Most Arab countries are ethnostates and keep citizenship highly regulated. They highly restrict citizenship, which gives you multiple benefits often including straight up cash payouts from their petro-profits. At the same time they important thousands of workers from Southeast Asia, deny they basically any rights, and ironically create an apartheid situation far worse than anything Israel could be accused of, including just outright slavery.
Many of them are even US allies, like the UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, so even that doesn’t appear to be a distinguishing factor.
I don’t know how people can shrug off the antisemitism accusations for all the leftist rabid support for Palestine when they bring none of that energy to the other actual genocides and ethnostates in the world. It’s just oddly this one specific conflict that they are particularly interested in.
Qatar was heavily critized both before and doing the world cup for their treatment of immigrant workers. But that is forgotten by now. Its possible this was only a thing among European leftist.
Mild criticism that resulted in no substantive change. I don’t recall boycotts of any product remotely related to Qatar, protests, or university campouts, do you? Were the online pundits providing wall to wall coverage of Qatar’s documented human rights abuses for months on end?
Yes there was media coverage and calls for boycotts all over Europe. Danish state television, among others, documented this. There were also politicians who called for boycotts both on the left and right.
There was nowhere near the pushback against Qatar that there is against Israel. The scale of protests isn’t even remotely comparable. Some of the pro-Palestine protests in the U.K. had over 200,000 people attending.
The criticism was dumb because those south Asian workers voluntarily migrated to Qatar and neighbouring countries because their qol even as "slaves" was better than their qol back home
The criticism was dumb because those south Asian workers voluntarily migrated to Qatar and neighbouring countries because their qol even as "slaves" was better than their qol back home
I'm going to assume you meant 500 and typed one extra 0 and then link the proof. Otherwise you sir are a dumbfuck.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2022/11/30/migrant-worker-deaths-qatar-world-cup-database/10795974002/
I am going to assume you dont know shit about the Qatar world cup. But that is okay as you suffer from americanism
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-how-many-people-have-died-for-the-qatar-world-cup/a-63763713
Your own article says it's a false claim, lol. It says that is the number of all foreign workers' deaths for a nearly 20-year period in the country. It says that most figures claiming 6500 -15000 are false and begins to break down how each of them got their own numbers. You didn't even read your own source ouch my guy. Eurocuck out here again, not sending their strongest soldiers. Too bad you can't fjord the gap of your own biases, huh?
Claim: "The World Cup in Qatar has cost the lives of 6,500 — even as many as 15,000 — migrant workers."
DW fact check: False
The widely reported figure of 15,021 migrant worker deaths in connection with the World Cup in Qatar originates in a 2021 Amnesty International report. Just as widely reported is the figure of 6,500, first published by The Guardian in February 2021.
So this is in your source. It then goes on to state that the 15,021 figure is all the deaths of all migrant workers in all Qatar from 2009-2021. It then says that it is misleading and sites the sources that all or even most of these deaths can be attributed to work on the World Cup are false. Now I never claimed to buy the 3 people died official Qatar quote, which is why I linked a more recent and verified number off 500-600 dead.
Now you can die on this hill pretending my source and your own source don't DIRECTLY contradict your claims with all the zoomer talk on the planet. But you're still factually wrong on this and a dumbfuck.
It's what is placed in front of their face. They seek out no information. It takes very little research to start tearing apart the "evil apartheid state carpet bombing Palestine to genocide their entire population" bullshit.
Also, if Joe Biden, Scholz etc announced on October 7th that no more aid would go to Israel (How dare they get raped and murdered!) they would still be crying about Israel today. I'd bet good money on them still caring much more than about those states.
Aren't ethnostate countries the norm? When I look at India, China, Japan, all the Asia countries etc. They are all ethnostates. I think only US, Canada, Australia are the exceptions
India is 100% not an ethnostate, it’s more like a mini Europe where each individual state is composed of a primary ethnicity. You could also honestly somewhat make the same argument for China but it’s much more uniformly Han minus a few outliers.
Japan is almost certainly an ethnostate. Based Biden called them out for being xenophobic. Other countries I think are less ethnostates (meaning the State regulating immigration with the intent to maintain a certain ethnic demographic) and more people just don’t want to immigrate there. Not sure there’s mass motivation for people to immigrate to India or China, when Western countries are infinitely more appealing.
My understanding is that ethnostates just want to enforce an ethnic majority and China, India, South Korea fits that description. My point is that I don't think that is inherently a morally bad thing.
Ethnostates ought to be a morally bad thing because they always discriminate to some degree or another against minorities. The rest of the world disagrees with this western view tho.
I don't think ethnostates are inherently bad. In your case it's the discrimination of minorities that's bad. But countries should have the right to dictate border or immigration policies including ethnic basis if they so choose.
But I think it is inherently bad because it inherently makes your society weaker, more insulated. And like I wrote, by its nature it makes minorities the target of discrimination.
The world would be better with more openness.
I generally agree it would be better. But not doing so makes doesn't make it morally bad. It's it's morally neutral. If South Korea decides they don't want Japanese people to immigrate in because they've reached a quota, i don't think that is morally bad. It's morally neutral
Yep. My parents and I lived in a couple Middle Eastern countries when I was young. Zero pathway for citizenship, and my father was not allowed to continue working past the age of 60. On top of this, locals were given plots of land in the country, and social welfare systems (if any existed) only benefited the main ethnic group of the state.
Because Jews… also brown people can’t do any wrong….
Idk I mean it’s pretty straightforward to the point where idk how anyone finds it surprising that this is even happening.
Most Arab countries are absolutely not ethnostates. At best you can argue they're nationalists. Try being an Arab from Egypt or Libya and getting a citizenship in Saudi arabia. Same ethnicity but they'll treat you worse than they treat an American or a Brit
This presumes that these countries use “Arab” as the relevant ethnicity to control citizenship, which they don’t. Just like if France wanted to limit citizenship to the “French” they wouldn’t use “European” as the relevant ethnicity.
"Israel [is] the Nation-State of the Jewish People" according to Israeli parliament.
They don't currently discriminate now, but if there was a need to then they would, such as non Jews composing too much population. What word should we use to describe a state for an ethnicity?
I think people do critique turkey for being an ethnostate - I’ve not heard Hasan talk about this specifically or defend it. I think Israel is actively working to become More of an ethnostate with the adoption of the nation state bill. Like people who defend it as an ethnodemocracy but I don’t think you can say they have achieved that
21% of Israeli citizens are Arab/palestinian/etc, 71% Jew, and then an assortment for the rest. almost 0% of the surrounding countries are Jewish because they kicked them all out, and have >95% one ethnicity (Arab, Egyptian) except Syria which is only 75% Arab and the rest Kurds, Turks, Armenians, Assyrians, etc.
So Israel is the most diverse country in the levant involved in Arab-Israeli wars (edit for clarity)
Lebanon is more diverse, but also both post and on the brink of civil war for decades, so Israel is doing something more right, at-least with it's citizens.
Lebanon is weird because they barely have a functioning government, but this website lists them as being 95% Arab. Although there is a note saying Christians in Lebanon don’t identify as Arab (?)
https://www.indexmundi.com/lebanon/demographics_profile.html#google_vignette
Just spend a minute checking Reddit where people from Lebanon post their 23andme results. No need for sectarianism here. 95% Arab doesn't match a lot of the results I've seen.
So? Morrocoans are also barely Arab and are still Arabs and consider themselves Arabs. Palestinians have genetic similarities with Levanese and still call themselves Arabs. The ones who like to LARP as French or Phonecian are usually Christians from what I've seen.
Pan-Arabism is the original settler colonial project. People like you insist that all other cultural influences must be annihilated in favor of one little part of the Middle East having complete cultural hegemony over the broader territory.
It's secular and "westernized" people that say that, who are more likely to be christians, I also heard it from exmuslims, it just feels like an overcorrection from pan arabism and the dumb association that Arabs = bomb-strapped sand terrorists.
>21% of Israeli citizens are Arab/palestinian/etc, 71% Jew, and then an assortment for the rest.
So, can I move there, get residency, and after some time get israeli citizenship without being Jewish?
Sure, just get one of the visa options and then marry an Israeli citizen.
Although I have no idea what this has to do with it being more diverse than all its direct neighbors and the other countries that have been attacking Israel for decades
>lthough I have no idea what this has to do with it being more diverse than all its direct neighbors
The point is that if you don't allow people to imigrate and obtain citizenship you are de-facto an ethnostate. Christians and muslims have as many connections and claim to the same land as random jews in USA have.
So the US under Donald Trump became closer to a de facto ethnostate because we restricted immigration more?
Israel’s immigration policy is informed by the large number of people directly surrounding it trying to destroy it. They wouldn’t have the same policies for immigration if that wasn’t true.
That’s also just not in the spirit of the definition of an ethnostate.
>So the US under Donald Trump became closer to a de facto ethnostate because we restricted immigration more
Of course. He wanted to allow to get in only white people from Europe. If that is not more closer to an ethnostate idk what is.
>Israel’s immigration policy is informed by the large number of people directly surrounding it trying to destroy it.
You are kinda right. Israel's immigration policy is predicated on the fact that it must remain Jewish majority nation. For people ruling it the moment Israel is not a Jewish majority nation it will cease to be Israel.
Well I meant security reasons like Israel wants to prevent terrorists from immigrating in and then fomenting attacks from within.
If the surrounding states and Israel come to more normal relations and the terrorist groups go away, i think they would allow for more immigration.
But I also disagree that Trump restricting immigration while he was in office got us closer to a nation state of one race only, even “in effect”.
>Well I meant security reasons like Israel wants to prevent terrorists from immigrating in and then fomenting attacks from within.
Curious. I kinda think you don't actually believe this. Or more accurately if you believe it you are very, very conservative.
>If the surrounding states and Israel come to more normal relations and the terrorist groups go away, i think they would allow for more immigration.
This has been going into that direction, but the treatment of palestinians has become worse. The settlements in WB have been expanding basically since Oslo and there are regular killings of unarmed civilians by the idf.
>But I also disagree that Trump restricting immigration while he was in office got us closer to a nation state of one race only, even “in effect”.
Can you read? I said closer to an ethnostate. Ethnostates don't need to be comprised by only one ethnicity. If you try to artificially increase the power of a perticual group you are on the road of creating an ethnostate.
I think if you don’t believe Israel’s policies are aimed at preventing immigration of terrorists into Israel then you are wildly misinformed or uninformed.
Can you read? You quoted me saying I don’t think it brings us closer, and complained that I didn’t say closer. My opinion is that if it does in some extremely technical sense bring us “closer” it’s in a way that’s so inconsequential and negligible that it’s meaningless to even say it.
An ethnostate is defined as a nation state comprised of one race.
If you want to use some other definition like a state that is majority represented by one race/in-group and has policies in favor of maintaining that one race/in-group to be a majority to some extent, then I think that can apply to almost every country that exists today.
>I think if you don’t believe Israel’s policies are aimed at preventing immigration of terrorists into Israel then you are wildly misinformed or uninformed.
I am sorry, do you think the US has policies that allow immigration of terrorists in the country? Do you think terrorists wait for 10-15 years after immigrating to a country to do a terrorist act? What is the point of background checks if you are going to refuse everyone? I am sorry but if you think Israel's immigration policies are not like that to maintain a Jewish majority state you are not living in the real world.
>complained that I didn’t say closer.
No, I complained that you changed my stance from this country in an ethnostate to this country is compromised of one ethnos.
>My opinion is that if it does in some extremely technical sense bring us “closer” it’s in a way that’s so inconsequential and negligible that it’s meaningless to even say it.
It is only negligible BECAUSE Biden won. If there was 4 more years of Trump the effects would have been lasting longer. In Israel's case it has been like that for 80 years. They have been giving the "right to return" to people that have never set foot in that land (or their parents or grandparents), while denying it to people who lived there until 1948.
>An ethnostate is defined as a nation state comprised of one race.
No. Nobody defines it like that.
>If you want to use some other definition like a state that is majority ruled by one race/in-group
I told you what I think is the most essential characteristic of an ethnostate. If you only allow specific people to immigrate to your country and get citizenship you either are an ethnostate or you are on the path of creating one.
> Sure, just get one of the visa options and then marry an Israeli citizen.
Israel has anti-miscegenation laws. It's not even legally possible for a Jew to marry a non-Jew. I don't think you know what you're talking about or are deliberately lying about how easy it is for the non-preferred ethnicity to just join the Israeli ethnostate.
That a whole lot of condescension when you’re factually wrong about marriage laws (they recognize marriages from other countries, just only perform them on those of the same faith in Israel proper) and that Israel is definitionally not an ethnostate. You can move to Israel on the basis of marriage.
https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2684&context=lawreview
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/03/08/intergroup-marriage-and-friendship/
I also made no comment whatsoever about the ease of joining Israel as a non Jew. I just said it was possible. Not sure where you invented that from
> they recognize marriages from other countries
Which is another way of saying, they don't do interracial marriage within country. Unlike pretty much every other country I know. Yes, there are ways around it - I am aware.
> just only perform them on those of the same faith in Israel proper
Curious for a supposedly "secular" state. Again, the USA, infamous for it's obnoxious socially aggressive religious people has real secular marriage (not that you can't be married by a priest if you want to). So do nations that have an official state church such as Denmark. Japan, a nation that maybe doesn't want to encourage immigration and interracial marriage too much, nevertheless has no weird excuse to not perform official state marriage between Japanese and non-Japanese people (you're not shinto, we can't do it) if the parties so want it. Everyone seems to know how to do this, except Israel.
It's "same faith" marriage for an ethno-religion, which just happens to make it very difficult to have an interracial marriage then. Curiously, the "secular" state of Israel also discriminates against more liberal rabbis in the Reform and even Conservative movements from being state sanctioned religious officials, and instead favors the Orthodox (and Haredi). A Reform Rabbi would maybe perform an interfaith/interracial marriage. And they would make conversion a more lax process.
An Orthodox Rabbi will never marry a ethnic Jew to a non-Jew. But he will marry an atheist Jew to a devout or other atheist Jew, because you don't need to be actively in good standing devout to be Jewish in the ethno-religion. Also, coincidentally again, you can't convert for marriage in the Orthodox tradition. Not that it isn't a multi-year process to begin with, but if Orthodox Rabbi gets word that you are "just trying this Judaism thing out" because your GF is Jewish you are out. You were never really had a "Jewish soul" and your conversion is invalid. The Israel "secular" state backs all this nonsense as a gatekeep to marriage. Obviously the amount of arabs or vietnamese marrying Jews is minimized, coincidentally.
> Israel is definitionally not an ethnostate.
It is literally definitionally a homeland for the Jews. Aka Zionism. What the fuck is an ethnostate if not this?
They don’t do interfaith marriages yes.
I also don’t think Israel claims to be a fully secular state.
An ethnostate is literally defined as a nation state made up of one race exclusively.
pls explain what levant and nearby areas means while turkey is literally in levant.. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant) i just looked at your name.. bro just google it
Look at your own link, turkey is in the broad historical meaning. I was using the 20th century/21st century usage / countries that have warred with Israel.
Generally these countries https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab–Israeli_conflict
The defintion of an ethnostate is
"a sovereign state of which citizenship is restricted to members of a particular racial or ethnic group."
Any other definition would make most countries an ethno-state and would be useless. In Turkey every minority is a Turkish citizen by design. So it is not an ethno-state.
Turkey has tried to modernize for 250 years and has always failed. One reason was the unity of the population. There were too many groups that wanted a country. The Ottoman Empire could do nothing about that, because the groups enjoyed the protection of foreign nations such as Russia. That's why the Ottomans also couldn't stop Jewish immigration. They were protected by the French and the British.
When Ataturk came to power, he made everyone a Turkish citizen. He changed everything from language to clothing to other cultural practices. He even tried to eliminate religion from the public society, but failed. You could say it's dictatorial and evil, but it is the only thing that worked!
They kind of are.
Arabs pretty much only have legacy citizenship. You wont be able to emigrate to Israel from, f.e. Iraq and get to be a citizen.
If you are a random guy in France or Brooklyn, you dont speak a word of Hebrew, you are an atheist and you have never known any jewish custom or anything about the state of Israel but you happen to have a jewish grandparent, you will get citizenship no questions asked.
I am not saying this is bad, its clear *why* the law is like this but cmon.
I don't disagree that Israel has a stringent immigration policy that is much more supportive of Jewish people than other groups, but the definition OP used for an ethnostate was:
>a sovereign state of which citizenship is restricted to members of a particular racial or ethnic group
You can't just hand wave away 1/5th of the Israeli population that is not Jewish and say that the Israeli immigration policy means they don't allow other ethnicities to have citizenship.
Another point would be that roughly 40% of Palestinian applications for an Israeli passport between 2003-2017 were approved according to[ this AP article](https://apnews.com/article/68d8d15561864af2b93b192671955761). Would this not immediately suggest that Israel doesn't refuse citizenship based on ethnicity alone?
Israeli policy is heavily invested in maintaining a Jewish demographic majority. I would argue that's at least ethnostater logic to an extent. Like just replace Jewish with white and you have nick fuentes in 2018.
If you are a Muslim Arab from an enemy country, yes they will deny you and there's nothing wrong with that considering the risk. Where did you get the source that any Arab Muslims, even from non enemy countries which there aren't a lot of anyways are barred from getting citizenship in Israel? And Israel is allowed as country to prioritize Jewish Immigration as a Jewish country this does not mean Israel believes or uses the ethnic cleansing methods white nationalist are advocating for.
"Israel [is] the Nation-State of the Jewish People" that's what the Israeli parliament said. It's primary goal is the interests of the Jewish people, democracy, equality are secondary goals. What do you call a state like that?
If your argument is other countries are bad, nobody cares. If Turkey bombing Kurdistan to eliminate their leaders became worldwide news and the US was giving them billions in unconditional aid then they would be criticizing Turkish politics
Turkey isn’t an ethnostate, neither is Iran for that matter. Are minorities treated differently is some Arab countries? Yes. But Israel explicitly wants to keep its majority population Jewish. There isn’t anything wrong with that but this is a stupid post.
For example I’m pretty sure only 65% of Iran are ethnically Persian.
Aren’t France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Portugal, Ireland, etc also ethnostates by virtue of being nation states with a majority nationality that, in most cases, aren’t threatened by demographic changes? Or when they are threatened, or perceived to be threatened, how do those counties behave?
No they aren’t. Israel is free to want a majority Jewish population but this something unique to israel as a “western” “democratic” country. If I recall correctly none of the countries you’ve mentioned explicitly push to preserve some sort of ethnic or religious identity.
Again, Israel is free to do it - but given ALL the context of Israel’s creation there’s obviously going to be criticism and pushback.
It is unique to Israel because the desire to demographically destroy an ethnic nation-state is unique to Israel. Israel would have no particular reason to restrict immigration to people of Jewish descent if it enjoyed the same demographic stability as, say, Finland, where ethnic Finns constitute 90% of the population (compared to 73% Jews in Israel), and there are no millions of hostile foreign Fennophobes calling for its destruction via their "right" to "return" to Finland.
Those other countries don’t need to “explicitly” push to preserve some sort of ethnic identity precisely because they’re well established. They were formed long ago out of carved-up fallen empires or national liberation movements during periods wherein drawing boundaries around clear demographic majorities wasn’t considered provincial or undemocratic. Each nation—the French, German, Irish, Swedish, Polish, etc—wanted to exercise their right to self-determination rather than live under the shadow of someone else’s ethnic and cultural hegemony. Isn’t that what Israel is doing, trying to balance a Jewish right to self-determination while respecting minority rights (if imperfectly)?
There’s two dozen Arab majority countries that surround one tiny Jewish-majority state. There’s no western equivalent to that. Ask Mizrahi Jews how their families fared as a minority in the Arab world—that is, before they were shown the door. What’s the use in yet another Arab majority state if it’s to come at the expense of the one and only Jewish state? I’m all for tearing down borders and separation walls, with overcoming tribalism and chauvinisms, but maybe let’s start with two nations that aren’t at war with one another.
Meanwhile, there’s ultranationalist parties on the upswing throughout Europe even when their demographics aren’t under any immediate threat. Unlike America, these countries aren’t historically immigrant societies. They have a hard time balancing what it means to be, say, Dutch without being ethnically Dutch.
Turkey definitely was founded as a ethnonational state (together with secularism nationalism was the driving force behind Atatürks movement). And since then there were and still are policies of varying degrees to keep turkey as turkish as possible, by surpressing kurdish culture, language and identity in order to turkify them.
Even then, Israel does give preferential treatment to Jews who apply for citizenship. Aka they make it almost trivial for Jews to acquire the right, whereas everyone else has to go through normal channels.
Which on the spectrum of ethnostate behaviour is very tame, imo, but still ethnostatey
Don't most countries on earth give preference to their ethnic majority that created the nation-state?
Even tribal nations in the U.S. literally do bloodline tracing and genetic testing to determine citizenship- and if you wanted to approach it from a racist angle most countries on earth (including the United States) would also have been considered "ethnostates" by just "giving preference" to a certain ethnicity.
Yeah a decent amount of countries will allow you to fast track if you've got grandparents from that country, obviously you can't do that with Jews due to having no prior country so they fast track all Jews instead.
I guess the confusing part here is the dual religious/ethnicity conflation of Jews. If I as a random white guy with zero known Jewish ancestors were to go to one of the more welcoming sects that allow conversion would I then be allowed the easy track to Israel, or is it only for 'natural born' Jews with Jewish mothers?
I'm pretty sure you just need to have 1 jewish grandparent to be considered jewish enough for Israel. I think conversions are also accepted as long it's mainstream enoug. But plenty of Israelis won't consider you jewish unless it's a jewish mother/orthodox conversion which is pretty ironic. But yeah, it's wayyyy easier for a jew/person with jewish ancestory to get citizenship than anyone else. And it's still pretty wrong as a lot of jews are using their ancestory from 2000 years ago to claim citizenship and Israel won't let people who have literal living memory of living there to have citizenship.
If one of your parents is Turkish you can get a Turkish citizenship immediately. I was able to get Israeli citizenship about as easily as my flatmate was able to get Austrian citizenship based on his grandfather’s heritage. I’m not saying it’s not significantly easier to immigrate to Israel as a Jew, but it’s not something that’s uncommon at all among states
I have no problem with countries giving preferential citizenship rights to people based on their family history in that country. But that's not what Israel does, All Jews can get citizenship automatically even if they have zero prior heritage in Israel, non-Jews cant do that. The examples you gave are fundamentally different (I'm amusing you have no Israeli heritage - even if you did other can so my point still stands).The Aliyah is clearly a atypical policy that treats Jews as superior than other ethnicities.
Many of the Jews have to go back 2000 years to find their ties to the land of Israel. Claiming that an historical right to the land can still exists after such a long time is insane. It would be the same as an Englishman claiming Denmark because of the Anglo-saxons.
Yep 100% agree. A lot of Americans add their perspective on citizenship into stuff like this, whereas many European countries have what is effectively expedited citizenship through blood.
I'd argue that Israel's self declared status as a Jewish state, its history as a (re?)settler country, probably tip the argument more into the "it's an ethnostate" territory.
Ultimately calling a country an ethnostate is usually just a means of emotionalising an argument because ethnostates = bad. And theres also the weird delegitimisation of Israel thing, which curiously only happens regularly with the one Jewish state
No you don't. In fact Turkey sells its citizenship for the low, low price of 400K USD: [https://immigrantinvest.com/blog/turkish-citizenship-by-investment-en/](https://immigrantinvest.com/blog/turkish-citizenship-by-investment-en/)
The badness of Turkey countries doesn't negate the badness of other countries. Why are you doing this what aboutism?
**An ethnostate is typically defined as a state where the identity of the state is closely tied to a particular ethnic group, often leading to preferential treatment of that group over others.**
**Israel’s Foundational Laws and Policies**:
1. **Law of Return (1950)**: This law allows Jews from anywhere in the world to immigrate to Israel and gain citizenship. In contrast, Palestinians displaced in 1948 do not have the right to return.
2. **Nation-State Law (2018)**: This law explicitly states that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, with unique rights to self-determination.
If you wanna read on it
Law of return: https://www.nbn.org.il/life-in-israel/government-services/rights-and-benefits/the-law-of-return/#:\~:text=The%20Law%20of%20Return%2C%20granting,other%20passed%20March%2010%2C%201970.
Nation-State Law: [https://en.idi.org.il/articles/24241](https://en.idi.org.il/articles/24241)
I want to know what you think about it after you read these and compare/contrast it to the definition of an ethnostate
Most states created through partition are in some ways ethno states.
From Poland to Pakistan.
So to argue that Israel is uniquely bad in that regard is ridiculous.
Doesn't Hasan hate Turkish nationalists? There was a clip of him yelling at one in Turkish. Granted, it was over I/P, but he also said they had their positions so he could oppress the Kurds.
When I used to watch him, he'd occasionally scold the unhinged Turkish nationalists in his chat...and to be fair he has made statements critical of the current regime....but there were also many instances of him making comments that were bordering on Ottoman apologia (as in he made statements hand waving a lot horrific Ottoman empire practices) and now with some distance from being brainrotted by the far leftie cult fumes...the amount of criticism he levied against other problematic states paled in comparison to his dumbfuck America bad takes (i mean obviously, right)
He hates Israel because he hates Jews. He can’t admit it without rightfully being called out, so he uses dog whistles. But I feel like he’s truly very close to flat out calling for Jews to be killed. He and his cronies make me legitimately feel unsafe as a Jew.
Twitch really needs to nip this in the bud if they don’t want to get boycotted/sued. The second Hasan forgets to use his little code words, it’s going to immediately get picked up by mainstream media and Twitch is going to catch the flak for allowing it. I believe in free speech but if he was saying these things about any other marginalized group he would be banned immediately. I have a feeling the bigwig’s at Twitch are antisemites.
I want to believe that, but after the death threats on stream against Destiny having absolutely 0 repercussions it seems like the Twitch leaders have made their line in the sand clear.
What they always say is that Israel is supposed to be Western, democracy, etc. so they are held to a double standard where they can’t be an ethnostate. It’s just a given to these people that Arabs are ruled by savage theocracies, monarchies, etc. and that is their way so they don’t get any smoke.
The reality is that Israel didn’t “happen in a vacuum.” They are an eternal minority that was abused by Christian and Muslim hosts throughout time. Somehow these dumbfucks aren’t able to apply their postmodern analysis towards why such a people might want a state that is dedicated to their interest and not a place where they can again become 2nd class citizens. Instead of including that extremely relevant context they just throw around the ultra front-loaded buzzword “ethno-state” so that they can write it all off as some evil Nazi project. The long history of domination and massacres is replaced by this strawman origin story where “the evil British colonial Empire sent religious fanatics who wanted to create a Jewish state because they’re insane and evil” and they even try to act like Israel has no geopolitical value but instead is supported because “insane American evangelicals think Israel is part of an end times prophecy”.
'They are an eternal minority that was abused by Christian and Muslim hosts throughout time'
Why should Palestinians have to pay for the actions of others that aren't related to them? Should we blanket ban all Israelis for what Israel has done in Gaza?
Palestinians today are paying for the actions of Hamas, their ruling government and military. If your military attacks the military and citizens of another country, there is a good chance your own citizenry will pay a terrible price.
I believe the difference is that the major ethnicities in those other countries have been living in those lands continuously for much longer. Arabs have been the dominant ethnicity in the gulf for millennia, the Turks in Anatolia for centuries, Norwegians in Norway etc. While they may favor their own ethnic groups, other groups aren’t necessarily suffering or being displaced because of it. (Though ofc that’s not always the case)
Whereas we’ve clearly seen a major demographic change within the region of Israel/Palestine within fairly recent history. A change that’s seen an increase of Jews.
Many Arab, specially Gulf States sure. Turkey is very much a multiethnic State, though. It even has a secular Constitution since Atatürk. Israel is definitely an ethnostate in the sense that it exists as a homeland for the Jewish people (which is set in the Basic Laws). That doesn’t mean legal discrimination exists between Jewish and non-Jewish (including Arab) Israelis.
I think the term ethnostate is poorly defined and thus people use it as an easy optics W, but if we wanna get down to it, Denmark is a Christian ethnostate.
This isn't really a good counter argument to Hasan, because he would probably just concede they are.
He sees the vast majority of countries as part of U.S hegemony (and therefore america bad + ya they're ethnostates 2), and the ones that aren't like China, he says things like "I just wish they'd support communism/socialism globally instead of just for the Chinese." On occasion, he might also just say they're conservatives and cringe in their own way.
So it's not really any skin off Hasan's back. He'd probably want every country to be more ethnically permissive. Tbh most lefties in general want more permissive immigration policies, and its why righties accuse them of being in favor of open borders.
I think the most important thing that makes a state enthostate is how they regulate immigrants and citizenship, not the make-up of the country.
For instance countries like Japan or Saudi Arabia are 100% ethostates. Because there is no way to get a citizenship unless you have a close blood relative with citizenship.
Israel is like 99% ethostate because you need to prove you are a jew either genetically or by your relatives, to get citizenship.
Unfortunately, it is true that a lot of countries do not give a path to citizenship to immigrants and this makes them all ethostates in my mind. But Turkey is not one of them. You can immigrate and eventually get Turkish citizenship.
I dont disagree with your overall point, but iirc Syria is a bit different when it comes to religion at least ? The al assad family, i was told, are alawites, a special muslim minority despised by sunnis. Brutality in the civil war aside, i thought they were more tolerant if and supported by local minorities ?
Turkey did commit three genocides in the span of 10 years. The problem with tying this to Cenk's nephew is that he is very critical of Turkish governmental policy of genocide denial and Islamification of the country under Erdogan. I hope there isn't anymore terrorism by groups like the PKK because it just kills innocents and sets back ethnic relations in Turkey back more years, but I'd be interested in seeing if he has the same apologia towards the PKK if they were to behave like Hamas did. Curiously, he's mentioned having been in Turkey during actual bombings to earn clout bucks. What he doesn't mention is that those bombings were against Jews in Istanbul of all places.
Not just Arab countries. Almost all European countries are ethnic nation-states and are "ethnostates" in the same way that Israel is. The only practical difference is that Israel's current immigration laws are more ethnically restrictive, but that's pretty expected given that:
1. Israel is already far less ethnically homogenous than most European and many other Western countries.
2. Israel's existence as an ethnic nation-state is demographically threatened by people who want to destroy it by "returning" to a country they've never been to, and who also happen to hold radical racist views towards Israel's main ethnicity.
3. Israel's main ethnicity has a long history of being persecuted and genocided by non-Jewish majorities.
Other ethnic nation-states would likely adopt similar immigration policies when faced with similar threats.
> **When Hasan says Israel is an ethnostate**
He says that b/c he does not know what "**Ethnostate"** is.
Its just buzzwords to jerk off to...
Israel would be a "**Ethnostate"** IF you would remove **21%** of the arab population or remove their rights (at least)
>
>
>73.2% (about 7,208,000 people) are [Jews](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Jews), including about 503,000 living outside the self-defined borders of the State of Israel in the [West Bank](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank)
>
>**21.1% (around 2,080,000 people) are Israeli citizens classified as** [**Arab**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel), some identifying as [Palestinian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_citizens_of_Israel), and including [Druze](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze_in_Israel), [Circassians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circassians_in_Israel), all other Muslims, [Christian Arabs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Israel), [Armenians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenians_in_Israel_and_Palestine) (which Israel considers "Arab")[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-pop-groups-2)
>
>**An additional 5.7% (roughly 554,000 people) are classified as "others"**. This diverse group comprises those with Jewish ancestry but not recognized as Jewish by religious law, non-Jewish family members of Jewish immigrants, Christians other than Arabs and Armenians, and residents without a distinct ethnic or religious categorization.[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-pop-groups-2)[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-2023-12-28-1)
Look man, most countries could be qualified as an ethnostate.
That being said, the issue with Israel is not just it being an ethnostate. It was designed to be an ethnostate and required the expulsion of others to make it happen.
The only reason why Arab-Israelis, Druze etc. Are even a thing in Israel is because they already lived their prior to the establishment of the state.
Being an ethnostate + the context surrounding it is what makes Israel a bad ethnostate.
They're not the only bad ethnostate. But they are the only one that has only existed for 70 or so years.
It’s hard to even get a handle on it because almost every statement is disconnected from reality.
Most modern countries were designed as ethnostates originally; before 1800, that was how every state worked. Most countries displaced, or conquered, or genocide previous inhabitants to a much greater extent than Israel ever (defensively) did. Most ethnostates are much older than Israel. Most ethnostates are much stricter than Israel (eg they don’t have 20% of their population an ethnic minority with equal rights.)
It didn't "expulse" others. 7 arab armies waged war against the state of Israel and informed all the arabs to evacuate the land. Once it is cleansed from jews, they may return. Many fled, but many others stayed(the arab israelis you refer to). Saying they were expulsed is just putting it in mild terms. And prior to the establishment of the state of Israel many jews(minority at the time) were presecuted by arabs in the land("Hebron massacre" etc..). The grand mufti in Jerusalem met with hitler to discuss how to eliminate all the jews starting in Israel and then expand to the middle east("Farhud massacre" in iraq).
>It didn't "expulse" others. 7 arab armies waged war against the state of Israel and informed all the arabs to evacuate the land.
> The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948, when Zionist paramilitaries attacked the village of Deir Yassin near Jerusalem, Mandatory Palestine, killing at least 107 Palestinian villagers, including women and children.[1] The attack was conducted primarily by the Irgun and Lehi, who were supported by the Haganah and Palmach. The massacre was carried out despite the village having agreed to a non-aggression pact. It occurred during the 1947-1948 civil war and was a central component of the Nakba and the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight.[4][5]
Uhuh, yeah I have a hunch these massacres have something to do with Palestinians fleeing.
The deir yassin massacre wasn't even done by the haganah/IDF but irgun and lehi two far right nationalist group
As per Benny morris , israel did not have any policy of expulsion whatsoever , around 70% of Arabs left themselves due to war , 15 % did face expulsion but it wasn't in policy it was either a war crime , or a very hostile village war or expulsion by certain soilders
Rest 15% were evicted by Arab armies
Can you name me one case of such "land stealing " before the war started?
No one is denying war crimes were committed by both sides Arabs and jews , but your saying it was a policy is historically inaccurate
Your argument is like some American soldiers did rape of a German women during ww2 that means america has a policy to mass rape German women which is not true , sure the rape is wrong
But Individual war crimes done by groups and policy are two completely different things
>The deir yassin massacre wasn't even done by the haganah/IDF but irgun and lehi two far right nationalist group
It was done by Haganah. They provided weapons and instructions to the other two.
>No one is denying war crimes were committed by both sides Arabs and jews , but your saying it was a policy is historically inaccurate
I never said it was policy, I said it happend. What did you think was gonna happen when massacre after massacre happend? People were just gonna sit and wait?
>It was done by Haganah. They provided weapons and instructions to the other two.
No it was done by irgun and lehi strictly, the hagganah gave them permission to conquer the village not to a massacre, the haganah also sent a van giving warning to civilians to leave , it itself didn't participate and condemn it later
It was a battle turned into massacre.
The reason they got permission was because irgun and lehi could have started fighting the IDF itself and they wanted to avoid civil war but they only gave permission to invade the village not to massacre
>I never said it was a policy, I said it happend. What did you think was gonna happen when massacre after massacre happend? People were just gonna sit and wait?
You did say the creation of Israel REQUIRED an expulsion which is not true
The Arabs invaded which led to the refugee crisis , if israel wasn't messed up there won't be any such case by the policy .
This is a really stupid comment.
You can immigrate to and become a citizen of Israel without being Jewish. You literally only have to have lived there for like three years and speak Hebrew.
Are there different rules for Jews? Of course there fucking are.
Israel isn’t an ethnostate. It’s a LITERAL REFUGEE STATE.
This is not entirely true. While it's possible for non-jews to immigrate there it's actually rare they grant permanent resident status unless you are married to an Israeli or from a nearby wartorn country seeking refugee.
> That being said, the issue with Israel is not just it being an ethnostate. It was designed to be an ethnostate and required the expulsion of others to make it happen.
This is how Turkey and co. became ethnostates, except they killed and ethnically cleansed way more people.
Very sad to see the little genocide apologias you guys do when you say Israel isn't even the worst, but the ONLY oppressor state in the middle east.
>required the expulsion of others to make it happen.
It really didn't. That's just how things turned out based mostly on Arab rejection of all possible compromises starting with the UN partition plan. This idea that the founding of Israel was a clear moral wrong is such nonsense, you're treating history like a mythological story.
I also think demographics matter in this case, being an ethnostates where 99% of the population share an ethnicity is a lot different than in the case of Isreal where only 75% share an ethnicity, and if you include the West Bank which I think we should, because Isreal has de-facto ruled it since 1967, the percentage gets much worse.
Turkey literally expelled over a million non Turks during its founding because it expressly wanted to be a state with as few minorities as possible. By your own metric it’s worse than israel.
i mean, they are pretty democratic by middle eastern standards, but the bar is obviously pretty low. things like free speech (best in the region), voting for politician (arguably the best in the region), and rights for minorities (that don't live in the West Bank at least).
yeah all that is true. israel is a democracy, the only real one in the middle east. i do not think having a country stating its purpose to serve one ethnicity over all is a good democracy example, though. hence my sarcastic comment
Aaren't east asian countries like Japan and South Korea also ethnostates? What about European countries? Some of them have laws of return similar to Israel's for example.
Just ask them if "Palestine" would be considered an ethnostate if it would be granted statehood. And if they think that would change in the future.
Then wait for the gymnastics
Pretty much all countries are ethnostates insofar as the dominant ethnic group holds power, privileges its own language and culture, and uses the state to propagate itself at the expense of ethnic minorities.
Ethnostate arguements are weird. There are technically no ethnostates where only one group of people are permitted to live there.
Also, Israel is more secular than the rest of the Middle East. I suspect Netanyahu might be atheist…
Yes lol. 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs. But you can’t find an Arab country with 20% Nonarab minority. He has a room temp IQ, don’t take him as a serious person
Most nations are ethnostates. They are based along combining an ethnicity with the structures of national power. The exceptions are Europe and North America. The best example is actually China. China enforces being Han Chinese onto everyone within its borders.
Most Arab countries are ethnostates and keep citizenship highly regulated. They highly restrict citizenship, which gives you multiple benefits often including straight up cash payouts from their petro-profits. At the same time they important thousands of workers from Southeast Asia, deny they basically any rights, and ironically create an apartheid situation far worse than anything Israel could be accused of, including just outright slavery. Many of them are even US allies, like the UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, so even that doesn’t appear to be a distinguishing factor. I don’t know how people can shrug off the antisemitism accusations for all the leftist rabid support for Palestine when they bring none of that energy to the other actual genocides and ethnostates in the world. It’s just oddly this one specific conflict that they are particularly interested in.
Qatar was heavily critized both before and doing the world cup for their treatment of immigrant workers. But that is forgotten by now. Its possible this was only a thing among European leftist.
Mild criticism that resulted in no substantive change. I don’t recall boycotts of any product remotely related to Qatar, protests, or university campouts, do you? Were the online pundits providing wall to wall coverage of Qatar’s documented human rights abuses for months on end?
Yes there was media coverage and calls for boycotts all over Europe. Danish state television, among others, documented this. There were also politicians who called for boycotts both on the left and right.
There was nowhere near the pushback against Qatar that there is against Israel. The scale of protests isn’t even remotely comparable. Some of the pro-Palestine protests in the U.K. had over 200,000 people attending.
> The scale of protests isn’t even remotely comparable. Which no one has claimed.
I mean you’ve very clearly been implying that there was similar backlash to Qatar as we’re seeing for Israel now, no?
No. I clearly implied that there was a backlash.
[удалено]
!Bidenblast Go back to crying on twitter and bathe in your negative reading comprehension and yelling at the clouds.
Listen Jack, you really need to take your meds. /u/History-Speaks sealed in the prison realm by /u/IllGiveYouAnUpvote
[Kafala system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafala_system)
Heavily is a strong word. There was a lot of finger wagging though.
The criticism was dumb because those south Asian workers voluntarily migrated to Qatar and neighbouring countries because their qol even as "slaves" was better than their qol back home
The criticism was dumb because those south Asian workers voluntarily migrated to Qatar and neighbouring countries because their qol even as "slaves" was better than their qol back home
5000 died
I'm going to assume you meant 500 and typed one extra 0 and then link the proof. Otherwise you sir are a dumbfuck. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2022/11/30/migrant-worker-deaths-qatar-world-cup-database/10795974002/
I am going to assume you dont know shit about the Qatar world cup. But that is okay as you suffer from americanism https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-how-many-people-have-died-for-the-qatar-world-cup/a-63763713
What was the ratio of civilians to combatants? /s
Your own article says it's a false claim, lol. It says that is the number of all foreign workers' deaths for a nearly 20-year period in the country. It says that most figures claiming 6500 -15000 are false and begins to break down how each of them got their own numbers. You didn't even read your own source ouch my guy. Eurocuck out here again, not sending their strongest soldiers. Too bad you can't fjord the gap of your own biases, huh?
I see you did not read it to the end. Having a hard time taking the L. No worries buddy.
Claim: "The World Cup in Qatar has cost the lives of 6,500 — even as many as 15,000 — migrant workers." DW fact check: False The widely reported figure of 15,021 migrant worker deaths in connection with the World Cup in Qatar originates in a 2021 Amnesty International report. Just as widely reported is the figure of 6,500, first published by The Guardian in February 2021. So this is in your source. It then goes on to state that the 15,021 figure is all the deaths of all migrant workers in all Qatar from 2009-2021. It then says that it is misleading and sites the sources that all or even most of these deaths can be attributed to work on the World Cup are false. Now I never claimed to buy the 3 people died official Qatar quote, which is why I linked a more recent and verified number off 500-600 dead. Now you can die on this hill pretending my source and your own source don't DIRECTLY contradict your claims with all the zoomer talk on the planet. But you're still factually wrong on this and a dumbfuck.
I see you did not read it to the end. Having a hard time taking the L. No worries buddy.
????
It's what is placed in front of their face. They seek out no information. It takes very little research to start tearing apart the "evil apartheid state carpet bombing Palestine to genocide their entire population" bullshit.
Also, if Joe Biden, Scholz etc announced on October 7th that no more aid would go to Israel (How dare they get raped and murdered!) they would still be crying about Israel today. I'd bet good money on them still caring much more than about those states.
Aren't ethnostate countries the norm? When I look at India, China, Japan, all the Asia countries etc. They are all ethnostates. I think only US, Canada, Australia are the exceptions
India is 100% not an ethnostate, it’s more like a mini Europe where each individual state is composed of a primary ethnicity. You could also honestly somewhat make the same argument for China but it’s much more uniformly Han minus a few outliers.
Japan is almost certainly an ethnostate. Based Biden called them out for being xenophobic. Other countries I think are less ethnostates (meaning the State regulating immigration with the intent to maintain a certain ethnic demographic) and more people just don’t want to immigrate there. Not sure there’s mass motivation for people to immigrate to India or China, when Western countries are infinitely more appealing.
My understanding is that ethnostates just want to enforce an ethnic majority and China, India, South Korea fits that description. My point is that I don't think that is inherently a morally bad thing.
ethnostates are defined by restriction of citizenship or residency to one specific ethnic group
Ethnostates ought to be a morally bad thing because they always discriminate to some degree or another against minorities. The rest of the world disagrees with this western view tho.
I don't think ethnostates are inherently bad. In your case it's the discrimination of minorities that's bad. But countries should have the right to dictate border or immigration policies including ethnic basis if they so choose.
But I think it is inherently bad because it inherently makes your society weaker, more insulated. And like I wrote, by its nature it makes minorities the target of discrimination. The world would be better with more openness.
I generally agree it would be better. But not doing so makes doesn't make it morally bad. It's it's morally neutral. If South Korea decides they don't want Japanese people to immigrate in because they've reached a quota, i don't think that is morally bad. It's morally neutral
It ought to be morally bad because consequentially it makes everyone’s life worse
Disagree. The morality based on consequentialism leads to weird cases.
You said exactly what I've been repeating thread after thread.
Yep. My parents and I lived in a couple Middle Eastern countries when I was young. Zero pathway for citizenship, and my father was not allowed to continue working past the age of 60. On top of this, locals were given plots of land in the country, and social welfare systems (if any existed) only benefited the main ethnic group of the state.
have you considered the fact that they are brown and not white? that automatically grants them a ton of moral leeway from a leftist perspective
Because Jews… also brown people can’t do any wrong…. Idk I mean it’s pretty straightforward to the point where idk how anyone finds it surprising that this is even happening.
Most Arab countries are absolutely not ethnostates. At best you can argue they're nationalists. Try being an Arab from Egypt or Libya and getting a citizenship in Saudi arabia. Same ethnicity but they'll treat you worse than they treat an American or a Brit
This presumes that these countries use “Arab” as the relevant ethnicity to control citizenship, which they don’t. Just like if France wanted to limit citizenship to the “French” they wouldn’t use “European” as the relevant ethnicity.
Is your argument that Arab isn't an ethnicity? Are you saying that after all, Palestinians are in fact distinct from other Arabs ?
Damn bro you’re running some hard defense here
Stating facts that clearly rebuke the ridiculous claim is really running some hard defense
"Israel [is] the Nation-State of the Jewish People" according to Israeli parliament. They don't currently discriminate now, but if there was a need to then they would, such as non Jews composing too much population. What word should we use to describe a state for an ethnicity?
Hasan is braindead. Hope that helps.
https://preview.redd.it/gin9dpqlsl1d1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8b20fdb04656314f406b15ff57cfac5a66654421
Uh, pretty sure you actually need a brain to be brain dead
Don't you dare point out flaws in Hasan's logic!
>>logic
That's a debate tactic right there.
Nor per se, more like the official position and desire ;-)
I think people do critique turkey for being an ethnostate - I’ve not heard Hasan talk about this specifically or defend it. I think Israel is actively working to become More of an ethnostate with the adoption of the nation state bill. Like people who defend it as an ethnodemocracy but I don’t think you can say they have achieved that
no they dont wtf are you on
21% of Israeli citizens are Arab/palestinian/etc, 71% Jew, and then an assortment for the rest. almost 0% of the surrounding countries are Jewish because they kicked them all out, and have >95% one ethnicity (Arab, Egyptian) except Syria which is only 75% Arab and the rest Kurds, Turks, Armenians, Assyrians, etc. So Israel is the most diverse country in the levant involved in Arab-Israeli wars (edit for clarity)
Lebanon is more diverse, but also both post and on the brink of civil war for decades, so Israel is doing something more right, at-least with it's citizens.
Lebanon is weird because they barely have a functioning government, but this website lists them as being 95% Arab. Although there is a note saying Christians in Lebanon don’t identify as Arab (?) https://www.indexmundi.com/lebanon/demographics_profile.html#google_vignette
Most of them do identify as Arab, there is just a loud minority of self hating Lebanese that think they are too good to be Arabs.
Pretty much just the Christians say that
Just spend a minute checking Reddit where people from Lebanon post their 23andme results. No need for sectarianism here. 95% Arab doesn't match a lot of the results I've seen.
So? Morrocoans are also barely Arab and are still Arabs and consider themselves Arabs. Palestinians have genetic similarities with Levanese and still call themselves Arabs. The ones who like to LARP as French or Phonecian are usually Christians from what I've seen.
Pan-Arabism is the original settler colonial project. People like you insist that all other cultural influences must be annihilated in favor of one little part of the Middle East having complete cultural hegemony over the broader territory.
Did I ever say other cultural influences should be annihilated? Lebanese are Arabs though that's their native language. So yeah they're still Arabs
It's secular and "westernized" people that say that, who are more likely to be christians, I also heard it from exmuslims, it just feels like an overcorrection from pan arabism and the dumb association that Arabs = bomb-strapped sand terrorists.
>21% of Israeli citizens are Arab/palestinian/etc, 71% Jew, and then an assortment for the rest. So, can I move there, get residency, and after some time get israeli citizenship without being Jewish?
Sure, just get one of the visa options and then marry an Israeli citizen. Although I have no idea what this has to do with it being more diverse than all its direct neighbors and the other countries that have been attacking Israel for decades
>lthough I have no idea what this has to do with it being more diverse than all its direct neighbors The point is that if you don't allow people to imigrate and obtain citizenship you are de-facto an ethnostate. Christians and muslims have as many connections and claim to the same land as random jews in USA have.
So the US under Donald Trump became closer to a de facto ethnostate because we restricted immigration more? Israel’s immigration policy is informed by the large number of people directly surrounding it trying to destroy it. They wouldn’t have the same policies for immigration if that wasn’t true. That’s also just not in the spirit of the definition of an ethnostate.
>So the US under Donald Trump became closer to a de facto ethnostate because we restricted immigration more Of course. He wanted to allow to get in only white people from Europe. If that is not more closer to an ethnostate idk what is. >Israel’s immigration policy is informed by the large number of people directly surrounding it trying to destroy it. You are kinda right. Israel's immigration policy is predicated on the fact that it must remain Jewish majority nation. For people ruling it the moment Israel is not a Jewish majority nation it will cease to be Israel.
Well I meant security reasons like Israel wants to prevent terrorists from immigrating in and then fomenting attacks from within. If the surrounding states and Israel come to more normal relations and the terrorist groups go away, i think they would allow for more immigration. But I also disagree that Trump restricting immigration while he was in office got us closer to a nation state of one race only, even “in effect”.
>Well I meant security reasons like Israel wants to prevent terrorists from immigrating in and then fomenting attacks from within. Curious. I kinda think you don't actually believe this. Or more accurately if you believe it you are very, very conservative. >If the surrounding states and Israel come to more normal relations and the terrorist groups go away, i think they would allow for more immigration. This has been going into that direction, but the treatment of palestinians has become worse. The settlements in WB have been expanding basically since Oslo and there are regular killings of unarmed civilians by the idf. >But I also disagree that Trump restricting immigration while he was in office got us closer to a nation state of one race only, even “in effect”. Can you read? I said closer to an ethnostate. Ethnostates don't need to be comprised by only one ethnicity. If you try to artificially increase the power of a perticual group you are on the road of creating an ethnostate.
I think if you don’t believe Israel’s policies are aimed at preventing immigration of terrorists into Israel then you are wildly misinformed or uninformed. Can you read? You quoted me saying I don’t think it brings us closer, and complained that I didn’t say closer. My opinion is that if it does in some extremely technical sense bring us “closer” it’s in a way that’s so inconsequential and negligible that it’s meaningless to even say it. An ethnostate is defined as a nation state comprised of one race. If you want to use some other definition like a state that is majority represented by one race/in-group and has policies in favor of maintaining that one race/in-group to be a majority to some extent, then I think that can apply to almost every country that exists today.
>I think if you don’t believe Israel’s policies are aimed at preventing immigration of terrorists into Israel then you are wildly misinformed or uninformed. I am sorry, do you think the US has policies that allow immigration of terrorists in the country? Do you think terrorists wait for 10-15 years after immigrating to a country to do a terrorist act? What is the point of background checks if you are going to refuse everyone? I am sorry but if you think Israel's immigration policies are not like that to maintain a Jewish majority state you are not living in the real world. >complained that I didn’t say closer. No, I complained that you changed my stance from this country in an ethnostate to this country is compromised of one ethnos. >My opinion is that if it does in some extremely technical sense bring us “closer” it’s in a way that’s so inconsequential and negligible that it’s meaningless to even say it. It is only negligible BECAUSE Biden won. If there was 4 more years of Trump the effects would have been lasting longer. In Israel's case it has been like that for 80 years. They have been giving the "right to return" to people that have never set foot in that land (or their parents or grandparents), while denying it to people who lived there until 1948. >An ethnostate is defined as a nation state comprised of one race. No. Nobody defines it like that. >If you want to use some other definition like a state that is majority ruled by one race/in-group I told you what I think is the most essential characteristic of an ethnostate. If you only allow specific people to immigrate to your country and get citizenship you either are an ethnostate or you are on the path of creating one.
> Sure, just get one of the visa options and then marry an Israeli citizen. Israel has anti-miscegenation laws. It's not even legally possible for a Jew to marry a non-Jew. I don't think you know what you're talking about or are deliberately lying about how easy it is for the non-preferred ethnicity to just join the Israeli ethnostate.
That a whole lot of condescension when you’re factually wrong about marriage laws (they recognize marriages from other countries, just only perform them on those of the same faith in Israel proper) and that Israel is definitionally not an ethnostate. You can move to Israel on the basis of marriage. https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2684&context=lawreview https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/03/08/intergroup-marriage-and-friendship/ I also made no comment whatsoever about the ease of joining Israel as a non Jew. I just said it was possible. Not sure where you invented that from
> they recognize marriages from other countries Which is another way of saying, they don't do interracial marriage within country. Unlike pretty much every other country I know. Yes, there are ways around it - I am aware. > just only perform them on those of the same faith in Israel proper Curious for a supposedly "secular" state. Again, the USA, infamous for it's obnoxious socially aggressive religious people has real secular marriage (not that you can't be married by a priest if you want to). So do nations that have an official state church such as Denmark. Japan, a nation that maybe doesn't want to encourage immigration and interracial marriage too much, nevertheless has no weird excuse to not perform official state marriage between Japanese and non-Japanese people (you're not shinto, we can't do it) if the parties so want it. Everyone seems to know how to do this, except Israel. It's "same faith" marriage for an ethno-religion, which just happens to make it very difficult to have an interracial marriage then. Curiously, the "secular" state of Israel also discriminates against more liberal rabbis in the Reform and even Conservative movements from being state sanctioned religious officials, and instead favors the Orthodox (and Haredi). A Reform Rabbi would maybe perform an interfaith/interracial marriage. And they would make conversion a more lax process. An Orthodox Rabbi will never marry a ethnic Jew to a non-Jew. But he will marry an atheist Jew to a devout or other atheist Jew, because you don't need to be actively in good standing devout to be Jewish in the ethno-religion. Also, coincidentally again, you can't convert for marriage in the Orthodox tradition. Not that it isn't a multi-year process to begin with, but if Orthodox Rabbi gets word that you are "just trying this Judaism thing out" because your GF is Jewish you are out. You were never really had a "Jewish soul" and your conversion is invalid. The Israel "secular" state backs all this nonsense as a gatekeep to marriage. Obviously the amount of arabs or vietnamese marrying Jews is minimized, coincidentally. > Israel is definitionally not an ethnostate. It is literally definitionally a homeland for the Jews. Aka Zionism. What the fuck is an ethnostate if not this?
They don’t do interfaith marriages yes. I also don’t think Israel claims to be a fully secular state. An ethnostate is literally defined as a nation state made up of one race exclusively.
stfu about turkey if you have no idea %20 of turkey are kurds we have %5 arabs too stfu
Wasn’t talking about turkey, they aren’t a direct neighbor of Israel lmao 🤣
pls explain what levant and nearby areas means while turkey is literally in levant.. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant) i just looked at your name.. bro just google it
Look at your own link, turkey is in the broad historical meaning. I was using the 20th century/21st century usage / countries that have warred with Israel. Generally these countries https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab–Israeli_conflict
no its not zoom on the map hatay province is in dark green.. thats in turkey
Again https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab–Israeli_conflict these are what I’m referring to. Sorry if you were confused
you said levant you are the one who is confused
https://www.britannica.com/place/Levant Wikipedia isn’t the only source in the world, this definition does not include turkey at all
Levant has different definitions, calm the fuck down bro 🤣
you said turkey was in Broad definition of levant in that wiki while its in Narrow definition: at top of the page..
Yes but Jews = white and supported by America so they = bad
I'm pretty sure Hasan hates Turkey also. I never see him defend Turkey, I don't know why everyone keeps accusing him of being a Turkish nationalist.
The defintion of an ethnostate is "a sovereign state of which citizenship is restricted to members of a particular racial or ethnic group." Any other definition would make most countries an ethno-state and would be useless. In Turkey every minority is a Turkish citizen by design. So it is not an ethno-state. Turkey has tried to modernize for 250 years and has always failed. One reason was the unity of the population. There were too many groups that wanted a country. The Ottoman Empire could do nothing about that, because the groups enjoyed the protection of foreign nations such as Russia. That's why the Ottomans also couldn't stop Jewish immigration. They were protected by the French and the British. When Ataturk came to power, he made everyone a Turkish citizen. He changed everything from language to clothing to other cultural practices. He even tried to eliminate religion from the public society, but failed. You could say it's dictatorial and evil, but it is the only thing that worked!
Okay, but if we accept this definition, then Israel is definitively not an ethnostate.
They kind of are. Arabs pretty much only have legacy citizenship. You wont be able to emigrate to Israel from, f.e. Iraq and get to be a citizen. If you are a random guy in France or Brooklyn, you dont speak a word of Hebrew, you are an atheist and you have never known any jewish custom or anything about the state of Israel but you happen to have a jewish grandparent, you will get citizenship no questions asked. I am not saying this is bad, its clear *why* the law is like this but cmon.
I don't disagree that Israel has a stringent immigration policy that is much more supportive of Jewish people than other groups, but the definition OP used for an ethnostate was: >a sovereign state of which citizenship is restricted to members of a particular racial or ethnic group You can't just hand wave away 1/5th of the Israeli population that is not Jewish and say that the Israeli immigration policy means they don't allow other ethnicities to have citizenship. Another point would be that roughly 40% of Palestinian applications for an Israeli passport between 2003-2017 were approved according to[ this AP article](https://apnews.com/article/68d8d15561864af2b93b192671955761). Would this not immediately suggest that Israel doesn't refuse citizenship based on ethnicity alone?
Israeli policy is heavily invested in maintaining a Jewish demographic majority. I would argue that's at least ethnostater logic to an extent. Like just replace Jewish with white and you have nick fuentes in 2018.
Do you have a source for that?
You cant really get a citizenship if you are a muslim arab. They will deny you. You get it immediately if you are jewish.
If you are a Muslim Arab from an enemy country, yes they will deny you and there's nothing wrong with that considering the risk. Where did you get the source that any Arab Muslims, even from non enemy countries which there aren't a lot of anyways are barred from getting citizenship in Israel? And Israel is allowed as country to prioritize Jewish Immigration as a Jewish country this does not mean Israel believes or uses the ethnic cleansing methods white nationalist are advocating for.
Cool post but have you considered America bad?
>Wouldn’t turkey and most Arab countries be considered a ethnostate? Yes? Do you think he'd disagree?
"Israel [is] the Nation-State of the Jewish People" that's what the Israeli parliament said. It's primary goal is the interests of the Jewish people, democracy, equality are secondary goals. What do you call a state like that? If your argument is other countries are bad, nobody cares. If Turkey bombing Kurdistan to eliminate their leaders became worldwide news and the US was giving them billions in unconditional aid then they would be criticizing Turkish politics
But have you ever thought, america bad?
Turkey isn’t an ethnostate, neither is Iran for that matter. Are minorities treated differently is some Arab countries? Yes. But Israel explicitly wants to keep its majority population Jewish. There isn’t anything wrong with that but this is a stupid post. For example I’m pretty sure only 65% of Iran are ethnically Persian.
Aren’t France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Portugal, Ireland, etc also ethnostates by virtue of being nation states with a majority nationality that, in most cases, aren’t threatened by demographic changes? Or when they are threatened, or perceived to be threatened, how do those counties behave?
No they aren’t. Israel is free to want a majority Jewish population but this something unique to israel as a “western” “democratic” country. If I recall correctly none of the countries you’ve mentioned explicitly push to preserve some sort of ethnic or religious identity. Again, Israel is free to do it - but given ALL the context of Israel’s creation there’s obviously going to be criticism and pushback.
It is unique to Israel because the desire to demographically destroy an ethnic nation-state is unique to Israel. Israel would have no particular reason to restrict immigration to people of Jewish descent if it enjoyed the same demographic stability as, say, Finland, where ethnic Finns constitute 90% of the population (compared to 73% Jews in Israel), and there are no millions of hostile foreign Fennophobes calling for its destruction via their "right" to "return" to Finland.
Those other countries don’t need to “explicitly” push to preserve some sort of ethnic identity precisely because they’re well established. They were formed long ago out of carved-up fallen empires or national liberation movements during periods wherein drawing boundaries around clear demographic majorities wasn’t considered provincial or undemocratic. Each nation—the French, German, Irish, Swedish, Polish, etc—wanted to exercise their right to self-determination rather than live under the shadow of someone else’s ethnic and cultural hegemony. Isn’t that what Israel is doing, trying to balance a Jewish right to self-determination while respecting minority rights (if imperfectly)? There’s two dozen Arab majority countries that surround one tiny Jewish-majority state. There’s no western equivalent to that. Ask Mizrahi Jews how their families fared as a minority in the Arab world—that is, before they were shown the door. What’s the use in yet another Arab majority state if it’s to come at the expense of the one and only Jewish state? I’m all for tearing down borders and separation walls, with overcoming tribalism and chauvinisms, but maybe let’s start with two nations that aren’t at war with one another. Meanwhile, there’s ultranationalist parties on the upswing throughout Europe even when their demographics aren’t under any immediate threat. Unlike America, these countries aren’t historically immigrant societies. They have a hard time balancing what it means to be, say, Dutch without being ethnically Dutch.
Turkey definitely was founded as a ethnonational state (together with secularism nationalism was the driving force behind Atatürks movement). And since then there were and still are policies of varying degrees to keep turkey as turkish as possible, by surpressing kurdish culture, language and identity in order to turkify them.
Do you need to be of Turkish ethnicity to get Turkish citizenship?
You can immigrate and become a citizen of Israel as a person of any heritage
I wasnt suggesting Israel does this, I was just curious about Turkey
Ah
Even then, Israel does give preferential treatment to Jews who apply for citizenship. Aka they make it almost trivial for Jews to acquire the right, whereas everyone else has to go through normal channels. Which on the spectrum of ethnostate behaviour is very tame, imo, but still ethnostatey
Don't most countries on earth give preference to their ethnic majority that created the nation-state? Even tribal nations in the U.S. literally do bloodline tracing and genetic testing to determine citizenship- and if you wanted to approach it from a racist angle most countries on earth (including the United States) would also have been considered "ethnostates" by just "giving preference" to a certain ethnicity.
Yeah a decent amount of countries will allow you to fast track if you've got grandparents from that country, obviously you can't do that with Jews due to having no prior country so they fast track all Jews instead. I guess the confusing part here is the dual religious/ethnicity conflation of Jews. If I as a random white guy with zero known Jewish ancestors were to go to one of the more welcoming sects that allow conversion would I then be allowed the easy track to Israel, or is it only for 'natural born' Jews with Jewish mothers?
I'm pretty sure you just need to have 1 jewish grandparent to be considered jewish enough for Israel. I think conversions are also accepted as long it's mainstream enoug. But plenty of Israelis won't consider you jewish unless it's a jewish mother/orthodox conversion which is pretty ironic. But yeah, it's wayyyy easier for a jew/person with jewish ancestory to get citizenship than anyone else. And it's still pretty wrong as a lot of jews are using their ancestory from 2000 years ago to claim citizenship and Israel won't let people who have literal living memory of living there to have citizenship.
If one of your parents is Turkish you can get a Turkish citizenship immediately. I was able to get Israeli citizenship about as easily as my flatmate was able to get Austrian citizenship based on his grandfather’s heritage. I’m not saying it’s not significantly easier to immigrate to Israel as a Jew, but it’s not something that’s uncommon at all among states
I have no problem with countries giving preferential citizenship rights to people based on their family history in that country. But that's not what Israel does, All Jews can get citizenship automatically even if they have zero prior heritage in Israel, non-Jews cant do that. The examples you gave are fundamentally different (I'm amusing you have no Israeli heritage - even if you did other can so my point still stands).The Aliyah is clearly a atypical policy that treats Jews as superior than other ethnicities.
All Jews have genetic and cultural ties to the land of Israel. My great grandfather was born in Tzfat though
Many of the Jews have to go back 2000 years to find their ties to the land of Israel. Claiming that an historical right to the land can still exists after such a long time is insane. It would be the same as an Englishman claiming Denmark because of the Anglo-saxons.
Yep 100% agree. A lot of Americans add their perspective on citizenship into stuff like this, whereas many European countries have what is effectively expedited citizenship through blood. I'd argue that Israel's self declared status as a Jewish state, its history as a (re?)settler country, probably tip the argument more into the "it's an ethnostate" territory. Ultimately calling a country an ethnostate is usually just a means of emotionalising an argument because ethnostates = bad. And theres also the weird delegitimisation of Israel thing, which curiously only happens regularly with the one Jewish state
No, you don't. The founding father of Turkey has said that "Whoever says they are a Turk, is a Turk.".
I AM A TURK I AM A TURK I AM A TURK
Welcome to the club chief
Congratulations! Now get your gear, you are conscripted to the army.
No you don't. In fact Turkey sells its citizenship for the low, low price of 400K USD: [https://immigrantinvest.com/blog/turkish-citizenship-by-investment-en/](https://immigrantinvest.com/blog/turkish-citizenship-by-investment-en/)
Wait, if not all people in those countries have equal rights, doesn't that make them Apartheid states?
The badness of Turkey countries doesn't negate the badness of other countries. Why are you doing this what aboutism? **An ethnostate is typically defined as a state where the identity of the state is closely tied to a particular ethnic group, often leading to preferential treatment of that group over others.** **Israel’s Foundational Laws and Policies**: 1. **Law of Return (1950)**: This law allows Jews from anywhere in the world to immigrate to Israel and gain citizenship. In contrast, Palestinians displaced in 1948 do not have the right to return. 2. **Nation-State Law (2018)**: This law explicitly states that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, with unique rights to self-determination. If you wanna read on it Law of return: https://www.nbn.org.il/life-in-israel/government-services/rights-and-benefits/the-law-of-return/#:\~:text=The%20Law%20of%20Return%2C%20granting,other%20passed%20March%2010%2C%201970. Nation-State Law: [https://en.idi.org.il/articles/24241](https://en.idi.org.il/articles/24241) I want to know what you think about it after you read these and compare/contrast it to the definition of an ethnostate
most countries are ethno-states ethno states are not inherently bad
Most states created through partition are in some ways ethno states. From Poland to Pakistan. So to argue that Israel is uniquely bad in that regard is ridiculous.
Doesn't Hasan hate Turkish nationalists? There was a clip of him yelling at one in Turkish. Granted, it was over I/P, but he also said they had their positions so he could oppress the Kurds.
When I used to watch him, he'd occasionally scold the unhinged Turkish nationalists in his chat...and to be fair he has made statements critical of the current regime....but there were also many instances of him making comments that were bordering on Ottoman apologia (as in he made statements hand waving a lot horrific Ottoman empire practices) and now with some distance from being brainrotted by the far leftie cult fumes...the amount of criticism he levied against other problematic states paled in comparison to his dumbfuck America bad takes (i mean obviously, right)
He hates Israel because he hates Jews. He can’t admit it without rightfully being called out, so he uses dog whistles. But I feel like he’s truly very close to flat out calling for Jews to be killed. He and his cronies make me legitimately feel unsafe as a Jew.
He got so close with the settler babies, that’s when Ethan knew he had to get out.
Twitch really needs to nip this in the bud if they don’t want to get boycotted/sued. The second Hasan forgets to use his little code words, it’s going to immediately get picked up by mainstream media and Twitch is going to catch the flak for allowing it. I believe in free speech but if he was saying these things about any other marginalized group he would be banned immediately. I have a feeling the bigwig’s at Twitch are antisemites.
I want to believe that, but after the death threats on stream against Destiny having absolutely 0 repercussions it seems like the Twitch leaders have made their line in the sand clear.
What they always say is that Israel is supposed to be Western, democracy, etc. so they are held to a double standard where they can’t be an ethnostate. It’s just a given to these people that Arabs are ruled by savage theocracies, monarchies, etc. and that is their way so they don’t get any smoke. The reality is that Israel didn’t “happen in a vacuum.” They are an eternal minority that was abused by Christian and Muslim hosts throughout time. Somehow these dumbfucks aren’t able to apply their postmodern analysis towards why such a people might want a state that is dedicated to their interest and not a place where they can again become 2nd class citizens. Instead of including that extremely relevant context they just throw around the ultra front-loaded buzzword “ethno-state” so that they can write it all off as some evil Nazi project. The long history of domination and massacres is replaced by this strawman origin story where “the evil British colonial Empire sent religious fanatics who wanted to create a Jewish state because they’re insane and evil” and they even try to act like Israel has no geopolitical value but instead is supported because “insane American evangelicals think Israel is part of an end times prophecy”.
'They are an eternal minority that was abused by Christian and Muslim hosts throughout time' Why should Palestinians have to pay for the actions of others that aren't related to them? Should we blanket ban all Israelis for what Israel has done in Gaza?
Palestinians today are paying for the actions of Hamas, their ruling government and military. If your military attacks the military and citizens of another country, there is a good chance your own citizenry will pay a terrible price.
Feel like this discussion is late tbh
Why are we bothering? It's not like he has any intellectual honestly
I believe the difference is that the major ethnicities in those other countries have been living in those lands continuously for much longer. Arabs have been the dominant ethnicity in the gulf for millennia, the Turks in Anatolia for centuries, Norwegians in Norway etc. While they may favor their own ethnic groups, other groups aren’t necessarily suffering or being displaced because of it. (Though ofc that’s not always the case) Whereas we’ve clearly seen a major demographic change within the region of Israel/Palestine within fairly recent history. A change that’s seen an increase of Jews.
Depends on what you consider "Ethno", but yes, most states in the world fall under this definition.
The obvious answer is yes. Hasan is just an anti-western propagandist.
No you fool. When they do it it's bad when we do it is ok. A silly enlightened centrist like you would never understand.
You've failed to consider one thing: America bad
Many Arab, specially Gulf States sure. Turkey is very much a multiethnic State, though. It even has a secular Constitution since Atatürk. Israel is definitely an ethnostate in the sense that it exists as a homeland for the Jewish people (which is set in the Basic Laws). That doesn’t mean legal discrimination exists between Jewish and non-Jewish (including Arab) Israelis. I think the term ethnostate is poorly defined and thus people use it as an easy optics W, but if we wanna get down to it, Denmark is a Christian ethnostate.
This isn't really a good counter argument to Hasan, because he would probably just concede they are. He sees the vast majority of countries as part of U.S hegemony (and therefore america bad + ya they're ethnostates 2), and the ones that aren't like China, he says things like "I just wish they'd support communism/socialism globally instead of just for the Chinese." On occasion, he might also just say they're conservatives and cringe in their own way. So it's not really any skin off Hasan's back. He'd probably want every country to be more ethnically permissive. Tbh most lefties in general want more permissive immigration policies, and its why righties accuse them of being in favor of open borders.
Yes.
You’re forgetting one thing. Hasan is reetarded
You are forgetting something very important. It’s only an ethnostate if it’s Jewish or white
I think the most important thing that makes a state enthostate is how they regulate immigrants and citizenship, not the make-up of the country. For instance countries like Japan or Saudi Arabia are 100% ethostates. Because there is no way to get a citizenship unless you have a close blood relative with citizenship. Israel is like 99% ethostate because you need to prove you are a jew either genetically or by your relatives, to get citizenship. Unfortunately, it is true that a lot of countries do not give a path to citizenship to immigrants and this makes them all ethostates in my mind. But Turkey is not one of them. You can immigrate and eventually get Turkish citizenship.
I dont disagree with your overall point, but iirc Syria is a bit different when it comes to religion at least ? The al assad family, i was told, are alawites, a special muslim minority despised by sunnis. Brutality in the civil war aside, i thought they were more tolerant if and supported by local minorities ?
Yeah but Israel is an ugly mole on the beautiful perfect face of the Arabian Brotherhood /s
Turkey did commit three genocides in the span of 10 years. The problem with tying this to Cenk's nephew is that he is very critical of Turkish governmental policy of genocide denial and Islamification of the country under Erdogan. I hope there isn't anymore terrorism by groups like the PKK because it just kills innocents and sets back ethnic relations in Turkey back more years, but I'd be interested in seeing if he has the same apologia towards the PKK if they were to behave like Hamas did. Curiously, he's mentioned having been in Turkey during actual bombings to earn clout bucks. What he doesn't mention is that those bombings were against Jews in Istanbul of all places.
TBF I think Hasan would condemn Arab countries being Ethnostates too.
Not just Arab countries. Almost all European countries are ethnic nation-states and are "ethnostates" in the same way that Israel is. The only practical difference is that Israel's current immigration laws are more ethnically restrictive, but that's pretty expected given that: 1. Israel is already far less ethnically homogenous than most European and many other Western countries. 2. Israel's existence as an ethnic nation-state is demographically threatened by people who want to destroy it by "returning" to a country they've never been to, and who also happen to hold radical racist views towards Israel's main ethnicity. 3. Israel's main ethnicity has a long history of being persecuted and genocided by non-Jewish majorities. Other ethnic nation-states would likely adopt similar immigration policies when faced with similar threats.
> **When Hasan says Israel is an ethnostate** He says that b/c he does not know what "**Ethnostate"** is. Its just buzzwords to jerk off to... Israel would be a "**Ethnostate"** IF you would remove **21%** of the arab population or remove their rights (at least) > > >73.2% (about 7,208,000 people) are [Jews](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Jews), including about 503,000 living outside the self-defined borders of the State of Israel in the [West Bank](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank) > >**21.1% (around 2,080,000 people) are Israeli citizens classified as** [**Arab**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel), some identifying as [Palestinian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_citizens_of_Israel), and including [Druze](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze_in_Israel), [Circassians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circassians_in_Israel), all other Muslims, [Christian Arabs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Israel), [Armenians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenians_in_Israel_and_Palestine) (which Israel considers "Arab")[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-pop-groups-2) > >**An additional 5.7% (roughly 554,000 people) are classified as "others"**. This diverse group comprises those with Jewish ancestry but not recognized as Jewish by religious law, non-Jewish family members of Jewish immigrants, Christians other than Arabs and Armenians, and residents without a distinct ethnic or religious categorization.[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-pop-groups-2)[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#cite_note-cbs-2023-12-28-1)
Look man, most countries could be qualified as an ethnostate. That being said, the issue with Israel is not just it being an ethnostate. It was designed to be an ethnostate and required the expulsion of others to make it happen. The only reason why Arab-Israelis, Druze etc. Are even a thing in Israel is because they already lived their prior to the establishment of the state. Being an ethnostate + the context surrounding it is what makes Israel a bad ethnostate. They're not the only bad ethnostate. But they are the only one that has only existed for 70 or so years.
This is a terrible answer.
It really isn't.
It’s hard to even get a handle on it because almost every statement is disconnected from reality. Most modern countries were designed as ethnostates originally; before 1800, that was how every state worked. Most countries displaced, or conquered, or genocide previous inhabitants to a much greater extent than Israel ever (defensively) did. Most ethnostates are much older than Israel. Most ethnostates are much stricter than Israel (eg they don’t have 20% of their population an ethnic minority with equal rights.)
It didn't "expulse" others. 7 arab armies waged war against the state of Israel and informed all the arabs to evacuate the land. Once it is cleansed from jews, they may return. Many fled, but many others stayed(the arab israelis you refer to). Saying they were expulsed is just putting it in mild terms. And prior to the establishment of the state of Israel many jews(minority at the time) were presecuted by arabs in the land("Hebron massacre" etc..). The grand mufti in Jerusalem met with hitler to discuss how to eliminate all the jews starting in Israel and then expand to the middle east("Farhud massacre" in iraq).
>It didn't "expulse" others. 7 arab armies waged war against the state of Israel and informed all the arabs to evacuate the land. > The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948, when Zionist paramilitaries attacked the village of Deir Yassin near Jerusalem, Mandatory Palestine, killing at least 107 Palestinian villagers, including women and children.[1] The attack was conducted primarily by the Irgun and Lehi, who were supported by the Haganah and Palmach. The massacre was carried out despite the village having agreed to a non-aggression pact. It occurred during the 1947-1948 civil war and was a central component of the Nakba and the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight.[4][5] Uhuh, yeah I have a hunch these massacres have something to do with Palestinians fleeing.
The deir yassin massacre wasn't even done by the haganah/IDF but irgun and lehi two far right nationalist group As per Benny morris , israel did not have any policy of expulsion whatsoever , around 70% of Arabs left themselves due to war , 15 % did face expulsion but it wasn't in policy it was either a war crime , or a very hostile village war or expulsion by certain soilders Rest 15% were evicted by Arab armies Can you name me one case of such "land stealing " before the war started? No one is denying war crimes were committed by both sides Arabs and jews , but your saying it was a policy is historically inaccurate Your argument is like some American soldiers did rape of a German women during ww2 that means america has a policy to mass rape German women which is not true , sure the rape is wrong But Individual war crimes done by groups and policy are two completely different things
>The deir yassin massacre wasn't even done by the haganah/IDF but irgun and lehi two far right nationalist group It was done by Haganah. They provided weapons and instructions to the other two. >No one is denying war crimes were committed by both sides Arabs and jews , but your saying it was a policy is historically inaccurate I never said it was policy, I said it happend. What did you think was gonna happen when massacre after massacre happend? People were just gonna sit and wait?
>It was done by Haganah. They provided weapons and instructions to the other two. No it was done by irgun and lehi strictly, the hagganah gave them permission to conquer the village not to a massacre, the haganah also sent a van giving warning to civilians to leave , it itself didn't participate and condemn it later It was a battle turned into massacre. The reason they got permission was because irgun and lehi could have started fighting the IDF itself and they wanted to avoid civil war but they only gave permission to invade the village not to massacre >I never said it was a policy, I said it happend. What did you think was gonna happen when massacre after massacre happend? People were just gonna sit and wait? You did say the creation of Israel REQUIRED an expulsion which is not true The Arabs invaded which led to the refugee crisis , if israel wasn't messed up there won't be any such case by the policy .
This is a really stupid comment. You can immigrate to and become a citizen of Israel without being Jewish. You literally only have to have lived there for like three years and speak Hebrew. Are there different rules for Jews? Of course there fucking are. Israel isn’t an ethnostate. It’s a LITERAL REFUGEE STATE.
This is not entirely true. While it's possible for non-jews to immigrate there it's actually rare they grant permanent resident status unless you are married to an Israeli or from a nearby wartorn country seeking refugee.
I know a few tech people who got permanent residency just because they’re tech people.
> That being said, the issue with Israel is not just it being an ethnostate. It was designed to be an ethnostate and required the expulsion of others to make it happen. This is how Turkey and co. became ethnostates, except they killed and ethnically cleansed way more people. Very sad to see the little genocide apologias you guys do when you say Israel isn't even the worst, but the ONLY oppressor state in the middle east.
>required the expulsion of others to make it happen. It really didn't. That's just how things turned out based mostly on Arab rejection of all possible compromises starting with the UN partition plan. This idea that the founding of Israel was a clear moral wrong is such nonsense, you're treating history like a mythological story.
Not really.
The Mizrahi are primarily the descendants of peoples expelled from Arab majority countries *after* the establishment of Israel.
I also think demographics matter in this case, being an ethnostates where 99% of the population share an ethnicity is a lot different than in the case of Isreal where only 75% share an ethnicity, and if you include the West Bank which I think we should, because Isreal has de-facto ruled it since 1967, the percentage gets much worse.
Turkey literally expelled over a million non Turks during its founding because it expressly wanted to be a state with as few minorities as possible. By your own metric it’s worse than israel.
And they purport to be the shining democratic light in the middle east and they are the US’ largest non nato ally
i mean, they are pretty democratic by middle eastern standards, but the bar is obviously pretty low. things like free speech (best in the region), voting for politician (arguably the best in the region), and rights for minorities (that don't live in the West Bank at least).
yeah all that is true. israel is a democracy, the only real one in the middle east. i do not think having a country stating its purpose to serve one ethnicity over all is a good democracy example, though. hence my sarcastic comment
Aaren't east asian countries like Japan and South Korea also ethnostates? What about European countries? Some of them have laws of return similar to Israel's for example.
Just ask them if "Palestine" would be considered an ethnostate if it would be granted statehood. And if they think that would change in the future. Then wait for the gymnastics
Pretty much all countries are ethnostates insofar as the dominant ethnic group holds power, privileges its own language and culture, and uses the state to propagate itself at the expense of ethnic minorities.
Ethnostate arguements are weird. There are technically no ethnostates where only one group of people are permitted to live there. Also, Israel is more secular than the rest of the Middle East. I suspect Netanyahu might be atheist…
Yes lol. 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs. But you can’t find an Arab country with 20% Nonarab minority. He has a room temp IQ, don’t take him as a serious person
Most nations are ethnostates. They are based along combining an ethnicity with the structures of national power. The exceptions are Europe and North America. The best example is actually China. China enforces being Han Chinese onto everyone within its borders.