[Qem]

> would propose a way to move forward for Israel would be a one-state solution: to recognize Palestinians as equal people with human rights, give them citizenship in a democratic rule, and allow them to return to their land. All of this without any military occupations.

I second this. South Africa managed to end apartheid without the need to split in a white-people country and a black-people country. The same can be done in Israel too.

[shiroiuma]

>South Africa managed to end apartheid without the need to split in a white-people country and a black-people country. The same can be done in Israel too.

And decades later, South Africa is probably one of the most dangerous countries to live in, where people install flamethrowers on their cars because violent carjackings are so common and people who have any kind of money live in gated compounds with heavy security. South Africa doesn't look too much like a success story to me, and certainly doesn't look like it's completely eliminated a form of apartheid, it's just replaced apartheid enforced by the national government with an apartheid at the local levels.

[niel]

South Africa's inequality and resultant crime can't be blamed on a one-state solution. The peaceful transition from Apartheid to an inclusive democracy absolutely was a success story in terms of overall wellbeing.

The remaining inequality (especially along racial lines), government corruption, and violent crime are terrible problems, yes, but pale in comparison to the dehumanising codified violence of Apartheid.

Are you seriously proposing that a two-state solution would have served the people of South Africa as a whole better in the long run? I think the resultant inequality would have been far worse. Do you have another proposal?

(Edit to point out that I'm not implying that what worked for South Africa can or can't work for Israel. This comment is about South Africa.)

(As an aside) I know this community prefers not to focus on weak arguments and avoid flame wars (no pun intended), but I have to point out blatant fear mongering:

> where people install flamethrowers on their cars because violent carjackings are so common

I wouldn't repeat this as fact. The device referenced was a short-lived gimmick from 1998, four years after South Africa's first democratic election. It is in no way a reflection of reality.

Yes, carjackings are a problem in South Africa, but repeating the flamethrower story reads like FUD.

[shiroiuma]

>Are you seriously proposing that a two-state solution would have served the people of South Africa as a whole better in the long run?

I'm not proposing anything; I'm just pointing out that South Africa doesn't look like some kind of success story to me, but maybe to locals it is if it's genuinely better than what came before.

[niel]

Fair enough. I can imagine how South Africa looks from the outside, but our experience does not match all the doom and gloom. I'd encourage anyone to visit - there is absolutely no risk of getting fried by someone's car flamethrower, at least.

I understand you meant no harm.