Comment by reliabilityguy
7 months ago
> Yes they did, this was the Nakba
Gotcha. So, refugees are colonizers then, right?
> The purchase of the land up to 1948 resulted in only 6% of palestine being occupied
Palestinians owned about 8%. The rest was owned by the Ottomans and later by the British mandate.
> White supremacy is not really about being white or not. Italians and southern europeans were not considered white in the early 20th century US. Its about who is considered the top of a hierarchy of a racial hierarchy or not.
You are contradicting yourself. White supremacy is either about race (ie white) or not. If it’s not about race at all, then how can it determine racial hierarchy???
> You are talking to a Jewish former zionist, with grandparents who survived the holocaust, who has rejected the myths of Zionism.
I don’t care who you are. I argue about your claims, and not ethnic or cultural or ancestral background. You can be the Moses himself and still be wrong.
> The narrative is based on historical evidence.
You are not.
> I'm applying the same standards to Jews as I would do to Nazis.
What does it even mean? Are you saying Jews are nazis?
> Gotcha. So, refugees are colonizers then, right?
Once you start making natives refugees themselves and oppressing them, yes
> Palestinians owned about 8%. The rest was owned by the Ottomans and later by the British mandate.
So not owned by Jews either. Also most of African colonies were not owned by Africans themselves so by your argument they could not own the land they had been living on for generations? Really bad argument there
> You are contradicting yourself. White supremacy is either about race (ie white) or not. If it’s not about race at all, then how can it determine racial hierarchy???
Because what constitutes a race shifts according to what is convenient for the powers that be. Since early Zionist Jews in Palestine were primarily European, they were considered worthy, because it was suitable.
> I don’t care who you are. I argue about your claims, and not ethnic or cultural or ancestral background. You can be the Moses himself and still be wrong.
You asked me in your previous comment "Man, why are you like that?", so I answered.
> The narrative is based on historical evidence.
Multiple historians, including Israeli ones have researched the subject and even there are differences on some points, they broadly agree that the Nakba existed. To deny it is the same thing as denying the Holocaust.
> I'm applying the same standards to Jews as I would do to Nazis.
I'm simply saying that I'm not making a special case for Jewish people committing war crimes. I don't think Jews are Nazis, but I do think that zionist rhetoric and methods, especially in Gaza, shares disturbing similarities to the Nazis.