I'm sure @maypk and @trustme and @Exiled would welcome this guy with open arms to their Hamas meetings.
Shrodinger's safe haven. Chose a future safe haven for the Jewish oppressed population in Europe but chose a place that apparently was a center point of anti-semitisim. No. This is post hoc justification to feel justified about the modern Aparthied system. Before 1948, there were already established Zionist settlements that pushed out Palestinians where people justify it today by pretending it was like kicking out tenants from an apartment from a change of ownership when it was more like the change of hands of ownership in the manner the French sold land to the US to displaced the Native population. Many that stayed were turned into cheap labor force for the new economic system that the European settlers brought. And many of the clashes before 1948 was from either displacement of Palestinians or labor class warfare clashes. But we don't justify the modern genocide of Native Americans because native Americans didn't have a "developed" society and a unified nation.
True, but you've got to take into consideration that its been almost 2 centuries since Americans "dealt" with the Native Americans in that manner, I mean Andrew Jackson moved 'em to Oklahoma to basically die in the 1800s. Today people are very sympathetic and not proud of what happened to 'em; but it took time. This is happening in modern times and its 70 years in, I'm pretty sure no-one gave a f about the Native Americans in the 1700s or so.
Antisemitism was part of the culture, like in many other places. It became more pronounced and violent as people started to believe that the Zionist movement was a threat to their own political aspirations and would eventually force them out. Ironically, the Arab leadership’s fear over that outcome and the way they responded to it actually contributed to it happening. Regarding your point that Palestinians were forced to become laborers under Jewish rule, a few points/questions. First, was it not the case that lands were typically owned by rich Arab families who then decided to profit from well-resourced Jewish immigrants by selling the land to them? I don’t think your comparison to America and the native Indians here is accurate in that sense. Second, was it not the case that Jews invested heavily in land development and construction in Palestine when they arrived, which local Arabs also benefited from? Arabs had legitimate concerns that the rapid influx of well-connected and industrious Jews and talk of a Jewish state would ultimately come at their expense. If their leaders were better organized, I believe they could have engaged in a compromise plan that shared Palestine in a more equitable manner. They ultimately failed their people.
A variation of Ottomans, Arabs, Christian Orthodox land owners sold land to European Jewish colonists. But this isn't the type of land selling in the sense of someone buying an apartment complex full of existing tenants. This was an era of subsistence farming and serfdom for the native Palestinian population. This wasn't them getting kicked out of some temporary apartment unit they loved in for a few years. This was people being kicked out of land that tilled and farmed for generations. This is any aspect of dehumanization of Palestine pretending that wealthy Arabs, Ottomans etc all had the same interests as the naive Palestinian population. They were different people and those wealthy owners of land had no shared interest with the Palestinian population. Colonists always justify their colonialism by saying they improved the region. The British empire used that justification over their subjugation of the Indian subcontinent. I guess Ghandi should have been grateful to his British rulers.
Complex and broad subject, it started with the Christians and Muslims using Jews for interest loans, because its against Christianity and Islam to take interest but not against Judaism. So they would use Jews to give out loans with interest, and when sh.it would hit the fan they would just blame the Jews for it, thats how they got into banking. Kinda like how businessmen here are using Native Americans for the casinos, but on a larger scale. Then because Jews are mostly educated and well connected amongst themselves, they started getting into media, politics etc. N then they would blame 'em for controling their politics and narratives. Basically how the antisemitism started.
Yes a lot of anti-semtisim is basically someone holding your hand and slapping your face with it and yelling at you asking why you are slapping yourself in the face. Europeans basically forcing Jewish communities to be segregated and relegating them to certain professions and then blaming them for the conditions the anti-Semities themselves created. It's pretty ****ed up. That's what you can't blame European Jews for desiring a safe haven. It's just the manner in which it was carried out was basic European colonialism.
Agreed, they needed their state so nobody can line 'em up anymore and take 'em to concentration camps, they can only be defeated via army. But I don't personally agree with how they're going on about it.
And he was put in jail the same day. And there were no "right to beat women" protests in the country. Unlike rapist, terrorist, and apartheid states like Israel, this is how true democracies operate.
