Hacker News Reader

Comment by Beefin | Hacker News Reader

i assume you've created a negative association with zionism (from the news?) but that is far from the case.

zionism is the belief that the jews have the right to live in their ancestral homeland (ancient judea), which is not at the expense of anyone else.

any jew that's gone on birthright visits Masada, it's a right of passage. the vast majority of jews around the world are zionist and believe israel is the original homeland of jews, which historically is true.

now if there's an argument to be made that there should be no religious centric nations, well then we should hold the christian and muslim majority states to the same standard, no?

View on HN

>which is not at the expense of anyone else

I think that's the contentious part, as the establishment of modern Isreal has come at great expense to many others- I don't think their religious nature in and of itself is much of an issue with most of their critics. Though I'm not sure that's what the original commenter was implying

Jewish land acquisition in Palestine before 1948 was often through legal purchases from Arab landowners.

However, not all left; those who remained within the borders of what became Israel after 1948 were granted citizenship.

If you're referring to the Nakba, Palestinian Arabs were instructed by their own leadership or neighboring Arab states to leave their homes temporarily to facilitate military operations against the newly declared state of Israel.

The displacement of Palestinians was a consequence of war, not solely a deliberate act by Jewish forces

> If you're referring to the Nakba, Palestinian Arabs were instructed by their own leadership or neighboring Arab states to leave their homes temporarily to facilitate military operations against the newly declared state of Israel.

This is a myth. Vast majority of left at gunpoint. Please read about operation Dalet and histories of that era by the “new historians” eg Benny Morris, Ilan pappe, etc.

Not even a Myth. But a lie told and retold several times, the Zionists deemed it to be the truth and the only truth. But the Nakba has always been seen here, through the victims' tears and the colonialists' documents.

> Jewish land acquisition in Palestine before 1948 was often through legal purchases from Arab landowners.

Sometimes the mob wants to buy up real estate. And if people are willing to sell, it's just a transaction with varying shades of exploitation (knowing that it will be worth more when they resell).

But if those people don't want to sell, the mob doesn't just offer larger sums. There are then elements of intimidation. Strange cars drive past your home at night. You see big ugly men staring at you in a menacing fashion when you're out in public, then they wave and walk away. Bricks through windows. Anonymous threats of grave harm or murder. The escalation is constant. Anyone who sells at that point knows better than to start blabbing that they did so only because their lives were in danger... the people who extorted them don't much like being in the news even after the fact.

But that's the mob. I'm sure it was different in the first half of the 20th century in the place now known as Israel.

>zionism is the belief that the jews have the right to live in their ancestral homeland (ancient judea), ///which is not at the expense of anyone else.///

Somewhat dubious.

see my comment that's getting downvoted, of all the singular religious majority states it has the lowest of that single majority. muslims hold the highest position in the land.

why do you believe zionism is at the expense of other religions?

The term 'Expense' in your original comment did not seem to be restricted only to other religions, but to 'other people'. Leaving aside contentious regional and religious disputes- As a US taxpayer, it seems the expenses required for Israels continued existence are quite high to say the least

Wow are you this upset over Ukraine receiving $24b in 2022? Btw Israel received $3.2b, and the majority of which are "credits".

If you were an actual concerned taxpayer, you'd want to understand what America gets in response from 24b - what do we get?

Israel is America's strongest partner in the ME your belief that it's a one-sided relationship is ridiculous.

Not a fair comparison, Ukraine is obviously in a crisis and doesn't get that kind of money from us on a regular basis just for existing. We've been sending billions to Israel every year for decades now, in both money and military equipment. They don't get to take all that and then claim 'Zionism comes at no expense to other people' which was the original point. Not to mention a lot of that is sent due to AIPAC influence which is absurd, foreign governments should not be able to dump money into our politics to further their national interests.

Have you ever heard of CAIR? You understand they've influenced billions in aid to Afghanistan, what has America gotten in return?

the anti-Israel bias on HN is absurd.

CAIR shouldn't be able to give money to campaigns either, and also PACs shouldn't exist- at least not as a roundabout form of political bribery. All that aside, according to opensecrets CAIR raised 80k in political funding over the past 2 years when the AIPAC raised 45 mil, they're not in the same league in terms of influence. And that's not even getting into all the state-funded social media astroturfing campaigns that have been posted about here as well. I'm not sure how any US citizen could defend these practices while also having a (warranted) conniption over election meddling when the Russians do it

I'm also disapointed that the posts for this submission were immediately mired in politics (due to one off-hand remark in the article) instead of discussing the history of this siege or even the fascinating life of Josephus, but I guess I shouldn't complain if I'm part of the problem

>what has America gotten in return

The ability to retake a small shred of moral high ground, I guess, given its role in turning Afghanistan in to a failed state.

>Israel is America's strongest partner in the ME your belief that it's a one-sided relationship is ridiculous.

I actually agree with the second part of this sentence, but it is worth explaining what this means in a material sense.

intelligence, agriculture, startups, weapons, theres a very long list of resources America gets exclusive access to due to our relationship with Israel.

So aside from agriculture, nothing that average Americans get material benefit from.

The average American has never used a cell phone I guess?

https://www.israel21c.org/made-in-israel-the-top-64-innovati...

Motorola being first to market with a product developed in their Tel Aviv office doesn't seem to fit in the categories GP laid out, but cool.

The negative association is there because Zionism is no different from Islamism. In both cases Fascist ideologies have coopted religion to dominate people deemed inferior.

I think this is sort of what I mean - I don't know if this is true for all uses of the word, or if you're coopted by very one-sided, uninformed, and ideological media, and that's just what all your friends say who watch the same media. Who knows?

To be fair, not all definitions of Zionism refer to colonizing the area around jerusalem. More generally, zionism is around creating a jewish state and controlling their own destiny.

correct, my point is op seems to carry an emotional burden with the word "zionism". which is really only explained by the recent (since 10/7) media cycles IMO.

Insofar there's been a very ramped up effort to characterize 'zionist' as a slur so as to silence critics of the ideology, yeah.

you're saying zionists use zionism as a slur to subdue criticism of zionism? that's peak jew conspiracy.

No, I'm saying that (some) zionists characterise the use of 'zionist' as anti-semetic, more so today than in the past, but cool straw man.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com