#this conflict has been going on for 75 years | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

steveyockey · 7 months

Text

I paid $5 to access séamus malekafzali’s latest substack on palestine, here’s the full text,

It is easy to be lulled into a state of complacency, even with military occupation.

Israel’s occupation of Palestine has gone on longer than many of us on Earth have been alive, now going on 75 years. The levels of that deplacement, blockading, and violence have ebbed and flowed over years and decades, but that hand around the neck has always remained, even if how much it constricts has a tendency to loosen and tighten. Over 200 Palestinians have been killed by Israel this year in its occupation. News bulletins of them dying, oftentimes teenagers, come up through the headlines of Palestinian newspapers and channels as often as the weather. These deaths at the hands of Israeli security personnel are not isolated incidents, with soldiers materializing on roadsides and at checkpoints as unfortunate coincidence. They are constant spikes in the waveform of an incessant low-grade hum of humiliation, imprisonment, and destruction that has made daily life a forced agreement to constantly exist on the precipice of death.

This framing is not meant to be a tired retread of the conflict between Israel and Palestine or the nature of the Israeli occupation. This is meant to be a bulwark against the inevitable framing of this latest battle unfolding around Gaza, as it will appear in the Western media in the days to come.

There is a tendency, a deep-set one, to report Israel and Palestine as two countries that are on roughly the same playing field internationally, as you might report on a war that might involve Israel battling against a place like Jordan or Egypt. This kind of coverage obscures how deeply interlocked Israel’s military operations are with the fabric of the Palestinian society.

In the West Bank, settlements and checkpoints have made Palestinian land into a kind of comical archipelago, where in addition to being separated from Gaza by a huge land border, they are also separated from traveling to communities only a stone’s throw away from them without going through significant anguish. In Gaza, while no Israeli soldiers walk the streets, all their land borders are essentially sealed, their ports almost completely blockaded. Israel’s continued occupation has been so pinpoint and precise that its planes have gone as far as bombing bookstores, and its restrictions did not let up even when the COVID-19 pandemic reduced one health organization to carrying only as many tests of the deadly disease as could fit in a car.

This is not a matter of moral justification; one does not need to constantly busy themselves with having to make a full ideological conversion before understanding this. This is a matter of cause and effect.

What is the logical expectation, regardless of politics, ideology, culture, and creed, when a population of people is thrust into conditions that can only be described as an open-air prison, where every individual is a criminal in the eyes of the military occupying power regardless if they pick up a rifle or not, because there is supposedly always the threat that they will one day?

These are the basic conditions that have preceded the initiation of Operation al-Aqsa Storm this morning. As dawn broke on the morning of October 7, only one day after the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, Hamas’ military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, launched a military operation of unprecedented scope in its history. Hamas fighters would not only attempt to enter Israeli territory proper with ground troops, already in of itself an intensely bold action (though not without precedent in the past decade). This operation would be a combined incursion into Israel by both land, sea, and even air. Ground forces would cut the border fence into settlements surrounding Gaza, speedboats would make landings in southern Israel, and fighters from a newly-inaugurated paraglider division would fly over the border fortifications and then further inland.

Threats of an invasion of Israeli territory proper have been a staple of speeches from Hamas and Hezbollah and groups like it for years. There was a long-standing perception by outside observers that it was fanciful. An intentionally lofty piece of propaganda that fires up supporters while the real military wheeling and dealing is done under far more subtle and controlled terms, as with most militant organizations. After all, no Israeli-administered town, the ones occupied in Palestine during the initial 1948 war, had ever been taken in any war against the Jewish state since its creation, even by a combined force of multiple Arab national militaries.

That notion now can no longer exist.

At sunrise, Hamas fired a gigantic barrage of rockets into Israeli territory, a staggering 5,000 in the first wave alone. As Israeli military and police forces were distracted by fires and rocket destruction in residential areas of the country, Palestinian forces in Gaza proceeded to make their primary move.

After the sun rose, Hamas cut through the border fence surrounding Israel and sent both fighters on foot and on motorcycles into Israel. Images released by the group seem to tell a story in frozen figures. Israeli soldiers, strewn dead, caught by surprise, one having even rushed out so quickly that he put on his military gear but no other clothes except his underwear. An even grimmer story could be found in one of the IDF military dormitories, where an entire room full of soldiers had been massacred, only having perhaps seconds earlier gotten the alarm that Hamas had breached the perimeter, many of them seemingly mid-way through getting out of bed.

From there, Hamas made unprecedented move after unprecedented move. Hamas fighters moved as far north into Zikim, built on the former Palestinian village of Hiribya, and moved as far east as Ofakim, built on the former hamlet of Khirbat Futais. The Erez Crossing, for years the only legal border crossing that Israel operated with the Gaza Strip, came under full Palestinian control. Sderot, a city where Israelis had once gathered on couches dragged to high peaks to watch the bombardment of Palestinians, now found themselves facing down Palestinian fighters in their own streets.

An additional shock would come in Israel’s initial response. Amidst cataclysmic scenes like hundreds of ravers in the desert near Gaza fleeing on foot, neither the Israeli president nor the prime minister spoke in those early hours in the morning.

The Israeli high command, despite the continuous insistence of Palestinian factions that they would one day attempt to take the fight into Israel itself, had become complacent. They, like many observers of Israel-Palestine, believed the occupation they had constructed could go on forever, unburdened by the need to adapt. Israeli soldiers after all were now more used to sniping reporters and unarmed protesters than engaging in military conflict. Entropy was what was propelling the military occupation complex of the Jewish state, not a wholly active effort.

Despite an ungodly amount of Western military equipment, highly advanced anti-aircraft systems programmed to shoot down thousands of rockets, an international reputation for tenacity and strategic knowhow, and multiple victories against Arab nations again and again and again, all of it ended up being useless against a Hamas fighter flying in on a box fan and a parachute.

This failure is two-fold, and both are closely related. One is the expectation that things could go on as before without addressing the root of the issue (that being a military occupation of an entire state), and the other in expectation that those being occupied had no capacity to learn from experience how Israel’s military strategy operates, people who could then going on to capitalize on that knowledge.

There is a fundamental flaw in the perception of Western powers toward the Middle East in general and Arabs in particular that because the groups fighting with Israel or the United States are irregular, bereft of highly professional uniforms and dedicated gigantic military headquarters, that they do not have the same ability to strategize and to confront the forces that are occupying their countries. Flashes of how faulty this thinking is rear their head again and again, from Iraq to Afghanistan and everywhere in-between and around, but still the idea, unspoken as it may be, remains that they are fundamentally unequipped compared to the might they are fighting against. But Hamas has military strategists of its own, ones that understand the asymmetric situation they are dealing with, and ones that understand what the actual capabilities of Israel are, versus what their perception is.

The perception of Israel’s invulnerability versus what has actually been displayed today could not have been more different. Instead of being forced to immediately pull back, in essence making today a raid, Hamas has instead actually contested several Israeli settlements, which are still being fought over at time of this writing many hours after the initial incursion from Gaza began. A single Israeli soldier captured and held in Gaza used to capture the Israeli imagination for years; now there are believed to be not only tens of soldiers captured by Hamas, but tens of Israeli civilians as well, all now being held within the Strip. Hamas has also brought Israeli military vehicles back into the Strip, the novelty of working IDF equipment now under Palestinian control a source of celebration within the territory. Over 100 Israelis are believed to have been killed in the first day of Hamas’ attack, and nearly 1000 injured, a shocking early casualty count in an ongoing conflict where casualties on the Palestinians’ side are usually far more lopsided.

Israel’s response so far to Hamas’ operation has been to escalate rhetorically, with Netanyahu now calling this a war, and escalating its usual military strategy with Gaza, with carpet bombing now on an intense, concentrated scale. At the time of this writing, almost 200 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza in only a few hours, with that number expected to rise significantly in the days to come. Already, news has come in of Israeli planes having leveled Gaza’s second-largest building, the Palestine Tower, which housed a plethora of media offices, in scenes reminiscent of Israel’s bombing of another tower block of media offices in 2021 that infamously took out the local bureau of the Associated Press.

As fighting continues into the night in ways never seen before since 1948, the question remains: after all these decades, why now?

The ostensible justifications of what the clincher was that sparked this operation are innumerable, but two appear to be most clearly illuminated: the recent increased activity of far-right Zionists at the al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem (hence the name of the operation itself), but just as well the indications that the Saudi Arabia and Israel may be close to a normalization deal, which would be the largest such development in the Abraham Accords yet. Hezbollah mentioned this operation as being a “message” and a “decisive response” to Arab nations pursuing the idea of normalization with Israel. Still, it is important to recognize that pinning the undertaking of a completely gigantic operation of this scale as just a simple message to Saudi Arabia would be reductive. As the Los Angeles Times’ international correspondent Nabih Bulos says of the matter:

“To pretend that Hamas did this to be a spoiler of KSA-Israel normalization is just downright epic in its navel-gazing nonsense.”

What is important to always return to is that eternally governing line above everything: the low hum of constant occupation, and who has been causing its spikes. Israel’s government, its most far-right in its history, has been on the warpath almost immediately from its inauguration, with figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, now thrust to the forefront, doing everything large and small to provoke a Palestinian response. The hope is that the inevitable Palestinian response can mobilize the Israeli society, that it can be swiftly defeated by the Israeli military, and that the Israeli state can use such an opportunity to impose its sovereignty over what little of Palestine governed by Palestinians remains, and perhaps even what lies beyond it.

But that formula relies on the Palestinian side only accepting being provoked, themselves having no strategy of their own outside of firing rockets and yelling on television. Military occupation breeds a feeling of annihilation, but that annihilation is enclosed with it inevitable feelings of rabid and desperate hope, inspiring within irregular groups desires to try things never tried before. These are not always guaranteed to be successful: one may look at Aleppo when rebel groups managed to come together and break the siege on the city in the final stages of the battle, only for it to fall in the months to come anyway. Nevertheless, there is a real perception within Israel, communicated out to the world by its media and by its intelligentsia, that it is a nation on the verge of internal collapse, brought to the precipice by far-right forces it has let fester for decades without envisioning its eventual conclusion.

What does looking at how Israel is faring now communicate to Palestinian factions in Gaza? What do young people in Gaza, who make up 47% of the Strip’s population, imagine might lie ahead for them as they see these events unfold? What does a Hamas fighter imagine might be possible when, as the writer Josef Burton says, he exits a 25 by 7-mile space he’s never left in his entire life?

#reading #palestine #from the river to the sea 💗#I’ve debated caving and giving séamus my money many times before and today was like well. okay 👍🏻

438 notes · View notes

crumb · 3 months

Text

please tell me you guys watched that video Noah Schnapp put out trying to backtrack and save his pathetic career. Please listen very carefully to the language and words he uses. He's choosing his wording VERY carefully in order to save his career and try to pacify those who support Palestine without actually denouncing genocide or zionism. "I feel my thoughts and beliefs have been so far misconstrued..." babe you were yelling from ig post to ig post about being pro israel, calling Palestinians terrorists, and being a proud zionist. How has that been misconstrued?? "I only want peace and safety and security for all innocent people affected by this conflict" He makes sure to use the qualifier 'innocent' several times in the video when referring to Palestinians, victims of a genocide not a conflict. But as we know, zionists don't see Palestinians as innocent so who is he talking about? This kind of tentative language helps him try to appear like he actually cares about Palestine while still condemning hamas without addressing the actual root of the issue—israel and the IOF. "We all hope for the same things..." Do we? You're a zionist. Zionism is settler colonialism and based in white supremacy. Please be more specific on what you hope for. "...That being, those innocent people being held hostage in Gaza be returned to their families. And equally hope for an end to the loss of innocent life in Palestine..." Zionists LOVE to go on and on about the hostages without mentioning the very real danger those hostages face from israel and the IOF bombs themselves. Israel is carpet bombing Palestine indiscriminately when they very much have the tech to make extremely detailed and targeted attacks. Did you see the way they targeted the specific apartment unit in Lebanon? In Gaza they're wiping out whole city blocks. Israel and the IOF don't actually care about the hostages. If they did they wouldn't be razing Gaza and boasting about their plans to use the land for beach condos. If israel and the IOF actually cared about israelis, why are they basically using the Hannibal Directive? Especially at the music festival on October 7th where the IOF killed a number of their own civilians. If israel cared about the hostages, why aren't they willing to release the hundreds of Palestinian hostages they have who are being jailed illegally and without charges? 'oh but they did! They released some during the pause so they could get hamas to release some israeli hostages' yeah and then the IOF rounded up and captured more Palestinians than they released that very same day. "...I think anyone with any ounce of humanity would hope for an end to the hostility on both sides. I stand against any killing of any innocent people" Once again with the manipulative qualifiers 'both sides' and 'innocent people'. How can you expect an occupied people who have been living through apartheid and genocide for 75 years to not eventually fight back? To not understand why October 7th happened you have to be either completely uneducated about even the most basic history of Palestine and/or so deeply entrenched in propaganda and denial that it doesn't even matter if you do know about the history because you truly believe you deserve an ethnostate on a piece of land that has inhabited several diverse groups over thousands of years. It was never a land of 1 singular homogeneous group. To want it to be that, is actually insane.

#noah schnapp #palestine #stranger things

218 notes · View notes

incorrect-riordanverse · 6 months

Text

the problem with all these white authors like rick riordan who are revealing their stances on the israel-palestine apartheid is that they barely do anything but virtue signal when they claim “i’m on the side against war” “i’m anti-violence” “i abhor terrorism.” zero people are going to disagree with you. zero people believe what hamas did is justified. zero people think israel shouldn’t have a right to defend itself against terrorism. but that isn’t what israel is doing when they collectively punish all of palestine, who doesn’t even have an official army. when rick riordan says some wishy-washy bullshit about the violence suffered on both sides of the conflict, and words his whole dumbass blog post like it’s violence that is in any way equal, that literally helps no one. in fact, it’s so damn negligent of the 75 years of violence that palestine has suffered and been oppressed for. yes, there are innocent civilians in israel who are suffering, no one is disagreeing with you. that doesn’t erase the fact that israel is a disgusting state that has used state-sanctioned violence on a systemic scale since its conception, and the oppressed people have responded to that in violent retaliation (because OBVIOUSLY they would). israel is built on the subjugation of palestine, there is no equal suffering between the two.

#ricky when i catch you ricky #so fucking disappointed with rick and aveyard and gaiman and brown and tjr and the list goes on #it makes me so damn mad. israel doesnt need your support to genocide palestinians #was thinking about buying chalice of the gods but im probs not going to for now #maybe until i can get it secondhand. but idk if i even care to read it atp #riordanverse #rick riordan #free palestine #percy jackson #pjo #hoo #heroes of olympus #toa #trials of apollo #correct riordanverse #rewriting #what is happening to innocent israelis is horrible. but i find it funny how the world only cares when its an israeli person #suddenly every innocent palestinian who has died since israel’s conception is flattened by history to somehow be on equal terms #10000 palestinians have died since 2008. its not equal at all.#how can u say that the attacks in gaza have reached genocidal proportions and then still talk abt suffering of israel like its equal???#‘What can I do? I will continue to write books—‘ oh my god shut up #‘I will resist the urge to demonize entire groups of people.’ YAWN #‘ I will call for less violence not more violence. 🥺🥺’#‘ And when asked whose side I am on I will tell you I am on the side of humanitarianism—‘ OH MY GOD SHUT UPPP

313 notes · View notes

slyandthefamilybook · 4 months

Note

they're not dismissed because they live in "the bad country" they're dismissed because any solution they might pose, for the vast majority of them at least, will fundamentally involve preserving the state apparatus of israel, which is an inherently oppressive force. the two state solution is not justice. don't twist this into a call for the murder of the israeli population. that is explicitly not the goal. it is a demand to dismantle the fucking government system of a settler state that has spent 75 years committing genocide. if your leftism was worth anything you would believe that israel should be abolished. if you don't, your allyship is shallow and will only lead to electing people who will still do genocide, but with better pr so you can go back to ignoring it. if you really give a shit, genuinely ask yourself if the solution you have in mind would actually stop the genocide of Palestinian people, or if it would just slow it down a little, and answer the question honestly. if you can't do that, fuck off

I predicted this. I saved this to my drafts 3 days ago

here's that response

there are a lot of people who seem to think that peace would be bad because it would involve Palestinians cooperating with the Israeli government. They believe the government should be spurned at every moment. Any action taken by the Israeli government is inherently one-sided and therefore it's categorically impossible to reach an agreement that's mutually beneficial and respects the dignity and autonomy of Palestinians

I hear this a lot in discussion of the UN Partition Plans. "Oh, so you want victims of violence to just roll over for their oppressors? You can't just steal someone's land and then offer it back to them!" To which my response is always "this is better?". Can you honestly look me in the eye and say that whatever lopsided colonial apartheid agreement you're imagining would've been made in 1948 would've been worse than the situation we have now?

It displays a really limited understanding of how geopolitics works. Countries aren't just a government and a set of borders. A country is also a people and a mechanism through which that people can interact with other peoples. You can't just point at a country and say "they're doing bad things, we should get rid of them". That's how America has functioned for the past 150 years and I thought we all decided that was bad. Dismantling a country doesn't solve your problems, it just creates new ones. "Burn it all down and start over" won't bring back the dead. It won't honor their deaths or make them any more worthwhile

Every time Hamas attacks Israel, Israel gets stronger. The right thrives off of conflict. It's why they don't want to give people free healthcare. When people suffer, it strengthens their positions. Every time Israel is attacked it generates more support for the military, in the people and in the Knesset. The IDF gets more soldiers, more rifles, more tanks. It drives the Overton Window further to the right. The Israeli government starts borrowing more money from the US, starts getting sent more foreign aid, further entrenching their economic dependency. The only reason Netanyahu has stayed in power for so long is because Israel keeps getting attacked. Israel gets hundreds of millions in military aid from the US, a country that has made killing people a science. You're not going to defeat them in open battle. People have been trying for 75 years with no success

I dislike the Israeli state as much as I dislike every state (which is a not-insignificant amount). But I also understand that states are massive webs of economy, policy, international trade, and agreements and treaties. If every member of the Israeli government stepped down tomorrow with no plan, the country would be thrown into chaos and millions would die. You can't say you want to destroy the apparatus of a country that is currently at war, while also claiming you want its citizens to be safe. That's not how that works. You claim that the majority of Israeli leftists want a two-state solution (something I don't believe I've ever said I support), but if that the case you don't have to throw your weight behind those people! There are also leftists who want anarchism, and a no-state solution. There's a vast diversity of thought and pretending that there isn't doesn't help anyone

I notice that in your decrial of people who are actually trying to help, you don't offer an alternative solution. You say you want to dismantle the Israeli state, but how do you plan to do that? I assume from your tone that you're not yourself Israeli, so how do you plan to affect change? You can pressure whoever is the leader of your country to stop sending aid to Israel, but Israel has a domestic economy as well. The worst you'll do is send them into a depression. And if you are somehow successful in cutting of Israel at the windpipe, what will you do when people begin to starve? When people are kicked to the curb because they lost their job? Will you be proud of yourself for sending 9.5 million people into a humanitarian crisis? Does your plan to end suffering involve making other people suffer instead?

We live in a statist world. As much as you or I dislike it, that's the reality we have. You can aspire to a better system, you can set your sights on a world in which there are no states, no governments, no militaries, and no borders. But you can't work within that framework before it's applicable. You can't eat raw cookie dough because you want it to eventually become a cookie. Liberalism won't save us, but it might stop the bleeding

#ask #anonymous #also I never said anything about Palestinian liberation being a call for Israeli genocide? people just love to make up a guy to get mad at

148 notes · View notes

girlactionfigure · 30 days

Text

Some hard facts no one will tell you, but if you care about truth, you’ll want to know.

Let’s start with the most fundamental lie you’re being told.

“Israel occupied an Arab Palestinian state and stole their land.”

Sit down for this.

Such a state never existed in the history of the world. Don’t believe me? Try to find a date that the Arab Palestine was established. Try to find out who the president was. What currency did they use? What was their national anthem?

I’ll save you the time.

It never existed.

Onward….

The next blatant lie is “Israel occupied Gaza before October 7th, which is why Hamas attacked.”

Really?

Here. I’ll help you.

Open your web browser. Open Google. Type in “The Disengagement.”

2005. Israel forcefully removed 10,000 Israel from Gaza, dug up its dead (Yea, you read that right!) so Hamas wouldn’t rape (Yes, that’s a thing. Hamas raped corpses on October 7th.) the dead bodies, and handed the Palestinians Gaza on a silver platter for them to build a state.

The Palestinians pretty much immediately elected Hamas to govern them and chose a terror state over what could have been paradise.

There were zero Jews in Gaza on October 6th.

That’s not an opinion. It’s an indisputable fact.

Next…

Genocide. People love to use that word when describing the war in Gaza.

So there are a few ways to address this.

First of all, the numbers everyone keeps quoting are from Hamas, a terrorist organization that raped little girls and burned families alive.

Have you considered that maybe they’re lying?

But you know what? Let’s go with Hamas. What ridiculous number are they up to? 30,000? 40,000? You know what? Let’s go with 50,000.

50,000 dead in Gaza? Sure. How many of those were terrorists? Because according to the Gaza Health Ministry, out of those tens of thousands, zero of them were terrorists.

Cool. Makes sense…

But forget the numbers. Just kindly explain to me why Israel has lost hundreds of its soldiers in Gaza. Why didn’t Israel just attack from the air and flatten Gaza if genocide was what Israel was after?

How long would this war take if Israel didn’t send in soldiers and just dropped bombs on Gaza? Spoiler: It would have ended on October 8th.

Finally, do you know how those numbers, again, even according to Hamas’ fake numbers, compare to other wars and conflicts in the world? Syria, for example.

If the numbers in Gaza are so microscopic compared to other wars, why is it that you haven’t heard about a genocide going on anywhere else but Gaza?

“Ceasefire now!”

Here’s a little secret for ya.

There was a ceasefire! Wanna know when? On October 6th. Then Hamas broke it and attacked Israel.

Want a ceasefire? Great. So do I. Right after Hamas returns all the hostages and surrenders.

If you’re calling for a ceasefire and looking at Israel, you must be confused. Israel has offered a ceasefire so many times in this war, all of which Hamas rejected.

We all want a ceasefire. Don’t look at Israel. Look at Hamas who broke the ceasefire then proceeded to reject offers for a ceasefire over and over.

Ok, moving on…

“Jews love to pull the antisemitism card. There is no antisemitism. It’s just anti Zionism.”

Really now…?

Because antisemitic attacks, against Jews, not Israelis, are up over 300%.

Kindly explain to me why Jewish influencers are getting thousands of comments about the war when they haven’t even stepped foot in Israel.

Kindly explain to me why synagogues are being vandalized and attacked.

Kindly explain to me why Jewish events need extra security or why Jewish speakers require body guards.

Kindly explain to me why there are marches around the world in which thousands chant antisemitic chants about Jews, not zionists.

I’ll wait for your explanation.

Ok, next.

“Israel is ethically cleansing Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and has been for 75 years.”

Fascinating.

So if that were the case, you’d expect the Palestinian population to be on a sharp decline.

Wanna take a guess how many “Palestinians” (added the quotes because they didn’t call themselves that till Arafat hijacked the word that previously just meant Israelis.) were in Israel in 1948 and how many there are now?

Take a guess.

5,462,888. That’s how many Palestinians there are now. ()

You know what? Forget numbers. Here, I’ll give you a visual.

Does that look like ethnic cleansing?

Want to know what real ethnic cleansing looks like? Go choose any Muslim country and notice how many Jews lived there 50 years ago and how many live there now. That is ethnic cleansing.worldometers.info/world-populati…

“Israel is an apartheid state.”

That’s so interesting because I was just watching an interview with a member of Knesset, Israel’s parliament, who is not only a Muslim Arab, but he’s also anti Zionist. That means he opposes the existence of Israel and yet, he has a seat in the parliament.

If Israel was an apartheid state, why is every road sign in Israel written in Hebrew and Arabic?

If Israel was an apartheid state, why are there Arabs who are judges in Israel?

If Israel was an apartheid state, why do Arabs, Muslims, and Christians have total freedom in Israel?

If Israel was an apartheid state, why are there Arab doctors, lawyers, soldiers, actors, athletes, and CEOs in Israel who are Muslim?

Israel must really suck at this apartheid thing. But since there are so many people out there who are experts in apartheid, maybe some of them can train Israel to up its apartheid game…

🤣

Moving along…

“Give them a state. They deserve a state. If only they had a state, the terror would stop.”

Wow, how did we not think of that?

Oh wait, I forgot one thing.

They had a state given to them once or twice. Or 15 times.

1937, 1947, 1967, 1991, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2019, 2020.

Perhaps they don’t want a state…

What else we got…?

“End the occupation and the “Resistance” will end.

First of all, let’s just clarify some terms. Resistance. What is legitimate resistance?

Because Hamas beheaded babies, raped girls and old woman, burned families alive, and committed other unspeakable sexual crimes and they also made sure their family members watched their loved ones get raped.

Is that valid resistance to you?

But let’s address the premise.

Put on your logic hat for a second.

If occupation —-> terror

Then logic dictates

No occupation —-> no terror

Right?

So if I show you that Arabs were massacring Jews before any so-called occupation, this whole argument falls apart, right?

What if I showed you that there was Arab terror against Jews before there was even a state of Israel for them to oppose?

1929. Hebron. Arabs massacred Jews.

Great. Glad we cleared that up.

Next…

“Israel is lying about October 7th. There was no rape and Hamas only attacked soldiers. The rest of the people were killed by Israel.”

Um. Where do I even begin?

Ya know what? I can’t even. Go watch the GoPro footage. Go listen to Hamas who is so proud of what they did.

So you don’t believe Israel and you don’t believe Hamas. Got it.

Must be nice to live in a fantasy world.

“Israel is indiscriminately killing Gazans.”

Wow, had no idea.

So is Israel strong and therefore should act with restraint or Israel so weak that even though it’s killing indiscriminately, the numbers don’t reflect that.

Shouldn’t there be hundreds of thousands of dead Gazans if the mighty Israel is just trying to kill as many of them as possible?

Make up your mind. Is Israel strong or is Israel weak? It can’t be both.

Cmon you’re better than that.

Let’s see, what’s next…

“Islam is a religion of peace and the only reason there is so much radical Islamic terror in the world is because of Israel.”

Awesome. So it has nothing to do with the Quran encouraging violence, right?

Cool cool.

I’ll just leave this here.

Don’t worry, we’re nearing the end…

“Israel is a white colonial state that wants world dominance and is only starting with Gaza.”

Wow, so crazy how I didn’t know.

So how many wars has Israel started? I would assume all of them, since Israel is the aggressor.

How about none? Not a single one.

Israel has never started a war and attacked an enemy first.

Maybe those same people can teach Israel how to be better colonizers.

Also, you don’t have to spend more than 24 hours in Israel to see how many “Not white” people live there.

Ok, I’ll stop here even though I can continue for hours.

Stop spreading lies about Israel. Words matter and if you stand against Israel, you stand with rapists and pedophiles.

History will remember that.

Besides, siding with the Jews, history will show, is the smart thing to do.

Otherwise you join ancient Egypt, Rome, Greece, Nazis, Soviet, Babylonian, and so many other empires who messed with the Jews and are now extinct.

This isn’t just another war. This is a war between the dark forces of radical Islam and the western world and all that it stands for.

This is good vs evil and there is no nuance.

• • •

Hillel Fuld

#Israel #Palestine #October 7 #Facts

134 notes · View notes

workingclasshistory · 10 months

Photo

On this day 75 years ago, 5 July 1948, the UK National Health Service (NHS) was founded, on the principle that medical treatment should be provided according to need rather than the ability to pay. During World War II, to motivate millions of people to sacrifice and dedicate themselves to the war effort, the government promised reforms to benefit working class people after the war was over. Conservative MP Quentin Hogg had warned Parliament that 'if you do not give the people social reform, they are going to give you social revolution.' Sure enough, after the war ended, servicemen returning home, and others, began demanding better conditions, backing it up with direct action, like a huge wave of squatting. The NHS was part of a package of reforms introduced following the conflict to ensure social peace. But almost right away, it came under attack. Legislation to bring in prescription charges was introduced by the Labour Party in 1949. Then fees for dental treatments were introduced, and ever since the free, socialised service has been under attack from successive governments who have gradually introduced more charges, marketisation and privatisation. And it's up to us, the working class, to defend it. More information and sources: https://stories.workingclasshistory.com/article/10531/foundation-of-the-nhs https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=656335616539657&set=a.602588028581083&type=3

266 notes · View notes

the-p-in-lgbtqa · 3 months

Text

Um hi hello, can I say a lil something? I don't have a big xitter audience so i hoped i can reach people here by tags.

So first thing's first, I'm Middle Eastern, muslim country muslim family, raised well aware of the conflict in Palestine since i was big enough to hear and understand.

So ...you guys have been pestering celebrities about it! Trying to get them to comment on it huh?

I know you all mean well! But you're...doing it wrong.

You're pushing the wrong people. The "Spreading Awareness" level has passed; now the entire world are aware of it. It's been 75 years! Everyone knows about this war.

These actors actresses singers and models? Their job is to look pretty. They're mildly wealthy. They don't have the power to help. They can't do anything for Palestine with their millions of followers anymore!

You should change your focus for the people who are REALLY powerful. Who can do something. Go attack the parliament, the embassy, your presidents! I don't know, you know your own country better. Especially USA and Britain, they're what's keeping israel in power.

Believe me and don't attack me for this.

I didn't specify above, but I'm iranian. Less than a year ago we were the focus of the news. I thank you for tweeting and posting i do but... It didn't change anything. Actually it's worse. It's gotten more dreadful than it's ever been in history, you guys can't imagine. Your loud voices didn't save us. Because the world's highest powers didn't want us to be saved.

So please please change your focus to the right people. Actually go out to where those people in power are. Social media can only do much

#this was in my head for some time but the post was triggered by Georgia Tennant #michael sheen #also #neil gaiman #palestine #ghaza #israel #georgia tennant #david tennant #stranger things #فلسطین #غزه

139 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 1 month

Text

youtube

By: Douglas Murray

Published: Feb 24, 2024

Like a number of ‘anti-colonialists’, William Dalrymple lives in colonial splendour on the outskirts of Delhi. The writer often opens the doors of his estate to slavering architectural magazines. A few years ago, one described his pool, pool house, vast family rooms, animals, cockatoo ‘and the usual entourage of servants that attends any successful man in India’s capital city’.

I only mention Dalrymple because he is one of a large number of people who have lost their senses by going rampaging online about the alleged genocide in Gaza. He recently tweeted at a young Jewish woman who said she was afraid to travel into London during the Palestinian protests: ‘Forget 30,000 dead in Gaza, tens of thousands more in prison without charge, five MILLION in stateless serfdom, forget 75 years of torture, rape, dispossession, humiliation and occupation, IT’S ALL ABOUT YOU.’ It is one thing when a street rabble loses their minds. But when people who had minds start to lose them, that is another thing altogether.

I find it curious. By every measure, what is happening in Gaza is not genocide. More than that – it’s not even regionally remarkable.

Hamas’s own figures – not to be relied upon – suggest that around 28,000 people have been killed in Gaza since October. Most of the international media likes to claim these people are all innocent civilians. In fact, many of the dead will have been killed by the quarter or so Hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets that fall short and land inside Gaza.

Then there are the more than 9,000 Hamas terrorists who have been killed by the Israel Defence Forces. As Lord Roberts of Belgravia recently pointed out, that means there is fewer than a two to one ratio of civilians to terrorists killed: ‘An astonishingly low ratio for modern urban warfare where the terrorists routinely use civilians as human shields.’ Most western armies would dream of such a low civilian casualty count. But because Israel is involved (‘Jews are news’) the libellous hyperbole is everywhere.

For almost 20 years since Israel withdrew from Gaza, we have heard the same allegations. Israel has been accused of committing genocide in Gaza during exchanges with Hamas in 2009, 2012 and 2014. As a claim it is demonstrably, obviously false. When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, the population of the Strip was around 1.3 million. Today it is more than two million, with a male life expectancy higher than in parts of Scotland. During the same period, the Palestinian population in the West Bank grew by a million. Either the Israelis weren’t committing genocide, or they tried to commit genocide but are uniquely bad at it. Which is it? Well, when it comes to Israel it seems people don’t have to choose. Everything and anything can be true at once.

Here is a figure I’ve never seen anyone raise. It’s an ugly little bit of maths, but stay with me. If you wish, you might add together all the people killed in every conflict involving Israel since its foundation.

In 1948, after the UN announced the state, all of Israel’s Arab neighbours invaded to try to wipe it out. They failed. But the upper estimate of the casualties on all sides came to some 20,000 people. The upper estimates of the wars of 1967 and 1973, when Israel’s neighbours once again attempted to annihilate it, are very similar (some 20,000 and 15,000 respectively). Subsequent wars in Lebanon and Gaza add several thousands more to that figure. It means that up to the present war, some 60,000 people had died on every side in all wars involving Israel.

Over the past decade of civil war in Syria, Bashar al-Assad has managed to kill more than ten times that number. Although precise figures are hard to come by, Assad is reckoned to have murdered some 600,000 Arab Muslims in his country. Meaning that every six to 12 months he manages to kill the same number as died in every war involving Israel ever.

There are lots of reasons you might give to explain this: that people don’t care when Muslims kill Muslims; that people don’t care when Arabs kill Arabs; that they only care if Israel is involved. Allow me to give another example that is suggestive.

No one knows how many people have been killed in the war in Yemen in recent years. From 2015-2021 the UN estimated perhaps 377,000 – ten times the highest estimate of the recent death toll in Gaza. The only time I’ve heard people scream on British streets about Yemen has been after the Houthis started attacking British and American ships in the Red Sea and the deadbeat idiots on the streets of London started chanting: ‘Yemen, Yemen, make us proud, turn another ship around.’ Because like all leftists and Islamists there is no terrorist group these people can’t get a pash on, so long as that terrorist group is against us.

I often wonder why this obsession arises when the war involves Israel. Why don’t people trawl along our streets and scream by their thousands about Syria, Yemen, China’s Uighurs or a hundred other terrible things? There are only two possible conclusions.

The first is a journalistic one. Ever since Marie Colvin was killed it became plain that western journalists were a target in Syria. Not eager to be the target, most journalists hotfooted it out of the country. Some who didn’t fell into the hands of Isis. Israel-Gaza wars by contrast do not have the same dynamic and on a technical level the media can applaud itself for reporting from a warzone where they are not the target.

But I suspect it is a moral explanation which explains the situation so many people find themselves in. They simply enjoy being able to accuse the world’s only Jewish state of ‘genocide’ and ‘Nazi-like behaviour’. They enjoy the opportunity to wound Jews as deeply as possible. Many find it satisfies the intense fury they feel when Israel is winning.

Like being fanned on your veranda while lambasting the evils of Empire, it is a paradox, to be sure. But it is also a perversity. And it doesn’t come from nowhere.

"From the water to the water, Palestine is Arab."

This is the actual genocide.

#Douglas Murray #Israel #hamas terrorism #hamas terrorists #palestine #palestinians #genocide #ethnic cleansing #israel genocide #gaza genocide #palestinian genocide #genocide myth #antisemitism #genocide lie #religion is a mental illness

58 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 3 months

Text

Many thousands of civilians have reportedly been killed. The number of people displaced from their homes is well into seven figures. Densely populated urban areas have been reduced to rubble. Supplies of electricity, food, and water have been cut off. Hospitals have come under attack. Many of those fleeing, injured, or dead are children.

I could be describing Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which has raged on for almost two years now, or the terrible human costs of Israel’s military offensive in the Gaza Strip following the horrific Hamas attacks on Oct. 7. But I am referring to a conflict that has received much less international attention: the civil war in Sudan that broke out last April. Even as one lethal war captures the world’s attention, others roil on in the background.

Unsurprisingly, given its geopolitical significance, Ukraine has received considerable attention in the West, where leaders have been quick to condemn Russia’s war crimes. The new conflict in the Middle East has dominated headlines over the past couple of months. But Sudan’s crisis has gone woefully underdiscussed, like many others that for various circumstantial, political, or geographic reasons seem to matter less to the international community.

The West likes to think it has abandoned the racist habit of ascribing different value to human life in different places. We profess our respect for international law, which codifies the principle of equality. But in practice, our behavior does not always reflect this. Accusations of double standards from non-Western counterparts sting precisely because they have a point.

This is not to advocate for a zero-sum redistribution of attention and diplomatic energy from one conflict to another. Nor is it to say that we should care any less about innocent people killed, for example, in Kharkiv than those killed in Khan Yunis or Khartoum. Instead, more than 75 years after the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international community needs to rediscover the tradition of humanitarian universalism. We must avow in word and deed that all human lives possess the same value and that the killing of civilians is unacceptable wherever it occurs.

Never before in recent memory has this been more urgent. The world has entered what David Miliband, the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, has called an “age of impunity.” War crimes often go unpunished. Nations increasingly disregard the laws of war: Torture, sexual violence, acts of collective punishment, and indiscriminate destruction of civilian homes and services are tragically common.

In a fragmenting international order, old mechanisms such as naming and shaming no longer work. Multilateral peacekeeping operations are in decline. These days, when wars do end, it is more often the result of one side vanquishing the other than a negotiated settlement. This new disorder arrived gradually—as the optimism of the immediate post-Cold War era gave way to new wars, power shifts, and then global economic crisis in the 2000s—and then accelerated in the early 2020s.

Wars are now more frequent, they are lasting longer, and they are killing more people. In 2022, more than 200,000 people died in state-based conflicts globally—the highest death toll since 1986 (excluding unilateral acts of violence such as the Rwandan genocide). Mass civilian casualties in recent years include the massacres of Tamils in Sri Lanka; the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in Yemen; and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in Ethiopia’s Tigray region. Such conflicts are forcing more civilians to flee, which is one of several factors that has driven the number of displaced people worldwide to a record 114 million.

Open Society Foundations, the philanthropy I run, provides funding to several of the largest humanitarian organizations to support their work on these overlooked conflicts. We also fund a range of advocacy and policy groups working to bring attention to the roots of these crises and mobilize the political will to address them. But this work can feel like a drop in the ocean. It needs more funding and scaled-up operations, particularly at a time when there is less news coverage of international conflicts, as media outlets have fewer resources to send foreign correspondents to distant war zones. When these conflicts are out of public sight, they too easily become out of mind for officials and politicians.

The time has come, then, for a new universalist global campaign for solidarity with victims of conflict everywhere that reestablishes the norm of equally valuable human life. This may seem like an obvious principle, woven as it is through the constitutions of multilateral institutions such as the U.N. But it is evidently getting lost in today’s world.

Civil society activists capable of crossing national and partisan divides should lead this campaign. They should cooperate with existing multinational institutions, such as the U.N.; nongovernmental organizations, such as ONE Campaign and Amnesty International; and far-sighted cultural and media figures with the reach needed to build momentum.

This global campaign should demand deeper pools of core funding for emergency aid, especially from groups of national governments, ensuring that aid responses do not depend merely on media attention or the largesse of individual governments. It should challenge both media and government to widen their attention spans and scope for empathy. And it should also demand swifter multilateral responses to crises, including by pressuring the U.N. Security Council to speak out immediately for basic humanitarian principles rather than deliberating for weeks.

Perhaps most fundamentally, the campaign should draw in a network of civil society groups, cultural leaders, and new generations of human rights champions to proclaim: no more hierarchies of civilian suffering, no more double standards, no more selective blind spots.

In an age of multiplying and interlocking crises, the international community must find room for solidarity for more than one or two benighted groups at a time. Global civil society should convene, whether in person or online, to launch this new campaign and reassert fundamental but increasingly sidelined principles of equality, solidarity, and shared humanity. As the English poet John Donne put it: “Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.”

76 notes · View notes

heartcountry · 6 months

Note

i've been following you for a couple years now. i'm sending you, your loved ones, and all palestinians so much love. i think about your account nearly every day and wonder what you're up to, or if you're alright

i'm really thankful for your account as it gives me and so many others insight into your situation. you're in my heart always

thank you so much. to be honest i’m not alright. this has been one of the worst weeks of my life. thank you for gaining the insight 🤍 please lend it to others when you can. palestinians are facing an ethnic cleansing and have been for 75 years and and as tired as i am of the horrifying justification of the slaughter of palestinians i am also tired of the insidious lie that it is a complex issue where both sides are “wrong” or even worse just commonplace conflict in the middle east as if the destabilization there wasn’t at the hands of western imperial powers. please watch the footage of not just this week but the decades long violence that began at the Nakba and continued on. including but not limited to the beating of civilians on the street, the torture of children in prisons, the demolition of palestinian homes, the burning of olive groves, the erasure of entire villages, the removal of palestinian names from the registry, the checkpoints palestinians in the west bank go through everyday where they are harassed by is***** soldiers, the different license plates palestinians have to have on their cars, the imprisonment of anyone who tries to film the atrocities, the death of journalists like shirin abu-akleh and how the i*f stormed her funeral and beat the attendees, a siege on gaza that is filled with palestinians who were displaced from other villages and where is**** controls what goes in and what goes out. i need everyone to really sit with that. can you imagine you are locked into this strip of land while the settlers outside live in your villages and worse your family homes. you are locked in and they are in your homes. i need you to share this with others. we have been denied our history. i have the safety and security of not being there rn but i am still so tired.

84 notes · View notes

jordanianroyals · 6 months

Text

24 October 2023: Queen Rania of Jordan relayed the Arab World’s shock and disappointment at the world’s “glaring double standard” and “deafening silence” in the face of Israel’s ongoing war on the Gaza Strip, emphasizing that, despite the prevalent Western media narrative, “this conflict did not begin on October 7th.”

“Most networks are covering the story under the title of ‘Israel at War.’ But for many Palestinians on the other side of the separation wall and the barbed wire, war has never left. This is a 75-year-old story; a story of overwhelming death and displacement to the Palestinian people,” Her Majesty said. “The context of a nuclear-armed regional superpower that occupies, oppresses, and commits daily documented crimes against Palestinians is missing from the narrative.”

In a live interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, conducted remotely from Queen Rania’s offices in Amman, Her Majesty explained that the people of Jordan are united in “grief, pain, and shock” in response to the staggering civilian casualties of the past 18 days of war.

“We've seen Palestinian mothers who have had to write the names of their children on their hands, because the chances of them being shelled to death – of their bodies turning into corpses – are so high,” Queen Rania said. “I just want to remind the world that Palestinian mothers love their children just as much as any other mother in the world. And for them to have to go through this, it's just unbelievable.”

Conveying Jordan’s position, Her Majesty stated that the country has been very clear that it condemns the killing of any civilian, whether Palestinian or Israeli. “That is Jordan's ethical, moral position. And it's also the position of Islam,” she said, explaining that the religion prohibits Muslims to kill a woman, child, or elderly person, to destroy a tree, or hurt a priest.

The Queen stressed that these rules of engagement should apply to all sides, arguing that Israel is committing atrocities under the guise of self-defense.

“6,000 civilians killed so far, 2,400 children – how is that self-defense? We are seeing butchery at a mass scale using precision weapons,” she said, “For the past two weeks, we have seen the indiscriminate bombardment of Gaza: entire families wiped out, residential neighborhoods flattened to the ground, the targeting of hospitals, schools, churches, mosques, medical workers, journalists, UN aid workers – how is that self defense?”

The Queen went on to state that many in the region view the Western world as complicit in this war through the support and cover that it provides Israel. “This is the first time in modern history that there is such human suffering and the world is not even calling for a ceasefire,” Her Majesty said. “Many in the Arab world are looking at the Western world as not just tolerating this, but as aiding and abetting it.”

Elaborating on the plight of Palestinian people, Her Majesty explained, “There are over 500 checkpoints scattered all over the West Bank. You have a separation wall, which is deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice, that has separated the territories into 200 disconnected enclaves. And you've seen the aggressive expansion of settlements on Palestinian land, and those have interrupted the territorial contiguity of the territories and has deemed an autonomous, independent Palestinian state not viable.”

The Queen also mentioned that Israel is in violation of no less than 30 UN Security Council resolutions, which “require it, and it alone, to act to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, and to stop the settlements, the separation wall, and the human rights violations.” She also underscored that Israel has been designated as an “apartheid regime” by Israeli and international human rights organizations.

Commenting on military solutions to conflict, Her Majesty said: “Victory is a myth that politicians make in order to justify immense loss of life… There can never be a resolution except around the negotiating table. And there's only one path to this: a free, sovereign, and independent Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the state of Israel.”

The Queen also indicated that allies to Israel are doing it a disservice by giving it blind support. “Expediting and expanding the provision of lethal weapons to Israel is only going to expand this conflict. It’s only going to prolong and deepen the suffering,” she said.

Criticizing the role of the media in covering the current conflict, Queen Rania noted the double standard presented when Western interviewers demand that people representing the Palestinian side immediately issue condemnations, requiring them to “have their humanity cross-examined and present their moral credentials.”

“We don't see Israeli officials being asked to condemn, and when they are, people are readily accepted by [claiming] ‘our right to defend ourselves,’” she said. “I have never seen a Western official say the sentence: Palestinians have the right to defend themselves.”

The Queen also discussed the oppression of Palestinian expressions of solidarity in Western democracies, commenting that when people gather to support Israel, they are exercising their right to assembly, but when they gather for Palestine, they are deemed terrorist sympathizers or anti-Semitic.

“Freedom of speech is apparently a universal value, except when you mention Palestine,” Her Majesty said.

(Source: Petra)

#Queen Rania

68 notes · View notes

steadfastabiha · 6 months

Text

YOU STAYED SILENT WHEN PALESTINIANS WERE BOMBED AND KILLED THIS YEAR, LAST YEAR, AND EVERY OTHER YEAR. YOU STAYED SILENT WHILE PALESTINIANS ARE FORCED TO LIVE IN AN “OPEN PRISON” WITH NO WHERE TO GO. NO FOOD, MEDICAL OR WATER SUPPLY.

YOU STAYED SILENT AS CHILDREN WERE KIDNAPPED FROM THEIR HOME AND HAD THEIR HOMES DEMOLISHED AND THEIR FAMILIES TORN APART. YOU STAY SILENT EACH DAY A PALESTINIAN'S RIGHTS ARE TAKEN AWAY WITH NO REGARD TO THEIR HUMANNESS. BUT YOU OUTRAGE WHEN ISRAEL EXPERIENCED WHAT PALESTINIANS HAVE EXPERIENCED FOR THE PAST 75 YEARS?

YOU WANT PALESTINIANS TO STAY QUIET AND BE THE PERFECT VICTIMS? TO JUST SUFFER AND STAY OPPRESSED? THE OPPRESSED HAVE A RIGHT TO RESIST AND HAVE A RIGHT TO EXIST! IF YOU ARE SPEAKING UP IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL THESE LAST WEEKS AND HAVE NEVER SPOKEN UP IN SUPPORT OF THE DAILY ATROCITIES TAKING PLACE IN PALESTINE. SIT DOWN. YOUR PERFORMATIVE ACTIVISM IS SHOWING. HAMAS WAS FORMED IN 1987. PALESTINE HAS BEEN UNDER ZIONIST OCCUPATION SINCE 1948. ISRAEL JUST LIKES USING HAMAS AS THEIR “EXUSE” SO THEY CAN PORTRAY THE OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE AS A "CONFLICT" OR A "WAR".

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN AN OCCUPATION AND A SETTLER COLONIAL PROJECT. NOTHING MORE. WESTERN COUNTRIES SENDING WEAPONS, WARSHIPS, AND FIGHTER JETS TO SUPPORT ISRAEL. AMERICA FUNDS ISRAEL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. MUSLIM COUNTRIES ARE JUST MAKING PHONE CALLS TO EACH OTHER. AT LEAST SEND PROPER HUMANITARIAN AID TO GAZA. WHEN ISRAEL BOMBS HOUSES. WHEN ISRAEL KILLS JOURNALISTS. WHEN ISRAEL KILLS CHILDREN AND WOMEN. WHEN ISRAEL BOMBS HOSPITALS WHERE NOT JUST THE INJURED ARE BUT WHERE PALESTINIANS ARE TAKING SHELTER! WHEN ISRAEL STEALS LANDS. WHY DON'T YOU CALL THEM TERRORISTS? I SERIOUSLY DON’T UNDERSTAND! OR IS IT BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT BROWN OR MUSLIM.

A MUSLIM NEVER LOSES HOPE. IT HURTS RIGHT NOW WHEN THE WORLD DOES NOT EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE OUR CHILDREN DYING, AND THE PEACE THEY ADVOCATE FOR IS A RETURN TO APARTHEID AND SUBJUGATION. BUT A MUSLIM IS NEVER HELPLESS. ALLAH SWT IS THE LISTENER AND THE HELPER OF EVERY SINGLE MUSLIM BROTHER AND SISTER OUT THERE. IT MAY TAKE TIME. BUT THE TRUTH WILL PREVAIL. AND THIS, THIS IS WHY THERE'S A JUDGMENT DAY. THERE HAS TO BE. BECAUSE NO ONE GETS AWAY WITH THIS.

🇵🇸 FREE PALESTINE AND CEASEFIRE NOW!

75 notes · View notes

tinyozlion · 8 months

Text

“True Peace” and “Total Pacifism”: the Peacecraft Ideals & the Point of it All

(buckle up, this is a long one)

Capital “P” Peace is by far the most crucial concept in Gundam Wing.

It is a simple word that’s tossed around a lot and it pulls far too much weight for one little noun. The range of topics covered beneath this straining umbrella of a term includes everything from “a general sense of unthreatened well-being”, to “unilateral demilitarization and disbandment of global military rule”. The fault here lies not with translation difficulties or simplification for the ease of dubbing; real-world discussions of pacifism and peace are plagued by a lack of nuanced vocabulary as well. Alas, in this instance, it is the English language itself that has conspired to prank us.

Nevertheless, while overuse of the word is certainly frustrating at times, I find that when broken down and decoded, what may appear to be a lot of vague, flowery statements about the Virtues of Peace™ is actually a strategic political debate.

…Mostly. This is complicated somewhat by the fact that there are a significant number of characters for whom making flowery statements about the Virtues of War™ is a hobby and a way of life. So yes, indeed, sometimes convincing someone with Extreme Eyebrows that mankind can find value outside of eternal, violent conflict IS a priority that must be considered.

Part of why I think Gundam Wing had such a profound effect on its young audience when it came out is that it managed to cover most of an Intro to Ethics course in 49 episodes and a movie. It was a lot of kids’ first exposure to philosophy and politics, and it communicated its ideas by way of exciting robot fights and aspirationally cool characters. Gundam Wing made it easy to care about complex, abstract ideas and how they might affect the world– ideas that, at least for American audiences in the early 00’s, were well in advance of what they were likely to encounter in public school.

…Now, maybe you read that and found yourself thinking: “Come on, ‘peace is better than war’ is a pathetically simple dichotomy that no one needs to seriously debate”-- and I would love to give that to you. But as an American, I must beg you to consider that in the USA we have been trying to decide for decades whether an average of 75 school shootings per second is enough school shootings to consider implementing basic gun control.

Never underestimate the ability of a simple idea to become so polemicized that it becomes impossible to talk about or resolve without a total public paradigm shift– and now consider that learning how to cause a paradigm shift is exactly what Gundam Wing is all about.

--There Is No War in A.C. 195--

For the majority of cases, when a character talks about war or peace, they mean specifically “between the Earth Sphere and the Space Colonies”-- as in, “an end to the conflict we have been embroiled in for roughly 20 years”.

This rather misleadingly makes it sound as though the Alliance is at war with the Colonies– but in AC 195, the Colonies do not have a military to go to war WITH. The Colonies aren’t engaged in a war with the Earth Sphere Alliance, they are under military occupation by the Earth Sphere Alliance.

When the Gundams first come to Earth and begin attacking the Alliance/OZ, the immediate question is: is this a declaration of war by the Colonies?

The burden continuously falls on the Colony ambassadors to prove that the Gundams are not politically associated with them. For all intents and purposes, they consider the retaliation of the Gundams to be acts of terrorism– which they must! Because otherwise they will indeed be at war with Earth, something the Colonies absolutely, 100%, definitively cannot afford. The Colonies are space bubbles. They can be popped. They can be blockaded. Earth provides the Colonies with the majority of their resources; declaring war against it would be insanity.

All this makes “peace with the Colonies” a very lopsided affair. Since officially speaking the Colonies have no military power, and since the nations of Earth that had previously allied with them were wiped out, negotiating for peace would require placing full trust in the Alliance. In other words, it would mean relying on the oppressor to stop oppressing purely as an act of goodwill.

This is why the “Peace Negotiations” proposed by the Alliance military leaders was at best a naive gesture that would have broken down at the first conflict of interest. The Alliance was responsible for the oppression of the Colonies to begin with– choosing to withdraw is a matter of their convenience; there is nothing to negotiate, because they have all the power. At worst, its “diplomacy” would simply be a farce designed to put a benevolent face on continued exploitation.

–Which is exactly what happens under OZ’s rule: “peace” is obtained in name only, while nothing about the power dynamic changes.

Here’s the trouble with settling for peace by any means: Every single military organization in Gundam Wing expresses a desire for world peace.

The Earth Sphere Alliance Military began as a peace-keeping measure. OZ claims it is correcting the Alliance’s failure to bring about world peace. Romefeller insists that it will bring about peace through a firm, authoritarian hand guided by the traditions of the ruling class. White Fang asserts that earth is responsible for all wars, and that peace can only be attained by destroying it.

There are many, many roads to “peace” that end in totalitarianism, to peace removed from liberty, to Pax Romefeller. In practice, White Fang’s approach would probably be the most effective at bringing about total, ever-lasting peace– if the result is all you care about, then sure, mass-extinction is one way to go!

But assuming we value peace because we ALSO value life and happiness and art and puppies and things like that, then we need to set the acceptable standard for peace somewhere above the eternal calm of a dead universe.

--The Peacecraft Ideals--

So, having established that “world peace by any means and any cost” is not a reasonable, humane, or moral outcome to strive for, we must consider “True Peace” to be a different outcome from “peace”.

As defined by Relena and ideals of the Sanc Kingdom, True Peace must be non-exploitative. It must require no threat of violence to enforce. To establish it, the means of military conflict must be removed and abolished, and the sources of human dispute must be addressed by means other than force of arms. Most importantly, True Peace requires fostering a transformational attitude towards peace– one that empowers the collective will of the people to both achieve and maintain peace.

To summarize, the Peacecraft plan of action is: 1) Remove weapons that are the means of military conflict, 2) Remove the primary sources of military conflict, and 3) unite people in the desire for peace, and to uphold peace.

It’s this last point that is so crucial to events that the entirety of the final narrative arc hinges upon answering the all-important questions: how does one foster the desire for peace, and bring about a massive paradigm shift that can change the course of history? and what price is one willing to pay for it?

“Absolute pacifism [which is understood as a maximal and universal rejection of violence and war,] is an ideal. Some versions of absolute pacifism go so far as to abjure the idea of personal self-defense. Other absolute pacifists may allow for personal self-defense while rejecting the impersonal and political violence of war. Almost every defender of absolute pacifism recognizes the difficulty of attaining the absolute ideal.” “The world often presents us with difficult ‘kill or be killed’ choices as in the question of self-defense or war. Absolute pacifists may hold that it is better to be killed than to kill. But such a choice may be impossible for many of us to make. Pacifists will often argue that this way of describing a situation—as one where the choice is ‘kill or be killed’—usually presents us with a false dilemma: often there are other nonviolent alternatives to either killing or being killed. But when presented with such a stark choice, absolute pacifism may require self-sacrifice.” --“Pacifism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Andrew Fiala, 2006

--Pulling back to real-earth for a moment: there is a wide and continuous spectrum of ethical, religious, political, and practical attitudes to be found spanning the distance between Absolute and Conditional forms of pacifism, but despite its similar name, the Total Pacifism of Gundam Wing is not a synonym for Absolute Pacifism:

There is no indication that Relena is against self-defense, nor that she insists on absolute non-violence; she’s a staunch defender of the Gundam pilots, after all, and they’re practically the face of violent resistance. She admits that in past history there were conflicts that could not have been avoided, and that one cannot maintain civilization without some degree of enforcement of principles. We can safely assume (especially after her change of heart in Endless Waltz) that she supports the proportional defensive reaction of people who are resisting oppression. But killing people is not, or at least very rarely, justifiable in her worldview (allowing for the fact that both Relena’s character and her philosophy evolve over the course of the series), and warfare never is.

“Peaceful intercourse is easily rejected by those who assert the benefits of the martial values, who claim that a war brings out the best of people and of a society, that wars heighten humanity s perception of itself in the great existentialist quest between life and death, that war relieves the monotony of consumerism and so on. This highlights one of the most difficult aspects of pacificism, that the goal of peace and of tranquility may not suffice human nature. The persistent nagging of bellicosity, of adventure, personal and collective glory, whether it derives from something genetic or culturally deeply embedded in most societies, remains an easily revitalized clarion call to war. The culture of peace is often very shallow, taking many generations to produce, and even then can be swiftly eroded with atavistic rhetoric.” --“Pacifism”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Alexander Moseley

(...Remember what I said about needing to convince certain people that mankind can find value outside of eternal warfare?)

Relena’s Total Pacifism is primarily an anti-military political stance; it is only secondarily a philosophy of nonviolence. Over the course of the series, Relena confronts over and over again the notion that many people are drawn to the act of fighting for various reasons, ranging from the vindictive to the instinctual. It is not an impulse she shares or understands, but she recognizes that it exists. She is ready to admit that even within Total Pacifism, a world totally without violent desires may be impossible– but it is not necessary that people accept a world where those desires give rise to military conflict.

–Something that is worth noting is that the Peacecraft’s plan for total pacifism does not include a rubric for solving conflicts that do arise, only how they should NOT be solved.

In the series, the single method that Relena espouses for solving disputes is through “dialogue”-- something that is repeatedly pointed out to be a flawed and inadequate form of conflict resolution. “Dialogue” cannot solve all of humanity’s problems, that is unquestionably true– but neither is it a bad place to start as a baseline. More to the point, of all the possible conflicts and struggles that humanity might encounter in the vast expanse of the future, it’s futile to try and codify the best method of solving all of them based purely on abstract theory and best guesses.

Again, the Peacecraft ideal is only secondarily a philosophy; its primary goal is not to tell people HOW to solve all future problems, its goal is to solve ONE problem, and that one problem is war.

“Disarmament” Means Mobile Suits

Removing the possibility of military conflict is a preliminary for Total Pacifism, and therefore it is necessary to implement universal disarmament– and “disarmament” as it pertains to the conflicts of AC 195 means primarily the discarding and prohibition of Mobile Suits.

The reason for this is not simply because Mobile Suits are dangerous weapons. After all, Mobile Suit warfare is hardly the biggest or baddest type of war the human race has developed– leveling a city with Mobile Dolls couldn’t possibly be worse for people than leveling a city with an atomic bomb– the main thing Mobile Suits allow people to do is fight wars using infantry in space.

Not only do Mobile Suits allow for space combat, they also grant very granular control of combat zones and civilian populations without substantial risk to the troops– which is great if you’re trying to enforce military rule in the Colonies. Space fortresses and missile satellites are also threats of course, but where a missile attack would simply destroy or damage a Colony, Mobile Suits allow military forces to take direct control of it, the area around it, its resources, its populace; everything, inside and out. This is why disarmament of MS has to be a primary concern for de-escalating conflict between Earth and the Colonies: as long as Mobile Suits are still in the picture, the potential threat of domination by the Earth Sphere remains, and nobody in the Colonies is going to relax.

The Other Pacifists of A.C. 195

“Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. A common and natural result of an undue respect for the law is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, aye, against their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power? […]The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, &c. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well.” —“On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”, Henry David Thoreau

The Sanc Kingdom is not the only proponent of pacifism in the Earth Sphere.

In the Autonomous Mountain Region of former China (helluva mouthful, you'd think they'd have given themselves an actual name), for instance, we’re shown another civic leader who gathers support for demilitarization and objects to Alliance occupation. Like the Colony leader Heero Yuy and King Peacecraft before him, this unnamed leader is assassinated, and his independent nation taken over by the local branch of the Alliance military.

It’s only a brief footnote in the series, but it’s important because it demonstrates that the dream of pacifism is not dead on Earth, despite how often it has been violently silenced by the prevailing world order. It speaks to how powerfully the message spread by Yuy and the Sanc Kingdom resonated with people that their ideals continue to generate new martyrs; we see it also in the nations surrounding the Sanc Kingdom who are willing to stand up against Romefeller and refuse to participate in military affairs.

The existence of these nameless “Autonomous Regions” and “Independent Nations” shows us that there is at least some degree of successful resistance against the Earth Sphere government (whether that be the Alliance or OZ); it’s also clear by statements from Duke Dremail that these independent entities are considered a tremendous threat.

In a system of global military rule, to renounce the military is to essentially declare one’s withdrawal from the existing government– something that surprisingly doesn’t elicit immediate reprisal under Romefeller’s oligarchy, at least when the seceding nations offer no armed resistance.

But the rise of pacifistic nations on earth is nevertheless regarded with as much suspicion and hostility in A.C. 195 as it was during the Sanc Kingdom’s first bid for Total Pacifism, and while Romefeller, unlike the Alliance, is either unwilling or lacks the unilateral authority to quash dissenters without justification, it is more than willing to manufacture justifications to remove political rivals from the playing field. But what’s important is that they still need that manufactured justification– Romefeller, like any authority structure, requires a certain level of assent and cooperation in order to maintain power.

The practical implication of multiple countries withdrawing from the Earth Sphere and/or refusing to support the global military, is that the Earth Sphere government has fewer nations to tax and draw on for resources or support, and more places where rebel elements can take refuge. In the long run, a sufficient number of simultaneously defecting nations could mean the collapse of global military rule itself.

Armies and weapons and soldiers don’t spawn automatically on a map. Everything has to come from somewhere, and a global military organization needs to be supplied and maintained by the globe.

Whatever the Alliance’s policies were, it’s safe to assume that OZ/Romefeller inherited and maintained many of them, partly because they were always part of the decision making process, and also because hey, why let a perfectly good global bureaucratic infrastructure go to waste? The Alliance began as a cooperative global peace-keeping initiative; at its root, it was developed from international bureaucracy, rather than an imposed dictatorship. Even after it became the dominating world government, that underlying bureaucratic structure surely remained to some extent. National borders were still recognized, at least as an organizational convenience; the Alliance relied on taxes from the various recognized nations under their control (including the Colonies), as well as the heavily-incentivized funding of the arms industry, tied to the wealthy estates of the Romefeller Foundation, many of whose members were leaders or rulers of different nations themselves. It’s also likely there was some sort of draft for citizens of the Earth Sphere and the Colonies.

Why does this matter? Because in non-violent resistance, particularly in civil disobedience and non-compliance, it’s necessary to find ways to gain leverage that don’t involve offensive combat. In the case of resisting a military oppressor, learning what conditions allow the military to continue operating, and how to disrupt that operation, is of key importance.

Outside of Earth, we’re shown another notable example of disruptive resistance from the Winner family– adamant pacifists themselves, though their sole male heir, Quatre, broke with tradition and chose to fight against OZ using the Gundam Sandrock. The Winner family is in charge of several major natural resource satellites, a primary source of supplies for the adjacent Colonies. When those Colonies allied themselves with OZ and began arming themselves in spite of their past commitment to pacifism, and in spite of OZ’s quite recent manipulative and violent suppression of the Colonies, the Winner family patriarch protested this move vehemently. When it was clear the now-militarizing Colony would continue supporting OZ and intended to begin manufacturing weapons on the natural resources satellite, Mr. Winner removed his support from the Colony– both ideologically and physically, by decoupling the resource satellite; a move that cost him his life at the hands of OZ.

A Glass Kingdom Throws No Stones

The Sanc Kingdom’s existence is based on hope.

It assumes peace (i.e. a state of goodwill and non-conflict) is the natural state humanity longs for, the only condition it can truly flourish in, and therefore it is in everyone’s best interest to pursue. Even those who advocate in favor of war would eventually see the pragmatic benefit of peace– wars are costly, and demand a constant supply of resources and humans to throw into it. If everyone simply acknowledged these truths, True Peace ought to be the inevitable outcome.

This position is largely (but not universally) viewed as naive, idealistic, and ultimately hopeless. Even its proponents acknowledge that the Sanc Kingdom’s ideals are built on trust and air– but they maintain that their belief in that trust is nevertheless of utmost value, for inspiring others to realize what might be possible if that trust were universal.

The Sanc Kingdom’s one defense is its total lack of offense. By removing itself as a potential threat and offering no resistance or antagonism to the ruling power, it minimizes the incentive for that ruling power to overrun and destroy it– but there are no guarantees.

Relena pragmatically warns her students that the Sanc Kingdom will never be a safe place until Total Pacifism is adopted globally. She herself is prepared for the likely scenario that advocating for peace will cost her her life. The tenuousness of the kingdom’s position is fully acknowledged by all– how could it not be? The current Sanc is built on the ruins of the previous generation’s bid for pacifism.

Despite this, the kingdom’s doors are open to all; Relena maintains a supremely generous view of mankind that gives everyone the benefit of doubt, continuing within the same logic that non-aggression will be met with non-aggression. Perhaps more accurately, this policy is her way of insisting that this is how peaceful interactions ought to be; despite the considerable risk they incur, both she and her kingdom stand defenseless in a world of grasping military powers, wielding only her dignity, her public visibility, and a conviction that everyone is capable of choosing respectful conduct.

The Sanc Kingdom is perfectly set up for martyrdom– and it is a very short ride before it gets there.

But the power of Relena’s ideals is not tied to the existence of the Sanc Kingdom– it’s not even tied to her, or the Peacecraft name. The naivety, the impossibility, of pacifism in an era defined by global military rule, is constantly reiterated, and yet it does not disappear.

Even as the bottleneck of war grows tighter and the violence between the ever-fragmenting world powers continues to escalate, the majority of people bearing witness to these horrors look to an alternative that offers hope, as practiced and advocated by a brave girl facing impossible odds.

The more pitched the violence becomes, the louder its perpetrators shout that peace is impossible, while to the people suffering its effects, the more outrageous and unnecessary that violence is revealed to be. The ones waging the wars seem to be the ones generating new reasons for them, their excuses becoming increasingly absurd, their justifications transparently thin.

Is it really so absurd or unreasonable by comparison, to take part in an actionable plan for peace?

“I’m aware that my views may appear to be a little naive to some people, but I wonder why people battle if everyone agrees that it’s foolish to do so? I don’t think that we’re too far from the answer.”

#Gundam Wing #Relena Peacecraft #Sanc Kingdom #After Colony #Gundam Wing Meta #Dorothy Catalonia #Romefeller Eyebrow Brigade #gundam wingtionary #wing watcher's toolkit #parsing post #i can't believe this entry is finally done hallelujah i'm free

76 notes · View notes