Consider the following word replacements. [Ukraine/Israel] is established as an ethnic state after the end of the [Soviet/British] regime. [Ukraine/Israel] passes laws to protect its language and national identity in the face of its neighboring [Russia/Arab states] [Ukraine/Israel] is persecuting its [Russian/Arab] minorities by enacting discriminatory laws. [Ukraine/Israel] does not recognize [DNR/Palestinian] state…
Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
441–450 of 735 posts
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
The restriction applies to everybody, not just Israeli Arabs. However it is true that Israeli Arabs are the ones most affected by it.
Laws that make it illegal to sleep under bridges apply to everybody, not just the homeless. Does that mean a law against sleeping under bridges is not targeting the homeless?
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#443Look I always encourage people to read the Israeli constitution. Jewish state. Fact. Not multicultural, not secular. Jewish. That was the founders design.
What’s your point?
“Ben-Gurion essentially said in effect to his nation: ‘In this world we can only have two out of three of our objectives. We are being offered a chance for a Jewish state and a democratic state, but in only part of the land of Israel. We could hold out for all the land of Israel, but if we did that we might lose everything. If we have to compromise on our objectives, let it be on obtaining all the land of Israel. We will settle now for half a loaf, and dream about the rest later.’”
“Then came June 1967. Israel, in the course of the Six-Day War, occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip, extending, in the process, Jewish control over virtually all the historical land of Israel originally sought by Zionism. From that moment on, Israelis again faced the monumental question: What kind of nation do we want to be? Once again, it could only have two out of three of its objectives. One choice was to keep all the land of Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to remain a Jewish state, but this could be done only by curtailing Israeli democracy. The only way Israel could permanently control the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be by physically suppressing them and ensuring that they were never given political rights.”
From Beirut to Jerusalem, Thomas L. Friedman
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#444Most comments here are attacking the decision, or just quoting the decision, and following it up by a "wtf". Just being shocked is not an argument. Jews are or have been persecuted in all middle eastern countries. What would happen if they were a minority in a democratic state in the Middle East? Why would it be different than in the other democracies in the Middle East? Laws like these lower the probability of Jews…
> Jews are or have been persecuted in all middle eastern countries. Jews have been prosecuted on many parts of the world and on different timelines of history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews They have also found refugee in Muslim community from Christian prosecution multiple times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_under_Musl... > Laws like these lower the probability of Jews becomi…
Nevertheless persecution seems more likely now in the Middle East than in in non middle eastern countries. In any case, the fact that they have been persecuted by everyone wouldn't be an argument against them being less worried, on the contrary, they should be terrified then.
> It doesn't. The children still remain Isreali citizens. Which means this is an inconvenience to the spouse and a quite racist law.
Note I find this abhorrent, but inconveniencing mothers or possible future mothers does lower the probability of Jews becoming a minority. And yes, inconveniencing here is an euphemism.
> History shows that their prosecution, demographics, and geography are not that related. Jews got prosecuted because they held significant wealth in a certain societies. It's a power/wealth grab in certain cases; and finding an easy scapegoat in other cases.
You're making the case that Jews shouldn't allow impoverished migrants into their land, again, I don't see why this should diminish their concerns.
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#445This article doesn’t really provide much in the way of explanation for why this law is being enacted. Here [0] is a better article that quotes supporters and objectors to the law. It includes the (IMHO not very convincing) figures that "Between 1993 and 2003, around 130,000 Palestinians were given Israeli citizenship or residency through family unification, including children, according to court filings. The Shin Bet…
.037% terrorism sounds high to me
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#446Here's an interesting exercise: 1. Substitute "Israel's Knesset" for ANY other legislative body anywhere. 2. Substitute "Palestinian" for ANY other nationality, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, or other adjective describing a group to which YOU belong. 3. See if you like how it feels: "[Legislative body] passes law barring spouses who are [like you] from becoming citizens."
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
Israel seems to care quite a bit about its image in the west, which is why every time news such as this comes out you see the same arguments trotted out over and over about how this is what’s necessary. Is western oriented propaganda and it’s important that it is seen for what it is. Now, as to your point about persecution. I do care about the safety and well-being of all involved in this. But your argument boils dow…
> there is something inherent in middle eastern culture writ large that makes people utterly incapable of living peacefully together By any means this is the case, but in the current state of affairs, given the amount of hatred in the region, if Israel was a region of Palestine with no sovereignty, I don't think it would fare well for the Jews. How do I know this? This is publicly routinely announced by the Palestini…
I’m not asserting there is any clean path forward, but at the same time the hypothetical you are offering wouldn’t happen overnight either.
The question is whether we are able to justify actions as they are now. Will Israel work towards reconciliation and restitution or will it continue with its current policy of colonialism and expulsion?
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
The hypothetical doesn’t ban marrying Russian speakers or citizens. It doesn’t ban naturalisation based on marriage for a Russian speaker. It bans naturalisation based on marriage for Russian citizens. While at war that seems fine.
Thank you, this is my point. The Israeli right wing views the Palestinian state as an extension of Jordan and other Arab states surrounding Israel, and while they are not currently shooting at each other, they are most definitely not at peace with them.
Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. The premise of a state which is 'for' a specific group inherently employs segregation. I say subjugation because I think there is a version of that system that maintains a Jewish ruling majority without subjugating the minority. Again, you can agree or disagree with a state that is built on segregation, but I ask that you include in your judgement the history and context of Israel's existence.
out of genuine curiosity, how would that system work? how can you prevent subjugating the Arab minority?
1. Israel should move its capital to Tel Aviv and Jerusalem should become a U.N. Mandate. No single group should have exclusive claim over what many groups consider their holiest place. 2. There remains a permanent group like the U.N. security council in the Knesset that represents the Jewish people and their interests in the state of Israel, so regardless of the makeup of the coalition government, the interest of a Jewish state/state of the Jews remain effective - this is the least undemocratic way there could be representation while maintaining representation 3. All occupied territories are either returned or annexed--if annexed, full citizenship and rights are given to those who live there
Those are just my thoughts. I'm sure greater minds would come up with greater opinions. I just firmly believe there is a way to co-exist.