Israel's right to exist

[AnotherHardDayAtTheOffice]

Israel did have elections a few months ago and Natanyahu 'won' again with an emergency government under the threat of the virus. hes a professional at taking advantage of threats and probably the best politician israel ever had. we had 3 elections in about a year and in all election he didnt win but successfully blocked a new government to form and led us to re-elections.
he has a bunch of corruption charges floating over his head and surrounded by corrupt people.
i doubt anything changes anytime soon, israel is really divided among itself, the right wing will never vote for a left wing leader, the left wing is super divided and have no real leader, and even in the left wing some politicians wont sit in a coalition with an arab party, basically blocking any chance to form a government that actually want to change stuff. and the security threat still makes people blind to how bad things really are under the government we had in the last decade or so. sometimes it feels that people vote for parties like it was their favorite football club and its for life, they will keep voting for the same guy even when they know hes bad.
 financially israel is a mess, wages are bad and everything is super expensive, especially rent. the second we dont have the life threat over our head we will start demanding shit from our government and ask questions for how they spend our tax money.with all the money we spend on religion and demands from the religious parties that have alot of political power because their public is unified and the money we spend on the army israel could have been an amazing place. but even if israel did a complete 180 and started trying, this whole area is infected with foreign interests. from the USA to Russia and even Iran, everyone has a piece in this conflict.
 i dont have much hope for the direction israel is taking right now, alot of the world is having a rise of nationalism and stupidity right now and israel is no different. it will probably be worse before it becomes better.

right now so many people live in settlements and in areas that might be given back in the future that its going to be a big problem politically and logistically. Gaza area had about 10,000 settlers while in the west bank there are about 400,000. israel is tiny and only has about 8 million citizens, its not going to be easy. they built a few big cities that are going to be a big problem if the Palestinians wont give up that land. The government pretty much solidified israels presence in the area over a long period of right wing leadership. the scumbag that was the minister of education even built a university there. it is possible to withdraw from alot of small settlements, but a complete withdraw seems unlikely, especially with the atmosphere we have right now. even mellow people are worried that we will have buses and restaurants blowing up weekly again if we withdraw.
the best solution i can see is a complete seperation and having two states in agreed territories and that will require hard compromises from both sides. living next to a hostile nation is easier than occupying it, easier to deal with in a diplomatic manner and easier to get the worlds support if you attack it with a good reason and there is always the chance that it wont be a hostile nation and we will both gain from it. the best peace is achieved with common interests, and financially it could be amazing for both sides, and thats not talking about the increase in the quality of life and general safety.
   
 

Thanks for your reply, man! I hope that things will get better at some point in the future for people on both sides of the border, because they deserve it. I really liked Israel when I was there 2 years ago. You seem to have a great scene in cities like Tel Aviv with so much going on. I found Israel different from what many people might expect it to be: open-minded people, great food, hospitality. It's a shame that politics are so difficult there (the same applies to Palestine/West Bank).

[Lord Viper Scorpion]

i refuse to give a shit about this thread until i hear from a palestinian

[Hmmmm Nice Bike]

Expand Quote

Israel did have elections a few months ago and Natanyahu 'won' again with an emergency government under the threat of the virus. hes a professional at taking advantage of threats and probably the best politician israel ever had. we had 3 elections in about a year and in all election he didnt win but successfully blocked a new government to form and led us to re-elections.
he has a bunch of corruption charges floating over his head and surrounded by corrupt people.
i doubt anything changes anytime soon, israel is really divided among itself, the right wing will never vote for a left wing leader, the left wing is super divided and have no real leader, and even in the left wing some politicians wont sit in a coalition with an arab party, basically blocking any chance to form a government that actually want to change stuff. and the security threat still makes people blind to how bad things really are under the government we had in the last decade or so. sometimes it feels that people vote for parties like it was their favorite football club and its for life, they will keep voting for the same guy even when they know hes bad.
 financially israel is a mess, wages are bad and everything is super expensive, especially rent. the second we dont have the life threat over our head we will start demanding shit from our government and ask questions for how they spend our tax money.with all the money we spend on religion and demands from the religious parties that have alot of political power because their public is unified and the money we spend on the army israel could have been an amazing place. but even if israel did a complete 180 and started trying, this whole area is infected with foreign interests. from the USA to Russia and even Iran, everyone has a piece in this conflict.
 i dont have much hope for the direction israel is taking right now, alot of the world is having a rise of nationalism and stupidity right now and israel is no different. it will probably be worse before it becomes better.

right now so many people live in settlements and in areas that might be given back in the future that its going to be a big problem politically and logistically. Gaza area had about 10,000 settlers while in the west bank there are about 400,000. israel is tiny and only has about 8 million citizens, its not going to be easy. they built a few big cities that are going to be a big problem if the Palestinians wont give up that land. The government pretty much solidified israels presence in the area over a long period of right wing leadership. the scumbag that was the minister of education even built a university there. it is possible to withdraw from alot of small settlements, but a complete withdraw seems unlikely, especially with the atmosphere we have right now. even mellow people are worried that we will have buses and restaurants blowing up weekly again if we withdraw.
the best solution i can see is a complete seperation and having two states in agreed territories and that will require hard compromises from both sides. living next to a hostile nation is easier than occupying it, easier to deal with in a diplomatic manner and easier to get the worlds support if you attack it with a good reason and there is always the chance that it wont be a hostile nation and we will both gain from it. the best peace is achieved with common interests, and financially it could be amazing for both sides, and thats not talking about the increase in the quality of life and general safety.
   
 

[close]

Thanks for your reply, man! I hope that things will get better at some point in the future for people on both sides of the border, because they deserve it. I really liked Israel when I was there 2 years ago. You seem to have a great scene in cities like Tel Aviv with so much going on. I found Israel different from what many people might expect it to be: open-minded people, great food, hospitality. It's a shame that politics are so difficult there (the same applies to Palestine/West Bank).

Agreed, been to Israel twice myself a couple of months at a time to visit my girlfriend's family and loved it. I'm neither religious nor interested in tourist attractions, so I mostly just spent time with my girlfriend around her neighborhood and while visiting I've witnessed plenty of diversity among the folks around both the Tel Aviv and Rishon LeZion regions mostly consisting of Israeli, Russian, Arab, Filipino and Ethiopians. I'm Mexican American myself and was told there's even a small community of Latin/Hispanics in Tel Aviv somewhere, but I'm not sure whether there's any truth to that or if just the local who told me was trying to make me feel welcomed, however I did meet someone who immigrated from Spain and was making a living selling at one of the local markets.

Eranka who posted his perspective and thoughts up above in this very thread was even kind enough to contact me here on Slap after I had posted some footage and invited me to check out more local skate spots, however I couldn't make it unfortunately because due to the whole Covid-19 situation I was already on my way back home to Chicago at that time, but regardless I've never experienced such hospitality from a total stranger before.

Despite all of it's complications I feel Israel is truly something precious and hopefully someday both sides of the conflict will find a way to coexist and be at peace together, although it's pretty evident that peace is possible between it's average everyday civilians I hope their political parties will stop jeopardizing the lives of both sides. That's just my impression though, from an outsider who is perhaps a bit ignorant.

I'm sharing this last bit just because it's a little funny I guess, but I had a couple of original Shalom stickers from the first batch feedmeseymour had made and distributed. I took one all the way with me to Israel for the soul purpose of placing it at Galit park in Tel Aviv. That was months ago already and I wonder if it's still even there by now.

(Side note, Anti Hero have said they were involved in the parks development somehow)

[Willie]

Between his first and second stints in office, my sister had to procure and deliver a $20,000 check to Netanyahu for a college speaking engagement. She was not enthused about it but remarked, "at least he's no longer Prime Minister."

[OldieButFrenchie]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

2 : Israel is the only democracy in the region. There is not one arab country with democracy, unfortunately.

[close]

I'm not sure what point you're making here? Should new states only be allowed to form if they are a democracy? Does Israel's ability to form a democracy give it a greater right to exist/a more superior position in comparison to Arab countries and potential new Arab states? Just trying to guess what you mean by this point.

The reason for a lack of democracies in the Arab world is wildly complicated. For one, Western-style democracy is not a one size fits all solution that will work for every country. Also, Western powers love to point their finger at the Middle East (and other areas of the world) and criticize them for their instability, corruption, and lack of democracy, painting them as inferior nations and their people as uncivilized. This is also the message that is fed to the people in these western nations. However it is decades of continued intervention from these same western powers to purposefully destabilize the region that has made it impossible to institute a democracy in most of these countries.

The US especially is guilty of this and has directly helped several authoritarian regimes in these Arab countries come to power. The US and UK even led a coup to dismantle democracy in Iran in 1953 because the elected leader did not agree with the US/UK's control of Iranian oil. This resulted in a monarchy that lasted several decades in Iran (I realize Iran is not an Arabic country, however it is in the region of discussion and the dismantling of its democracy has a ripple effect to nearby Arab countries making it less likely for other democracies to form; it also serves as an example of the actions the US and UK are willing to take for their own interests at the expense and well-being of this region and how they do not actually care or want stability/democracies in this area). Hamas was also helped to power through repeated intervention by the US and other western powers. And the list goes on (not just in this region, but around the world).

Despite all of this, there are Arab countries that do currently have partial democracies and there are growing movements throughout the region pushing for instituting democracies. The Arab Spring and Libyan Civil Uprising are both examples of Arabs rising against their governments for the hope of a better life and democracy. They are living and dying for the cause.

Expand Quote

Right, fuck this thread, and fuck me for thinking it was possible to actually discuss this.

[close]

This has actually been a pretty tame thread considering the subject matter and this being Slap. You started the topic and multiple people have given you honest, thought-out answers regarding their position while also challenging your statements in a pretty respectful manner (for a skateboard messagboard). People are discussing it. Why are you upset?

[close]

yes that was what I meant: Israel's ability to form a democracy gives it a "moral high ground" if you will. There are arab members of the Knesset but nowhere in the arab world can you find jewish members of parliament, I don't think so. Everything else you said is true and I cannot disagree with it. But if you take the exemple of Algeria, how long can you blame French colonialism for the fucked-up state the country is in? Nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence, 60 years ago, but it is still a one-party state.

[close]

But is this ability to form a democracy really an accurate measurement of "moral high ground" if Israel and its government is being supported by the most powerful nations in the world while Arab countries and their governments are being purposely sabotaged by these same world powers?

As for Jewish-Arab government representation as a measure of a country's "moral ground":
Had to look up the exact numbers, but the Arab countries with the largest Jewish populations are Tunisia and Morocco. Jewish people make up approximately 0.02% and 0.006% of these nation's populations respectively. Not even 1% of the population in these countries is Jewish - we are talking tiny fractions of a percent and this is in the two Arab countries with the largest Jewish populations. In the other Arab countries we're looking closer to 0.0001-0.000001% of the population being Jewish. Therefore it wouldn't make much sense for these countries to have Jewish people in their parliaments/representative bodies of government. It would make even less sense to judge these nations for this fact.

Meanwhile Arab people make up approximately 20% of Israel's population. That is a large percentage of the population and therefore it makes sense for Israel to have an Arab presence in their representative government. However once again, does this even allow Israel to hold some form of "moral high ground" if they treat their Arab population as 2nd class citizens and create barriers to their participation in voting, etc? Not expecting you to answer that, just a question to consider.

Honestly man this just shows how little you know about the issue and the region. After Israel was founded the vast majority of Jews living in arab states had to flee the retaliations. To give you an idea, there were 300 000 jews in Morocco in 1945, less than 10 000 in the 80's.
Also, while it is true the west does intervene in some countries, that does not explain everything. no one "sabotages" governments in countries like Algeria/morocco/tunisia. It's just that the military clique that governs since independence refuses to give up power. It's an internal struggle, and sometimes a very violent one. Algeria had a bloody civil war in the 90's because when they tried to have elections, the islamists won. The military then cancelled the elections' result and that was the start of a 10 year long war.

[OldieButFrenchie]

Ethno-nationalism is a bad idea, regardless of who controls the state. A jewish state shouldn't exist anymore than a christian or islamic state. Any political entity that prioritizes one religion over another is bound to oppress.

Beyond that, Israel supports illegal settlement and the oppression of one race over another due to religious favoritism. It's not a good idea. It's not working out for the majority. At one time they may not have been the aggressor, but they certainly are now. Bulldozing over peaceful protestors, shooting kids and medics, the list goes on. Any justification for this is sheer entitlement and ego that's putting one religious group over another.

I totally agree with you in theory , but you do realize all arab states are islamic states? Governed by islamic law. To give you an exemple, the inheritance laws: women get half of what men get, still today. I think Tunisia is the only arab state that instituted equality for that, in 2017.

[JANUS]

i refuse to give a shit about this thread until i hear from a palestinian

I used to live in Syria, but I guess that’s not exactly what you’re asking for.

[iKobrakai]

Expand Quote

i refuse to give a shit about this thread until i hear from a palestinian

[close]

I used to live in Syria, but I guess that’s not exactly what you’re asking for.

I don't know what the dude expects other than hatered towards US/Israel...

[disintegration]

i refuse to give a shit about this thread until i hear from a palestinian

Why? You won't believe it until you hear it from a Palestinian?

[Banned from the room]

Israel is a National Socialist State. People don't like to hear that but it is. France is pretty close to one now.

The entire frickin planet is tripping out on the good old days because all systems are suffering from  PTSD.

Elitist primates fuck off

[Sidewalk Funk.]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

2 : Israel is the only democracy in the region. There is not one arab country with democracy, unfortunately.

[close]

I'm not sure what point you're making here? Should new states only be allowed to form if they are a democracy? Does Israel's ability to form a democracy give it a greater right to exist/a more superior position in comparison to Arab countries and potential new Arab states? Just trying to guess what you mean by this point.

The reason for a lack of democracies in the Arab world is wildly complicated. For one, Western-style democracy is not a one size fits all solution that will work for every country. Also, Western powers love to point their finger at the Middle East (and other areas of the world) and criticize them for their instability, corruption, and lack of democracy, painting them as inferior nations and their people as uncivilized. This is also the message that is fed to the people in these western nations. However it is decades of continued intervention from these same western powers to purposefully destabilize the region that has made it impossible to institute a democracy in most of these countries.

The US especially is guilty of this and has directly helped several authoritarian regimes in these Arab countries come to power. The US and UK even led a coup to dismantle democracy in Iran in 1953 because the elected leader did not agree with the US/UK's control of Iranian oil. This resulted in a monarchy that lasted several decades in Iran (I realize Iran is not an Arabic country, however it is in the region of discussion and the dismantling of its democracy has a ripple effect to nearby Arab countries making it less likely for other democracies to form; it also serves as an example of the actions the US and UK are willing to take for their own interests at the expense and well-being of this region and how they do not actually care or want stability/democracies in this area). Hamas was also helped to power through repeated intervention by the US and other western powers. And the list goes on (not just in this region, but around the world).

Despite all of this, there are Arab countries that do currently have partial democracies and there are growing movements throughout the region pushing for instituting democracies. The Arab Spring and Libyan Civil Uprising are both examples of Arabs rising against their governments for the hope of a better life and democracy. They are living and dying for the cause.

Expand Quote

Right, fuck this thread, and fuck me for thinking it was possible to actually discuss this.

[close]

This has actually been a pretty tame thread considering the subject matter and this being Slap. You started the topic and multiple people have given you honest, thought-out answers regarding their position while also challenging your statements in a pretty respectful manner (for a skateboard messagboard). People are discussing it. Why are you upset?

[close]

yes that was what I meant: Israel's ability to form a democracy gives it a "moral high ground" if you will. There are arab members of the Knesset but nowhere in the arab world can you find jewish members of parliament, I don't think so. Everything else you said is true and I cannot disagree with it. But if you take the exemple of Algeria, how long can you blame French colonialism for the fucked-up state the country is in? Nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence, 60 years ago, but it is still a one-party state.

[close]

But is this ability to form a democracy really an accurate measurement of "moral high ground" if Israel and its government is being supported by the most powerful nations in the world while Arab countries and their governments are being purposely sabotaged by these same world powers?

As for Jewish-Arab government representation as a measure of a country's "moral ground":
Had to look up the exact numbers, but the Arab countries with the largest Jewish populations are Tunisia and Morocco. Jewish people make up approximately 0.02% and 0.006% of these nation's populations respectively. Not even 1% of the population in these countries is Jewish - we are talking tiny fractions of a percent and this is in the two Arab countries with the largest Jewish populations. In the other Arab countries we're looking closer to 0.0001-0.000001% of the population being Jewish. Therefore it wouldn't make much sense for these countries to have Jewish people in their parliaments/representative bodies of government. It would make even less sense to judge these nations for this fact.

Meanwhile Arab people make up approximately 20% of Israel's population. That is a large percentage of the population and therefore it makes sense for Israel to have an Arab presence in their representative government. However once again, does this even allow Israel to hold some form of "moral high ground" if they treat their Arab population as 2nd class citizens and create barriers to their participation in voting, etc? Not expecting you to answer that, just a question to consider.

[close]

Honestly man this just shows how little you know about the issue and the region. After Israel was founded the vast majority of Jews living in arab states had to flee the retaliations. To give you an idea, there were 300 000 jews in Morocco in 1945, less than 10 000 in the 80's.
Also, while it is true the west does intervene in some countries, that does not explain everything. no one "sabotages" governments in countries like Algeria/morocco/tunisia. It's just that the military clique that governs since independence refuses to give up power. It's an internal struggle, and sometimes a very violent one. Algeria had a bloody civil war in the 90's because when they tried to have elections, the islamists won. The military then cancelled the elections' result and that was the start of a 10 year long war.

Haha I almost feel like I’m being gaslighted here. Yes, it’s basic knowledge that Jewish people left in masses from the Arab nations where they once lived due to hostile conditions – I figured that was a given and didn’t need to be directly pointed out. My grandfather and some relatives were actually among those Jewish people that fled these areas (including Morocco) during that time period. You had brought up that Arab nations with democratic elements in their current governments do not have any Jewish representation – so I provided present day numbers showing that: well yeah, there’s not going to be Jewish representation in these nations’ governments when there are very few Jewish people that live there.

Also, while it is true the west does intervene in some countries, that does not explain everything. no one "sabotages" governments in countries like Algeria/morocco/tunisia.

Perhaps “sabotage” was too intense of a verb for me to use here (although it is certainly fitting for some cases) and maybe “derail”, “destabilize”, or “undermine” are more fitting when generally speaking of the West’s intentions when intervening. These interventions are not always just in the form of physical occupancy, assisting in overthrow of a government, bribing/corrupting politicians, etc. They also come in the form of deliberate and targeted economic actions that affect the country’s economic stability, value of local currency, and resources (and it should be noted that historically the ability to maintain a stabile and successful economy is vital to the process of establishing a democracy). No matter the form of intervention taken, the end goal when intervening is always the same: to protect their interests and maintain control/influence in the region at any cost.

Anyway, the list of Arab nations where this has taken place in recent times is significantly larger than the list where it hasn’t. Also that group of 3 countries you provided is not free from intervention by western powers in recent times either.

With that said, I never stated that the only reason democracy is not more prevalent in Arab nations or that all problems in the region are due to outside intervention from western powers. That would be a gross oversimplification of the situation. Other internal factors specific to the inner workings of these Arab nations obviously exist as well. However when specifically comparing Israel’s ability to form a democracy to other nations in the region (which was the topic we were discussing), an emphasis on outside intervention from western powers is necessary since it plays such a huge role in the different outcomes of Israel and these other nations.

[Sidewalk Funk.]

But if you take the exemple of Algeria, how long can you blame French colonialism for the fucked-up state the country is in? Nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence, 60 years ago, but it is still a one-party state.

For many (but not all) countries, it takes several decades if not longer to complete the process of beginning a democratic movement to successfully forming a stable democracy. It’s often a long, tumultuous back and forth process that depends on many factors. Several Arab nations have already established partial democracies while others have growing movements towards establishing the initial elements of a democracy. They are on their way, but it takes time just like it did for many democracies that currently exist around the world. There is no set timeline for how long it’s supposed to take. Each nation is unique and has its own barriers and obstacles to overcome. When additional barriers and obstacles continue to be thrown into the mix like we’re seeing in many of the nations under discussion, the process takes even longer.

As for Algeria specifically – French colonization of Algeria lasted over 130 years and involved stealing farm land from the people, exploiting their resources, destroying aspects of their culture, and systematic torture and killing of Algerian people among countless other atrocities. It would take a long time for any country to recover from colonial rule of that length and severity, even if they are truly left alone for 60 years without significant outside intervention. Unfortunately that is not the case in Algeria as even after colonization ended, France continued intervening for the sake of their own interests at the expense and detriment of Algeria and its people.

For example, France continued to have military stationed in Algeria and used the now independent country as a test site for France’s nuclear bomb program. Over the span of several years after colonization ended, France detonated more than a dozen nuclear bombs in Algeria. France even used local Algerians as test subjects and purposefully placed them in proximity of the bomb sites so they could learn about the effects of radiation on the human body. The effects of these bombs and their radiation continue to this day as tens of thousands Algerians have fallen ill from cancer and other health ailments linked to the radiation. Beyond the human death toll, these bombings continue to cost Algeria via its environmental and economic impact as well as added stress to the medical system. Issues and problems like these have a lasting impact and influence on the stability of a nation, shaping of political discourse, the people/parties that come to power, etc.

This is only one example of post-colonial intervention in Algeria though and does not even touch on outside actions regarding Algeria’s oil supply and natural resources among other things. To say that nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence is simply not true.

[Sidewalk Funk.]

That’s it from me. I’m just challenging some of your statements and reasoning for your beliefs in this thread. I’m not disagreeing with your belief that Israel has a right to exist (and it appears most here are not either), however I can’t say I agree with many of your supporting statements you’ve provided in this thread and in some cases I strongly disagree with them, but I guess we’ll just have to leave it at that. Good discussion.

Best of luck to you.

[Deputy Wendell]

But if you take the exemple of Algeria, how long can you blame French colonialism for the fucked-up state the country is in? Nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence, 60 years ago, but it is still a one-party state.

know that there are some of us out here who do not think there is a statute of limitations on ANY country's bungling, insatiable, disastrous, imperialistic intrusions into another country--especially European countries' cursed intrusions into Africa.

convince me that there is actually some kind of realistic, concrete set of criteria for evaluating the scale and scope of damage--social, economic, cultural, spiritual--caused by a colonialist power that enters, occupies, and leaves another country, and maybe we can begin to talk about how long a country like France is accountable for what happens in Algeria after it has left.

and i hold my county in far more contempt historically, than i do yours by the way

[OldieButFrenchie]

That’s it from me. I’m just challenging some of your statements and reasoning for your beliefs in this thread. I’m not disagreeing with your belief that Israel has a right to exist (and it appears most here are not either), however I can’t say I agree with many of your supporting statements you’ve provided in this thread and in some cases I strongly disagree with them, but I guess we’ll just have to leave it at that. Good discussion.

Best of luck to you.

thanks for a very well written and thought-out answer, I learned some stuff here! Including the meaning of "gaslighting" ha..... And sorry for assuming you did not know something that is obviously basic knowledge for you and even family history.
BTW I looked up this thing about nuclear tests in Algeria and you are right. I just don't understand how it could happen after independence, as the French army was well and truly beaten during this war so I just don't get how all that could happen afterwards...I'll try to find some more info.
On the whole I think we agree about more stuff than disagree, actually. 
And good luck to you too!

[OldieButFrenchie]

Expand Quote

But if you take the exemple of Algeria, how long can you blame French colonialism for the fucked-up state the country is in? Nobody has intervened in Algeria since independence, 60 years ago, but it is still a one-party state.

[close]

know that there are some of us out here who do not think there is a statute of limitations on ANY country's bungling, insatiable, disastrous, imperialistic intrusions into another country--especially European countries' cursed intrusions into Africa.

convince me that there is actually some kind of realistic, concrete set of criteria for evaluating the scale and scope of damage--social, economic, cultural, spiritual--caused by a colonialist power that enters, occupies, and leaves another country, and maybe we can begin to talk about how long a country like France is accountable for what happens in Algeria after it has left.

and i hold my county in far more contempt historically, than i do yours by the way

I don't have answers for those questions, man. I won't pretend I do. But if, as you say, you hold France accountable for what happens in Algeria today, then should we hold Turkey responsable for what happens in Greece? After 500 years of Ottoman rule? If there is no "statute of limitations", there's just no end to the blame game. I know a lot of people who think Spain's conquistadors were plain evil, but then should we blame the 700 years of arab occupation for turning Spain into an agressive and militarized society?
What I've been saying from the beginning is that the idea of colonialism being a western concept is just false. It's a human concept.

[TheLurper]

I don't have answers for those questions, man. I won't pretend I do. But if, as you say, you hold France accountable for what happens in Algeria today, then should we hold Turkey responsable for what happens in Greece? After 500 years of Ottoman rule? If there is no "statute of limitations", there's just no end to the blame game. I know a lot of people who think Spain's conquistadors were plain evil, but then should we blame the 700 years of arab occupation for turning Spain into an agressive and militarized society?
What I've been saying from the beginning is that the idea of colonialism being a western concept is just false. It's a human concept.

Half paying attention to this thread but...

Algeria's independence was less than 60 years ago compared to the First Hellenic Republic coming about 200 years ago. The timing here is all the more important when we consider global growth in wealth prior to the 1800s was minimal and it exploded after that (thanks industrial revolution).

Second, its not like the French left Algeria in a great financial situation. Having to fight for independence wrecked the economy and the settlers sabotaged quite a bit of the machinery on their way out. And that the Evian Agreement was never going to hold as it gave the French far too much (especially in relation to oil). The Evian Agreement was no Marshall Plan.

Third, it ignores the political vacuum that existed after the war.

This isn't to put all the blame on the French (obv. the French can't be blamed for drops in oil prices, which the economy relies on heavily), but I sometimes feel it is hard to bark at a country, "So what if we screwed you over. You should have done better picking up the pieces of your shattered economy and fractured political landscape."

Also, it would be interesting to compare which former French colonies boomed in their independence and which ones struggled and what the differences were in terms of gaining independence, natural resources, education at the time of independence, percent of country owned by local bus/gov rather than foreign bus/gov, political leadership, and so on.

[Deputy Wendell]

Expand Quote

I don't have answers for those questions, man. I won't pretend I do. But if, as you say, you hold France accountable for what happens in Algeria today, then should we hold Turkey responsable for what happens in Greece? After 500 years of Ottoman rule? If there is no "statute of limitations", there's just no end to the blame game. I know a lot of people who think Spain's conquistadors were plain evil, but then should we blame the 700 years of arab occupation for turning Spain into an agressive and militarized society?
What I've been saying from the beginning is that the idea of colonialism being a western concept is just false. It's a human concept.

[close]

Half paying attention to this thread but...

Algeria's independence was less than 60 years ago compared to the First Hellenic Republic coming about 200 years ago. The timing here is all the more important when we consider global growth in wealth prior to the 1800s was minimal and it exploded after that (thanks industrial revolution).

Second, its not like the French left Algeria in a great financial situation. Having to fight for independence wrecked the economy and the settlers sabotaged quite a bit of the machinery on their way out. And that the Evian Agreement was never going to hold as it gave the French far too much (especially in relation to oil). The Evian Agreement was no Marshall Plan.

Third, it ignores the political vacuum that existed after the war.

This isn't to put all the blame on the French (obv. the French can't be blamed for drops in oil prices, which the economy relies on heavily), but I sometimes feel it is hard to bark at a country, "So what if we screwed you over. You should have done better picking up the pieces of your shattered economy and fractured political landscape."

Also, it would be interesting to compare which former French colonies boomed in their independence and which ones struggled and what the differences were in terms of gaining independence, natural resources, education at the time of independence, percent of country owned by local bus/gov rather than foreign bus/gov, political leadership, and so on.

all solid points Lurper. as i said in the comment that Frenchie was responding to, if one is to have any kind of realistic talk about accountability and consequences in this conversation, then the scale/scope of the damage caused by a colonialist power throughout the process of it entering, occupying, AND leaving another country all need to be considered--you basically put some meat on the bones of my comment...

edit: if there's a logic and/or value system governing how "reps" work in here, i'm sure it escapes me--i don't see any discernible correlation between my comments/participation in here, and the seemingly independent life of my "rep." it seems to go up and go down based on some force/process that might as well be cosmic, if it's a matter of how much i understand it. that being said, Frenchie old sport, even if i could, i would never kook you for this thread or for your comments in it. out of all of the issues in our day and age, this one needs to be discussed. as i said earlier, i'm always happy to see when my freshman students have the sand to tussle with this topic when we do our big researched argument paper in the ENG 1020 classes i teach.

considering how civil this thread has seemed to remain--and regardless if any opinions have actually been changed--it doesn't seem that anyone has espoused any toxic or extreme sentiments for any one position in the argument, and it doesn't seem that any feelings have been hurt, so as far as i'm concerned, a positive and important conversation and thread...

[OldieButFrenchie]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I don't have answers for those questions, man. I won't pretend I do. But if, as you say, you hold France accountable for what happens in Algeria today, then should we hold Turkey responsable for what happens in Greece? After 500 years of Ottoman rule? If there is no "statute of limitations", there's just no end to the blame game. I know a lot of people who think Spain's conquistadors were plain evil, but then should we blame the 700 years of arab occupation for turning Spain into an agressive and militarized society?
What I've been saying from the beginning is that the idea of colonialism being a western concept is just false. It's a human concept.

[close]

Half paying attention to this thread but...

Algeria's independence was less than 60 years ago compared to the First Hellenic Republic coming about 200 years ago. The timing here is all the more important when we consider global growth in wealth prior to the 1800s was minimal and it exploded after that (thanks industrial revolution).

Second, its not like the French left Algeria in a great financial situation. Having to fight for independence wrecked the economy and the settlers sabotaged quite a bit of the machinery on their way out. And that the Evian Agreement was never going to hold as it gave the French far too much (especially in relation to oil). The Evian Agreement was no Marshall Plan.

Third, it ignores the political vacuum that existed after the war.

This isn't to put all the blame on the French (obv. the French can't be blamed for drops in oil prices, which the economy relies on heavily), but I sometimes feel it is hard to bark at a country, "So what if we screwed you over. You should have done better picking up the pieces of your shattered economy and fractured political landscape."

Also, it would be interesting to compare which former French colonies boomed in their independence and which ones struggled and what the differences were in terms of gaining independence, natural resources, education at the time of independence, percent of country owned by local bus/gov rather than foreign bus/gov, political leadership, and so on.

[close]

all solid points Lurper. as i said in the comment that Frenchie was responding to, if one is to have any kind of realistic talk about accountability and consequences in this conversation, then the scale/scope of the damage caused by a colonialist power throughout the process of it entering, occupying, AND leaving another country all need to be considered--you basically put some meat on the bones of my comment...

edit: if there's a logic and/or value system governing how "reps" work in here, i'm sure it escapes me--i don't see any discernible correlation between my comments/participation in here, and the seemingly independent life of my "rep." it seems to go up and go down based on some force/process that might as well be cosmic, if it's a matter of how much i understand it. that being said, Frenchie old sport, even if i could, i would never kook you for this thread or for your comments in it. out of all of the issues in our day and age, this one needs to be discussed. as i said earlier, i'm always happy to see when my freshman students have the sand to tussle with this topic when we do our big researched argument paper in the ENG 1020 classes i teach.

considering how civil this thread has seemed to remain--and regardless if any opinions have actually been changed--it doesn't seem that anyone has espoused any toxic or extreme sentiments for any one position in the argument, and it doesn't seem that any feelings have been hurt, so as far as i'm concerned, a positive and important conversation and thread...

well if we're going to talk about invasions and occupation, one might point out that France was invaded, occupied and pretty much half destroyed just a little before the Algerian war, in that little regional conflict called WWII. Now I'm being ironic here, but whole French cities like Rouen, Le Havre and Toulon were almost totally razed. And a lot of the shady shit French politicians did after the war actually has its roots in the resistance: these guys were used to underground and/or violent operations. Watch Army of shadows by Melville, on this topic.
And this is what I mean by "the blame game having no end". France obviously handled decolonization very badly (cough cough Vietnam war....) but WWII has to be considered as well if judging that period.
In any case, my point is not to defend France or French politics/history, which has stains like any other country's, it wasn't my original intention. My point is rather that war and invasion are the normal state of affairs in world history.
Anyways to those of you that gave me solid arguments instead of insults, I think we would agree generally on my original point: there should be room for a Jewish state in the Middle East, and saying "death to Israel" (or death to any country) should not be tolerated on this forum IMHO.

->Deputy Wendell: I'm reading this right now, if you mention your own country's colonialist past. It's an awesome book!



Oh btw about rep: it's still kind of a mystery to me too man! and basically I dont care. I knew this thread was going to attract me a lot of flak, but why should I care about my "rep" on a skateboarding forum really? A little too old to try and be "popular". 

[TheLurper]

While we are bit off topic here, but I'm interested...

I'm not sure we can compare France recovering from the wars and 2-4 years of Nazi occupation (as insanely brutal as that was) to Algeria attempting to (re)form and build a state after being under French rule for 130ish years.

France was the second biggest recipient of Marshall Plan money.
France's enemy was crippled on the world stage and France had a lot of power dictating the terms of post-war Germany.
Germany paid France in industrial assets, coal, and forced labor in the post-war era.

What else played a role in the 30 glorious years post WWII?

How did France reconstruct during the 4th Republic? What themes and politicians and parties held from the 3rd to 4th Republic? What residual power did France retain from pre to the post war era? (This is an honest question, I don't know much about this). What else played a role in France returning to pre-war manufacturing levels by 1947?

[Zephyr-Cum]

Rebuild Solomon's Temple. If that can't happen, nuke everyone.

It's not that complicated, people. They all follow a death cult. Jehovah is a blood-thirsty demon and will take us all down unless we bury it in the sand forever. Both sides are fools. In the end, we are all foolish. This intellectual masturbation fest is over. I provided the truth. Ignore, if you want.

[OldieButFrenchie]

While we are bit off topic here, but I'm interested...

I'm not sure we can compare France recovering from the wars and 2-4 years of Nazi occupation (as insanely brutal as that was) to Algeria attempting to (re)form and build a state after being under French rule for 130ish years.

France was the second biggest recipient of Marshall Plan money.
France's enemy was crippled on the world stage and France had a lot of power dictating the terms of post-war Germany.
Germany paid France in industrial assets, coal, and forced labor in the post-war era.

What else played a role in the 30 glorious years post WWII?

How did France reconstruct during the 4th Republic? What themes and politicians and parties held from the 3rd to 4th Republic? What residual power did France retain from pre to the post war era? (This is an honest question, I don't know much about this). What else played a role in France returning to pre-war manufacturing levels by 1947?

Definitely off-topic and I'm not qualified enought to answer all this, so I'll point you to this book which is really an incredible read, like every book by Beevor basically.



Just 2 things: IMHO France did not have "a lot of power dictating the terms of post-war Germany". I've read Roosevelt barely tolerated De Gaulle sitting at the victors' table.

How did France reconstruct during the 4th Republic? What themes and politicians and parties held from the 3rd to 4th Republic?
Basically the dominating parties after the war were the ones not tainted by collaboration with the nazis and a real resistance pedigree: the communists on the left and the Gaullists on the right.


I'm not sure we can compare France recovering from the wars and 2-4 years of Nazi occupation (as insanely brutal as that was) to Algeria attempting to (re)form and build a state after being under French rule for 130ish years.

definitely hard to compare and controversial to boot, but France actually built the modern algerian infrastructure: roads, rails etc. The nazi occupation was much shorter of course.....but they just plundered and slaughtered. damn here we are turning slap into an academics cafe ha!

[drewsmahgoos]

Expand Quote

Ethno-nationalism is a bad idea, regardless of who controls the state. A jewish state shouldn't exist anymore than a christian or islamic state. Any political entity that prioritizes one religion over another is bound to oppress.

Beyond that, Israel supports illegal settlement and the oppression of one race over another due to religious favoritism. It's not a good idea. It's not working out for the majority. At one time they may not have been the aggressor, but they certainly are now. Bulldozing over peaceful protestors, shooting kids and medics, the list goes on. Any justification for this is sheer entitlement and ego that's putting one religious group over another.

[close]

I totally agree with you in theory , but you do realize all arab states are islamic states? Governed by islamic law. To give you an exemple, the inheritance laws: women get half of what men get, still today. I think Tunisia is the only arab state that instituted equality for that, in 2017.

What's your point? Whataboutism?

What does this have to do with Israel? Where did I ever say those Islamic states are somehow a good thing either? I didn't. Stop deflecting.

[Lord Viper Scorpion]

Israel is a National Socialist State. People don't like to hear that but it is. France is pretty close to one now.

did you see how fast macron swooped in after the beirut explosion to promote regime change? scumbag cynical shit...

FUCK OFF FRANCE

FUCK OFF ISRAEL

[Dr.Fauci]

Expand Quote

I don't have answers for those questions, man. I won't pretend I do. But if, as you say, you hold France accountable for what happens in Algeria today, then should we hold Turkey responsable for what happens in Greece? After 500 years of Ottoman rule? If there is no "statute of limitations", there's just no end to the blame game. I know a lot of people who think Spain's conquistadors were plain evil, but then should we blame the 700 years of arab occupation for turning Spain into an agressive and militarized society?
What I've been saying from the beginning is that the idea of colonialism being a western concept is just false. It's a human concept.

[close]

Half paying attention to this thread but...

Algeria's independence was less than 60 years ago compared to the First Hellenic Republic coming about 200 years ago. The timing here is all the more important when we consider global growth in wealth prior to the 1800s was minimal and it exploded after that (thanks industrial revolution).

Second, its not like the French left Algeria in a great financial situation. Having to fight for independence wrecked the economy and the settlers sabotaged quite a bit of the machinery on their way out. And that the Evian Agreement was never going to hold as it gave the French far too much (especially in relation to oil). The Evian Agreement was no Marshall Plan.

Third, it ignores the political vacuum that existed after the war.

This isn't to put all the blame on the French (obv. the French can't be blamed for drops in oil prices, which the economy relies on heavily), but I sometimes feel it is hard to bark at a country, "So what if we screwed you over. You should have done better picking up the pieces of your shattered economy and fractured political landscape."

Also, it would be interesting to compare which former French colonies boomed in their independence and which ones struggled and what the differences were in terms of gaining independence, natural resources, education at the time of independence, percent of country owned by local bus/gov rather than foreign bus/gov, political leadership, and so on.

The only one that comes to mind is Canada/Quebec, and probably that's thanks to the British. The rest were savage before the French arrived and returned to savagery after they left. 

[Lord Viper Scorpion]

bump

[Dwyck]

Expand Quote

[close]

bump

[Madam, I'm Adam]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

[close]

bump

[close]

?

[DaleSr]

I find it kind of intellectually slippery that the only thing frenchie ever seems to agree with the rest of us is that Israel has a right to exist but is never willing to extend that to the Palestinians. And you also said that you are not here to defend the French government but reading through all the points that you made, they all defend French colonialism or deflect to Turkish colonialism. Do you support a two state compromise between the Israel and Palestine or are you only willing to recognize the Israeli claim to land as legitimate.

Also the Kurdish state also deserves to exist and a lot of people were making a ton of noise about the kurds being back stabbed by us when the turks attacked them in Syria a year or two ago

[Lord Viper Scorpion]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

[close]

bump

[close]

[close]

?

every time israel accelerates the genocide of palestine i bump that image - any questions?