Israel/Palestine
In reply to the discussion: Cancelled Israel Lorde gig sparks anti-boycott lawsuit [View all]aranthus
(3,386 posts)It never was. Arab rejectionism is not based on anger, and never was. It's based on chauvinism and antisemitism. Granted there is benefit in not mistreating people (which is not justified in any case), but holding the Palestinians morally accountable isn't about wanting them to get over their anger. It's about expecting them to do the right thing and to accept the consequences of their actions.
Ken: "OH, and no, the Palestinians weren't continually rejecting Israel."
That's so obviously false even you must realize it.
Ken: "Arafat made offer after offer after offer to negotiate."
Even if that were not a misrepresentation of history, so what? Offering to negotiate with Israel is not nearly the same thing as accepting the right to exist of a Jewish state. That the Palestinians still don't accept, and it's the core issue driving the conflict.
Ken: "And sometimes, the Israeli side had the most pointless, trivial grounds for refusing to negotiate imaginable...for example, what DIFFERENCE did it make if the PLO recognized Israel as soon as talks began(which was what Arafat usually proposed) rather than recognizing it BEFORE negotiating? It was recognition either way, and it meant the same thing either way."
Several reasons. First, because Israel's right to exist isn't negotiable. It's a right that the Palestinians need to accept before there can be negotiations to resolve those other issues. Otherwise, it looks like the Arabs aren't really accepting Israel's existence as a right. Second, since it's the major issue, if the Arabs won't give on that, then there isn't much point in talking about anything else.
Ken: "And there were also the decades when the Israeli side refused to admit that Palestinian national identity was a thing or that Palestinians themselves had any real roots in the lands, insulting these people by pretending that they basically all came in on the night bus from Cairo in late 1946 or something just to be nasty, as well as pretending that their issues with the Israeli state were based on prejudice against Jews when it was clear that, while there were always some Palestinian anti-Semites, the anger Palestinians expressed was not mainly bigotry it was the anger any oppressed people would naturally people towards anyone who oppressed it."
The Israelis de jure accepted the right of a Palestinian state when they accepted the Partition Resolution. They don't have to do it again because that's already a done deal even though the Arabs rejected Partition.
The bottom line is that you continually blame the Israelis, while asserting that Palestinian actions are merely "mistakes." You may do in different ways, but you are dehumanizing both sides.