The problem is that there is more to the motion than its title, which is the same for most things, really. The problems with this motion include the insistence on a one state solution (against the expressed wishes of the Palestinian people) and a threat of wholesale proscription of Jewish communities.
I say this as a Green member - this motion overshadows really decent policy passed at this conference including two BDS motions. This is a highly controversial motion within the party and it was only carried over the line by entryists. 4/5 of our MPs opposed it as well as the leader and one of the deputy leaders.
If you want to understand things, you have to read past the headline. It’s the only way.
How do you imagine a two state solution working when one of those states is an ethnosupremacist theocracy? Are you just trying to delay any action being taken until every Palestinian has been cleansed, or do you believe an equal, multicultural Palestinian state is somehow discriminatory against Jews?
It’s simply not up to us as British people to decide whether Palestinians or indeed Israelis, should organise themselves this way or that way. It is clearly within our remit to forcefully denounce violence and discrimination and systems of oppression, but what the affected people choose to do is not for us to tell them.
It is for us to produce the economic and political pressure for Israel to submit to making necessary changes in the interest of peace and equality. The exact nature of those changes is no more our business than it was to preside over this region 80 years ago. If the Palestinian people hold a legitimate referendum and decide to pursue a single state, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. We have no business telling them that that should hold a referendum to produce that result.
We organised them that way! We are the reason it’s such a fucking mess, we can expend our resources removing Israel instead of telling Palestinians it’s their problem now.
People like you are exactly why there’s a genocide going on, because you’re not willing to confront our complicity in the situation.
I explicitly said that it’s our responsibility to apply economic and political pressure to Israel. But without a clear mandate from the Palestinian people, it’s not our place to try to dissolve the Israeli state. The Palestinian people do not agree on the eventual solution to their problems but they do agree that applying economic pressure via BDS, even if it causes Palestinians harm in the short term, is the mechanism for achieving a better situation for their people. We accordingly support them by applying BDS, in line with their wishes.
So what, you transplant a foreign people into another land, move on, and then when the foreign people start eating the natives you just sigh loudly and proclaim ‘we’ve learned from our mistakes and we won’t interfere no longer’ ?
It is for us to produce the economic and political pressure for Israel to submit to making necessary changes in the interest of peace and equality. The exact nature of those changes is no more our business than it was to preside over this region 80 years ago.
Did you read this part? It is our responsibility to apply BDS to allow Palestinians the economic and political power to take on their oppressor. It is not our responsibility to determine for them how they wish to do that.
The problems with this motion include the insistence on a one state solution
Because only the most ignorant or naive think that being a separate nation protects anyone from the aggression of the West’s favorite fascist regime.
If you think being a neighboring country that isn’t aggressive towards Israel keeps you safe, you should have a word with someone from the Golan Heights or the part of Syria they RECENTLY started illegally occupying.
(against the expressed wishes of the Palestinian people)
Gonna need a source on that.
and a threat of wholesale proscription of Jewish communities.
That sounds like classic antisemitic conflating of Zionism and Jewdom, as well as ridiculous hyperbole. Specifics, please.
If you want to understand things, you have to read past the headline. It’s the only way.
I did. None of the things you claimed (other than 4/5 of the MPs being against it) were actually in the article afair from reading it last night.
As someone who hasn’t read the actual motion itself - sure, being a separate state doesn’t protect against Israel, but the issue seems to be that this motion insists on a one state solution.
Why?
Being a single state obviously doesn’t help. So what is the benefit? Why is it insisting on this?
Because a single state that doesn’t discriminate based on religion and ethnicity IS the only solution that could possibly create lasting peace and justice.
As long as there’s a Jewish supremacist apartheid ethnostate on or next to their land, no Palestinian will be safe.
Being a single ethnostate with several ethnicities being oppressed by the dominant oneobviously doesn’t help
Fixed it for you. Like South Africa before it, the solution is to overthrow the tyrannical apartheid system of government, not portioning out a tiny parcel of land next to it that the overlords will always scapegoat and vilify.
So what is the benefit? Why is it insisting on this?
Why is that? Israel is by definition an apartheid ethnostate and was always intended as such. It doesn’t get much more racist than that.
The problem is that there is more to the motion than its title, which is the same for most things, really. The problems with this motion include the insistence on a one state solution (against the expressed wishes of the Palestinian people) and a threat of wholesale proscription of Jewish communities.
I say this as a Green member - this motion overshadows really decent policy passed at this conference including two BDS motions. This is a highly controversial motion within the party and it was only carried over the line by entryists. 4/5 of our MPs opposed it as well as the leader and one of the deputy leaders.
If you want to understand things, you have to read past the headline. It’s the only way.
How do you imagine a two state solution working when one of those states is an ethnosupremacist theocracy? Are you just trying to delay any action being taken until every Palestinian has been cleansed, or do you believe an equal, multicultural Palestinian state is somehow discriminatory against Jews?
It’s simply not up to us as British people to decide whether Palestinians or indeed Israelis, should organise themselves this way or that way. It is clearly within our remit to forcefully denounce violence and discrimination and systems of oppression, but what the affected people choose to do is not for us to tell them.
It is for us to produce the economic and political pressure for Israel to submit to making necessary changes in the interest of peace and equality. The exact nature of those changes is no more our business than it was to preside over this region 80 years ago. If the Palestinian people hold a legitimate referendum and decide to pursue a single state, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. We have no business telling them that that should hold a referendum to produce that result.
We organised them that way! We are the reason it’s such a fucking mess, we can expend our resources removing Israel instead of telling Palestinians it’s their problem now.
People like you are exactly why there’s a genocide going on, because you’re not willing to confront our complicity in the situation.
I explicitly said that it’s our responsibility to apply economic and political pressure to Israel. But without a clear mandate from the Palestinian people, it’s not our place to try to dissolve the Israeli state. The Palestinian people do not agree on the eventual solution to their problems but they do agree that applying economic pressure via BDS, even if it causes Palestinians harm in the short term, is the mechanism for achieving a better situation for their people. We accordingly support them by applying BDS, in line with their wishes.
I don’t know, you guys seemed pretty gung-ho about the idea while creating the state of Israel from Palestine.
It’s almost as if some of us are trying to learn from the past rather than endlessly repeating the same mistakes.
So what, you transplant a foreign people into another land, move on, and then when the foreign people start eating the natives you just sigh loudly and proclaim ‘we’ve learned from our mistakes and we won’t interfere no longer’ ?
Did you read this part? It is our responsibility to apply BDS to allow Palestinians the economic and political power to take on their oppressor. It is not our responsibility to determine for them how they wish to do that.
I apologise. I read something into the ambiguities of your statements that you did not intend.
Because only the most ignorant or naive think that being a separate nation protects anyone from the aggression of the West’s favorite fascist regime.
If you think being a neighboring country that isn’t aggressive towards Israel keeps you safe, you should have a word with someone from the Golan Heights or the part of Syria they RECENTLY started illegally occupying.
Gonna need a source on that.
That sounds like classic antisemitic conflating of Zionism and Jewdom, as well as ridiculous hyperbole. Specifics, please.
I did. None of the things you claimed (other than 4/5 of the MPs being against it) were actually in the article afair from reading it last night.
As someone who hasn’t read the actual motion itself - sure, being a separate state doesn’t protect against Israel, but the issue seems to be that this motion insists on a one state solution.
Why?
Being a single state obviously doesn’t help. So what is the benefit? Why is it insisting on this?
Because a single state that doesn’t discriminate based on religion and ethnicity IS the only solution that could possibly create lasting peace and justice.
As long as there’s a Jewish supremacist apartheid ethnostate on or next to their land, no Palestinian will be safe.
Fixed it for you. Like South Africa before it, the solution is to overthrow the tyrannical apartheid system of government, not portioning out a tiny parcel of land next to it that the overlords will always scapegoat and vilify.
See above.