Skip to main content

View Diary: Israeli apartheid ? (93 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  To save some time and various apologists (6+ / 0-)

    for the current Israeli government, I have a few sites here that will cover most of the arguments they will make.  This is in the interest of parsimony in the comments section.
    However, I did run across this today, which while a bit off thread, is worth a read: http://marksteelinfo.com/...

    Now on to the reasons why Israel is not an apartheid state: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...
    (BTW, please note some of the defenses are based on parsing various terminology or misrepresentation of the situation on the ground in Israel and the OT)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/...
    http://www.timesofisrael.com/...
    http://www.factsandlogic.org/...
    http://www.latimes.com/...
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/...
    http://www.bloombergview.com/...
    http://www.jewishpress.com/...

    Now some of the defenses present problems as to their view of the current situation or their view of the history of the problem but I think the articles above more or less present all of the possible arguments against Israel being an apartheid state.  I would only point out that most of the authors have a binary view of the world so everything is either black or white.  Either a country is apartheid or it is not, with no shades or gradations of gray.  Personally I think the world is much too complicated to be explained by that world view  

    •  I'm sticking with "Absent massive evidence to (11+ / 0-)

      indicate dishonesty, I'm going to trust black South Africans when they tell me they've witnessed Apartheid".

      I mean, I'm not one to ever place special pleading above clear evidence - but it would take a lot to outweigh that personal authority.

      I have found myself repeatedly confronting very affluent American whites who keep telling me they know more about what Apartheid is than Desmond Tutu.

      These people often claim to be "liberals".  It's disturbing, at best.

      The UN should give Iraq a restraining order against the US.

      by JesseCW on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 07:13:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  However the apologists also have their (7+ / 0-)

        witnesses lined up to say Israel is not apartheid
        http://unitedwithisrael.org/...
        (note some of these sites I am now accessing are advocacy sites; please do not be upset with me as I am not agreeing with the sites but am trying to provide examples of what I am saying.  I am doing this after being called out a couple of times over statements I have made in the past which I was accused of fabricating despite citations to prove my accuracy)

      •  I am impressed that Hendrik Verwoerd (6+ / 0-)

        is on the list of those saying that of course Israel is an Apartheid state, and that he said it proudly while building up Apartheid in South Africa.

        In 1961, the South African prime minister, and the architect of South Africa's apartheid policies, Hendrik Verwoerd, dismissed an Israeli vote against South African apartheid at the United Nations, saying, "Israel is not consistent in its new anti-apartheid attitude ... they took Israel away from the Arabs after the Arabs lived there for a thousand years. In that, I agree with them. Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state."
        Quoted in the Wikipedia article cited in the comment above, from The Empire's New Walls: Sovereignty, Neo-liberalism, and the Production of Space in Post-apartheid South Africa and Post-Oslo Palestine/Israel. Andrew James Clarno. 2009. p. 66–67.

        Israel and the apartheid analogy

        I am inclined to take him at his word, as the world's foremost expert on the subject at the time.

        Israel was for a long time South Africa's staunchest ally, in spite of such earlier votes. See the Wikipedia article Israel–South Africa relations for the narrative plus references.

        Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

        by Mokurai on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 10:09:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not actually good evidence (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          thanatokephaloides

          You can certainly make an argument about Israel being an apartheid state, but anything in 1961 is a bad example.  Israel did have significant restrictions on Arab citizens (de jure, not only de facto) until 1965.  So the situation he was describing is not the situation that exists today, even solely within the pre-1967 border.

          •  So the fact that it has gotten worse, (0+ / 0-)

            both in Israel and particularly in the occupied territories, counts for nothing with you?

            Feh.

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 08:05:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

              Except that things are far, far better in Israel itself than they were pre-1965.  Arabs in Israel 1948-1965 did not have free rights of travel, they did not have the rights of employment that they have now, etc.  They did have the right to vote (which in some ways put them ahead of African Americans in the US at the time), but that's about it.  Are things worse in the West Bank now?  Yes.  Should there be accountability for that?  Yes.  Could you even call what goes on in the West Bank apartheid, which was the diarist's point?  Yes (and as the diarist noted, the real issue here is that it doesn't seem like there's any sort of proximate remedy).  Is an Israeli Arab citizen, living inside of the Green Line, far more equal today (both de jure and de facto) than they were in 1961?  Yes.  So it's poor logic to use that particular quotation, because it's not directly related to the situation at hand.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site