I must politely reject this assessment. There have been decades and centuries of peaceful coexistence. It isn’t as though this is a persistent condition.
Prior to 1948, there were a lot of Christians and Jews living in Palestine without major conflict.
The modern ethno-religious tensions are the product of modern political events, not some mystic curse.
This doesn’t get brought up enough. The UK and US rolling up with wealthy Zionists to bully people from their ancestral lands. To give those lands to the wealthy Zionists who has largely escaped personal suffering. As consolation for their suffering they’d largely escaped. (But also as a platform to influence and manipulate the middle east) Anyone should be infuriated. Not just Palestinians.
True. It definitely has a long history. My point though – as you said – is that it’s really a persistent myth that these people are just oil and water. Their conflict is far more material than that.
No there hasn’t, wtf are you on about? First of all, there literally has never been a Palestinian state in history before the modern one which started around the same time as the modern Israeli state. So what you’re referring to doesn’t exist.
Second of all, the different religious groups have been killing each for literally thousands of years over this crappy piece of land. This is true now, during the British mandate, during the Ottoman era, during the Mamluk era, and so on. Even in the most peaceful of times, there was still rampant oppression, discrimination, riots, and atrocities. This idea that things were just peachy before is complete nonsense.
Whatever Palestine ever existed as a state of not is completely irrelevant and that talking point is used by Zionists. The fact is that Palestinians was living on there land and foreigners came and forced a state on them then ethnically cleanse them two and not they are ethnically cleansed a third time . You have right to hate religions but please do not excuse settler colonialism, creating famine and the murder of children because of it.
Let’s not also forget that the 2 world wars didn’t happen because of religion and the European colonial powers had the most bloody colonization history. You would not dare to infer that Europeans are natural savages that are always bloody like you are trying to portray all Muslims and jews
Whatever Palestine ever existed as a state of not is completely irrelevant. The fact is that Palestinians was living on there land and foreigners came and forced a state on them then ethnically cleanse them two and not they are ethnically cleansed a third time
It’s not though. The point that I was trying to make is that this region never had sovereignty until very recently with the two modern states. Prior to this, the region was always controlled by foreign empires like the British, Ottoman, Malmuk, Ayyubid, and so on. Every one of these empires came and forced a state on to the region.
But we have to contextualize what this means. Back during the days of the Ottoman Empire, there was an infamous system in place called sürgün that kept everybody the boot and the Turks were at the top. They did this by radically shifting demographics of all the regions they conquered. They would forcibly deport entire ethnic and religious groups that they viewed as threat to their rule to other regions of the empire that they felt were safer, and vice versa.
For example, the Ottoman empire famously did this with the Christians in Southeastern Europe. The Ottomans moved millions of Christians Europeans to Anatolia and the Levant, and relocated just as many muslims and Turks to southeastern Europe. This is why countries like Bulgaria, Albania, Bosnia, etc have such large muslim populations and why Turkey and the Levant region have so many people who are ethnically European. This of course includes the region of Israel/Palestine. A lot of prominent figures in the Palestinian movement were ethnically European. For example, Amin al-Husseini was ethnically Bosnian.
The Israel/Palestine region meant a lot to the empire as it was a strategic location, but also contained important islamic sites that the empire uses to derive its legitimacy as the muslim empire. To ensure this, they wanted to make sure that the region stayed firmly in islamic hands, and so they tried their best change the demographics. The Empire forcibly relocated muslims and Turks from all over empire to settle in the region, they forcibly relocated Jews to other parts of the empire like Cyprus and Anatolia, they placed restrictions to prevent Jews from migrating to key cities in the region like Jerusalem and Hebron, and they use dubious reasons to depopulate Jewish areas by forcing them to evacuate from a nearby battle for example, but then the empire would give the okay for muslims to return but not Jews. They did the same to Christians in the region, but to a lesser extent. What this means is that a lot of the inhabitants of the region were moved out and replaced by other people not from the regions via imperial policy
The point is that this region was always controlled and populated by foreigners. This idea that the region of Israel/Palestine was inhabited by Natives like North America was when the Europeans arrived is simply false. The region’s population was pretty cosmopolitan and dynamic, though not by choice. This doesn’t excuse the ethnic cleansing campaigns that happened afterwards, but I do think there’s value in maintaining a historically accurate understanding of the region rather than repeating misinformed online narratives.
You have right to hate religions but please do not excuse settler colonialism, creating famine and the murder of children because of it.
This is a very myopic and historically inaccurate view of history. While some elements of Israel’s establishment can be classified as settler colonialism, it’s not accurate to say that all of it is. For example, when Israel was established. The muslim world started committing pogroms in mass against their Jewish communities even though they had nothing to do with Israel. These people who been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years were forced to abandon everything, including their citizenship, and flee to Israel because that’s the only place that took them in. The total number of people from the exodus total around 1 million people. These people and their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Israeli population, if not an outright majority.
The term “colonialism” implies intent, but in reality these people were refugees who ended up in Israel due to circumstance. This is a stark difference from European Jews, who were also refugees, but they actually migrated to the region with the intent of settling and creating their own state.
Let’s not also forget that the 2 world wars didn’t happen because of religion and the European colonial powers had the most bloody colonization history.
This is true, but these are also different regions with different histories.
You would not dare to infer that Europeans are natural savages that are always bloody like you are trying to portray all Muslims and jews
Except I never made such claims, I merely pointed out the historically accurate fact that this region has been fought over constantly for thousands of years. A bunch of major religions claim this region to be the holy land, and so it has always been the center of different people fighting for control.
You demonstrate a good enough understanding of the history that you clearly know that you are being deceitful.
While some elements of Israel’s establishment can be classified as settler colonialism, it’s not accurate to say that all of it is.
Is there any colonised country that this doesn’t apply to? Colonisation is a core principle of Zionism. It’s so central to Zionism that it’s in the introductory paragraph on it’s Wikipedia page. Many of the early Zionist leaders said that their goals could only be achieved through the displacement of Arabs, and the migration of Jews was, and still is, strongly encouraged by Zionists.
For example, when Israel was established. The muslim world started committing pogroms in mass against their Jewish communities even though they had nothing to do with Israel.
Gosh, I wonder if that was in response to the treatment of Arabs in Palestine.
These people who been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years were forced to abandon everything, including their citizenship, and flee to Israel because that’s the only place that took them in.
And they had no problem pushing out the Arabs (who had been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years) on their way in.
The total number of people from the exodus total around 1 million people. These people and their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Israeli population, if not an outright majority.
Before they started settling in Palestine it used to be that less than 5% of the population were Jewish.
A majority of Australian colonists were sent there for committing petty crimes, such as theft. The industrial revolution left much of the working class without work, so theft in Britain rose rapidly. For the crime of trying to fees their family, over 100,000 people were forcibly transported to Australia. Their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Australian population.
At the end of the day, most zionists at that time was europeen recent immigrant that came to palestine forced a state on the people by ethenically cleaning them from the region. It was imposible to create israel without ethenic cleansing since jew only has 9% of the land and was spread out and not contiguous. There was even a suggestion to have a one state from thr begining by arabs but israel refused and wanted an etheno state on the whole land. All your bullshit is irelevant thst you just use to portray jews and muslims as savages. You are no different from a non religious version of Tuck Carlson and Nick Fuentes
I’m also not going trying to white-wash anything. War and tribalism are indeed ancient, and historical echos can certainly be found. But my point is this: the regional conflict between Jews and Muslims is most certainly not a persistent, perpetual, irrational animosity that has stubbornly raged on for millennia. It is true that it is informed by a long cultural relationship. But the violence is modern. It’s caused by political forces, and it can be ended by changing those political forces.
Prior to the Zionist movement and the Arab nationalist movement of the twentieth century, Jews and Muslims (and many other groups) cohabitated Israel-Palestine (or Trans-Jordan or whatever you want to call it). They did in fact share the land peacefully in the nineteenth century.
the regional conflict between Jews and Muslims is most certainly not a persistent, perpetual, irrational animosity that has stubbornly raged on for millennia.
Using the reductio ad absurdum fallacy is not going to change the fact that what I said is true. Religion in the Middle East is NOT like what it is in the West. In the West religion is something that is private and chosen voluntarily. It is treated as another layer to someone’s identity. That’s not how it works in the Middle East, over there religion IS your identity. You religion defines you, your people, your culture, and your history. It’s something that you can’t escape, especially since secularism is not widely accepted.
Tribalism in the middle east is not ancient thing, it’s still alive and well. I’ve seen this first hand in my home country of Iraq. Things like collective punishments, discrimination on the basis of religion, and people in power prioritizing their own religious and ethnic groups over others or specifically targeting groups they don’t like are all very common.
The point of me saying all this is to say that religion in that part of the world has a different meaning. When people say different religious groups are fighting over there, they’re not fighting for some mythical holy war like you seem to think. They’re fighting for control, power, security, and resources like anywhere else in the world, it just that religion is primary driver to rally people. What this means is that if there’s a conflict, it’s usually between groups of differing religions because religion is what people there use to divide themselves. It’s similar to how Americans viewed race in the 1950s but on steroids.
In this case, Israel/Palestine is a region that’s claimed as the holy land by three major religions. All of which want complete control over it to give their religion legitimacy, which is a lot states in the region use to legitimize their rule. The competition for this regions goes way back and it hasn’t really stopped. Before the two modern states, the Ottoman empire controlled the region, but they had to constantly shift demographics via mass displacements, forced relocations, and migratory restrictions to make sure that the muslims and Turks were on top… and even they still had to deal with a lot of rebellions. Before that, the Malmuk Sultanate and the Ayyubid Caliphate faced a lot of resistance from Jews and Christians in the region and had to carry out a lot of cultural genocide campaigns to Arabize and muslimize them. Before that, the Kingdom of Jerusalem took over the region through the bloody crusades. You get the idea.
This idea that the different religious and ethnic groups in the region were living together in peace and harmony prior to the modern Israel/Palestine conflict is nonsense. It is quite literally propaganda. That’s not historically accurate, that’s not reality. This region was definitely not peaceful in the 19th century, in fact this was when this region was at its bloodiest because that’s when the century the Ottoman Empire started carrying out it’s infamous genocides before it collapsed during WWI. I’m literally from this region (Iraq), and I can tell you that the only people who believe this in this fiction are people who have never been to this part of the world.
Yeah let’s ignore all other times in history where there was inter religion solidarity. Like when the ottoman welcomed Jewish refugees kicked out from Spain and portugal or the yemeni jews welcomed in palestine in the late 1800s and both participated in each other festivities. Or when jews was allied with the early muslims in the 7th centuries or during the Farhud pogrom where both communities protected each others.
Isaac and Ishmael. It’s been going on for thousands of years. Old, old family squabble, it is. :(
I must politely reject this assessment. There have been decades and centuries of peaceful coexistence. It isn’t as though this is a persistent condition.
Prior to 1948, there were a lot of Christians and Jews living in Palestine without major conflict.
The modern ethno-religious tensions are the product of modern political events, not some mystic curse.
This doesn’t get brought up enough. The UK and US rolling up with wealthy Zionists to bully people from their ancestral lands. To give those lands to the wealthy Zionists who has largely escaped personal suffering. As consolation for their suffering they’d largely escaped. (But also as a platform to influence and manipulate the middle east) Anyone should be infuriated. Not just Palestinians.
Yeah, a common them I come back to is cycles of mistreatment: people who were push from their homes pushed people from their homes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
So it does go back a bit further, but the United Kingdom fueled the fire.
True. It definitely has a long history. My point though – as you said – is that it’s really a persistent myth that these people are just oil and water. Their conflict is far more material than that.
It certainly isn’t intractable.
No there hasn’t, wtf are you on about? First of all, there literally has never been a Palestinian state in history before the modern one which started around the same time as the modern Israeli state. So what you’re referring to doesn’t exist.
Second of all, the different religious groups have been killing each for literally thousands of years over this crappy piece of land. This is true now, during the British mandate, during the Ottoman era, during the Mamluk era, and so on. Even in the most peaceful of times, there was still rampant oppression, discrimination, riots, and atrocities. This idea that things were just peachy before is complete nonsense.
Whatever Palestine ever existed as a state of not is completely irrelevant and that talking point is used by Zionists. The fact is that Palestinians was living on there land and foreigners came and forced a state on them then ethnically cleanse them two and not they are ethnically cleansed a third time . You have right to hate religions but please do not excuse settler colonialism, creating famine and the murder of children because of it.
Let’s not also forget that the 2 world wars didn’t happen because of religion and the European colonial powers had the most bloody colonization history. You would not dare to infer that Europeans are natural savages that are always bloody like you are trying to portray all Muslims and jews
It’s not though. The point that I was trying to make is that this region never had sovereignty until very recently with the two modern states. Prior to this, the region was always controlled by foreign empires like the British, Ottoman, Malmuk, Ayyubid, and so on. Every one of these empires came and forced a state on to the region.
But we have to contextualize what this means. Back during the days of the Ottoman Empire, there was an infamous system in place called sürgün that kept everybody the boot and the Turks were at the top. They did this by radically shifting demographics of all the regions they conquered. They would forcibly deport entire ethnic and religious groups that they viewed as threat to their rule to other regions of the empire that they felt were safer, and vice versa.
For example, the Ottoman empire famously did this with the Christians in Southeastern Europe. The Ottomans moved millions of Christians Europeans to Anatolia and the Levant, and relocated just as many muslims and Turks to southeastern Europe. This is why countries like Bulgaria, Albania, Bosnia, etc have such large muslim populations and why Turkey and the Levant region have so many people who are ethnically European. This of course includes the region of Israel/Palestine. A lot of prominent figures in the Palestinian movement were ethnically European. For example, Amin al-Husseini was ethnically Bosnian.
The Israel/Palestine region meant a lot to the empire as it was a strategic location, but also contained important islamic sites that the empire uses to derive its legitimacy as the muslim empire. To ensure this, they wanted to make sure that the region stayed firmly in islamic hands, and so they tried their best change the demographics. The Empire forcibly relocated muslims and Turks from all over empire to settle in the region, they forcibly relocated Jews to other parts of the empire like Cyprus and Anatolia, they placed restrictions to prevent Jews from migrating to key cities in the region like Jerusalem and Hebron, and they use dubious reasons to depopulate Jewish areas by forcing them to evacuate from a nearby battle for example, but then the empire would give the okay for muslims to return but not Jews. They did the same to Christians in the region, but to a lesser extent. What this means is that a lot of the inhabitants of the region were moved out and replaced by other people not from the regions via imperial policy
The point is that this region was always controlled and populated by foreigners. This idea that the region of Israel/Palestine was inhabited by Natives like North America was when the Europeans arrived is simply false. The region’s population was pretty cosmopolitan and dynamic, though not by choice. This doesn’t excuse the ethnic cleansing campaigns that happened afterwards, but I do think there’s value in maintaining a historically accurate understanding of the region rather than repeating misinformed online narratives.
This is a very myopic and historically inaccurate view of history. While some elements of Israel’s establishment can be classified as settler colonialism, it’s not accurate to say that all of it is. For example, when Israel was established. The muslim world started committing pogroms in mass against their Jewish communities even though they had nothing to do with Israel. These people who been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years were forced to abandon everything, including their citizenship, and flee to Israel because that’s the only place that took them in. The total number of people from the exodus total around 1 million people. These people and their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Israeli population, if not an outright majority.
The term “colonialism” implies intent, but in reality these people were refugees who ended up in Israel due to circumstance. This is a stark difference from European Jews, who were also refugees, but they actually migrated to the region with the intent of settling and creating their own state.
This is true, but these are also different regions with different histories.
Except I never made such claims, I merely pointed out the historically accurate fact that this region has been fought over constantly for thousands of years. A bunch of major religions claim this region to be the holy land, and so it has always been the center of different people fighting for control.
You demonstrate a good enough understanding of the history that you clearly know that you are being deceitful.
Is there any colonised country that this doesn’t apply to? Colonisation is a core principle of Zionism. It’s so central to Zionism that it’s in the introductory paragraph on it’s Wikipedia page. Many of the early Zionist leaders said that their goals could only be achieved through the displacement of Arabs, and the migration of Jews was, and still is, strongly encouraged by Zionists.
Gosh, I wonder if that was in response to the treatment of Arabs in Palestine.
And they had no problem pushing out the Arabs (who had been living in their communities for hundreds, and for some, thousands, of years) on their way in.
Before they started settling in Palestine it used to be that less than 5% of the population were Jewish.
A majority of Australian colonists were sent there for committing petty crimes, such as theft. The industrial revolution left much of the working class without work, so theft in Britain rose rapidly. For the crime of trying to fees their family, over 100,000 people were forcibly transported to Australia. Their descendants now make up a very large chunk of the Australian population.
At the end of the day, most zionists at that time was europeen recent immigrant that came to palestine forced a state on the people by ethenically cleaning them from the region. It was imposible to create israel without ethenic cleansing since jew only has 9% of the land and was spread out and not contiguous. There was even a suggestion to have a one state from thr begining by arabs but israel refused and wanted an etheno state on the whole land. All your bullshit is irelevant thst you just use to portray jews and muslims as savages. You are no different from a non religious version of Tuck Carlson and Nick Fuentes
Chill, man. I’m not here to fight.
I’m also not going trying to white-wash anything. War and tribalism are indeed ancient, and historical echos can certainly be found. But my point is this: the regional conflict between Jews and Muslims is most certainly not a persistent, perpetual, irrational animosity that has stubbornly raged on for millennia. It is true that it is informed by a long cultural relationship. But the violence is modern. It’s caused by political forces, and it can be ended by changing those political forces.
Prior to the Zionist movement and the Arab nationalist movement of the twentieth century, Jews and Muslims (and many other groups) cohabitated Israel-Palestine (or Trans-Jordan or whatever you want to call it). They did in fact share the land peacefully in the nineteenth century.
https://www.972mag.com/before-zionism-the-shared-life-of-jews-and-palestinians/
Using the reductio ad absurdum fallacy is not going to change the fact that what I said is true. Religion in the Middle East is NOT like what it is in the West. In the West religion is something that is private and chosen voluntarily. It is treated as another layer to someone’s identity. That’s not how it works in the Middle East, over there religion IS your identity. You religion defines you, your people, your culture, and your history. It’s something that you can’t escape, especially since secularism is not widely accepted.
Tribalism in the middle east is not ancient thing, it’s still alive and well. I’ve seen this first hand in my home country of Iraq. Things like collective punishments, discrimination on the basis of religion, and people in power prioritizing their own religious and ethnic groups over others or specifically targeting groups they don’t like are all very common.
The point of me saying all this is to say that religion in that part of the world has a different meaning. When people say different religious groups are fighting over there, they’re not fighting for some mythical holy war like you seem to think. They’re fighting for control, power, security, and resources like anywhere else in the world, it just that religion is primary driver to rally people. What this means is that if there’s a conflict, it’s usually between groups of differing religions because religion is what people there use to divide themselves. It’s similar to how Americans viewed race in the 1950s but on steroids.
In this case, Israel/Palestine is a region that’s claimed as the holy land by three major religions. All of which want complete control over it to give their religion legitimacy, which is a lot states in the region use to legitimize their rule. The competition for this regions goes way back and it hasn’t really stopped. Before the two modern states, the Ottoman empire controlled the region, but they had to constantly shift demographics via mass displacements, forced relocations, and migratory restrictions to make sure that the muslims and Turks were on top… and even they still had to deal with a lot of rebellions. Before that, the Malmuk Sultanate and the Ayyubid Caliphate faced a lot of resistance from Jews and Christians in the region and had to carry out a lot of cultural genocide campaigns to Arabize and muslimize them. Before that, the Kingdom of Jerusalem took over the region through the bloody crusades. You get the idea.
This idea that the different religious and ethnic groups in the region were living together in peace and harmony prior to the modern Israel/Palestine conflict is nonsense. It is quite literally propaganda. That’s not historically accurate, that’s not reality. This region was definitely not peaceful in the 19th century, in fact this was when this region was at its bloodiest because that’s when the century the Ottoman Empire started carrying out it’s infamous genocides before it collapsed during WWI. I’m literally from this region (Iraq), and I can tell you that the only people who believe this in this fiction are people who have never been to this part of the world.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.
You can deny history all you want, it’s not going to change it
what “side” were the people on the beach on?
Yeah let’s ignore all other times in history where there was inter religion solidarity. Like when the ottoman welcomed Jewish refugees kicked out from Spain and portugal or the yemeni jews welcomed in palestine in the late 1800s and both participated in each other festivities. Or when jews was allied with the early muslims in the 7th centuries or during the Farhud pogrom where both communities protected each others.
It’s been going on since ~1900. Before that they were friends, often brothers in arms.