Big Joe Corrigan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 3,471
Did this really warrant a new thread? It’s been discussed to death in the UK far right trouble thread.
Israel-Palestine Conflict
- Thread starter The blue phantom
- Start date
Yeah, bit of a shitty thread title that, mate.
FlemishDuck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,785
I use the term in the "follow up" context of "any extra establishment of the Jewish state"
Israel exist, some might regret that very fact however pragmatism dictates that this is a fait accompli regardless any potential opposition to the very principle of establishing a homeland in a region that is occupied and which results in violence and dislocation. Which is to say, as an ideoligy Zionism doesnt nessecarily even get a pass for what it wanted given the consequences of it or even the people and powers that played a factor into it, but whats done is done and the only humanly justifyable thing to do is to accept that.
Practically, the ideal NOW i guess would be that the Jewish people are happy with the Homeland they have today, as to what is atleast in their official borders, while the Palestinians have their own state AND CRUCIALLY both can live in peace with eachother. Now that last one is arguably not so likely and many feel "it takes two to tango here".
Purely pragmatically, the further colonization of Palestine is just that step to far atleast from the Israeli or Zionist side. I have a very strong impression that the Jewish settlers in Palestine self-justify their presence from an extension of Zionist principles, aka imho many of them feel Palestina is "their Jewish homeland to take back", even though its otherwise also a cheap way to get a house and some land trough benevolence of the jewish state.
FlemishDuck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,785
The thread was spawned into existance because the matter was brought up in that thread, where arguably it should not belong.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 17,432
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
hilts
Well-Known Member
Is there any other country in the world where one has to be so specific about being against a particular government rather than its people.
History and its baggage.
Its not really hard to just say the Istaeli government are shit. I feel some like the controversy.
On bluemoon what am I thinking? I retract that last sentence:-)
PragueBlue
Well-Known Member
Same here.
hilts
Well-Known Member
I hate barren fields.
Green ones are okay though before fucking Titchmarsh starts.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 57,186
And that’s the issue. The need to be specific and peoples’ laziness.
Maybe it’s also to muddy the waters and have a slanging match about terminology, rather than actually debate the real issues that need resolving.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Zionism is a wide movement that covers the whole spectrum of politics and religion. At it's core is the definition posted above. The origin of Zionism was the late 19th century, before the establishment of the state of Israel, when a very significant number of Jews lived in the Russian 'Pale of Settlement', which covered what's now Western Russia, through Ukraine, Poland, Belarus, Moldova, Lithuania, etc. They weren't allowed to live outside this area and were increasingly subject to antisemitism including violent pogroms. That's why there was mass migration in the late91th and early 20th centuries, which was greeted in the UK in an even more vehement fashion that the 'Stop The Boats' rhetoric, and led to the Aliens Act of 1905.A matter of contention was generated on the thread "Uk far right trouble" - the thread about riots in the UK on a unrelated topic
UK far right trouble July/August 24
It’s a shame Frothy’s frothings have been removed. The responses to them were a great example of where the majority of this forum is at on this subject.forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk
West Didsblue contentious argument
My main counterargument to that principle:
Hence my argument is that zionism is not restricted solely to the belief that the Jewish people should have "a homeland", its also an ideoligy that is used for the expansionism of the Jewish state.
Feel free to discuss
The idea of a Jewish homeland, where they'd be free from persecution, was mooted and the Zionist movement started from that. Initially it was a left-ish, more secular movement, and opposed by the more traditional, religious grouping. People started making their way to what was then Ottoman-ruled territory. So that's the original definition - those who wanted a Jewish homeland where they could be secure and live peacefully. Nothing more than that.
Over time the Zionist movement has morphed into that wider and more fractured group, encompassing very secular and left-wing groups (who are more sympathetic to the Palestinian desire for statehood) and the right-wing, religious, settler grouping, who are expansionist and support annexation what they see as biblical Israel, and are (to put it mildly) very unsympathetic and quite aggressive and violent towards the Palestinian residents on the West Bank. They are akin to the sort of 'patriots' we saw on the streets of Southport, Middlesbrough and other places.
That's why using 'Zionist' as a blanket term is completely meaningless. Effectively, they mean 'Jews' but use 'Zionist' to cover their racism.
Similarly, people who use the term 'anti-Zionist' could range from those horrified at the current actions in Gaza (which is perfectly understandable) but who accept an Israeli state within the 1948 borders (or thereabouts) to those who don't accept Israel's right to exist and who wish to see it destroyed. They are antisemites, not anti-Zionists.