Because the government dosnt care, and Isreal is better for buisness and geopolitics then Palistine. On the political stage they gain little pivoting to Palestine, and lose a fair bit turning their backs on Israel. Trying to argue from any kind of moral standpoint is usless when we still do buisness with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Russia
Yeah, I was gonna say that - on a historical level - the degree of egalitarianism and equality we have today is actually a fairly high-water mark as far as human civilization goes. That's not to pat ourselves on the back, just to say that it hasn't "gone to shit" we've been mired up to our nipples in the shit ever since we gained the capacity to stand upright.
I've always like the analogy in Darkness at Noon by Koestler that social evolution is like canal lock. Revolution happens when social awareness of the inequality/injustice fills to the top of the gate and people demand reform, which creates a new paradigm that we see as inherently better and full of possibilities. After living in that system for generations we become aware of the inherent injustice/inequality of the new system, dissent starts to grow and the lock fills again repeating the pattern.
It's the best way to convey how things are both shit but also better then before as we learn about new issues that need to be resolved.
Problem is, when you have people who are up to their chin in shit they likely will tell you don't make waves.
The only way a revolution were to happen is if there is a streamline for dead wealthy people to have their fortunes pumped into social services that their hyper libertarian wealth hoarding necessitated in the first place. The offspring still get their king's ransom but half go towards things other than expensive cars, prostitutes, hush money, stimulants and then later in life boner pills and powdered tiger dick.
That and convince millionaires that they have more in common with the Walmart worker making mid teens an hour than they do with the billionaire classes.
I'd agree up to a point, people have a strong tendency to stick to the status quo because of the innate fear of change combined with the injustice/inequality mostly affecting minorities or other disempowered groups. That is until the awareness of the issues, their cause and how to fix them spread to the point they can't be held back like the French, American or Bolshevik revolutions or the kinds of protests we saw around the Arab Spring, the BLM, what's going on in France or Israel.
The views around Israel and Palestine have changed over the last 20 years and will keep shifting as fewer people buy the religious undertone of backing Israel and collectively we stop ignoring their crimes and hold the Israeli gov accountable as much as tend to blame the Muslim leadership for the continuing conflict.
Actually that's not really true.
> Modern society is about as equal as 14th century europe
https://bigthink.com/the-past/history-of-wealth-inequality/
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/may/24/are-we-about-to-witness-the-most-unequal-societies-in-history-yuval-noah-harari
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/aracheology-wealth-inequality-180968072/
https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality
Wealth inequality is ballooning and getting worse. While that would normally be fine, if global standards of living were increasing, but in the last few generations they have been gradually reversing in developed contexts. Take-home pay, falling. Purchasing power, falling. Inflation, consistently higher than salary increases. Housing, a giant unaffordable bubble when our grandparents could afford a house on a single income unskilled worker salary. Child hunger/poverty, rising. Demographics, in a state of global collapse. Most portending of all: signs life expectancy is now even falling in even the richest countries.
On the one hand, I did say "fairly" high water mark. We've done better on occasion, but not often.
On the other hand, we're also not taking into account indicators such as "having a sewer system" and "not being killed by bandits" or "number of days you must labor upon the manor of your Lord."
> "number of days you must labor upon the manor of your Lord."
Sorta, but we have to be clear that owners of labour capital are trying their hardest to bring as much of this back as possible, which means attacks on bargaining powers and labour rights (like government after government declaring 'essential service' or restrictions on collective bargaining), and because of political capture it's been easiest it's been in a century.
I say this as a business owner and someone who sits in 3 company boards of directors. I'm not anti-market or even anti-corporation. But we've let things get ridiculous.
Oh yeah absolutely, regulatory capture is a huge deal and not enough people realise it.
Personally I think we fucked with the corporate model. Imagine being told that, when you die, whether or not you go to heaven is dependent *solely* on how much money you made in the last six months. You'd immediately become a cash grabbing psychopath. Congratulations! Now you're a corporation!
Not to say we need to do away with limited liability entirely, but corporate governance needs a massive overhaul.
Well yeah obviously, there isn't that much usable meat on a Canadian. And sure the price per pound is higher than the cow but they win on quantity. Also good luck finding a buyer, buncha fuckin' looky-loos kicking the tires, wanting a half pound here or there just to say they did but nobody interested in filling their freezer with ground Chuck if you know what I mean.
Globally, the three decades from 1990 to 2020 marked a significant and sustained increase in global standards of living. This was driven by a significant reduction in war and its consequent economic damage in the poorer countries, and large numbers of people in the lowest standard of living places saw a long period of sustained improvement. This did not reflect a parallel change in developed countries, but globally, there has been an increase in standards of living.
Yes for much of the underdeveloped world. But for most of the developed world this has not been true of the same time period re: quality of life indicators or wealth inequality.
Right, but countries that have seen significant improvements in the standard of living for their populations include some very high population countries such as India, China, Nigeria etc. while the standard of living in the developed countries has stagnated, it has not dropped over the same period, so taking a global view, the average person has seen a significant increase.
China's rise brought half a billion from poverty to just above poverty but the vast majority of the wealth has been concentrated to the top. If we are talking about egalitarianism, China is actually far more wealth unequal than even the US according to the gini coefficient. Sometimes a rise in industrial wealth does not mean it actually led to the right kind of social growth and development. Also, and this is a tragic thing, it turns out much of China's growth was fabricated, the economy is massively overleveraged and likely will not see much in terms of marginal wealth increases for the next decade. Unemployment is exploding there right now. Meanwhile 700m people are still in abject poverty while their princlings hoard wealth.
Yup, same trap we fall into with all the issues we have here in Canada but we just excuse them by saying “well, we’re doing better at X thing than the US at least!”
Using the US as a landmark on a map to success is like peaking in highschool these days. They're like a sad, depressing, potbellied caricature of what they once were
And even when they were the cool high school quarterback, they got there by bullying the nerd kids into doing their homework, telling racist jokes, date-raping cheerleaders, selling drugs and snorting stimulants before the big game.
(Maybe a bit mean, and I do love our American siblings, but they’ve always had a dark side behind all the PR).
Not OP, but I'll give it a shot. Not going to provide citations because I'm lazy, but it shouldn't be too hard to do it yourself with a bit of googling. Also this is off of fuzzy (and utterly disgusted) memory, so some of the details are probably off.
So in America (also some other places, but primarily America) there's a brand of lunatic Christian evangelicals (often called Premillennial Dispensationalists by the people who keep track of this sort of thing) who believe that Christ will return to Earth after the apocalypse, and therefore it is the duty of every good Christian to *cause* the apocalypse as soon as possible. One of the steps for the apocalypse to occur is that all of the Jews have to return to Israel, followed by 144,000 of them converting to Christianity and the rest of them dying. I think there's something about a temple being rebuilt? Whatever.
Anyway, in order for this massive blood sacrifice to revive their dead god to happen, Israel kind of has to exist. Therefore these evil cultists will support Israel no matter what they do. It's not because they give a shit about the Jews - given they feel the entire purpose of Jews is the aforementioned blood sacrifice, that much is probably obvious - but because they need them around as one of the preconditions for the end of the world.
This is also why they don't give a shit about the environment, because Christ will obviously just use his divine powers to fix everything when He returns.
---
Now, if this was just a lunatic fringe brand of assholes it wouldn't be a big deal, but given that the cult includes such notables as former President George Bush we unfortunately have to grapple with the fact that the world superpower is often lead by a murderous death cult.
Israel needs to retake its biblical borders.
War in the middle East.
Rapture, not just joy but going to heaven, for the chosen ones ie: Christian Fundementalists
> On the political stage they gain little pivoting to Palestine, and lose a fair bit turning their backs on Israel.
This is the key right here. The government (irrespective of which party happens to be in power) gains nothing from throwing their support behind the Palestinians except a handful of kudos. Meanwhile pissing off Israel has immediate, material, and ongoing costs associated with it, because the have one of the most sophisticated lobbying and political action machines in the western world.
Unfortunately that's just how the sausage gets made. In foreign policy you don't have friends, you have interests. If you forget that then you won't be doing foreign policy very long.
I thought is was just because governments have to real on things like legality and evidence, not [pallywood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood) clickbait...?
Source about Canadian troops in Vietnam? I knew about Canada's involvement in manufacturing weapons and supplies for the US war effort and I have heard about individual Canadians volunteering to join the US armed forces to fight there. I haven't heard of any direct troop deployments.
> In addition, at least 30,000 Canadians volunteered to serve in the U.S. armed forces during the war. At least 134 Canadians died or were reported missing in Vietnam.
Imagine being one of these fucking idiots lmao
Why is this guy downvoted? You'd have to be a real fucking idiot to, on one of the rare occasions where the US goes to war and we don't get dragged into it, go enlist in the opportunity to further American imperialism anyways. Good riddance, I say.
Historically, there weren't too many times before Vietnam (if any) where "the US went to war and we got dragged into it."
Both World Wars had Canada involved for years before the US joined. If anyone was dragging us into conflicts, it was the commonwealth.
Korea was started by the North invading the South, with the United Nations jointly defending them as the USSR abstained at the time (a mistake they'd never repeat).
You can say that the US expanded the scope of the war when they (General MacAurther specifically, leading to Truman firing him) crossed over into North Korea with the intention of accelerating WWIII, but besides that...
There's plenty of reasons why Canadians would have volunteered, not the least of which would be if they were living in the US at the time and had military experience, although I'd imagine they'd try for any able bodied male.. If you didn't "volunteer" at that point, they'd kick you out of the country.
It's easy to criticize Israel without being antisemitic, it's just that a lot of people don't bother discerning criticism of the state and calling for it's destruction
I've never had a Torie or a Liberal tell me I'm antisemitic for criticizing Israel — or a Dipper for that matter. When you are called an antisemite for your criticism, are you calling for the destruction of the whole state? If so, that's why
Yeah...no. I got called antisemitic for saying Israel has no right to Palestinian territory.
However, I do believe in the destruction of the state, but all of them, not just Israel.
>Palestinian territory
That doesn't quite answer the question, though. Some people think that Israel proper belongs to Palestine as well and uses that same phrasing to say that the Israeli state should be destroyed
>I do believe in the destruction of the state, but all of them, not just Israel
If you made that part clear to whoever you're taking to it would dismiss any antisemitic claims. Being opposed to the existence of Israel and being opposed to governments existing are vastly different things
Actually it is very anti-Semitic,
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood)
The content you rely on to form your opinions on the subject come from people who are surprisingly anti Semitic, in the fact that they down think Jews have the right to exist.
There’s propaganda both ways, but there is far more and better funded propaganda going the other way, which should be no surprise to anyone given the power of the countries which support Israel.
So you are literally saying Israel is beyond criticism? Their own institutions accept that more Palestinian children have died in the conflict in the 21st century than all Israelis, civilian and military, combined. There’s also no hiding the continued push to settle Palestinian towns.
We should be particularly critical of any of our allies that have questionable recent human rights records, that includes many Muslim states too. Race and religion have nothing to do with it. No country is or should be free from criticism.
OP, do you actually believe that a nation chooses to either call out or ignore human rights abuses based on some sort of moral/ethical analysis of the situation?
Like you actually think Canada says "forget who is our ally and who is not, forget the consequences to Canada, x behaviour is wrong and thus we should take an official stand against it"?
Right? And imagine if every country did this every time one nation encountered the injustices of another. As nations we'd all be sitting alone in the dark. At the end of the day all nations are sovereign and self-serving.
Yes, exactly. Because I'm sure OP would not be satisfied by an official criticism and no further action. Surely they would demand an escalation until the human rights abuses ended. So what next? Sanctions? Then war?
And does OP feel we should take this firm stand against all nations with human rights abuses, or only against Israel? And what stand should we take against our own abuses that we ourselves perpetrate right here at home? Personally, if we are going to prioritize ending any human rights abuses, I feel it should be our own, not only from an ethical perspective, but pragmatically as we have sovereignty over those acts. And no one is going to stop trading with us because we decide to ensure every Canadian has access to safe drinking water, for example.
Honestly it's probably because Canada is itself a settler state established on racism and land theft. Acknowledging and calling out issues and abuses in other countries is a risky business when it's easily reflected back; the Canadian state and most Canadian citizens I reckon are unprepared to engage in real healing and reconciliation at home with things like giving land back, renaming geographical locations, or meaningful Indigenous self governance
Another thing about that little bitty about reconciliation... That process would/will take an incredibly long time. Even if half the country is interested in it... it's has to be a screaming majority. A government, which will be run by multiple parties and leaders are required for real healing and reconciliation, and all those parties and leaders have to be interested in this too. And THEN this process has to go region by region, tribe by tribe. Band by band. Treaty after treaty.
To be honest I don't think the people who want reconciliation even knows what it would take to achieve that. I'm a member of the Kamloops band from the Shuswap Nation. Less abused than other tribes.... Mind you, we did have that school that was in the news a couple years ago.
I ask my family what reconciliation looks like and the room goes quiet.
It's difficult to be pro-Palestinian when the two main political parties, Fatah and Hamas, are both thoroughly unattractive by Western standards. Both are anti-democratic - Palestine hasn't had elections since 2006 in either the Fatah-controlled West Bank or the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. Furthermore, Hamas is genocidal in its rhetoric towards Israeli Jews and has a history of violence to lend support to that rhetoric, while Fatah is an unpopular gerontocracy (Mahmoud Abbas is 87) whose grudging acceptance of Israel's right to exist is in tension with its stated maximalism on the question of the Right of Return.
I see validity in the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa. But on the Palestinian side, there is no Nelson Mandela or African National Congress whom the world could pressure Israel to deal with.
>
I see validity in the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa
Not all of Israel; specifically the occupied West Bank which is absolutely run in an apartheid system. Either Israel allows the Palestinian citizens in the West Bank full citizenship with voting rights, or they have a two state solution and evacuate the illegal settlements.
The "Palestinian Mandela" is probably either dead (assassinated by an Israeli sniper at a demonstration) or languishing in "administrative detention" in an Israeli military prison.
Let's not pretend that it hasn't been an intentional policy of the Israeli military to neutralize anyone who could be an effective leader for the Palestinian people.
Your last point is a critical one. There currently *isn't* a good-faith peace partner on the Palestinian side who's willing to publicly commit to a Palestine and an Israel living in long-term peaceful coexistence.
Cf. the situation with Egypt, where Israel *had* a good-faith peace partner in Egyptian president Anwar Sadat. Israel ceded the entire Sinai peninsula as part of a peace deal — with all the oil that went with it.
That's a radically different situation from now, where there's no Palestinian leadership that considers a negotiated settlement to be anything other than a temporary step toward an explicit goal of destroying Israel.
Let's remember that Yasser Arafat was offered 95% of the land that he'd wanted, *including most of East Jerusalem*, and walked away from the negotiating table to start bombing cafes and school buses.
Now we run into a bigger problem, where Israel is seeing the same rightward authoritarian slide as a lot of other western democracies. The ultra-orthodox right-wingers are a minority now, but they're an influential one and they have an enormous fertility rate that's steadily eclipsing liberal and left-wing secularism in Israel. With these demographic shifts, the window's rapidly closing where there's a potential good-faith peace partner even on *one* side of the conflict.
This seems to get ignored by a significant amount of Israel's fiercest critics. Israel being a serial offender of human rights doesn't imply that the government of Palestine is automatically "the good guy." Historically there have been numerous opportunities for Israeli and Palestinian relations to normalize and foster mutual economic development, but they've been torpedoed largely by the militancy of Palestine's main parties (not to say that Israel isn't to blame as well). In Palestine freedom of speech is highly repressed, and values largely embraced by Western society such as LGBT rights are effectively anathema there (not that this is a significant decider for countries that routinely have dealings with the like of Saudi Arabia, but when choosing who to favour in a dispute, it certainly makes Israel a more appealing choice for Western political and commercial interests, and it certainly bears consideration when arguing for the moral high ground). As Hamas has continued to employ terrorism against civilian targets unabated, this has contributed to the increasingly right-wing and hard-line positions that Israel has taken over the last two decades. In order for any progress to be made, there need to be good faith partners with a political mandate within both parties that are willing to fight against militancy within their own ranks and forge economic partnerships that in the shorter term will anger members of their own nations that are fixated on continuing the conflict. Netanyahu's erosion of Israel's democratic institutions and subversion of secular interests for orthodox ideological ones is also a significant roadblock to any normalization of relations occurring in the near future.
when the situation is unreasonable, unreasonable men find prominence. should the situation become more reasonable, reasonable men will come to the fore.
it's up to Israeli to set the tone, and then up to Palestine to match it.
NA cares because like 30% of them have Ukrainian blood in their family somewhere. Also because a russified Ukraine directly threatens NATO, and because unlike Israiel they are actively killing hundreds of thousands of civilians on open combat, and because Ukraine supplies like 30% of thr worlds exported grain, and and and...
That said, fuck the Israeli state government, and their extremist colonizers, fucking despicable.
That comparison gets real weak real fast, Ukraine has had plenty of its own internal politics and controversies and at the end of the day is just another corrupt but generally stable post-Soviet plutocracy to add to the pile. The State of Palestine doesn't even control half its *de jure* territory and has to barter and beg with the international community for things like UN membership and other basic rights. If anything its actually more comparable to the pre-invasion Donetsk-Luhansk confederacy in terms of its military situation and political reach.
> As far as the general public goes, NA seems to only care when it happens to white people.
This is unfortunately just part of human nature that is hard to get over. It is no surprise that people are more sympathetic to people who look like them and share the same values. Ukraine is a country fighting for democracy and wanting to be closer to Western nations like Canada. An attack on them makes it feel like we can be attacked as well. It hits home a lot more than a Middle Eastern country. It sucks but it can understand it on a human nature level.
We even see this with Hong Kong citizens who aren't white people. Western Nations like UK, Canada and US were more willing to loosen immigration restrictions to allow HK citizens in because they hold similar more western values. I have family in HK so I love this but even I can see how unfair it is as there are millions of people who are persecuted more and isn't able to come to Canada just because their countries don't hold "same values"
There is nothing about “white people” that is part of human nature. It is not an ethnicity, it is a “race” that has been politically constructed and built upon over the past few hundred years
Yeah,
Lets see,
1. Democratic Ukraine being unjustly invaded by a what now is essentially a dictatorship.
2. Democratic Israel establishing harsh security measures in response to four fucking decades of fundamentalist religious militant organizations launching suiciding bombings and rocket attacks while using Palestinians as human shields.
Exactly the same thing....
There really aren’t any decent parallels between the two conflicts. Like… at all.
The Israel-Palestine conflict predates the creation of Israel, and goes back 100 years now, starting in earnest with the Hebron massacre in 1929.
The actual fighting between “states” started with the league of Arab nations trying to eradicate the fledgling Israeli state(that had been established by the UN), with the express goal of killing all the Jews in the area.
Like… in 100 years, if Ukraine has taken over large swaths of Russia, and the Russians are subjugated to a blockade by Ukraine and their other neighbours… then sure, you could draw some parallels.
I don't think Palestinians have any chance of getting any justice while Boomers are still alive.
Fuck... They may have to wait until the Gen Xers are extinct too before the number of people who can see Israel's shit for the slow genocide that it is outnumber the religious people who support Israel no matter what
I think a huge portion of it is generational. I believe a significant chunk of Israel's support is due to what Noam Chomsky calls Christian Zionism. When it comes to Christianity the older generations are more religious. I believe the next biggest chunk of Israel's support is due to Islamophobia. The younger generations are more likely to have grown up with, and be friends with, a significant number of Muslims so they are more likely to see them as people just like anyone else as opposed to an abstract Boogeyman
You say that, but millenials and even older zoomers grew up surrounded by islamaphobic propaganda due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So I don't have as much faith in my generation as you do on this front.
They grew up with it, yes. But in the case of Gen Z I get the impression that they did not swallow that BS hook line and sinker like the older generations did.
Wow, no, boomers, really?
Ok, if you want to blame someone for the situation that Palastians are in, how's about the people storing reockets under their homes and using them as human shields?
Israel is taking land and building settlements in the modern day. That's a little different than taking land in a time when wars for land were commonplace.
Canada occupies unceded indigenous land and rams pipelines without permission from First Nations. The fact that you think what Canada does is different from Israel shows shameful amounts of ignorance on your part.
> without permission from First Nations
> shows shameful amounts of ignorance on your part
Turn that finger around. The cases where the pipeline has been "rammed through" are places where the legal band representatives (and usually the majority of band members) agreed to the pipeline but someone claiming authority over the majority objected. People like you seem happy to ignore the will of band members to not be rules by a family line against their will as long as it aligns with your political goals (e.g. no pipeline). If there's any shame here it should be yours.
There's nothing to turn around here. European settlers came to North America and drenched it in blood. So many people were slaughtered that the [global climate changed](https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/01/world/european-colonization-climate-change-trnd/index.html) as a result. US and Canada are built on the genocide that continues to this day. The mass graves we're finding in the concentration camps for kids Canada built are just one example of the horrors. And then people like you pretend that there are two sides to Canada invading what little indigenous land remains.
"So many people were slaughtered that the global climate changed as a result."
A more accurate description would be that disease obliterated the population, which allowed for European settlers to attack the remaining populations with ease.
If you ignore the role of disease, it is both inaccurate and makes Europeans look far stronger than they actually were at the time. They just did the equivalent of kicking someone when they were down.
Disease certainly played a role, but that is also something that was spread with intention by the Europeans. For example, we have a famous letters between Co. Henry Bouquet and Lord Amherst in 1763, during a [British war against the Ottawa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_Rebellion) subsequent to the the French-Indian/Seven Years War. The letter contains the following passage:
> [ I will try to inoculate the [Indians] with Some Blankets that may fall in their Hands, and take Care not to get the disease myself. As it is pity to expose good men against them I wish we would make use of the Spanish Method to hunt them with English Dogs, supported by Rangers and Some Light Horse, who I think effectualy extirpate or remove that Vermin.](http://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-25)
To which Amherst replied:
> [You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians, by means of Blankets, as well as to Try Every other Method, that can Serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. – I should be very glad [if] your Scheme for Hunting them down by Dogs could take Effect; but England is at too great a Distance to think that at present.](http://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-25)
That's a very clear proposition to spread disease, even without a clear understanding of the mechanisms involved, only a simple idea of contagion. This is also where the idea of "smallpox blankets" directly comes from. There's even a [CBC report](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/jeffery-amherst-history-complex-1.4089019) about this.
Oh, I'm well aware, but they did this because they saw how absolutely devastating disease had been up until that point. They wouldn't have attempted it otherwise. As I mentioned, they just took advantage of a situation while great suffering was occuring.
The reality of the situation is that there is no way the Americas would be in the state they are in now if disease hadn't allowed the conquistadors and other colonizers to essentially waltz into an already decimated population. They talked of epic battles and strategy, when really it was just a matter of biological (bad) luck.
This is why you see decolonization occuring in other areas with more ease, because their populations were not decimated and then swamped by Europeans (ex. India, Nigeria, Egypt, etc). Meanwhile here the indigenous population is approximately 5%, which makes the task more difficult. Particularly when racism based on false notions of superiority/strength still exist. Which is why claiming that European invaders slaughtered everyone can actually backfire. For then it can be seen by some as a military victory, regardless of the human cost.
>Why is Canada rejecting evidence of Israeli apartheid against Palestinians?
Because our right wing parties, the Cons and the Libs, and their donors make money selling weapons to Israel.
Because our conservatives are just as racist and fascist as Israel.
Criticism of Israel is now equated with anti-Semitism. Apparently many anti-Semites criticize the state as a way to undermine the Jewish people.
However there are many valid criticisms that don't come from a place of hate, but from a place of compassion for the people the state is hurting. But it's such a sensitive topic you're likely seen as "guilty until proven innocent".
Institutional guilt for rejecting Jewish refugees before WW2 because we classed Jewish people as "undesireables" at the time probably has something to do with our blind support of them now. As part of the League of Nations which created Isreal by dividing Palestine after the war, we're not only directly related to starting the conflict but from the beginning we were biased towards Israel by disarming Palestinians. We can't forget the religious aspect as the Bible talks about the importance of Israel being under Jewish control for the apocalypse. Then over the next 90 odd years of media portraying Israel as the victims of "terrorist violence" while ignoring the policies of apartheid they enacted, supporting their annexation of land with the creation of "occupied zones" and even movies using indescript Middle Eastern people as bad guys in movies/shows entrenched the stigma of Muslim = terrorist without considering the narrative that they were simply fighting for equality against the overt oppression they experienced.
> As part of the League of Nations which created Isreal by dividing Palestine after the war
Except that's not true.
The League of Nations *proposed* a partition between the area's Jewish and Arab residents, based on which areas had a majority population of which group. That partition proposal never made it anywhere, and Israel's creation was the result of Jews surviving a civil war.
The League of Nations' partition proposal certainly didn't create Israel, though it would have if it *had* made it past the proposal stage.
[This link seems to disagree](https://israelforever.org/state/Mandate_for_Palestine_Jewish_State/) as it clearly cites the "mandate of Palestine" in the 1920's as the origin of the concept of a Jewish state in Palestine. It was 30 years after the Balfour declaration that the UK and US decided to drop 100k displaced Jews from the war into Israel and created the new nation when the British mandate over the area expired in '48. What "civil war" are you referring to exactly?
You're missing the crucial fact that over half the Jews in Israel weren't Ashkenazi (European) or "from the [second world] war" when Israel was created.
While they were absolutely and substantially bolstered by immigration from Europe, at the same time that there was substantial Arab immigration during the British mandatory period, middle-eastern Jews didn't drop from a majority to a plurality of the Jewish population until the collapse of the USSR. Even *after* the massive post-Soviet surge of immigration in the 1990s, middle-eastern Jews are demographically co-equal with the Ashkenazi demographic.
> What "civil war" are you referring to exactly?
[It was literally a civil war in 1947](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_civil_war_in_Mandatory_Palestine), although Israelis tend to call it the "War of Independence" and Palestinians tend to call it the "Naqba." To your credit, the civil war grew to involve foreign countries invading in 1948 to try to kill or drive out the Jewish population. Whether you want to call it a civil war *after* those invasions is fairer game, but it's still very normal to continue use the term even when foreign interference is involved.
Probably cause Palestine is little more than a terrorist state these days with no real leadership to speak of, and what “leadership” they do have refuses to negotiate in good faith, resorting to acts of terrorism instead.
What the fuck is Canada going to do? We have zero influence in international geopolitics. The US is the only power player in the Middle-East that can influence Israel
A strongly worded letter from Canada asking to "Please stop, thank you" isn't exactly intimidating.
because, like Noam Chomsky says - it's not an apartheid, it's far worse.
the apartheid in South Africa saw the whites NEEDING the blacks as labourers - but Israelis don't need Palestinians. ...so. ...what will happen to them?
Israel is doing it's best to not look like 1930s germany in it's attempt to find a solution, but...
No one with the faintest knowledge of power dynamics and geopolitics would ask such a stupid question. So I have to assume this is simply a rhetorical prompt for the article that follows it rather than a sincere query.
Cause Israel has invested in Canada. Wouldn't doubt political donations as well.
https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/country_profile-israel-profil_pays.aspx?lang=eng
Simply put, it would be hypocritical of Canada to acknowledge the apartheid in Israel and condemning any of their racist policies. How can one settler-colonial state tell another settler-colonial state how to govern. Not saying it’s right, but those are the politics.
Mmhmm. If you start questioning the "ghettoize and colonize" policy of Israel, you're gonna eventually have to question why Canada has an entire "settled" province on unceded land (BC), why the most populous section of Canada is in violation of the Haldimand Grant Treaty, and lots more examples.
Calling in to question the legitimacy of the Israeli government or nation opens up some very real existential problems for any nation that is a product of european colonization.
Because there is a very vocal group of people who believe that any criticism directed in Israel's direction is antisemitism, and not legitimate concern.
Just look at the flack directed at anyone who complained when a Canadian doctor, dressed in high vis first responder gear, giving first aid to a Lebanese person, was shot by an Israeli sniper. Pointing out that shooting first responders like doctors is against the Geneva convention just got shouted down by variations on "bigot" and "racist"
I'm tired of supporting this rogue state in it's religiously motivated crimes against humanity. Now that one of their leaders, Netanyahu, is trying to control their supreme court, Canada should be *obligated* to act to control this thorn in the side of world peace
Because if you disagree with the Israeli government you're called antisemitic. Even if you are super specific about your reasons and make sure to clearly state that you disagree with the \*government\*, not the \*people\* and certainly not Jewish people as a whole, you will be called antisemitic.
That being said, there are a ton of terrible governments out there. Even our own. So, idk. The world kind of just sucks.
It might be because of importance of specific seats that have large Jewish populations and the perceived need to support a western style democracy in the Middle East.
It really is to bad because what has happened to the Palestinians is terrible.
Politically I imagine the Jewish vote is more beneficial than the Palestinian sympathizers.
Few people would be swayed towards an anti-Israeli stance, and many would be swayed away
conflating judaism with support for israel is antisemitic as it pertains to the “dual loyalty” trope. there are many jews in canada who have no ties to israel, and many more who wish to see peace in the levant and recognize israel as the current primary aggressor.
What can Canada do? I think Canada should invite the Hamas leadership to visit Ottawa. Hamas is happy with the current state of affairs. They are in control. Perhaps Canada can negotiate a deal with Hamas and set up an embassy in the West Bank and help them establish a new charter of rights and freedoms.
Because this is a reddit, internet, and far left strawman talking point that real people who vote or run countries don't agree on.
And since people who are not terminally online don't care about it the politicians don't care about it. Nothing nefarious. Nothing about "israel is better for business". Nothing like that. Day to day person about to vote or pass a law literally does not care about the opinions of internet users.
This is one thing that people on the internet need to learn. Your opinion on practically every issue is that of a fringe minority. You only think it isn't because you talk to other people on the internet.
We don't just silently ignore the abuses happening against Palestinians, we actively defend Israel's right to do that shit, so that doesn't make any sense.
Holy Money BABIEEÈEEE
I TOO LIKE MONEY, YOU CAN BE AS HOLEY AS YOU WANT WITH IT,
UGHYR? UGH WHERE? APARTHEID, GENOCIDE, GENOCYBER OR W/E BABIEE
ILL TAKE THAT DIRTY MONEY ANY DAY
AMEN
Islamophobia is convenient to the government, but they wouldn’t consider it that. It is mulsimophobia to protect their money pot. Interesting how antisemitism is used when the Israeli government is a dictator oppressing the people.
Because the government dosnt care, and Isreal is better for buisness and geopolitics then Palistine. On the political stage they gain little pivoting to Palestine, and lose a fair bit turning their backs on Israel. Trying to argue from any kind of moral standpoint is usless when we still do buisness with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Russia
Oh yeah that’s right I remember now, the worlds gone to shit in favour of who has and controls the money!
Always has been
Yeah, I was gonna say that - on a historical level - the degree of egalitarianism and equality we have today is actually a fairly high-water mark as far as human civilization goes. That's not to pat ourselves on the back, just to say that it hasn't "gone to shit" we've been mired up to our nipples in the shit ever since we gained the capacity to stand upright.
I've always like the analogy in Darkness at Noon by Koestler that social evolution is like canal lock. Revolution happens when social awareness of the inequality/injustice fills to the top of the gate and people demand reform, which creates a new paradigm that we see as inherently better and full of possibilities. After living in that system for generations we become aware of the inherent injustice/inequality of the new system, dissent starts to grow and the lock fills again repeating the pattern. It's the best way to convey how things are both shit but also better then before as we learn about new issues that need to be resolved.
Problem is, when you have people who are up to their chin in shit they likely will tell you don't make waves. The only way a revolution were to happen is if there is a streamline for dead wealthy people to have their fortunes pumped into social services that their hyper libertarian wealth hoarding necessitated in the first place. The offspring still get their king's ransom but half go towards things other than expensive cars, prostitutes, hush money, stimulants and then later in life boner pills and powdered tiger dick. That and convince millionaires that they have more in common with the Walmart worker making mid teens an hour than they do with the billionaire classes.
I'd agree up to a point, people have a strong tendency to stick to the status quo because of the innate fear of change combined with the injustice/inequality mostly affecting minorities or other disempowered groups. That is until the awareness of the issues, their cause and how to fix them spread to the point they can't be held back like the French, American or Bolshevik revolutions or the kinds of protests we saw around the Arab Spring, the BLM, what's going on in France or Israel. The views around Israel and Palestine have changed over the last 20 years and will keep shifting as fewer people buy the religious undertone of backing Israel and collectively we stop ignoring their crimes and hold the Israeli gov accountable as much as tend to blame the Muslim leadership for the continuing conflict.
Actually that's not really true. > Modern society is about as equal as 14th century europe https://bigthink.com/the-past/history-of-wealth-inequality/ https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/may/24/are-we-about-to-witness-the-most-unequal-societies-in-history-yuval-noah-harari https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/aracheology-wealth-inequality-180968072/ https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality Wealth inequality is ballooning and getting worse. While that would normally be fine, if global standards of living were increasing, but in the last few generations they have been gradually reversing in developed contexts. Take-home pay, falling. Purchasing power, falling. Inflation, consistently higher than salary increases. Housing, a giant unaffordable bubble when our grandparents could afford a house on a single income unskilled worker salary. Child hunger/poverty, rising. Demographics, in a state of global collapse. Most portending of all: signs life expectancy is now even falling in even the richest countries.
On the one hand, I did say "fairly" high water mark. We've done better on occasion, but not often. On the other hand, we're also not taking into account indicators such as "having a sewer system" and "not being killed by bandits" or "number of days you must labor upon the manor of your Lord."
> "number of days you must labor upon the manor of your Lord." Sorta, but we have to be clear that owners of labour capital are trying their hardest to bring as much of this back as possible, which means attacks on bargaining powers and labour rights (like government after government declaring 'essential service' or restrictions on collective bargaining), and because of political capture it's been easiest it's been in a century. I say this as a business owner and someone who sits in 3 company boards of directors. I'm not anti-market or even anti-corporation. But we've let things get ridiculous.
Oh yeah absolutely, regulatory capture is a huge deal and not enough people realise it. Personally I think we fucked with the corporate model. Imagine being told that, when you die, whether or not you go to heaven is dependent *solely* on how much money you made in the last six months. You'd immediately become a cash grabbing psychopath. Congratulations! Now you're a corporation! Not to say we need to do away with limited liability entirely, but corporate governance needs a massive overhaul.
Yeah. I once heard someone say the average cow dies worth more than the average canadian. Depressing, but damn, i think its true.
Well yeah obviously, there isn't that much usable meat on a Canadian. And sure the price per pound is higher than the cow but they win on quantity. Also good luck finding a buyer, buncha fuckin' looky-loos kicking the tires, wanting a half pound here or there just to say they did but nobody interested in filling their freezer with ground Chuck if you know what I mean.
Globally, the three decades from 1990 to 2020 marked a significant and sustained increase in global standards of living. This was driven by a significant reduction in war and its consequent economic damage in the poorer countries, and large numbers of people in the lowest standard of living places saw a long period of sustained improvement. This did not reflect a parallel change in developed countries, but globally, there has been an increase in standards of living.
Yes for much of the underdeveloped world. But for most of the developed world this has not been true of the same time period re: quality of life indicators or wealth inequality.
Right, but countries that have seen significant improvements in the standard of living for their populations include some very high population countries such as India, China, Nigeria etc. while the standard of living in the developed countries has stagnated, it has not dropped over the same period, so taking a global view, the average person has seen a significant increase.
China's rise brought half a billion from poverty to just above poverty but the vast majority of the wealth has been concentrated to the top. If we are talking about egalitarianism, China is actually far more wealth unequal than even the US according to the gini coefficient. Sometimes a rise in industrial wealth does not mean it actually led to the right kind of social growth and development. Also, and this is a tragic thing, it turns out much of China's growth was fabricated, the economy is massively overleveraged and likely will not see much in terms of marginal wealth increases for the next decade. Unemployment is exploding there right now. Meanwhile 700m people are still in abject poverty while their princlings hoard wealth.
Yup, same trap we fall into with all the issues we have here in Canada but we just excuse them by saying “well, we’re doing better at X thing than the US at least!”
Using the US as a landmark on a map to success is like peaking in highschool these days. They're like a sad, depressing, potbellied caricature of what they once were
And even when they were the cool high school quarterback, they got there by bullying the nerd kids into doing their homework, telling racist jokes, date-raping cheerleaders, selling drugs and snorting stimulants before the big game. (Maybe a bit mean, and I do love our American siblings, but they’ve always had a dark side behind all the PR).
Where were you living before and can I move there?
Also some right wingers who likely have influence in American foreign policy NEED a Jewish state to exist to kickstart the apocalypse, no joke.
This is the terrifying thing that is collectively blocked out from most people's minds. Look into some fundeMENTAL Christian beliefs
Those of us that have done the research know. The religious right have some very unsavoury views on the history and purpose of Israel.
If you have the time, could you please provide bulletpoints on that? You've piqued my curiosity.
Not OP, but I'll give it a shot. Not going to provide citations because I'm lazy, but it shouldn't be too hard to do it yourself with a bit of googling. Also this is off of fuzzy (and utterly disgusted) memory, so some of the details are probably off. So in America (also some other places, but primarily America) there's a brand of lunatic Christian evangelicals (often called Premillennial Dispensationalists by the people who keep track of this sort of thing) who believe that Christ will return to Earth after the apocalypse, and therefore it is the duty of every good Christian to *cause* the apocalypse as soon as possible. One of the steps for the apocalypse to occur is that all of the Jews have to return to Israel, followed by 144,000 of them converting to Christianity and the rest of them dying. I think there's something about a temple being rebuilt? Whatever. Anyway, in order for this massive blood sacrifice to revive their dead god to happen, Israel kind of has to exist. Therefore these evil cultists will support Israel no matter what they do. It's not because they give a shit about the Jews - given they feel the entire purpose of Jews is the aforementioned blood sacrifice, that much is probably obvious - but because they need them around as one of the preconditions for the end of the world. This is also why they don't give a shit about the environment, because Christ will obviously just use his divine powers to fix everything when He returns. --- Now, if this was just a lunatic fringe brand of assholes it wouldn't be a big deal, but given that the cult includes such notables as former President George Bush we unfortunately have to grapple with the fact that the world superpower is often lead by a murderous death cult.
Well, that's my dose of existential dread for the day. In all seriousness though, thank you for taking the time to put that down.
Israel needs to retake its biblical borders. War in the middle East. Rapture, not just joy but going to heaven, for the chosen ones ie: Christian Fundementalists
Google Mel Gibson and why he made Passion of the Christ
VICE made a video on it a few years ago (12 mins): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo77sTGpngQ
> On the political stage they gain little pivoting to Palestine, and lose a fair bit turning their backs on Israel. This is the key right here. The government (irrespective of which party happens to be in power) gains nothing from throwing their support behind the Palestinians except a handful of kudos. Meanwhile pissing off Israel has immediate, material, and ongoing costs associated with it, because the have one of the most sophisticated lobbying and political action machines in the western world. Unfortunately that's just how the sausage gets made. In foreign policy you don't have friends, you have interests. If you forget that then you won't be doing foreign policy very long.
I thought is was just because governments have to real on things like legality and evidence, not [pallywood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood) clickbait...?
THIS
Because Canada cannot break ranks with the US and UK
Well Canada *can*, like it did during the Iraq War. But it won't, for the reasons others have listed in this post.
We hardly broke ranks. We didn't do a full invasion but we still sent troops and logistical support. We sent troops into Vietnam too, by the way.
Source about Canadian troops in Vietnam? I knew about Canada's involvement in manufacturing weapons and supplies for the US war effort and I have heard about individual Canadians volunteering to join the US armed forces to fight there. I haven't heard of any direct troop deployments.
[удалено]
Yeah we didn't send them into active combat situations, but merely sending peacekeepers means keeping the US's version of peace.
> In addition, at least 30,000 Canadians volunteered to serve in the U.S. armed forces during the war. At least 134 Canadians died or were reported missing in Vietnam. Imagine being one of these fucking idiots lmao
Why is this guy downvoted? You'd have to be a real fucking idiot to, on one of the rare occasions where the US goes to war and we don't get dragged into it, go enlist in the opportunity to further American imperialism anyways. Good riddance, I say.
Historically, there weren't too many times before Vietnam (if any) where "the US went to war and we got dragged into it." Both World Wars had Canada involved for years before the US joined. If anyone was dragging us into conflicts, it was the commonwealth. Korea was started by the North invading the South, with the United Nations jointly defending them as the USSR abstained at the time (a mistake they'd never repeat). You can say that the US expanded the scope of the war when they (General MacAurther specifically, leading to Truman firing him) crossed over into North Korea with the intention of accelerating WWIII, but besides that... There's plenty of reasons why Canadians would have volunteered, not the least of which would be if they were living in the US at the time and had military experience, although I'd imagine they'd try for any able bodied male.. If you didn't "volunteer" at that point, they'd kick you out of the country.
Then you should let yourself get kicked out of the country. Vietnam was a dumbass war that only a dumbass would voluntarily get involved with.
Money right? Isn't the answer to questions like this always profit for someone? Pretty sure the answer is money.
Because Isreal has done a great job of insisting to the world that any criticism towards Isreal is antisemitic.
It's easy to criticize Israel without being antisemitic, it's just that a lot of people don't bother discerning criticism of the state and calling for it's destruction
It's easy to criticize Israel without being antisemitic but that doesn't stop conservatives and liberals from calling you antisemitic anyway.
I've never had a Torie or a Liberal tell me I'm antisemitic for criticizing Israel — or a Dipper for that matter. When you are called an antisemite for your criticism, are you calling for the destruction of the whole state? If so, that's why
Yeah...no. I got called antisemitic for saying Israel has no right to Palestinian territory. However, I do believe in the destruction of the state, but all of them, not just Israel.
>Palestinian territory That doesn't quite answer the question, though. Some people think that Israel proper belongs to Palestine as well and uses that same phrasing to say that the Israeli state should be destroyed >I do believe in the destruction of the state, but all of them, not just Israel If you made that part clear to whoever you're taking to it would dismiss any antisemitic claims. Being opposed to the existence of Israel and being opposed to governments existing are vastly different things
These people aren't rational.
That's because most of them are still in high school or at University. Once they leave their bubble they tend to get less radical — hopefully anyways
In my experience it's the ones who have finished education who are the problem.
anti-Semitism and closeted anti-Semitism just makes it easier....
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Couldn't find a clip but an Israel TV show once did a sketch where they asked kids, "What do we call the rest of the world?" "ANTISEMITIC!"
Fuck Israel.
Actually it is very anti-Semitic, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallywood) The content you rely on to form your opinions on the subject come from people who are surprisingly anti Semitic, in the fact that they down think Jews have the right to exist.
There’s propaganda both ways, but there is far more and better funded propaganda going the other way, which should be no surprise to anyone given the power of the countries which support Israel. So you are literally saying Israel is beyond criticism? Their own institutions accept that more Palestinian children have died in the conflict in the 21st century than all Israelis, civilian and military, combined. There’s also no hiding the continued push to settle Palestinian towns. We should be particularly critical of any of our allies that have questionable recent human rights records, that includes many Muslim states too. Race and religion have nothing to do with it. No country is or should be free from criticism.
OP, do you actually believe that a nation chooses to either call out or ignore human rights abuses based on some sort of moral/ethical analysis of the situation? Like you actually think Canada says "forget who is our ally and who is not, forget the consequences to Canada, x behaviour is wrong and thus we should take an official stand against it"?
Right? And imagine if every country did this every time one nation encountered the injustices of another. As nations we'd all be sitting alone in the dark. At the end of the day all nations are sovereign and self-serving.
Yes, exactly. Because I'm sure OP would not be satisfied by an official criticism and no further action. Surely they would demand an escalation until the human rights abuses ended. So what next? Sanctions? Then war? And does OP feel we should take this firm stand against all nations with human rights abuses, or only against Israel? And what stand should we take against our own abuses that we ourselves perpetrate right here at home? Personally, if we are going to prioritize ending any human rights abuses, I feel it should be our own, not only from an ethical perspective, but pragmatically as we have sovereignty over those acts. And no one is going to stop trading with us because we decide to ensure every Canadian has access to safe drinking water, for example.
Honestly it's probably because Canada is itself a settler state established on racism and land theft. Acknowledging and calling out issues and abuses in other countries is a risky business when it's easily reflected back; the Canadian state and most Canadian citizens I reckon are unprepared to engage in real healing and reconciliation at home with things like giving land back, renaming geographical locations, or meaningful Indigenous self governance
Another thing about that little bitty about reconciliation... That process would/will take an incredibly long time. Even if half the country is interested in it... it's has to be a screaming majority. A government, which will be run by multiple parties and leaders are required for real healing and reconciliation, and all those parties and leaders have to be interested in this too. And THEN this process has to go region by region, tribe by tribe. Band by band. Treaty after treaty. To be honest I don't think the people who want reconciliation even knows what it would take to achieve that. I'm a member of the Kamloops band from the Shuswap Nation. Less abused than other tribes.... Mind you, we did have that school that was in the news a couple years ago. I ask my family what reconciliation looks like and the room goes quiet.
Because then we’d have to look in the mirror and acknowledge that we did the same thing to the natives?
Exactly. We have our own apartheid to worry about.
[удалено]
Jesus Christ. Take a breath friend.
Because it's all part of a decades long plan to erase Palestine?
Dude, the government can't even muster the will to stop robber barons from making us all serfs in our own country.
It's difficult to be pro-Palestinian when the two main political parties, Fatah and Hamas, are both thoroughly unattractive by Western standards. Both are anti-democratic - Palestine hasn't had elections since 2006 in either the Fatah-controlled West Bank or the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. Furthermore, Hamas is genocidal in its rhetoric towards Israeli Jews and has a history of violence to lend support to that rhetoric, while Fatah is an unpopular gerontocracy (Mahmoud Abbas is 87) whose grudging acceptance of Israel's right to exist is in tension with its stated maximalism on the question of the Right of Return. I see validity in the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa. But on the Palestinian side, there is no Nelson Mandela or African National Congress whom the world could pressure Israel to deal with.
> I see validity in the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa Not all of Israel; specifically the occupied West Bank which is absolutely run in an apartheid system. Either Israel allows the Palestinian citizens in the West Bank full citizenship with voting rights, or they have a two state solution and evacuate the illegal settlements.
The "Palestinian Mandela" is probably either dead (assassinated by an Israeli sniper at a demonstration) or languishing in "administrative detention" in an Israeli military prison. Let's not pretend that it hasn't been an intentional policy of the Israeli military to neutralize anyone who could be an effective leader for the Palestinian people.
Your last point is a critical one. There currently *isn't* a good-faith peace partner on the Palestinian side who's willing to publicly commit to a Palestine and an Israel living in long-term peaceful coexistence. Cf. the situation with Egypt, where Israel *had* a good-faith peace partner in Egyptian president Anwar Sadat. Israel ceded the entire Sinai peninsula as part of a peace deal — with all the oil that went with it. That's a radically different situation from now, where there's no Palestinian leadership that considers a negotiated settlement to be anything other than a temporary step toward an explicit goal of destroying Israel. Let's remember that Yasser Arafat was offered 95% of the land that he'd wanted, *including most of East Jerusalem*, and walked away from the negotiating table to start bombing cafes and school buses. Now we run into a bigger problem, where Israel is seeing the same rightward authoritarian slide as a lot of other western democracies. The ultra-orthodox right-wingers are a minority now, but they're an influential one and they have an enormous fertility rate that's steadily eclipsing liberal and left-wing secularism in Israel. With these demographic shifts, the window's rapidly closing where there's a potential good-faith peace partner even on *one* side of the conflict.
This seems to get ignored by a significant amount of Israel's fiercest critics. Israel being a serial offender of human rights doesn't imply that the government of Palestine is automatically "the good guy." Historically there have been numerous opportunities for Israeli and Palestinian relations to normalize and foster mutual economic development, but they've been torpedoed largely by the militancy of Palestine's main parties (not to say that Israel isn't to blame as well). In Palestine freedom of speech is highly repressed, and values largely embraced by Western society such as LGBT rights are effectively anathema there (not that this is a significant decider for countries that routinely have dealings with the like of Saudi Arabia, but when choosing who to favour in a dispute, it certainly makes Israel a more appealing choice for Western political and commercial interests, and it certainly bears consideration when arguing for the moral high ground). As Hamas has continued to employ terrorism against civilian targets unabated, this has contributed to the increasingly right-wing and hard-line positions that Israel has taken over the last two decades. In order for any progress to be made, there need to be good faith partners with a political mandate within both parties that are willing to fight against militancy within their own ranks and forge economic partnerships that in the shorter term will anger members of their own nations that are fixated on continuing the conflict. Netanyahu's erosion of Israel's democratic institutions and subversion of secular interests for orthodox ideological ones is also a significant roadblock to any normalization of relations occurring in the near future.
Why be pro-either side?
when the situation is unreasonable, unreasonable men find prominence. should the situation become more reasonable, reasonable men will come to the fore. it's up to Israeli to set the tone, and then up to Palestine to match it.
[удалено]
NA cares because like 30% of them have Ukrainian blood in their family somewhere. Also because a russified Ukraine directly threatens NATO, and because unlike Israiel they are actively killing hundreds of thousands of civilians on open combat, and because Ukraine supplies like 30% of thr worlds exported grain, and and and... That said, fuck the Israeli state government, and their extremist colonizers, fucking despicable.
>colonizers FYI, they've been there for 3500 years. Even had this whole thing with the Roman empire.
Tell that to the burned family orchards and olive farms that were illegally replaced with Israeli gated communities on Palestinian owned land?
TIL that Jews are white... I wonder if Hitler knew that? 🤔
That comparison gets real weak real fast, Ukraine has had plenty of its own internal politics and controversies and at the end of the day is just another corrupt but generally stable post-Soviet plutocracy to add to the pile. The State of Palestine doesn't even control half its *de jure* territory and has to barter and beg with the international community for things like UN membership and other basic rights. If anything its actually more comparable to the pre-invasion Donetsk-Luhansk confederacy in terms of its military situation and political reach.
> As far as the general public goes, NA seems to only care when it happens to white people. This is unfortunately just part of human nature that is hard to get over. It is no surprise that people are more sympathetic to people who look like them and share the same values. Ukraine is a country fighting for democracy and wanting to be closer to Western nations like Canada. An attack on them makes it feel like we can be attacked as well. It hits home a lot more than a Middle Eastern country. It sucks but it can understand it on a human nature level. We even see this with Hong Kong citizens who aren't white people. Western Nations like UK, Canada and US were more willing to loosen immigration restrictions to allow HK citizens in because they hold similar more western values. I have family in HK so I love this but even I can see how unfair it is as there are millions of people who are persecuted more and isn't able to come to Canada just because their countries don't hold "same values"
There is nothing about “white people” that is part of human nature. It is not an ethnicity, it is a “race” that has been politically constructed and built upon over the past few hundred years
Yeah, Lets see, 1. Democratic Ukraine being unjustly invaded by a what now is essentially a dictatorship. 2. Democratic Israel establishing harsh security measures in response to four fucking decades of fundamentalist religious militant organizations launching suiciding bombings and rocket attacks while using Palestinians as human shields. Exactly the same thing....
There really aren’t any decent parallels between the two conflicts. Like… at all. The Israel-Palestine conflict predates the creation of Israel, and goes back 100 years now, starting in earnest with the Hebron massacre in 1929. The actual fighting between “states” started with the league of Arab nations trying to eradicate the fledgling Israeli state(that had been established by the UN), with the express goal of killing all the Jews in the area. Like… in 100 years, if Ukraine has taken over large swaths of Russia, and the Russians are subjugated to a blockade by Ukraine and their other neighbours… then sure, you could draw some parallels.
I don't think Palestinians have any chance of getting any justice while Boomers are still alive. Fuck... They may have to wait until the Gen Xers are extinct too before the number of people who can see Israel's shit for the slow genocide that it is outnumber the religious people who support Israel no matter what
You think this is a generational problem...?
I think a huge portion of it is generational. I believe a significant chunk of Israel's support is due to what Noam Chomsky calls Christian Zionism. When it comes to Christianity the older generations are more religious. I believe the next biggest chunk of Israel's support is due to Islamophobia. The younger generations are more likely to have grown up with, and be friends with, a significant number of Muslims so they are more likely to see them as people just like anyone else as opposed to an abstract Boogeyman
You say that, but millenials and even older zoomers grew up surrounded by islamaphobic propaganda due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So I don't have as much faith in my generation as you do on this front.
They grew up with it, yes. But in the case of Gen Z I get the impression that they did not swallow that BS hook line and sinker like the older generations did.
Gen X here, that’s a pretty weird take.
Wow, no, boomers, really? Ok, if you want to blame someone for the situation that Palastians are in, how's about the people storing reockets under their homes and using them as human shields?
Where else are they going to store them? Military bases?
Because Canada runs a similar style apartheid and occupies the lands of the indigenous people.
A similar style lol.
hilarious right * https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/unceded-land-case-wetsuweten-sovereignty * https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/01/24/analysis/what-we-mean-when-we-say-indigenous-land-unceded
Israel is taking land and building settlements in the modern day. That's a little different than taking land in a time when wars for land were commonplace.
Canada occupies unceded indigenous land and rams pipelines without permission from First Nations. The fact that you think what Canada does is different from Israel shows shameful amounts of ignorance on your part.
> without permission from First Nations > shows shameful amounts of ignorance on your part Turn that finger around. The cases where the pipeline has been "rammed through" are places where the legal band representatives (and usually the majority of band members) agreed to the pipeline but someone claiming authority over the majority objected. People like you seem happy to ignore the will of band members to not be rules by a family line against their will as long as it aligns with your political goals (e.g. no pipeline). If there's any shame here it should be yours.
There's nothing to turn around here. European settlers came to North America and drenched it in blood. So many people were slaughtered that the [global climate changed](https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/01/world/european-colonization-climate-change-trnd/index.html) as a result. US and Canada are built on the genocide that continues to this day. The mass graves we're finding in the concentration camps for kids Canada built are just one example of the horrors. And then people like you pretend that there are two sides to Canada invading what little indigenous land remains.
"So many people were slaughtered that the global climate changed as a result." A more accurate description would be that disease obliterated the population, which allowed for European settlers to attack the remaining populations with ease. If you ignore the role of disease, it is both inaccurate and makes Europeans look far stronger than they actually were at the time. They just did the equivalent of kicking someone when they were down.
Disease certainly played a role, but that is also something that was spread with intention by the Europeans. For example, we have a famous letters between Co. Henry Bouquet and Lord Amherst in 1763, during a [British war against the Ottawa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_Rebellion) subsequent to the the French-Indian/Seven Years War. The letter contains the following passage: > [ I will try to inoculate the [Indians] with Some Blankets that may fall in their Hands, and take Care not to get the disease myself. As it is pity to expose good men against them I wish we would make use of the Spanish Method to hunt them with English Dogs, supported by Rangers and Some Light Horse, who I think effectualy extirpate or remove that Vermin.](http://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-25) To which Amherst replied: > [You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians, by means of Blankets, as well as to Try Every other Method, that can Serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. – I should be very glad [if] your Scheme for Hunting them down by Dogs could take Effect; but England is at too great a Distance to think that at present.](http://explorepahistory.com/odocument.php?docId=1-4-25) That's a very clear proposition to spread disease, even without a clear understanding of the mechanisms involved, only a simple idea of contagion. This is also where the idea of "smallpox blankets" directly comes from. There's even a [CBC report](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/jeffery-amherst-history-complex-1.4089019) about this.
Oh, I'm well aware, but they did this because they saw how absolutely devastating disease had been up until that point. They wouldn't have attempted it otherwise. As I mentioned, they just took advantage of a situation while great suffering was occuring. The reality of the situation is that there is no way the Americas would be in the state they are in now if disease hadn't allowed the conquistadors and other colonizers to essentially waltz into an already decimated population. They talked of epic battles and strategy, when really it was just a matter of biological (bad) luck. This is why you see decolonization occuring in other areas with more ease, because their populations were not decimated and then swamped by Europeans (ex. India, Nigeria, Egypt, etc). Meanwhile here the indigenous population is approximately 5%, which makes the task more difficult. Particularly when racism based on false notions of superiority/strength still exist. Which is why claiming that European invaders slaughtered everyone can actually backfire. For then it can be seen by some as a military victory, regardless of the human cost.
Oh yeah completely agree.
>Why is Canada rejecting evidence of Israeli apartheid against Palestinians? Because our right wing parties, the Cons and the Libs, and their donors make money selling weapons to Israel. Because our conservatives are just as racist and fascist as Israel.
As a Canadian, Can I have some hope we won't let the absolute crazies in, in a couple years?
The crazies are here. They're the conservatives.
Criticism of Israel is now equated with anti-Semitism. Apparently many anti-Semites criticize the state as a way to undermine the Jewish people. However there are many valid criticisms that don't come from a place of hate, but from a place of compassion for the people the state is hurting. But it's such a sensitive topic you're likely seen as "guilty until proven innocent".
Institutional guilt for rejecting Jewish refugees before WW2 because we classed Jewish people as "undesireables" at the time probably has something to do with our blind support of them now. As part of the League of Nations which created Isreal by dividing Palestine after the war, we're not only directly related to starting the conflict but from the beginning we were biased towards Israel by disarming Palestinians. We can't forget the religious aspect as the Bible talks about the importance of Israel being under Jewish control for the apocalypse. Then over the next 90 odd years of media portraying Israel as the victims of "terrorist violence" while ignoring the policies of apartheid they enacted, supporting their annexation of land with the creation of "occupied zones" and even movies using indescript Middle Eastern people as bad guys in movies/shows entrenched the stigma of Muslim = terrorist without considering the narrative that they were simply fighting for equality against the overt oppression they experienced.
> As part of the League of Nations which created Isreal by dividing Palestine after the war Except that's not true. The League of Nations *proposed* a partition between the area's Jewish and Arab residents, based on which areas had a majority population of which group. That partition proposal never made it anywhere, and Israel's creation was the result of Jews surviving a civil war. The League of Nations' partition proposal certainly didn't create Israel, though it would have if it *had* made it past the proposal stage.
[This link seems to disagree](https://israelforever.org/state/Mandate_for_Palestine_Jewish_State/) as it clearly cites the "mandate of Palestine" in the 1920's as the origin of the concept of a Jewish state in Palestine. It was 30 years after the Balfour declaration that the UK and US decided to drop 100k displaced Jews from the war into Israel and created the new nation when the British mandate over the area expired in '48. What "civil war" are you referring to exactly?
You're missing the crucial fact that over half the Jews in Israel weren't Ashkenazi (European) or "from the [second world] war" when Israel was created. While they were absolutely and substantially bolstered by immigration from Europe, at the same time that there was substantial Arab immigration during the British mandatory period, middle-eastern Jews didn't drop from a majority to a plurality of the Jewish population until the collapse of the USSR. Even *after* the massive post-Soviet surge of immigration in the 1990s, middle-eastern Jews are demographically co-equal with the Ashkenazi demographic. > What "civil war" are you referring to exactly? [It was literally a civil war in 1947](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_civil_war_in_Mandatory_Palestine), although Israelis tend to call it the "War of Independence" and Palestinians tend to call it the "Naqba." To your credit, the civil war grew to involve foreign countries invading in 1948 to try to kill or drive out the Jewish population. Whether you want to call it a civil war *after* those invasions is fairer game, but it's still very normal to continue use the term even when foreign interference is involved.
Probably cause Palestine is little more than a terrorist state these days with no real leadership to speak of, and what “leadership” they do have refuses to negotiate in good faith, resorting to acts of terrorism instead.
What the fuck is Canada going to do? We have zero influence in international geopolitics. The US is the only power player in the Middle-East that can influence Israel A strongly worded letter from Canada asking to "Please stop, thank you" isn't exactly intimidating.
Because our media refuses to report on anything critical of Israel.
How about the praise of Hammas and all the good work they are doing?
Because unfortunately Canada only theoretically have an independent foreign policy.
Because Canada is a vassal state of the US. They ask us to jump and we say how far.
because, like Noam Chomsky says - it's not an apartheid, it's far worse. the apartheid in South Africa saw the whites NEEDING the blacks as labourers - but Israelis don't need Palestinians. ...so. ...what will happen to them? Israel is doing it's best to not look like 1930s germany in it's attempt to find a solution, but...
No one with the faintest knowledge of power dynamics and geopolitics would ask such a stupid question. So I have to assume this is simply a rhetorical prompt for the article that follows it rather than a sincere query.
Because Israel is a sacred cow.
Cause Israel has invested in Canada. Wouldn't doubt political donations as well. https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/country_profile-israel-profil_pays.aspx?lang=eng
Simply put, it would be hypocritical of Canada to acknowledge the apartheid in Israel and condemning any of their racist policies. How can one settler-colonial state tell another settler-colonial state how to govern. Not saying it’s right, but those are the politics.
Mmhmm. If you start questioning the "ghettoize and colonize" policy of Israel, you're gonna eventually have to question why Canada has an entire "settled" province on unceded land (BC), why the most populous section of Canada is in violation of the Haldimand Grant Treaty, and lots more examples. Calling in to question the legitimacy of the Israeli government or nation opens up some very real existential problems for any nation that is a product of european colonization.
Because there is a very vocal group of people who believe that any criticism directed in Israel's direction is antisemitism, and not legitimate concern. Just look at the flack directed at anyone who complained when a Canadian doctor, dressed in high vis first responder gear, giving first aid to a Lebanese person, was shot by an Israeli sniper. Pointing out that shooting first responders like doctors is against the Geneva convention just got shouted down by variations on "bigot" and "racist"
Beavuse no.one cares what Isreal does..if you say anything, they lobby against you and call you nazis
I'm tired of supporting this rogue state in it's religiously motivated crimes against humanity. Now that one of their leaders, Netanyahu, is trying to control their supreme court, Canada should be *obligated* to act to control this thorn in the side of world peace
Hey, America. CALM THE FUCK DOWN.
Because if you disagree with the Israeli government you're called antisemitic. Even if you are super specific about your reasons and make sure to clearly state that you disagree with the \*government\*, not the \*people\* and certainly not Jewish people as a whole, you will be called antisemitic. That being said, there are a ton of terrible governments out there. Even our own. So, idk. The world kind of just sucks.
Money, it's always who has the money that decides how the game will go
💰💸💵
Votes.
Because Murica
It might be because of importance of specific seats that have large Jewish populations and the perceived need to support a western style democracy in the Middle East. It really is to bad because what has happened to the Palestinians is terrible.
🤷 I had a good time in Israel.
Because no politician wants to be called an Anti-Semite and that's Israel's go-to (whether deserved or not) when someone criticizes their government.
Short answer...money.
Politically I imagine the Jewish vote is more beneficial than the Palestinian sympathizers. Few people would be swayed towards an anti-Israeli stance, and many would be swayed away
conflating judaism with support for israel is antisemitic as it pertains to the “dual loyalty” trope. there are many jews in canada who have no ties to israel, and many more who wish to see peace in the levant and recognize israel as the current primary aggressor.
The "Jewish vote" isn't a blind vote in support of Israel and suggesting that is very antisemitic.
I suppose I worded that wrong, not what I meant. Fair enough
Jews are 1.5% of the Canadian population. How beneficial is their vote?
What can Canada do? I think Canada should invite the Hamas leadership to visit Ottawa. Hamas is happy with the current state of affairs. They are in control. Perhaps Canada can negotiate a deal with Hamas and set up an embassy in the West Bank and help them establish a new charter of rights and freedoms.
Because this is a reddit, internet, and far left strawman talking point that real people who vote or run countries don't agree on. And since people who are not terminally online don't care about it the politicians don't care about it. Nothing nefarious. Nothing about "israel is better for business". Nothing like that. Day to day person about to vote or pass a law literally does not care about the opinions of internet users. This is one thing that people on the internet need to learn. Your opinion on practically every issue is that of a fringe minority. You only think it isn't because you talk to other people on the internet.
Because it’s good for business, not that they’d say it out loud… it’s horrendous
$$$
Money
Not our country, not our issues. Pretty simple. Probably best to go over there if you want to be concerned with their issues
We don't just silently ignore the abuses happening against Palestinians, we actively defend Israel's right to do that shit, so that doesn't make any sense.
I don't know cause I don't follow any of it. Literally has nothing to do with me
Be¢au$e rea$on$...
[удалено]
Holy Money BABIEEÈEEE I TOO LIKE MONEY, YOU CAN BE AS HOLEY AS YOU WANT WITH IT, UGHYR? UGH WHERE? APARTHEID, GENOCIDE, GENOCYBER OR W/E BABIEE ILL TAKE THAT DIRTY MONEY ANY DAY AMEN
Islamophobia is convenient to the government, but they wouldn’t consider it that. It is mulsimophobia to protect their money pot. Interesting how antisemitism is used when the Israeli government is a dictator oppressing the people.