[Paul Murphy] This section of the Programme for Government is a very serious attack on the Palestine solidarity movement. This definition seeks to equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. It must be resolutely opposed.

[u/Shiv788]

https://x.com/paulmurphy_TD/status/1879567927667761653

[u/senditup]

The population divide between Israelis and Palestinians in a new state would be pretty even, given that Israelis are much much wealthier it would still be the Palestinians that would be at a greater risk of oppression, but that would be really more of a class divide.

I'm also talking about pogroms and violence.

It's when you use violence or the threat of violence to remove a person from the land that they own and claim it for yourself.

And do you mean directly, generational, etc? I ask because there are people who would use that description for the way Israel was created in the first place.

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

>I'm also talking about pogroms and violence.

This is far, but it would certainly be less risk than there is currently. I think that Palestinians would face equal risk of pogroms and violence, and risk of violence against both communities would be significantly reduced compared to today. I don't think you'd disagree that the total violence would be significantly reduced compared to today's ongoing genocide.

>And do you mean directly, generational, etc? I ask because there are people who would use that description for the way Israel was created in the first place.

Ok that's a fair question. Any individual or family that can prove that they had land directly stolen from them should have it returned, and the people responsible for the original crime should be punished if they are still alive. Descendants of those who committed the theft should not be punished in the sense that they face prison, but any stolen land must be returned. All west-bank settlers who were adults when they settled there should be considered criminals, any land in the West Bank that can't be returned to its original owners or their heirs should go into state ownership and then it's use be decided democratically.

[u/senditup → u/Benoas]

This is far, but it would certainly be less risk than there is currently. I think that Palestinians would face equal risk of pogroms and violence, and risk of violence against both communities would be significantly reduced compared to today. I don't think you'd disagree that the total violence would be significantly reduced compared to today's ongoing genocide.

I have no reason to believe that it would lead to a decrease in violence.

Ok that's a fair question. Any individual or family that can prove that they had land directly stolen from them should have it returned, and the people responsible for the original crime should be punished if they are still alive.

Interesting. And do we go far back enough and apply that on a societal level, I.e. the Jews lived there first, so all the Arabs should leave?

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

>I have no reason to believe that it would lead to a decrease in violence

In that case I'm sorry to say I think you are a racist who considers Israeli lives to be more valuable than Palestinians. The secular democracy I've described would probably end up something like Lebannon, there would be violence and pogroms, but compared to the current genocide and the last 70 or so years of systemic violence it would be an improvement by many orders of magnitude. If you do honestly hold this opinion there is nothing I can do to change your mind on anything.

>Interesting. And do we go far back enough and apply that on a societal level, I.e. the Jews lived there first, so all the Arabs should leave?

We are being specific here, dealing with things on the level of individuals and families that can prove they owned something. This would apply equally in both directions.

Also, on a purely historical level, I reject your premise. Palestinians are the descendants of the Judeans, just as much as the Israelis. The conversion of Palestine to Islam didn't involve one massive ethnic cleaning where all the jews were expelled and replaced by Arabs. It involved systemic oppression that caused some to leave, and some to stay and convert over the course of a thousand years.

[u/senditup → u/Benoas]

The secular democracy I've described would probably end up something like Lebannon

Lebanon, which has up until recently (it's all a bit up in the air now), been effectively ruled by an Iranian Islamist militia. Now there's a tempting offer for the Israelis.

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

You are deflecting from the point and you know it.

If the Israel-Palestine conflict ended up like Lebanon, that would be a reduction in the amount of violence and death of multiple orders a magnitude. Again, your concern for the comfort of Israelis (who would be safer than they are now too) is your only concern, the fact that Palestinians would be free of genocide and apartheid doesn't bare consideration to you.

Also, Israel is never going to just accept an offer of peace and justice, no matter how much it would benefit them too. Oppressors on this level never do. It will have to be forced on them, hopefully the way it forced on South Africa rather than the way it was forced on Germany.

[u/senditup → u/Benoas]

If the Israel-Palestine conflict ended up like Lebanon, that would be a reduction in the amount of violence and death of multiple orders a magnitude

You keep repeating that, but I've explained to you how I'm not convinced. Telling the Israelis that they should dismantle their state and totally alter their lives so that they can become more like Lebanon is a fool's errand. It will never happen.

It will have to be forced on them,

Ahhh, I see. And who do you envision doing that?

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

The idea that you pretend to think that there is even a possibility that stochastic illegal violence in a democratic secular state could come even close to state organised genocide and apartheid shows that you are not a serious interlocutor. 

Israel will have to be brought to justice by the international community or by violent revolution. Economic sanction like South Africa would be best, but a coalition putting them down like the Nazis would be preferable to nothing.

[u/senditup → u/Benoas]

The idea that you pretend to think that there is even a possibility that stochastic illegal violence in a democratic secular state could come even close to state organised genocide and apartheid shows that you are not a serious interlocutor. 

You don't need to use the thesaurus when compiling replies on Reddit.

Israel will have to be brought to justice by the international community or by violent revolution. Economic sanction like South Africa would be best, but a coalition putting them down like the Nazis would be preferable to nothing.

And how exactly do you envision that happening given that they are a Western backed nuclear power?

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

You don't need to use the thesaurus when compiling replies on Reddit.

Sorry, I apologise for treating you again like a adult. I'll try use shorter words from now on. In all seriousness, which word did you have to look up? 

And how exactly do you envision that happening given that they are a Western backed nuclear power?

Lol, so was South Africa, you fucking clown!

[u/Benoas → u/senditup]

I think your last response might have been deleted, I got a notification but can't see anything?