or hopes for their millions of refugees, and it also means that Palestinians must relinquish their rights to live in over 80% of the land they were ethnically cleansed from. Consequently, resource distribution, from water to fertile land, will be heavily stacked in Israel’s favor.

        Shortly put, the two-state solution is more interested in maintaining Israel’s colonial gains and artificial demographic aspirations, and lending them legitimacy, rather than seeking justice for the Palestinians in any form.

        You should really go ahead and read the other myths discussed there too.

        stop it with the holy wars, stop it with the persecutions, stop it with the genocides, stop it with the forced resettlement, stop it with terror attacks, stop it with the bombings

        Only one “side” is doing all that and is the only one that has the power to immediately stop doing all of that. Instead, it keeps doing all of that. I wonder why it hasn’t stopped. thonk

        and stop it with religions altogether.

        Seriously? You are a clown. And I say that as an atheist myself.

        Everyone has the right to live, so just live and let live

        Oh, just give peace a chance, right? My god liberals are so fucking vapid. This is not a situation with two sides of equivalent means and committing equivalent atrocities with an equivalent power to stop the violence. It is extremely asymmetric in every sense, including the fact that one side is currently conducting an open genocide against the other which is disproportionately made up of children. I would guarantee that most of the Palestinian people would do just about anything to be able to live and let live but Israel will not have that - they never have and they never will, which is the nature of all settler-colonial projects which you clearly don’t understand.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          TBH I even agree that Israel is the one doing the genocide right now. The problem I have is with your solution.

          If the solution is dismantling the state of Israel and giving everything to a possible new State of Palestine, it means another fuck ton of problems, if not a straight-up civil war and genocide.

          What’s the solution that avoids genocide, displacement, apartheid and suffering BOTH for Jews and Palestinians?

          Right now Israel is perpetrating all of these atrocities, but, unless you believe them just when perpetrated on your enemy, you should be looking for a solution that doesn’t involve destroying a nation and its people. Otherwise, you are the same as them.

          Remember that most Jews in Israel were born in the land of Israel, in Palestine, for the vast majority there is no place to “return to”.

          We need a better solution than “destroy their nation, send them away, kill them all or make them live under a muslim-arab state in a state of apartheid”

          • CindyTheSkull [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            As I already said, you have no understanding of what settler-colonialism is, and your disgusting (and actually racist) insistence that the Palestinians (who we agree are being genocided right now) will simply genocide everyone living on their stolen land is testament to your ignorance. You know how space_comrade pointing out you were telling on yourself by spouting a Zionist delusional fear, and that it is pure projection? Well it really is both those things: delusional and projection.

            Most of what you said I already addressed, and you seemed to have missed it, so it doesn’t make me very keen to respond to it again. But this part:

            you should be looking for a solution that doesn’t involve destroying a nation and its people.

            is very revealing. Destroying a STATE is not the same thing as destroying a people and it’s very sneaky to pretend that it’s the same thing.

            The site I already linked has a FAQ, and here is one entry from it:

            Does Israel have a right to exist?

            People have a right to self-determination, but no state in the world has a right to exist. This ‘right’ simply has no foundation, and Israel is not special in this regard. More here

            Since I don’t expect people to always read when something is linked, even when they absolutely should do so if they have even a passing interest in actually understanding the situation they are talking about (let alone talking as if they have the solution, lol) I am going to paste another piece from the write-up that I linked and suggested you read in my last comment. It puts the lie to your insistence that a Palestinian state (which is the only way forward that is congruent with both justice and long-term peace) would also necessitate another genocide.

            Everything below is from: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/

            These anxieties are not unique to Jewish Israelis, settlers in many different colonies throughout history have echoed these same sentiments. If we were to take a look at the narrative surrounding anti-Apartheid South Africa activism and boycotts, we would find eerily similar projections and arguments.

            For example, In an article for the Globe and Mail under the title “The good side of white South Africa” Kenneth Walker argued that ending the Apartheid system and giving everyone an equal vote would be a “a recipe for slaughter in South Africa”. Others, such as Shingler, echoed similar claims, saying that anti-racist activists were actually not interested in ending Apartheid as a policy, but in South Africa as a society. Others came out to claim these activists were actually motivated by “anti-white racism”, fueled by “Black imperialism”. Political comics displayed a giant soviet bear, bearing down on South Africa declaring “We shall drive South Africa into the Sea!”

            Sound familiar?

            Yet even when it is rarely acknowledged that Palestinian refugees were wronged, and deserve to return home, the refrain is that while it is tragic, it is the only way to keep the Jewish people safe. Once again, this pretense is hardly unique to Jewish Israelis, as a matter of fact, similar arguments were used against the abolition of slavery in the United States. For example, Thomas Jefferson likened slavery to a wolf:

            “we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.”
            

            How utterly ridiculous this all sounds now.

            While the first approach is crude and vile propaganda, designed to instigate fear and panic, it is par for the course for settler societies. Perhaps the second approach stands out a little bit more for its brazen attempt at manipulation. In a final endeavor to center their experiences and erase their victims, settlers frame themselves as the stars of their own tragedy, in the end they were the tragic victims of fate, forced to wield injustice for the sake of self-preservation.

            Underlying the logic of both of these approaches are racist assumptions that the colonized are barbaric, bloodthirsty and ruthless. It is a deeply dehumanizing logic, steeped in every colonial and Orientalist trope. The idea that a decolonized, free Palestine would inevitably lead to genocide comes from this same logic. As a matter of fact, for all the claims of the Palestinians wanting to push Israelis into the sea, only the opposite has occurred in reality.

            Regardless of your ideological leanings, the reality is that we are already living under a de facto one-state reality. Israeli politicians proudly boast about never allowing a Palestinian state to materialize. Israeli school books already erase the green line. Israel already rules the lives of everyone there. Palestinians calling for the dissolution of this naked colonialism is legitimate and just. The fact that Palestinians are even asked to guarantee the well-being and welfare of their oppressors as they are killed, imprisoned and brutally repressed daily is a testament to their utter dehumanization.

            • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              the only people who actually tried to genocide white people to any significant degree were… other white people. the germans doing genocide on the slavs. and european jews.

              only one “culture” decided to travel all over the world and steal everything. the west.

              but western imperialist dogs will continue to project their own barbarity on the rest of the world, based on no evidence.

            • Rinox@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              9 months ago

              Regardless of your ideological leanings, the reality is that we are already living under a de facto one-state reality

              And this is the problem. Until there is just one state, one side will feel oppressed. There’s also the religious issue, where both Jews and Muslims can’t apparently tolerate each other. Just or not, I don’t see a way for Jews and Palestinians to peacefully and happily coexist in the same state. Maybe you do, I don’t.

              I also don’t see a way for Palestinians to gain the whole region without a war, or for Jews to renounce to the land they live in and to the state they have peacefully. If it’s a war, I think it will be very very ugly; I mean, we are seeing right now what an all out war is like, it would be this, but on an even greater scale.

              I’m with you, we need to stop Israel. The international community needs to force them to the negotiating table, and I feel like a two-state solution is the only thing that could make this genocide stop. Asking for a Palestinian one-state solution will only reinforce Israel aggression. What’s the other solution really?

              • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                9 months ago

                Just or not, I don’t see a way for Jews and Palestinians to peacefully and happily coexist in the same state.

                That’s odd, they coexisted just fine for the first 1300 years of Islam’s existence. There were maybe 3 instances in that whole period that Jews were excluded from certain areas by Arab or Islamic authorities, and these still weren’t blanket bans. Compare that to the dozens upon dozens of times that they were kicked out by Christian kingdoms. Ashkenazi Jews had no barriers to doing “aliyah” to Palestine where they met Mizrahi Jews who were still living in the region.

                Israel is an ethnostate that emerged from late-19th-century European nationalism. This is not true of Palestine, which has no ethnic exclusion and is more accurately part of the movement towards decolonization (whether Ottoman or British).

                Saying that “Palestinians would do the same to Jews” is not even a simple counterfactual. There is no evidence for it. A couple vague statements and actions by fundamentalist minority groups that were curated by Israel do not make an entire population guilty of a Tu Quoque malicious intent. This is a bad faith argument, and it sounds like you have absorbed it from ubiquitous repetition in spite of the egalitarian values you seem to have.

                The genocide in Rwanda was ended without splitting it up into two states, there is certainly precedent for inclusivity. Listen to what Palestinian voices are actually saying, not what they’re presumed to be saying by Israelis.

          • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            We need a better solution than “destroy their nation, send them away, kill them all or make them live under a muslim-arab state in a state of apartheid”

            Zionists simply cannot argue in good faith and have no tactics beyond lies and subterfuge. Nobody said kill them all, nobody said send them away, nobody said “a muslim-arab state of apartheid”

            Disgusting.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        would mean another genocide

        No it wouldn’t. You are saying EXACTLY the same thing that people said about the end of South African apartheid. Everyone claimed it would be a genocide for white people.

        It was not.

        And it will not be in Palestine either.

        You are indistinguishable from the people who opposed the end of apartheid in South Africa.

      • TheLastHero [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I wrote longer response but then I lost it, so I’m just going to quickly simplify it.

        The two state solution is what we have now, and it means Palestine is forced to live in a permanently degraded state of sovereignty. Sovereignty is the key cornerstone of international relations, as is deterrence (live and let live, as you call it). This is not a holy war, this is a colonial war over the autonomy and self-determination of a people, the Palestinian people.

        Thus, if you truly believe in equal rights for the Palestinians in a two state solution, you need to ask yourself this:

        Would you allow the Palestinians to form their own army? Import weapons from Iran? Build their own air force with bombers? Many of their officers would undoubtedly be Hamas veterans, you wouldn’t get to exclude them from serving their new country either, could you accept that?

        You say you don’t want forced resettlement, a laudable ideal to be sure, but you can’t have no forced resettlements and a hard border because of the Zionist settlements. Go look at a map, there is no border line to be drawn between them, they are scattered around the whole of Palestinian territory. Those settlements are their for the express purpose of denying the Palestinians their freedom of movement and critical resources and infrastructure, so they would have to go.

        Would you let the Palestinian army evict those settlers if they refused? Would you let them defend their new borders, with lethal force if necessary? And how about the people who have already been forcibly resettled, the Palestinian refugees? They’re still alive, waiting to come back, what about their homes? Even if somehow a general peace treaty was signed to settle all these messy issues at once, would you really expect either side to just take eachother’s word for it? Would the Zionists turn over their illegal nuclear weapons? And allow Palestinians to inspect sensitive facilities to ensure their destruction?

        You don’t have to like these things, but you would have to accept them, because they are the rights afforded to every sovereign nation.

        I can tell you now the Zionists would never accept these conditions, it would be incredible blow to their colonial project. Maybe under extreme international pressure and isolation, but then you have the lingering tension between the two states that lasts for who knows how long. A two state solution is basically impossible, the Zionists made it impossible over decades. So in my opinion alright then, you made this bed, you fucking lay in it now: a single state is the only way forward now. A single state from the river to the sea, so that all of the people victimized by this colonial project may move towards a brighter, more peaceful future. I will never apologize for saying that, despite the recriminations of the zionists and the propaganda of their collaborators. There would in fact be less chance of war and genocide than with two states. However, you couldn’t call it a Jewish (ethno)state anymore. But the Jews living there would still get to stay there, what’s more important?

        Honestly, the Zionists wouldn’t accept that either, but they need to humble themselves and accept something, because they are marching the entire region toward a massive conflagration that will engulf and destroy them eventually.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          They are people. If you don’t consider them people, well, that’s what brings on genocides.

          They live there, they were born there, and they have equal right to stay where they were born as the Palestinians do. If the only option you are willing to entertain is total displacement or annihilation, then you are no better than them and should be ashamed of yourself.

              • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                23
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                How was it they lived there before? I wonder what happened. I wonder who stole land, murdered thousands of people, and turned themselves into the enemy of everyone in the region?

                (it was zionists. the zionist project created this strife intentionally to push jews to israel. zionists made their bed and they’re not going to get sympathy because now it’s inconvenient for them.

              • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah no, the one state is the only future, and if you’re squatting in a Palestinian family’s home your ass is getting evicted so you best come to terms with that

                I hope you enjoy your future Palestinian citizenship and can look back on your old racist self with disgust and shame, it’s honestly more than you deserve

      • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        To remove a state is not to remove a people, the Israeli state can be destroyed potentially without any loss of life (not that that’s likely)

  • davelA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    Reporter: [REDACTED]
    Reason: Fuck off with this racist, xenophobic shit.

    Apparently decolonization is xenophobic.

    • Cowbee [he/they]
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I recently got banned from !Playstation@Lemmy.zip because I called out the moderator for crying about black people in God of War. The reason given? Racism, apparently, for telling the mod to stop being racist.

      They deleted their account and locked the community, lol

      Edit: to add on, a hexbear user saw that I got banned for “racism” after calling out the racist mod, and they also got banned, lmao. It’s really funny, the mod edited their post and pretended they were a victim for “being called a bigot for standing against DEI in video games.”

      Such reactionary bullshit.

        • Cowbee [he/they]
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yea, haha. I still genuinely cannot believe the level of contradiction in their edit.

          For context :

          Edit: Well it seems like people here don’t agree with me. OK. I’m locking this post now as the very thing that I said happens has happened. Right here. I was called a bigot for being against DEI. Calling people racists or bigots and/or claiming harassment when those people call You out and then screaming VICTIM is simply unacceptable

          It’s actually absurd.

          • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Oh good lord. Do people not hear themselves? “Im not racist guys! I’m just against diversity, equity, and inclusion!!!1!” Sir, how in the fuck is that not racist?

      • BennyHill500
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        being called a bigot for standing against DEI in video games.

        I love this response because thats still being bigoted.

        • Cowbee [he/they]
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yep, they genuinely thought that immediately getting tossed the fuck out proved their point, that gamers are an oppressed minority. I haven’t seen shit like that since Reddit.

        • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          ‘How dare they call me a bigot for my bigoted views!’ it’s so tiring, would the fuckers just own it and stop crying all the time?

        • Cowbee [he/they]
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yea, unfortunately, but it was strange seeing such a Reddit moment on Lemmy

          • Omega_Haxors
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Remember to report problem content even if you get banned for it. The reports go to all relevant parties; the mods of the community, (who are going to be in bad faith and will likely laugh at your report) but more importantly the admins of both your and their instance. If the home instance does nothing it will signal to your instance that the admins are supporting that kind of behavior which can kick off diplomacy efforts.

            The threat of defederation keeps instances accountable, as even a bad faith instance wants to retain their audience.

        • Cowbee [he/they]
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Hey, fancy seeing you, comrade! It was wild, and it was hilarious to see them shut it all down. <3

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      This logic is what got me, for a brief period in my teens, to identify as an antisemite, because I genuinely thought that was just the word for people who think genocide is fucked and ‘never again’ sounds like a pretty good guideline.

      And I’m terrified how many other kids bought into the Zionist propaganda since, and how many of them are going to be less willing to admit they made an oopsie than my dumb ass was. I’m terrified how many people are going to be hurt by second order Zionist violence, all over the world. I think when they start attacking language, a nuclear response is warranted.

  • z00s@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    As an Australian I sometimes wonder what this place would be like if there hadn’t been genocide and institutional racism for 200 years.

    • Cypher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Due to the mineral wealth we don’t need to wonder much.

      Australia… or whatever it would have been named, would have been a patchwork of dictatorships like we see in resource rich parts of Africa.

      It’s actually really unusual that Australia didn’t end up that way.

  • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    9 months ago

    Love when they get to the point of using “show me a modern nation that isn’t deserving of nuclear fire” as an argument for why America isn’t so bad.

      • duviobaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Here, “nation states” does not refer to the actual landmass their borders engulf, but rather to the abstract concept of differentiating between human populations on the basis of laws that merely exist within our minds and areas of land based on virtual lines that equally only exist in our minds

      • я не из калининграда
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        9 months ago

        what exactly is your point? the fact that korea suffers inhumane sanctions imposed by the us empire with the goal of punishing the korean people for resisting their imperialism?

        • jsomae
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think it was meant to be a light-hearted joke.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          What the fuck are you talking about. NK’s biggest allies have always been the second-biggest economy in the world, first the USSR, now the PRC.

          They’re poor af because their “allies” prefer it that way

          • я не из калининграда
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            wrong. back when the ussr was still a thing the dprk had a pace of development matching, or in parts even exceeding that of the south, and that even with only minimal soviet assistance post 1965, as korea stayed neutral in the sino-soviet split.

            the prc on the other hand not only complies with the sanctions that were unjustly imposed on the dprk, but was instrumental in bringing them about in the first place. the reason for this is that china, since dengs betrayal of socialism, tries to integrate with the western dominated world market, something an extremely belligerent anti western dprk is not useful for. this is why the dprk currently tries to develop ties with bourgeois russia, as they are at least somewhat serious about fighting the west.

    • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      If my grandpa stole your grandpa’s house, and I live in that house while you’re homeless (my dad also fucked over your dad a bunch), how clean are my hands? Are my hands clean if my sister is fucking you over still today (maybe I yell at her about it, but it still happens) and I still live in the house?

    • DessalinesA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Stealing is not okay as soon as you give the stolen item to your kid. It should still be returned.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah but is the kid to blame?

        Answer: no, but the kid should recognize inequity and help correct it anyway.

        • DessalinesA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Blame is irrelevant, the kid needs to give back the stolen items.

          • InappropriateEmote [comrade/them, undecided]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Meh, blame is still relevant, and the kid deserves to keep getting blamed when he not only fails to give back what was stolen and keeps insisting he’s the rightful owner, but continues to rob and suppress the victims of the original theft, forcing them to pay exorbitant rent for access to the tiniest morsels of what was stolen from them.

          • _tezz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I can’t help but think your framing is a little off. It’s more like someone stole the item, then gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who gave it to their kids, who sold it to someone else, who gave it to their kids. And then asking those kids to give up the item (in this case their property and home?).

            • DessalinesA
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              So all you need to do to get away with theft is wait and move it around a bunch after the initial theft? And the rightful owner loses their right to it?

              • _tezz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                Like I feel like your perspective sounds nice and empathetic for about three seconds, then you realize you’re advocating another ethnic cleansing in response to ethnic cleansing. Or not, I guess it’s possible to think ethnic cleansing is good.

                • DessalinesA
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Returning land to the people it was stolen from isn’t ethnic cleansing, and it’s a typical settler response to accuse their victims of hypothetically doing something the colonizers are already guilty of.

              • Gabu@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                So what you’re saying is that it’s okay to take back the food stolen by a homeless man desperate to feed his kids, right? And if they’ve already eaten, it’s okay to take a scalpel to their stomach to retrieve it.

                Hypocrisy isn’t excusable.

                • DessalinesA
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Land stolen from indigenous people isn’t done in desperation for starvatian, it’s theft.

          • jsomae
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            “Not sure about the optics of that” lol

            • Omega_Haxors
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              I know I love that clip so much. That “feels like he supports the holocaust” streamlabs donation lives absolutely rent free.

              • jsomae
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Nazi Germany ruling the world would be a terrible thing and won’t cease to be terrible even after 200 years.

      • pop
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        China give back Tibet, when?

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sure, we didn’t invade these countries but we maintain the colonial power structures and continue to benefit from colonisation as indigenous people continue to be dispossessed. It’s easy and convenient to point your finger at the past and say thats where all the responsibility lies

      • seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I mean, depends on your definition of invasion. I have no problem calling British and French colonization of North America “invasion” but my main point is, Israel is actively doing it right now and all of the other countries listed did it hundreds of years ago where we can’t reach them.

  • NIB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    You might think that no country has any right to exist but that belief wont protect you from someone who thinks their country should control the entire world.

    Nationalism is a basic and maybe outdated mechanism that protects against foreign invasions. You need to understand its purpose and function if you want to abolish it. At some point, i think everyone would agree that some populations share certain moral values and priorities. And those values deserve to be defended.

    You can call those values “Germany” or “EU” or “Europe” or “lemmy” or “lgbtq people of earth and nearby planets”, but in the end you will have an entity that encapsulates values that are worth being defended. I dont give a fuck about my country and i wish daily that somehow it gets nuked out of existence. But fuck anyone who wants to take it over by force.

    Why is all this important? We are entering an age where information warfare is crucial. If an entity can shield its population from enemy informational warfare(great firewall of China) while being free to use informational warfare against its enemies(tik tok or any social media), then you(in the West) will just become a useful idiot.

    The enemy is trying to persuade that a thing is bad(countries/nationalism), while at the same time is preaching how great that same thing is on his own population. When the shit hits the fan, which side do you think will win? The one who thinks that nations are bullshit and no war is justified, or the country which thinks that its nation is the greatest and war is a moral necessity in order to “liberate” the rest of the world?

    This is nothing new. Japanese imperialism was disguised as anti-western/anti-imperialistic. Japan was the sign that asian people can be equal/superior to europeans and they just wanted to spread their values and liberate other asian nations from the european/american shackles. You dont need to be a historian to realize how utterly bullshit this lie was. The germans did the same with the whole “honorary aryan” thing.

    TLDR : Ask yourself, if you apply your belief, will the rest of the world follow? If not, who benefits from you applying your beliefs? Sometimes it is fine to have noble beliefs and realizing that they arent realistically applicable to the current world.

  • kaffiene@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    Sure, no state has a right to exist. Rights don’t really exist either, for that matter. The issue with Israel isn’t just being a colonist state, though. NZ is a colonial state. Awful things happened and continue to happen due to NZ colonisation. There is a pretty stark difference between race relations in NZ and Israel, however. When people rail against Israel it isn’t solely on the basis of colonisation

  • bufalo1973
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    Does anybody know when is gonna change Netanyahu the national anthem to “Israel uber alles”?

  • jsomae
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    9 months ago

    Get outta here with this false equivalence. The marginal human suffering inflicted per year caused by Israeli’s colonialism is incomparably greater than any other country’s in the modern era.

    • Nakoichi [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The average life expectancy on the Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota is 52 for men and 54 for women. Their land is contaminated from uranium mining and the US uses parts of it as a bombing range.

      What is happening in Israel is exactly what was done and is being done to indigenous people in all those other places too.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        A terrible injustice which of course needs to be corrected.

        The population in question is 20,000 people. That’s about 400 people born per year with a life expectency of 60% the national average; arguably equivalent to 400 murders per year.

        Gaza has 2.4 million people with a similar life expectency. (The same math yields 50,000 effective murders per year.) Not to mention they are actively being bombed today, and their population is mostly children (under 18). This means that when someone is killed by an Israeli soldier, that someone is most likely a minor!

        • Bay_of_Piggies [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          What is the point of isolating Pine Ridge within the United States to directly relate it to Israel’s treatment of all Palestinians? Pine Ridge isn’t the only indigenous community in the United States. The United States is just farther along the settler colonial project, that doesn’t make it better or incomparable.

          • jsomae
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Of course it’s better to be further along the colonial project. Probably every country on earth could be considered colonial over some timespan. As that duration goes to infinity, the marginal damage per year inflicted by colonialism goes to zero. (The cumulative damage increases of course, to some upper bound.) This is basic calculus.

            • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              23
              ·
              9 months ago

              This is basic calculus.

              I don’t think you’re coming from the worst place, but maybe consider that quantifying marginal units of human suffering isn’t the best framework for this type of discussion.

              • jsomae
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                Absolutely it is. I’m a staunch utilitarian. This is the most effective framework to help reduce human suffering in the modern world.

                • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I’m going to say the folks who’d slit your throat if it makes enough other people feel warm and fuzzy do not have the best framework to reduce human suffering

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yes. The overall damage through the centuries caused by western colonialism, in my estimate, is far greater than Israel’s.

        That in and of itself is not a good reason to wish America/Canada/Australia not to exist. Should we wish China to de-exist because of the Yangzhou massacre of 1645?

        Genocide is happening right now in Israel/Palestine and we can do something about it. There are modern injustices happening today which we should occupy ourselves with, not meaningless finger-pointing. Let’s tear down the western world sensibly, please.

        • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Should we wish China to de-exist because of the Yangzhou massacre of 1645?

          There’s a pretty clean break between the PRC and the Chinese dynasties of the 17th century. I’d have to brush up on my history but that’s borderline pre-Qing even. Very different than holding the U.S. (or Australia, etc.) to account for a genocide it did under the same constitution and form of government it has today.

          There are modern injustices happening today which we should occupy ourselves with, not meaningless finger-pointing.

          I don’t think it’s meaningless finger-pointing to say that the continuing harm the U.S. (or Australia, etc.) is doing to indigenous people (among others) is a live issue that should be addressed. Israel actively killing people right now does not mean those other wrongs should be dismissed.

          • jsomae
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Of course those wrongs should not be dismissed. Those are serious wrongs and need to be fixed. I’m of the belief that the entire western world needs to be dismantled and it’s causing great harm. But “occupying other people’s land” is not a good justification here, since that land has by and large traded hands many generations ago. Israel is different.

            I do not wish to see hundreds of millions of non-indigenous people shipped out of North America back to wherever their ancestors used to live in order to re-establish the sovereignty of a small minority of people. Let’s solve inequality and inequity in sane and non-violent ways instead.

            • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              9 months ago

              I do not wish to see hundreds of millions of non-indigenous people shipped out of North America back to wherever their ancestors used to live

              Who’s calling for this?

              When people said “the Russian Empire should not exist” in 1915 they were talking about replacing the existing political structure with something like the USSR, not depopulating the country in its entirety.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Okay granted. From this perspective, sure, American colonialism is strictly broader than Israel’s. I don’t think this really changes anything about what I’m saying here.

        • Donkter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I mean the only reason you’re technically correct is cause you limited the scope to just the last year. Just cause Israel did it the most recently doesn’t make them incomparable.

          • jsomae
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Even the year before that, it’s still true. Well, depending on what “incomparable” means lol

    • ComradeSharkfucker
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Just because it isn’t obviously genocidal(anymore) doesnt mean the US hasnt done incredible harm to the entire world. What israel is doing right now if horrific yes but the US is responsible for even greater suffering. Neither should exist

      • TraschcanOfIdeology [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Not to mention that many of the policies regarding Indigenous peoples and enforcement thereof in North America are still actively genocidal. Just because the US is not bombing people within their own land doesn’t mean that indigenous peoples in Turtle Island are thriving.

      • Omega_Haxors
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Seeing how Zionism is just a continuation of the Nazi’s cleansing efforts, which was inspired by America’s genocide, the US would very much be cupule in all of this if they weren’t already the biggest donors to and defenders of its continued existence.

        • ComradeSharkfucker
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          9 months ago

          I want you to go to an iraqi and tell them that american intervention benefitted them and their nation. Say that to a cambodian, vietnamese, nicaraguan, chilean, cuban, north korean, venezuelan, haitian, balkan, etc. the list goes on. You haven’t had a truly experienced the third world if you havent sat around a fire with sunflower seeds and grumbled about america. When i say that america is worse than israel i am referring to the purposeful bombings of civilians, hospitals, industrial infrastructure, and schools; I am referring to the overthrowing of democratically elected governments, the funding of fascist death squads, and the illegal and immoral sanctions meant to destabilize foreign powers all in the name of profit. Humanitarian aid is meaningless if you are the reason its necessary

            • davelA
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              You complain about America yet America contains China and their genocidal Muslim death squads.

              The US’s “Uyghur genocide” disinformation campaign has already been debunked several times over.

              We see here for example the evolution of public opinion in regards to China. In 2019, the ‘Uyghur genocide’ was broken by the media (Buzzfeed, of all outlets). In this story, we saw the machine I described up until now move in real time. Suddenly, newspapers, TV, websites were all flooded with stories about the ‘genocide’, all day, every day. People whom we’d never heard of before were brought in as experts — Adrian Zenz, to name just one; a man who does not even speak a word of Chinese.

              Organizations were suddenly becoming very active and important. The World Uyghur Congress, a very serious-sounding NGO, is actually an NED Front operating out of Germany […]. From their official website, they declare themselves to be the sole legitimate representative of all Uyghurs — presumably not having asked Uyghurs in Xinjiang what they thought about that.

              The WUC also has ties to the Grey Wolves, a fascist paramilitary group in Turkey, through the father of their founder, Isa Yusuf Alptekin.

              Documents came out from NGOs to further legitimize the media reporting. This is how a report from the very professional-sounding China Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) came to exist. They claimed ‘up to 1.3 million’ Uyghurs were imprisoned in camps. What they didn’t say was how they got this number: they interviewed a total of 10 people from rural Xinjiang and asked them to estimate how many people might have been taken away. They then extrapolated the guesstimates they got and arrived at the 1.3 million figure.

              Sanctions were enacted against China — Xinjiang cotton for example had trouble finding buyers after Western companies were pressured into boycotting it. Instead of helping fight against the purported genocide, this act actually made life more difficult for the people of Xinjiang who depend on this trade for their livelihood (as we all do depend on our skills to make a livelihood).

              Any attempt China made to defend itself was met with more suspicion. They invited a UN delegation which was blocked by the US. The delegation eventually made it there, but three years later. The Arab League also visited Xinjiang and actually commended China on their policies — aimed at reducing terrorism through education and social integration, not through bombing like we tend to do in the West.


              Look how China has been behaving in Africa.

              Yeah, it’s investing in Africa’s infrastructure, as opposed to exfiltrating its resources like the Global North neocolonialists.

        • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          During this time of hegemony we’ve also had major developments in medicine, farming, manufacturing worldwide. How can you say the world is better off with US hegemony? There is no control to compare it to. Humanity has improved materially in the last 100 years, in SPITE of American dominance. I would ask the thousands of people killed every year by US munitions if they believe the world has been improved.

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      China says hi.

      Remember when Apple.moved to India and tried to use the same conditions as their Non-Slave Chinese factories?

      Remember when the Indian workers rioted over that?

      Edit: fucking Google. Doesn’t correct Infia to India, but automatically changes rioted to rooted.

    • flora_explora@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Israel is certainly causing tremendous harm, but what you are saying is just blatant antisemitism. And you are obviously not up to date what happens in the world being so obsessed with demonizing Israel. Try to get a grip on reality again please.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        antizionism != antisemitism.

        To elaborate: I don’t believe Israel’s nationalistic sentiment is unique to Judaism. Israel could be a Christian state and could contain any ethnicity, its active colonialism would still be a problem.

        What other country’s active colonialism is anywhere near the level of Israel’s?

        • flora_explora@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          These are just excuses for your Israel-hating worldview. There are so many conflicts around the world. And all other western nations including the US but also countries like China are actively neocolonialist and much worse imo. Just think of how many billions of lives are miserable or being ended by western nations. So why pick out the one Jewish state to demonize as the worst one and project all your hate onto? The Israeli government is ultra nationalist and extremist right, and needs to be stopped, I agree. But same goes for so many countries worldwide.

          • jsomae
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m not saying Israel is worse than other nations. (I believe the U.S. is worse actually, insofar as human suffering caused.) I am saying its more actively colonial than other nations.

            • flora_explora@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Oh, now that I’m thinking about it again, I think I fell for your fallacy there. Why would you classify Israel as a colonial nation in the first place? And your argument that you were only talking about colonial nations is also weird, what difference does it make if other nations are activel neocolonial vs colonial? Or actively killing thousands of people like e.g. Russia and Turkey are doing? Seems like you wanted to find or create a category where Israel is the worst in and then blame it for it. Again, in my mind you are demonizing Israel because you assign it a special diabolic role while in a global context it is behaving not unlike many many other nations. Sure, lets critique the Israeli government. But remember, it is just another extremist right government. The Israeli people have the same right to live as Palestinians. There are people from both sides that want to live in harmony together. It is not one group against another, not one colonizer against the colonized. It is mostly the transgenerational trauma and hate materialized in Hamas, Hezbollah, the Likud party, the settler community, etc that strive to repeat this cycle of hate forever.

              • jsomae
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Basically, the meme says “if israel has no right to exist [because X], then U.S./Canada/Australia don’t have a right to exist [because X too]”

                I think most people interpret X is: actively settling/killing/displacing people from their homeland. I would call this “active colonialism.” And it’s not true that those other nations are doing this.

                I don’t have it specifically out for Israel. I am against Western imperialism in general. I do not wish to make shit up in order to help further the narrative that western imperialism is destroying the world. That would be detrimental to the goal of furthering the narrative that western imperialism is destroying the world.

                Why would you classify Israel as a colonial nation in the first place?

                Is this an honest question? Because this is obvious to me…?

                • flora_explora@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Yes, this was an honest question. If Israel were colonial, then it would be a form settler colonialism. (So very different from the typical European kind). And even then, academic scholars aren’t sure if it is indeed settler colonialist or not. The whole history of Israel/Palestine is really fucking complicated and I get sceptical if someone says it’s actually simple (regardless of affiliation to any side). So why would you classify it as active colonialism?

                  And regarding the meme, your interpretation seems to be very narrow. Why would people necessarily need to interpret X to be active colonialism? X could also mean atrocities in general, not just narrowly defined atrocities. My interpretation was rather that people defending Israel’s right to exist try to do so by tying it to other (western) nations’ right to exist. But the punchline of the meme then is that they fail to see that no nation should exist in the first place. I strongly agree with that, no nation or border should exist regardless of how they act. That’s how I would interpret the message of this meme (this is an anarchist community after all).

  • duviobaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    But sadly we live in reality and have to accept that talking about how the israeli people have just the same right to live as the palestinians is way more effective than outright demanding the abolishment of all nation states, a thing that, even if ever, is only going to become even fathomable to most humans in at least a few centuries

  • ElcaineVolta@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    it’s such a pleasant feeling having these “spells” break in your head. they shatter to the floor when you realize a state “not having a right to exist” makes no fucking sense to begin with.