The American media loves saying that, but does it really have a right to exist? Does an apartheid colonizing regime have the right to exist in someone else’s land?

    • Black AOC@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Decolonization and mandatory re-education of settler-descent persons is really the only sane answer. I could be saying a half-dozen more overtly ghoulish things; but the first step of least harm is a ceding of power and privilege from the colonizers to the colonized, and education as to the fuckery that this country-- and as a result, Israel-- perpetuated to come into existence, and why what they did is an aberration.

      • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who is included in the colonized and colonist categories in this sense? All “white” people? All white passing people no matter background? Recent (last 50 years) migrants of all races?

        What would the differentiation be, and what is the line in the sand? This doesn’t seem to be nearly as cut and dry as “Isreali vs Palestinian”.

        • Black AOC@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The differentiation is “can we trace your geneaology up to a slave owner”. There’d need to be a party apparatus for this sort of records-checking; but I imagine in this day and age, there’s likely a technological solution for this that I’m not immediately landing on. Beyond that, I’m not above the idea of re-educating anyone who’s ever flagged themselves “Caucasian” on a federal census; but the priorities are ‘do you have slave-owner in your blood’.

          • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That does seem like a good criteria, but that is an extremely small and limited amount of people. Slave owners were by far concentrated in the South, and only the ultra-wealthy could afford to own slaves to begin with. It was only a 1-2 percent of people owning 95%+ of all slaves. As most free people in the South, white or black, were themselves near destitute and extremely poor.

            Plus records of that would be difficult to work with, yes a direct relative would be an easy find, but we would go after someone for their great great great great great uncle twice removed owning slaves?

            Also the Caucasian label is itself extremely tenuous, as you would catch the decent majority of slavs, turks, some arabs, Romani, and a whole hell of a lot of bizarre and “non-white” groups by going after the Caucasian label.

            Plus then you run into the problem of a decent chunk of people being mixed, meaning no single label would work well for them, or you could have a family where one partner could have had a slave owning ancestor, while their partner had a ancestor who was a slave, and one of their children is extremely dark, while one of their siblings could be much lighter, and then another that’s white as snow. There would be an absurd amount of unique scenarios you would have to grapple with, this is just one.

            • Black AOC@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Is it such a sin to want to see those who self-identify a certain way educated on the baggage they’ve associated themselves with? You raise fair points on the concept of mixed families; but beyond that, while self-identification is fine and all, I see a use case for the education.

              • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                But its not really “self-identification”, its not really a personal choice is it? You can’t just self-identify as another ethnicity, race, or background, and most people don’t give theirs a second thought.

                Education should just be done overall. I just don’t see the point in otherizing and targeting certain groups on factors such as race, sexuality, ethnicity, or background, barring other overt reasons. I’m definitely not defending racist white chuds and they’re the first ones that could use reeducation, but it just feels like belief and views should be a primary concern. I’ve met plenty of gusanos, extremely out of touch extremely wealthy minorities, and people with racist families who grew beyond that. It just feels the main separator is class and education more then anything.

                Again, going back to it, dividing a clean cut colonizer and colonized just seems to be near impossible in the United States. It feels like other factors should be taken into account first.

                • renownedballoonthief@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I fully agree, and I feel the logic follows that the only actual path to peace for Israel/Palestine is a sort of de-Balkanization, a one-state solution where the one state in question can’t be Israel or Palestine.

            • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That does seem like a good criteria, but that is an extremely small and limited amount of people. Slave owners were by far concentrated in the South, and only the ultra-wealthy could afford to own slaves to begin with. It was only a 1-2 percent of people owning 95%+ of all slaves. As most free people in the South, white or black, were themselves near destitute and extremely poor.

              people rented slaves, and for the purposes of this discussion, that should be at least partial credit for “owning”

              • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Sure, but how in the world would you ever prove that? I doubt less then 1 percent of the receipts from those transactions survived.

        • Farman [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most of em were originall from there yidish is a germanic language after all. And it would be more justified since we can all agree germany did the holocaust. And the jews need their own state because to protect themselves from that. So if the germans broke it they should fix it. Way should the palestinians pay for the duck?

          • Shrike502@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This solution may have been sensible in 1945, for reasons you have described. But now? How many people in Israel even speak Yiddish?