Hacker News Reader

Comment by homo_ergaster | Hacker News Reader

> given their precarious situation in the Middle East

That’s an interesting choice of words but I guess settler colonies with apartheid policies do tend to be precarious

Israel's enemies attempted two wars of annihilation against it before there were any settlements, unless you consider the existence of a Jewish state within the 1948 armistice lines a "settler colony" (which admittedly some do).

> unless you consider the existence of a Jewish state within the 1948 armistice lines a "settler colony" (which admittedly some do).

I'm pretty sure OP means exactly that. In fact there are very few progressive leftists who haven't adopted this line of thinking.

? Israel continues to build and operate settlement colonies in the West Bank in internationally recognized Palestinian land. I’m not sure how you can get around calling it a settler colony without some impressive mental backflips

I'm not sure what you mean. Even if one agrees that Israel "builds and operates settlement colonies" how does that make Israel a settler colony? But perhaps you consider Tel Aviv a settlement?

I don’t think anyone denies that Israel is building settlements in internationally recognized Palestinian and Syrian land. They don’t hide it, there’s a lot of very recent news online about it e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/27/world/middleeast/israel-s...

Yes, I know what the "international community" thinks about that. I'm asking why that makes Israel a settler colony, as you claimed. Do you consider Tel Aviv a "settlement", for example?

Why is a state that builds settlements in other countries’ land a settler colony? Seems very obvious, I don’t really understand your point?

Perhaps it's a simple misunderstanding around terminology. I certainly wouldn't say that Britain at the height of empire was a "settler colony". I would reserve that description for the colonies themselves, i.e. those settlements outside Britain itself! Likewise I wouldn't describe Israel as a "settler colony" simply because it has (perceived) colonies outside its borders. I would only say that if I believe that Israel had no right to exist within any borders. But perhaps that's not what you meant and I just misunderstood you.

"Therefore it would be necessary to carry on colonization against the will of the Palestinian Arabs,...Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. This colonization can, therefore, continue and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population – an iron wall which the native population cannot break through. This is, in toto, our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it any other way would only be hypocrisy."

--Vladimir Jabotinsky, The Iron Wall, (We and the Arabs) (1923)

For once there's something to really harshly critique and attack Israel about that isn't "It's a Jewish state in a neighborhood of unreconstructed Arab nationalists who don't want to admit they invaded Jewish land." And of course, no, you can't just let us attack the actual bad things Israel really did do. You have to change the goddamn topic to "Jew state bad."

Where did you get that from? I wrote two specific criticisms which are quite different from your characterizations, maybe you should reread the comment?

What do you mean by settler colony and what are you suggesting exactly - Israel should dismantle itself and send away its citizens to whoever will be willing to take them?

You can google settler colony. I’m not suggesting anything in this comment other than that settler colonies with apartheid policies tend to be unstable throughout history.

But since you asked, I don’t think citizens of Israel should have to leave, I would advocate for Israel to do something similar to South Africa when they ended their apartheid policies

If Israel is a settler colony like you say, play tell what the host country is?

Are you asking which country enables Israel to continue to violate international law in the longest occupation in modern history (the West Bank)? That would be the US, who gives them $4 billion dollars each year and prevents them from being sanctioned at the UN

Do you live in an old world non colony then?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com