"I don’t believe it’s a big ask for you or anyone else to apply equal application of this practice to Jews."
Haha, if you'd like me to stop replying I will. I'll restrict myself only to addressing the above point, because it's important. But happy for this to be my last reply.
Yes, I agree completely. The application of any principle shoul…
"I don’t believe it’s a big ask for you or anyone else to apply equal application of this practice to Jews."
Haha, if you'd like me to stop replying I will. I'll restrict myself only to addressing the above point, because it's important. But happy for this to be my last reply.
Yes, I agree completely. The application of any principle should be consistent. And I'm consistently opposed to the creation of ethnostates on the basis of religion or ethnicity or any aspect of group identity. I'm not singling out Jews here at all.
To my knowledge, Israel's legal and often illegal enforcement of the Jews' alleged God-given right to a piece of land is unique. But if not, as I said above, I'd object exactly as strongly to a "black" state or a "Christian" state or a "Muslim" state.
Not least because, in each of the cases you mention, there was enormous death, brutality and suffering, both at the time, and in many cases, still years later, as a result of the creation of these states. There's a reason why both the partition of India and the expulsion of Arabs are known in their native languages as "The Catastrophe." There's a reason why there's still a genocide happening in Sudan. There's a reason why Jews and Muslims are still dying in the Middle East.
If outsider military might is used, I think it should be used to unite people, most of whom, I'll remind you, were already living in peace. Jews and Muslims have lived in that part of the world, largely without incident, for centuries. It was European anti semitism, the British empire's God complex, and religious extremism on both sides that led to the mess we see today.
So yes, I sadly agree with you that we don't seem to learn from history. But we should. And Israeli Jews have more reason to have learned from history than most. Indeed, as I've pointed out, the Jews who experienced the worst of that history *have* learned from it. I'm just praying that nobody, Jewish or Muslim or anything else, has to experience those same horror before they learn too.
Quick follow-up. I am deciding to keep my posts up. Regardless of the topic, I hope our exchange here can serve as an example of how to have a civil dialogue online. Lofty ambition?
“To my knowledge, Israel's legal and often illegal enforcement of the Jews' alleged God-given right to a piece of land is unique. But if not, as I said above, I'd object exactly as strongly to a "black" state or a "Christian" state or a "Muslim" state.”
The Crusades were EXACTLY about a religion’s God-given claims to the holy lands. Religion was used as a “justification” taming the “savages” and “infidels” of all the places conquered and colonized by the Christian and Islamic worlds. Religions were the umbrella political system that united pfeifdoms, sheikdoms, tribes, etc., prior the to the development of political nation states as we know them today.
More specific to Israel/Palestine (and applicable to India/Pakistan), this is exactly the Arab Islamist claim to the land—and 1,300+ years later written in Hamas’ charter. I believe it’s called the “ummah,” and it basically states that any land conquered by Islam can never be given up or surrendered to non-Muslims. The Islamic Empire was a conquering and colonizing force that originated in the Hijaz (Saudi Arabia post WWI colonialism). They didn’t build the pyramids of Giza or the Roman aqueducts and amphitheaters in the Levant. The didn’t build the Byzantine church that became the Hagia Sofia Mosque in Istanbul (which was once Constantinople).
"I don’t believe it’s a big ask for you or anyone else to apply equal application of this practice to Jews."
Haha, if you'd like me to stop replying I will. I'll restrict myself only to addressing the above point, because it's important. But happy for this to be my last reply.
Yes, I agree completely. The application of any principle should be consistent. And I'm consistently opposed to the creation of ethnostates on the basis of religion or ethnicity or any aspect of group identity. I'm not singling out Jews here at all.
To my knowledge, Israel's legal and often illegal enforcement of the Jews' alleged God-given right to a piece of land is unique. But if not, as I said above, I'd object exactly as strongly to a "black" state or a "Christian" state or a "Muslim" state.
Not least because, in each of the cases you mention, there was enormous death, brutality and suffering, both at the time, and in many cases, still years later, as a result of the creation of these states. There's a reason why both the partition of India and the expulsion of Arabs are known in their native languages as "The Catastrophe." There's a reason why there's still a genocide happening in Sudan. There's a reason why Jews and Muslims are still dying in the Middle East.
If outsider military might is used, I think it should be used to unite people, most of whom, I'll remind you, were already living in peace. Jews and Muslims have lived in that part of the world, largely without incident, for centuries. It was European anti semitism, the British empire's God complex, and religious extremism on both sides that led to the mess we see today.
So yes, I sadly agree with you that we don't seem to learn from history. But we should. And Israeli Jews have more reason to have learned from history than most. Indeed, as I've pointed out, the Jews who experienced the worst of that history *have* learned from it. I'm just praying that nobody, Jewish or Muslim or anything else, has to experience those same horror before they learn too.
Quick follow-up. I am deciding to keep my posts up. Regardless of the topic, I hope our exchange here can serve as an example of how to have a civil dialogue online. Lofty ambition?
I lied…you are too irresistible not to reply.
“To my knowledge, Israel's legal and often illegal enforcement of the Jews' alleged God-given right to a piece of land is unique. But if not, as I said above, I'd object exactly as strongly to a "black" state or a "Christian" state or a "Muslim" state.”
The Crusades were EXACTLY about a religion’s God-given claims to the holy lands. Religion was used as a “justification” taming the “savages” and “infidels” of all the places conquered and colonized by the Christian and Islamic worlds. Religions were the umbrella political system that united pfeifdoms, sheikdoms, tribes, etc., prior the to the development of political nation states as we know them today.
More specific to Israel/Palestine (and applicable to India/Pakistan), this is exactly the Arab Islamist claim to the land—and 1,300+ years later written in Hamas’ charter. I believe it’s called the “ummah,” and it basically states that any land conquered by Islam can never be given up or surrendered to non-Muslims. The Islamic Empire was a conquering and colonizing force that originated in the Hijaz (Saudi Arabia post WWI colonialism). They didn’t build the pyramids of Giza or the Roman aqueducts and amphitheaters in the Levant. The didn’t build the Byzantine church that became the Hagia Sofia Mosque in Istanbul (which was once Constantinople).