US Politics, May 2024: They Shoot Puppies, Don't They?

see, i figured. even though i have no idea.

i will say that i was genuinely surprised - i was not closely following the palestinian situation prior to current events - that so many people here - here being the u.s. - thought that israel should cease to exist as a country. lots of young people obviously. no doubt my children believe this. i'm afraid to ask them. but that's all i have to say about that. just wanted to say it. i will admit that it kinda bummed me out. i don't know. it's a whole thing.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/03/college-campus-protests-israel-gaza-student-journalists-00155672

xp what's your source for that scott? there was an alarming survey about antisemitism that got a lot of attention in the fall that turned out to be super dubious methodologically

i read a harvard study/poll? i can try and find it. also hearing it on television. and in newspapers. certainly signs i've seen at protests make me think that people feel that way.

that Politico thing is good but i'm surprised by how little of it is new news to me and how much of it is in line with what i read in the papers and see on television news. it feels like everyone is reporting similar things.

idk the student journalists are as usual being less hysterical than their older media colleagues. I've been proud of the way our student journalists here have covered our rallies and protests.

this one. i am not a poll person. and obviously most of this country still thinks israel should exist. but the young people numbers surprised me. i get it though. i do get where they are coming from as far as u.s./israel goes. you don't want to get me started on this country and oppression and its long long history of murdering people of color and poor people. i'll give you an earful! 20+ years of middle east murder and oppression post-9/11 should have seen 20+ years of tents on the quad.

https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/HHP_Dec23_KeyResults.pdf

i will add one more thing. i do not come from religion. i do not know what christians, muslims, and jews feel deep down inside about other religions and wars and territorial disputes and all of it. this stuff runs deep! and i have no knowledge or understanding of any of that. other than what i read about or movies i see. documentaries. its not in me though. i watched a a really cool doc about the people who take care of jewish cemeteries in arab countries where jews were thrown out after israel was created. its an ancient thing. i try to learn. i only really know what i was raised with. dizzy, bird, and woody herman.

thanks, scott, I hadn't seen that poll

xp rob -- it's part of the fraughtness of "from the river to the sea" and uses of the term "intifada" -- there are definitely people I know who believe that Israel shouldn't exist. The vast majority of them are under 40. I feel like we've had this discussion in another thread? I think it was in the context of the hearings where they were grilling Presidents of Penn, Harvard and MIT.

oh I know and yes we discussed this in the fall. I was literally just curious about the source as there was an Economist poll that had alarming results but turned out to be an online poll (which are inherently flawed).

there are some puzzlingly contradictory results in that Harvard poll, but tbc I definitely take the larger point

so many people here - here being the u.s. - thought that israel should cease to exist as a country

The problem with this position is not philosophical, but practical. I recognize there are persuasive moral arguments that the creation of Israel and its subsequent recognition by and support from a broad spectrum of powerful nations was deeply flawed and unjust, constituting an extension of colonialism at a time when colonialism was already discredited and in retreat.

But that pony left the barn 75 years ago and as a friend of mine likes to say, "there's no use hoping for a better yesterday." The existence of Israel is a done deal and the only conceivable way to dissolve Israel as a nation would be through a successful war of conquest, which would of necessity be even bloodier and more violent than the present war in Gaza, resulting in far more death and destruction than the ongoing horrors. Personally, I can't condone that any more than I can condone this genocide in Gaza.

The only other available path is a political one and it will not be nearly fast enough to avert further injustices, further death and bloodshed, more political prisoners, agitation, anger and fear. There's zero chance of a happy near future no matter where this leads. The idea that Netanyahu has been pushing, that total elimination of Hamas through this war will be a meaningful victory and a cause for rejoicing is just an empty delusion. All it can accomplish is the creation of deep scars, social mutilations, and a lasting grief that will endure for multiple generations.

It's justifiably maddening to see all this happening. So long as the Israeli government pursues this bloody delusion of peace through genocide Israel must needs to become a pariah state. The USA needs to get its head straight on this point, asap. Stopping arms shipments and subsidies seems like too little, too late, but it is a place to start. Condemnation is just so much lip service until that happens.

https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/HHP_Dec23_KeyResults.pdf

Are you referring to the part where it says 31% of 18-24 year olds think Israel shouldn't exist?

I'm not all that sure how much I'd read into that, or poling in general especially in the light of the Economist poll referred to by rob. I also don't really know what flawed or not flawed actually look like, but would want to drill down with further and more substantive questions to tease out what people actually thought. But it wouldn't surprise me if people read that question as "Are Israel pricks?" rather than "Should Israel exist?"

But on the other hand I don't want to dismiss it either, its more that I think you need to move from the conceptual to proposed solutions to get to more consequential thoughts - on any topic

it's part of the fraughtness of "from the river to the sea" and uses of the term "intifada"

This too, but its more about their vagueness and flexibility than their fraughtness, they mean different things to different people, which is something notoriously inherent in slogans, which is why they should be chosen carefully - but also they happen organically and its not so simple as saying "we should use this one"

This is exploited by conservatives with "do you even know which river and which sea" line of attack

xp fwiw that poll was also online, which probably explains the weird results (e.g., 67% of 18-24 year-olds think Jews are an oppressor class, but 70% of 18-24 year-olds think Israel is trying to avoid civilian casualties in fighting its war against Hamas)

liar liar pants of fire

Noem writes: “Through my tenure on the House armed services committee, I had the chance to travel to many countries to meet with world leaders.

“I remember when I met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. I’m sure he underestimated me, having no clue about my experience staring down little tyrants (I’d been a children’s pastor, after all).”

I have to admit that I have found the whole "from the river to the sea" thing baffling from the start, because like... it's not really about how big the Israeli state's territory is or is not, it's about the Palestinians who are subject to the authority of that state while being denied freedom of movement within that territory. Reading the chant as "Palestine will be free [because Israel will cease to exist]" just seems like bad faith obfuscation.

I think the other one that shows the malleability about how a lot of things are conceptualised by people is that 60% of 18-24 year olds think that Israel is carrying out a genocide, but 70% of the same people think they are trying to avoid civilian casualties which means a significant number of people think both these seemingly contradictory things at the same time

in other news: useless DINO Cuellar indicted

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/03/politics/henry-cuellar-indictment-doj/index.html

Buying a Rep. is so cheap.

i have seen plenty of younger people on social media state that Israel shouldn't exist, sometimes they extend this to 'no borders should exist' which, ok, but please join us in the real world. Israel exists and is unlikely to disappear, so please advocate for a solution (2 state, 1 secular state with equal rights, something)

I am confused…who is obfuscating? There are people chanting this who mean it that way

There are some seriously pissed off people

1 secular state with equal rights is “Israel not existing.”

Who see this as an opportunity for decolonization. … conservatives are shit stirring and being racist but to say that this opinion is made up … idk

Reading the chant as "Palestine will be free [because Israel will cease to exist]" just seems like bad faith obfuscation.

― The king of the demo (bernard snowy), Friday, 3 May 2024 18:24 (eight minutes ago) link

It's really not bad faith obfuscation. I'm sure some people who use the phrase don't mean it that way, but its historical meaning is literally that Israel will cease to exist. Here is an Arabic wikipedia page about the slogan, which you can read in translation.
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%86_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D9%87%D8%B1_%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%89_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%AD%D8%B1

From the River to the Sea is a political slogan associated with Palestinian nationalism. The logo refers to the geographical area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea , which includes the State of Israel and the Palestinian territories: the West Bank , including East Jerusalem , and the Gaza Strip . It is also said in Palestinian colloquialism with the expression “from miyya to miyya” [meaning from water to water, i.e. from river to sea].

This slogan has been used by political groups to support Palestinian liberation since the 1960s, and has its origins in the Charter of the Palestinian National Council , which demands a Palestinian state that includes the geographic borders of Mandatory Palestine , and the removal of most of the Jewish population. Although the PLO withdrew this demand within the framework of the Oslo Accords , this slogan remains controversial, as some groups see it as a call for the elimination of the Jewish state.
...
One of the general principles of the Islamic Jihad movement in Palestine is that “Palestine, from the river to the sea, is an Arab Islamic land. It is forbidden by Sharia to give up any inch of it, and the Zionist entity is an invalid existence that it is forbidden by Sharia to recognize in any part of it

It is also sometimes paired with the Arabic chant ""Min maa' ila maa', Filasteen 'arabiyya" (From water to water, Palestine is Arab). There were controversies recently at a couple of the university protests over people allegedly being taught this chant as the translation of From The River To The Sea, Palestine Will Be Free, but I can't say for sure whether that happened, i.e. have not seen a video of it, it's just something that students reported..

Hamas has also called for Israel to cease to exist since its founding, including in its original charter (which also propounded all kinds of insane anti-Jewish conspiracy theories). The "updated" 2017 charter still calls for Israel to cease to exist but proposes the possibility of a two-state solution, with the implication seeming to be that it would be temporary, although you could read the rhetorical tea leaves different ways.

I don't agree with the take that this makes the slogan "antisemitic" per se, but it most certainly originated as a call for the end of Israel. And I can fully understand why the people who originated it called for the end of Israel, I just don't think there should be any illusions about it.

at the heart of this, from what I understand, is that israel is not a country like most other countries. It is founded on the basis of religious (and I guess, ethnic) identity. IMO that is a bad thing, and I don't think nation states should be founded on these things.

I heard on the news this morning that the university of Minnesota protesters quietly took down their encampment after university officials agreed to meet with them to discuss deinvestment. That was all it took - agreeing to talk about the university no longer profiting off genocide. But somehow other universities felt that sending in cops in to beat up their own students was preferable to even talking to them about maybe making less money off their investments for moral reasons. Sickening.

The argument that it is antisemitism can be bolstered by comparing Israel to Russia … are people demanding that Russia cease to exist… or historically, Germany… like I also know people who see this as antisemitism because Israel is being punished more than other countries

at the heart of this, from what I understand, is that israel is not a country like most other countries. It is founded on the basis of religious (and I guess, ethnic) identity. IMO that is a bad thing, and I don't think nation states should be founded on these things.

The difference is that Israel is a fairly new country…

1 secular state with equal rights is “Israel not existing.”

Uh. This raises interesting questions in my mind. If I was born with the name Aimless and now I in no way resemble the infant named Aimless, does that mean "Aimless does not exist"?

I don’t think you can compare an individual to a state, which is something that doesn’t naturally exist

I feel like the one state solution is ultimately more tenable in the long run, but most israelis are in no mood for a 'melting pot,' especially not now

i found these informative. in an "easy to read" way. ha! i am not as sharp as i once might have been. watching them made me realize how fast i forget history now. it goes in one ear and out the other. and i do read stuff! you know, articles. maybe not big thick books.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-vzy4tYfaI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt3PpqaLfxo

A very sore point at the University of Texas, not just with the Palestinian Solidarity Committee (who organized the original event that got its permit withdrawn) is that President Hartzell refuses to meet with anyone or discuss the matter at all. He won't take questions from the press, won't meet with the Deans or any faculty, never mind having an open forum with students. It's purely one-way communication from his office and it is not going over well, even with people who don't have any particular sympathy with the protestors.

The argument that it is antisemitism can be bolstered by comparing Israel to Russia … are people demanding that Russia cease to exist… or historically, Germany… like I also know people who see this as antisemitism because Israel is being punished more than other countries

― sarahell, Friday, May 3, 2024 1:56 PM (forty-nine minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I think the best analog is actually Pakistan. Not a perfect analog. But a country created by a British partition along ethno-religious lines that had ethnic cleansing as part of its creation.

And also at virtually the same time

I heard on the news this morning that the university of Minnesota protesters quietly took down their encampment after university officials agreed to meet with them to discuss deinvestment. That was all it took - agreeing to talk about the university no longer profiting off genocide. But somehow other universities felt that sending in cops in to beat up their own students was preferable to even talking to them about maybe making less money off their investments for moral reasons. Sickening.

Here's an article about how the protests ended at certain schools:

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/03/campus-protest-universities-student-arrest

as someone who was heavily involved in the "divest from South Africa" college protests from spring 1986 to fall 1987 m/l, and was on the front lines of an encampment, I have been having a very strong sense of "same shit different decade", except the contrast between how we were treated then (at Indiana University) and how they have been treated now is stark and brutal. Back then, the police and administration were largely hands off, but the harassment came from rural KKK types (not kidding) who firebombed, teargassed, and otherwise harassed the encampment. Today, the admins won't even talk to the kids, and I wonder how many of the racists who fucked with us back then are now on the same police force that came down on the new kids this week.

The thing i realized the other day is these shitheels in charge of… most things… are no longer boomers but x-ers

Yeah. Who came of political age under Rush Limbaugh etc.

Why do the protesters wear masks outside

What’s the deal with protesters wearing maaaaasks

maaaaan

those posts are condescending

I've become unsympathetic to the protesters. There seems to be a significantly increasing aggrandizing amount of antisemitism within the protests and here on ilx, really. I wish it would stop

I've become unsympathetic to the protesters.

quelle surprise

I haven't detected much antisemitism here... i.e. against Jews or Judaism. Loads of critiques of Israel's governmental policies, but not of their larger population's ethnicity or faith

Maybe you see something different

Maybe not here, but all I can see with the encampments and skirmishes is that it's kids acting out, and it seems very chaotic and antisemitic and frankly childish to me, sorry. They want people to look at them, they want to be the center of attention, but it doesn't seem to me they know anything about gaza or what the issues are or how to solve them except to encourage university divestment and speak badly of Jewish people

I also think there are a lot of outside agitators on all campuses