padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
[btw if you don't want to read these long posts, don't. they're basically me working thru a synthesis what you could find in greater detail elsewhere for my own benefit, so that I can have a better understanding.]

I don't want to endlessly hammer this point, but that sickness of the occupations also tracks alongside the rightward drift of Israeli politics since Begin's first election in 1977. for people unfamiliar - warning, facts incoming - Begin ended 30 uninterrupted years of Labor rule by playing on the serious and justified resentment that Mizrahi Jews felt toward their decades-long racist treatment at the hands of the traditional Ashkenazim elite. it's a generalization, but that divide between Askhenazi/secular/more affluent/liberal and Mizrahi/religious/working-class/conservative still persists.

Netanyahu's base is Mizrahi and more recently Russian-speaking immigrants, who tend to be secular but very hawkish as personified by Avigdor Liebrman. It's the Israeli equivalent of the Democrats losing white working-class voters by largely abandoning class issues under Clinton. In that sense Netanyahu was Trump before Trump. he, and his equally terrible wife, have been playing the "elites hate us but the people love us" card since the late 90s. The only difference is that in Israel the racial element is reversed. and just like Trump, Netanyahu is a secular politician (or rather in each case their religion is self-worship) happy to ally that populist base with religious fundamentalists, in this case the various settler and Haredi parties.

that's why if you look at his Cabinet ministers, they're basically all Mizrahi, Kahanist/settler militants, Haredi rabbis, or some combination thereof. Yoav Gallant and Netanyahu himself are the only prominent traditional Ashkenazi soldier-politician figures. the traditional Ashkenazi secular left is basically defunct, as shown by the decline of the Labor Party into total irrelevance over the last 20 years, as well as traditional liberal peace groups like Peace Now etc.

I'm probably to going to stop making these disclaimers bc they're stupid, but the point here isn't that the people who make up the current Israeli govt are inherently bad and the traditional Ashkenazi elite were good, it's that they reflect an Israel that is more hardline, less tolerant, more triumphalist, less pragmatic. They didn't begin the sickness of the occupations but they are I think mutually reinforcing processes. the cruelty and devaluation of human life which the occupations entail bleed back into Israeli society. settler extremism is supported and encouraged by Sharon and Netanyahu govts bc they share the same goal of Greater Israel. and so on.

there isn't even room for loyal opposition anymore. so you get the op-ed in the Jersualem Post saying if you're not with us, you're not a Jew. you get the top Israeli police official banning protests against the war and threatening to bus protestors into Gaza. That's always been Netanyahu's policy, like Trump's, viciously attack any critics - it's how he winds up doing things like allying with a true antisemite like Viktor Orban against George Soros - but it's basically the default position of Israeli society now. the big protest movement earlier this year against Netanyahu trying to overthrow the Supreme Court and make himself a dictator studiously avoided Palestinian issues. the occupation has become almost untouchable.

all of that is to say I'm extremely unhopeful about any kind of real peace deal going forward, I guess. the dominant forces in Israel want a Greater Israel and the final expulsion of the Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan. they and Hamas have also combined to ensure that there is also no credible Palestinian negotiating partner even if there was Israeli willingness. very depressing, very grim.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
The first problem to sort is the innocent civilians. They are primarily Hamas' responsibility and the only way Hamas can secure their safety is through capitulation. In doing so, Israel would experience extra pressure to accept a longer peace.
I like how you've replied as if what you're saying is relevant to the link I posted, when you've actually ignored it completely.
 

germaphobian

Well-known member
hey guys, i guess i'm sort of lurker but feeling obliged to add my few cents:-

in much of eastern europe, where i'm from, the pereception is that this particular conflit between israel and palestine is just an aspect of the larger conflict between the west on one side and all the bitter rougues, lead mostly by russia, on the other (with china still sort of on the sidelines). deffo there's a fair amount of cold war geopolitical thinking still involved, because during the soviet era palestine really used to be a russian proxy - mahmoud abbas even studied in patrice lumumba's peoples' friendship university of russia which was sort of breeding ground for all those third world proxy warriors - so there's this long historical connection. but leaving history aside, it would still be false to attribute this view just to eastern european paranaoid thinking regarding all thinks russia-connected. the fact is that hamas leaders have been visting russia quiet frequently (october of this year being the latest visit) and then you have the iranain connectiona and all that. so that's that.
and then, of course, you come to the staunchest palestine defenders themselves - worst of the worst, ungodly atrocity excibition - all those chomskies, finkelsteines and suchlike. norman finkelstein, which is the biggest boi of dem all, recently said that ukraine is russian land so they had the right to invade (can post link if needed) and then you have all the chompskies and phlomskies saying the same until you go "ya' knaw wha? fak palstine!" get it?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
[btw if you don't want to read these long posts, don't. they're basically me working thru a synthesis what you could find in greater detail elsewhere for my own benefit, so that I can have a better understanding.]

I don't want to endlessly hammer this point, but that sickness of the occupations also tracks alongside the rightward drift of Israeli politics since Begin's first election in 1977. for people unfamiliar - warning, facts incoming - Begin ended 30 uninterrupted years of Labor rule by playing on the serious and justified resentment that Mizrahi Jews felt toward their decades-long racist treatment at the hands of the traditional Ashkenazim elite. it's a generalization, but that divide between Askhenazi/secular/more affluent/liberal and Mizrahi/religious/working-class/conservative still persists.

Netanyahu's base is Mizrahi and more recently Russian-speaking immigrants, who tend to be secular but very hawkish as personified by Avigdor Liebrman. It's the Israeli equivalent of the Democrats losing white working-class voters by largely abandoning class issues under Clinton. In that sense Netanyahu was Trump before Trump. he, and his equally terrible wife, have been playing the "elites hate us but the people love us" card since the late 90s. The only difference is that in Israel the racial element is reversed. and just like Trump, Netanyahu is a secular politician (or rather in each case their religion is self-worship) happy to ally that populist base with religious fundamentalists, in this case the various settler and Haredi parties.

that's why if you look at his Cabinet ministers, they're basically all Mizrahi, Kahanist/settler militants, Haredi rabbis, or some combination thereof. Yoav Gallant and Netanyahu himself are the only prominent traditional Ashkenazi soldier-politician figures. the traditional Ashkenazi secular left is basically defunct, as shown by the decline of the Labor Party into total irrelevance over the last 20 years, as well as traditional liberal peace groups like Peace Now etc.

I'm probably to going to stop making these disclaimers bc they're stupid, but the point here isn't that the people who make up the current Israeli govt are inherently bad and the traditional Ashkenazi elite were good, it's that they reflect an Israel that is more hardline, less tolerant, more triumphalist, less pragmatic. They didn't begin the sickness of the occupations but they are I think mutually reinforcing processes. the cruelty and devaluation of human life which the occupations entail bleed back into Israeli society. settler extremism is supported and encouraged by Sharon and Netanyahu govts bc they share the same goal of Greater Israel. and so on.

there isn't even room for loyal opposition anymore. so you get the op-ed in the Jersualem Post saying if you're not with us, you're not a Jew. you get the top Israeli police official banning protests against the war and threatening to bus protestors into Gaza. That's always been Netanyahu's policy, like Trump's, viciously attack any critics - it's how he winds up doing things like allying with a true antisemite like Viktor Orban against George Soros - but it's basically the default position of Israeli society now. the big protest movement earlier this year against Netanyahu trying to overthrow the Supreme Court and make himself a dictator studiously avoided Palestinian issues. the occupation has become almost untouchable.

all of that is to say I'm extremely unhopeful about any kind of real peace deal going forward, I guess. the dominant forces in Israel want a Greater Israel and the final expulsion of the Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan. they and Hamas have also combined to ensure that there is also no credible Palestinian negotiating partner even if there was Israeli willingness. very depressing, very grim.
An energising blast of controlled factulence
 

germaphobian

Well-known member
All the crap 'bout different perspectives is actually true in a way because i can bet all of you guys have read at least couple of books about "CIA mind control" .. "gay alien conspiracy (ma my bum hurts), "deleuze meets john dee" blah blah blah all that crap, but you are comp. ob. of ruskie propoganda. just co. ob. because the only evil is the west and suchlike. but wha about reading "CCCP infiltration of Washington D.C." or ""Kennedy the Thriump'?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
In the unlikely event that Hamas and co begin to make inroads into Israel, I think it likely that they will set about ethnic cleansing and I also think it likely that there won't be a sea change in sentiment among the masses of fervent pro-Palestine supporters in the UK. Their rhetoric asserts that the Israeli response is already disproportionate to the terrorist attack so, in quintessential tit-for-tat style, a worse riposte against Israel would be considered justified. Burgeoning anti-semitic purge there will belatedly mobilise pro-zionist resistance here within the Jewish diaspora which will thereby cast them in the same light to the pro-Palestinians and see anti-semitic murders here too, possibly a worldwide anti-semitic purge. But this all depends on Hamas and co turning the tables which I think thankfully unlikely.
 

maxi

Well-known member
and then, of course, you come to the staunchest palestine defenders themselves - worst of the worst, ungodly atrocity excibition - all those chomskies, finkelsteines and suchlike. norman finkelstein, which is the biggest boi of dem all, recently said that ukraine is russian land so they had the right to invade (can post link if needed) and then you have all the chompskies and phlomskies saying the same until you go "ya' knaw wha? fak palstine!" get it?
chomsky said the russian invasion was a "terrible war crime." he states it clearly and repeatedly here despite this idiotic times journalist repeatedly trying to twist his words. (10:55 mins but also throughout). he makes no justification of the invasion whatsoever
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
All the crap 'bout different perspectives is actually true in a way because i can bet all of you guys have read at least couple of books about "CIA mind control" .. "gay alien conspiracy (ma my bum hurts), "deleuze meets john dee" blah blah blah all that crap, but you are comp. ob. of ruskie propoganda. just co. ob. because the only evil is the west and suchlike. but wha about reading "CCCP infiltration of Washington D.C." or ""Kennedy the Thriump'?
WSJ.png
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Absolute disgrace that the US supports a country because it derives some benefit. It should expressly avoid supporting countries which benefit it because then their support would be pure.

Of course the subtext is simply that Israel is thereby merely a vassal state, has no real right to exist etc. It's a hawkish position.
 

version

Well-known member
One outcome of all this seems to be greater scrutiny of Israel's influence in the US, and not just from the usual fringe elements.
 

germaphobian

Well-known member
chomsky said the russian invasion was a "terrible war crime." he states it clearly and repeatedly here despite this idiotic times journalist repeatedly trying to twist his words. (10:55 mins but also throughout). he makes no justification of the invasion whatsoever


yeah, he keeps repeating the line that russian attack is a terrible war crime - he is not so insane to deny that. BUT, and that is the key, he also keeps repeating the age old lie about russian "over-reaction" being a response to NATO moving closer to its borders. that line, which has been parroted ad nauseam by large swathes of the left (an increasingly the alt-right) has done a terrible harm to people's overall understanding of 21st century geopolitics, because that view is a hot, steaming pile of lies.
i truly recommend this book - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_One_Inch_(book) which takes that outlook apart detail by detail. so it's strange that chomsky - a dedicated facts man - for decades keeps repeating a factually false view. what happened was that after collapse of USSR - all the east-euro countries, for obvious reasons, rushed to western block lead by america and literally begged to be made part of NATO, because that's the only guarantee that you won't be swallowed by russia again. in fact, USA was quiet resistant to that idea - so much so that polish leadership even had to use a bit of blackmail saying that in case of not becoming part of NATO they will start developing nuclear weapons straight away since that's the only other form of effective protection against russian expansionism they can think of. an if trump dismatles NATO - which he hints he will do - the poles deffo will get the nuclear bombs. maybe even baltics. probably also sweden and finland. is that an better alternative to the "imperialistic" NATO.?
but i think the bigger point is that a lot (even most) of the western presumptions and presuppositions regarding larger geopolitical issues need to be reevaluated. up until now they've been incredibly simplistic with world being divided in two camps - the evil west and the rest; the rest, of course, always being victims and so on. but it's not how it works really. and, coming to israel - palestine conflict, it's just a part of the larger game. all these local conflicts that will keep exploding will be a part of this larger game. remember that one book written in response to fukuyamas "end of history" was written by his teacher samuel huntington and was called "clash of civilizations" and i think that's where we at, global village coming undone. that's how we should look at the palestine conflict.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
yeah, he keeps repeating the line that russian attack is a terrible war crime - he is not so insane to deny that. BUT, and that is the key, he also keeps repeating the age old lie about russian "over-reaction" being a response to NATO moving closer to its borders. that line, which has been parroted ad nauseam by large swathes of the left (an increasingly the alt-right) has done a terrible harm to people's overall understanding of 21st century geopolitics, because that view is a hot, steaming pile of lies.

Everything I've heard him say on Russia-Ukraine basically aligns with this. If you ask him if the invasion is unjustified, he'll say "Yes, but...", and there is always a "but", which hinges on it being the West's fault really for 'provoking' Russia and all the usual apologetics.
 

thirdform

pass the sick bucket
Absolute disgrace that the US supports a country because it derives some benefit. It should expressly avoid supporting countries which benefit it because then their support would be pure.

Of course the subtext is simply that Israel is thereby merely a vassal state, has no real right to exist etc. It's a hawkish position.

rights are not inalienable though outside of the suppositions of social contract theory. you guys say israel has a right to exist, instead of saying israel exists. and by that logic you capitulate to its abolition, or a sense in which one can justify it has no right to exist. It's equally hawkish bullying.

Mixed Biscuits: 'hamas has a right to exist, as does Saudi, and as does Iran.'

God may have kneaded your lifeforce dough with tenderness and kindness, but it's obvious that your mother gave birth to you by accident whilst defecating. You have regressed from being embarrassing into self-parody. Turns out this is what weed and porn does to the brain of the 10000 magikal i.q thinkers. tut tut.
 

maxi

Well-known member
Everything I've heard him say on Russia-Ukraine basically aligns with this. If you ask him if the invasion is unjustified, he'll say "Yes, but...", and there is always a "but", which hinges on it being the West's fault really for 'provoking' Russia and all the usual apologetics.
He's a US dissident so it's his job to speak out against the US role and US hypocrisy. That's not apologetics, and he goes further than saying it's unjustified ("terrible war crime"). Your argument sounds quite similar to the Israel supporters who accuse people of being Hamas apologists when they explain the history prior to October 7th. Explanation is different to justification
 
Top