United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
The 30s? 17 years before the state was even established?
Yep. Israeli militias used terrorism against Palestinians and the British starting at least that early. Those militias would go on to become Likud and crew.
I'm guessing you're referring to Irgub, so please remind me when we started conflating the actions of historic terrorist organisations with current governments?
There is enough to criticise the current regime about without needing to skirt awfully close to white nationalist talking points which aim to suggest the state shouldn't exist.
No no. Irgub and crew then went on to create Likud and their ilk. They are the current government. Anyway I guess if you wanna only count the actions of the modern Israeli state, it went beyond self-defense in 1948 with Israeli massacres like Deir Yassin.
BTW Israeli shouldn't exist. That's not white supremacism; it's the belief that Apartheid ethnostates don't have a place in the modern world.
The immoral disaster that is Gaza and the West Bank does not make one state a viable solution, regardless of who runs it.
You need to engage in the practical realities of the situation. Israel has existed for 80 years, so if it suddenly stopped existing, where do the people who have been born there over 3 generations go? That is as much a problem now as it was for Palestinians in 1947. Just because it was handled terribly then doesn't mean we should repeat the situation. It also doesn't satisfy the reasons for why Israel was created in the first place; to have a Jewish state where, in the worst of circumstances, non-Israeli Jews can flee to. And none of that justifies the continued blockade of Gaza, of illegal settlements, or killing tens of thousands of Palestinians.
The disestablishment of Israel is a white nationalist ideal. It is also a view held by other groups as well, but that doesn't stop it being a white nationalist desire. Presuming you aren't a nazi, you should consider why you are aligned on this.
There are so many options we could try before concluding that Israel shouldn't exist. Jumping straight to the most extreme option is just displaying ignorance, or that you have ulterior motives.
I never said they should go anywhere. Israel not existing simply means Israel, the Jewish state, not existing, not its people being driven off.
Something like that never should've existed in the first place. Jewish "right" of return is half the reason we got the current mess. There's no reason Jews should have a country that'll take them unconditionally for the same reason it'd be ridiculous to suggest the same thing if Roma people decided to build a state in India.
And no, I'm not a Nazi. I'm not sure when white supremacists coopted the idea that Israel shouldn't exist given they tend to be supportive of Israel, but anyway it's first and foremost an Arab and Palestinian idea.
Let's think about this for a second. If one democratic state was created, and a government elected, given population differences alone and presumed voting along established political (ie religious) lines, you'd end up with a Jewish/Israeli government rather than a Muslim/Arab government.
Two independent, internationally recognised, and supported, nations is the only viable option.
Over a very long time powersharing may be an option, but that's not now, or any time soon.
You'd end up with a government with both groups. It'd be possible to, for example, have a large Arab party in a coalition government with a left-wing Jewish coalition. And also someone like Netanyahu would've never won; because Palestinians would all rally around someone else.
This is especially true in a parliamentary government like Israel; the Knesset would look much different if the Palestinian population suddenly tripled.
There is no way that coalition would work together. I mean just look at the absolute mess the Israeli government coalition currently is.
It's a complete pipedream, we can't just wish the situation is different.
Isn't that coalition mostly right wing?
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah right wingers and Palestinians don't go together at all. I'm saying that with more Palestinians a left wing-Palestinian government is also possible.
A Palestinian government of a single unified state is not possible. A left wing one doubly so. The demographics are far too split and far too easily divided. There is no Mandela equivalent who can appeal to both sides whilst pushing peace, and so the polarisation would continue on religious lines. It would quickly devolve to a two party state, regardless of electoral method, because it would become solely about power.
You'd just end up with an even worse situation than now, and an all out civil war. All that would be achieved is the expansion of the current Israeli state, something you claim you're against.
Please think things through rather than just wishing for convenient solutions.
Okay I think you misunderstood me. I meant a coalition with left-wing and Palestinian parties. The 2021 government had an Arab party in the coalition so it's not exactly impossible. At least on matters of Palestinians these two groups have a decent amount of common ground, no?
As I've been saying from the beginning, you would find voting would concentrate around two blocks, drawn on religious lines because that is the main divisor.
Any election campaign would fuel that fight, and voting for smaller parties would be characterised as a negative to concentrate power, likely pushed through narratives of eradication. You'd end up with one major "Israeli" party and one "Palestinian" party, with the "Israeli" party wining because there are more of them.
If you're going to compare to an apartied state - and I think that is valid - you also need to look at how South Africa transitioned, and how Mandela specifically was vital to that. He achieved a largely peaceful restructuring of the country, and one not often repeated elsewhere.
Think about it like this; almost permentently since 1947 the people in power of the region have been right wing, and stoked violent rhetoric against each other, and often calling for the destruction of the other. That dynamic doesn't go away overnight, even if the walls are torn down.
I don't think Israel has a similar problem right now? If this was how Israeli politics worked you'd see right wingers and left wingers concentrating into one party each, but that's not happening. I don't see how Palestinians would cause the left wing to abandon all their causes and run towards the right wing and their genocidal agenda when they're the people advocating for Palestinian rights and a Palestinian state.
I can see your concerns, but this is a very unlikely worst case scenario. The two-state solution equivalent is "two states are created, but they hate each other and immediately go to war".
Then you need to read more about how deeply divided nations operate politically, and how people vote tactically.