← Back to context

Comment by akoboldfrying

1 day ago

> Israel is a democracy (albeit increasingly authoritarian) only if you belong to one ethnicity.

> You're referring to the small minority of Palestinians who were not expelled by Israel in 1948. They and their descendants number about 2 million now.

Your initial statement was highly sensational, strongly negative if true, and yet easily debunked. Statements like this on a contentious topic reduce one's credibility and the overall quality of discussion. Why do it?

If the United States were to strip 40% of its population (targeted on an ethnic basis) of citizenship and subject them martial law, would you consider it a democracy?

The answer is obvious. You can pretend to be worried about credibility, but you know what you're defending.

  • I haven't so far defended anything other than the principle (in fact, merely the utility) of making arguments in good faith.

    You could have initially made the observation that a large fraction of Israel's population lack voting rights, and all of those people share an ethnicity -- but you chose instead to make a stronger and more alarming claim that you knew to be wrong.

    Arguing in good faith is a prerequisite of useful discussion, it's that simple. Until you accept this, statements you make will tend to undermine your position in readers' minds, not strengthen it.