The Off Topic Topic

[Capetan Mihali]

No, in fact the backlash induced the company to move its factory out of the "Occupied Territories" and into Israel proper.  Sorry.

Is that supposed to be better?  I don't see how it is.

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

[Admiral Yi]

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

My question was more about the values of BDS than effectiveness.  From the BDS pov is X hundred Palestinians losing their jobs and the remainder commuting 8 hours a day a net benefit?

[Capetan Mihali]

I gotta say I do agree with Mihali in his critique of Israel as the "Jewish state" especially when you consider the religious component. Israel gets away with it only because everybody else in the region is much worse. The pragmatist in me says it is fine, the idealist disagrees - both are valid positions to hold.

Most Israelis I know are utterly against the religious types who often make life difficult there. The religious types have excessive power because of Israel's wacky electoral system - most Israelis resent that as much as you would.

The "Jewish state" thing means basically the same thing as Turkey being a "Turkish state", Germany being a "German state" or Poland being a "Polish state" - it's basic ethno-nationalism, no different from other states founded on ethno-nationalist principles. The founders of the "Jewish state" were mostly socialist Atheists, many from your part of the world originally. 

I would hope that as history progresses ethno-nationalism can be left behind, but unfortunately that requires everyone else to leave it behind, too - the whole point of having a "Jewish state" was that others would not leave ethno-nationalism behind and, historically, refused to consider Jews to be "real" Germans, Poles, Turks etc. The exceptions being in NA, the UK and Australia.

Again, look at the timeline.  Most ethno-nationalist states are founded around populations that have lived in the area for centuries.  Of course there was conquest, but the Turks, for example, conquered Byzantium in 1453, not 1953.  And Russian conquest of the Caucasus was objected to even during the 19th Century, and certainly the Soviet Union's domination of the Baltic States, etc. was used critically against them as "Soviet Imperialism" by the West; I believe that underwrote a lot of the outrage against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Palestine had Jews living and prospering in it under Ottoman and British rule, but the region was essentially Arab.  It is only in living memory that the region was declared a Jewish State, with a massive influx of Jews from Europe.  Of course the Holocaust played a major role in creating that influx, but as tragic as it was, it is really neither here nor there for the people who had been living in that area for centuries (and who did not participate in the extermination of Jews during the Holocaust) only to find that they now lived in an ethno-nationalist state that was not of their ethnicity or nation. 

[frunk]

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

Cutting ties between Israelis and Palestinians seems like a very bad idea.  It gives the extremists on both sides more leverage the less interaction there is between the two groups.  It's what you do when you are preparing for conflict, not resolution.

[Capetan Mihali]

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

My question was more about the values of BDS than effectiveness.  From the BDS pov is X hundred Palestinians losing their jobs and the remainder commuting 8 hours a day a net benefit?

I don't get the commute thing; Palestinians live in Israel proper as well, the "Israeli Arabs".  And the company's decision to lay off X hundred Palestinian workers was not at all an inevitable consequence of pressuring them to move out of the West Bank.

[Barrister]

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

My question was more about the values of BDS than effectiveness.  From the BDS pov is X hundred Palestinians losing their jobs and the remainder commuting 8 hours a day a net benefit?

I don't get the commute thing; Palestinians live in Israel proper as well, the "Israeli Arabs".  And the company's decision to lay off X hundred Palestinian workers was not at all an inevitable consequence of pressuring them to move out of the West Bank.

How was it anything but?  If you pressure an Israeli company to leave the West Bank of course Palestinians are going to lose their jobs.  Perhaps some other people gain those jobs, but it sounds like cold comfort for those no longer working.

[Capetan Mihali]

It shows that the BDS movement is at least somewhat effective and it represents a step back from the further Israelification (can't say colonization around here) of the West Bank.

Cutting ties between Israelis and Palestinians seems like a very bad idea.  It gives the extremists on both sides more leverage the less interaction there is between the two groups.  It's what you do when you are preparing for conflict, not resolution.

I agree.  Jews and Palestinians should live and work side by side.  When Israel is ready to shed its ethnic supremacy and institute a real democracy for the Arabs under its control, that might happen.  Of course, Palestinians would make up the majority of the electorate and Israel would no longer be the Jewish State.  Until there is real progress in that direction, the focus should be pressuring Israel to stop the continuing construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and to acknowledge the civil rights of Palestinians.  This doesn't entail "cutting ties" that don't exist.

[LaCroix]

is there any oppression going on re: israeli arabs? can they vote, etc.

[Capetan Mihali]

]
How was it anything but?  If you pressure an Israeli company to leave the West Bank of course Palestinians are going to lose their jobs.  Perhaps some other people gain those jobs, but it sounds like cold comfort for those no longer working.

So we must accept the status quo to avoid any disruption in anyone's employment?  Nobody was concerned with all the Iraqi municipal employees losing their jobs when we bombed power plants and water treatment plants to liberate them back in 2003.  And conversely I didn't seen many tears shed over the Iraqis who lost their jobs mopping the floors of American contractor compounds in Baghdad when the US eventually withdrew from Iraq.

It's really a joke to use these lost jobs as a criticism when multinational corporations are frequently "downsizing" to the tune of several thousands lost jobs for the purpose of increasing profit and shareholder value, while this is accepted as just a natural part of our economy.  Suddenly when a group challenging Israel achieves something, these lost jobs are an unacceptable tragedy that this mean-spirited group should be held accountable for.

[Malthus]

You have a cause, too: Zionism.  And I'm just as convinced that you're quite sincere.  It just happens to be that your cause has become the status quo not just on Languish but in most of the West, so you don't have to assert it as openly as those with a different cause.

I see my "cause" as broader than mere Zionism, but whatever: the issue isn't simply having a cause, it is with presentation of evidence. Having a cause should not lead to a one-sided presentation of evidence. Even if all you are committed to is a particular "cause", presenting evidence in a one-sided manner isn't going to convince any but the decided to support your cause.

Take this debate as an example: presenting the maps, without acknowledging the "small details" (the UN partition plan, the '48 war, etc.) leads to an unconvincing case.

It's the difference between persuasion and propaganda. 

Not sure what the scare quotes around settlers implies, but nevermind that.  The difference between the scandalous things Canada has done is that those are long in the past; Israel is doing those scandalous things now -- I can't go back in time and denounce the Trail of Tears or the Mexican-American war. I see it as a moral obligation to object to those things, just as I object to the things I think are scandalous that the US is currently doing.  And I feel a special obligation to resist Israel's deeds because billions of dollars of the money of US citizens is enabling them.

I strongly disagree.

Take the example I gave: residential schools. If the Israelis did anything like that to the Israeli Palestinians, you'd have pretty good proof that the Israelis were utterly amoral: the "residential schools" took native kids, moved them away from their families, and forced them to learn the culture and language of the dominant majority (a deliberate policy of cultural extinction) - while subjecting them to all sorts of abuse.

Imagine if Israel took Palestinian kids away from their families en mass, forced them to abandon Arabic language and culture. I bet you would not approve! 

Do you know when the last "residential schools" finally shut down in Canada?

It was in ... 1996.

I do not consider 1996 to be "long in the past". And that's just one example: native Canadians still, in many cases, live in 3rd World-like conditions today.

Now, opinions differ as to what causes that and what can be done about it, but most people agree: that's scandalous. Yet it does not utterly "de-legitimize" Canada. A country can do bad stuff, but on the whole, be better than the alternatives.

[Capetan Mihali]

is there any oppression going on re: israeli arabs? can they vote, etc.

Yes they can vote and as I noted earlier there a few Arab members of the Knesset, who can achieve exactly nothing by virtue of holding electoral office.  You can be able to vote and still have some oppression going on re: yourself, you know.

[LaCroix]

Yes they can vote and as I noted earlier there a few Arab members of the Knesset, who can achieve exactly nothing by virtue of holding electoral office.  You can be able to vote and still have some oppression going on re: yourself, you know.

considered deleting the vote comment because that wasn't exactly what I meant, and I assumed they could vote after I thought about for longer than a second. I don't know the israeli political system, so I wasn't sure what, if any, restrictions were placed on israeli arabs. I asked in reference to your comment about true democracy in israel

[MadBurgerMaker]

Wait.  Sodastream had a factory in Palestinian territory, along with a few hundred Palestinian employees, a pro-Palestinian group gets them all shitcanned and the factory moved somewhere else, and they call it a win?

How the hell does that work?

[Admiral Yi]

So we must accept the status quo to avoid any disruption in anyone's employment?  Nobody was concerned with all the Iraqi municipal employees losing their jobs when we bombed power plants and water treatment plants to liberate them back in 2003.  And conversely I didn't seen many tears shed over the Iraqis who lost their jobs mopping the floors of American contractor compounds in Baghdad when the US eventually withdrew from Iraq.

It's really a joke to use these lost jobs as a criticism when multinational corporations are frequently "downsizing" to the tune of several thousands lost jobs for the purpose of increasing profit and shareholder value, while this is accepted as just a natural part of our economy.  Suddenly when a group challenging Israel achieves something, these lost jobs are an unacceptable tragedy that this mean-spirited group should be held accountable for.

There are a number of reasonable perspectives that someone who purports to support the plight of Palestinians could adopt in regards to Palestinians losing their job as a direct result of their actions, but in my personal opinion indifference should not be one of them.

[DGuller]

Wait.  Sodastream had a factory in Palestinian territory, along with a few hundred Palestinian employees, a pro-Palestinian group gets them all shitcanned and the factory moved somewhere else, and they call it a win?

How the hell does that work?

It shows the world they're hardcore.