#41
[account deactivated]
#42
[account deactivated]
#43
Post rating: ~
not that this really warrants the xpost

discipline posted:
To respond to some of the points raised in that thread:
1. Hasbara is extremely effective both internally and externally for many reasons, of course it can be likened to certain extreme cases such as North Korea or Maoist propaganda but in all honesty the differences are obvious and meaningful. North Korea exists in effective isolation, its inhabitants do not compare the official narrative to the global narrative and in the other examples we're talking about vast empires that were self sustaining both culturally and economically. Israeli propaganda and the zionist narrative in general are incredibly self consistent.
2. Baby Finland's view of a 'peaceful solution' are clearly not compatible with my own, what Goey said is more akin to what I intended to discuss, what does Baby Finland mean when he says "Israel will have to die or integrate", while I agree it's a likely eventuality that Israel will be forced to become a bi-national country i do think it will either require a massive paradigm shift in the zionist narrative or alternatively massive bloodshed (that is of course more likely to produce results other than bi-national utopia, i.e the 'samson option' as noted by mr. Paine). That's basically why I brought up South Africa, it seems like the level of indoctrination was not as meaningful in SA, it seems like SA ethnocentric propaganda failed to achieve such degrees of conviction and support, on a global as well as a local scale. Forcing integration non-violently in SA didn't really require rewriting history per-se, wouldn't it be different in Israel?


I don't feel comfortable telling israelis how or even that they should change their zionist narriative. that's really up to them. I think we were just pointing out that a solution to zionism can be found outside of this. besides, the zionist narrative is not going to change due to good will of israelis. so you can fashion a compelling moral argument against the zionist project, good for you, now write a book about it! because hebrew-language news is not going to adopt that as the mantle of zionist thought.

anyway you are going to have to make the continuation of that thought process incredibly dangerous to popular israeli interests and that doesn't happen through marching in tel aviv or lecturing coworkers. what we were saying is that israelis do what is best for israel and this is almost totally unblameworthy as far as I am concerned. that's what it is to be a nationalist. since the tenants of antiopccupation are clearly so set against those of zionism there must be another concept created that is going to scare people out of zionism and into integration, and that is probably a free and democratic egypt, jordan, syria, etc. I think BDS is good for popularizing the idea of ending the occupation and so I support it on these grounds, but it is ultimately counterproductive as it forces israel deeper into the hole and leaving them no where to run. it's not until the arab states themselves start to confront israel on a direct popular united front against zionism that we will see haaretz and jpost change their bottom lines.

in the meanwhile it is important that western powers change their perceptions of israel because as support slips here, this is going to signal the feasibility of creating such a popular front in the arab states.

you better duck when it comes, better duck coz it's comin
best believe that it's on, got em runnin r-runnin
now tell them rap bitches that khammy says this
WE GOT TOMTOMS OVER HERE BIGGER THAN A MONSTER!!!!!!!



Ah, well, okay sorry but you just take too many historicist reductionist conclusions i just can't agree with pretty much anything you said.

I do not view anything as if it has already been decided at this point, second, i think that the actions of israeli jews are only beneficial to them within they own narrative; objectively they're quite possibly highly damaging , for the reasons that you view as the 'inevitable solution to the conflict'.

the questions i originally raised took into consideration the possibility of a change in external perceptions forcing a change on israelis, whether it will lead to an isolationist model or not etc, idk for me these are interesting questions, i guess for you these are forgone conclusions.


EDIT: FIXED FORMATTING

Edited by NEOADMINISTRATOR ()

#44
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

Israel only negotiates seriously when it feels it has no other choice and when its adversary has enough power to impose an outcome it cannot prevent by other means.

(...)

But while Hamas was strong in the specific context of negotiations over prisoners, the movement by itself or even in combination with other Palestinian factions is not strong enough to compel Israel to meet broader demands.



Modeled on the successful campaign that helped isolate apartheid South Africa, the logic is straightforward: As long as Israel enjoys an overwhelming power advantage it will never respect Palestinian rights nor dismantle its racist, colonial and apartheid-like policies. Why should it when it pays no price for doing what it pleases?



And in his May speech to the Israel lobby (AIPAC), President Obama vowed that the U.S. would help Israel fight “delegitimization.”
But he warned nonetheless that “the march to isolate Israel internationally — and the impulse of the Palestinians to abandon negotiations — will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process and alternative.”

Israel’s isolation is growing not only because of BDS, but because of regional developments including the uprising that toppled Egypt’s pro-Israel Mubarak regime, and Turkey’s break with Israel over the Gaza siege and the attack on the Mavi Marmara.



http://www.salon.com/2011/10/21/inside_the_mideast_prisoner_swap/

#45
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
I don't know why you said that my idea of "peaceful solution" is "clearly different' from yours since I didn't explain at all what a just peace might look like and neither did you. What are you implying? I don't really disagree with anything you said in that post so that seemed like a weird "antisemite" ad hom or something
#46
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
Guestpost from Ask Phoebe:

GILAD!!!!!!!!!!

He’s free and he’s home in the bosom of his family and his country.

Celebrate, Israel, with all the joyous gratitude that fills your hearts, as we all do along with you.

Then round up his captors, the slaughtering, death-worshiping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women—those who aren’t strapping bombs to their own devils’ spawn and sending them out to meet their seventy-two virgins by taking the lives of the school-bus-riding, heart-drawing, Transformer-doodling, homework-losing children of Others—and their offspring—those who haven’t already been pimped out by their mothers to the murder god—as shields, hiding behind their burkas and cradles like the unmanned animals they are, and throw them not into your prisons, where they can bide until they’re traded by the thousands for another child of Israel, but into the sea, to float there, food for sharks, stargazers, and whatever other oceanic carnivores God has put there for the purpose.



http://badrachel.blogspot.com/2011/10/gilad.html?spref=tw

#47
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
Mearsheimer and Finkelstein discussing the future of Israel

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/pathbreaking-scholars-norman-finkelstein-and-john-mearsheimer-speak-out-about-the-precarious-future-of-the-jewish-state/

Finkelstein's arguments roughly correlate with discipline's and my own (that Israel is becoming increasingly isolated from its traditional power brokers), while Mearsheimer proposes almost precisely the opposite argument of SIF's, an argument that I think also clashes with ours: that Israel is materially powerful but ideologically vulnerable.
#48
[account deactivated]
#49
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
SIF:

I think the Israelis are bluffing irt "Samson Option". I take a lot of Israeli posturing as a bluff though. I'm probably the least "Israel is crazy" person you will find to talk to around here.

I don't doubt for a second that sectarian insurgency from the settlers is in the cards, but again a) I don't think ideological battles matter there at all and b) I don't think that's actually so significant i/r/t Israel's larger geopolitical trajectory. White South Africans have gone through a fundamentally similar ideological trajectory as the one we're talking about and yet it never mattered how zealous or violent they were willing to be in the end.
#50
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

discipline posted:
damn that's gotta be ask phoebe because I've never seen anyone but her construct a sentence that incredible



its actually eliott abrams's wife, rachel

#51
penitent
Post rating: ~
jews huh