adONisNew German citizens required to affirm Israel's right to exist
JeenaBut not Palestines.
HumaniusThe German state doesn’t recognise Palestine as a state currently, so probably not.
febraGermany doesn’t recognize Palestine’s right to exist. It’s only fair Germany gets deported
geneva_convenienceThe new Nazis and the old Nazis teaming up is a sight to behold.
snooggumsAcknowledging a country’s right to exist is the opposite of Nazi policy…
If you have 11 people and a Nazi at a dinner party, you have 12 Nazis.
Maintaining that an Apartheid state has the right to keep being an Apartheid state is very Nazi-like.
This is not agreeing that Israel is allowed to continue committing genocide. This is just saying that country is allowed to exist as a country. Or do you think that once a country commits a horrific act that they should no longer be allowed to exist?
I’m more interested in the inverse: when does colonizing an already-inhabited area turn into a recognized country? Because Israel was created by a stroke of the pen out of Palestinian land. Or is it purely “might makes right”?
Oh. Could you educate us more about this? Why exactly was it created with the stroke of a pen and when? And by whom? By the mighty Jewish people?
Google Mandatory Palestine
No, sorry.
If you’re not willing to learn, then don’t ask people to educate you!
I wanted him to write out his opinions. Since COVID I’m done with people who just throwing a link to me and say educate yourself.
it’s not their opinion… it’s facts.
Since COVID I’m done with links…
So, you rather accept someone else’s opinion, instead of building your own one? That’s how the Nazi-regime started in the first place.
No, I just don’t like to get some bullshit link with the words educate yourself.
I can send you some books to your home address, if you prefer it that way?
No, but please give me the titles with authors.
The great sea - A human history of the Mediterranean by david abulafia.
It’s not Palestine/Israel specific, but a “broad” history about the Mediterranean .
Honestly, thanks. I make sure to check this one out. I like reading about history.
I recommend you the last book I have read: the world of yesterday by Stefan Zweig.
Oh, I’ve read “schachnovelle” from him, back in school, which brought me into chess 😅
the sea is a very long book… I’m just half way through, although I’m not much of a reader.
I want to read the schachnovelle at a later point! Looking forward to it.
If you’re interested in the Mediterranean, I recommend Constantinople by Theophile Gautier. It’s about his visit to Istanbul in the 19. century. I think the print version is hard to come by in English, but the ebook is just a few cents.
lol… who the fuck downvotes this comment? it’s just regular convo about books… people are really awkward.
thx for that book recommendation. I love the turkish culture, and will put it on my list… after I’m done with the sea, the arabs and the balkans.
No worries. Lemmy is unfortunately sometimes Like Reddit. Comments get downvoted just because of opinions.
I wish you the best and really hope that people learn to live in peace and that there are consequences for evil goverments. It doesn’t look that at the moment, but you can hope.
the thing is…WTF do people care about Israel, Brazil, Uganda, Madagascar, etc. when applying for German citizenship? That’s the whole point of this absurdity.
You can’t understand that a county that once did a genocide tried to make amends?
A country being shitty doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to exist. Does Russia not have a right to exist? Did Iraq not have a right to exist?
Does Russian Crimea not have a right to exist?
No, because Crimea is part of Ukraine.
What makes it different from Israel on occupied Palestine?
Honestly, time. Time eventually changes things and Russia’s occupation of Crimea was only a decade ago and the founding of Israel was like 80 years ago. Israel’s continued expansion and settlement is wrong and comparable to Russia occupying Crimea.
Then why isn’t Germany recognizing Palestine? Those people have been there quite a while.
Germany should recognize Palestine!
But the fact that they don’t doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be actively opposing antisemitism in Germany. Opposing Israel’s actions is different than “Israel shouldn’t exist” because in the context of Germany and the neo mazid, not existing is literal and includes the people of Israel.
Germany is famous for being a primary enabler of the Genocide in Gaza. The German Nazis are as Nazi ad ever.
This pretense of antisemitism is so ridiculous you should consider dropping it.
Ok tankie.
rockmeatno state has a right to exist. None of them.
Points for consistency, but no points for nihilism because the points are meaningless anyway.
I don’t consider myself a nihilist, so where did that come from?
Countries, as a rule, don't have a right to exist. People have a right to self-determination. These are different things. That said, Israel is fundamentally an Apartheid state. If Israel stopped being an Apartheid state it'd stop being Israel. And if a state needs to treat half the people in it as second class citizens to exist then it can go die in a ditch.
acargitzWhite South Africa did not have the right to exist. Rhodesia did not have a right to exist.
That’s what we are talking about.
Israel has become a Jewish supremacist apartheid state. Its crimes have become so egregious and so entrenched (“facts on the ground”) that it is not unreasonable to argue that it cannot be reformed in its present form. In this case it is reasonable to argue for its replacement by a democratic successor state in which Jews and others will all have the same rights to freedom and safety.
So funny story, South Africa was able to end apartheid without not existing.
Imagine that!
Wake me up when Israel elects Marwan Barghouthi as president and changes it flag to incorporate Palestinian national symbolism. If such an entity would like to still call itself Israel, I will be happy to be proven wrong.
I favor a two state solution myself, as it is my understanding that is the desire of the majority of Palestinians.
Yes, it is the Fatah line as well. If it were feasible, I would also support it. However, Israeli created “facts on the ground” say it isn’t. It is impossible to extract the entrenched colonists from the West Bank and it is impossible for Israel to accept a sovereign Palestine that is anything more than a Bantustan.
The 2SS was reasonable 30 years ago. That time has very sadly passed.
The current mess is a knot that can only be solved by a single state solution. And if that is the case, and we agree that either side “cleansing” the other is completely unacceptable, then universal equality from the river to the sea, a democratic country, is the only game left.
We disagree on whether a two state solution is possible but do agree that either side committing genocide on the other is unacceptable.
I disagree that a single state solution is possible, even if we named it Peaceland because the same conflict you say prevents the two state solution will still exist and the conflict will continue within the single state. Forcing two opposing cultures into a single state against their will is how we get ethnic cleansing, aka genocide.
We obviously also disagree on what causes the conflict. I don’t see it as a clash between opposing cultures, which by definition is irreconcilable. It is a clash over land, over sovereignty, over rights, over resources. These can of course be resolved and have been resolved even at least tentatively in many countries in the region. If Serbs and Muslims can coexist in Bosnia, if Macedonians and Albanians can coexist in North Macedonia, if Protestants and Catholics can coexist in Northern Ireland, if Flemings and Waloons can coexist in Belgium, if the various denominations can coexist in Lebanon, if English and French can coexist in Quebec, then Israelis and Palestinians can work it out as well. Note that the above examples are at a varying degree of peace and harmony, from not very much to quite a lot. But none of them are genocidal cases.
If Serbs and Muslims can coexist in Bosnia
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_genocide
Forcing them to live together would be creating the same conditions that led to the genocide! Do you think they will just skip past the genocide this time?
That’s exactly my point, exactly what I’m saying. The Bosnian genocide happened, just like the Nakba did (or arguably still is) and still after it happened, the Bosnia and Herzegovina of today exists. The Bosnia of today is a case study of what an Israel/Palestine of tomorrow might look like.
Nakba of 1948 and Today Are Not Separate Events, but Ongoing Process of Palestinian Displacement, Replacement, Speakers Tell Panel, Urging Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
The Nakba of 1948 and today’s Nakba in Gaza are not two separate events, the Chair of the United Nations Palestinian Rights Committee told a special event at UN Headquarters in New York today, stressing the need for an immediate ceasefire in the Strip and to achieve Statehood for Palestinians.
We could also learn something from that and the other genocides and not force the conflict to escalate in the hope that the future survivors work things out.
I really don’t understand how ending apartheid is an escalation from where we are now. It’s de-escalation if anything.
poVoqThe historical Nazi Germany was actually quite supportive of zionist efforts and interestingly the reverse was also true for some time before the holocaust got into full swing.
The Nazi party supported zionist plans because they wanted more options for expelling Jews. That was antisemetic.
Modern Germany is supporting the state of Israel’s existence because of modern antisemitic rhetoric about how Israel shouldn’t exist. This requirement is in opposition to antisemitism.
The context is completely different.
LinkerbaanWhat’s anti-semitic about saying israel shouldn’t exist?
When any other country commits genocide, nobody says that country shouldn’t exist. They say that they should stop doing those things.
There were a bunch of countries that were consolidated, created, or had lines redrawn affer WWII along with Israel. Other than some choosing to split themselves once they gained autonomy, such as Yugoslavia, nobody is saying that those countries shouldn’t exist.
The only country that regularly has people say it shouldn’t exist is Israel. The only reason people say that is because it is a Jewish ethno state. It is surrounded by ethno states that nobody says shouldn’t exist. The primary people pushing the “Israel shouldn’t exist” are antisemitic groups like neo nazis.
Now, that isn’t to say that creating Israel was a good idea or done for good reasons, but enough decades have passed that it is established. There is plenty of criticism to be had about the genocide, apartheid, borders, and what Israel does wrong without leaping to the antisemitic idea that Israel shouldn’t exist.
Israel gains the right to exist when Palestinians grant it the right to exist.
As it stands Palestinians do not recognize israel.
Any other factor is irrelevant in this equation.
Found the hasbara bot. States have no eight to exist. This concept doesn’t exist.
Let’s assume for a second though that states would have such a right. When Nazi Germany committed genocide, hell yeah people said that state shouldn’t exist and they were right to say so. Apartheid South Africa, that state also shouldn’t have existed in the first place.
To spin this further, the settler colonial states that got established through genocide on the local population, e.g. the USA, Canada and Australia should have never existed in the first place. It’s not so difficult.
Hence, why should I agree to an anyway non existing right for a settler colonial state to exist that can only keep existing through genociding the indigenous population and otherwise keeping it under an apartheid regime.
I think you have confused the structure and implementation of a state as a culture with a collective identity of people located within a rough geographic area.
A state’s right to exist is not the right to act a certain way, but the right to not be wiped off the map. A colonial state colonizing is only wrong because they are conquering other states that had their own right to exist. Otherwise there would be no reason to say that Palestine should exist, and Palestine should absolutely exist.
So do I understand correctly that colonizing most of Africa, and e.g. the USA, Canada or Australia was not wrong? I’m not aware of indigenous people being organized in states. Hence, the colonization must have been okay by your logic?
The populations of Africa and the Americas had all kinds of states! The Mayan culture was a state or a collection of city states. Although most media about Native Americans focus on the tribes that were more nomadic, there were tons of tribes that had established cities and locations that were their territory all throughout the two continents Hell, even nomadic cultures tend to occupy a space even though they move a lot within it.
Africa and Australia had a lot too, I just don’t know them off the top of my head. Colonizers destroyed as much of their cultures as possible to erase their identity as a culture and state.
You have fallen for the colonizer’s myths of unorganized native populations, which they used to justify conquering so that they could “civilize” those populations. The colonizers were absolutely wrong.
Alright got it. So for example were the Mayan states part of the UN? What kind of state were they organized in? What about people colonized by the Mayans?
So are established cities and locations and being nomadic without having a state designated by the UN enough for being protected against colonization?