Indiana University's "Liberation Commencement" was a celebration of the students' brave commitment to fighting powerful institutions and their involvement in challenging Zionism and the Palestinian genocide.
If someone is against "Zionism," then they're basically saying they're against a Jewish state in what many believe are their "ancestral" lands. Maybe people don't understand what Zionism actually refers to.
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel absolutely wrong Zionism and Judaism has nothing to do, with each other just because the West tries to portray, it that, way
@LALegault@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel I was on about America and UK trying to tell people what Semtism is even though they are the same forcing there, way into a country and then taking control
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel I am telling you as someone who has actually read and understand what it is, just because a person makes a article doesn't make it true Zionism was a continuation of an Ideology from long before all of us were born
Zionism is a late 19th century construct. Its only purpose was to create a homeland for the Jews in Palestine, where there was already an indigenous population. The old 'a land without a people for a people without a land' bullshit doesn't wash with anyone who has read their history.
Israel has no right to exist in its present form. Indeed, it wouldn't have existed at all without the duplicity of the British, French and Americans.
So, what was wrong with creating a homeland for Jews in Palestine? I agree that Israel should never have come about because of the meddling of Europeans and Americans, all of whom probably felt guilty at their failure to accept Jewish refugees from Europe. But now that there is an Israel, are you saying it should be dissolved?
So Israel should be dissolved because you don't like the fact that the Jews have a homeland? Europeans colonized the Americas and murdered or drove out or killed by disease and subjugated millions of Native Americans. Native Americans are still on reservations. Maybe we should just give the U.S. back to the Native Americans? Actually, that would be fine with me, since they'd probably do a much better job of governing than the GOP would.
@KathyLK@FloydyStu@mondoweiss@palestine@israel Why was these countries even commiting genocide in those countries stop trying to make America and Uk look good in history cos that's not gonna happen and nobody said the Jews should be kicked out u keep saying that
I absolutely do NOT think America and Europe, Canada and Australia should "look good." Genocide has been committed by "Christian white people" for centuries.
You think I don't know? My question stands: IF ISRAEL HAD NEVER BEEN SUBJECTED TO TERRORIST ATTACKS SINCE PARTITION IN 1948, WOULD ISRAEL HAVE "ACQUIRED" THE TERRITORY IN WHICH SETTLERS WERE ATTACKED ON OCTOBER 7, 2023?
Or would Israel still have the same borders it had right after Partition?
NO, I AM NOT DEFENDING ISRAEL'S ACTIONS IN GAZA. NETANYAHU AND THE RIGHT WING IN THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT NEED TO GO. NETANYAHU NEEDS TO BE ARRESTED AND REMOVED FROM POWER. THE U.S. SHOULD STOP ALL MILITARY AID TO ISRAEL UNTIL THERE IS A CEASE FIRE AND ISRAEL WITHDRAWS FROM GAZA. THE HOSTAGES SHOULD BE RETURNED, NOW.
What on earth does Hamas gain by keeping the remaining hostages?
@KathyLK@nabz123@mondoweiss@palestine@israel you ever heard of the King David Hotel bombing? It predates your 1948 by 2 years. It was a terrorist attack by zionists. Do you know what the motive was? To destroy evidence of Zionist terrorist activity against the British in the Palestinian mandate.
The zionists have been terrorists since way before you or I were born. They won't ever change.
Getting rid of Netenyahu isn't the solution. He's only a very small part of the problem. A majority of Israeli citizens would vote for a continuation of this 'war'. Why? Because they know that the only way they can sleep at night is to destroy the people whose land they are squatting on.
Whoever follows Netenyahu will carry that same mandate from the people of Israel.
Israel has consistently thwarted any attempts at peace. They don't want a two state solution. They want it all. They want what should never have been theirs.
@KathyLK@FloydyStu@mondoweiss@palestine@israel And that, homeland isn't the Jews anyways it will always be the Palestinians Muslim, Christian and Jews, land not some Europeans who came over in 1948
@KathyLK@FloydyStu@nabz123@mondoweiss@palestine@israel "What's wrong with me killing your family and moving into your home while you stay chained in the backyard? Now that I've killed your family, you're saying I should leave?"
Did you never hear of any terrorist attacks on Israel in the past 80 years? If you were continually attacked, would you roll over and say, "OK, we'll all leave now and you can have our land back?" If there had been no terrorist attacks on the state of Israel as it was drawn in 1948, do you think the Israelis would have been fighting in Gaza now?
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel You must have some sort of reading disability. They're saying that the bunch of genocidal white colonialist invaders should leave. If the indigenous people of any place in the middle east want to become a Jewish state, they can do that if they want to. Invasion, colonialism, and genocide is not that, and anyone that thinks they should do that is a million times worse than Hitler.
If Israel had never been subject to terrorist attacks in the years since Partition, do you think they would have invaded the land beyond Israel's original borders?
I'd really like an answer to that question. I'm curious. If Israel had been left alone and never suffered ANY terrorist attacks from Hamas or Hezbollah or anyone else, would Israel have attacked, invaded, committed genocide in Gaza and elsewhere?
@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@actuallyautistic
Jews? I certainly didn't say word one about Jews. You make an assumption from a perspective of bias. Your initial question is speculative at best and pure conjecture on your part. my answer is still yes ... oh hell yes!
@Zumbador@actuallyautistic I just blindly replied to the thread, did not notice the Autistic group had been added by someone for no apparent reason. Sorry for the trouble
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel dumbfuck, genocide white colonialist invader supporters really start think that it's terrorism for natives to start defending themselves
I'll interpret your question as rhetorical. You have proposed the essential question, & my answer, no, if Israel had not been consistently attacked since 1948 they would not have had to counteract against the continuous terrorism.
The fascistic State of Israel has chosen war for decades now.
If the United States of America started rounding black people into ghettos, applying military force every time one of them committed a crime, and started sweeping ethnicity-specific attacks on them, you'd get a sense of what Israel is doing to Palestinians.
"Israel is putting Palestinians in concentration camps and torturing them, but..."
Nobody cares about your weird lies about me, Nick. The fact you think that genocide is acceptable if people on Mastodon don't play your stupid games is a YOU problem.
The fascistic State of #Israel has chosen war for decades now.
If the United States of America started rounding black people into #ghettos, applying military force every time one of them committed a crime, and started sweeping ethnicity-specific attacks on them, you'd get a sense of what Israel is doing to #Palestinians.
Numerous studies, many employing quantitative methods, demonstrated that the democratic peace is a historical fact.
While interstate wars are rare events in general, wars between democraci
In summary, the democratic peace theory suggests that democratic states exhibit a remarkable tendency to avoid armed conflict with other democracies, contributing to a more peaceful international system.
Democratic peace theory fails because it gives equal weight to every entity calling itself a democracy.
The US's unique power and global influence lead to conflicts that smaller democracies simply don't and won't face, showing that power dynamics and strategic interests often outweigh simplistic democratic peace assumptions.
theories based on hypotheticals and ideals are great intellectual exercises, but have no practical value
And peace between democracies occur because of accepted hierarchies... as long as US hegemony (political and economic) is accepted, democracies can be pacified
Canada does well... as long as we jump when the US tells us to
Going back to Gaza, when Hamas was voted in... how much respect did it get?
primarily because the DPT was what I jumped in regarding, not Israel/Gaza
and because Gaza as any kind of example is insignificant regarding the DPT...
In exactly the same was as Sweden or Canada would be insignificant
As well, entertaining any argument that allows for equating conditions on the ground conducive to "regular elections" between Israel and Gaza since 2005 is just ludicrous.
Jesus, that's a very nice ignorant prejudice showing through
Prior to the coup that lead to the Pinochet government, Chile had a very strong democratic tradition
The US only rates a "moderate" in "The Carter Center's Standards for Democratic Elections"
Wars:
War of 1812 (US-UK)
Kargil War (1999, India-Pakistan)
Greek Civil War (1946-1949)
Cenepa War (1995, Peru-Ecuador)
Maritime Dispute (2008-2014, Peru-Chile)
BTW, as other people have noted, Nicholas Saunders is a troll who asks dumb questions then feigns offense if you don't tell him exactly what he wants you to say, in exactly the way he wants it to be said.
(And an antisemite, and a rape advocate, but that's another story)
you, in turn, seem to be proposing that the CIA can some how be divorced from the US government... it can't.
And, I could care less if you defend either.
What brought me into this thread was you saying
"But democracies rarely choose war."
Which is a ridiculous statement in and of itself, and from there that the DPT is a bad theory based on ideals and hypotheticals, making anything valid it could say bankrupt
"Anyhow, the all knowing copilot ai says that the theory is valid."
uhh... what the actual f*ck?
Ok, we're done.
I've never saw anyone discredit themselves so hard before in my life. No one is debating "nicholas", they're arguing with Copilot... an AI with known and blatant biases.
This guy introduced Chile as a #redherring and when that didn't go the way he thought then it's suddenly personal attacks without ever even offering a cogent criticism of the theory itself.
Vous êtes vous déjà demandez ce qu'est la démocratie ?
Est-ce d'élire de menteurs ou de pouvoir dégager les menteurs ?
Quelqu'un d'honnête a-t-il besoin d'entreprises de commuications , de copinage avec la presse, avec les milieu financiers ?
While your points aren't without validity, just going with the usual usage. What did Churchill say? That democracy is terrible, but the alternatives are worse?
C'est un argument assé pauvre quand on prétend défendre un principe aussi précieux.
Autant le foutre à la poubelle.
Dites-vous que si la "Démocratie" == "déléguer sa voix à quelqu'un qui n'est en rien obligé de la porter" .. alors mieux vaut la dictature .. au moins c'est l'arbitraire mais un arbitraire qui n'est pas caché, qui n'a paas besoin de dissimulation de frais de communication exhorbitants etc↘️
Non ... la démocratie c'est lorque les citoyens auront le dernier mot et l'accès à tous les paramêtres pour que leurs déscisions soient optimisées et durrables.
@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
Absolutely NOT, of course. Israel has never started a war. What's more Israel has always agreed to every serious peace initiative, starting from the Partition Plan of 1947 to the call for peace in the Declaration of Independence in '48, to withdrawal after the Sinai campaign, to the Peace settlement with Egypt in 1977, Madrid agreement, Oslo accords, and evacuating Gaza in 2006.
@nabz123@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
The question was, if Israel had never been attacked by any of its Arab neighbors, or any terrorist groups, would any of these so-called "genocide" or "massacres" ever have happened.
The answer is clearly: of course not.
@nabz123@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
As you probably know, there are about 2.5 Million Palestinian citizens of Israel (sometimes we call them "Arab Israelis"). They have full rights, vote in elections, work, go to university, have the same modern health care, same as every Israeli citizen. No ethnic cleansing here. (BTW, all the above is NOT true for Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria...)
@nabz123@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
Huh??
The 1947 Partition Plan left Jews with all the malaria ridden swamps in the Jezreal and Hula valleys, and the "uninhabitable" Negev desert. Whereas the part that could have become Palestine included the rich agricultural regions in the central mountains, with the cities of Nablus, Ramallah, Jerusalem and Hebron as well as the farm region of Gaza.
@Micha_Silver And they do it ALL through the human version of Cattle Contol pens and gates. Like concentration camp prisoners on their way to mittlebau work details at nordhausen.
@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
Jews and Muslims lived in peace in the region until the forced injection of the masses of Jews into the land in a secular ideology called Zionism. Since then the theft of home and property has been devastating to the Palestinian locals. Despite what you would do in such circumstances, the way forward is for the two peoples to work together towards a two state solution. That means going back to the previously agreed upon borders.
I'm not arguing with that. OTOH, the root of the problem is that there were NO "agreed upon borders," since Israel was forced upon Palestinians by Europeans. Therefore, even if Israel was shrunken back to its "original" Partition borders, there will still be terrorism against Israel because according to Muslims, there should NOT BE an Israel at all.
@KathyLK@somekindahate3@mondoweiss@palestine@israel
You're talking about a war of religion.
How many in Israel's govt are truly religious and not pretending? I'd say there's hateful people on both sides, and some prioritize their hate first on race and then religion. An objective view would tell you that one religion isn't better than another (any religion) and both can be weaponized for genocide and to commit human vices.
Si le Hamas avait 1/10e des lobbyistes EU US qu'à Israël, Nettanyahu serait en prison avec tout son gouvernement néo-nazi, plus rapidement que Poutine.
Le droit international est du côté des palestiniens et hélas pour Istraël qui a abandonné son humanité en laissant un raciste à sa tête, né sur l'assassinat de Yitzhak Rabin , pas du sien.
yes, because of #Zionism, the political ideology that #Israel has a right to Palestine.
Israel has illegal settlements in the #WestBank.That is an invasion because it is illegal.
The fact that #Gaza has no free access to the outside world (no international maritime port, no air space/airport, endless checkpoints) amounts to invasion in the form of #IsraelApartheid
Israel is a US-funded nuclear outpost: that is an invasion of Palestine.
Ah, now the personal attacks begin. I don't agree with you, or I question you, so suddenly I have a "reading disability." Try reading my responses again, and then tell me that. Not ONCE have I supported or even indicated, any support for Israel's genocide in Gaza. I don't defend it--it's indefensible. But that's not what this discussion has been about.
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel Dumbfuck white people are out here supporting genocide, and they expect to be treated with respect. What do you think that you're doing when you support the inherently genocidal colonialist invasion of Palestine? The only way that colonialism works is genocide. You're not the victim here, you idiot Karen.
@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel Palestinians' lands should not have been stolen to create the Jewish state. The mere existence of Israel in the place it is today depends on ignoring the Palestinians whose land was stolen by a colonial power to give to European and American Jews fleeing antisemitism at home. Whether or not you agree that there should be a Jewish ethnostate, Israel was built on theft and murder.
As with any other settler-colonial project, the guilt lies with the colonizers. The US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so many more are complicit in exactly the same kinds of crimes.
@nicholas_saunders@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel You're evading the question. Palestinians were living in the area now called Israel before Israel was created. They were subsequently kicked out to enable European and American Jews (who were and are just as American or European as anyone else) to move in. We can talk about how we should address this fact, but trying to deny this fact is denying history.
And I never beat my wife, so the question is meaningless.
Jews were living there, too. It was a "logical" place to put more Jews and to alleviate guilt over the Holocaust by giving the European Jews their own state. The creation of Israel was driven by Europeans, and while its creation was unfortunate, it happened. So, given that, why the terrorism over the years? I don't approve of any kind of "state" that has a "state" religion, be it Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. But since there already are Christian and Muslim countries with those as state religions, why not Israel for the Jews? After all, the only reason they ended up all over the place (the Diaspora) was because they were kicked out of their homeland to begin with.
If you cannot get past settlers colonialism, and undoubtedly tying that into apartheid, then what's left to discuss?
Said differently, if you're able to acknowledge the contentious nature of those claims then there's at least the sliver of an opportunity for dialogue.
@nicholas_saunders@KathyLK@chiraag@mondoweiss@palestine@israel I love how Zionists say "Israel for the Jews!" with the same ethnonationalist fervor as the Nazi screaming "If Japan is for the Japanese, then let us keep Europe for the Europeans!" And other such racist, bigoted bullshit
@KathyLK@nicholas_saunders@mondoweiss@palestine@israel The only way this make sense is if you're implying that European Jews are more Jew than European (i.e. they aren't "true" Europeans). People have been scattered from whatever homelands for dozens of reasons over millenia - does that mean they can just go back and kick out whoever's living there now?
@KathyLK@nicholas_saunders@mondoweiss@palestine@israel Put another way: Should indigenous Americans be able to kick all other people off their land in the US, Canada, Mexico, etc? What about Maori in New Zealand? How about indigenous Australians?
Having lived on the Navajo Reservation for a brief time, I can tell you that there were quite a few Whites that the Navajos would have happily kicked off the reservation. I suspect that's also true in Canada. Are there reservations for Native Americans in Mexico? I didn't think so. How about the Maori?
Wouldn't it be possible to consider Israel a "reservation" for Jews? Jews are obviously not safe anyplace else.
There are no rockets being launched from Hamas on them there.
Israel is a colonizer project. That is why they are kicking out non-Jewish people and settling Jewish people in the West Bank.
This would be akin to white people kicking out Native Americans on reservations and moving in new families that had recently converted to Christianity.
There are no rockets being launched from Hamas on them there.
Israel is a colonizer project. That is why they are kicking out non-Jewish people and settling Jewish people in the West Bank.
This would be akin to white people kicking out Native Americans on reservations and moving in new families that had recently converted to Christianity, and screaming that Jesus gave them the land.
First off, I would like to thank you for agreeing with me that Israel is a settler colonial project. I find settler colonialism disgusting. I hope you can join me in that as well.
Second, since it's the only point you felt like touching, Jews are safer in America than Israel.
You are talking about protesters against the war. AGAIN, NO ONE is defending Netanyahu or his cronies in the government. AGAIN, are you an American Jew?
Vous faites comme si les Américains étaient venu poliement, en ami, rencontrer les Indiens, et non comme des colons sauvages ne respectant rien tués leurs bisons industriellement.
Bro, your syntax parsing skills leave a lot to be desired -- but, thing is that you lost all privileges with me through your unwillingness to articulate a response to the #AlAqsaFlood operation.
tl;dr though this moron is misusing the term in trying to say that there are semantic differences between the interlocutors whenever he wants to reject an argument from definition. By saying that "you're stuck" epitomizing the hypothesis, he's making an incoherent claim to try to make it seem like the interlocutor is exhibiting some sort of defect, when in reality he's simply unwilling to evaluate definitions from a pragmatic basis. Instead, he is pretending that there is a more legitimate worldview corresponding to his view, yet he cannot articulate it without immediate rebuttal.
Why does he choose to use an esoteric artifact of linguistics and analytic philosophy instead of saying "irreconcilable semantic differences that shape our worldview"? Well, it's because that gives away that he's a coward and is yielding the conversation. Instead, he hopes to throw the reader off from the conversation hoping they don't know what he's talking about, while feigning some sort of intellectual ascendancy. In reality, he's just exposing himself as a doubly incompetent pseudointellectual bitxh (on top of being a genocidal Zionist). Feel free to use this hollow shell of a man as target practice.
So what is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? In short, it's a claim that languages (whether natural or artificial) affect the way that we think, since languages don't always map to each other. This incongruency between languages occurs both in the form of 1) syntax (meaning the form and structure of the language) and 2) semantics (meaning the words and meanings).
It had been noted that some natural languages are structured in closed logical form, which means in short that they map formal logic languages like propositional calculus or first order languages. Extrapolating from that, people could reasonably infer that some languages facilitate learning those formal structures, albeit not guaranteed that people will (see: Americans lmao).
Secondly, it has been noted that some languages have words that don't translate to words in other languages. Instead, at some point in history the practitioners of that language identified a concept and gave it a term, which makes that concept more readily available for use. Moreover, while words in different languages may refer to the same thing (the "rigid designator" lmao), how they conceptualize that thing per definition may vary. A famous thought experiment in philosophy involves a person pointing at a rabbit and calling it "Gavigai" and the observer being unsure as to what it means, as the definition could vary in many ways, for example: "a furry rodent with long ears" or "a collection and configuration of atoms that forms the image of a fluffy long eared animal when exposed to the visible light frequency". Whatever the exact conception it is, it is virtually inaccessible to the interpreter.
The whole Sapir Whorf hypothesis has been substantiated by philosophers and thinkers noting differences in the writing, methods, and argumentation style of scientists, where people note that German scientists are surprisingly strict and rigorous in their argumentation and methodologies, while French scientists tend to be a lot more loose and creative. This lead many to believe that it is language itself that has determined this difference. However, consensus amongst linguists and researchers is that it's not that simple.
Once again, feel free to enact violence against pseudointellectual fascists in Minecraft or whatever game you play.
@nicholas_saunders@chiraag@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel lmao we all know that idiot fascist bootlickers like you will contend every definition if it serves to delude themselves further into their nonsensical narratives. You're unfixable, like a lame horse.
It's only your own misunderstanding of words and meaning on display here, my friend -- as well as your need, of course, to make baseless accusations and be insulting.
@nicholas_saunders@chiraag@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel Don't say something is implicit if you can't (1) demonstrate it nor (2) make a cogent argument about it, that's it. The rest of us can do it, why is it that your incompetent ass can't despite the fact that you post 24/7?
You're an F grade person. Simple as that. Get lost.
You seem to have lumped together the meanings for implicit with implied without recognizing any distinction, as you've used them seemingly interchangeably -- or, at least, that's the inference.
@nicholas_saunders@chiraag@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel LMAO that's what the word implicit means, but if you have a different esoteric meaning, then go ahead and share it, and we can all see how you were just pretending to make claims with some sort of clairvoyant authority that you can't justify to just blatantly trying to paint a narrative that now is suddenly very transparent.
But you're not going to do that because useless fascist dipshits like you would rather just back off and repeat themselves hoping there's someone out there that is just as stupid as they are, then wonder they get made fun of for the rest of their lives (and beaten to shit).
@chiraag@KathyLK@mondoweiss@palestine@israel #Israel was Truman's mistake and should not be considered irreversible. Eisenhower warned Israel not to venture beyond the 1948 borders, and it was a popular decision.
Since then, the American public has been brainwashed to accept complete bullshit contrary to their own needs and values.
That's all this random contributor has to say.