Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

Not sure what you mean by this. There's not a current, similar situation in the US where the average US citizen feels like they were recently displaced/oppressed/etc by occupiers. That's been the situation in the past with Native Americans, slave populations, the American revolution, etc. I suspect the numbers met that threshold then.

References, because of course nobody believes it.

>Currently, in Israel “proper” (within the Green Line), only 7 percent of the land is owned privately by individuals (3 percent Jews and 4 percent Arabs). According to the Israeli NGO Regavim, the rest is owned by the Jewish state (80 percent) and the Jewish National Fund (13 percent)

https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/opinion/marty_kaplan/12...

> But not to the core values of middle eastern Arab countries

Source, dearly lacking. Though I'm uncertain how you would support this claim. I tried digging up some examples, but the best I found was a list of countries [0] supporting 'right to return' laws with accelerated naturalization if you are of the 'favored' ethnicity. I don't see any arab or middle eastern countries on this list. I sincerely would appreciate any supporting articles you have towards this claim.

I agree liberal values must be defended. I just don't believe illiberal methods such as those described in the OP are effective methods of doing so. I think the world is growing more concerned with things like LGBT and women's rights in large part because of the freedom of exchange of information, ideas, and experiences. These are accelerated by both the internet and multicultural cities and nations which aren't possible with ethnicity-based immigration laws.

You're right I should not have alluded to the Fourteen Words, I could have picked a better example. The similarities in attitude frighten me, however. Elevating the safety and prosperity of ethnic group A to the detriment of group B is not promoting or maintaining a liberal way of life, despite what we might want to call it.

> The enmity is baked into the Koran and therefore approximately as old as Islam.

I won't rehash my previous response to this idea, but leave a hopefully unbiased wiki link [1] on the subject with just one small anecdote. The holiday of purim is an entire commemoration of the 'elimination' of a certain peoples. Does this mean a certain enmity is baked into the Torah towards Amalekites? Do you think this history actually gives you a negative bias towards the present day descendants of Hamman?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return#Countries_with...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Islam#The_Qura...

> Under apartheid, rights were infringed based on race.

This is a good point. Israel totally doesn't deny entry, immigration, work visa status, citizenship, and even recognition as Jewish to black Jews:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Jews_in_Israel#Absor...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Hebrew_Israelites_in_I...

Thanks, but those figures weren't what I was asking about -- I do believe in their accuracy, and used a similar breakdown when writing my comment. I meant regarding the following:

> [Arab Israeli citizens owning private land] apply similar restriction on any Jewish family trying to settle in a predominantly Arab town or village. A similar restriction doesn't apply to predominantly Jewish towns, only to small community villages.

I'm not sure, because you clearly make a distinction between towns and small community villages, so I could be wrong, but it sounds like even there you are describing the (probably rampant) petty discrimination by individuals on 4% of the land. My default is also to assume there are comparable levels of petty discrimination on the other 3% of private land, unless you have some reference to support your comments about restrictions only applying in the other direction.

To repeat another point though, I am highlighting the rigidly enforced discrimination on at least 13% of the land, and think this is far more significant than haphazard petty discrimination on either side of the 4% and 3% private land divide, where creating or buttressing homogenous communities is far harder without state support (though one side does have that). Never mind that, like I said I don't have time to research it now, but I think a substantial portion of that 80% of state land has similar restrictions in place against non-Jewish nationals.

As I said:

> Of course there will be petty discrimination, perhaps even rooted in each side's belief that each property transaction is really a territorial battle. The actions of consequence are those of the state and those backed by the state apparatus.

To make clear the reasons for this:

- they cover a far greater proportion of the land

- they are far more rigidly enforced

- their power to engineer demography is far greater, as the instruments at their disposal are far more powerful (punitive travel/work restrictions, evictions, municipal infrastructure support/denial, military support/harassment, etc.)