#and that even just looking historically being on the palestines side is the right choice

[mooninagust]

my roman empire is that my GRANDMA who only watches tv and doesn't have access to social media gets why we need to stand with Palestine but my chronically online friends and parents who claim to be "so well informed" don't.

#like the fact that my gran knows that there are always two sides #and that even just looking historically being on the palestines side is the right choice #BUT MY PARENTS DONT #and even worse #MY FRIENDS DONT #ppl who are my age #who are so > all for equality < #and all > we need to fix this world < #like girl get a grip #im pissed im sorry #an rambles

[haberdashing]

i get where your last post about nuking gaza off the face of the earth is like...coming from. but just beware people using it to be like "yeah! jews control the media!" bc that's not a good take either... i think the take away should be listen to many different journalists from many different agencies and dont just trust one source of news as your only source. and if you find yourself responding with "so that's why the other side is the sole problem!!" then you are being swayed. there are many bad actors in this with biiiig focus on the United States, the British, and specifically Netanyahu's right wing government, but also shout out to UNRWA, the EU, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iran for throwing their influence in the ring. Like I don't like the IDF either but I feel like that last post might have nazis secretly loving it for it's "jew media control" conspiracy vibes.

Oh absolutely!

In fact, I've been considering making a post about my thoughts on Israel, and I think this ask might be the impetus I need to get that going. (For better or for worse.)

So:

Israel, as the country, is clearly in the wrong here. This is literal war crime. This is literal genocide. Israel and its allies are on the wrong side of history.

BUT:

The Israeli people, by and large, are not to blame for this.

There are a lot of parallels with the American government, actually. Including how normalized the military industrial complex is, how pro-military propaganda is rampant throughout society. So if you're an American citizen like I am, you understand that those in the low levels of the military are by and large victims of the system, too.

Now imagine that the right-wing kooks who claim that our society is under attack, literally... could point to actual wars on our soil only a couple decades ago, could point not to one terrorist attack twenty years ago but an ongoing regime of them, could claim that every historical instance of antisemitism fits into this same pattern and that antisemitism and criticism of Israeli society are one and the same.

And, oh yeah, imagine that everybody who turns eighteen gets drafted in your society. Not some slim fraction like the Vietnam War draft that still gets maligned here (and rightly so), but everybody. (Barring, presumably, those who get excluded for medical reasons?) You have two choices: serve your country in the military, or go to jail. And everybody talks about military service not only as a duty and an honor but as a coming-of-age experience that everybody knows about and looks forward to.

A few brave Israelis do choose jail over the draft, but the vast majority don't. And with that societal conditioning, can you blame them?

Of course, this doesn't excuse the atrocities. But it does help explain them.

And naturally, Jewish people outside of Israel are even less able to take down this system, even less culpable for the harm it causes. And yet Zionism and antisemitism still get conflated. And yet pro-Palestine rallies still include literal Nazis, which makes them hard to approach for... well, anyone who doesn't want to associate with Nazis, but especially literal Jewish people, who might already be assumed to be pro-Israel just because of that fact.

A bit of the Israeli propaganda does seep through to Jewish culture even outside of Israel, admittedly. My mother is living proof of it. I've only ever heard her comment on the horrible things the Israelis go through here, not the atrocities of Gaza. Because those are her people, in her mind, and the Gaza residents... aren't.

And yes, the Israelis don't have a great lot in this either. But it's still a far sight better than that of Gaza residents right about now.

And that "her people" reference? Not entirely rhetorical. I've been to Israel, as has my father, though it's been over a decade in both cases. We have family friends from there. We have friends of friends who are there. Heck, two friends-of-a-friend that I know about, or people at similar levels of not-quite-connectedness, are in the IDF.

Obviously not all Jewish people are connected. I bet my college friend from rural Mississippi would have a different experience, despite also being Jewish. But my mother still keeps in touch with temple friends who can be a close-knit bunch, and there's ties to Israel, including the Israeli military, in there.

So where does that leave me?

I've been wondering that more and more as the days go on.

Am I honor bound to talk to my mother about this, to get her to recognize the war crimes and the genocide being committed by "her people" in Israel? Even if I try, I doubt she'll turn against Israel entirely. But do I still have to try?

Is it okay to wish friends-of-a-friend in the IDF well, even while condemning the actions of the IDF as a whole?

Can I speak up in favor of Palestine without being seen as a traitor to my fellow Jews, and without keeping company with those who see the current situation as a vent for their antisemitism?

How do I, a Jewish American, thread the needle between condemning Israel and supporting my pro-Israel Jewish friends and family?

I don't know. I don't have an answer to this. I really wish I did.

#personal #israel #gaza #idf

[atreefullofmonkiesonnitrous]

Thou Little Tiny Child

Day 12  -  Caroling

*Note that this story includes PTSD and a historical incident of mass murder against children

"This kind of torment is what comes of defying Hell to be with an angel," Crowley bemoans his fate.  Granted the torment in question would generally have been considered mild by hell's standards.  He is currently carrying enough packages that he has to use a minor miracle to keep them balanced.  He's following Aziraphale through the "Angel's Christmas Market" in Hyde Park.   The name isn't a coincidence, Aziraphale had helped get the thing started and absolutely adored it.   Given that it was less than a 10 minute walk from the flat, Crowley couldn't really beg off.  (Not so)  Secretly he's enjoying watching his angel enjoy himself, he always loves seeing Aziraphale happy.  

Still he is about to lose control of the pile of purchases, and the flat was not far away.

"Angel, I think I'm going to nip back home and drop these off.  Won't be a tick."

Aziraphale has caught sight of a stall selling churros, which are still not often to be found in London, and makes a distracted sound of agreement.  Crowley chuckles and heades off in good spirits.  The workings or mortal minds and hearts are strange enough, how much more so those of eternal beings, who have lived through all the lives of mankind.  The mind can be full of tripwires and sinkholes that catch you, even when you think you feel fine, when you are happy even.  Even the triggers can be shifting and changing.  Something as simple as an old, old carol, heard thousands of times before, can suddenly pull the world out from under unsuspecting feet.

Maybe it is all the news on the telly.  No huge prophesy needed to make humans act beastly to each other, after all.  Kids in cages all over the world, in the old places where the only change is who is on which side of the fence, Palestine and China, and places like America that seem determined to make up for the late start.  It is so hard to hear, over and over, they just never learn.  As he walks through the happy market, people celebrating obliviously or defiantly (it looks the same from the outside), he passes several groups of carolers without hearing them at all.  Somehow this song winds through the air, into his mind, and back into memories that have the dull cast of nightmare. Herod the king, in his raging,

Chargèd he hath this day

His men of might in his own sight

All young children to slay.

The bright night market fades into another long ago daytime one.  His bundles fall from nerveless hands and knees go out from under him. He hits the ground hard and there is shouting around him.  (The people shouting and running, parents clutching their children.)  There is chaos around him and he can hear running feet.  (The clatter of armor and nail studded sandals on the stone.)   He needs to get up, needs to move, there is an angelic presence nearby, hands grasp on to him.  (There is an Archangel manifest nearby, if he is caught here he might be destroyed, but he has to do something.)  He fights the grip on him, filled with terror and purpose.  He gathers himself to slid into scales and slither away.  The hands are arms now, encircling him and pinning him.  His terror is rising, there is a voice in his ear, but words have deserted him.  There is a sound like a small snap of fingers, like a crack of lighting and everything goes still.  

"...here, everything is alright.  Crowley, it's just me.  I've got you. I'm here, everything is alright. Crowley, it's just me…"  The words filter slowly into his consciousness.   Aziraphale.  Aziraphale is holding him, fingers carding through his hair, and talking to him.  He opens his eyes slowly.  They are on the bed in the flat, packages scattered around them.  He tries to remember how they got here.  They had been at the market.  Slowly memory trickles back and he groans in embarrassment.  Aziraphale's litany stops.  

"None of that, now, love," the angel admonishes.  "Whatever happened, it wasn't your fault.  You didn't do anything wrong.  You didn't hurt me or anyone else.  Can you tell me what happened?"

Crowley starts to shake his head, but he's never really been able to deny Aziraphale anything.  "I honestly don't know if I can.  I'll try.  It was just a song.  I've heard it thousands of times.  I've sung it.  But this time…"  He shakes his head.  "It just threw me back.  Happens sometimes.  I've been there for a lot of terrible things, we both have."

"And it was a carol that brought this one back?"

"Remember you told me to get out, after He was born.  Whole place was going to be crawling with angels."

"I do remember," Aziraphale says softly.  Crowley nods and licks his lips.

"I was about to leave when Hastur showed up.  Said something was up,  whole lot of killing about to happen, but hell wasn't happy about it.  Mostly kids.  Hell doesn't like killing kids, they're still innocent, go straight up."  He gestures upwards and makes a shhwwwoooP sound.  "They thought maybe Heaven was moving up their timetable, skipping all the miracles and teaching bits and going straight for the sacrifice.  Wanted me to take a look.  Didn't get very close though, Gabriel was already there, getting them out.  But that was it.  Just them snuck out, no help for any of the rest of the people.  Got a kid the same age?  Too bad for you.  It's fine though, going to heaven right?  So no matter if they don't get a life."  He scoffs and Aziraphale winces, it's an accurate representation of heaven's attitude.

"Found a cave under an abandoned house.  Managed to get a few families down there.  Not enough, not nearly enough.  But the streets were full of soldiers by then.  Couldn't risk moving anyone else.  Got them hidden deep inside then just lay in the sun across the doorway.  Nobody in there!  Clearly the lair of a bloody great snake.  Should probably do something about that later.  Not safe around the kids (at least the ones we don't kill today).  The streets were full of people running, screaming, dying.  It's amazing that such little bodies can hold so much blood.  And all I could do was lay there and watch and listen.  Protect the few I had grabbed."

Aziraphale's arms are still around him, holding him tightly.  "You did more good for those people than Heaven.  Because you see them as people, not as assets waiting to be divided.  I think you are the only other one that does, heaven certainly doesn't.  I love you so much, my dear."  

"Hell doesn't either, but leastways Heaven leaves them be, once they get there.  Maybe they are right.  Maybe if Hell ended up with them, I didn't do those kids any favors after all."

Aziraphale shakes his head.  "Not to harp on free will, but they have to make their own choices.  Isn't that why She set this up in the first place?  I know how you feel about ineffability, and I'm not saying it's a choice that anyone ever ought to have to make, but you gave them a chance. What they did with it was their choice."  

"Still.  What good is saving them now, if they only suffer so much more later?"

"The good  is doing what you can, my dear, and giving them the world, while they have it.  The rest is, well, for tonight let us say the rest is a problem for later.  You are too tired for it now, and nothing is changing while you rest."

He frees one arm to pull back the covers on the bed and manovers them both under them without letting go.  Once they are under the covers a miracle rids them of their clothing till they are pressed warm skin to chilled, and soft fingers in his hair and loving words in his ears lull Crowley to rest, his angel set to guard his dreams.    

for @drawlight‘s 31 Days of Ineffables, day 12 Caroling

thanks to @waywren for the beta

#31 days of ineffables #drawlight #good omens #good omens fic #ineffable spouses #ineffable husbands #ptsd mention #the slaughter of the innocents #violence against children #protective!crowley #Protective!aziraphale #crowley (good omens) #Aziraphale

[pamphletstoinspire]

Two Kings, Two Kingdoms (John 18:28-40)

“Jesus responded to the questions of the Roman governor affirming that he was King, but not of this world. He did not come to dominate peoples and territories, but to free men from the slavery of sin and be reconciled with God.” – Pope Benedict XVI

John 18:28-40: They then led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the Praetorium. It was now morning. They did not go into the Praetorium themselves or they would be defiled and unable to eat. So Pilate came outside to them and said, ‘What charge do you bring against this man?’ They replied, ‘If he were not a criminal, we should not be handing him over to you’. Pilate said, ‘Take him yourselves, and try him by your own Law’. The Jews answered, ‘We are not allowed to put a man to death’. This was to fulfill the words Jesus had spoken indicating the way he was going to die. So Pilate went back into the Praetorium and called Jesus to him, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ he asked. Jesus replied, ‘Do you ask this of your own accord, or have others spoken to you about me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? It is your own people and the chief priests who have handed you over to me: what have you done?’ Jesus replied, ‘Mine is not a kingdom of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, my men would have fought to prevent my being surrendered to the Jews. But my kingdom is not of this kind.’ ‘So you are a king then?’ said Pilate. ‘It is you who say it’ answered Jesus. ‘Yes, I am a king. I was born for this, I came into the world for this: to bear witness to the truth; and all who are on the side of truth listen to my voice.’ ‘Truth?’ said Pilate ‘What is that?’; and with that he went out again to the Jews and said, ‘I find no case against him. But according to a custom of yours I should release one prisoner at the Passover; would you like me, then, to release the king of the Jews?’ At this they shouted: ‘Not this man,’ they said ‘but Barabbas’. Barabbas was a brigand.

Christ the Lord: As the liturgical year reaches its conclusion with the Solemnity of Christ the King, by presenting us with this passage the Church shows us the stark contrast between Christ’s Kingdom and all other kingdoms. Pilate is the Roman Emperor’s representative in Palestine. His career as procurator had been marked by violence and political blunders, by which he alienated the Jews he was supposed to be ruling. Though he recognized Jesus’ innocence, he feared further conflict with the Jewish leaders, since that could cause them to denounce him to the emperor. Pilate is the typical earthly king, interested more in his personal career, prestige, and success than in what is true and right. Even when he finds himself face-to-face with the light of Truth itself, his own worldly ambitions blind him to it. We are sympathetic to him because we share his weakness.

Jesus, on the other hand, is fully identified with his Kingdom, the eternal Kingdom, established on the solid but hidden foundations of truth and divine love. His Kingdom is demanding but lasting. It involves obedience to the Father’s will, even at times to the point of sacrificing one’s earthly life. But it is the true Kingdom, the realm of meaning – deep, existential meaning – that abides. For the sake of this Kingdom, Jesus is willing to suffer rejection and injustice at the hands of an earthly king, because he knows that such a crime will only reveal more brilliantly the splendor of his Lordship. We are inspired by him because we know in our hearts that we are called to the same kind of nobility of spirit. We recognize that we cannot serve both Christ the King and the kings of this earth, and we are often torn between the two. Every such moment of decision (and there are plenty of them every day) presents us with a chance to renew our option for Christ, to confirm our citizenship in the Kingdom of God.

Christ the Teacher: Pilate stands face-to-face with the Lord of the universe. They are having a conversation. No one can interrupt them. The cool morning air is refreshing. Pilate is agitated by the circumstances, but he is thinking clearly because it’s still early in the day. Jesus is exhausted from the first twelve hours of his Passion, but his eyes glow with the love and determination that had led him to this hour. His love for Pilate is no less because of his tiredness. He came to earth in order to save Pilate’s soul. Providence has brought them together. Jesus is eager to draw this Roman patrician close to his heart. All the conditions are right for Pilate to detect in Jesus the God for whom his heart longs. Yet he doesn’t. He is in the same room with Jesus, speaking with him, but he remains unmoved. Why?

“Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” Here Jesus teaches us the secret to intimacy with God. Whoever lets himself be led by what is true will be drawn into communion with Christ and will hear and heed God’s ceaseless invitations to follow him more closely. But being led by truth requires humility. It requires recognizing a higher authority than oneself: if I am obliged to discover, accept, and conform to what is objectively true (morally, physically, historically), then I am not autonomous, I am not the master of my universe, I am not God. That act of humility, which frees us from the enervating bonds of selfishness, is hard to make. Our fallen human nature tends towards pride, towards self-sufficiency, control, and dominance. To resist that tendency requires courage. It takes courage to obey the truth and expose oneself to the burning love of God. May he grant it to us all in abundance.

Christ the Friend: “Mine is not a Kingdom of this world.” If it were, our friendship with Christ would be a lot easier than it sometimes is. He wants to lead us along the journey of life in this world towards our eternal home in heaven. Therefore, he often urges us to get up and move along when we are tired. He often asks us to take steep, demanding paths that we would prefer to avoid. But he knows the way, and he knows the destination. Like a true friend, he will never rest until we have reached the fullness of life – even if he has to put up with our complaining along the way.

Pilate: Many things confused me that day, but nothing confused me more than the crowd’s choice to free Barabbas. Barabbas was a typical hotheaded revolutionary, a man who would kill or maim as easy as he would break a stick for the fire. But that Jesus was a noble man, a temperate man, a wise man. He had done nothing wrong. They were envious of him, that’s all. But why did the crowd choose Barabbas? How could they not see that Jesus was a worthy man? I can say this now, but the fact is that I acquiesced to their choice; I made the same horrible mistake. If I had been in Jesus’ place and he had been in my place, I know he never would have turned me over to that crowd. But he wasn’t in my place; I was in my place. Why did I give in? Why didn’t I stand my ground? I wish he hadn’t brought up all that talk about the truth. That disconcerted me. No one believes in truth anymore – that went out of fashion long ago. But when he said the word, it rang in my ears like the single clap of a small silver bell, clear and penetrating. It is still ringing. I can’t stop thinking about it. Why did I not listen to him? Why did I not trust him? Why did I not follow that voice that was speaking so clearly in me? Everything would be different if I had just done what I knew was right! Yet I know I can never undo what I did.

Christ in My Life: Who is my king? Whom do I serve? I want to serve you, Lord, because you truly are the King. But I still tend so much to serve myself. I want people to do things my way – I want to have what I want, when I want it. I want my plans to work out exactly as I plan them. I guess all of this is natural, but you want to lead me to the supernatural realm. Renew my mind and heart, Lord; Thy will be done, not mine…

Every time I have followed your voice resounding in my conscience, I have experienced the peace and the satisfaction that comes from living in harmony with the truth. And every time I haven’t, I writhe and agonize. And yet I still haven’t learned, Lord. I still waffle. How do you put up with me? O Jesus, purify my heart, pour your love into my heart; with the courage of your heart, strengthen my heart…

Mary, I don’t want to be like Pilate. Why am I such a reluctant disciple? I know Jesus; I have been given a share in his mission – what greater privilege could I desire? And yet, sometimes I look at it as if it were a burden. The spirit of self-centeredness and fascination with the trinkets of this world still pulls at me. Mary, teach me to be his faithful friend, his brave soldier. Mother most pure, pray for me…

#two kings two kingdoms

[expatimes]

Eviction of Israeli Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah part of policy

For at least a dozen Palestinian families living in the occupied East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, the threat of eviction from their homes looms over their heads, paralysing any thoughts of the future.

In October, the Israeli magistrate court of Jerusalem ruled to evict 12 of the 24 Palestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah and to give their homes to Israeli Jewish settlers. The court also ruled that each family must pay 70,000 shekels ($ 20,000) in fees to cover the settlers' legal expenses.

The families were given 30 days to file an appeal, but most expressed little hope for a ruling in their favor, saying the Israeli judiciary is no more than an instrument of the Israeli occupation policy of forcibly displacing and erasing the Palestinian presence in Jerusalem.

“Since the eviction order, we've been living with the daily anxiety of not knowing when the Israeli army will come and evict us from our home,” said Ahmad Hammad, a resident of Sheikh Jarrah.

“All of my memories are here. I was born here and my father, aunts, uncles and grandparents all lived in this house. ”

Israeli forces patrol as a Palestinian building in demolished in the village of Sur Baher, which sits on either side of the Israeli barrier in occupied East Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank [File: Mussa Qawasma/Reuters]

'Well-oiled colonial machine'

Sheikh Jarrah, located on the slopes of Mount Scopus just north of the Old City, is home to 3,000 Palestinians, all refugees who were ethnically cleansed from their homes in other parts of historical Palestine during the 1948 Nakba.

The neighborhood is a juxtaposition of affluent and poorer areas, home to the American Colony and Ambassador hotels. But the part where the refugees and their descendants live is marked by unpaved roads and homes that are in disrepair because the Israeli municipality in Jerusalem prevents any kind of renovation work.

The refugees, 28 families displaced from their homes by Israel, were able to relocate to Sheikh Jarrah in 1956 after Jordan, which had a mandate over the eastern part of Jerusalem, built housing projects for them there. An agreement between the United Nations and Jordan stipulated that the families would receive the houses in return for renouncing their refugee status with the UN refugee agency and that after three years the Jordanian government would transfer ownership titles to the families.

However, that did not happen and by 1967, Israel had captured East Jerusalem.

Right-wing Israeli activists place an Israeli flag in support of Jewish settlement activity in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood [File: Ronen Zvulun/Reuters]

According to Grassroots Jerusalem, an NGO that is a platform for Palestinian community-based mobilization, there has been an influx of Jewish settlers since 2001 “who have been responsible for forced evictions and terrorism in the neighborhood”.

According to Fayrouz Sharqawi, global mobilisation director for Grassroots Jerusalem, it is “absurd” to count on the Israeli judicial system to protect Palestinian rights.

“This system is an integral part of the Zionist colonial state, which identifies as a 'Jewish state' and accordingly and systematically oppresses, dispossesses and displaces Palestinians,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Rulings that momentarily suspend eviction or demolition orders serve only Israel, as they create the illusion that it is a democratic state where courts hold the government or army accountable and prevent violations of Palestinian rights,” she continued.

Sharqawi said even in the best-case scenarios, more than 70 years of occupation prove that court decisions postpone but rarely reverse such orders, which are eventually implemented.

“Palestinians, especially in Jerusalem, have to face a well-oiled colonial machine: the Israeli military, bureaucratic and judicial systems, who work hand in hand on dispossession and displacement of Palestinians,” she said.

Evictions part of Israeli 'demographic balance'

For Hammad, he knows the reality all too well.

“I'm not optimistic regarding the appeal,” he said. “I just feel like it's buying more time but only for the inevitable to happen.

“We have all the documents and proof needed,” he added. "But the overwhelming feeling is that of fear and seeing our home being taken away from us and given to settlers."

This Palestinian writer wants Americans to understand how their tax dollars are making his family homeless. pic.twitter.com/2D85iM7BUl

- AJ + (@ajplus) November 26, 2020

Since the 1970s, the Israeli government has been working on implementing a “demographic balance” in Jerusalem at a 70-30 ratio, limiting the Palestinian population in the city to 30 percent or less.

This urban planning has been executed by a number of policies such as land confiscation, displacement, and colonization of Palestinian neighborhoods.

On November 26, the Jerusalem District Court authored the eviction of 87 Palestinians from the Batan al-Hawa area in occupied East Jerusalem's Silwan neighborhood in favor of the Israeli settler group Ateret Cohanim.

The 87 Palestinian residents of Batan al-Hawa have been living in their homes since 1963.

After launching a legal case against the residents, Ateret Cohanim settled 23 Israeli families among 850 Palestinian residents, under heavy security.

Other settler organizations, some funded by individuals in the US, include Nahalat Shimon and the Israel Land Fund.

According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), 689 structures have been demolished across the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, in 2020 alone - more than in any full year since 2016 - leaving 869 Palestinians homeless.

'Irrevocably political'

Mohammed al-Kurd was just 11 years old when Jewish settlers forcibly took over half of his home in November 2009 [File: Jaclynn Ashly/Al Jazeera]

For Mohammed al-Kurd, a poet and writer from Sheikh Jarrah who is currently studying in New York, the evictions of Palestinians, which he describes as “forced displacements”, are not just an isolated event.

“It is a rooting of a sustainable dispossession movement,” he told Al Jazeera.

“We need to always constantly remind people that this is not just some poor Palestinian family [who] for some weird legal reason [is] losing their property. This is [about] Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians all around Jerusalem and neighbouring cities - Palestine at large - who are facing the vicious fangs of a judicial system inherently to displace them.

Al-Kurd was just 11 years old when Jewish settlers forcibly took over half of his home in November 2009 and described sharing it with “squatters with Brooklyn accents” as “insufferable, intolerable. [and] terrible ”.

“They are just sitting in our home, tormenting us, harassing us, doing everything they can to not only force us to leave the second half of hour home but also harassing our neighbours into leaving their homes as part of an effort to completely annihilate the presence of Palestinians from Jerusalem, ”he said.

Hammad, who grew up with al-Kurd, said it is difficult to think and plan ahead for the future.

"I don't know what will happen if they evict us," he said. “This ruling came at a time where life is pretty much as a standstill due to the coronavirus pandemic.

“We're taking this day by day,” he continued. "Even if we decided to pitch a tent outside our house and live there, the Israeli government will not allow it."

Al-Kurd said his family cannot afford to rent a place in Jerusalem, and the only other choice they will have will be to go to the occupied West Bank, where they will lose their Jerusalem residency and not be allowed to come back to the city again.

“That is the larger issue here,” he explained. “It's home demolitions, forced displacements, evictions, but it's also psychological - losing our to enter Jerusalem again.

"The way Israel has created this to look like some kind of a legal problem - it's not, it's irrevocably political."

. #world Read full article: https://expatimes.com/?p=14958&feed_id=20729

#MiddleEast #News #OccupiedEastJerusalem #Palestine

[ratpac-atx-blog]

Painkillers in the Front, and a Knife in the Back: A Tale of Two Housing Programs

A STATEMENT FROM RATPAC-ATX

The Revolutionary Alliance of Trans People Against Capitalism - Austin (RATPAC-ATX) condemns the emergency trans housing app being developed as a tech startup company in our city by “revolutionary”-turned-entrepreneur McKinley Forbes. There is no doubt that emergency housing is a dire need facing trans people, something we recognize in our own work. However, our understanding of addressing the immediate material needs of trans people should never be separated from the long-term struggle for trans liberation.  If we truly desire to combat the scarcity facing trans people, we must recognize the class struggle in which it is taking place. Capitalism creates, upholds, and regenerates patriarchal brutality and scarcity facing trans people, and will continue to do so until it is smashed. It is a system for those who own everything, and built off the backs of those who own nothing. It is a system that can never be for the broad majority of the world’s trans people.

The interests of everyday trans people are completely incompatible with that of the capitalists and their state. The conflict between the makers of society vs. the owners of society is present in every fiber of life under capitalism, and is the foundation of why there is an interest in keeping trans people invisible, down, and dead. This means that even various approaches to addressing the needs of trans people will have a political character. It will side with one camp of the conflict, or the other. It will either advance revolution, or it will serve those who profit from trans oppression. When we see something that claims (or even outwardly appears) to help trans people, but ultimately sides with the enemy camp in the struggle, this is a “sugar-coated bullet.” It is with this understanding that we denounce McKinley Forbes and her startup business. While her business fronts the feel-good image of “helping trans people,” it is actually a product of traitorous actions meant to build her own career. The fact that she continues to call herself a “revolutionary” makes it all the more two-faced on her part.

RATPAC EMERGENCY HOUSING PROGRAM

At the end of March this year, RATPAC announced its emergency trans housing program. It was the first of such programs in our city. It was established on revolutionary principles: it exists not only to meet the immediate material needs of trans people, but to politically equip us with the ability to defend each other, to build community power independent of the capitalist state and corporations, to be by-and-for the community alone, and to be part of laying the foundations of the liberated society that trans people need. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), non-profit organizations (NPOs), and corporate charities build careers off the needs of the people in our city, but they ultimately do nothing to address a system that ensures these needs remain infinitely unmet. There are no careers to be found in siding against the enemy. So, rather than building careers, we address immediate material needs through a program that is part of the political struggle to put a final end to the infinite continuation of scarcity and brutality. We are fighting to provide vetted and sober safe housing, work closely with our housing guests in addressing all aspects of their circumstances, enhance political agency and participation in the militant trans liberation struggle, and offer integration into a comradely network of mutual support and community defense. Because “rights” and the scraps handed out by rainbow capitalist businesses can all be taken away by the capitalists, we fight for power in our communities instead.

MEETING MCKINLEY

McKinley Forbes first reached out to RATPAC in mid March, before the official announcement of our housing program. She told us she had been homeless, accepted a job offer in Austin, and had been directed to us for assistance with temporary housing and relocation. In that first contact, she presented herself as a revolutionary looking to become involved in local struggles and to assist with building up RATPAC. We lined up temporary housing with some local comrades, and one of our members picked her up from the bus station.  Quickly after her arrival, she became a seemingly enthusiastic and dedicated member of our organization, espousing revolutionary principles and dedication to building up our work with Austin’s trans folks including our housing program. Other members invested themselves into supporting her struggles with relocation, and her energy excited members and supporters alike. She participated in flyering teams and was actively engaged during RATPAC’s Month of Stonewall in June.

However, in late June, her trajectory quickly nosedived after having won the first place prize of the Startup Weekend HackOut Event, the prize for which included SXSW (the scourge of Austin) tickets, office space from Capital Factory (hosted in the Omni “luxury hotel” in Austin’s “Innovation Zone” where speculative entrepreneurs are connected with investors), and having her business infrastructure handed to her. She had won the Startup Weekend by, unbeknownst to RATPAC, pitching a prospective business plan for an emergency trans housing app that mirrored similar infrastructure to our housing program but utterly hollowed of its community roots and political content. She informed one member of having won a prize so contradictory to the revolutionary principles that uphold our own work in Austin, to which that member expressed considerable concern and attempted to establish a meeting for her to talk about what was going on. At first, McKinley was open towards that idea, but in the weeks following she mysteriously became less and less available for such a meeting, and was entirely absent from the revolutionary project that she had shown so much enthusiasm for weeks earlier. Without further communication, McKinley began spreading  tech industry publications’ gushing coverage of her new business. The member she had spoken to previously again expressed their concerns and criticisms with how a supposed "revolutionary" who had claimed dedication to the struggles of our city was handling this, to which McKinley never responded. Another member attempted to reach out to her, to which their messages were uncharacteristically ignored. After that, she rather bluntly informed a member of her exit from RATPAC, primarily because of her newfound business. While she assured that member that her beliefs "remained the same as before", the action which gave those beliefs life were now gone. She also expressed that her project was somehow unique in that it was starting in Austin but intended to go country-wide. One has to wonder what she thought the point of her work with us in Austin was.

MORE SHADY CHARACTERS IN A DARK WORLD

The most important aspect of these developments were the opportunistic, career-oriented, and traitorous choices made by McKinley Forbes--but first we should note the grimy entities that have oversaw the establishment process of this tech startup. While the housing program she had formerly claimed dedication to had its roots in everyday Austin trans people, her starting point is immensely different. It was these shady characters that she needed to appeal to, since they made up a large part of the judge's table. The Startup Weekend HackOut was hosted in the affluent Domain area in northwest Austin, in the offices of HomeAway (the main competitor to airbnb in the homestay industry). The weekend is a joint project of LGBTQ capitalist groups and heads of the tech startup industry, bringing in many prospective entrepreneurs from outside of Austin (like McKinley herself only three months before). Of course, prospective startup techies descending upon our city is nothing new. Between 2000-2010, the tech industry market expanded by over 40% in Austin, bringing with it a substantial gentrifying population. However, as Austin’s population grew by ~20% in that time, Austin’s predominantly working class black population was reduced by at least 5% as gentrification pushed folks out of their historic neighborhoods.

HomeAway was not only the host, but the primary sponsor of the event.  As we face rapid urban displacement, Austin’s east side has come to know what the spread of the homestay industry means means: more and more homes stripped of their working class families and turned into “host houses” for short-term rentals oriented towards tourists and business travelers, greasing the cogs in driving property values up. Among HackOut’s other sponsors was Keller-Williams real estate, one of the many entities that are overseeing the gentrification process in the brown working class areas of the eastside, cashing in on the rising property values and despair of local residents. A former everyday brown family home on E. Cesar Chavez is up for sale by them for a cool million bucks! These are also the same folks who are actively attempting to rebrand South Harlem into “SoHa.”  Finally, the “Startup Weekend” is masterminded by Techstars. This was just the local example of their event which takes place all over the globe. Techstars prides itself in being a "diverse company" that seeks to “accelerate” tech industry startups (and gentrification across the U.S. along with it). Aside from their partnerships with cybersecurity providers for the brutal Israel Defense Forces in occupied Palestine, their other projects include traveling Latin America to speak with politicians and tech industry heads about "modern and harmonized legislation between different countries [to] promote the availability of capital” and create new marketplaces for their leaches to stick their fangs.  Among the recommendations was support for collusion between local governance and big money to do such. Given that we’ve seen the effects of such “innovative approaches” by the tech industry in our own city, we can only imagine what this would mean for the working classes of those new target areas to the south of us. This month, their partnership with some folks in the defense industry that are making bank off dropping bombs on people began (including with Boeing)—starting with their “acceleration” of a drones technology startup.

LIES AND BETRAYAL: THE MAKING OF A CAREER, NOT REVOLUTION

However, no matter how skeevy the players are in overseeing the opportunity for her newfound career, the real knife in the back of Austin's trans people is in her own lies and self-serving choices (and which class they serve).  In her recent newfound spotlight in the news rags of the ATX startup industry, she has taken to underhandedly referencing RATPAC’s own housing program, not to offer welcomed criticism of our housing program as it struggles to build, but only to boost her own parasitic career. In one article she claims that RATPAC failed to account for her being “highly allergic to peanuts and cats”. Strangely, the presence of both peanuts and cats in her hosts’ home was discussed with her directly to which she gave assurance of it not being worth seeking alternatives. She claimed there were no other possibilities provided in the housing program, and yet this is not based on any honest investigation on her part. Afterall, she was never involved with our vetting process, nor in working with our hosts past and present (beyond those who she stayed with for a short time). Even more suspicious is the fact that despite being active in RATPAC for months in a time when she no longer had material reliance on the organization (having already established her own apartment and flashy tech industry job in Lakeway), these criticisms were never brought up. This was despite our organization's foundations upon a constant process of internal criticism and self-criticism to hold everyone politically accountable and keep our organization moving forward. Not only is our organization open to criticism, it asks for it directly in our internal operation! It appears that these "criticisms" have magically materialized only alongside her new entrepreneurial career path, and primarily serve to boost her own brand and media spectacle. Sadly, this represents more and more of her general activity as she sells out Austin’s trans masses in the name of careerism (selling-out revolutionary and community-based projects to build a career that fighting capitalism will never offer) and opportunism (swaying to whatever is going to offer the best immediate personal gain rather than having any semblance of principles) to serve herself.

There is something particularly backhanded about someone espousing revolutionary principles while siding against them, especially in the context of our city where there is no shortage of sell-outs and career-builders who see personal opportunities in building top-down hollow "$olution$" to constant devastation while doing nothing to kill it.  Her exodus from RATPAC for her career isn't just us losing a member, but a former member joining the enemy's side of the class struggle on this front. Revolutionary community programs, such as our housing network, stand opposed to the usual model of "assistance" by non-governmental organization (NGOs), non-profit organizations (NPOs), and corporate charities. Our program differs in that it does its best to put the political interests of everyday trans people at the forefront, including above flaunting surface-level numbers “served” like those churned out by careerists looking for corporate and government funding. We recognize that assisting the most trans people possible actually means much more than an outlook that only values serving the most short-sighted needs of the most people with the path of least resistance under capitalism… without any attention or investment into building people power to stop the inevitable unendingness of trans oppression under this system. While these surface-level numbers can give the appearance of benefitting the trans people of our class, this is also content with allowing infinite unmet needs to continue: it creates a cycle by which careers are built up for a few crisis industry aristocrats who make comfortable livelihoods off of the cyclical devastation of trans people under capitalism. Getting a tech start up business handed to McKinley by some of the shadiest motherfuckers in Austin may assist her in having immediate resources for a rainbow capitalist program to spread quickly (and getting to be her own boss, the American Pipedream for most of us!), but only as a hollow careerist shell of the program she feigned dedication to in our city. It takes painstaking work to build up a deep difference in the lives of trans people and RATPAC struggles to get this right ourselves, but people who consider themselves revolutionary have a responsibility to engage in that work regardless of the tides of personal opportunity. This shit won't stop until we stop it, and there is no career to be made in sailing against the winds of a society that produces trans oppression. Something that is empty is going to move fastest, and startups like these get the applause of the entire society they work for, and not against.  At some point our community has to have a basis of coming together to do the necessary work. We are quickly approaching a point, as fascism lurks closer in this country, that siphoning work and energy away from community power is going to mean blood on your hands. McKinley Forbes came to a city where there was a revolutionary community program independent of the capitalists when it came to meeting the material housing needs of trans people while defending each other and getting folks together to fight… and she is now attempting to hand it right back to the ruling parasites in the form of her own career. She looked at all available opportunities for investment, and she chose the one with a paycheck.

WE MUST STAND AGAINST TRANS FLAGS IN THE ENEMY CAMP

Depending on the situation, our relationship to certain resource providers can vary. However, in a situation where it becomes a matter of a fake revolutionary redirecting efforts and potential resources away from a community program independent of capitalism (and aligned with local anti-gentrification groups, revolutionary students, and from-the-people-to-the-people organizations actively in struggle in Austin's hoods) for the sake of building one’s own career, this conflict ultimately embodies escalated class struggle—with one program upholding the interests of everyday people, and the other serving up sugar-coated bullets for the ruling class. NGOs, NPOs, and corporate charities are no strangers to historical campaigns at co-opting revolutionary community programs and political struggles to bring folks back into a non-threatening formation, and the system invests in this process where they are able to. In a time and place where conflict is sharpening, the truth that all of our actions and investments will at the end of the day either serve trans people or strengthen the people who profit off their oppression is more obvious than ever. No matter what McKinley thinks she believes, it is the real-world result of her actions that determine what camp she stands in. McKinley has claimed that RATPAC did not desire to be associated with the app, though McKinley never offered that ability towards our work—and absolutely, we wouldn’t desire to liquify a single inch of our work into her career, especially as her startup is publicly entertaining the notion of partnering up with HomeAway and airbnb to operate her platform "for trans people". There’s nothing quite like feeding Austin’s hoods painkillers in the front while stabbing them in the back.

RATPAC writes this statement not only to explain what went down, but to draw a clear line of division between our housing program and any hollow tech startup lookalikes. We call on all politically conscious people to keep this in mind as we move forward in providing for each other and engaging in struggle together. The sinister outlook this society spreads against the people it oppresses will be quick to try and frame RATPAC as self-serving in this statement, even in the minds of some self-fancied "revolutionaries". It bows down at the feet of non-profits and corporate charities as a counterbalance to capitalist oppression rather than part-and-parcel to its function. It is quick to fawn over and support disarmed projects by charlatans as "revolutionary!" and "what we really need right now!", and it hopes that you will too. We have absolutely no profit to gain from going against these smokescreens. Gaining the trust of the people we want to fight alongside us means telling the truth no matter how unpopular it is in the short-term, or how pretty the veneer of the enemy looks. RATPAC believes in holding true to the principles of serving the exploited majority of Austin's trans people. McKinley Forbes' half-truths and cardboard commitments are the bricks that careerism is paved with. We welcome investigation into these events, but her narratives and motives should be deeply questioned. After all, she has a brand to defend now. Maybe with her new tech startup, she'll be able to afford a gravesite for her revolutionary principles.

#trans #revolution #rainbow capitalism #austin #trans housing

[abarahman-richard-chignell]

Nationalism...A Whole Lotta Nationalism!

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatulahi wa barakatuh,   The original title was going to be "A revert's thoughts on the rise in Nationalism drawing on the Quran and Sunnah", but "a whole lotta nationalism" is appropriate given the rise of it everywhere and the length, I',m afraid, of this podcast! I normally try to avoid politics but in this day and age, it's almost impossible (Brexit, Trump, Saudi, China, to name just a few that seem to be all that is in the Western news). As always I want to try and tackle this in a way that is helpful to reverts or those rediscovering their Islam as this can be a rather difficult area to navigate as it involves it seems one has to question identities, nationalities, allegiances, religion, etc. It is rather a lot easier to understand if you are of Pakistani or Bengali heritage in the UK or Latino in the US, you've sadly experienced navigating this complex mix of where you fit in one way or another on a daily basis. If you are a refugee, life has always been hard, you never left your home just for a giggle, contrary to what it seems many people think you are not an expat who is just from a quote-unquote 'undesirable' country.  If you are from Palestine the struggle is in your blood. And of course this is just a snapshot of cases and far from fully inclusive. But of course, as a revert, you may be from none of the cultures under 'attack' you may even be from the culture or nation that is doing the attacking of your now new Brothers and Sisters. As a Brother from Britain or France, for example, you have the colonial legacy to deal with too. A Sister from the USA has the modern colonial warmongering of her own country to somehow come to terms with. As an Arab, you have the difficulty of leadership that never seem to represent the Islam that is everything to you, in a good light...I found and find this topic incredibly complicated and I hope that InshaAllah my thoughts and how I try to navigate this minefield may be of some value. Let me set the scene by giving some examples of rife nationalism and then tackle the Islamic view on this through some excerpts from the Qu'ran and hadith.  Although a warning ahead of time: my efforts to deal with this through an Islamic lens are going to be in no way exhaustive. Alhamdullilah this is simply because there are so many references that I could choose. Allah is the most Kareem (Kind) and his Messenger pbuh the best of examples - it should not surprise you that like most things - we've got this covered! DOCUMENTARIES I cut the cord to the TV ten plus years ago but still sometimes go down a YouTube rabbit hole now and then with my wife! We basically stick to lectures or documentaries in some pseudo attempt perhaps to be educated or intellectual ha ha. I am more than aware that our recent 'watchlist' is thanks to Google and whatever clever algorithm they have deployed to nicely serve up things for us to watch on a plate. Thank you YouTube algo-developers you clever little things! The 'freedom of choice' that we have online and the 'echo chamber'  effect is a whole other topic. I'm not going there today!!   Anyway recently we watched a series of interesting documentaries, from what I can remember, on VICE channel, Journeyman Productions, Ross Kemp on Gangs, BBC, Al Jazeera, etc I said it was a binge so let me share the ones I can remember:   Immigration - the harsh, fraught, struggle filled, emotional journeys of Syrians / Sub-Saharan Africans / Eritreans (the North Korea of Africa) / kind British people on the island of Lesbos / less kind Greek locals with a 'treat them mean and they won't continue to come' approach (as if that is going to do anything when they are willing to risk injury and death to leave where they are coming from) / unkind French and Italian police / kind local French people willing to go to court over providing refuge in their gardens to tens of refugees every day /  the disgraceful French police behaviour at the Calais Jungle camp. Israel, although we normally don't watch things on the Israeli occupation as my heart breaks at the barbaric nature of this ongoing apartheid and the international communities unwillingness to act on behalf of the Palestinian victims, we did watch an interesting thing on how the Haredi Jews have refused to serve in the Israeli military for religious reasons and yet how the Zionist government are not letting them get away with it. Now persecuting their own people for their religious beliefs which they are meant to share. As I'm an Englishman and we have a bit of a dark humour, I must confess to being amused by how un-Jewish the Zionist government are, and how if you are actually a practising Jew you are also borderline, or maybe not even borderline, an 'enemy of the state'! Also, I had no idea what a large number of practising Jews were opposed to military service.  A cursory bit of research highlighted that there are many other Jews like the Hasidic Jews who are against the occupation and service in the IDF.   We watched on Guantanamo Bay and how it is still open and on a 'tour' were quite amazed by how little the US soldiers guarding knew about their 'enemy' that they were holding. This is rather damning of the educational level and natural intellectual inquisitiveness. Even the base commander with rather a lot of stars on his shoulder confessed to knowing next to nothing! Quite staggering. Of course, the former guard who reverted to Islam featured in the documentary, mashaAllah, so it is wrong to totally generalise - we come to Islam in some very unexpected ways! Allahu Akhbar! We also watched Hate Thy Neighbour on the Deep South of America and the horrid EDL in the UK which was simply staggering for the total demonstration of ignorance and racism that are on both sides of the 'pond'. As an Englishman watching the EDL I just felt horribly ashamed. It is quite hard for me to fathom how this country can produce such disgusting characters from its midst.   A documentary on the most insane murder rate in Mexico border towns controlled by the cartels and how El Salvador is just so dangerous that those expelled from the US who have never really known El Salvador as home are willing to walk this 'caravan' that takes a minimum 30 days, and is truly treacherous, to try and get back into the US. Fully aware of the stakes involved if they are caught and that is if they beat the odds and even get anywhere near the border in the first place. We watched one on Afghanistan being, amongst a cornucopia of other natural resources, a gemstone capital. The one we watched focussed on emeralds and if you can afford them and want the greenest in the world then Afghanistan surely has them! This backed up what Afghan friends of mine had said about mineral resources in the country that I confess to never quite believing. It is amazing when you see for your own eyes that it rams home the point that you've been sold a dud by the media. It might even make one question the real motivations over the presence in a country that historically has been a graveyard for one army after another? Also, a debate hosted by intelligence squared and Chaired by Lyse Doucet (BBC's Chief International Correspondent) with the motion that "The West should cut ties with Saudi Arabia". For the motion were Mehdi Hassan (Journalist and Al Jazzera Broadcaster) and Madawi Al-Rasheed (LSE Professor and expert on Saudi Arabia). Against the motion Crispin Blunt (Conservative MP for Reigate - just up the road from me) and Mamoun Fandy (Egyptian born Middle East expert). It was a thoroughly good debate and well worth the watch. Before coming into the event 41% said they were for the motion, 22% against, 37% undecided. After the debate the positions had changed to 63% for the motion, only 5% were undecided, 32% were against. That was a swing of 6% towards the motion that "The West should cut ties with Saudi Arabia".  An obvious trigger and feature of this debate was the alleged but clearly fairly solid 'off with his head' order by MBS on journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi embassy in Istanbul. We also watched an interesting Oxford University Hard Talk on "What is the human cost to China's economic miracle?" again with Mehdi Hasan who this time was challenging Charles Liu on China's economic and human rights record - particularly on the Uighur Muslim detention or extermination depending on who you choose to believe.  Many are calling this ethnic cleansing and again it is happening pretty much undeterred. I forget where we watched it, but a just heartbreaking look at the humanitarian disaster that is Yemen, with a war that has been going on since 2015!  The civil war was ongoing but everything got significantly worse and became the worlds worst humanitarian crisis upon the involvement of the Saudi-led coalition. As in every war, civilians are bearing the brunt and suffering. Normally Scandinavia is portrayed as the lands where everything works, people are the happiest in the world, etc. Yet another documentary on the rise of Far Right parties puts pay to that notion - at least in my mind. In the sidebar, there were similar documentaries on neighbouring and regional countries. Sweden was even interesting and frightening in that there is a vicious battle between these right wing hate filled groups and militant violent left groups that actively combat the fascist right. All of this centred around the topics of nationalism, immigration, race, etc.   It is not just the algorithm served documentary binge fest where nationalist, separatist, racist, derogatoriness seems to be the global norm. The Christchurch terrorist act occurred and is obviously fresh in everyone's mind. As everyone knows this was nationalist, racist and hate inspired. I will not elaborate on that here. You may like to listen to my former podcast that covered the global Muslim reaction I experienced to this dreadful event, especially as it may not have been the reaction you may have expected (you can find it here). WHATSAPP Another example is from my own WhatsApp. I am a member of a number of Malaysian WhatsApp groups, after having lived there, and there is always a whole heap of Malay nationalism due to their concerns about the Chinese takeover of their country and the economic destruction that comes from not following Islamic economic principles at the state level. Post Christchurch I have received a troublesome number of links to mosques being vandalised in the north of England, we had Surrey Police talk in my local mosque and say that there had been a terrorist act against Muslims in normally sleepy Surrey. A 50-year-old man ranting about 'white supremacy' knifed a 16-year-old in a supermarket carpark..... and what is sad I am sure there are far more examples that someone with less aversion to media and social media could add to this already saddening list. The Today Show was shared with me where Muslim parents are upset about primary school sex and relationship education and Piers Morgan, taking on the mantle of a gay rights activist, decided to slander the Muslim journalist on his show, and Muslims in general, with an Islamaphobic and racist rant which was aired on an apparently well watched national TV channel. Although interesting the last 6 minutes or so were not featured online via the TV station where Piers steps a little too far over the line (the full version was sent to me). Piers, Piers, Piers, we are here to stay, when are you going to get that? Many of us are white like you mate. No, we're not going back to Islamabad, most of us never came from there, we're as British as you and have contributed more to building this society with real-world jobs than you. Wind your neck in mate. Accept that in a pluralistic society a favourite soundbite that you like to throw out, which is defined as: "A pluralistic society is a diverse one, where the people in it believe all kinds of different things and tolerate each other's beliefs even when they don't match their own.", you are going to have to accept that there are a whole bunch of us who face Mecca 5 times a day, wear different clothes, and rank God above all things. We accept you, time to actually be pluralistic and stop always targetting Muslims. That my friend is called Islamaphobia and you are only getting away with it because we don't seem quite as good as the Jews have been at getting it to be a term that people quake at being associated with, like anti-Semitism but.... we will get there soon inshaAllah, so watch out! NEWSPAPER Now I don't normally get a newspaper as I have a method that suffices my needs using my investment platforms excellent resources and I prefer books or periodicals for their deeper more thoughtful analysis. In general, I am not a fan of the 'news' per se. I know many successful people who seem to be just fine operating in a complete news blackout or reading headlines on the daily newspaper as they walk past a newsstand. However, after my family took my Dad out for lunch at the Shard last week I picked up an FT. I did it as a kind of walk down memory lane as I used to take the FT every day. As a finance chap, there really is no substitute. Now, this is not meant to be topical but rather an example of what is being pumped out and consumed. What I mean is that it is not specifically these stories that matter but rather the type of content I want to highlight. Scanning other newspapers in preparing a bit for this podcast, there is a commonality running through almost all UK publications - the examples I'm citing are indicative of the general state of affairs. I'm going to be referring to the Tuesday 19 March 2019 International Edition. Amidst the pages, on literally almost every page, what do you get but: Nationalism, Nationalism, Nationalism!   Also, I quite like the FT as they don't mess about! The news section is a few condensed pages before they get full-on business. So let me walk you through this sample Tuesday from our look-for-the-nationalist or leaning-that-way articles and references: 

- The front page headline has of course Brexit with "May's Brexit hits block as Bercow rules out third vote on same deal", naturally this sets the tone for a number of other articles where everyone guesses about the fiasco that has become the Brexit. The FT indicates what is coming in the rest of the paper on the front page. - Turning to page two, blissfully we get a pass.  - Page three has four articles all of which are loaded with nationalistic, and because this is Britain schoolboy antics of our esteemed politicians. The main article is "Bercow adds to May's problems while delighting Europhiles and Brexiters". The photo below showing Union Jacks and European flags jostling for our attention. As its a Brexit piece it is safe to say that this is nationalistic, them and us stuff. Then we have "Leavers will back PM's deal 'if she agrees to go'. In short, this is where conservative party members seem more interested in their positions in parliament than the future of the country. Pretty standard fare for politicians. We also have "Article 50 Back to Brussels with extra baggage" which is of course more of the same about poor old Theresa May having to go back and forth to Brussels to try and find some way out of this pickle we as a nation have got ourselves in. Finally, we have more of the games in the Conservative party with "Johnson and Raab jockey for position" which is all about how to slip into the PM spot as Theresa May leaves. Oh yes, it's not about serving the public interests first but rather serving their own. Loyalty to none it seems. Of course, cherrypicking some terms we have plenty of "leading Eurosceptic contenders", "prominent Brexiters", "insisting they are acting in the national interests", "hardline Brexiters", "pro-Brexit hardcore", etc, etc, yawn, yawn. - Page four we have a detour from Brexit woes for a little foray into Europe-land. "Staff resist Czech tycoon in battle for Le Monde"  is an article on a Czech billionaire looking to acquire control of the famous Le Monde newspaper. We have quotes like "I'm very suspicious of a foreign billionaire trying to get a foothold in the western establishment through the ownership of a media, especially through a newspaper such as Le Monde, which sets the tone and agenda of news in France and beyond". Yet we also have someone presumably talking on behalf of Kretinsky the billionaire saying "He is a Francophile and believes that France plays an important role in the fight of populism.". So here we have suspicion, foreign, western (making Czech back to the Eastern Bloc I presume), French nationalism in Le Monde as voice, Francophile, populism. Then it gets deeper as of course, we have "French interior minister in hot seat after yellow vest protest". This is more of the yellow vests protests that descended into violence with rioters setting fire to newsstands, a bank, restaurants and ransacking more than 90 shops. Sadly also for this chap they report on his playing around with waitresses rather than his wife. Who only knows what this movement is about anymore. It may not be so nationalistic but it is certainly popular and violent. And of course the French are often quick to say that everywhere immigrants come from are uncivilised and yet here we have France regularly looking like a war zone. - Page five, oh dear me, we have "Brazil's Trump pivots towards US in boost for White House", with subtitle "Rightwing Bolsonaro's Washington visit brings hope on both sides of closer ties". I can probably rest my case here but there are two disturbing quotes I will site to ram home the point: Firstly: "Day's before Jair Bolsonaro's meeting with Donald Trump this week, a select group of enthusiasts gathered at the Trump International Hotel in Washington to celebrate the ideas that helped bring the two rightwing populist leaders to power.Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of the Brazilian president who won a landslide election in October, was there. So too, as co-host of the event, was Steve Bannon, the former White House strategist who has set up a club for nationalist populist leaders called The Movement. "This is a very important movement and not just for Brazilian-US relations.... but the world," Mr Bannon told the gathering. "Ideas have consequences, and with the arrival of Bolsonaro [in Brazil], Trump [in the US], Orban [in Hungary], and Salvini [in Italy], it's a critically important time."We're at last doing what communists and socialists did a long time ago," added Eduardo Bolsonaro, who is also head of Brazil's congressional foreign relations committee. "We're organising ourselves internationally". All I will say personally is that I find this level of organisation globally of Nationalist leaders, the language used, and the titling of their club as The Movement, simply terrifying. - Page 6 and I promise we're done, inshaAllah, but there are a couple of things here which are both nationalistic and divisive. I have to make a little detour here. The first is "Erdogan angers Wellington by airing video" where we find out the Mr Erdogan screens footage of the mosque killings during his election rallies. It seems whilst everyone else is noting how well the NZ Primeminister has dealt with the whole affair Erdogan is trying to garner voters that he is struggling to hold onto. Now I am not sure who his advisors are but even my local Imam preached to the community not to share the videos due to the hurt it would cause the victims families, the disrespect to the martyrs, and the fact that it aids the intention of the killer himself. Oh no it seems Erdogan went and dove in with both feet the videos even being captioned "A terrorist who is the enemy of Islam and the Turks". In the rallies, Erdogan said 'the "real target" of the New Zealand killings was the Turkish people, the Turkish flag and the Turkish state.' Do we need to remind Mr Erdogan that whilst he might be struggling for votes that Islam, Muslim and Turk are not synonyms. But, without going too deep into this from the Islamic perspective, we have again(!) another example of rife nationalism. Next, we have "China talks up close ties with EU in riposte to 'systemic rival' label" and language like "concerns Beijing is trying to divide the bloc", China being an "economic competitor" and "systematic rival". China's representative making a big thing of "co-operation is a mainstay of European relations". The whole thing, of course, suggests discomfort from both sides with Europe marking their turf and China doing the same. I am going to finish with the headline "Beijing attempts to justify Uighur detention". As we all know by now Human Rights groups, international concern, yet not enough governments speaking out about the atrocious, ethnic cleansing, abuse, forced marriage, forced consumption of pork and alcohol, all in the name of education, oh and torture, murder, etc,  treatment of the Uighur people in China. Here we have Erdogan reclaiming some class by being the "first leading Muslim-majority country to call on China to close its mass internment camps holding Uighurs." Of course, I don't have to work hard to convince you that this is nationalistic, ethnic, racist, behaviour at play. I do have to say one thing.... you know you have that one friend or family member who is prone to massive exaggeration. Well, it seems China's state council has a serious case of exageritis! Let me read you this quote "Xinjiang has destroyed 1,588 terrorist groups, arrested 12,995 terrorists" and it goes on. But really? Really? 1,588 terrorist groups. 1,588 terrorist groups inside Xinjiang province. I spat my tea out reading that! Come on China state council pull the other one! I think you need to double down on your editorial control to ensure that the 'stats'  you produce have at least some basis in reality. WRAP UP THROUGH THE LENSE OF ISLAM Ok, ok, no I haven't turned this into a news review podcast but what I do hope I have done is demonstrated how everywhere you look there is the talk of nationalism or conditions that trigger nationalistic feelings. There are whole regions in flux and mobile populations at unprecedented scales. I want to say unprecedented but I'm not a good enough historian to know if that is totally true. What is for sure is that there is a significant amount of population movement and a significant amount of nationalism. What I'd like to do now is address nationalism through the eyes of Islam and my views as to how we as Muslims are meant to actually tackle this specific issue of nationalism. I'll start with making the point that Muslims living in non-Muslim majority countries can have issues that are kind of hard for them to deal with although I emphasise they have to rely on the religious teachings of our Deen (religion). Let's note the ease with which Muslims can feel awkward in Western countries with things that are nowhere near in line with our Religious views e.g. homosexuality, sex education at increasingly younger and younger ages, public debauchery, the promotion of gambling, sexualisation of almost everything, diminishing moral standards, etc, etc. Regrettably, the list is quite long. As this warrants a whole other podcast in its own right I am going to cover this in as short and sharp a practical manner as I can without giving any specific scriptural references, I'll save that for the full podcast inshaAllah. The key point: Muslims as long as able to practice their religion have to respect and uphold the laws of the land. After having travelled in many Muslim countries, you will find that many in those lands are jealous of the law and order in the West. There is no perfect Islamic environment in the world. We have to simply make do with what we have and in the West you are really rather blessed, whether you know that or not. Just wise up and be pragmatic. Thank God that you can freely worship, that you can listen to khutba's (sermons) that are not written by the state, that you can homeschool your children if you don't like the state education, that there is good state education at all, that there is access to medical care - which is often free, the rule of law is more balanced, bribery is not rife, etc. My suggestion is don't be a complainy-pants. Don't focus on the few things that are less pleasing and overlook much that is good. We should have shukr gratitude, for the blessings Allah swt has bestowed on us and sabr for those things he has also bestowed upon us that we find hard. As Muslims, remember we are people of shukr and sabr. So what do you do my brothers and sisters about things you are uncomfortable with, like homosexuality? Well how about this? Don't go to any gay bars!! What if you meet someone 'strange' or 'odd'? Be kind and well mannered. You never know if you may be an instrument of Allah swt and a trigger for them looking to Islam. There is no compulsion in religion and we are all the creation of Allah swt after all. A simple heuristic is to worry more about yourself, then your family, then your community, and work your way up. I am sure there are more than enough things for you to work on in those first three areas before being outraged by fringe groups. Even if they are rather vocal considering their meagre numbers.   Back to Nationalism. Look I checked my logic on this whole topic of Nationalism and being a Muslim with one of my close Arabic Brothers who has memorised the Quran mashaAllah. I also asked him for verses that he thought were relevant. There are honestly so many on this topic and additionally many many Hadith. I messaged him the following: "I would like to write something on nationalism and its dangers. It will be along the line of what I believe is stated in the Quran and the Sunnah: that we are Muslim first and from a nation second. That cultural things from our national traditions are cool as long as they don't contradict explicitly something from the Qu'ran and the Sunnah. This is my logical understanding so far." My Brothers response was "I stand with you for this Brother, flags and colours should not take us away from each other, we are being called by Allah swt as "one Ummah" and the only differences between us are in Taqwa which no one can judge except He." Note the key points here. 1) we are an ummah before we are nations with flags, colours, etc, (2) our unity as brothers and sisters in Islam supersedes our allegiances to nation states, (3) in the eyes of Allah swt we are all the same except in our taqwa. Taqwa if you have not heard of it before is our God consiciousness or you can have it translated as fear of Allah swt. It is what makes us do acts in remembrance of Allah swt. This can only be judged by Him the Most Magnificent as He is the only one who can look into the hearts to see this taqwa. None of us mere mortals possibly can. Actually, there is another area I want to share in my communication with my Brother that I think is important to reflect on as Muslims. I laughed with my wife that it is so amazing that I can just ask him for references and he closes his eyes and can just pull relevant verses from the Quran database that is his brain. What an incredible blessing that is from Allah swt and for someone who didn't grow up with any knowledge that people have memorised God's word in its entirety with no errors I continue to be astounded when I see this. I told him we thought this and he laughed. He said "Alhamdullilah Brother, when someone says this to me I really would say as Prophet Suleiman (Solomon) said in the Quran 27:19 "... "My Lord, enable me to be grateful for Your favour which You have bestowed upon me and upon my parents and to do righteousness of which You approve. And admit me by Your mercy into [the ranks of] Your righteous servants" Alhamdullilah" Then he tells me "you should teach your kids Arabic Brother, they will be grateful to you afterwards, they will appreciate how much you really love them especially when they read the Quran and understand it the way it was revealed" Then he said: "Walahi Brother, Quran is the only guidance in my life, and without it, I am completely NOTHING. It is my soul's oxygen! and every Muslim's too (supposedly)!" I share this as I feel it imperative to ask anyone still listening or reading: is this how you feel about the Quran? Is this your relationship with it? Is it your oxygen? Are you nothing without it?   It is meant to be! This is what creates our unity, creates our understanding, means that when there are issues like nationalism we know 100% where we stand as Muslims. We know that we're united with every single other Muslim on the Straight Path as we all go our understanding from Allah swt's direct words to us in the Holy Quran as well as the example and explanation of those words from the Prophet pbuh and what we have learnt from the Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them), and the great scholars who have helped ensure in these modern times we understand as we were meant to the way to live. May Allah swt enable us as an Ummah to reconnect with Him through His Words and may we have the Qu'ran such a part of our life that it testifies on our behalf in the hereafter. Ameen. So here are a few quotes from the Qu'ran:    21:92-93 *"[Prophets], this is your community, one community, and I am your Lord, so serve Me. They have torn their unity apart, but they will all return to us."* 23:52-53 *"This is your community, one community - and I am your Lord: be mindful of Me - but they have split their community into sects, each rejoicing in their own." *   In both of these the emphasis, the angle that is being stated if you like, is referring to us as a community which is understood as an Ummah-nation. A community united by shared beliefs. One where our religion is the unifier, that is what makes us a nation, we are not separate from any other Brother or Sister, we are united as an Ummah through our religion, through the Lord we worship, the Lord we fear, and the Prophet pbuh who's example we follow. Allah swt reminds us of the risks of division and how we will all ultimately return to Him. He swt also highlights at the end of the second verse how the Jews and the Christians split into sects "each rejoicing in their own". Here the Quran is warning Prophet Muhammad pbuh and us that we are meant to be united as an Ummah, as a community, and not divide up into groups, making the errors of the former peoples of the book. Do you see how this trumps all human constructs of nations or nation-states? How it runs so much deeper? *3:102-103 *"You who believe, be mindful of God, as is His due, and make sure you devote yourselves to Him, to your dying moment. Hold fast to God's rope all together; do not split into factions. Remember God's favour to you: you were enemies and then He brought your hearts together and you became brothers by His grace: you were about to fall into a pit of Fire and He saved you from it. In this way God makes his revelations clear to you so that you may be rightly guided." * This is massive! We were enemies, and He brought our hearts together, through the religion, and His favour and we became brothers. Allah swt tells us that this saves us from the pit of the Fire. He swt tells us that we must "hold fast to God's rope all together".  So why are we fighting, killing, making enemies of other Muslims, fighting as nations against other nations, when that favour of Allah swt and brotherhood in religion that he has given us is what keeps us from the fire? *3:104 "Be a community that calls for what is good, urges what is right, and forbids what is wrong: those who do this are the successful ones."* As is the case throughout the Quran Allah swt tells us what makes us "the successful ones" and it as a community - a global ummah again - calling for what is good and forbidding what it is wrong. Calling to good is about as expansive as it gets. Are nationalistic motivations, the superiority of one type over the other, calling for good? Is this treating our brothers as we would hope to be treated? A community is stated here, not multiple nations. A community of believers where collectively, we focus on good. United we are successful as a single global community. I see this as knowing that deeper than the human constructs of nation-states there is a bond between me and my Moroccan brother, or between me and my Yemeni brother, or between me and my Colombian brother, or any other brother you can think of.... that transcends that nation-state man-made construct.   *3:105 "Do not be like those who, after they have been given clear revelation, split into factions and fall into disputes: a terrible punishment awaits such people."* This should make us think, should it not? Are we going down the route of those in the past who became divided? Have we not been given clear revelation? Have we not witnessed the mess that has become of those who have split into so many factions they lost all unity and are clearly in confusion? Do we no longer fear the punishment of Allah? Allahu Akhbar! La illah ill Allah. We hear and we obey! Or at least we should be unified by that La illah ill Allah. There is a community or a nation but its the community or nation that unites across all languages, races, and types under the shahada: La illah ill Allah, Muhammad rassululah.   THIS TOPIC REQUIRES MORE I actually got into this topic without thinking it through fully! I realise that I have only really scratched the surface of what needs to be said on this matter. For example, I need to address the race and racism part. How the inclusiveness of Islam is one of the biggest draws and how the Quran and indeed the Prophet pbuh's last sermon covered how we are all the same no matter our skin colour or where we happen to have been born. Maybe even more so than this is the importance of highlighting the importance of brotherhood and sisterhood as a broad concept in Islam and how this adds to the trumping of nationalism. However, this is already exceptionally long and so I guess I shall inshaAllah break this topic up and cover these in future podcasts. InshaAllah I also didn't lose everyone with the length of this one, in what seems to be, unintentionally, my first long-form podcast. CONCLUSION To wrap up I hope that I have made a clear case that as Muslims we must be very careful around nationalism and tribalism. We are Muslim first and of our countries second. Or maybe even deeper we are of the human community first and foremost, as all are created by Allah swt irrespective of belief. Then as Muslims, we believe in Allah swt and we happen to live in a particular nation, for what is ultimately a very short period. The purpose of this residence being to work so that we get where we so desperately hope to in the hereafter which is eternal. Furthermore, I hope that, although I didn't drum it home so much that, as long as we are able to practice our religion we are bound by the laws of the lands we reside in. This can raise emotions that can be difficult to deal with but we must be patient (have sabr) as well as being grateful (having shukr) for all those things we are blessed with. I've lived in different European countries most of my life and then in Muslim countries. I have good friends and business interests in many different countries and I can categorically tell you that even if things look 'idyllic' somewhere else - they aren't. Remember this is the dunya - you want idyllic? - work for it through your worship and remembrance of Allah swt. May Allah swt draw us together as Muslims, enable us to be the best of examples and the ones no one fears, may we not harm our brothers and sisters in any way and may our leaders lead with wisdom and mercy for all humankind. Ameen.

[jewishphilosophyplace]

One State And Democratic in Palestine & Israel (Interview with Ahmad Tibi)

This fascinating interview which you can read here with MK Ahmad Tibi by Carolina Landsman here at Ha’aretz follows the political logic at this precise moment when the ultra-righwing settler government under the leadership of Prime Minister Netanyahu is finally shutting the door on the two-state solution. Now there are two options left, a democratic one-state in all of Greater Israel/Historic Palestine with a Palestinian majority or apartheid Jewish minority rule.

Consider the difference between what’s “possible” and what’s “actual.” It used to be that the one state idea was considered a possible solution to the conflict over Palestine and Israel, but not a realistic one. Today it’s no longer so clear if the two-state solution is even possible given how entrenched the settlement project is, in the occupied West Bank, and also on the Israeli political and social scene. As a thought exercise, Tibi’s projection of a democratic one-state is worth serious consideration. While the two-state solution remains somewhere out there as a possible future, given the actual alternative today between democracy and apartheid, his is coherent and compelling vision.

More pessimistic, my only thoughts are two. First, I don’t think Tibi’s model adequately grapples with the problem of domination as a basic feature of society, one that can be ameliorated even down to point zero, or reconfigured, but never eliminated. Societies are always organized on majority-minority relations. Second and based on the principle of national self-determination, I still believe that a two-state confederated solution between a Jewish majority and Palestinian State constitutes the better option. But that ship is sailing. The country’s future as a bi-national entity is being determined not by the left, but by the sovereign rightwing government of the State of Israel. This means that Tibi’s is the only practical alternative to apartheid.

The interview is magnificent. I’ve never believed in the idea of a one-state solution, but if it’s going to look like anything, then let it look like this. No matter what happens, Jews and Muslims, Palestinians and Israeli are going to have to come to terms, one with the other, will have to begin to understand each other better than they do now. This is especially true of Jews who, in Israel today, enjoying all the arrogant trappings that come with power and privilege seem not to take much interest in or even notice of their neighbors, the Palestinians, except in terms of  threat. If the choice is going to be between apartheid and democracy, then the principle of “mutual recognition” will have to trump the principle of “national self-determination.”This  should hold true no matter how the future turns out, if, that is, it’s going to be democratic. The details about domination will have to be worked out and in good faith. About that, I cannot pretend to be optimistic.

For those of you who can’t get behind the paywall, I’m pasting the whole thing here:

The Arab lawmaker vying to be prime minister of a utopian Israeli-Palestinian state

Which flag? Which religion? And what about the army? Knesset Member Ahmad Tibi lays out his vision for the one-state solution.

By Carolina Landsmann Mar 04, 2017

Half an hour was all MK Ahmad Tibi needed – from the moment U.S. President Donald Trump stated, two weeks ago, that he was committed to a solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but not necessarily a two-state solution – to appear on CNN and illustrate what Israeli Palestinians mean when they hear “one state”: “If this will be the case,” he said, “I will be running for the post of prime minister, and I can assure you that I will win [over] Bibi Netanyahu.”

On the way to a meeting with Tibi in his Knesset office this week, I remembered a letter that was sent to Haaretz last year in response to a controversy that played out in the paper about the meaning of Israel as a “Jewish and democratic” state. The writer, a Rimon Lavie from Jerusalem, noted: “Whoever talks about ‘Jewish and democratic’ is evading the main issue without which a democratic state is not feasible: In the future, the minority, every minority, can become the majority.”

Observing the separation barrier through a car window, one understands that for Israeli Jews, the attraction of maintaining the “Green Line” is that it allows for the civil affiliation of the millions of Palestinians who live in the West Bank (and the Gaza Strip) to a Palestinian state, even an imagined one. The “two-state vision” makes it possible to exclude the Palestinians who live on the other side of the Green Line from being counted with the Arab citizens of Israel. Because the number of the latter constitutes just one-fifth of the country’s population, the prospects of Mr. Lavie’s principle being tested in reality are quite slim.

However, the moment we discard the two-state vision, even if only for argument’s sake, and adopt the one-state vision in its place, Israeli democrats have no choice – even before we’ve annexed a millimeter of land – but to imagine the possibility that the Palestinian minority will become the majority. Which is exactly what I invited MK Tibi to do.

Why him? Because he was the first to bring it up.

What’s the first thing you would do as prime minister?

“Ensure that the principle of equality among all citizens is the country’s primary value.”

Israel’s Declaration of Independence states that the state is committed to total social and political equality for all its citizens, irrespective of religion, race or sex.

“We will annul the Declaration of Independence and in its place write a civil declaration that represents all citizens: Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze. The entire public. It’s untenable for a democratic state to have a declaration of independence that is fundamentally Jewish.”

What would the country’s name be?

“I don’t know. Its parliament will decide.”

What about the flag?

“That would have to change.”

The national anthem?

“It would be changed.”

The Law of Return [enabling all Jews to establish residency and citizenship in Israel]?

“That would automatically be annulled, because the country would no longer be a Jewish state as it is today. The single state will not resemble the present-day State of Israel. It will be something different. Why should Jews be able to return here and Palestinians not?”

Could there be a Law of Return and a right of return [of Palestinian refugees from 1948 and their descendants]?

The country would be open to all Jews and Palestinians from everywhere in the world. There would be equality in entering the country and in returning for all citizens – Jews and Arabs. The Law of Return embodies the state’s Jewishness, which I do not accept.” In other words, the single state you envision would mean the dismantlement of the State of Israel.

“The single democratic state will have a different format from the present State of Israel.” ‘Rolling apartheid’

Ahmad Tibi, 58, was born in the Arab town of Taibeh in central Israel, studied medicine but didn’t practice (he didn’t finish his internship in gynecology), and served as a political adviser to the late PLO leader Yasser Arafat. Currently a member of the Ta’al faction of the Joint Arab List party, he is one of a number of deputy speakers of the Knesset, where he began his career in 1999.

The profile image accompanyinig Tibi’s WhatsApp account is Martin Luther King’s assertion, “I have a dream.” It’s certainly difficult to think of a more apt slogan for the civil struggle for equality between Jews and Arabs. If the two-state paradigm is to be supplanted by the one-state conception, the struggle of people like Tibi against the occupation will become a fight for one person, one vote. Nonetheless, it’s important for Tibi to point out that he himself does not advocate one state but believes in the two-state solution: a Palestinian state, and Israel as a state of all its citizens. It was only when President Trump spoke about the acceptability of a single state that he began to imagine what that would mean on a practical level.

Before we met, Tibi asked me what the thrust of my article would be, whether for or against the one-state notion. I Trumped him: I said I thought the two-state idea was best for both peoples, but that if both want to live together in one state, I would flow with that. I’m in favor of the future. “Yes, exactly,” Tibi said.

Is that how you understood what Trump said?

“What surprised me is that for the first time an American president spoke about one state, with an Israeli prime minister standing next to him and not opening his mouth. Were Trump’s remarks those of someone who’s not versed in the details, or were they very sophisticated? It’s hard to know. I belong to those who support the two-state vision, have fought for it and continue to fight for it. I think it’s the optimal solution for the existing situation. The international community wants it and the majority on both sides wants it, even though that majority is diminishing according to the surveys I see, among both Palestinians and Israelis. And with 620,000 settlers in the West Bank and Jerusalem, and two separate judicial systems, there’s a reality today of one state with rolling apartheid.

“And then along comes Trump, who says ‘one state,’ and the debate is launched. There are three possibilities: two states or one state that could take two forms. One form is apartheid, where a privileged class, namely the Jews, gets all the rights, and there’s a class with diminished rights, or no rights, no vote, namely the Palestinians. The second form that a single state could take is that of a democratic, equal state: one person, one vote. My point is that if there is to be one state, we will want the democratic model and we will never accept the apartheid model. But not only us. The international community in the 21st century will not accept an apartheid model.”

Even though it’s accepted a 50-year occupation.

“Even though it’s accepted a 50-year occupation. And in such a state, I assume that the Palestinians will take power, because they will have a majority.”

In other words, by virtue of demography, you will be prime minister.

“I don’t like the use that’s made of the demography issue in the political debate in Israel.

It draws on all kinds of professors who count us day by day and talk about us as a demographic threat. I am not a demographic threat.”

You are a democratic threat.

“Exactly. I am not a demographic threat, I am a democratic hope. And I am not saying that I or some other Palestinian will be prime minister in order to frighten the Jews, but to make it clear that there will not be an apartheid state, because we sanctify the value of democracy. For years you feared and attacked our nationhood, and lately there are those in the government who are fearful and who are trying to assail our citizenship – whether it’s Bibi warning that we are ‘flocking to the polling stations’ in droves, or [Defense Minister Avigdor] Lieberman who wants a transfer of Wadi Ara. When I said I would be prime minister, I meant Ahmad Tibi as a parable.”

Do you think a state like that would be able to fulfill the national aspirations of the Palestinian people? Can you envisage a single state, in which Jews and Palestinians live, that meets the criterion of Palestinian self-determination?

“Those who support it as a first option think so. When the Palestinian national movement was founded, it spoke of one state. The Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish told me, two years before he died, that two states is the possible solution, one state is the just solution. Why is it just? Because all the refugees will return; Jews will live where they want, Palestinians will live where they want; and there will be no problem of borders.”

Can the Zionist dream be realized in the one-state format?

“Not in the way you demonstrate Zionism to us on a daily basis. You know, we get lessons in Zionism: in laws, in the definition of the state, in the attitude toward the Arab Other. Zionism prefers the Jew over the non-Jew. And that’s translated into a discriminatory approach toward Arabs in Israel and across the Green Line: through the Law of Return, through the Jewish National Fund, through land seizures. Zionism advocates ‘a nation that dwells alone.’ Zionism will come to the end of its road in a one-state format.”

Recognizing the Nakba

Will the one-state format be empathetic to the harsh history of the Jewish people?

“Of course. In my speech about the Holocaust, I spoke out against Holocaust deniers, because it’s not humane: To deny the suffering of the Other is to cause suffering. But I also want empathy for my nation, which is suffering today. There must also be empathy for the Palestinian narrative. The single state must recognize the Nakba [“catastrophe,” in Arabic, used to describe the 1947-49 Israeli War of Independence when more than 700,000 Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes], with all that this entails historically, legally and judicially.”

So you say we would mark the Nakba. And would we celebrate Independence Day?

“The independence of the new state.”

In other words, the Independence Day celebrations of the state that was established in 1948 will be canceled?

“For the Palestinians, your Independence Day is a catastrophe. It is our Nakba, which denotes suffering of a people that fell apart. Crashed. Was crushed. Was expelled. Killed. How can it be celebrated?”

So we cancel Independence Day and mark the Nakba. What about Memorial Day?

“You mean with all the sadness and so on? Everyone is entitled.

At present it’s a day of national mourning. There’s a siren, there are ceremonies. What would happen with all those practices?

“There were also Palestinians who fell.”

What do you mean?

“The question is whether the single state will want to emphasize the contrasts or push them aside and emphasize what there is in common.”

From your perspective, is there a difference between 1948 and 1967?

“Politically, yes, because I am demanding two states. But I have a narrative that goes back to 1948, and I will not revoke my narrative just because a Palestinian state has come into being. I do not forget my memories. Look, 1948 is the homeland, 1967 is the state. There’s a difference between [the entire] homeland and state. Homeland is in the heart. Jaffa is homeland. My father was born in Jaffa; my mother was born in Ramle. People were born in Haifa. I can’t annul the feelings of those people, not even if a Palestinian state is established in the territories [conquered in] 1967. The feeling a person has for his first birthplace, his homeland, will always continue to exist.”

And that feeling, you say, is not divided by a Green Line?

“Feeling is not crossed by lines, but there are pragmatic policy decisions that incorporate concessions. A state that’s established within the 1967 lines covers 23 percent of greater Palestine. You can’t imagine what it was for Yasser Arafat to agree to that – for the leader of the PLO, the leader of the Palestinian people, the leader of the national liberation movement. It’s the same for [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Mazen, who is from the founding generation. He told me: It’s 23 percent of the homeland. And yet even that is not agreed to. [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu doesn’t agree to it.”

In the single state, if we want to push the differences aside and emphasize the common elements, do we need to cancel Independence Day and Memorial Day, or maybe expand them? To celebrate both, to remember both? How do you envisage it?

“I don’t want to go into details now. You are getting into the minute details of a single state, which is far off.”

We are trying to imagine what the one-state solution will look like concretely.

“I will sum it up in one sentence: With one, equal state, the State of Israel in its present format will not exist. All its symbols will change, and the narrative will be different. The unifying element in one state will be different from what it is today, because it will be a state of everyone, not a state of the Jewish collectivity in which there is a tolerated minority that is thrown a bone in the form of gestures like new roads and the establishment of well-baby clinics. In an equal, single state, equality is a supreme value.”

What about the language?

“Both Hebrew and Arabic, which will be taught and spoken at the same level. At present Israel does in fact have two official languages, Hebrew and Arabic, but Hebrew is dominant. And the leader will have to be articulate in both languages and deliver speeches in both – like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who speaks English and French.”

In all the schools.

“That would be decided by the one-state parliament – what the education system will be. Whether there will be separate systems, like today, or a joint one. There are several examples, such as Belgium and Canada, of a bilingual system.”

But in the education system you envisage, with two languages and two narratives – how would that work?

“I don’t know, but getting to know the Other is important.”

What would be the core subjects? What would be studied by all pupils?

“I’m sure that the Education Ministry of the future will be different from the one under Naftali Bennett.”

In what way?

“There will not be control of Arabs by Jews, nor control by Arabs of Jews by coercion. In a lecture I gave two months ago, I said that if there were to be one binational, democratic state, and elections were held, it was probable that I would be prime minister, and I added: But I want to promise you that I will behave toward you as you behave toward us. A cabinet minister from the previous government who heard me said, ‘Ahmad, don’t be bad.’ That says it all.”

You are saying to the Jews that they would not want a Palestinian majority to treat them the way the Jews now treat the Palestinian citizens of Israel.

“The attitude toward us is discriminatory, exclusionary, unequal, and there is great bitterness and anger over that. I am talking about the Arab public that I represent, but also about the Palestinians who are under occupation. Between themselves, Jewish Israelis know they are not treating the residents of Taibeh or Nazareth equally. Or those in Umm al-Hiran and [elsewhere] in the Negev. I don’t know how a people that suffered a great deal has reached the present pass in its attitude toward the Other. Look at who’s leading public opinion, who the social leaders in Israel are: Netanyahu, [Gilad] Erdan, Miri Regev, ‘The Shadow’ [the far-right rapper Yoav Eliasi], Bennett, the fans of [the soccer team] Beitar Jerusalem in the eastern stands of the stadium, Elor Azaria as a national hero.”

Jokes and racism

While preparing for the meeting with Tibi by watching videos of some of his speeches in the Knesset – as impressive as they are numerous – I found it impossible to ignore the fact that the most beautiful moments in the House, as well as the ugliest ones, are embodied in the interaction between Jews and Arabs. There are moments where everyone is laughing and joking, and the Israelis [Jews and Arabs alike] look normal, and suddenly it seems as though the conflict is no more than a misunderstanding that has swelled to monstrous proportions. But at other times the hatred and the racism rise to the surface, and you are ashamed to hear what the Jewish MKs and ministers are saying, and the future looks bleak. Tibi agrees with that description, and adds that even when interrelations are good and cordial, this cannot blur existing ideological disparities. I admit to Tibi that I identify with Darwish’s remark.

But would the moral corruption of the occupation make it possible for a single state to be just, or would the bitterness you mention be translated into revenge?

“We have to do all we can to create a structure that would gradually do away with that bitterness. The bitterness exists and it won’t go away automatically by pushing a button. The national tension will remain, and the inter-religious tension, too. It’s important to neutralize this structurally. You know what, it’s important to neutralize it today, even before there is a single state. Everything I said about the one-state option and about the anger and so forth – we have to start dealing with it now.”

Would it be important to guarantee equal representation in a single state?

“No, there would be democratic elections.”

But democratic elections in which 50-50 representation between Jews and Arabs would be mandatory?

“I don’t know, I hadn’t considered that. My vision is two states, but I’m not one of those whose knees wobble or who goes into defensive mode or gets nightmares from the one-state vision. Even more so because now there is one state with three governmental systems [for Israel, and in the territories, for settlers and for Palestinians] and two national groups, toward which there are divergent approaches. And I assume that in democratic elections no one will be shortchanged. No group must be shortchanged in an equal state.”

Do you think that the structure of the regime of such a state must by definition oblige equal representation of the different nationalities?

“In Lebanon, for example, there are communities. I don’t think it should be like Lebanon: distribution of roles according to communities.”

Do you have any sort of state model in mind?

“I don’t think there is anything similar.”

Though there have been similar failures in history.

“True, there have been failures. It will be pioneering – after a conflict of this kind, entering into a model of an equal, democratic state that hasn’t yet been tried. I am aware of the debate and of what the majority of the Jewish public says: that this is not why we’re here. They say they will leave the country if that happens. There are some who leave because of [the price of the snack] Milky. I don’t think it’s a nightmare.”

But the country will look different.

“The country will look completely different.”

Is there any area in Israel today where you can get a feeling of what it would look like?

“Neve Shalom [a community west of Jerusalem]. Jews and Arabs live there, and there’s equality. Sometimes there are serious differences, but they still live in peace and in mutual respect and with respect for the two narratives. Or the bilingual schools in the country – my daughter went to one of them.”

Where?

“In Jerusalem. It was attacked and burned several times, so it’s possible that the single state will also be attacked.”

But the places you mentioned do offer a glimpse of this possibility. Can you describe what it will be like? For example, will both languages be heard equally?

“Each person will speak his language, and it’s desirable for everyone to know the other’s language. In today’s Israel, 90 percent of the Arabs speak Hebrew and want to learn it, and 90 percent of the Jews don’t know Arabic and don’t want to learn it. Knowing the Other is an important element. That doesn’t exist today. The Arabs know the Jews better than the Jews know the Arabs. In regard to the language, in terms of the desire to know, to read Hebrew, we know Hebrew literature – we study Tanach [the Hebrew Bible] in high school. Jews don’t study the Koran, for example.”

So in the single state, the Koran will be taught, too.

“I think that those who wish can study both the one and the other. It’s preferable to learn the other in all its aspects. Jews and Arabs will learn Tanach and Koran and the New Testament.”

But there will be separation of religion and state.

“Yes.”

And there won’t be an official state religion?

“No. There has to be separation of religion and state. The vision of the Palestinian secular left was of a secular state.”

What about the division of taxes? Would people in Tel Aviv and Ramallah pay the same taxes?

“Yes, provided the investments will be the same: when the investments in Arab or Palestinian locales are similar to those in Kfar Sava or Ra’anana. After the two Germanies were united, West Germany embarked on affirmative action costing hundreds of billions of dollars in order to develop the eastern section, and now there is a large-scale narrowing of gaps. My opinion is that this should be done in Israel today.”

What about the army?

“I don’t know. In one state, it would be the army of everyone. But I’m telling you once again: We haven’t reached that point. It would not be an army that occupies the Palestinians, because the Palestinians and the Israelis will be equal citizens in the same country. It sounds like a dream, like utopia, and when I talk to you now, it really does seem utopian. But utopia, too – you can draw it, picture it; you can fear the possibility of failure and hope for the possibility of life together that will succeed in one form or another. Look, the situation today is catastrophic, and the worst thing is the desire to preserve the status quo.”

In the one-state situation, aren’t you concerned about a Hamas takeover, as happened in the Gaza Strip? You and I can say, okay, one democratic state, but there are also antidemocratic forces.

“They exist today, too.”

But they are restrained by the Israel Defense Forces.

“I mean that they exist today within Israel. True, the structure is democratic, but the government takes the form of an oppressive rule over a nation, rule that discriminates against 20 percent of the population. And there is an antidemocratic thrust led by influential Jewish forces that is threatening the traditional democratic structure.”

In other words, you don’t see a greater threat to a one-state situation by Hamas than by Jewish nationalists.

“I think that no religious movement on either side supports the idea of a democratic secular state.”

If we try to imagine the single state in a regional context, would it in effect resemble an Arab state?

“I am telling you now that it is Palestinians and Jews – Arabs, Christians, Jews, Druze. It’s something special. There is nothing comparable.”

And you see it being welcomed in the Middle East region?

“I think it will be more exceptional and more progressive than other countries.”

Do you see a state like that being accepted by Iran, Syria, Lebanon?

“I don’t know what kind of a welcome it would get even from the United States. I don’t know how it would be viewed by Iran. It would depend on what it looks like, because a secular democratic state will be something attractive.”

And with a joint Jewish-Muslim army?

“I don’t know if an army would be needed, though every country needs an army in the end. But it would be different from an occupation army. It will not be an army of occupation or oppression of a people under it. There will not be a Jewish army that will oppress Palestinians in the democratic state.”

Do you coordinate moves with Abu Mazen?

“We meet. But this present declaration of mine is not coordinated with anyone.”

Would he be warranted in viewing you as an opponent?

“Abu Mazen is committed to the two-state idea, but he comes from the PLO, which originally advocated one state. The one-state idea is not foreign to him.”

But Abu Mazen would run against you for prime minister, won’t he?

“It seems to me that when that happens – in another 20, 30, 40, 50 years – neither I nor he will be here,.”

You would have opponents in Israel, too. Why you and not Ayman Odeh, who heads the Joint Arab List and is also the leader of Hadash, which has five seats, compared to your party’s two seats?

“Each person has the right to present his candidacy.”

Why do you think it will be you?

“Possibly because of my popularity and the public surveys. According to a poll conducted by Statnet [a research institute based in Daliat al-Carmel], I am the most popular Arab MK among the Arab population. But I am certain that there are people who are perhaps better suited than I both in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip. Again, I meant Ahmad Tibi as a parable.”

Hadash defines itself as an Arab-Jewish party.

“Yes.”

But your party, Ta’al [Arab Movement for Change], doesn’t categorize itself like that. “Our slogan is ‘a state of all its nationalities.’ I am in favor of cooperation with Jews, I think it’s important, but that’s not how Ta’al defines itself, Jewish-Arab, no. Our party represents the Arab public, but is in favor of Jewish-Arab cooperation.”

But let’s say that in the one-state vision, you see a possibility of redefining your party.

“Everything will change. But I challenge you to conduct a survey of the whole public in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza – Israelis and Palestinians – that asks, ‘Bibi or Tibi?’ If you ask the whole population, I beat Bibi.”

What’s the first stage in getting there? For the Palestinians to forgo the struggle for a Palestinian state?

“That won’t happen. That’s why I told you that I prefer two states, which is the preferred, optimal option. The demand for national liberation is for national liberation from the yoke of the occupation. That cannot be relinquished.”

But the question is whether a paradigmatic change is implemented – if we change course in the direction of a one-state situation and in the first stage say that you no longer aspire to a state of your own and want equal rights in the State of Israel.

“A few Palestinian intellectuals have spoken of equal rights in one state. But never at any stage have we said that we were stopping the struggle.”

But maybe in order to change tracks, the first thing to say is that we are no longer aspiring to a state of our own.

“That won’t happen.”

The Palestinians could announce that they are joining the state and then they would fight from within for civil rights and for changes in the state’s character.

“No. I am familiar with that thesis of ‘civil rights for all in the State of Israel.’ That is not the intention. A secular democratic state is something else, it’s not joining Israel, it’s a whole new game. It’s an equal game between Palestinians and Israelis, there’s no Israeli hegemony.”

But how does it get off the ground?

“There is no Jewish-Israeli hegemony at any stage, it’s a new state.”

In other words, without a struggle.

“At no stage will a national struggle be forgone. The banner now is two states; the banner can be replaced, but while continuing the struggle against the existing occupation, because the Israeli establishment, the governing establishment, does not want to forgo the hegemony of the occupier. Accordingly, it’s necessary to go on struggling against the occupier. We don’t have to make things easier for the occupier by a one-state declaration.”

The question is whether you change tracks.

“We don’t change tracks. We don’t replace one track with another. There are two options. My preferred track is the two-state solution, which calls for an end to the occupation. Maybe if you ask one of the Palestinian intellectuals – ask Sari Nusseibeh [a philosopher and the former president of Al-Quds University in Jerusalem], for example – he will tell you equal civil rights for everyone, as he’s already said in the past. Possibly if you ask someone from one of the Popular Front organizations, he will say straight out: a secular democratic state. But we will not stop the struggle.”

I didn’t say to stop the struggle, but to conduct it within the state as a civil battle to change the character of the State of Israel. To start with the call, “Annex us.”

“No. No one is saying ‘annex us.’ There are some who have been positive about the notion of one state in which there are equal voting rights for all, as President Rivlin said. That changes the whole situation but doesn’t eliminate the struggle. It’s only a semblance of the victory of the struggle.”

What you’re actually saying is that it has to be the result of an agreement, a prior decision about a change in Israel’s character. And not as a different track of the struggle that’s planned in stages – first you ask to join and then begin to spearhead a struggle for civil equality.

“Which is why I am telling you that, despite my personal ambitions, it will probably be someone else, many years from now.”

http://ift.tt/2lLsrBv

#uncategorized #Israel #Palestine