I really don't see how boycotting Apartheid can be immoral. Nor do I understand why anyone should be prevented from living in their ancestral homeland.

BTW, I buy Israeli stuff every now and then, but I avoid anything produced in the illegal settlements.

BDS.

you're welcome

You don't like that? Tough....

Last edited Wed Jul 6, 2016, 09:18 AM - Edit history (1)

To prove it, there is no definition of Apartheid that brands Israel to the exclusion of any other liberal western democracy on the planet.

Provide a definition and if you can't, tough. I'll help you out - you won't be able to do so.

Fun Facts

About 77% of Arab Israelis believe Israel is better than most other countries.
http://www.herzliyaconference.org/Eng/_Uploads/1388Pat_e.pdf

75% of Israeli Arabs support Jewish, democratic constitution
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/poll-75-of-israeli-arabs-support-jewish-democratic-constitution-1.219373

Up to 80% of Palestinians admire Israeli government more than any other on the planet
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/international/middleeast/02LETT.html?pagewanted=1

These are not typical responses from people who believe such a country is Apartheid, or even similar to Apartheid.

QED.

I'm not sure why yr going on about Israel when what I pointed out was that the system in the West Bank is what's similar to apartheid. So, now that you know that the West Bank isn't Israel, do you want to go back into the DU archives and read the many, many post from myself and others that explain in great detail why there are similarities between the West Bank and apartheid South Africa, and maybe come back and talk about the West Bank and not Israel?

They're liars. We shouldn't disagree there.

As to the W.Bank, that's not apartheid either - but BDS claims that. So BDS lies on that one too, correct?

...then they're not lying.

I dunno. When it comes to apartheid, who should I listen to? Anonymous folk on the internet who defend just about everything Israel does and have no knowledge or experience of apartheid, or Desmond Tutu, who experienced apartheid first hand. Tough call. Let me think on it for all of 0.001 seconds and get back to you...

They're not saying Israel is similar to apartheid. They claim it is apartheid.

You mention Tutu, but why not bring up Nelson Mandela? He never claimed Israel was apartheid or similar to it.

As for Tutu, he claims Israel is apartheid - not just the territories...

Sorry but I'm just not into obsessing over them like some do. I know from experience it's wise to fact check ur claims of what others think and say, but in this case even if they did it just means I disagree with them and don't feel the need to scream at them.

Okay that last bit makes no sense at all. Can you explain what your thought process is coz I'm not following.

He didn't just say the W.Bank situation is similar to apartheid. He went much farther than that.

The problem isn't disagreement, it's outright dishonesty and lies. It's publicly castigating Israel and its Zionist supporters (nearly all Jews) for non-existent crimes. That's bigotry.

That's the bit that made no sense...

Seriously? So you disagree with me that the system in the West Bank is similar to apartheid. But according to you that's not disagreement, that's me lying? And not only lying, but being anti-semitic? For real???

OTOH, Tutu lied about Israel being apartheid within its borders, nevermind what he said about the W.Bank. I'll go with Mandela over Tutu. I don't see why anyone would trust Tutu on this one.

Also, I'm pretty sure Desmond Tutu hasn't said that the system in Israel itself is apartheid. I've never seen him say that. He's always talked about the treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories...

I don't get it, sorry. If I say the system in the West Bank is similar to apartheid, you don't see that as a lie, but mere disagreement?

And again you're wrong about Tutu, as he definitely stated Israel itself is apartheid.

I'd not read that before, so I've learnt something tonight....

It's not, never was and never will be apartheid. You don't like THAT or that the vast majority of Americans completely disagree with you, tough. Two can play at that stupid game.

I don't know why you'd think I'd give a shit what you think the vast majority of Americans think. Israel imposes different systems of law in the West Bank for Palestinians and for Israelis. Palestinians are subject to Israeli military law, Israel lays claim to the West Bank, yet Palestinians are not allowed to vote. So it's very similar to South African Apartheid. Unlike the vast majority of Americans, who probably wouldn't have a clue what Apartheid was, Desmond Tutu lived through it and has pointed out the similarities...

ignore WHY they don't have their own state in the West Bank. You're just another who ignores they could have had their own state in 1947 and went to war instead. Nothing but hatred and terrorism has followed - NOTHING. And you want to reward that. Thankfully, the US will always have Israeli's back. I'll take Elie Weisel over Tutu any day.

I'm already aware that you blame the Palestinian people for everything and see Israel as a blameless victim being forced to carry out a brutal occupation against its will. I pointed out that the system in the West Bank is similar to apartheid South Africa and you took offense at that.

Not sure what eli wiesels experience of South African apartheid was but I'm kind of strongly suspecting it wouldn't be the same experience as Desmond tutus and other black South Africans who were victims of apartheid.

somebody's mouth usually work for you? I have NEVER claimed Israel is blameless - NEVER. But they aren't to blame for the Palestinians giving up their state in 1947, they're not to blame for walking away from peace treaties that didn't give them 100% of what they want. The problems of the Palestinians are the fault of their "leaders" - first arafat and now abbas and hamas - all either thoroughly corrupt or terrorists themselves. And you want to reward their repulsive behavior and put the entire blame on Israel (I've never seen you - not once - blame the Palestinains for their own problems).

The situation in the West Bank is of their own making and rewarding terrorists is a fools errand and bibi may be an asshole but he's no fool. Why should Israel believe, for even one second, that withdrawing from the West Bank would result in anything different than withdrawing from gaza did? They got nothing but violence and terrorism in return but you continue to ignore that. Your attitude is part of the problem and the reason the Palestinians continue to suffer. And until they lay down their arms, they will get nothing which happens to be what they deserve in return for terrorism and violence. The status quo is MUCH worse for the Palestinians than for the Israeli's.

I dunno. If you don't want to give that impression then maybe make an attempt to be a bit more balanced? Starting with not putting a 'but' after claiming you don't hold Israel blameless and then continue to post about there not being any blame on Israel.

If you've never seen me place blame on Palestinian leadership then you clearly haven't read what I post. And just in this thread I made it clear there's blame on both sides and the one sided simplistic and inaccurate version you gave doesn't do that. Am I doing it wrong? Should I be screaming and cranking up the outrage and broad brushing the Palestinian population with a bunch of negative stereotypes to get that point across? It's just that in the interests of fairness I'd have to do the same for Israel and Israelis and that would be, well, a bit bigoted.

that I think bibi is an asshole, that he's not helpful and perhaps even hurtful to the prospect of peace by his bellicosity to satisfy you? The problem, as I see it, is that you think this is a complex issue. It's not. Not at all.

He's got far more credibility than you when it comes to recognising apartheid.....

That's inside Israels borders, and that's the only part of Israel where I could see that comparison being made. But I would disagree with him on Israel itself, as all citizens of Israel live under the same set of laws and I don't consider East Jerusalem to be part of Israel.

Okay, I'm getting thumb fatigue typing on this phone, and going and watching some Dr Who is just far more tempting than arglebargling away here. When I return and there's no more Dr Who reruns for me to get through, let's have a long back and forth on how you disagree with me about how the system in the West Bank is similar to apartheid. I haven't had a long back and forth with you in what seems forever and my post count misses those days!

Last edited Wed Jul 6, 2016, 09:51 AM - Edit history (7)

You know very well it's been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that BDS is a hate movement, so why support it? BDS claims Israel is apartheid - not only the territories - but Israel proper. So BDS lies and incites. Why support it?

In fact, you admitted recently Israel doesn't match the definition of apartheid, and yet you continue to accuse Israel of apartheid. Why?

=================================

As to apartheid, see post #4 above. I'll repeat those fun facts for you here just in case:

About 77% of Arab Israelis believe Israel is better than most other countries.
http://www.herzliyaconference.org/Eng/_Uploads/1388Pat_e.pdf

75% of Israeli Arabs support Jewish, democratic constitution
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/poll-75-of-israeli-arabs-support-jewish-democratic-constitution-1.219373

Up to 80% of Palestinians admire Israeli government more than any other on the planet
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/02/international/middleeast/02LETT.html?pagewanted=1

These are not typical responses from people who believe such a country is Apartheid, or even similar to Apartheid. That's because it's not Apartheid; the charge is baseless & it's incitement to hate each and every time it's used.

It doesn't really help to show how much Israeli Arabs love Israel, when it's about other people who live under Israeli occupation. And it doesn't help to show that the occupied people want freedom and rights like Israelis have either.

The Apartheid analogy stems from the fact that Palestinians living in the occupied territories live under military jurisdiction with no civil rights whatsoever, and Israelis living in the occupied territories have civil rights and access to all resources there, which has led to a disparity in living standards: Palestinian GDP per capita in the West Bank is $1924 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_State_of_Palestine) which is considerably less than the Israeli GDP per capita of $35,833. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Israel). Without any form of discrimination against Palestinians in the occupied territories, there should be equal access to economic opportunities which should mean economic parity.

I've said that I didn't know of a good definition of Apartheid in general, but that doesn't mean that I think that Israel doesn't fit the definition - that a different argument. Apartheid is a system of discrimination, and the political system in South Africa was an example of such a system. A definition of Apartheid is difficult to formulate, as it would be almost impossible to include all possible forms of discrimination that an Apartheid system could use.

The Israel apartheid analogy is based on scholarly analysis and facts while the objections to the analogy are more based on opinion. At least that's my own opinion...

Israel and the apartheid analogy
Source: Wikipedia

You make up your own definition of apartheid in order to implicate Israel & castigate its Zionist supporters. You can advocate for Palestinians' rights in the W.Bank w/o resorting to the false charge of Apartheid, so why not do that?

But it's not just apartheid that you re-define for your own purposes. You do the same with the definition of anti-semitism. You create your own version of BDS to distance yourself from the actual BDS hate movement. You choose to believe Hamas when it suits you.

And then you wonder why your views aren't catching on with Hillary, Bernie, Obama....

Those who lie to further their agendas only prove to others how morally bankrupt their agendas are.

Your definition of Apartheid seems to range from all other countries but not Israel, to no other countries (including Apartheid South Africa) and not Israel. The reason why I don't care that much about a definition of Apartheid is that it's extremely difficult to make a definition of a political system. Look up fascism, for example - any definitions are vague and more like examples rather than proper definitions.

When it comes to anti-Semitism, I strongly reject the idea that Israel and Zionism equals the Jews. You can bring up as many definitions of the "new" anti-Semitism you want. I'll still maintain that anti-Semitism is directed against Jews, and that criticism of Israel and Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

And then finally BDS: You seem to use an imaginary form of BDS that doesn't exist. If there were any actual attempts to boycott Israeli companies just because they were Israeli and not operating in the illegal settlements or supporting the occupation, I would be against that particular form of BDS. But there's no such BDS happening - all forms of actual acts of BDS are directed at the occupation and the settlements. All forms of legislation against BDS are directed against criticism of the settlements, not primarily Israel. The list of companies that do BDS only include companies divesting from the settlements or the occupation. The evidence shows clearly that all forms of BDS only target the occupation and the settlements, and all activities against BDS are aimed at protecting the illegal settlements and the occupation from criticism.

If you disagree, why don't you show me examples of BDS targeting Israeli companies that are not connected to the settlements and the occupation, or show me examples of attempts to counter BDS that don't include the settlements as "Israel"?

But it doesn't matter, nor do your other assertions matter either. I'm more interested in the Apartheid analogy and why you don't think the conditions in the occupied territories would warrant such an analogy. I've tried asking the same thing before, but never got further than this.

Sigh.

...Ali Abunimah, and the Mondoweiss sewer supported boycotting an individual Jew. Why keep pretending they're not all racists?

As the Apartheid Analogy, here's a definition:

The crime of Apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity "committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."

Before I go any further, do you agree with this definition or do you prefer another?

discriminated against by Israel?

I think that the core of the Apartheid argument stems from the perceived discrimination against Palestinians, and if I had a clearer understanding of your position on that issue I will have a much easier time to understand your objections to the Apartheid analogy.

If we can't agree on what it is, how can we ever agree on what it should be called? I have no interest in splitting hairs about the definition of Apartheid - that's pointless.

Meaning, that since there is discrimination in every single country on the planet - including Israel - then all countries are apartheid.

Right?

which is about Jewish attitudes, not a conflation between Jews and Israel/Zionism.

Do you think it's ok to conflate Jews with Israel/Zionism? I personally think it's completely wrong at all times, but you seem to adhere to the definition of the new anti-Semitism which does exactly that...

BTW, do you have any comments on the OP as in whether the people living in the occupied territories are systematically discriminated against or not?

Be honest. You support BDS because you oppose the existence of a Jewish state. Even though that isn't the definition of apartheid.

If the Jewish State was Jewish in the same sense as the German State is German and the Norwegian state is Norwegian, I would have no objections at all. I think all Israelis should have the same rights regardless whether they are Jewish or not, which is in essence post-Zionism.

However, your argument is a bit of a red herring, as BDS is almost exclusively about the settlements and the occupation, and not the treatment of non-Jewish citizens in Israel. The settlements and the occupation has resulted in a political system of discrimination against Palestinians that is similar to what South Africa once had, hence the Apartheid analogy.

They do.

Isn't there a bit of a discrepancy between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews when it comes to recovering property lost in the 1948 war?

ignoring the fact they could have had their own state in 1947. But chose violence and war instead. Like they've chosen nothing but violence and war since then. And you want to reward them. Fuck that.

With the same amazingly one sided and incorrect take on what was a complex issue. There's no simple 'my side is pure and good! The other side are evil and hate peace and suck!' Neither Israel or Palestine come out of it smelling of roses.

But I thought my post was in response to a post about equality in Israel which is why I responded with something about equality in Israel. If you want to yell at me, maybe do it about what's being discussed?

There AREN'T two sides when it comes to refusing their own state in 1947. They went to war and LOST (and again in 1956, 1967 and 1972) and you want to give them continual do-overs. Nothing complex about that at all.

Yell? On a comment board? How does that work? As far as equal treatment - when they lay down their arms and sit down to talk peace, they'll get equal treatment - until then, they can thank their terrorist leaders for the treatment they get.

Because it's a bit on the simplistic, inaccurate and totally one-sided side of things.

Yr talking about the UN Partition Plan where they divvied up Palestine? That wasn't an offer of a state, that was a decision made to divide up Palestine. The Jewish Agency agreed with parts of it and not with other parts, and as far as I know Palestinians weren't asked, and it was Arab leaders who refused it. If someone were to come along and partition Australia, I'd be pretty pissed off about the whole thing and opposed to it. Partition plans back then tended to lead to lots of upheaval and bloodshed...

See, yr doing that thing where you talk about the Palestinian people as though they're a bunch of terrorists. 'When they lay down their arms..until then they can thank their terrorist leaders...' If anyone spoke that way about Israelis, they'd be rightly called out on their bigotry and the same should apply when it comes to the Palestinian people.


btw, just a reminder, but the discussion in this part of the thread was about equal rights for Israeli Arabs. It's just that yr sentence 's far as equal treatment - when they lay down their arms and sit down to talk peace, they'll get equal treatment - until then, they can thank their terrorist leaders for the treatment they get.' makes it look like yr talking about Palestinians and not Israeli Arabs...

I don't know much about the laws to which you are referring.

I was just making the point that there is equality under the law for all Israeli citizens according to the Declaration of Independence.

I'd go and find a link to some stuff but I'm on my phone and I can't copy and paste URLs either my phone or myself suck. I'll get on my laptop tomorrow night if you'd like some links, but my recollection is that while Israeli Jews are entitled to reclaim property, Israeli Arabs are defined as 'present absentees' or something like that and aren't allowed to reclaim property in Jerusalem.

I think that when it comes to formal declarations of equality and reality on the ground, Israel may be similar to here where equalitys there on paper but there's areas where things aren't so equal.

YOUR problem is that you want to not only forget the terrorism but to reward it. Never gonna happen.

Arab Israeli citizens have what would defined in other countries as a partial citizenship, with no access to equal rights. For example 93% of Israeli lands are off-limits to Arab Israelis, and earmarked for Jews only:

Israel's Two-Tiered Citizenship Law Bars Non-Jews From 93 Percent of Its Lands
Source: Washington Report on Middle-east affairs, Jan 1990
http://www.wrmea.org/1990-january/israel-s-two-tiered-citizenship-law-bars-non-jews-from-93-percent-of-its-lands.html

Off the Map: Land and Housing Rights Violations in Israel’s Unrecognized Bedouin Villages, IV. Discrimination in Land Allocation and Access
Source: Human Rights Watch, 2008
https://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/iopt0308/4.htm#_Toc193705071

Types of land in Israel
Source: Buy Property in israel
http://www.buypropertyinisrael.com/article/types-of-land-in-israel

State land
Source: Bimkom
http://bimkom.org/eng/state-land/

Israel Lands - Privatization or National Ownership?
Source: Jewish Virtual library
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/land.html

Israeli land and property laws
Source: Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_land_and_property_laws

Arguing that Arab Israelis have equal rights is futile.

First of all, if you think that BDS is almost exclusively about the settlements, then you are simply ignorant about BDS. You can start learning about it here. https://bdsmovement.net/call

That is the website of the Palestinian civil society movement that started BDS. These are the people who have the right to say what BDS is about. It's their movement, not yours. Next google Omar Barghouti and read what he has to say about BDS. Hint. It is first and foremost about enforcing right of return (i.e., ending the Jewish state by flooding it with hostile Arabs).

The Occupation equals apartheid argument is BS for the same reason that arguing that the occupation of Germany was apartheid would have been BS.

Secondly, I don't know of any instance where the self-appointed BDS movement has actually caused any forms of actual BDS of Israel to happen. If all the attempts to stop BDS was about Israel, why are they only targeting companies divesting from the settlements?

To illustrate my point, here's a list of companies targeted by recent Illinois legislation (http://www.illinois.gov/sites/iipb/Pages/ProhibitedInvestmentList.aspx), with a description of their transgressions. Please note that none of the companies on the list has actually divested from Israel:


Source: http://forward.com/news/338058/did-illinois-bungle-first-in-nation-anti-bds-blacklist/

I don't get it.

BDS was created by an organization. That was the website I gave you. Since the Palestinians created BDS (that organization in particular), they have the right to speak authoritatively about it. They get to define it. Give them the respect to understand that you are joining their movement, and they are the ones who's opinion counts.

Your chart is inconclusive at best, since at least some of those companies seem to be divesting from Israel proper. More to the point, the entire BDS movement is about more than the settlements or the Occupation. It isn't even about directly pressuring Israel. It's about radicalizing people in the West against Israel; recruiting them into the war against Israel's existence on the pretense of opposing the Occupation.

the "real" BDS. If BDS was what you claim, then legislation against BDS should (logically, at least) target what you claim is the "real" BDS and not something else. The list of BDS'ers only include companies that have divested from the illegal settlements or the occupation - check them out if you don't believe me. The legislation as I understand it, supports my argument; BDS is a tool, BDS is all about the settlements, the self appointed "leaders" of BDS have nothing to do with actual acts of BDS, and all attempts to counter BDS are only about protecting the illegal settlements.

Your conjecture that people who are concerned with Israel's treatment of Palestinians are actually recruited in a war against Irael's existence doesn't follow from the available evidence. It's more likely that Israel's treatment of Palestinians is the actual problem and that criticism of Israel will end if Israel ends treating Palestinians like they do.

It is currently led today by Barghouti and Ali Abunimah. To deny this is absurd. It's their movement and all participants in BDS know this for a fact.

They're very clear about being for 1-state, full right of return, no more Jewish state.

Both Barghouti and Abunimah support Hamas (same Hamas calling for genocide of Jews).

That's BDS.

Own it.

....for latest Black Lives Matter:

http://mondoweiss.net/2016/07/modern-lynchings-international/

Since American police receive some anti-terror training in Israel, then the thinking goes that Jews are to blame for Castille and Sterling. Apparently anyone killed by Karate or Tae Kwon Do can blame the Japanese and Koreans if they hate Asians enough.



It's not that the boycott is immoral, BDS is arguably the ugliest most toxic rightwing western Jew hating movement today.

Not sure why this thread was resurrected, but I'm one of the very few in this thread still here at DU, and let me tell you, there's nothing the slightest bit immoral about trying to damage the economy of a belligerent country invading and occupying another people, whether it's Israel and Palestine, or Russia and Ukraine.

Anyway, that 2016 article in the OP did not age well at all. If I did a drinking party where we had a shot every time the 'author' used the word 'immoral', we'd all be totally wasted...

It happens now and then ......probably the ghost of Shira or of King David

Great to see a friendly face in this empty wasteland of what used to be an I/P forum full of Americans arguing why it's totally fine for an much more powerful occupying country to label the entire occupied population as terrorists and defend human rights abuses against them. Guess most of them have moved on to being outraged about Russia labelling Ukraine as terrorists and pushing their version of Hasbara to justify atrocities against innocent civilians....

Hope all is well and you've managed to avoid the Rona