Sure. And being an anti-Zionist means supporting a secular multicultural democracy which upholds human rights and the dignity of all its citizens. Except, you know, when it means something else.
Here’s an interesting perspective: Eight Marxist Reasons to Despise BDS.
I think he makes some good points, especially WRT to the stupidity of the cultural/academic boycott of Israel extending to anti-Occupation Israelis. OTOH, he doesn’t address the fact that, AFAIK, all polls have shown that Palestinians overwhelmingly support the BDS movement, and presumably they don’t need a Marxist lecturing them to realize that they actually live in the Israeli economy, and anything that hurts it will also hurt them. They have decided the short-term pain is worth the potential long-term gain. Maybe that is a stupid decision, but if you’re going to claim to be about democracy, it seems like you need to at least acknowledge that fact.
…the problem with this framing is that each of these words describe individual events. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation daily killings were “mass slaughters of civilians.” The deliberate targeting and destruction of some hospitals was a “warcrime.” The ongoing siege is “collective punishment.” The murder of those 15 paramedics was an “atrocity.”
But what do you call it when, combined with intent, you put that all together?
What category do you put this in?
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/1-000-days-of-genocide-israel-wiped-out-over-2-700-families-destroyed-more-than-90-of-gaza/3984268
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/israel-erased-more-than-2700-palestinian-family-bloodlines-in-the-gaza-genocide/video/d34e8f939f63c2ab7632984d5a41afe9
When entire bloodlines of families are gone at this scale, what is the appropriate term for that?
What do you call this?
When we have a natural disaster anywhere in the world, it gets flooded with aid, civil defense workers, and reconstruction materials. But in Gaza? It’s being left to rot. Thousands of people are still missing. And for many, we don’t know if they are being held illegally by Israel or they are buried under the rubble.
What category do we fit that into? Hundreds of bodies are still buried under rubble in Israeli-controlled territory in Gaza. What do we call that? Some of those bodies have been there, rotting, for years.
I’m not suggesting that you have to use the word “genocide” here. Far from it.
But the people that do aren’t doing it for an “emotional response.” I use it because multiple different humanitarian agencies and a broad consensus of genocide scholars have all used the genocide convention to come to the very same conclusion: they believe that this is a genocide.
And knowing that it’s a genocide, every contracting nation has a duty according to the convention to prevent and punish what is a crime under international law. Because ultimately this is the point. This doesn’t end until we get to the point where the international community forces it to end. That’s why statistics like this are so important:
It means no matter how much the establishment tries to deny it, and how others try to police the use of the word, what has happened in Gaza is so openly, transparently, and so horrendous, that people can’t deny it anymore. And if the establishment continues to ignore what most of their voters believe, then the voters will look elsewhere.
Gaza right now needs a massive humanitarian response. It’s a disaster zone and it should be treated as such. You wouldn’t know it from the way most people act. But it needs food, aid, medical supplies, and reconstruction materials. Urgently. The reason why I’m still on Twitter is because despite all of its shortcomings, it’s still one of the few places where Palestinians still haven’t been utterly shut down by the platform. And while the daily mass slaughters have stopped, they are desperate for help.
…I haven’t shared from the situation reports in a very long time. But this is the current state on the ground.
From additional reporting:
On the healthcare system:
On supplies/aid:
On casualties:
On the West Bank:
Much more available at the link.
Since the creation of Israel in 1948, a lot of Arab nations have become much less aggressive (in large part because of how competent Israels military is and they realize they can’t win a war against them). Israel has peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt. Syria realizes Israel is much stronger than them and doesn’t attack. Lebanon’s government is trying (somewhat) to suppress Hezbollah.
It seems like for now, Israel’s main enemies are Iran and its proxies. Turkey seems to want to become the new anti-Israel power in the region too, which sucks.
I really don’t know when the Palestinian people will ever accept a 2 state solution. Also with so much of the west bank being occupied, I don’t even know if thats possible anymore for the Palestinians to have their own nation in the west bank. Also in 2006 when Israel handed control of Gaza over to the palestinians, the palestinians elected terrorists to run the country and the terrorists destroyed the democracy and engaged in large amounts of weapons smuggling and diversion of humanitarian funds.
There is something in sociology called a reverse dominance hierarchy. Its where people in the goal of egalitarianism, try to put those on top on the bottom, and put those on bottom on the top. Since Judeochristian white westerners are seen as the top of our current dominance hierarchy, people try to invert that and put them at the bottom and put people who do not fit those demographic boxes on the top. The issue is that there are people who are the opposite of those things, but they are still destructive.
In Japan, white people are considered inferior to the Japanese. If some egalitarian types in Japan tried to invert the dominance hierarchy and said that white westerners were automatically good, they would probably ally with Trump and MAGA since Trump and MAGA are non-Japanese. But a lot of white people in the US would tell them ‘just because they are white christians doesn’t mean they are good people, there are lots of bad white christians too’. This happens a lot in the red-green alliance where Islamic extremists ally with western leftists. A lot of moderate muslims in the muslim world try to tell them ‘these Islamist extremists you are allying with are not good people’ but ironically those muslims get called ‘Islamophobic’ for knowing more about Islamic culture than the people who criticize them.
Repeating this nonsense again and again doesn’t make it true.
At this moment, we have an Israeli government who, for years, purposefully assisted Hamas, and dismantled all more moderate alternatives, because they agreed with Hamas that the bigger threat was a possible two-state solution. At this moment the vast majority of Gazan and West Bank Palestinian children are facing brutalization, vandalism, terrorism, and murder, largely at the hands of Israeli forces (including terrorist settlers) every single day, and have essentially no chance for a life of peace, health, and happiness, regardless of their personal preferences and choices.
That’s not about some silly sociological notion of hierarchy, it’s about human rights being violated every single day, and those in power consistently brutalizing civilians because war and violence better serves their political purposes than looking for a peaceful solution.
Cite? I mean Qatar sent millions to help Hamas, and Israel allowed it, as it was for humanitarian purposes )but there are allegations it was spend for arms, etc). There have been other Allegations, but they remain just that- allegations, not facts.
True, Hamas does violate human rights daily, and Hamas brutalizes their own people.
This has been widely reported:
Israel could have easily tried to help the Palestinian Authority, but deliberately and purposefully kneecapped them while elevating Hamas. Because the possibility of a Palestinian state was so scary to them that they thought Hamas was better.
Netanyahu has essentially said this himself, years ago:
As do Israeli forces and settlers.
Have you independently verified those cites? You wouldnt accept my cites without that.
The first cite is from 2023, and it only verifiies what I already said
And it is a Israel cite, which would wouldnt accept from me.
The second cite is also Israel, and again it only confirm what i said
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended Israel’s regular allowing of Qatari funds to be transferred into Gaza,…
See, when someone dismisses cites like the Guardian, then they reap what they sow.
I accepted your cite 100% - it reported what Israeli officials said. I accept that the Guardian accurately reported the words of Israeli officials. Your cite reported nothing as to the accuracy of those words.
My cites report what Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders did and said, with regards to Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.
The Guardian reported that AFTER extensive fact checking.
You didnt accept what the Israeli sources said in the Guardian, why do you accept those sources now?
In any case your
Breaks down to Qatar sending some millions to Hamas/Gaza for humanitarian reasons (allowed by Israel) vs “Israeli government who, for years, purposefully assisted Hamas”. Israel didnt assist Hamas- Qatar did. Israel just was being humanitarian- something you deny- in allowing Qatar to send that aid.
Just like i said.
That claim of yours is widely exaggerated. And havent you made that same claim before?
There was nothing in your cite that indicated this.
Here’s a Guardian article on a bunch of lies and bullshit from Trump on Greenland and NATO. The Guardian accurately quoted Trump. That doesn’t mean Trump’s words weren’t lies. They were very obviously lies.
On the rest, from my cite:
For years, the various governments led by Benjamin Netanyahu took an approach that divided power between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank — bringing Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to his knees while making moves that propped up the Hamas terror group.
The idea was to prevent Abbas — or anyone else in the Palestinian Authority’s West Bank government — from advancing toward the establishment of a Palestinian state.
According to the Times of Israel, Netanyahu deliberately strengthened Hamas, and weakened the PA, because he opposed the possibility of a Palestinian state more than Hamas.
Yes, and the totality of that " strengthening" was allowing Qatar to send millions of Humanitarian aid to Hamas and Gaza. You can give vague quotes about Netanyahu- but the reality of what was actually done- is that Qatar aid.
Whatever it was, Netanyahu made deliberate choices to help Hamas, and weaken the PA, because he was that afraid of a Palestinian state.
He could have, and should have, made efforts to elevate and empower the PA and other more moderate groups in order to work towards long term peace. But he prefers endless war and bloodshed to peace alongside a Palestinian state.
By allowing humanitarian aid from Qatar. Isnt that what some posters here have been demanding Israel allow? Did you not say Israel is wrong by not allowing Humanitarian aid in? Now is it- Israel was wrong by doing that? I am confused. Israel allows Humanitarian aid from Qatar- they are wrong? Israel doesnt allow humanitarian aid they are wrong? Which is it?
It wasn’t for humanitarian reasons. From your Wikipedia cite:
In an interview with Israeli journalist, Dan Margalit in December 2012, Netanyahu told Margalit that it was important to keep Hamas strong, as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Netanyahu also added that having two strong rivals, this would lessen pressure on him to negotiate towards a Palestinian state.[10] In an interview with the Israeli Army Radio in August 2019, Ehud Barak, the former Prime Minister of Israel from 1999 to 2001, said that Netanyahu’s main strategy is to keep Hamas “alive and kicking” in order to weaken the Palestinian Authority, even at the expense of “abandoning the citizens [of the south].”[41] In an interview with Politico in 2023, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said, “In the last 15 years, Israel did everything to downgrade the Palestinian Authority and to boost Hamas”, before adding that “Gaza was on the brink of collapse because they had no resources, they had no money, and the PA refused to give Hamas any money. Bibi saved them. Bibi made a deal with Qatar and they started to move millions and millions of dollars to Gaza.”[42]
It wasn’t for humanitarian reasons, it was to strengthen Hamas and weaken the PA. He made that choice deliberately - save Hamas at the expense of the PA. He could have tried to get money to the PA instead, but he wanted Hamas to have it.
…the phrasing here confuses me. Wouldn’t you be one of those posters? I certainly demand that Israel allow in significantly more humanitarian aid, at the very least the amount they agreed to in the ceasefire agreement.
Do you not think that?
Qatar started sending money to the Gaza Strip on a monthly basis in 2018. $15 million worth of cash-filled suitcases were transported into Gaza by the Qataris via Israeli territory. The payments commenced due to the 2017 decision by the Palestinian Authority ¶, an administration in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and rival to Hamas, to cut government employee salaries in Gaza. At the time, the PA objected to the funds, which Hamas said was intended for both medical and governmental salary payments.
Hamas said was intended for both medical and governmental salary payments
So yes, altho Qatar sent the money for Humanitarian reasons, Netanyahu allowed it for political reasons.
Right - Netanyahu wanted to help Hamas, and hurt the PA, to better fight the possibility of two states.
So, for the 3rd or 4th time- Netanyahu did NOT assist Hamas. He allowed Qatar to send humanitarian aid- for political reasons. The wording is important.