Well said.
this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
59 points (83.9% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
313 readers
242 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' etc.
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
Ok, then what is the simple, easy answer?
The US to stop funding genocide would be a nice start.
Before I respond, I want to make it clear what the Israeli government is doing is horrible.
But how can you call your solution a simple answer?
If the US stopped funding Israel, would the surrounding counties just let it exist? Israel is not simply defending itself at this point, but would it be able to if the funding was ended?
I suspect we would see a genocide of the Israelis instead.
This whole situation has barely been balanced for decades, and this genocide is sickening, but I’m not smart enough to see a way for the US to stop all killing.
How do you imagine things would turn out in the region if funding was cut?
Israel is a failed colonialist experiment that needs to end.
Is there a simple, easy way to do that?
Decapitation strike against the criminal Israeli regime would be great. At a minimum, enforcing a no fly zone over the entire area, along with missile defense for Palestine and Lebanon.
Would we then move the Israeli citizens to another part of the world?
This still seems like a tangled mess.
I agree she should do everything we can to end not just the genocide, but also the power struggle—preferably with minimal harm to anyone—but I see no indication any of it will be easy or simple. I think the answer is really hundreds of answers.
Where's your concern for Palestinians and Lebanese? Where did we move all the Afrikaners after apartheid? Some left and the rest had to learn how to live as equals with the people around them-- something Israelis have never had to do.
Related questions: Would Israelis be given the chance to integrate or, would the newly shifted power dynamic just lead to Israel's neighbours perpetrating the same horrors against Israel?
Basically, have these differences not gone on long enough that almost any of their neighbours would be willing to return the favour?
In what ways would this paralell the end of apartheid?
What does peace look like once Israel ends hostilities and the US cuts off supplies?
There cannot be peace with the current makeup of groups in the middle east. Some groups have to either, deradicalize (yeah right), leave or be killed by the others. There's no solution that will make you happy, or me or anyone. Many people will have to die before that mess is sorted out. Who those people are is up to the tax money from the USA I feel. Personally, I feel like colonization is bad and colonizers are bad people. So if Israel has made all of their neighbours unable to tolerate their existence by being colonizing pieces of shit for generations, that's just unfortunate for them. I suppose they will have to leave or deradicalize.
Israel would be forced to integrate into the region if they simply had a limited supply of weaponry. Because they have the full and clearly unconditional backing of the US, they don't have to do normal diplomacy (see all the ceasefire deals they've torpedoed); they know they can just shoot missiles and kill indiscriminately until the other side capitulates, and so does everyone else, because they're proving it every day now.
It would be messy, but they'd find a way to do it because they would finally have skin in the game. Or they'd lose one of the wars they're starting and that would be too bad in the "fuck around and find out" sense.
These questions were absolutely asked in south Africa. I encourage you to read about it. There are other similar historical examples too. Rwanda and Bosnia come to mind. Change is often painful, but it is a mistake to maintain this kind of status quo because you fear it.
Both examples you provided resulted in some of the most horrific genocides in modern memory perpetrated by the dominant ethnic groups against ethnic minorities seen as outsiders or invaders. These issues are still not reconciled to this day and still amount to daily acts of violence or terror.
Are you suggesting in your answer that the acceptable end to Israeli colonialism is the tables being turned on them? Because that's what would happen.
Israel does need to de-escalate, disarm, de-colonise while recognising the Palestinian state. Allowing any of their neighbours to oversee this would just see another genocide perpetrated.
Either way the status quo becomes genocide. So, what's our goal here?
The status quo is genocide now, just as it was in apartheid south Africa and civil-war era Rwanda and Bosnia. Israel and Palestine are at the stage of genocide now. The next stage will be truth and reconciliation, and likely an international peacekeeping force. If you insist on a perfect, clean solution where 100% of the violence stops once and forever, then you will never have it and you will only continue the current genocide. Decades of genocide have consequences and the sooner they are faced the better for everyone.
What I'm getting at is that nobody will touch that mess with a ten-foot pole. It is in no middle eastern nation's best interest to keep Israel around. If the UN isn't going to hop into Israel and prevent atrocities commited against Palestine by a so called american ally what are they going to do when Hezbollah and Hamas perpetrate the same while backed by Iran?
Have you by chance read Shake Hands With the Devil? It covers the UN response to genocide in Rwanda and it wasn't pretty.
The middle east basically just gets to choose their favourite flavour of Genocide forever now.
Best not do anything then, eh? Keep arming Israel until they finish the genocide I guess? Stop the genocide now, and do what it takes to make it work. Israel would have to give up quite a lot of territory at a minimum, and may likely cease to exist as a state at all (see Rhodesia). Jews can coexist in the region, but not as settler colonialists.
You're taking what I'm saying in bad faith. Then proposing a solution that just would never work. You're calling for the cessation of a (ethno)state. One whose theology is a large contributing factor to hostilities they perpetrate and that are targeted at them.
Keeping Israel is not a great option, nor is it even the better of two evils. But the end of Israel would spell the end of the Israeli peoples by way of genocide as well. A solution where Israel is forced to cooperate, sit at the table and work things out with a two state solutiom is the clear option. Though that will never happen under Netanyahu.
You also can't ignore the fact that every single one of their neighbours (nations, not people) would see every last Israeli dead or displaced. Regardless of how the israeli state came to be, they are now a legitimate ethnic group in the area who can easilly become the target of their own brand of ethnic cleansing.
This is not black and white at all.
I don't know how else to take what you're saying. It's like that Simpsons meme "We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas!". This kind of handwringing about the 'complexity' of the issue only benefits Israel in it's ongoing genocide of Palestinians. Yes, a lot of people that neighbor Israel hate it for very fucking good reasons, and it will take a lot of sacrifices from Israelis to build any sort of good will with their neighbors. This is unavoidable.
The sacrifice you're talking about is trading one genocide for another.
You realise this, right?
No goddamit. You have this in your mind. I am not accepting your premise.
Your questions make this situation seem even more complicated and difficult than I first thought.
They wouldn't be forced to leave, they would be forced to integrate with society.
How would that work?
How do we ~~impose~~ implement that?
edit: brain supplied wrong word
"We" wouldn't "impose" anything. That isn't any outside nation's job. Read the article, nowhere is outside force mentioned. The US can defend Israel without enabling attacks on their neighbours.
It's actually much simpler than you're making it out to be. The US doesn't have to stop funding Israel entirely, but conditions can be put on the aid that it won't come if war crimes are committed with it. What, we can stop Ukraine using our missiles to strike inside Russia but we can't stop Israel from starting shit with Lebanon et al? Please, take this "sure, buddy", positively dripping in the finest sarcasm.
That does sound like it could be effective, but I doubt it’s all that’s needed.
Also, are we willing to cut off funding if Israel doesn’t meet the conditions?
are we willing to cut off funding if Israel doesn't meet the conditions?
Yes, that is part of the solution. If not, we're not doing what I said, we're just doing what we're doing now.
There would of course be more to it, but that one lever would remove the option to kill indiscriminately. You might be surprised how quickly Israel would stop shooting if they suddenly had an ammo counter to watch and the only solutions available are diplomatic.
Sounds like a consistent and reasonable plan.
Thank you, I strive for consistency and reason in my thinking - sometimes I even succeed 😂 I appreciate you engaging in good faith, this was a pleasant exchange.