I agree with you, because Israel is a settler-colonialist fascist genocidal apartheid state, and does not have the right to exist. It is indefensible. I don't think you can have a "non zionist" Israel, if that happened then it would be a totally different state.
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
-10 points (35.3% liked)
Palestine
985 readers
49 users here now
A community for everything related to Palestine and the occupation currently underway by the occupying force known as Israel.
Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism. Existence is resistance for Palestinians.
Please refer to Israel as Occupied Palestine, or occupied territories. The IDF is a fascist and ethnonationalist occupying force. Israelis are settlers. We understand however that the imperial narrative (which tries to legitimise Israel) is internalised in the imperial core and slip-ups are naturally expected.
We always take the sides of Palestine and Palestinians and are unapologetic about it. Israel is an occupying power whose "defence force"'s (note the contradiction) sole purpose for existing is to push Palestinians out so they can resettle their rightful land. If you have anything positive to say about Israel we do not care.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Off course. Israel exist to the protection of the jewish people and I can not imagine a secular Israel state not based on ethnic terms.
Israel does not exist to protect Jewish people, and that Zionist claim only contorts Judaism. Anti-Zionist Jews in Israel are regularly harassed and beat by IDF forces, and life doesn't really fare better by African Jews in Israel. There a number of politicians in Israel that actively incite Anti-African Jew Pogroms, and there are also reports of forced sterilization of African Jews.
Israel exists because the Nakba happened, there is no way around that. Tens of thousands of Palestinians were killed and hundreds of thousands more were expelled in the Nakba, and everything since 1948 is simply a continuation of that. Whether Israel identifies as a secular/ "Jewish" state is irrelevant at the end of the day. It's a settler colony on stolen land.
The West would have us believe that a Free Palestine entails killing every last Jew, but it doesn't. Jews, Arabs and Christians have lived in the region for long periods of peace, and the only obstacle to that is Zionism. There should be a one democratic Palestine, and Israelis who want to be productive members of it should stay once Palestine is liberated, but the ardent Zionists should leave. No different than South African Apartheid at it's core.
A state with equal rights for all scaring the shit out Israelis is everything you need to know about what it is.
Also it's not about being Jewish, it's about being a white supremacist. proof
In my view it depends of what you mean by defending Israel, if it means claming that the current state of affairs in that country is in any way acceptable, no it cannot be conciliated, because current Israel is a Zionist state. But if you mean the existence of a Jewish homeland then there is a much better point to be argued, the issue is where to draw the borders and how to keep'em that way
I mean, defend the 1967 borders. In my opinion is a form of legitimate de Israel state that it based in the steal of the land of Palestina.
I said that there is more of an argument to defend the existence of an Israeli state, it might be that said argument is still flawed but I am not informed enough to give a meaningful opinion about it, but at any rate arguing for the existence of a Israeli state is by far and away more reasonable than defending current behavior of Israel