[Oleh Hadash]

Can you then provide a coherent and universal moral framework for group rights? If you can't, then what's the point of arguing who has the right to form a state in Israel? You will just make up something arbitrary to support your cause, but is that justice?

Of course I can. And it's not arbitrary, it's something that's broadly consented to among the Jewish population in Israel and in the diaspora. There are individual rights and there are group rights. Group rights, in this sense nationalistic movements, have a right to determine their own destinies and live independently from others. Perhaps you don't acknowledge that right, and that's fine, but we're not going to see eye-to-eye on that. Until Star Trek becomes a reality, you're not going to get me to relinquish Jewish national rights in Israel.

Moreover, I don't think you really believe what you're saying in your heart of hearts. Rather, you're just playing around and experimenting with some new ideology you stumbled upon. You're still in your honeymoon phase with libertarianism/anarchism. For instance, you're making a concession for Zionism as a political movement for group rights. Are there no other legitimate national movements?

[Oleh Hadash]

Peter1988, I cannot use PM as I am yellow-carded for insulting people. I will tell you this, however, if you intend on taking this seriously, the only way you will ever be able to sell people on your ideas is by conveying how your ideas are in the national interests of the party you are communicating with. Interests in the other side's perceptions of justice or appeals to sympathizing with the needs of the other side will barely resonate with anyone.

[peterm1988]

Ach, I'm not really trying to convince you, or, frankly, anyone in Israel

More concerned with changing the minds of how British people feel about it all... Which I do generally articulate through what's best for Europe/Britain.

[Dave]

The correct feeling for Britons on Israel is apathy.

[peterm1988]

The correct feeling for Britons on Israel is apathy.

Really? Do you actually appreciate how interconnected the EU and Israel are, to just cite one facet of this?

[Dave]

Really? Do you actually appreciate how interconnected the EU and Israel are, to just cite one facet of this?

I do. European (and other) states should cease involving themselves in the Israel-Palestine conflict and focus on trade. Irrational obsessions with internal Israeli politics and the occupied territories prevent the application of such a rational policy.

I cannot for the life of me understand what interest a Briton has in condemning Israeli actions in the Occupied Territories or in condemning Palestinian terrorism.

The only acceptable rationale I could see would improving relations with Arab states for the former or increasing market-share in the Israeli arms market for the latter. Neither of these seem to motivate the irrational obsessives who vest so much emotion in this distant, irrelevant conflict.

[peterm1988]

I cannot for the life of me understand what interest a Briton has in condemning Israeli actions in the Occupied Territories or in condemning Palestinian terrorism.

Even beyond a certain recognition of common humanity and even ignoring the significance of the politics on our very sizeable trade relationship, I think you also fail to understand quite how symbolic the conflict has become for broader trends across the world. To say something which really deserves an entire book, Israel signifies a great deal of different things for a great number of people. Whether you appreciate this or not, the policy of the British state towards Israel/Palestine is a very important battleground for various groups. Whether this is justified or not (I think it is) it still is no reason for me to participate in my side's surrender in a key area.

[Dave]

Yes, the attention the conflict receives certainly is symbolic of the progressive ideology currently destroying the entire world.

Nothing is so vile as the idea that "common humanity" obliges me to involve myself in the conflicts of strange peoples in strange lands.

The foreign policies of the British state are important to Britons, of course, but strangely its foreign policies with respect to Israel command a disproportionate, unwarranted share of attention.

[Decky]

Look, there's really no point in continuing to speak with you. You're clearly opposed to Jewish independence and self-determination,

No shit I'm also opposed to Christian independence and self determination, and Scientologist independence ad self determination, or hockey fans independence and self determination. Being a member of a group gives you no right to go and create a country for gods sake, especially one just for your group dedicated to wiping out everyone else within your boarders.

[eugenekop]

Group rights, in this sense nationalistic movements, have a right to determine their own destinies and live independently from others.

What does this right entail? Does every nationality has this right? What about basques, the Eskimo, what about the American Indians, the blacks, the Flemish, the Chechens, the Australian natives? What about the different sub-cultures and smaller ethnicities? What about the territory which such ethnicity has the right to receive? How large should these territories be, should the inhabitants of these territories consist of exclusively people from that nationality? What happens with people who are not part of that nationality still live in those territories, do they have to immigrate? What about nationalities that are spread all over the globe, do they must immigrate to a single land or they can have several lands for each diaspora? What about groups that are not nationalities, but instead groups with common interests such as groups of gays, women, robbers, people of certain race, people with certain preferences? What about the ability to be part of such groups without territorial demands?

There are a lot of open questions, and I doubt you will be able to answer all of them consistently. Most likely you will adjust each answer so that it will support the Zionist cause, but as I said before this would not be just.

[Oleh Hadash]

They are hard questions to answer. Most importantly, I don't are about any of those groups. Let them figure it out on their own. If they want independence and have a reasonable prospect at achieving it, let them go for it. All I care about is me and mine. They don't care about us, and I certainly don't care about them.

[eugenekop]

So how are you going to convince people on this forum and strangers in general that your cause is just if you don't have a theory of justice?

[Oleh Hadash]

Well, I'm not naive enough to think I'm going to convince Israel's enemies who are primarily anti-nationalistic, if not outright anti-Semitic. They don't care about honesty or justice, all they care about is attacking Israel and the Jewish people from all angles. Jewish people in Israel form a relatively cohesive and distinct nation who refuse to have our destinies defined by others. And you can't actualize national rights without land and a state. It's really that simple. Moreover, there's no price that isn't worth paying towards realizing those ends.

As I said, part of me wants to live in your Star Trek fantasy world, but a bigger part of me knows that we're just not at that point yet. We can't surrender our togetherness and expect to survive in a world filled with competing nationalisms/groups, especially when some of them are committed to our destruction.

Me not caring about other groups doesn't mean I can't support their national aspirations if I know more about them. I'm not familiar with the contexts of other national struggles so I can't comment. I can assure you that if there are examples that hold strong parallels to the Jewish struggle for independence, I would support them. But at the end of the day I just don't really care about them. You threw out all of these examples which may or may not be similar to the story of Jewish people and Israel. Your post seemed to imply that all groups inherently have a right to independence anywhere because of my support for Zionism, as if that's all Zionism is based on. I hope I don't need to get into how monumentally stupid and simplistic such an assertion is. If Zionism was really all about a group of people claiming independence and country, without any context whatsoever, you'd have a point. Since that isn't the case, you have no point.

[Eran]

Well, I'm not naive enough to think I'm going to convince Israel's enemies who are primarily anti-nationalistic, if not outright anti-Semitic.

First, you aren't doing a great job convincing neutral parties. With the exception of the rabidly pro-Israeli American public, virtually no nation on Earth supports Israel's policies.

Second, Arabs haven't traditionally been anti-Semitic. Historically, they have been less anti-Semitic than Christians. So, to the extent that they are "outright anti-Semitic" now, you need to ask yourself why? And since they have changed their attitudes in the past, could those attitudes be changed again, in the opposite direction?

We can't surrender our togetherness and expect to survive in a world filled with competing nationalisms/groups, especially when some of them are committed to our destruction.

Nothing about anarchism and justice suggests that anybody "surrender their togetherness". Rather, such "togetherness" should be a voluntary choice by any members of society who desire to join a given group. People should very often work in groups. Working in a group, however you call that group, doesn't justify members of the group from going beyond the sum of rights they had as individuals.

As individuals, we have a right to protect ourselves and our property. As a group, we have a right to protect members of the group and the collective property of the group. We don't have a right, merely because the group calls itself "state" to go beyond the rights of its members.

I can assure you that if there are examples that hold strong parallels to the Jewish struggle for independence, I would support them.

Probably not. The Palestinian struggle for independence does have strong parallels to the Jewish one. Compare Palestinians today to Jews prior to 1948.

In both cases, a group has been largely dispersed from its ancestral land. In both cases, returning to the ancestral land is forcibly prohibited. In both cases, some members who do live in the ancestral land are subject to foreign occupation.

How is the case of Jews then more strongly justified than that of Palestinians today?

[eugenekop]

Oleh, how can you convince anyone of the justice of the Israeli cause if you have no theory of justice, and if you don't have the goal of convincing others, what are you doing on the forum?

[Oleh Hadash]

First, you aren't doing a great job convincing neutral parties. With the exception of the rabidly pro-Israeli American public, virtually no nation on Earth supports Israel's policies.

These are the same nations that were complicit in or looked the other way while were being exterminated. So I don't really give a damn what you or your nation thinks. Jewish refugees from the Holocaust were turned back by your vary nation to the camps. So again, I don't really give a damn about popular opinion. It's the consequence of being an ultra-minority in this world, where Jews constitute a fraction of a percent of the global population. Our interests and rights will always be marginalized in the realm of world opinion.

Second, Arabs haven't traditionally been anti-Semitic. Historically, they have been less anti-Semitic than Christians. So, to the extent that they are "outright anti-Semitic" now, you need to ask yourself why? And since they have changed their attitudes in the past, could those attitudes be changed again, in the opposite direction?

Well, you don't know anything about Arab history or culture, or the Jewish experience under Arab rule. You're just parroting the same bullshit that I come across in every discussion forum regarding this, trying to suggest that somehow everything was peachy until the arrival of Zionism. Put simply, aside from the fact that the Arabs were less anti-Semitic than the Christians (which is hardly an achievement, as you're trying to suggest), the entire paragraph above is false. I also love how prevalent anti-Semitism among the Arabs now needs to be inquired about. You and I both know that you are trying to place the blame for anti-Semitism on the Jews themselves, you might as well be honest with your own assertions. It's our fault because we seized our national rights in our homeland, I get it.

Probably not. The Palestinian struggle for independence does have strong parallels to the Jewish one. Compare Palestinians today to Jews prior to 1948.

None whatsoever. But then, it's not like knowing nothing about these events would stop you from pretending to know something, right?

Don't waste your time replying, Eran. I don't have the patience to continue with someone such as yourself. Stick to philosophical arguments with your ideological leanings and continued mental masturbation.

Oleh, how can you convince anyone of the justice of the Israeli cause if you have no theory of justice, and if you don't have the goal of convincing others, what are you doing on the forum?

Who says I have to convince anyone? What the hell is a "theory of justice"? You're just going on with endless gibberish. I don't need to rely on broad principles when I have a very deep knowledge of these specific events. I am able to explain things with much more clarity than depending on broad platitudes. What the fuck happened to you, man? You're like a libertarian robot who is completely detached from reality. It's sad. But then, it's unsurprising considering that you're a Johhny-come-lately to politics.

[eugenekop]

I don't need to rely on broad principles when I have a very deep knowledge of these specific events.

So were all events in the Zionist history justified in your opinion? Or are you simply comparing Zionism to other national movements and Israel to other countries? Is justice relative in your view?

[Eran]

Israel enjoyed great popularity in the world before 1967. Rather than find endless excuses for why "the world hates us", why don't you see what everybody else seems able to - that Israel is responsible for the only long-term military occupation by a democratic nation in the world?

You and I both know that you are trying to place the blame for anti-Semitism on the Jews themselves

Actually, I am blaming anti-Semitism on Israel, not on Jews.
The logic is very simple. Israel works hard to equate being Jewish to supporting Israel. It does that, of course, in the ways that it finds convenient when it appeals to Jews abroad to support Israel. Israel also positions itself as the state of the Jews. It is thus little wonder that many people around the world tend to associate Jews with Israeli policies.
That association, together with understandable opposition to Israeli policies (see military occupation above) translates naturally, if not logically, to anti-Semitism.

It's our fault because we seized our national rights in our homeland, I get it.

It is your fault because you "seized your national rights" (whatever that might mean) at the expense of a people who already lived in the land you considered your homeland. And because you continue to subject those people to military occupation, primarily to placate a small group of politically-powerful extremists.

[Typhoon]

No, it is both irrational and unhealthy.

Only if we try to consign the nation to insignificance but that would be a huge disservice to the nations historical role in the world, the consequences its existance and the situation in which it finds itself today has for our collective future.

Interest is hardly due to just recent trends (its irrelevant but personally I could not name anyone of standing active on the issue), Israel and the Palestinian issue are the focus of the Middle East and a huge trigger for a wide range of security concerns that affect Europe, because if there is going to be a flash in the pan you can bet your bottom dollar it will be related in some way to the Middle East. I would not say it is the most important issue on the publics agenda but everyone is entitled to an opinion on it and I think everyone has a vested interest in the amicable resolution of the problems of the region, you cannot afford to go turtle on Isreal and Palestine.

When considering also the UK's ethnic diversity and the great humanitarianism of the British public its entirely understandable that such a long running issue should demand such attention and that members of the public would try to encourage the goverment to take positive moves on the issue.

[Dave]

Yeah, I'm calling shenanigans.

The entire issue is based on Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, which is a non-issue in terms of European security interests. They do occasionally intersect with some wider geopolitical issue (e.g. recent shitshow in Egypt), which is not really well-served by involving one's self in the conflict.

You bring up the UK's ethnic diversity and humanitarianism, cutting closer to the core of the issue. The UK has imported ethnic diversity (Jews and Moslems) that has a stake in the issue, and the mental disease of humanitarianism is a major problem in the UK (and other countries).