"Almost one in 10 young Irish adults believe Holocaust is a myth"

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can make same point the world over.
Why just focus on Isreal ?
Indian tribes in America come to mind as I finish season 5 of Yellowstone.
That's true of course. Israel is just another example of European Settler Colonialism, like the USA, Canada, Australia and Ireland were.
Ireland apart those succeeded because the native people were mostly wiped out through war and disease and also because
of the sheer weight of numbers of colonisers. There is literally no chance of the native people threatening the colony.
This of course allows for a lot of beating of breasts by modern Americans for example about how terrible it was to destroy those
cultures, to utter fine words of contrition and to make essentially cost-free gestures of restitution, at least until such time as they want to run an oil pipeline through sacred land.

The problem Israel has (as did South Africa and Ireland) is that the colonised people haven't gone away.
They are still a factor and getting rid of them is politically difficult especially now with social media and the like.
In SA and Ireland that fact ultimately led to the negotiating table and meaningful change.
What will happen in Israel probably depends on what the USA will tolerate and for how long.
At the moment its grip on the levers of power in the US is pretty impressive.
The USA is quite likely to go to war with Iran, purely to serve Israel.
 
What will happen in Israel probably depends on what the USA will tolerate and for how long.
What do you want to happen ? As I understand it you want all the people to leave and tell the Palestinian people to take it over, or is that too simple .
 
There was already a people living in the land the zionists chose, the vast majority of whom weren't Jewish.
Therefore to create a Jewish State in Palestine necessitated violence, dispossession, massacres and ethnic cleansing
No it didn't. The State of Israel could have been formed without any of that. It is tragic and was utterly avoidable but the dye was cast before 1948.

There were approximately 850,000 people living in what is now Israel in 1948. More than three quarters of them were Jewish. When the Zionist movement started in the 1880's the total population of what is now Israel was around 450,000. Due to the first century Roman ethnic cleansing, the Muslim conquest and ethnic cleansing and the Ottoman conquest and ethnic cleansing only around 25,000 of them were Jewish at that time. By the end of the First World War it had grown to over 80,000. The 1922 Census carried out by the British showed that 590,890 (78 percent) were Muslims, 83,794 (11 percent) were Jewish, 73,024 (9.6 percent) were Christians, and 9,474 were others. It's interesting that the disappearance of the Christian community from the region gets so little coverage. They, along with the Jews, pre-date the Muslims (obviously).

The big demographic change took place during the British Mandated period with the Jewish population growing to over 600,000 and the Muslim Arab population dropping significantly due to the Arab Revolt and the resulting expulsions and economic hardship as well as the large scale sale of land to relatively richer European Jewish immigrants. The British support of Zionism had more to do with aa fear of pan-Arab nationalism and the potential loss of control of the Suez Canal and so access to India.

Islam only became the majority religion in the region after the 13th Century, and it may have been as late as the 16th Century, but certainly some time during the Malmuk period (a little before the Plantation of Ulster). Before that Christianity had been the majority religion for almost a thousand years.

All of that gives the impression of massive shifts in population but it was actually mainly through forces conversion, firstly from Judaism to Christianity once Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, and then to Islam after the very slow Islamic conquest of the region.

What is different in modern times about the Zionist period (1880's onward) is the plantation of Jews from outside the region.
I do not think that Israel should have been formed in the way that it was but it cannot be un-formed. The same applied to the partition of India and Ireland etc. There is no historical equation which makes one side right or wrong, or justifies present day evils. There is the here and now and how people behave. In that context I cannot support the actions of either side though my sympathies are largely with the civilian population of Gaza, people who are viciously oppressed by their own fundamentalist rulers, nothing better than a suicide cult, and massacred by the fundamentalist government of Israel. Neither government cares one iota about the death and suffering which is being inflicted upon the people of Gaza.
 
Last edited:
That's true of course. Israel is just another example of European Settler Colonialism, like the USA, Canada, Australia and Ireland were.
The first Dutch colony in South Africa was set up in 1652.
The Zulu (or the people who became the Zulu) had arrived in the eastern part of what is now South Africa in the 900's as part of the Bantu Expansion but had slowly expanded over the next 900 years, colonising, assimilating and wiping out the peoples who were there first. They didn't arrive in the Western Cape until the 1800's and didn't become the Zulu Nation until the 19th century. My point is that the Afrikaners and the Zulu were both colonising peoples.
It's undeniable that Western Imperialism and colonialism (European and American) was wrong and caused genocides, ethnic cleansing, wars, famines and untold suffering but they didn't invent and they weren't the only ones at it.
 

A Two-State Solution That Can Work​

The case for an Israeli-Palestinian confederation.
www.foreignaffairs.com
www.foreignaffairs.com
Won't happen as long as Hamas are in charge in Gaza and Netanyahu is in charge in Israel. The removal of Netanyahu requires an election. The removal of Hamas requires a war.
 
A 2 state solution seems far from what you were advocating at post #49
Clearly you didn't read up on the Confederated Solution then because my post at #49, quoted below, is compatible with it

I support the right of Palestinians to live as equal citizens in their own land.
I support the right of those who were ethnically cleansed (and their descendants) to return to their homeland as per UN resolution 194 which was adopted by the United nations in 1948 but blocked by Israel ever since.
Until those things happen, I support the right of the Palestinian people to resist.

If it isn't please explain how?
 
Won't happen as long as Hamas are in charge in Gaza and Netanyahu is in charge in Israel. The removal of Netanyahu requires an election. The removal of Hamas requires a war.
If America had the will I think a lot of movement could happen very quickly. That's a very big 'if' though
 
If it isn't please explain how?
You said;
I support the right of those who were ethnically cleansed (and their descendants) to return to their homeland as per UN resolution 194 which was adopted by the United nations in 1948 but blocked by Israel ever since.
That resolution was adopted in December 1948, within a year of the creation of the State of Israel and before the agreement which officially ended the first Israel-Arab War. It was in the context of those negotiations that the resolution was passed. Nearly 80 years later it is impossible to implement it and holding onto it as if it was an achievable goal is fanciful and a barrier to peace.

If that's a red line in any future settlement talks then there will be no peace. The displaced Arabs, and the Jews displaced from Arab countries, are almost all dead and the few survivors and their descendants will never get justice.
 
If America had the will I think a lot of movement could happen very quickly. That's a very big 'if' though
How would the Americans remove Hamas?

The necessity of their removal as a prerequisite for peace is one thing about which I agree with Netanyahu. I also think that his removal is also a prerequisite for peace but, as I said, that can be done with an election.
 
That resolution was adopted in December 1948, within a year of the creation of the State of Israel and before the agreement which officially ended the first Israel-Arab War. It was in the context of those negotiations that the resolution was passed. Nearly 80 years later it is impossible to implement it and holding onto it as if it was an achievable goal is fanciful and a barrier to peace.

If that's a red line in any future settlement talks then there will be no peace. The displaced Arabs, and the Jews displaced from Arab countries, are almost all dead and the few survivors and their descendants will never get justice.
The land for all solution envisages two states along the pre-1967 war borders.
Palestinians would have citizenship in one, Israelis in the other. There would be free movement between both to live and work [a bit like the Schengen area I suppose], but Palestinians living in Israel would only have a vote in the Palestinian state parliament and vice versa.
Returning Palestinian refugees could elect to live in the Israel but would not have citizenship there.
Similarly Jews making Aliyah could live in The West Bank but would be citizens of Israel.
People would be subject to the laws of the states where they live
Jerusalem would be the shared capital for both states and their would be an overall authorities to handle Security and other areas of shared concern.
 
How would the Americans remove Hamas?

The necessity of their removal as a prerequisite for peace is one thing about which I agree with Netanyahu. I also think that his removal is also a prerequisite for peace but, as I said, that can be done with an election.
Hamas are a symptom.
There needs to be a peace process, a lot of fudge and kicking of cans down the road.
I could see extremism evaporating more quickly on the Palestinian side than the Israeli.
This is because, like for Unionists, Israelis would feel that their side is giving away something whereas the
Palestinians would be the side getting something.
A bigger problem in my eyes are the settler movement and their holding of the balance of power in Israel.
 
I must have missed the bit when RTE sports journalists refused to commentate in the Dubai Desert Classic, the World Cup in Qatar (where 6,500 construction workers died building the venues), or any of the other sports washing events held in the region.

You are conflating a cheap/slave labour, work health and safety issue with a State policy of attempted mass displacement, occupation, blockade, dehumanisation, murder.

That said, I would be all for RTE taking a stand on the issues you have raised albeit for a separate topic. They haven't, just like the rest of the world has not made any real meaningful in-roads in ending this.
But that is for people at RTE to decide, just like anyone and everyone else to decide.
I'd rather they stood a principled stand on one issue - not participating and broadcasting in Eurovision, than take no stand at all on any issue.
 
The removal of Netanyahu requires an election.
That's a very simplistic view.

Yitzak Rabin was assassinated for endorsing the Oslo accords. The extremist elements of Zionism are at the helm. And whatever the Israeli people think of Netenyahu and his regime, concerns of his actions in Gaza are way down the pecking order for majority of Israeli's.
Just as it has been lamented of how many Germans fell behind Hitler, regrettably polling data would suggest a majority of Israelis endorse what the IDF has done in Gaza.
 
You are conflating a cheap/slave labour, work health and safety issue with a State policy of attempted mass displacement, occupation, blockade, dehumanisation, murder.
Okay, then we can talk about the 300,000 dead people in Yemen (including 100,000 children), the hundreds of thousands of dead in Sudan in a war being perpetrated by UAE. If we're talking bout UAE then add Libya, Somalia and Ethiopia. That's not a complete list. They have been major funders of, provided large volumes of arms for, and directly intervened in wars which have killed millions of people over the last three decades. They make Apartheid era South Africa looks like saints.
 
Last edited:
That's a very simplistic view.

Yitzak Rabin was assassinated for endorsing the Oslo accords.
Political assassinations happen in democracies. That doesn't stop them being democracies. The current Israeli government, vile and all that I thing it is, hasn't murdered the entire opposition and doesn't murder its own citizens if they disagree with them. Hamas on the other hand has done the former and continues to do the latter.
The extremist elements of Zionism are at the helm. And whatever the Israeli people think of Netenyahu and his regime, concerns of his actions in Gaza are way down the pecking order for majority of Israeli's.
I agree, but opposition is growing and when that view is held by the majority the current government will be out of office. That won't happen in the religious totalitarian state that is Gaza.

Just as it has been lamented of how many Germans fell behind Hitler,
That analogy works better to describe what's happened in Gaza. Their government and people are more akin to Nazi Germany. That doesn't for a moment forgive the actions of the Israelis.
 
@Purple @mathepac a very good summary of holocaust and history of the 'holy land'

And of course we can talk about Sudan (there is a topic open on it here Sudanese War ), or UAE or Native Americans etc, but the topic is about the apparent demise in awareness/understanding of the Nazi holocaust against Jews, and more broadly the causes of that and perhaps what can be done to reverse the trend.

I think there is broad agreement that the events of the last 2.5yrs are directly responsible in a large part for that demise in attitude towards holocaust memorial?

The broader issue of two-state solutions, the historic rights and wrongs are simply not going to be resolved here imo.

However, I do think a greater understanding and reversal of thinking amongst younger adults is possible. In my opinion, it will require a seismic shift on the part of the Israeli's to embrace a two-state solution, where Palestinians can be Palestinians and Israelis can be Israelis.
It will of course take a seismic shift on the part of Hamas also but I would suggest the last 2.5yrs has driven that further away.

I think its clear that Israel is intent on actually wiping Palestine of the face of the earth. I dont think its any secret. Hamas may want to wipe Israel of the face of the earth but it is as likely to do that as it is to participate in and win Eurovision. In that case, and from listening to some of their leaders I do think there is scope for a disarmed, disbanded Hamas but not without cast-iron assurances for an independent Palestinian State.

Israel holds the cards here. It is the dominant force in the region with the backing of US, what does it want? To live in peace of course. How does it envisage that? Its actions do not augur a peaceful resolution any time soon.
 
Returning Palestinian refugees could elect to live in the Israel but would not have citizenship there.
Similarly Jews making Aliyah could live in The West Bank but would be citizens of Israel.
People would be subject to the laws of the states where they live
Jerusalem would be the shared capital for both states and their would be an overall authorities to handle Security and other areas of shared concern.
The problem with that logical and reasonable proposition is that both sides think that they have a mandate from heaven to occupy the entire area. In fact not just a mandate but an instruction. God said it's their and to suggest otherwise is an affront to the divine. When it comes to god and heaven and the promise of eternity then within this brief and transient mortal plane, this veil of tears, the ends always justify the means.
If religion could be removed from the equation then it's a fixable issue but as long as it's "The Holy Land" then the inhumanity and immorality and boundless cruelty that flourishes in the world of religion will continue to turn men into monsters.
 
However, I do think a greater understanding and reversal of thinking amongst younger adults is possible. In my opinion, it will require a seismic shift on the part of the Israeli's to embrace a two-state solution, where Palestinians can be Palestinians and Israelis can be Israelis.
I find that proposition deeply disturbing. This is not the horse trading of morality. One thing that was wrong does not become right because of a later thing that is wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top