|
You literally went after someone just because they’re Israeli-could be my friend, coworker, or even me. If you single someone out like that, don’t be shocked when you get called out in return. And honestly, I’m not convinced my previous comment even counts as a real ad hominem-though sure, if it makes you feel better, let’s call it that. But let's get one thing straight: calling the Arabs in Israel/Palestine "indigenous" while dismissing the Jewish people’s claim to that land is laughable. The very name "Jew" comes from Judea—this same strip of land-where Jewish history stretches back millennia. I’m not saying Arab families who lived there never had rights; of course, they deserve their own country too. But the idea that they’re the only "indigenous" group is just another cheap piece of propaganda, right up there with labeling the whole situation as "genocide" or "apartheid". People have moved in and out of Israel/Judea for centuries. Plenty of folks calling themselves Palestinian today came around the same time as the Zionists or later-just look at the family names that point to places like Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and beyond Al-Baghdadi, Al-Masri (the Egyptian), Halabi (Haleb = Allepo, Syria), Hourani (from Houran in southern Syria), Tzurani (from Tyre in southern Lebanon), Hijazi (from the Hijaz province of the Arabian peninsula), Mughrabi (from the Maghreb). Hell, Arafat was born in Egypt. My basic point is this: both sides do actually have claims. But one side made it pretty clear they weren’t interested in compromise and resorted to terror against civilians, starting way back in the ‘60s. Naturally, the other side fought back, and things escalated. As for calling Israeli society "chauvinist", give me a break. Israel had a female prime minister in the ’70s, has had women on its Supreme Court since forever, and meanwhile the U.S. is still waiting on its first female president. So, yeah-save the grandstanding about "chauvinism". It’s not as black-and-white as you’re painting it, and if you’re going to throw punches, don’t whine when you get punched back. |
>> peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonisation or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples
> Several states do not recognize indigenous ethnic minorities within their territories as being indigenous peoples, and simply refer to them as ethnic minorities. Many of these ethnic minorities are marginalized from the majority ethnic population in relative social, economic and political performance measures, and their indigenous rights are poorly protected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_on_the_Rights_of_I...
Note that Israel merely abstained from voting on the latter, rather then voting against like Canada, The US and Australia did (while 143 voted in favor).
The case here is pretty clear cut. By most measures which actually matter for the rights of indigenous people, Palestinians are indigenous to Palestine, while most Israelis are settlers, or close descendants of settlers who gained control over the lands through conquest and colonization.
It is in fact very reasonable to dismiss the (European) Jewish people’s claim to the land if we are talking about legal claims to indigenous peoples. Even though no clear definition has been widely adopted (perhaps for the better) most of the umbrella terms capture Palestinians, and hardly any captures Israelis. Denying the Palestinian claims to their indigenous lands is very much the behavior that the Decleration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples sought to stop.