[Qem]

> I can't vote in the United States. Does that make the United States and apartheid regime? Of course not, I'm not a US citizen.

The attempts to characterize Palestinians as foreigners to deny apartheid are appalling. By that logic, South Africa could have solved apartheid by declaring itself a whites-only country, changing constitution, so every black person could be labeled "foreigner", even if belonging to families born and living in the land for generations.

The only acceptable way to solve apartheid is by ending it, not fixing the dictionary to change the meaning of words like foreigner.

[edanm]

But that's a completely different situation! Palestinian were never citizens of Israel. For the first twenty years of Israel's existence, they were refugees militarily controlled by other countries. So they are foreigners.

You might think the founding of Israel was itself an injustice, that there was ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, etc. Those are valid views (and I think they do have some merit, though less than most people think).

But you can't say that there is no difference between Palestinians that stayed during the founding of Israel and were granted citizenship, and between the Palestinians who fled to neighboring countries that proceeded to attack Israel hoping to get all the land, and then lost the war and the land.

[Qem]

A lot of people sought refuge in neighboring countries after the Ukraine invasion, for the duration of the war. At this point a Russian victory seems likely. Can you fathom those Ukrainians being denied entry in the country after the war, because now they are foreigners? Worse, do you think it would be legitimate for them be labeled "foreigners" while even still living inside Ukraine?

[taeric]

This is complicated by the fact that every other refugee situation is handled by an organization that is explicitly rehoming them. At the absolute least, their children will be citizens of the nations they have been moved to. This is in stark contrast to the situation we are talking about, where people can literally be adopted into the refugee status.

Edit: I would also be surprised if Russia does let previous citizens back in to claim any property they had. Do we have reason to think they will?

[edanm]

That's a different situation. They are Ukrainian citizens. There were no Palestinian citizens before because there was no state there, neither Israel nor Palestine.

[Qem]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartography_of_Palestine#/me...

There was land there, they and their ancestors inhabited it for countless generations before present, so they must be considered legitimate citizens, regardless of the names it had back then or today. There was no modern countries in Americas before Europeans arrived, yet we don't call amerindians foreigners because of that.

[wahnfrieden]

States are not necessary for populations to exist or thrive. Politically homogenous states united under a defined hierarchy is a new phenomenon; and much newer than the discovery of agriculture.