Whiteness is an exclusionary concept used to create an ‘ingroup’ and ‘outgroup’. Hasan Piker gives a great breakdown of it here.

Historically, it comes from a justification of chattel slavery. Painting ‘whiteness’ as purity and superior and ‘blackness’ as inferior and subservient. Leeja Miller gives a great analysis about how this has influenced Eugenics in American history (which inspired the ideology of the Nazis) which is still practiced to this day in certain circumstances.

It’s long, but Knowing Better gives an extremely detailed history of neoslavery in American history. To understand why ‘whiteness’ is still so prevalent in America in modern day, it’s important to understand the history of systemic racism and how it persists to this day.

Edit: We can expand on this concept of Identity Politics from just America to the lens of Colonialist Race Relations through the works of Franz Fanon who explored and wrote about this in detail. While Fanon wrote about this in the 1960s, his works are just as if not more relevant today. Adi Callai does a fantastic analysis of Fanon’s works about Identity Politics, how to overcome it, and the realities of Race Abolition. If you’re interested in how to overcome and move past the identity politics of Whiteness and Blackness, check out Adi Callai’s video here.

Zionism is antithetical to peace. Palestinians have been advocating for peace for generations. Whatever you think doesn’t change that reality.

The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.

• How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

• ‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

• One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

You’re the one justifying the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, I’m the one advocating for equal rights. I don’t care about whatever mental gymnastics you use to justify it, ethnic cleansing is never acceptable nor justifiable. I’m interested and an advocate for actual solutions to the present day situation, you clearly aren’t.

Equal rights and reparations for native Americans? Give me a break, how is that in any way acceptable after slaughtering them to take an entire continent?

It’s not. It’s the bare minimum

If that’s all that’s needed, then maybe Israel should just eject all Palestinians entirely into Egypt, Jordan, etc, then send them a gift basket for a housewarming in their new location

No, they could just have a One-State Solution with equal rights. Nothing justifies ethnic cleansing.

Zionism is a settler colonialism project that was able to really start with the support of British Imperialism. Zionism as a political movement started with Theodore Herzl in the 1880s as a ‘modern’ way to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ of Europe. Western Nations supported this instead of instituting legal protections and refuge for Jewish people fleeing persecution.

Adi Callai, an Israeli, does a great analysis of how Antisemitism has been weaponized by Zionism during its history.

Since at least the 1860’s, Europe was increasingly antisemitic and hostile to Jewish people. Zionism was explicitly a Setter Colonialist movement and the native Palestinians were not considered People but Savages by the Europeans. While Zionist Colonization began before it, the Balfor Declaration is when Britain gave it’s backing of the movement in order to ‘solve’ the ‘Jewish Question’ while also creating a Colony in the newly conquered Middle East after WWI in order to exhibit military force in the region and extract natural resources.

That’s when Zionist immigration started to pick up, out of necessity for most as Europe became more hostile and antisemitic. That continued into and during WWII, European countries and even the US refused to expand immigration quotas for Jewish people seeking asylum. The idea that the creation of Israel is a reparation for Jewish people is an after-the-fact justification. While most Jewish immigrants had no choice and just wanted a place to live in peace, it was the Zionist Leadership that developed and implemented the forced transfer, ethnic cleansing, of the native population, Palestinians. Without any Occupation, Apartheid, and ethnic cleansing, there would not be any Palestinian resistance to it.

Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be ‘Transferred’ to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.

Over 12000 Palestinians fought alongside Jewish forces against Nazi Germany. Nor would ethnic cleansing be justified if that wasn’t the case.

I support equal rights and reparations for Native Americans in America, which they still don’t currently have. So what’s your point. I’m advocating for equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians too.

After the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of Palestinian cities

• Page 8, The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948

There is the Saif al-Islam Gaddafi Isratin proposal:

The Gaddafi Isratin proposal intended to permanently resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through a secular, federalist, republican one-state solution, which was first articulated by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, at the Chatham House in London and later adopted by Muammar Gaddafi himself.

Similar to the Binational State Solution advocated by the Palestinian leadership and some others prior to the Nakba.

This ongoing Settler Colonialism annexing the West Bank continues to make a Two State Solution less possible, it has already divided the West Bank into hundreds of isolated enclaves. This Apartheid State needs to end as a binational state for all Palestinians and Israelis.

Here are resources by Historians about a One-State Solution. In many ways, it’s already a One-State, an Apartheid State, this change would be the emancipation of Palestinians to bring forth a One-State with equal rights.

The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.

• Avi Shlaim

How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

We certainly are

That’s a pretty good summary. I will add that the partition plan was deliberate tactic by Ben-Gurion to set a precedent for the Ethnic Cleansing needed to create the Settler Colonialist Ethnostate within Palestine. The alternative presented by Palestinian Representatives was a Unitary State for both Israelis and Palestinians.

I feel like you have to understand the circumstances of those affected most by this genocide to understand. It’s easy to be logical and vote Harris as she is the least worse option, but that’s harder to do when directly affected. I consider the blame to be entirely on the Democratic Administration and Harris’ Campaign Strategy. They have had every opportunity to change course, and them deciding not to may very well cost them the election. I will not blame anti-genocide voters, especially those who are directly affected and have lost loved ones.

I’m still voting for Harris, on the basis that change from public pressure is far more unlikely under Trump.

The rhetoric coming out of the White House, when it has been focused on peace or restraint, rather than continuous war, has been undercut at every turn by its actions. The constant supply of weapons — $17.9 billion of bullets, bombs, shells, and other military aid in the past year — has allowed Israel to keep waging its war on Gaza, and in recent weeks, expand that war to Lebanon and threaten to escalate its conflict with Iran. Despite documentation of U.S. weapons being used in probable war crimes, and credible allegations that Israel is committing genocide in its war on Gaza, the bombs have continued to flow.

https://theintercept.com/2024/10/09/white-house-oct-7-israel-war-gaza/

Here you can track the rhetoric and actions of the Biden Administration month by month. The US has been supplying the weapons used for Israel’s genocide unconditionally for a year. Against international law, against domestic law, against the will of the majority of the population, and all with US taxpayer money. This is pro-genocide foreign policy.

Harris, instead of breaking from Biden on this issue, has not deviated. She has repeatedly ignored the voices of Palestinian Americans, Arab Americans, and Muslim Americans on this issue. These people are directly affected, they have friends and family in Palestine and Lebanon that have been killed by Israel. She has not only taken their votes for granted, but has offered no concessions and ignored their voices. People are angry at Biden and Harris for this. They desperately want change, but they don’t see that from the Democratic administration.

Despite Trump’s horrendous track record, he has gained in their support solely because of how Harris has campaigned. It’s not logical, but it’s hard to be when directly affected by the actions of the current administration and no prospect for change. Advocating them to vote for the ‘lesser evil’ doesn’t work when the ‘lesser evil’ is directly responsible for the deaths of their loved ones. Trump successfully framed himself as a Dove and Hillary as a warmonger in 2016. He’s using that same tactic now. It would be a completely unsuccessful framing if Harris pivoted to Arms Embargo or Conditional Aid, but that has not happened.

Breaking from Biden would be a major boost in voter output.

• Split Ticket (July 2024)

• New Poll Suggests Gaza Ceasefire and Arms Embargo Would Help Dems with Swing State Voters (Full YouGov Report) (May 2024)

• Data For Progress Poll (May 2024)

• American Attitudes: Shifting Realities After the Unfolding Genocide in Gaza (Nov 2024)

• https://instituteforglobalaffairs.org/2024/09/vox-populi-battlegrounds/#full-report (Nov 2024)

Did the Jewish people in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? (1) (2) (3)

People have a right to resist occupation and fight colonialism

Israel does magnitudes more terrorism. Do you consider all the social workers in Israel in the same light?

Equating a health care worker within Hezbollah to a ‘good cop’ within the Police Department doesn’t make much sense. Nor does it use any materialist analysis of the situation to understand the context of their existence.

Hezbollah only exists because of Israel’s Settler Colonialism, deliberate targeting of civilians (Dahiya Doctrine), and Ethnic Cleansing. There is plenty about them I don’t agree with but that doesn’t change the fact that they are a resistance movement.

Removed by mod

Things are not that simple. Not all of Hezbollah are militants, there are many social workers and politicians

Hezbollah organizes an extensive social development program and runs hospitals, news services, educational facilities, and encouragement of Nikah mut‘ah. Some of its established institutions are: Emdad committee for Islamic Charity, Hezbollah Central Press Office, Al Jarha Association, and Jihad Al Binaa Developmental Association. Jihad Al Binna’s Reconstruction Campaign is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructure development projects in Lebanon. Hezbollah has set up a Martyr’s Institute (Al-Shahid Social Association), which guarantees to provide living and education expenses for the families of fighters who die in battle.

Hezbollah holds 14 of the 128 seats in the Parliament of Lebanon and is a member of the Resistance and Development Bloc. According to Daniel L. Byman, it is “the most powerful single political movement in Lebanon.” Hezbollah, along with the Amal Movement, represents most of Lebanese Shi’a.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

Most political parties aren’t born out of resistance to Israeli Settler Colonialism

If you have data that shows negative effects of immigration I will genuinely look into it. But yeah, I find it important to debunk right wing talking points of immigration, they are based on hysteria not fact. I don’t know what exactly you’re talking about when you say mass migration. I’m advocating to completely legalize migration and give everyone an avenue for citizenship.

Globalist? Ok, that’s some conspiracy theory nonsense.

Do you mean internationalism? Because that’s completely different

Supporters of internationalism are known as internationalists and generally believe that humans should unite across national, political, cultural, racial, or class boundaries to advance their common interests, or that governments should cooperate because their mutual long-term interests are of greater importance than their short-term disputes.

The pathogens created by hundreds of years of isolation between the new and old world, due to the disproportionate access to animal husbandry, is both completely unrelated to modern immigration, and does not at all change the fact that Dehumanization and Settler Colonialism nearly eradicated native American people and erased their culture. So why bring it up? How can you consider genocide and settler Colonialism a ‘sprinkle’

• Erasing Indigenous History, Then and Now

• The Native American Boarding School System

What part of treating everyone as equals, including people immigrating, is ‘infantilizing’ to you? Immigrants, across the board, are responsible for less crime per capita. That is a fact.

If you’re worried about jihadist terrorism in Europe, you should look at the EUs findings. The cause is from online radicalization, not immigration.

• How to stop terrorism: EU measures explained

The causes and prevention of radicalization is important to consider, such as material conditions and marginalization. But attributing the actions of those individuals who do jihadist terrorism to all Muslims or Immigrants or their culture makes no sense. They are the vast minority and in no way represent Muslims or Immigrants as a whole. Limiting or restricting immigration would not prevent that kind of radicalization. Education, preventing marginalization, and promoting awareness are the ways to address that root cause of radicalization.

• Radicalisation in the EU: what is it? How can it be prevented?

The economic benefits of immigration also applies to European countries, despite the racist sentiments many Europeans have towards immigrants. Additionally, the West’s destabilization of the Global South, from war and climate change, has caused the increase in people seeking asylum and immigration.

The crackdowns on migrants and the deliberate two-tier immigration system is certainly a problem, and is deliberate in order to coerce illegal immigrants into very low paying jobs with no workers rights under the threat of deportation.

Immigration was not the cause of the genocide of the Native Americans, that was due to Settler Colonialism and Dehumanization. That is not like today. Immigrants are not settler colonialist like the early Americans. Additionally, it is the US citizens who are dehumanizing Immigrants, not the other way around. Immigrants are a positive, the only negative is the reactionary violence by racist far-right domestic terrorists.

From an economical standpoint, immigrants bring in more taxes and labor, which can go towards infrastructure and social infrastructure like education and housing

America is a nation of immigrants so I don’t really understand this argument. Cultures don’t really integrate that way, plus assimilation is a generational thing.

A 2018 study in the American Sociological Review found that within racial groups, most immigrants to the United States had fully assimilated within a span of 20 years. Immigrants arriving in the United States after 1994 assimilate more rapidly than immigrants who arrived in previous periods.

Measuring assimilation can be difficult due to “ethnic attrition”, which refers to when descendants of migrants cease to self-identify with the nationality or ethnicity of their ancestors. This means that successful cases of assimilation will be underestimated. Research shows that ethnic attrition is sizable in Hispanic and Asian immigrant groups in the United States.

By taking ethnic attrition into account, the assimilation rate of Hispanics in the United States improves significantly. A 2016 paper challenges the view that cultural differences are necessarily an obstacle to long-run economic performance of migrants. It finds that “first generation migrants seem to be less likely to success the more culturally distant they are, but this effect vanishes as time spent in the US increases”. A 2020 study found that recent immigrants to the United States assimilated at a similar pace as historical immigrants.

• Wiki