Obviously the genocide the government of Israel is committing right now is horrific, but this begs the question: does any colonially-established and colonizer-ruled country have the right to exist? Like the USA? Canada? Australia?
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
-99 points (29.1% liked)
Memes
45719 readers
821 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
They don't. The genocide and theft of land of their indigenous populations mostly happened less than 150 years ago. That land should be returned to indigenous sovereignty.
How that decolonization should proceed is a question not for the colonizers or their descendents to answer, but the indigenous tribes themselves.
The US probably does not have the right to exist, not the way it was taken. Rectifying that today is an issue of listening to the people who were here first. The Land Back movement is how the country begins reconciling. Israels future, like The USs future should be paved with large amounts of input from the people who were there before the colonizers were.
I dont think the US has the right to exist but I also know Land Back doesn't simply remove the US from existence and the descendents of colonizers aren't going to be exiled. In much this same way I actually agree that Israel doesn't have the right to exist. It doesn't mean I inherently want them gone, it simply means they had no right to take their nation the way they did and they should be listening to the Palestinians, not warring against them. Saying things like Israel does have the right to exist minimizes things like the Nakba and many other horrific acts. These are not acceptable ways to establish countries in modern times, and the world agrees or no one would be trying to stop Russia right now.
Glad you ask. They don’t.
Uh, why doesn't it?
Because it’s a fascist, Western settler-colonial state that is committing genocide as we speak, and has been ethnically cleansing the indigenous peoples for the last eighty or so years.
So the issue is the settler colonial or the genocide? Cuz both have historically been not cared about
Both have historically not been cared about by whom? The BDS movement is almost twenty years old. The UN General Assembly has been continually reaffirming the Palestinian people’s right to armed struggle against their oppressors over 50 years. Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish American son of two Holocaust survivors, has been writing about this ever since his doctoral thesis in 1988.
There exist settled colonies apart from that. Nothing when europe did its jazz party worldwide, when all the '-istan' countries happened over a long period of 'peaceful times', when more 'recently' Pakistan and Bangladesh played the "sike, I dont want you" with Hindus? Or when Papua new Guinea was and is being settled on by Indonesia, funded by the obvious
Hell closest to you probably (idk if youre american), gold rush fucked every native over (Lakotah). tribes in America (also Lakotah 2007) and Australia (Muruwari 2013) wanted their own country, UN said no. Trust me, UN doesn't care, all it ever does is write a strongly worded letter when everyone starts glaring.
Is the issue here that they are being too hasty? Doing it too fast? Or the fact that news is easily accessible and people get to say things online for nothing to get done on ground level?
I am really confused about this mostly useless silent protest
Just because colonialism hasn't been opposed in the past, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be opposed in the present and future
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. From the sea to the river, Palestine will live forever.
Just like for the past 70 years