For most of the pro-Israeli posters on this site, this conflict is existential not ideological

[elias7]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Lithos (a host of the Israel/Palestine group).

There was a post earlier about how divisive this issue is amongst DUers. I decided to start a thread because I think the two camps are coming at this from completely different angles.

I hope I am not out of line in saying this, but I imagine most of the pro-Israeli posters on this site are Jewish, have acquaintances, friends or family in Israel, have family who were killed in the Holocaust, and grew up just waiting to hear about the next terrorist attack on Israel by surrounding countries and groups that did not and still do not acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. Our awareness and knowledge of the Israeli-Palestinian issue has been lifelong.

I do not think I am not being presumptuous by stating that most of the pro-Palestinian posters on the site are probably not Muslim or Palestinian and did not grow up with awareness of the history or the evolution of the region from ancient times to the Zionist era, through the decades of repeated Arab attacks on Israel by Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973, and now the past 50 years of ongoing terrorist attacks, first by the Arafat and the PLO and later by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Fatah and other extremist Islamic groups.

So, when Palestinian's chant from the river to the sea, people who do not have lifelong familiarity with the issue do not realize that this is a call for Jewish extermination as Palestinians and many surrounding nations still have not acknowledged Israel's right to exist, including Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen, all Muslim countries. Just as we all respect black peoples requests not to use the N word and respect transgender folks request not to say "sex is real", and we respect all the other dog whistles that minority groups tell us are dog whistles, please respect Jewish people being triggered by an existential threat enough not to tell us what you think it means.

The bottom line is that for many or most of the pro-Israeli posters on this site, the conflict is existential not ideological.

So when pro-Palestinian posters point out the devastation going on a Gaza it currently, it is not lost on us, we mourn for innocent lives, we do not all support Netanyahu or current IDF methods, few probably do at its current level, but the rapid worldwide sentiment swinging to a pro-Palestinian narrative within days of Israel responding to the worst terror attack in its history, starting with the bombing of the Gazan hospital and 500 deaths (which turned out to be the bombing of the hospital parking lot, 50 deaths and not at the hands of Israel, but Hamas missiles) is traumatic to me personally and I suspect to many of us.

When even Hamas is welcoming a cease fire, we cannot help but pull our hair out and shout that they could stop the war immediately if they were to surrender, release hostages, stop shooting missiles into Israel, and negotiate for peace. It should not be incumbent upon Israel to stop a war it did not start. Never any history has a country been able to call "timeout" in the middle of the war because it needs a break. Yet, somehow, the world feels that Israel owes this to the people who started the war. I do not feel we should take for granted that Gazans do not support Hamas. I know the majority of them believe Israel should no longer exist as a country and the Jews should leave.

As Bill Maher said on his show this week, Hanukkah is a festival celebrating the Jews recovery of Jerusalem in the 2nd century before Christ, or as the Palestinians say, "get off of our land".

Further:
There are actually more Jewish refugees than Palestinian refugees

The Muslim population in the region was 500,000-600,000 at the end of the Ottoman Empire and beginning of British control of the region at the end of World War II. By 1947, the Muslim population had doubled to 1.2 million. These 600,000 "Palestinians" came to the area because of opportunities due to British control and development.

Although approximately 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced by the Israeli war of independence, the Palestinian central Bureau statistics counts 5.9 million Palestinian refugees, since descendants of originally displaced Palestinians are counted as refugees. By this reasoning, there are 9 million Jewish refugees from their ancestral homeland, as there are 16 million Jews in the world and with 7 million Jews in Israel, that UN does not acknowledge the Jewish refugee problem that I am aware of.

Regarding a two state solution

Arabs have rejected a two state solution repeatedly, in 1922 when 75% of the Palestinian mandate became transJordan, in 1936 with the Peel commission as a result of Arab uprising, in 1948 with a UN partition plan, with Arafat’s PLO rejecting a two state solution with the Oslo accords in 1993-95, Olmert/Abbas in 2008, and most recently in 2019. Israel has always sought peace. Israel has always sought to give land back for peace and acknowledgment. Unfortunately, a Palestinian country will likely manifest as a failed autocracy as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq are currently. In fact, there are no functioning democracies in any of the 22 Arab Islamic states in the region, and none with any substantial rights for women, LGBTQ, etc.

The terms ethnic cleansing and genocide mischaracterize the history of this region

The current population of Gaza and West Bank is approximately 5 million Palestinians. In 1948, the population was approximately 900,000. In 1967, when is we have captured Gaza from Egypt, the population was 400,000 and the West Bank population was 600,000. Given that there are now 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 people in Gaza and the West Bank respectively, no serious argument can be made for ethnic cleansing or genocide.

The bottom line here, is that one side is coming from the perspective of identity and one is coming from the perspective of ideology. I think we both need to appreciate each others' perspective in order to find peace, and we both need to remember to be open-minded about a position we may not accept.

[RockRaven]

1. Bullshit. For example, there's nothing "existential" about indifference to killing children

as has been expressed by some posters on DU on this topic. And there is nothing "ideological" about opposition to the same -- perhaps "moral" is a better word for that.

This framing is facile and reductive.

It's a fucking complicated mess and a fuckton of people are biased to hell and back, and purposely close their eyes to monstrosities that would make their blood boil if the demographics of the parties were reversed.

[CincyDem]

4. I guess you could just as easily be talking about 10/7.

...indifference of some posters to killing children.

...fuckton of people [...] purposely close their eye to monstrosities...

...blood [would] boil if the demographics of the parties were reversed.

[RockRaven]

5. Hello? Yes. Hence the "for example" in the first paragraph, using the framing

of the OP, followed by a criticism of that framing, before proceeding to a more general/universal criticism of posting on this topic in the third?

I'm glad you got it. Hope everyone else does too.

[GoneOffShore]

6. I read the OP, and they explained the history very well. And then I read the following.

On Sunday, CNN’s Dana Bash asked Representative Pramila Jayapal why so many progressive women have been silent about the extensive reports of widespread rape and sexual assault carried out by Hamas against Israeli women during the massacres of Oct. 7.

What followed was a master class in evasion, both-sidesism and changing the subject from the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

“I’ve condemned what Hamas has done,” Jayapal allowed, briefly, before moving immediately to condemn Israel. Bash persisted: “I was just asking about the women, and you turned it back to Israel. I’m asking about Hamas.”

“I’ve already answered your question, Dana,” Jayapal replied, adding that while rape was “horrific,” it “happens in war situations. Terrorist organizations like Hamas obviously are using these as tools. However, I think we have to be balanced about bringing in the outrages against Palestinians.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/opinion/silence-rape-israel-jews.html

'Tools'? 'Tools'?!
Read the piece in its entirety, but be aware that the descriptions are horrific.

[Beastly Boy]

10. There is something very existential about Hamas pledging to end the existence of Israel.

Literally and in writing.

That's pretty existential, no?

[Igel]

12. Recent survey.

https://pcpsr.org/en/node/961

While 95% think Israel has committed war crimes during the current war, only 10% think Hamas also committed such crimes; 4% think Israel has not committed such crimes and 89% think Hamas did not commit war crimes during the current war.
85% say they did not see videos, shown by international news outlets, showing acts committed by Hamas against Israeli civilians, such as the killing of women and children in their homes; only 14% (7% in the West Bank and 25% in the Gaza Strip) saw these videos.
When asked if Hamas did commit these atrocities, the overwhelming majority said no, it did not and only 7% (1% in the West Bank and 16% in the Gaza Strip) said it did.

[elias7]

13. Maybe I was not clear

When my friends and relatives in Israel are afraid that the Israeli experiment may be coming to an end because the government cannot protect them, when I am sending my child to college next year where she may face violence because she is jewish, when Israel was created because half of the world's jewish population was gassed to death in real concentration camps, when I feel that this country may no longer be safe for me and my family, but we have no where safe to go, I call that existential.

I am sorry that you feel this is bullshit, my friend.

When I say ideological, I mean you don't have actual skin in the game other than being a fellow human being, which certainly counts for something. But, you are not jewish and you are not arab muslim, you don't truly know what is in my heart or theirs, so you frankly don't really know what you are talking about.

[Joinfortmill]

2. Very informative. Thank you.

[madaboutharry]

3. It is true that the majority of Americans do not know Middle East history.

Most non-Jews do not understand the things you talked about in your post. They can’t understand because it is not their lived experience.

There have been painful threads here on DU in which there was lecturing to Jews on what is and what is not antisemitism. There have been threads insisting that “The river to the sea” is a perfectly ok thing to say.
Maybe your post can help a little by encouraging people to take a step back and think about what they are saying.

No one cheers the loss of civilians. That is always a tragedy. War is ugly. It is painful to see and all caring people feel that pain. The accusations that those who support Israel don’t care are unfounded and not true.
The constant barrage of inflammatory words like genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid only serve to shut down respectful conversation.

[littlemissmartypants]

7. Define existential...

ex·is·ten·tial
/ˌeɡzəˈsten(t)SHəl/
adjective
relating to existence.
"the climate crisis is an existential threat to the world"
PHILOSOPHY
concerned with existence, especially human existence as viewed in the theories of existentialism.
"the existential dilemma is this: because we are free, we are also inherently responsible"
LOGIC
(of a proposition) affirming or implying the existence of a thing.
"the existential proposition that truth and reality are constructed fictions"
And...
●What does ideological mean in simple terms?
Ideological is an adjective that describes political, cultural, or religious beliefs. An ideology is a body of ideas, and those who agree with the main idea of something take an ideological stand to support it.
●What is an example of an ideology?
An ideology is a set of opinions or beliefs of a group or an individual. Very often ideology refers to a set of political beliefs or a set of ideas that characterize a particular culture. Capitalism, communism, socialism, and Marxism are ideologies.

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/10106608?hl=en
###
Make it make sense. Because it doesn't at this point. At least not to me. The juxtaposition doesn't seem logical. Sorry, elias7. I don't get it.
❤️

[fly2man]

8. No existential threat on either side

Complete nonsense. 1,200 dead Israelis is not an existential threat. That is 1 out of 5,000 Israelis. Now if Iran gets a nuclear bomb, that will be existential because that can kill 1 million.

The argument is really silly because 15,000 Palestinians have died. So if you go by numbers, there is more of an existential threat to the Palestinians. But in fact only about 1 out of 500 Palestinians died, so it is not even an existential threat to the Palestinians.

Also don't be fooled by the numbers. Some people have made the argument "if only 1,200 Israelis died, then obviously it was illegal to kill 15,000 Palestinians." International law rejects that argument. The 15,000 killed is proportionate because the issue is not how many Israelis already died, but rather how many might die without a heavy handed Israeli reaction. That is the principle of proportionality that is International law.

[Israeli]

9. The bottom line is that for many or most of the pro-Israeli posters on this site, the conflict is existential not ideolo

its both for me .

our very existence is being threatened right now .
everyone sees it from their own perspective elias7.
For me its their religious right wing fanatics versus ours and both are as
bad as each other .

[fly2man]

11. very balanced

Well, you sound very balanced, but I don't think you realize that 4,999 out of 5,000 Israelis survived October 7th. That means there is no existential threat.

[elias7]

14. see post #13

I don't think you know what existential means.

[fly2man]

15. definition of existential

" I call that existential.

I am sorry that you feel this is bullshit, my friend...

you frankly don't really know what you are talking about."

The problem is you are using the wrong word. Read the definition of existential above. If one person dies, it is not existential. If 1 out of 5,000 people die, it is not existential. So just pick another word. Pick "bad," for instance. I mean, why don't you just call it "Holocaust 2" if you get to use your own definitions. Or say "it is an existential threat, defined to mean it is bad instead of good." When you use the wrong definition without telling the reader, you are deceiving.