|
i'm aware of the history of the region, powerclown.
so what you're saying then is that the category people use to self-identify determines whether they do or do not have a claim to the land they'd lived on, and that their families have lived on, for--o i dunno---hundreds of years in some cases?
what that argument does is operate by false equivalence. you want to create space for the zionist project of the 1920s and to do it you render palestinian claims to the land the same as zionist claims by collapsing them back onto national-identity. what matters is who you say you are.
i imagine that were you confronted with this and were your home at stake in it, you'd not find that a terribly compelling line of thinking.
what i see in your posts is a version of the doctrine of manifest destiny.
that worked out real well in the states for the native americans.
it seems from reading what you've written that you'd have no problem with a similar fate awaiting the palestinians.
same logic: native americans really didn't "own" the land anyway.
besides, god gave this land to "us."
so "we" took it.
and the dead can't complain.
if you want to talk directly about gaza, then fine.
if you want to talk about the policy choices that have resulted in it, then fine.
we can agree or disagree--but at least we're talking about the same thing.
right now, we aren't talking about the same thing at all.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|