• interceder270@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Remember, no amount of brown suffering can make up for any amount of white suffering.

    I know this isn’t necessarily about race, but it is another example of whites getting their way while browns get in the way. Just gonna add another tally.

    • zerfuffle
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The idea that indigenous peoples should be subjugated and forcefully integrated by settlers is an inherently racial problem. This was just as true in Canada and the US as it was true in South America as it is in Palestine today.

      From the Atlantic to the Pacific, the indigenous people of North America should be free.

      • doctordevice@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        And that’s part of the reason the Israel-Palestine conflict is so contentious. Both peoples are indigenous to the region, having strong ancestral ties to the Canaanite peoples that inhabited the area over many periods of external rule and migrations.

        That the Jewish people were once forced from the area but retained their identity in new lands doesn’t diminish their right to live in their ancestral home. Nor does it give them the right to treat their distant cousins (who also have ancestral claim) the Palestinians the way the state of Israel has.

        I don’t know what the solution is, but many Palestinians and Israelis just want peace, contrary to the rhetoric of their governments.

        • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m starting to lean towards a one state solution myself. Especially the more I’ve learned about the fact that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all used to get along in the area before the colonization of European and Western Jewish people into the area and displacement of the locals.

          Give them democracy with a strong Constitution where everyone is equal, remove all traces of ethno nationalism or theocracy from the government (except for some public holidays). Integrate the security forces, courts, and other agencies of power together, enforce human rights, try to learn from South Africa, the Troubles in England, and I heard what they did in New Zealand to integrate with the indigenous worked, too. Mix up the schools so the next generation learns to grow up without the hate for the “other” their elders have.

          • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            At this point, one state solution is the only possible way forward. A two state solution will not work unless conditions radically change. Maybe it never would have worked, maybe the Israeli government only pretended to be willing to go with a two state solution.

            Such a thing is unacceptable to the current Israeli government because it would end their ethnostate but i don’t see an option between that and complete extermination of the Palestinians.

          • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            the more I’ve learned about the fact that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all used to get along

            The crusades would like a word.

            • Rambi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I mean there’s a good 600-700 years of stuff that was happening from the end of the crusades to the late 1940s

              • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You mean the time when the area was controlled by the Ottoman Empire, which enforced stability on it?

                I do agree, if we put the whole area under a single Empire’s influence again it would likely be a lot more stable.

                • Rambi@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t think any sort of one state solution that would exist between the two countries would classify as an empire, and “enforced stability” is a funny way to try to make people not killing each other sound bad. Also if you want to talk about enforced, that word seems perfectly applicable to Israel’s relationship with Palestine now.

            • livus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              @Tavarin the Crusades originated in Europe though. It wasn’t the locals infighting, more like warmongering tourists.

                • livus@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  @Tavarin I don’t think it really was. That’s what the Pope wanted people to think at the time, but historians have other explanations.

                  The early Crusaders attacked other Christians as well as Jewish settlements and Muslims.

        • zerfuffle
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Many of the organization in Gaza understand this: they have a desire to fight for their freedom, but not a desire to lead.

    • Hyperreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Last time I checked over half of Israel’s population is at least partly of Mizrahi descent. Ie. they have Middle-Eastern, Asian, or North African ancestry.

      They’re not homogenously white which is blindingly obvious if you look at a picture of ordinary Israelis. That’s also ignoring the fact that ‘European’ Ashkenazi Jews were historically never considered white either.

      Applying simplistic quasi-binary American notions of race, and simplistic understandings of colonialism, to a complex conflict is ignorant and stupid, and anyone who upvoted your comment is ignorant for doing so.

      It’s about as dumb as when Americans go on about the US being incredibly ethnically diverse, because they’re too ignorant and racist to realise a country like Uganda is super diverse even if ‘they all look the same’ to an uneducated American eye. Applying simplistic American notions of race to humanity’s birthplace, oblivious to the genetic diversity this entails, and to the fact that countries divided by colonial powers without any respect for existing linguistic, ethnic, national, or cultural borders are likely to be super diverse too.

      • queermunist she/her
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Last time I checked over half of Israel’s population is at least partly of Mizrahi descent. Ie. they have Middle-Eastern, Asian, or North African ancestry.

        What is passing complexion? What is colorismo?

        • Hyperreality@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I assume those are American concepts, part of American racial politics that primarily focuses on skin colour. But those genuinely aren’t as relevant to countries half way around the globe.

          America is not the world. Foreign countries are genuinely foreign. No, really. Allow me to illustrate:

          Example 1: imagine you just heard someone complaining about racism against white people.

          In an American context, you’d likely (often correctly) assume they were a right wing lunatic or a racist.

          But here in Europe, the Sámi and Irish travellers would likely seem ‘whiter than white’ from an American racial politics perspective. IRC there are some theories that suggest Irish Travellers are the descendants of people who lived in Ireland before the celts arrived. We’re talking millenia. And yet they face plenty of outright and often pretty nasty racism to this day.

          Example 2: Israel.

          My understanding is that Mizrahi Jews (sometimes known as ‘Arab Jews’ although that’s considered a pejorative by some) historically and still do face plenty of racism in Israel from ‘white’ Jews…

          And yet they also vote for Netenyahu and Likud en masse. The far right Itamar Ben-Gvir is (still?) the current Minister of Security. Iraqi and Kurdish heritage. Not ‘white’ by American standards. And yet here’s an excerpt from his wikipedia article:

          Itamar Ben-Gvir … is an Israeli lawyer and far-right politician who serves as the Minister of National Security. … His father was born in Jerusalem to Iraqi Jewish immigrants. … His mother was a Kurdish Jewish immigrant … Ben-Gvir, a settler in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, has faced charges of hate speech against Arabs and was known to have a portrait in his living room of Israeli-American terrorist Baruch Goldstein, who massacred 29 Palestinian Muslim worshipers and wounded 125 others in Hebron, in the 1994 Cave of the Patriarchs massacre. … He was also previously convicted of supporting a terrorist group known as Kach, which espoused Kahanism, an extremist religious Zionist ideology. … Under his leadership, the Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power), a party which espouses Kahanism and anti-Arabism, won six seats in the 2022 Israeli legislative election … He has called for the expulsion of Arab citizens of Israel who are not loyal to Israel. Ben Gvir is “widely known for his openly racist, anti-Arab views and activities” … led several visits to the Temple Mount as activist and member of Knesset, contentious marches through Jerusalem’s Old City Muslim Quarter, and set up an office in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood which witnessed several evictions of Palestinians. On 3 January 2023, he visited the Temple Mount where the al-Aqsa Mosque is located, spurring an international wave of criticism that labelled his visit purposely provocative. As a lawyer, he is known for defending Jewish radicals and terrorists on trial in Israel. … Prior to entering politics, he defended Jews spitting at Christians as a “an ancient Jewish custom”. … Ben-Gvir is married to Ayala Nimrodi… The couple has five children, and they live in the Israeli settlement of Kiryat Arba/Hebron, which is deemed illegal under international law, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Gvir

          TLDR: more complicated than ‘brown people/white people’

  • Arrakis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    And when you consider that approx 47% of the population is (was) under 18, they really showed those ~5k kids!!

  • halyk.the.red
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I attended American public school, just tell me how many 9/11’s that is so I can be appropriately outraged.

      • statist43@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        But you need to think like this: Terrorist attack in 9/11: 3000 deaths Terrorist attack hamas: 1300 deaths

        Antiterrorist attack 9/11: ~180.000 deaths Antiterrorist attack Israel: 11.000 deaths

        So its still 5% of the deaths of 9/11 dont play down the human rights violations of the US because of 9/11…

          • statist43@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Does it make it better that the US killed hundred of thousands in 20 years, than when killed in 2 years?

            Killed civillians are killed civillians, in a matter of 20 years or 2 this is irrelevant.

              • statist43@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The US killed 20-30 times more in Irak and Afgahnistan. And I would say that 20 years of war is another horrifying factor.

                If you look at the rate than /month israel killed more.

                But even if you look /year the 9/11 war with 20,000-30,000 deaths ist still much more compared to 11,000 this year from israel…

                • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This year. It started in October. Using your numbers, they have done half a years worth of murder in about 12th of the time, even with the USA drone striking weddings. Ones horrific, the other is a genocide.

                  This all started last month, not in January, we don’t know what the per year murder rate is but we can assume it would be around 132,000 if Israel continues the way they are currently.

              • statist43@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                So you say 200,000-300,000 deaths in 20 years is better that 11,000 in one month?

                Wtf?

                I really dont fucking know how americans can justify bullshit like this.

                Its 20,000-30,000 dead people a year, I know its not like 11,000 in a month, but I really hope that israel is going to stop soon.

                • Madison420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Do math. 200000÷20=10000 a year 833.3 repeating.

                  300000÷30= 15000 a year or 1250 a month

                  It is objective better.

                  Your high of you think 10000 a month is better than 10000 a year.

      • halyk.the.red
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Like I said before, I have an American public school education, so that’s more math than I can do, so I appreciate it. I also have no emotional intelligence, and the news isn’t telling me to be mad about this, so all I can say is that this is the type of bad emotion that makes your eyes wet.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re not verifying at the moment, I’d assume. The ministry’s numbers were fairly accurate in the past and held up to UN investigations on many occasions, so they give them the benefit of the doubt.

    • Questy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is definitely true that the numbers are unlikely to be exact. That is both for the reasons others have noted, propaganda is definitely at play on both sides of any conflict. A second reason for the likely imprecise number though, is that many casualties are probably uncountable currently as numerous buildings have collapsed under bombardment. Fully surveying those sites for bodies is difficult with continuing combat in the area. We know the buildings are destroyed due to surveillance and other intelligence sources, but can’t yet know how many people were killed and injured during the destruction.

      There are also reasons that the UN and other international organisations take the figures seriously. This is primarily because of historical accuracy, this is not the first occasion of strikes in the area and surveys in the aftermath of previous incidents have generally shown reasonable reporting accuracy from the Gazan health authority. Additionally there are other international organisations on the ground and reporting corroborating evidence of mass collateral casualties. UNICEF has supported the reporting on the 3700 children killed so far, inclusive of civilians on both sides. Recently Doctors Without Borders here in Canada issued a plea to our government, based on their presence in Gaza, calling for ceasefire directly because of the unreasonably high number of collateral casualties.

      At this juncture it doesn’t seem likely that the numbers are precise, but even a much more conservative estimate would be quite shocking and aligns with action in the Syrian civil war (for example) much more than with action in western invasions or Ukraine. That suggests that, at the very least, insufficient effort is being put toward limitation of collateral casualties. It’s also important to remember that while the three-to-one rule of casualties in war is very loose, we are likely looking at much higher numbers of wounded than killed. That is badly complicated by the blockades, lack of power and water, as well as current military operations against the remaining hospitals in the area.

      Just my thoughts, not an expert.

    • Zastyion345
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      From 1 look at their wikipedia page it seems so.

      Both sides will say what is in their best interest. You see it in Ukraine war where both sides like to make up numbers, same with Hamas and IDF its in their best intrest to seem like the bigger victim.