478
Israel frees colonist who stripped a Palestinian man naked, zip-tied his penis and paraded him around in front of his family, (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
52 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Link to article: https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-settler-accused-of-attack-to-be-freed-from-house-arrest-barred-from-west-bank/amp/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Oh my, sorry I missed this earlier. Yes, this is distortively oversimplified.

So, no, a complex system of colonialism, racialization, tools of genocide dependent on globalized economics and supply chains, and institutions of knowledge production are not part of our, "lizard brains." But to suggest that the underlying imperialism and genocide somehow is is a very popular, ahistorical narrative deployed by fascists, like Zionists, to naturalize their actions. If it is "natural" for humans to be "tribalistic," and tribalism inevitably results in genocide and imperialism, then there is no way to stop what they're doing and most importantly, no point in trying. This is, of course, a lie.

We have many examples of cultural or ethnic groups cooperating over territory well before and after this modern period. For example, the Dish Wirh One Spoon Wampum between the Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee in the Great Lakes Region of North America coexisted with British racialization and colonization of Gaelic peoples in Ireland. In fact, we know that the concept of territory as you naturalized here doesn't even apply to this agreement, as it presumes territory and land are equivalent, and both are commodified. Conversely, their agreement ensured a shared, "international" access to the land's resources on its terms as well as the nations who were a part of it.

This is all of course besides the egregious assertion that there is somehow an equivalence between the violence of the colonizer and colonized. No, self-defense is not the same as murder, and a victim is not irrational for refusing to stop so long as the murderer will not. Israel is a settler-colonial state, and as all of its kind it not only employs, but requires genocide to exist. It is founded on the notion that territory, which is the same as land in this understanding, ought to belong to a privileged, idealized group of people. There is no world where these systems exist and do not seek to continue their genocide of any and all indigenous peoples. This system exists not because it is inevitable, but because there is a vested interest of the EU, UK, Canada, US, Australia, every settler-colonial state in the world to safeguard Israel's power to commit that genocide as they all must and do. Ireland is actually a great example of how this functions since, as a colonized land and people, there is certainly more empathy and sympathy for Palestinians than many other global north cultures. However, that doesn't mean the Republic of Ireland will leave the EU so long as it is complacent in the genocide of Palestinians. It is for the same reason that Israel is very much a EuroAmerican project.

That is why it is such a strawman to behave as though decolonization amounts to, "kicking the white people out," even if that wouldn't be necessarily unjust to demand. Settler-colonialism is a system, a set of socially constructed relations, and decolonialism is the movement to deconstruct that system. A two-state solution is not that, and its use in Ireland has tellingly not resolved the centuries of continued harm to Irish Gaelic peoples. When you say violence only stops when "both sides," agree to stop, you have discounted the reality that this system can afford to postpone genocide. Canada and the US have legal guarantees for indigenous nations within their occupied territory that often function comparably to two-state solutions in their focus on autonomy and sovereignty, it would be laughable to say that this means neither the US or Canada have genocidal intentions toward those nations. There is little immediate or mass violence related to colonization projects in North America at this point not because both sides have agreed to peace, but because the colonizers have adopted more abstract, occluding mechanisms of genocide that can act slowly over generations. You are always wrong to say people should not fight that. Nobody is telling settlers to 'go home,' but that doesn't mean you can just expect them to lay down and die for the convenience of momentary peace.

Also, indigenous peoples do not live on "rock," they live in relationship to an ecosystem and all living things in it as well as the generations of memory and culture that they embody in relation to those living things. To suggest that indigenous peoples are defending "rock," is, quite frankly, genocidal in its attempt to minimize the rationality of their self-defense. Even if it was just a rock, that doesn't erase their relationship.I have my grandmother's flatware, it is hardly just "aluminum," and it isn't nearly as important to me as my home or the memories they are a part of. I seriously doubt you'd reduce it in this way if you were victimized by this system in the same way Palestinians have.

I'm not sure if you intended to promote fascism, but you did whether you wanted to or not. It is crucial to interrogate our own assumptions and ways of knowing this world exactly because settler-colonial institutions exert so much power over how we are able to engage with the world. If something does not make sense to you, it is better to consider that you do not understand it well enough than assume that others are simply less reasonable than you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children)

    That is why it is such a strawman to behave as though decolonization amounts to, "kicking the white people out," even if that wouldn't be necessarily unjust to demand.

    I can tell that you are a white North American looking at Americancentric lens judging from the fact that you ignored what I mentioned about non-whites settling later in lands already settled by other non-white people; thinking only white people can commit violence. Settling does not always mean resulting in violence. This is the weird self-hatred among white liberals that even Slavoj Zizek criticised and cringed upon. It is an ignorant claim that Ireland is complicit to Israel, even though Ireland-- along with Spain and Norway-- support Palestine. Not knowing this is probably due to your lack of knowledge outside of your country, or simply out of out group homogeneity bias. "Ah they are Europeans, they are all the same."

    A two-state solution is not that, and its use in Ireland has tellingly not resolved the centuries of continued harm to Irish Gaelic peoples. When you say violence only stops when "both sides," agree to stop, you have discounted the reality that this system can afford to postpone genocide.

    Nobody is telling settlers to 'go home,' but that doesn't mean you can just expect them to lay down and die for the convenience of momentary peace.

    The Northern Ireland peace process already had shown the way. The settlers in Northern Ireland did lay down their arms in exchange of peace. The dissident Irish republicans laid down their arms. The fact that you did not acknowledge this proved my initial point that most people ignore the Northern Irish model because they don't know Irish history, or purposefully ignore it to cheer on their favourite team no matter what.

    Also, indigenous peoples do not live on "rock," they live in relationship to an ecosystem and all living things in it as well as the generations of memory and culture that they embody in relation to those living things. To suggest that indigenous peoples are defending "rock," is

    And twisting my words as if I am demeaning Palestinians when in fact I am demeaning all humans for baseless tribalism. This usual exoticisation of indigenous groups that "they live in nature" is ironic "friendly" racism, as if non-whites could do no harm. Much of human history is filled with violence regardless of scale. I'm sure you will be disappointed to hear of the Moriori genocide. Let me tell you, you ain't going win brownie points exoticising non-white indigenous cos you ain't brown.

    We have many examples of cultural or ethnic groups cooperating over territory well before and after this modern period.

    All that patronising sophistry and somehow you have proven unable to comprehend. That's what I am saying you absolute dolt. That's why I am advocating for two state solution like post-British colonial Ireland, or post-Good Friday Agreement Northern Ireland. I suggest you read up on the history of Northern Ireland and learn more information outside of your self-flagellating circlejerk which Slavoj will condemn and cringe upon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Okay, so you did mean to promote fascism. I can tell you're a European by how you promote fascism and act entitled to do so with comfort; maybe they are all the same. You should read what I put before responding this way.

    • The use of whiteness was actually very intentional, it is a fluid category and if you noticed, I pointed out how Ireland was racialized despite the apparently inuitive fact that Irish people are white. You'll also notice that this was from a section that elaborates on how this mentality applies globally since, y'know, since you claimed that the lessons from Ireland are universal (like colonizers do). When we look at how it translates to other colonized spaces, like North America, we see that actually this is not the case.
    • I said the EU is complicit in the genocide of Palestinians, which it is and always has been. The fact that the Republic of Ireland would not leave the EU despite a cultural empathy toward Palestinians because of a shared colonial experience demonstrates how this system functions in fundamental ways to enable settler-colonial genocide internationally. The EU exists to prevent imperialism in Europe, which many European liberals and fascists such as yourself view as the real failure of the 20th century. Ireland's economic and political reliance on the EU enables the conditions where, despite clear signs that genocide should not happen internationally, any potentially disruptive states from within the EU are unlikely to muster a meaningful challenge to its enactment against the EU's will; as you've stated.
    • No, it is not the same thing as, "the noble savage" or "mystical indian" narratives to recognize the historical and cultural links between indigenous peoples and the land they live in relation to, which includes recognizing that your Euroimperialist understanding of "territory" doesn't apply exactly because it is constructed around colonialism, which is why you ended up advocating for colonialism by using it.

    You learned about oppressed white people and thought that gave you a free card to be "right" about colonialism. I followed this final quote with a well-documented, historical Wampum, but I figure that doesn't matter to you because it isn't white people. You aren't well informed on any of this, and were clearly undeserving of my understanding. I also have no clue about the fixation on Zizek, I did not mention him, and could easily beat him in a boxing match if I so wished, his approval (even this fictionalized version) is irrelevant.

    Like always, fascists can eat shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    When we look at how it translates to other colonized spaces, like North America, we see that actually this is not the case.

    Northern Ireland has been colonised and I am talking about utilising the model for Israel-Palestine, not North America. You are strawmanning and you know it.

    The use of whiteness was actually very intentional, it is a fluid category and if you noticed, I pointed out how Ireland was racialized despite the apparently inuitive fact that Irish people are white.

    The Irish wasn't even considered white until recently, along with Southern Europeans, especially the Italians.

    The fact that the Republic of Ireland would not leave the EU

    Huh? You do realise that disagreement in country happens, right? By that logic, why don't your state leave the United States for literally having elected a fascist PDF file president who objectively fund the Israeli genocide?

    Okay, so you did mean to promote fascism. I can tell you're a European by how you promote fascism and act entitled to do so with comfort; maybe they are all the same. You should read what I put before responding this way.

    So are you saying the people of Northern Ireland are all fascists? Both Irish and Unionists? Are you going to tell both Israeli and Palestinian scholars who advocate for two state solution they are fascists? Are the black and white South Africans fascists for reconciling post-apartheid instead of kicking out the Europeans?

    Aww..cry me a river..someone wants to win brownie points with all the sophistry and self-flagellation. Zizek would be cringing upon you. This is the wishy washy normie version of corpospeak. Where did I say I promote fascism? YOU are promoting fascism for only advocating violent interest groups rather than actually advocating for coexistence. YOU are the racist for exoticising non-white indigenous as if they could do no wrong and not seeing them as humans who are capable love, care, hate and uncaring. Again, you are trying to win brownie points but you ain't brown. You'd make a great cast for Get Out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent