RealJesus Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 (edited) Basically, this South African independent journalist sums up pretty much the situation: I grew up being indoctrinated by Zionists throughout my entire life. I was told that the state of Israel is somehow necessary to prevent another Holocaust. That Palestine/Israel was empty and uninhabited when Jews began immigrating there in the late 1800s and even more so post-WWII. I learned all this propaganda. But then I started picking apart that ideology. 1) First of all, we have to see Zionism as a nationalist ideology. The belief that a certain people or nation comes first - ie "the chosen people". Thats what Zionism is at its core. It is no different than any other types nationalisms except that it's based on religion in addition to race/culture whereas many nationalisms are defined purely culturally and regarding the extent to which this nationalism is expressed at the state level. All nationalisms based on a dominant culture and that identifies a particular race as above all others is by definition racist. Afrikaner nationalism here in SA is an easy example. But so is Zionism. 2) Secondly, we must recognise that before the British took control of the area, it was under the Ottoman Empire. So yes there was no such country called "Palestine" (just like there was no country called South Africa before the Dutch arrived). But there were lots of people there - the area was highly populated. Who lived there at the time? There were a few Jews there who had lived there for thousands of years but for the most part it was almost entirely made up of Muslims and Christians whom today identify as Palestinians. 3) Zionism resulted in hundreds of thousands of European Jews and later millions of Eastern European and Middle Eastern Jews moving to "Palestine". This was colonialism in the same way as the Dutch and British who moved to South Africa or other Europeans who moved to the rest of Africa or who colonised the Americas. If you don't recognise this as colonialism - which Zionism doesn't - then it is impossible to understand the rest of the conflict. The British encouraged Jews to colonise their protectorate to act as a buffer between the indigenous population there and the British political system. This was done in the same way as Indians were used as a political buffer in man y countries like Kenya. 4) The two state solution is a nationalist solution. It is also racist and would be the equivalent of South Africa being divided into a white state and a black state - these the goals of South African apartheid and of most colonial states in general. See also what Frantz Fanon has written about the colonial state. It has been as solution constructed to ensure that Israelis maintain the land-gains of their colonialism. The ideal solution is of one multi-national state not based on religion and ethnicity that includes what is now Israel and all the occupied territories. It must also include the right of return for all Palestinians who used to live within those borders. That is the ONLY non-racist solution to the conflict even though it accepts Jews who emigrated/colonised Palestine as legitimate residents. This is the ANC solution to apartheid. It was the PAC solution as well - though they reserved the right to the land for blacks first and foremost. Some small elements of Fatah and much of Hamas favour this one state solution. But even more important, Palestinian civil society and progressive social movements especially during the 60s, 70s and 80s favored the one state solution (though less so nowadays). Israel as a racist Jewish state has no right to exist. 5) That said, while the one state solution is the better solution, the two state solution might be a legitimate compromise - and the only practical one at this point. Almost all of Palestinian society and both Hamas and Fatah are in favour of a a two state solution. But ultimately, the two state solution was the creation of Zionism as a way to entrench colonialism and the only reason that Hamas and Fatah might favour it is because they don't see any other choice. 6) The Israeli state is very happy to prop up Fatah which is losing legitimacy more and more amongst Palestinians. Fatah is very corrupt and much of its leadership is very much co-opted by Israel. They only survive because Israel props it up financially, politically and militarily. Hamas may be problematic in many respects and certainly isn't a progressive organisation, but they do have popular legitimacy. 7) This current war in Gaza needs this background. Some months before the current fighting started, Hamas and Fatah tried to put aside their differences and enter into a unity government. They know that the only way to negotiate a solution - even a two state solution - is to unite politically so that together they can represent all Palestinians in negotiations with the Israeli government. 8) The Israeli political establishment, particularly Netanyahu, went berserk. They threatened to withhold all aid to Fatah if it didn't break off the pact with Hamas "terrorists". Fatah refused especially because the pact favoured them and would essentially give them political control over Hamas in negotiaions with Israel which was a key point for them. 9) If the unity government was moving forward against the wishes of Israel, the only way to stop it was to manufacture a conflict. This is the recent Gaza fighting. It should be noted that each and every time there is progress in peace negotiations, a war breaks out and Israel usually bombs Gaza. ~ Jared Sacks Edited July 26, 2014 by RealJesus Quad_Tube 1 Quote Link to comment
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.