The problem is that with that line of thinking, just about nowhere on the planet has a right to exist.
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.
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.
What if some watery tart threw a sword at you?
That depends. How watery are we talking?
Drenched.
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.
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.
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.
For established states like the US, it’s more due to neocolonialism now
Now let’s talk about fiat currency vs crypto currency
you mean paper backed by the might of a whole country vs expensive and poluting scam coins?
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?
A world without borders sounds like a dream 😍
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
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.
Until someone walks into your home
This kind of argument is like those anti-communist arguments “would you want to have to share your iPod with strangers?”
Big government is coming to take your toothbrush
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
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”
Big difference between nowhere and no state.
You’re beginning to get the point of anarchism.
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.
“Hey look at that disorganized group of people, I bet if we organized we could take them over”
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.
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.
That is more correct than what he said
Now you’re getting it
They have the “right” to exist but no mandate to exist. They’re allowed to exist and just as allowed to collapse and dissolve
How is that a problem?
Moreso it’s a contradiction in the original meme.
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.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
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.
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.
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.”
deleted by creator
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.
Except most of China was colonised by the Han people after the fall of Mongolia…
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
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.”
Something like that.
How long do you have to wait before it’s okay to live somewhere?
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…
Removed by mod
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.
You’re making a utilitarian argument that doesn’t account for the value of sovereignty.
Good job telling everyone you have no fucking idea what history is
Blisteringly stupid.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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”
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Then what’s the solution?
An actual democratic nation with equality. Imagine being so brain poisoned by zionism that the only kind of nation you can imagine is a racist one.
Rather than a two state solution… a new state solution?
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.
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.
That’s not how decolonisation works.
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.
Ok Adolf
They should go back to Europe.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
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
from the river to the sea
You should look up the Likud party chapter
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)
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Fuck off with this racist, xenophobic shit.Apparently decolonization is xenophobic.
I recently got banned from [email protected] 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.
I mean, racism was technically the reason you got banned. Just not your racism lol
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.
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?
I know, right? They really thought they were cooking, like a gamer martyr.
being called a bigot for standing against DEI in video games.
I love this response because thats still being bigoted.
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.
‘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?
Oh hey! That was me! Nice to see you around!
That mod was a piece of work, hilarious little saga all aroundHey, fancy seeing you, comrade! It was wild, and it was hilarious to see them shut it all down. <3
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.
As an Australian I sometimes wonder what this place would be like if there hadn’t been genocide and institutional racism for 200 years.
Emu supremacy
What makes you think it isn’t already emu supremacy? Check the outcome of the emu war. They built bigger fences.
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.
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.
Right? Like ‘no, everyone who wasnt a peasant in the 19th century was raping children, so its fine’
Sadly, due to the decimation of the indigenous population, you’re stuck with my white ass.
Look down at our planet from the heavens above
See it as it is, see it as it is.
No borders or banks. No wars or tanks.
No nations. No nations!
- “Fighting Song” by Outernational featuring Tom Morello
Counterpoint:
How beautiful is the north Korean sky? I bet it’s unmatched
I’ve never thought about that. It’s probably pretty good
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
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?
I think it was meant to be a light-hearted joke.
Removed by mod
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
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.
Removed by mod
'cept most sane borders are based upon geography
I’ll have to remind the French and British settlers that died hundreds of years ago to knock it off the next time I see them.
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?
Your hands are clean until you tolerate injustice. Help your fellow humans.
Stealing is not okay as soon as you give the stolen item to your kid. It should still be returned.
Yeah but is the kid to blame?
Answer: no, but the kid should recognize inequity and help correct it anyway.
Blame is irrelevant, the kid needs to give back the stolen items.
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.
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?).
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?
Removed by mod
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.
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.
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.
Land stolen from indigenous people isn’t done in desperation for starvatian, it’s theft.
China give back Tibet, when?
Give it back to who? The slave owning Dalai Lama? Fuck off, it wasn’t stolen, it was liberated.
Dig up their bones and send them to the British Museum
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
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.
deleted by creator
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.
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
Does anybody know when is gonna change Netanyahu the national anthem to “Israel uber alles”?
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.
in the modern era
Like Atlas, these words
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.
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.
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.
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.
People’s nationalist brainworms go so deep they immediately conflate people with the state.
Fair enough. I wouldn’t be entirely opposed to depopulating Israel though (if some safe way to do this were possible).
Israel is a US colonial project, these days.
The US pays Israel to cause suffering
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.
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.
Even the year before that, it’s still true. Well, depending on what “incomparable” means lol
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
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.
Bingo.
Removed by mod
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
Removed by mod
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.
- The Xinjiang Genocide Allegations Are Unjustified
- The Uyghur Human Rights Project is a product of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is the American government’s main regime change NGO.
- Uyghur genocide allegations
- US-Funded Uyghur Activists Train as Soldiers of Empire
- A Reddit AMA Claiming To Be A Uyghur Quickly Exposes A CIA Asset Slandering China
- The blueprint of regime change operations
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.
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.
You do realize most of the planet hates 'murica, yeah?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
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.
Can you post a link to that Apple story? I’d like to educate myself on it
That’s globalization, not colonialism. That’s a completely different reason to want to see western powers annihilated.
Try again. It was a longtime subsidiary based out of Taiwan that was shifting from Chinese labour to Indian labour.
I think I’m too stupid to understand what you mean.
Wasn’t a western entity involved outside of Apple paying a Taiwanese firm, which itself was paying a Chinese firm which was responsible.
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
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.
Money and nations are as real as ghosts and gods
Excuse me while I go to your store and buy your choicest items with make-believe hand shadows art money.
Hey man, if you can get enough people to believe in your art money it’ll become real, too.
Removed by mod
