Edit: Blocked the author’s name, because it’s not my tumblr. I didn’t expect so many people to misinterpret it and respond in this way.

Edit 2: This is not from the same author, but it’s a reply to them. I think it might help clarify the post for those that are confused:

I normally don’t worry about usernames on tumblr, but since there’ve been some really out-of-pocket misconceptions in the thread, I don’t want anyone to harass them.

  • ExIsraeliAnarchist@kbin.social
    67·
    9 months ago

    Zionists invaded Palestine in 1947-48

    Being deliberately ignorant of history isn’t helping anyone.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_Judaism_in_the_Land_of_Israel

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_diaspora

    I do not support the apartheid state of Israel or the illegal settlements and occupation of Palestine, but Jewish people belong on parts of that land just as much as Palestinians belong on others, and this conflict will never be resolved as long as people, especially those who brush of thousands of years of history aside as nuance because its easier than actually making an effort to understand it, argue that only one group has a rightful claim to the land.

    An anarchist should be supporting the people, not one state or another, and this isn’t to say that there is a power balance or that both sides are responsible, no, only Israel is, but those in power over both people are using them as pawns to stay in power. They are the ones who need to be removed.

    • LinkOpensChest.wavOP
      23·
      9 months ago

      I don’t see anything whatsoever in that Wikipedia that conflicts with the tumblr post. Would you care to quote which part you believe is inaccurate and why? I’m curious If you’re misreading or somehow misinterpreting the post.

      An anarchist should be supporting the people, not one state or another

      Yes, and here’s a relevant quote from Anarchism and Its Aspirations, which addresses this apparent contradiction nicely:

      If we understand this sense of negative and positive freedom, what appears as a contradictory stance within anarchism makes perfect sense. An anarchist might firmly believe that the Palestinian people deserve to be liberated from occupation, even if that means that they set up their own state. That same anarchist might also firmly believe that a Palestinian state, like all states, should be opposed in favor of nonstatist institutions. A complete sense of freedom would always include both the negative and positive senses—in this case, liberation from occupation and simultaneously the freedom to self-determine. Otherwise, as both actually existing Communist and liberal regimes have demonstrated, “freedom from” on its own will serve merely to enslave human potentiality, and at its most extreme, humans themselves; self-governance is denied in favor of a few governing over others. And “freedom to,” on its own, as capitalism has shown, will serve merely to promote egotistic individualism and pit each against each; self-determination trumps notions of collective good. Constantly working to bring both liberation and freedom to the table, within moments of resistance and reconstruction, is part of that same juggling act of approximating an increasingly differentiated yet more harmonious world.

      We can recognize that no state is good while still recognizing the Palestinians’ right to be free from oppression and genocide. There really is no conflict with anarchism, even though it may appear to be at first glance. This is one of many very common misconceptions about anarchism.

      • ExIsraeliAnarchist@kbin.social
        25·
        9 months ago

        Did you fully read the post you shared or my reply?

        I already quoted the part that’s inaccurate, also the post you shared isn’t calling simply for liberation from occupation, which I support, its calling for the displacement of Israelis basically “back to where they came form”, ignoring that they came form the region of Palestine/Israel, and mostly displaced by their own oppressors generations ago, while still maintaining some continuous settlement the region (so no, they didn’t sudenly turn up in 47-48, and Zionism is about a hundred years older than that - like I say, it’s easier to brush off as nuance than even learn the basics).

        You don’t free one people by displacing another. You free both by freeing them from the people playing them against each other and stopping peace for power.

        • LinkOpensChest.wavOP
          21·
          9 months ago

          The state of Israel appeared in 1948. This is a well-documented historic fact, no matter how inconvenient that fact may be to your agenda (had a look at your comment history, wow). It is this state that the post is referring to.

          Also:

          its calling for the displacement of Israelis basically “back to where they came form”

          What are you quoting from? This is not a quote from the post, nor is it stated by it in any way.

          So I am correct that you have completely misread and misinterpreted the post.

          In fact, your comments appear to be copy/pasted versions of themselves. That may be why your comments don’t really address my post at all…

          • ExIsraeliAnarchist@kbin.social
            6·
            9 months ago

            Did you fully read the post you shared or my reply?

            “Well, Jewish people need a place where they won’t be discriminated against” I absolutely agree. so make every country in the world safe for Jewish people.

            How you can interpret this as anything other than displacing the Jewish people from that region, is on you.

            As for my “agenda” - it’s to share from my lived experience and knowledge of this conflict (which most of you have none) to push for REAL peace and freedom for ALL of the people of that region (and it looks copy-pasted because the erasure of Jewish history on the land is always the same), and as I already said - ignoring thousands of years of history because you’re too lazy to learn it properly, and reducing the conflict to an “easy” but useless solution to fit your black and white view, is a sure fire way to ever let that happen. If you want to continue to do so, knock yourself out, but erasing the parts that are inconvenient to your agenda, only demonstrates your ignorance and unwillingness for there to be an real and viable solution to a conflict you openly refuse to understand (until we are free of states and nations, the ONLY viable solution is a two state one, where both people share the land).

            No one is forcing you to double down, you can just put your hand up and say that in your quest to ignore nuance you uncritically shared a post that didn’t say what you think it did (unless you agree that Jews have no history or place in the region and should all be removed and displaced to countries they have nothing to do with, which I don’t think you do) and admit it’s an uninformed shit take. A straightforward “free Palestine” or even “fuck the state of Israel” meme would serve everyone much better.

            • LinkOpensChest.wavOP
              5·
              9 months ago

              How you can interpret this as anything other than displacing the Jewish people from that region, is on you.

              How can you possibly interpret it as “displacing the Jewish people from that region”? In what twisted way are you extrapolating that. It’s not there. Like at all. Care to break that down for me and let me know how you arrived at such an interpretation?

              You’re arguing against a post that doesn’t exist.

              you uncritically shared a post that didn’t say what you think it did and admit it’s an uninformed shit take.

              A bit full of yourself, considering you made a fool of yourself by grossly misinterpreting a post that makes an accurate point.

              • waybreadenthusiast@feddit.de
                5·
                9 months ago

                I really don’t want to get involved… But I think someone else needs to say this: The original post is indeed ambiguous. It could be interpreted in two ways:

                i) making every country safe for jews indicates that they should be going back to “their” country of origin

                ii) making every country safe for jews indicates that a new state of israel/palestine is also safe for jews and everyone can just go on and live wherever they please.

                Now we have two possible interpretations. The problem being that i) is actually ignorant of historical facts (jews have lived in that region far longer than muslims) and while admittedly being a minority have some right to live in the region. The claim that ashkenazi jews are by and lagre converts has also not a real and (this is even more important) clear historical background. On the other hand ii) might be a fairer interpretation and would actually solve a lot of things but fails in two aspects: 1) It seems not an easy solution and 2) It has the air of being a bit oversimplified. It reminds of a child hearing of war for the first time and reacting with “why can’t they just stop and love each other”. This sentiment is noble and a nice thought but it’s also not based in reality.

                • LinkOpensChest.wavOP
                  2·
                  9 months ago

                  If you like, I can DM you the tumblr account information, and you can ask them. It seems like for some reason people here are interpreting the post in the worst possible way, and I think the first person to comment on this post was not doing so in good faith, deliberately seeking to derail this thread, and it’s worked.

                  If you check their comment history, it’s pretty spammy, with the same comments being made on any post criticizing Israel. They’re from kbin, and since I have an account there as well where I can view downvotes, I looked into it and it appears they have an alt account they’ve used to downvote any comments here supporting Palestine.

                  There is zero reason “their country of origin” should ever have been referenced here. It is not referenced in the post. At all.

                  So I actually disagree that it’s unclear, unless you REALLY reach.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          11·
          9 months ago

          its calling for the displacement of Israelis basically “back to where they came form”, ignoring that they came form the region of Palestine/Israel

          No, they didn’t, really. Most ashkenazi jews were converts. And also: european. There’s a reason why yiddish is so closely related to German. And jewish cuisine is clearly distinct from palestinian cuisine.

          Jewsin diaspora are exactly that: in diaspora. They belong to wherever they live. You can actually still see the hole in German culture which the Nazis tore by murdering/displacing so much of the German population.

          Claiming that a people needs to have some country to be purely for them is nothing, but blood and soil ideology.

          (so no, they didn’t sudenly turn up in 47-48, and Zionism is about a hundred years older than that - like I say, it’s easier to brush off as nuance than even learn the basics).

          Zionism is about 50 years older. And there was a minority of about 20% of jews in the 1930s. To make it a jewish majority state, mass settling was performed.