|
|
| Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar (1181370) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed May 7 16:57:06 2014, in response to Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar, posted by 3-9 on Wed May 7 16:04:07 2014. That's the Jewish population of the former Jewish state whose change in demographics has put in a majority of people who have been anti-Semites for decades.?? I ask again, which countries do you think will take in those refugees? What historical proof do you have that they will? I ask again, where are these refugees coming from? Because I don't see any countries that Jews are fleeing from en masse. Why do you think it's an "off-chance"? They HAVE been oppressed in the recent past, anti-Semitism is alive and well in the present and shows no sign of dissipating in the future. Jews are hardly the only demographic to have been oppressed in the recent past— I'd rather be Jewish in America in the 50s than black. Prejudice lingers, obviously, but Jews today face a lot less risk of oppression and violence than plenty of other demographics that aren't having artificially controlled countries set aside for them. Why shouldn't they get together to do something about it? Oppressed demographics are getting together and doing something about their situation all the time, yet it's only the Jews who have demanded an artificially controlled country for their exclusive use. When you can point to the Romani State on a map or show me which chunks of North America have been set aside as nation-states in the modern sense of the term which are reserved for the exclusive use of various First Nations, then the insistence on a dedicated Jewish State will seem less odd. Six million people died just because they were Jewish, and because the countries of the world largely failed them when they tried to escape. After that, would you decide to put your fate into the hands of other countries again? At least tens of thousands of Romani were killed in the same places by the same people for the same reasons. Meanwhile, America had segregation (and de facto semi-slavery) as a matter of course, plus the racially motivated imprisonment of anybody with Japanese descent. Worldwide, women were considered servants, domestic workers, and fetus incubators. If you came out as gay, being declared mentally ill was probably the best outcome that you could expect. So basically, I wouldn't put my fate into the hands of anybody in the 1940s. Thankfully, society has moved on since then. So you're claiming we need to go through all manner of political nonsense to create and enforce a dedicated Jewish State™ because antisemitic genocide campaigns that are not currently happening might potentially happen again in spite of 70 years of gradual historical progress, and if they do then we can't trust any other countries to accept refugees because the relatively primitive people of the 1940s didn't. No, they ARE subject to majority vote, at least indirectly. If by some horrid chance enough religious conservative lawmakers make it into the executive and legislative branches, there is a very real chance they can amend the Constitution to declare a state religion. That's the basis of how conservative pundits successfully spread FUD about the "Islamization of America" - it contains a (tiny) grain of truth which makes it look plausible. You're completely missing the point. I didn't say that the Christianists couldn't physically enforce their preferred brand of theocracy, I said that it would be wrong (and you seem to agree). I pointed this out to draw a parallel between a Christian majority electing a Christian theocracy that infringes on the rights of non-Christians and a Jewish majority electing a Jewish theocracy that infringes on the rights of non-Jews (which you seem to support). That's your homework assignment. I suggest you start with money and tack on political connections. So then, you admit that Israel is a product of money and connections - effectively, a "might makes right" approach - and not because there is any genuine legal or moral need for a dedicated Jewish State™ after all? |
|
|
|