@@johnkayoss5422 Daniel's not pretending to do Hasbara, in fact, his video ends up being harshly critical with Israel and its policies (considered genocide or mass slaughter as a way to describe them). Even in the late beginning he talks about "silly revenge games" that IDF was doing in the West Bank instead of being alert in the Gaza Strip. The most he can do is a sort of accidental Hasbara because misaimed sources (NYT Mass Rape) and because he's explaining the Hasbara side in the video, but that's not the entire point.
@@davidlahozgil that he is pretending to not be Hasbara is the point. He mentions the exodus of Jews from Iraq, without mentioning the well documented fact that it was Zionists bombing the synagogues and other Jewish gathering places that led to this. He has admitted he was aware of this, but made the choice to leave it out. He mentions the closure of European countries to Jewish refugees, without mentioning this was done due specifically to the Zionist lobbies preventing it. He mentions the Balfour declaration without mentioning that Balfour gave this to Lord Rothschild of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in exchange for Rothschild and his Zionist allies crashing the Austro-Hungarian Economy during WWI, creating the mass trauma on the population that was blamed on "the Jews", leading to the rise in power of the ideological twins of the Zionists, who openly allied with the Zionists throughout WWII, With Irgun proposing a formal alliance in Beirut at the height of the Holocaust. He made no effort to distinguish between "Jew" and "Zionist". He deliberately erased the arguments of anti-Zionist Jews along with their existance. He did not mention the Mass Hannibal order on Oct 7 that had already been reported in the Hebrew edition of Ynet, and mocked me for pointing this out to him. He claims that Arab citizens of JSIL (which is no more "Israel" than ISIL was "the caliphate") have equal rights, which is factually false, as the Law of Return and 60+ laws based on it, as well as the Nation-State Law exist. When this was pointed out to him, he falsely claimed the Nation-State Law had been overturned. Rather than respond in a rational manner when his factual inaccuracies that expose his work as Hasbara are pointed out, he reacts with obscenities and "your mama" jokes. It is precisely because he lacks the intellectual integrity to admit that he is Hasbara, of the type known as a "limited hangout", that I feel the need to point out to those whose ignorance he strives to maintain as to what he is. Please feel free to make a rational argument that anything I have said is in any way less than accurate and precise
"“national” conflicts are often an illusion which mask more substantial class conflicts", here in México people tend to forget pretty quickly about this, it´s even worst when the US is involved
"National" conflicts are a PART of class conflict. A class conflict of the imperial core exploiting the global south. Most leftist liberation movements (including nominally anarchist ones) take on a nationalist character as, first and foremost, a pragmatic galvanizing force to deal with the more immediate oppression of colonialism over the broad, long term international class struggle.
No they are not. Struggle against colonialism always takes precedent over internal or international class struggle. The oppression of imperialism and colonial subjugation is a far more immediate concern. This is why most left wing liberation movements (even nominally anarchist ones) take on a nationalist character.
and then the leaders of the nationalist movement magically always warp their actions toward their own class aims, at the expense of the people that they’re liberating. See Zimbabwe for a very clear example one of a zillion. Or the USSR, or anything anytime anywhere.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69just so you understand, this rationale is functionally the same as openly supporting colonialism and/or imperialism. "We shouldnt support imperfect national liberation movements because they will inevitably turn against the class interests of their own people" is functionally indistinguishable from supporting imperialism because colonized people arent civilized enough for self determination.
Very informative. I am not a strict materialist, but this channel is probaby the best on the platform at delivering a knowledgable and non-dogmatic materialist perspective. Great work.
Almost every day I refresh my podcast app hoping for another What Is Politics episode - today is the day!! I'm so appreciative of all the time and effort you put into this work. I have learned so much. Thank you!
Hands down the best, most balanced, and detailed take on the conflict I have heard or seen. You are an incredibly clear thinker and presenter, don’t stop what you’re doing!
@@khubza8999 Hamas is a party of Billionaires who steal UN Aid and care nothing about the refugees their war creates who they say are the UN's problem.
I just can't wrap my head around punishing the entirety of Palestinian population over who they voted.. Should not this same judgement be cast to those here in America? Who voted for Bush Sr? Even if it was your parents who voted for him? How come no one ever says that is okay to apply to ANY other set of human beings... Just Palestinians. The Ukrainians get taught how to make molotovs, but Palestinians? They should be happy to just be alive..
somehow missed this comment 5 months ago! it’s kind of worse than that even - only 45% of palestinians voted for hamas in 2006. half that vote was an anti corruption vote. they had 18% support left in gaza on october 6th 2023… half of the population of gaza were toddlers when hamas was elected. but in the israeli imagination, 100% of palestinians either support hamas and the objectives of hamas and are responsible for oct 7 on some level. it’s insane.
As an Israeli I must say this is one of the most well informed and clear videos I have seen over the recent months. I agree that things have never looked worse but we must still strive towards a brighter future 🇮🇱❤🇵🇸
what kinda future, do israelis really believe they can live together and accept palestinians, cuz for me a one state (secular, democratic,equal rights) solution is the best, but both should be ready to give up their fantasy scenarios.
@@oussamarofaik8545 that sounds amazing but it would never work without changing the deep state. Even if both sides were singing kumbaya, nothing will systematically change
I can't believe the amount of work that went into this video!! thanks for making such a clear overview of the conflict, it helps a lot to get a better understanding of what's been going on, without all the propaganda :S looking forward to part two !!
thank you! it’s nice to get recognition for the amount of work this stuff takes - this one was especially brutal to put together! hey, i think you bought a zoom recorder from me this summer! you make good music and videos as well! i guess it takes someone who makes videos to understand how much goes into it!
On the YT channel: The Balfour Project watch Dr Ralph Wilde’s webinar on how Britain broke international law to prevent Palestinian Independence. All the other neighboring countries were given independence after the defeat of the Ottoman Turks after WW1. The British plan for Palestine was to give the land to Russian and European Zionist Jews with preferential immigration policies (Jews only) and forced land exchange to favor the Zionist Jews over the Palestinians. We would not have anything like all the endless wars in the Middle East nor the genocide in Gaza without this interference by Great Britain.
I discovered your channel because of your critique of the DofE and it got me hooked on other videos. Your clarity and capability to explain and articulate very complex issues and terminology is really astonishing. Thank you so much for all the work
I do disagree with the narrative. The conflict is not two sided. I am Palestinian and lived under the apartheid ocupation and experienced the injustice and brutally of it. Further more my family experience . For example my father village near the city of lid was demolished and the inhabitants of it either forced to flee or died like many villages in western Palestine Just to make room for colonizers. So that narrative of both sides are equally guilty is not true, while it is true that some Palestinian committed crimes that is only a drop in the bucket. I also want to note the the rape allegation most likely is completely fabricated as noted by isreali press and the fact that isreal couldn't produce evidence. And if you want to view real allegation of rape look at the UN and major human rights organizations reports of rape and torture in isreal prisons. If you want to speak from a humanity perspective please try to see Palestinian as humans first, look at the facts not omitted.
maybe i didn’t explain clearly enough, but i’m not at all saying both sides are equal, or equally guilty. i’m saying both sides have a version of history which mix truth and myths, that justifies their cause and denigrates the cause of the other one, and i’m explaining these versions while presenting the basic uncontested events of the conflict, leaving out the more contentious or controversial events that would surprise people. Before challenging anyone’s view, I’m presenting the view of both sides. next time is when i will go over what actually happened, and then we will see where the guilt and responsibility lie for this. some of it will be just as you are saying above, and some of it will probably surprise you. i would have preferred to do it all at once, and this was my initial plan, but it was just too long, so i’m doing it this way. for the rape, it seems that the mass systematic rape was fake, but from what i saw there were still some real ones, which is to be expected - just as it’s to be expected from the israelis, ive seen the accusations of prisoner abuse etc, i posted some of it in the video, but i found out about the faked NYT article after i posted it. one thing i should have mentioned was the civilian massacres in 1948 by the hagannah forces, deir yassin, etc, because it’s not contentious but i will discuss it next time
I don’t take issue with the factual content of this video, but it strikes me as a bit of a dodge to halfway imply that basically every non-class-based in-group’s self-justifying narrative is roughly equal in terms of factual and ethical content because they all contain distortions and elisions. If the point of the vid is more to persuade hardcore Israel boosters and Western “read Settlers!” teens to reconsider their understanding of the conflict, I get the rhetorical choice, but given universal class consciousness has failed again and again to transcend ethnic, national, and other chauvinisms, it’s a little pat to argue that the conflict would seem different if it were analyzed with a frame that does not overlap much with the cognitive content of what people actually thought they were doing in the moment they were doing it. If we’re actually moving toward a post-class world, there is value in this kind of analysis, but if we’re moving toward a world of fortress politics around a deteriorating climate, we’re going to have to sift through a lot of bullshit and make rough, dirty determinations about which class-based social formations ultimately have superior claims to being wronged or being in the wrong in conflicts over land and resources. Also, fwiw, settlers from North American nation states were not blind to the fact that they were displacing people, yet they did it anyway. They weren’t even necessarily blind to the fact they were serving elite interests, yet they perceived themselves as ultimately benefiting from that social order and so did it anyway. I’m not sure how much of a difference the counterfactual of Zionist settlers being aware of unethical land acquisition practices by Zionist firms would actually make.
ack no no no, you’re missing the point. i’m not saying the two narratives are equal in any way, except that they’re both relatively equally coherent and make sense. the point is to understand the two narratives so that we know what’s motivating peoples’ behaviour. one might be 100% accurate and the other 0% or the reverse, or anywhere in between. Next time is when i’ll look at what really happened and who’s to blame for what. I’m just avoiding taking positions (aside from what’s happening today) because i’d like everyone to get these basic ABCs regardless of their position, and to be interested in seeing the next part. As for people being blind to what they’re doing, you’ll see next time how that works, and who was blind and who wasn’t and how that affected what happened, and where we are today.
12:13 - "and once we put some class analysis back into the story, *and by class I don't mean capitalists or proletarians I mean a more fundamental type of class meaning: the class of people who make decisions versus the class who has to suffer the consequences of those decisions,* once we do that then the conflict which at first glance is seemingly all about identity politics becomes a conflict about something very different. Instead of a story about Jews and Arabas fighting each other, *the story becomes one about Jews elites and Arabs elites competing to see who gets to be the administrative elite of a new state. Using identity politics (i.e., nationalism) to portray themselves as representatives of their respective identity groups while they're actually needlessly putting their own population in harm's way, lying to them, exploiting them and generating conflict where there could have been peace and cooperation had it been left up to the majorities of the people on both sides."*
Why do you assume someone who says "read settlers" is a teen? Im in my thirties and I just recently read it and I think its insightful. I also happen to be a white guy. I understand t has problems.
This was so damn good. I can’t believe I watched it AFTER this Reddit post I made saying many of these same things. It is so frustrating to see such important developments in this history omitted from the general discourse about it. By far the best introduction to the topic I have seen. One thing I noticed is that you said you had difficulty finding decent books discussing the land purchases of the early Zionist movement. My main source for that had been “Palestine and the Palestinians” by Farsoun and Zacharia. I haven’t read the sources you cite so maybe they’re even better, but it’s another source to add to the list where data is presented and some basics are covered. Studying the Tanzimat also helped me a lot, which I assume will make its way into your later and more focused videos on that piece of the history.
i haven’t read that i will check it out thanks - i have a zillion sources on land purchases, but they’re all written for academics - found very little popular writing besides dowty and some passing mentions in other books. it used to almost never get mentioned, now it seems to be mentoned more but never examined in depth as a source of the conflict. and yes tanzimat is a big part of it
@@cheezburger2000 youtube hates links but it’s from two weeks ago and it’s called “How should we think about nationalism that isn’t Zionism?” - posted to the JewsofConscience subreddit.
Hi Daniel, I just subscribed on Patreon. I wanted to say how much I appreciate your dedication to not only justice for working people (vis a vis being a lawyer for tenants and educator here) but also providing a balanced and rigorous interrogation of history. I love how your approach focuses not so much on large groups of people whose values are at odds but on the decisions of specific elites and how they shape the common narratives below. Not just in this video but across your work. It is a vital perspective to have in politics and one that, sadly, I do not see echoed much elsewhere on the internet or in reality. Please keep up the good work!
thank you i really appreciate that and also the support! the next ep on this subject will blow your mind i think, and everyone’s and i’ll get a lot of flak but worth it…
Even running at 2 hours this is one of the best and shortest video I watched explaining the history of this conflict. It’s not exhaustive but it puts the history into a much better picture, complete with opinions from both sides including from the elites, political groups and general population alike
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 it probably will! It’s because of how different everything about your content is from most bs on this platform that I watch it, and it’s not just full of analysis I could find elsewhere or figure out by myself without taking years of research. As someone who plans to organize in the future it’s really really satisfying to find concise videos like this that change your whole perspective on all the moving pieces in our world bc I really dont wanna spend years of my time not organizing if someone else already put in the work with intent of informing people like me so we dont contribute to these political mistakes in the future. It’s definitely the sort of content I hopefully wont forget and would watch a couple of times again in the future as a reminder of what not to do and not to fully unquestioningly support
I was so excited to see What is Politics in my feed this morning. Its such a joy to explore these topics with you. You do such a good job of getting us to think about important things at the core of politics and empower us to make a more thoughtful political impact. Thank you for tackling such difficult issues with such honesty.
this one took me 4.5 month of hell to do, and it’s only the first part of three, so i kind of never want to do another historical conflict video ever, but i very much appreciate the sentiment, and hopefully will do more - it’s interesting to compare this to south africa, which I will do next time
@@khosrowanushirwan7591 that’s complicated to answer because there are many different definitions of that word, but i believe that forms of dominance of some people over other should be eliminated, so landlord tenant, owner employee etc should not exist, but i also think markets are ok so long as they don’t create classes of owners and people dependent on the owned property. property should be owned by those who depend on it. i’ll talk more about it in future episode. it’s sort of a 19th century idea of socialism before bolshevism and european social democracy took over the meaning of socialism. and btw, when i said i don’t want to cover more conflict, i will still be covering this conflict - the episode i’m working on now goes into depth about the origins of the conflict.
Really excited for the next episode, great work as always. I will admit as one of those pro-Palestine college leftists you mentioned I do indeed find the both-sides rhetoric at the beginning of the video challenging as I believe the responsibility in the situation overwhelmingly falls on Israeli elites who have been involved in ethnic cleansing and discrimination from the beginning and increasingly so now. That being said I understand that as part of how you chose to present this series and I’m interested to see where you go with the rest of the series. However a different and more encompassing analysis of Israel/Palestine is sorely needed in today’s left and I am thankful you are doing that. As an aforementioned college leftist I am irked by my local pro-Palestine leftists and organizations, many of whom get their perspectives almost entirely from Hamas and aligned channels. They seem unwilling to consider any possibility of wrongdoing by Hamas on October 7th and either say it never happened (“most civilians were actually killed by Israel”) or if it did its their fault (“settlers ≠ civilians”). While I absolutely abhor the Israeli state and as an anarchist think it should be destroyed, a leftist analysis that only takes the Palestinian perspective into account to me feels like poor solidarity. At this point, the biggest group of Israeli Jews are from non-European countries despite simplistic characterizations of Israelis as Europeans with dual citizenship (in fact, I’ve heard only about 10% of Israelis have dual citizenship), and as you mentioned many Jews came to Israel fleeing antisemitic persecution. Does that mean Israel has a right to exist as an ethnostate and carry out ethnic cleansing? Absolutely not. However, it does mean that leftist proposals for justice must go beyond blindly supporting Palestinian resistance organizations like Hamas. Its simply untenable for leftist organizations to say that the needs of 7 million Jews living in Israel are either beyond our concern since they are privileged settlers or openly say they should pack up and leave. Any proposed solution must clearly state that the needs and rights of all residents between the river and the sea will be respected and uphold the Palestinian right of return. Furthermore, many of those who most ardently support Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups either won’t stand in solidarity with those oppressed by Hamas’s allies (mainly Iranians and Syrians) or outright tar them as western-backed traitors. Syria’s Assad regime has actually killed many Palestinian refugees, but to many Hamas supporters the Assad regime is unquestionable as a funder of Hamas. If our solidarity with Palestine means that we must ignore or silence the voices of all others whose suffering is inconvenient to Hamas, then we’re clearly doing solidarity wrong. Anyways, mostly I’m venting because all these narratives are things I’ve seen across the internet since October 7th. I believe we desperately need strong non-campist narratives which support Palestinian liberation. And I thank you for continuing to create nuanced media that looks beyond nationalist rhetoric!
this is super interesting - my friend who’s super involved in pro-palestine activism in europe tells me that most of the activists have zero awareness of any of the history whatsoever, and have all these laughably misinformed ideas of how we got here, if they even know at all - which is one reason why I did the ABC’s instead of jumping straight into the more interesting story about how the conflict started, and who was responsible for it. I didn’t realize people were just swallowing hamas pronouncements whole, which is almost hilarious, but i realize one should never underestimate the childishness and naitivité of students… the idea that educated students would think it makes sense to deport the 3rd and 4th and 5th generation of israelis is so insane to me - like where does that end? should the berbers (who are like 40-60% of the maghreb countries - no one even knows because the government falsely counts them as “arabs” even if you have whole regions where arabic is a 2nd language, and villages where no one even speaks arabic) or the south saharans seek to deport the arabs back to saudi arabia? total insanity. all those students themselves would end up back in england or wherever they came from before taking over the USA… even if it was WWII going on i would still want to explain the point of view of the germans because don’t we need to know what we’re dealing with? but in the case of israel it’s so much more interesting - germany, south africa etc, didn’t have very coherent moral justifications for what they were doing - just “we’re better, we came here first, we brought the blacks here” or whatever thin excuses. in israel you have a very compelling narrative, an also even if you were to assume the early zionists were all 100% factory made colonialists, you have the WWII refugees, and all the arab world refugees, who were 75% of country by the 60s all together, plus basically anyone who went to school since 1948 (i.e. 100% of the current population) who learned nothing about colonial attitudes and justifications, and learned that they gained the country by pure immigration and then by beating off a genocidal war in 1948 - you can’t just ignore that, it’s a huge factor in why this keeps going on, and why the current generation have turned into total racist genocidal maniacs, while thinking they aren’t. and when we look at what happened on the arab side in 1880s-1948 it really explodes the whole nationalist narrative on that side as well. i wish i could have made these episodes all at once, because it sucks to have people wait another 5 months before they understand where i’m going with this… maybe i’ll talk about it more in the QnA episode i’ll be putting out soon. this whole thing also illustrates what recipe for disaster states are…
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I guess I’ll clarify what I’m saying about student activists, I’m just pointing out the worst of them (who happen to be more involved in a lot of the organizations organizing protests etc)… I see a lot of these narratives online, and the people I know in pro-Palestine student activism are either the sort I’m talking about or generally pro-Palestine but without a deeper ideology/perspective. I see no one challenging the more harmful narratives from the left. It seems to be either hardliners or people who stick to current news + the basics without a deeper analysis
And no one seems to ever think the deportation thing through, its more lots of one-off online statements that Israelis should just pack up and leave which makes no sense. People who go more in-depth often point to Algeria as a precedent of what should happen, but clearly there are far more Israeli Jews than French settlers + Jews in Algeria at that time and it’d be a horrible catastrophe if there were millions of Jewish refugees from Israel. But few on the left seem interested in considering an Israeli Jewish perspective at all since they’re painted as privileged settlers who overwhelmingly hate Palestinians (and unfortunately recent polls do show how widespread hateful thinking is in Israel as you go into)
@@paco.effective.dreamer yeah, doing a “there are two narratives” video like this is a bit rough when the majority in israel now have lost their minds and just sound like fascists - like no one wants to hear the fascist narrative of WWII … but i think it’s important for pro palestine activists to understand the israeli perspective, if only just to be more effective at what they’re doing, but also because i think it makes justice more likely, and also because things aren’t caricatures, there’s a lot to understand about any situation in life when you want to go in and change something, you need to know what you’re dealing with, for moral reasons and for basic competence. for the deportation thing - the idea that people don’t belong somewhere is just wrong to me. people belong wherever they are. if you’re occupying a stolen house, then sure, be forced out of the house and have the house given back to the rightful owner, but to leave a country entirely is just nonsense. especially in israel where so few peopel have any idea that they stole anything. maybe the exception is the settlers, who moved there on purpose in order to take land away from the arabs, but even they can leave on their own if they don’t like living in a democracy. i don’t know enough about algeria, but suspect deportation wasn’t a good thing there either. one algerian guy on here was sayingthat was a mistake.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 to clarify, my understanding from reading about Algeria was that it was less a literal policy of deportation than increasing hostility and violence that led to most people leaving (and the French colonists could have more secure and comfortable lives back in France). That also involved a policy which only gave citizenship rights to Muslims, so Jews also left en masse (+ hostility they faced since they were given a higher class status by the French). But yeah I’d always advocate for a just solution that doesn’t entrench ethnic or nationalist divisions if at all possible
I always get so excited when I see you release a new video I also love that you have so many comments and so many likes already Great work is always my friend
I'm so happy you dropped another video, I can tell from the quality of your videos that they must take a lot of effort and I was a bit worried for your health. Thank you for making another one on this issue, your well researched but accessible explanations are very appreciated. Sending love from Nigeria.
thank you! they do, and your concern and good wishes are much appreciated. very cool that I have some viewers in nigeria. currently hard at work on the next one on this same subject…
Am so glad I got your video in my recommendation While I don't agree with all points and views you share you gave a refreshing middle ground unbiased view of the conflict I instantly subscribed
everyone is biased, but i do think that if you want to fix something, it’s important to understand what motivates people on both sides, and why they think and act the way they do
I'm glad you made this. Extremely worth watching. Truly nothing worth objecting to because this was actual unbiased coverage, plus understanding of both sides. Need this to be seen by more.
It's *_Extremely Simple_* . The solution is however "complex" because no one will tackle "Voldemort" head on. 1) Land given away from an organization that never had the right to give it away. 2) UN conventions on annexation of land during war ignored, no repercussions for ethnic cleansing. 3) Ongoing occupation, extra-judicial killings and imprisonments and dejure+defacto apartheid. I'm not even addressing the current crimes against humanity which would have absolutely isolated and sanctioned any other country but "Voldemort". (Even the mention of certain buzzwords gets some us deleted/shadow banned)
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Sorry, it wasn't a dig at your content. Just a statement of facts for people that have bought into the narrative that this is "complex". You do great work. I've subbed. Cheers.
@@Emanon... For solutions to be "complex" doesn't mean harm has mutually been done to both sides. The end of slavery was complex, the end of Apartheid was too (heck, we are still dealing with the circumstances of both) even the de-nazzification of Germany was complex. even if you think Israel is literally star wars Empire level of evil (which I would dissagree but it doesn't matter) at the end of the day most of the Israeli people are just common people and therefore the solution is complex because it has to be one the ensure the least harm to both palestinians and israelis .
@@kupeart3746 Common people can be misinformed or even willfully approve of the horror their country is committing, as long as they're beneficiaries or afraid to lose everything if they speak up. History has shown this over and over again. Here's an apt analogy, since you brought it up yourself: The Empire destroyed Alderaan because it supported the rebels - and to punish the people collectively. Rebels, who in all accounts would be considered terrorists by the Empire. What sequence of events does that remind you of? With regards to complexity, it means that to achieve true peace, the road is long and hard. But it starts with a measure of justice for the harm that has been done. Can we at least agree that Palestinians have suffered far greater, and for far longer, than Israelis? And that they also deserve a right to exist? Yes? Now go tell that to the Israeli government and the majority of Israelis that are consenting to the horror we are witnessing right now.
yup, started it on oct 7th after i was 2/3 of the way through a video on intersectionality, thinking it would be an EZ episode to make and instead it took me 4.5 months and it’s only the 1st part of 3…!
I cannot express how much I'm looking forward to the next episode of this! Since Oct 7 and the ensuing war in Gaza, I've been trying my best to do my own independent research into the history - where the narratives agree, disagree and what might be missing from the story. I've been trying to find stuff on land acquisition and have been fascincated by the Arab revolt of '36, but, as I'm sure you've found, there is very little in the way of actual analysis of that period. This video was everything I was looking for and I don't doubt that the next episode will be just as good! Thank you so much for all your hard work!
thanks! most of this will be gone into depth next time, but this time, when i get the bibliography up, i’ll put a few sources on land acquisition, the ones i showed in this episode in the graphics
i didnt yet listen to this one, nor did i finish listening to all the podcast episodes yet, but i just wanted to thank you for what you are doing.. been looking through the bibliographies of some of your episodes and i didn’t even realise such a wealth of information was available to us. i feel like a child on Christmas day. ive shared this podcast with any friend i thought would be interested and plan on continuing to do so. thank you! all of this is still blowing my mind.
I'll admit this was a difficult watch. I appreciate that you're trying to present a simplified account of events so people cam better grasp the overall history, but it's akin to listening to liberal media narratives of the history - completely whitewashing the real material and class dynamics at play. I get that you're saving that for the next video, but personally I didn’t feel like this approach was a good one given that we're in the middle of a propaganda war (on top of the actual onslaught in Gaza). Also, I'm a little surprised that you personally wouldn't call what's happening a genocide. This is as textbook as it gets.
@@harrypmayYou're an idiot. Don't fucking both sides a conflict in which the majority of the deaths are on one side. The definition of genocide is: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." Even the whitewashed facts of this video are evidence of genocide based on the Israeli governments actions and their stated objectives (to drive Palestinian out of Gaza and the west bank). Which would be, in addition to "the deliberate killing of a large number of people," be a destruction of "a nation or group" specifically the Palestinian nation and thus a literal dictionary definition genocide.
Palestine is from the river to the sea. Palestine is not the west bank only or Gazza only. Also, the egyptian leadership and the Jordanian leaderhsip are enemies for Egyptians and Jordanians, especially the Jordanian state elite.
I am about halfway through and will continue watching later. I just have one major issue so far. At 1:02:00ish you say that there were orders to evacuate by Arab leaders to advance Arab war aims, but the book you put up by Benny Morris says "Many... left as a result of orders or advice from Arab military commanders and officials. Fears for their safety rather than a grand strategy of evacuation underlay these steps." So, your statement is only true if by war aim you mean safety of the Palestinians. But this not what Zionists mean when they say that Palestinians left at the behest of Arab leaders, they say it to mean that it was so the Arab militaries could attack more strongly which, based on the sources I read and the one you put in the screen at that time, just isn't true. Also, I'd recommend reading Ilan Pappé, he is another new Israeli historian, and he has criticized Morris in the past for not using Arabic sources (since he can't read Arabic) which basically means Morris is missing one sides voice in all of his work. I know it is a bit if a nitpick but it is a point I recently read up about after arguing with some family about it. Overall though I am impressed so far, you've covered a lot of the history in such a short time. Looking forward to finishing the video tomorrow and hearing your analysis in the next video!
i don’t think that contradicts what i said though? “fears for their safety rather than a grand strategy of evacuation” - they didn’t want to kill a bunch of arab civilians so they asked them to move so they could fight more effectively .. no? what’s a “grand strategy of evacuation” anyhow? maybe it wasn’t clear the way i said it but arab armies telling arabs to evacuate was a thing, but it wasn’t a major cause of flight - most of the flight was people afraid of being in a war zone and expulsion by israeli soldiers. i was vague about it here because again, im not trying to challenge the narratives in a big way here. and sure morris doesn’t read arabic, and he’s got other flaws, but as far as i know morris’ book is still the main book on this subject, most detailed etc. you see people on all sides referencing it. and it’s not friendly at all to the previous zionist narrative - later he came out and said the zionist forces were doing ethnic cleansing but they should have done more! his turn really reflect israelis’ turn in general to the right at that time.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Oh, I interpreted it as fear for their safety because Israeli forces were destroying villages, but I could see how it could be interpreted either way now. And yeah, I agree that based on what I've read you got the big picture right, like I said it was a bit of a nitpick, though now I see it was even more of a minor thing. Yeah, Morris' book is longer than Pappe's, but Pappe doesn't describe the Nakba as a "justified ethnic cleansing", so I chose to read his book. Maybe that was a mistake, and I will read it eventually.
@@andrewlipnick8131 a lot of morris’ book is pretty borring, just detailing this unit went to this area and fought and this many people were killed, or more interesting this unit went and cleared out this village. and at the time he wrote the first edition, he wasn’t saying it was good, he was in part writing it to convince israelis to support Olso, that they had caused some of the problems and needed to compromise - but by the second edition it was after oslo failed, and he and most of israelis blamed the palestinians, and he then declared they should have cleared out more villages etc. which always strikes me as insane, because you have very little terrorist activity from the arabs in israel. you have more crime and poverty related problems, but very rare that someone joins hamas or PLO militant factions and carries out any militant operations etc. pappe i might agree with a lot more politically but dont trust him to cover different sides of an issue, he’s always going to present whatever agrees with his goals, and ignore whatever contradicts his position.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 oh, well then maybe I won't read it, sounds pretty dull and not super important for the bigger picture. Though I do think I need to read more from people I disagree with. Thanks for the detailed responses btw!
@@andrewlipnick8131 it’s still worth reading, because it’s not all like that, but you can skip through lots of it so it’s not as daunting as it seems in terms of length
I love your channel, I will pay you money as soon as I have some to spare! you deserve to be paid for this incredible work, these videos should be airing on public tv
I am a Muslim ,and i think that when religon and nationalism meet it becomes very dangerous and i can see that on both sides ..I am against hamas horrific attack on inoccent israeli but i am also against the occopation and the killing and abuse of the inoccent Palestinians ..I think its a never ending cycle good ppl from both side can stand up and just end this cycle ..both sides need leaders that would work for peace and both sides need to abandon hate and radicaliztion ..i m all for two state solution or one state solution and equal rights for all (maybe a secular state instead of a religious state )Both parties deserve peace security and a good future.
What kind of Muslim would say that lsraeI is innocent when they've attacked our brothers and sisters in the past before October? What kind of Muslim says they would favor a secular state over a religious one? You are clearly misguided and you are saying everything that a liberal would.
I agree with the one state model and agree with it being a secular state. Israel’s current model would work best, but they’d have to bring a separate Sharia court in for Muslims with such a large population (like how they did with the Rabbinate) but I think that has a chance to get messy. You’re one of the few Muslims that acknowledge what Hamas did was horrific and evil tbh. I mostly see the entire thing dismissed or praised by Muslims. I hope for a one state solution that Palestinians have a large say in forming and for reparations to all those that have suffered from this violence
@@emmettdonkeydoodle6230 yes u r right israel current Model is good only they have to give the Palestinian's same rights and citizenship as Israeli maybe they can rename the country as palestine Israel so both parties are happy 😊...The sharia law is only implemented when 99 percent ppl all Muslims otherwise Muslims are highly incouraged in islam to respect and obey the law of the land (if they have full religious and human rights in that land )..I and my family think that these militant groups should not stay in power coz it's a threat to democracy and usually they are dictators and they have nothing good to offer ...There should be judicial and political system in a country but again it's only possible when a country is free only then they can make their judicial and political system .
Mostly commenting for thr algorithm and cuz everything else's been said in some other comment here, but thank you for the extraordinary work and the extraordinary production that came out of it
I don't think both sides are Equal and I think that you are being pro Israel because you recognise the right of a Jewish state in historic Palestine when this is illegal under internal law because: 1) settlers don't have right of self determination, it is very dangerous giving right lf self determination because is approving colonisation (like is happening now in historic Palestine). Secobd the existabce of the state of Israel is a violation of the self determination right of palestians people even if the Jewish settlers have right of self determination (which they shouldn't as i explain), because israel by law is a etnonacionalist Jewish state. Third the Balfour declaration is illegal because bypass the self determination and independence right give by the luege covenant in the Versailles. The league council try to bypass this right of self determination with incorption of the Balfour declaration but it is not legally relevant because they don't had the legal authority to do it. even more the portion of Palestine is it illegal in accordance of the self determination right stablish in the league covenant, because Palestine was legally a single territory with a single population enjoying a right of self determination in a unitary basis. Despite of it a Jewish state was stablish 1948 by those controlling 78% of Palestine accompany by a etnic cleansing (the nakba) , and despite of violating internacional law Israel was accepted in the United nation.
dude, watch the beginning again because you missed the entire point of this. i never said the two sides are equal, and i never gave my position on anything, except the current destruction of gaza. the point of this video is to look at what each side believes so we can understand what motivates them, and then look at basic uncontested facts. next time i’ll look at what actually happened and give my very strong opinions on all of it.
A hard watch tbh, as someone who didn't feel at all like listening to an Israeli side, hearing 'both sides' again and again hurt my ears haha. Specially frustrating when knowing that the second part intends to deconstruct(?) this sides in the first place. I sympathize with the narrative of zionism as a settler colonial project from the get go. But yhea, looking at the narrative I heard, in retrospective i can see that earlier period when an actual "conflict" existed being glossed over, and the interests of the palestinian nationalist side being obscured or just taken for granted. I'm confused by the aside on the word genocide. I think a political conception of genocide should prioritize identifying it and acting on it way before it's obvious than the majority of a population is definitely going to die or be displaced. And afaik no group has literally wanted nor attempted to have every single drop of blood of a given ethnicity to go cold. This is not to say that the legal definition as it is can't be dumb, as an example some argue Gringoland's blockades fit the bill and while i agree those are ridiculously inhuman I agree the word starts to be stretched into meaninglessness. Looking forward for next vid. I wonder where it will eventually land, i don't think people are that stupid nor braiwashed, from palestinians siding with (or tacitly consenting to) nationalism, to zionist doing the same for their colonial state. Those narratives need at least a bit of truth, to somewhat align to the interests of the people, in order to be effective. I mean, #1 trick on the settler book is that the people living in stolen land won't have their interests ever aligning with something like land back or right to return, they're in to the neck. I'm not expecting a (long) response or anything, dear reader may have a better thing to do with their time than educating a non politically active armchair. Have a good day.
i wanted to do it all in one episode, present the narratives, the ABCs and then show what actually happened - but as you can see this one ended up being 2h15m and took me five months to do, and almost bankrupted me, and i dont get paid until it’s released so i had to do it this way or else end up on the street! for genocide, i think these terms need to be precise and be close to popular understanding or else it ends up being hyperinflated cancel kid type rhetoric that no one takes seriously. this is very clearly a mass murder, mass slaughter, evil, senseless, intent of ethnic cleansing, killing of civilians on an enormous scale - but i don’t see that they’re trying to exterminate the population as a whole. i wouldn’t put it past them morally, but i don’t think that’s what they’re doing at the moment… it doesn’t need to be genocide for it to be a an inexcusible mass atrocity people should mobilize to stop immediately.
I'm sorry about your struggles dude, whatever changes you intend to make to go more sustainable (if any, you look veru stubborn haha) I'm in. Sadly i ran out of people to promote your work to, not like there were a lot to begin with. Also this video covered a lot anx i can still appreciate your work, it's just the nature of the topic causing strong reactions despite all the disclaimers. I was stressed even before clicking.
ok, canadians go back to england and scotland, arabs go back to saudi arabia, half the english go back to france - nonsense. good luck with this mentality, you’re as bad as the israeli settlers and government.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Comparing countries that are for all intents and purposes "settled" to a region being settled are two entirely different things. You may think Israel is settled, that's fine. Your western privileged thoughts on the matter are completely irrelevant. What matters is what the Palestinians themselves think AND are willing to do. You either support them or get out of the way. They think otherwise and are engaging in armed struggle to resist colonialism. I'm sorry it's not to your taste. Nice to know you've rolled over for the US, Zionists and settlers. There is very little reason to believe you would not have felt the exact same way about Australia, Canada or the US during their early days when there was still a spirit and will amongst the indigenous peoples to fight back for their land. There is a real possibility for Palestinians to achieve land back. For Palestinians to finally achieve freedom and the right to self determination. Between armed resistance to colonialism, pressure being placed on western governments by good people (not you) for supporting "Israel", BDS and embargos, a coalition of indigenous militias and other Arab neighbours. The momentum and awareness is finally here. And look at you FREE PALESTINE 🇵🇸
You are comparing Palestine to countries, which are for all intents and purposes, "settled". Palestine is not, you may think it is settled, which is fine, because what you as a privileged westerner thinks regarding Palestinians resisting colonialism is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what Palestinians think and are willing to act on. As we speak the indigenous peoples of the region who are being held in captivity by "Israel" are engaging in armed resistance to reclaim their land. If not for their commitment and unrelenting desire to not be colonised, occupied and have their basic human rights violated on a daily basis they have agitated and reminded the world that their cause is alive and well. You however don't think it's real and mock/belittle their aspirations. There is no reason to think you would not have taken the same position on Canada, Australia or the US during their early settler days. There is a real possibility of Palestinians being free from the most oppressive regime and dehumanising state we have seen in quite sometime. Finally we are here, through armed resistance, a coalition of Arab militias, BDS, westerners showing out week to week (not you) to pressure their governments who are endorsing this genocidal project, we could very well see land back and a free Palestine. And here you are...
@@shabbaranks7968 how am i comparing palestinians to countries? i’m comparing them to native americans and berbers and native british before the norman invasions… land doesn’t belong to any people. land is for everyone to share. no one is taking back “their land”. to think land belongs to one or another collectivity is to be a tribal brained ape who wants endless war forever, everywhere on earth. i am not mocking the aspirations of palestinians who want and deserve freedom. i support all the efforts to stop israel form what it’s doing and to force it into compliance with human morality. but i don’t thnk you know what human morality is unfortunately.
No matter how hard you try to abstract things you must reckon with the fact that your version of decolonisation or freedom is laughable especially in the face of those being colonised. It's pretty putrid that you can't see that Palestinians have been left with no options but violence.
22:33 ok, just to be clear, there is going to be a part in the video where you clarify that Israel never actually offered the Palestinians a full state, RIGHT!?
Seeing a new video from this channel is always such a good surprise! This whole podcast really helped me see through the narrow view of current and local politics and understand politics at a more fundamental level, which has helped me in all sorts of surprising ways. If I ever have the money to give support to creators, you're at the top of my list.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 As someone who collects action figures and comic books, I appreciate your taste. Also wanted to say thank you because I started going to protests in my community and getting involved with non-profits from watching your videos. I tell all my friends and family who will listen about your early human history and how it relates to modern hierarchies stuff, I find it so fascinating. You’re making a real difference with this education!
@@Noobslayar to find out that someone started getting involved with politics and activism because of my show is the best possible think i could hear! thank you so much!
Thank you. Using archaeology and anthropology to precisely reveal the history of Arabs and Jews and Palestine is very helpful. I think I understand the main argument you make about two competing nationalism producing conflict and violence. FIRST POINT Nationalism is poison. Still, the context of nation states and the assumptions about them and international cooperation means that talking about nations and nationality must go on. Indigenous people and others are bound by the nation state framework and the incumbent assumptions about property, especially when sorting out legalities and rights. National liberation struggles informed by class analysis are superior and better equipped. I think in the context of colonial history and its outcomes as they manifest today, and the facts of monopoly capitalism reaching to grab, plunder and subjugate abroad, must be acknowledged. So, I do believe that national liberation struggles for liberation from direct occupation and the strangleholds of transnational corporations and the local ruling class that enables and profits by them must be supported. Their shackles have to be lifted before class struggle can advance further. I think there are historical cases of national liberation struggle and class war happening simultaneously and succeeding....SECOND POINT Perhaps you should review what happened in Israel on Oct. 7. Evidence is emerging to debunk the claim of systematic rape by Hamas. (Though rape is often systematic weaponry in war arsenals, and incidences of rape in the course of armed battle.) See Aaron Mate's articles and today's videos by Democracy Now!. Also, evidence is emerging suggesting that the panicking Israeli military fired on everybody, such as a public statement by an Israeli general and clips of Israeli military videos and analysis of published photos of the aftermath (Max Blumenthal's articles). Then there is the much understated reality that there is a Palestinian armed resistance front of 12 factions, with Hamas being the biggest and acting as the representative. Furthermore, the main events of that day are the successful attacks and takeovers of at least 5 Israeli military installations, though the media and L and R commentators seem to refer to the attack on the Nova dance party and Kibutzim as the main and only event. We have yet to know what exactly happened that day, though resistence fights certainly attacked some people and kidnapped others there (took hostages might not be the most precise term). About the argument that Hamas is using the Palestinian people (allowing the genocide to happen) to carry out its war is questionable. Israeli forces and settlers have been regularly assaulting the Palestinian residents in Gaza and the West Bank all the time for decades. That deplorable conditions and systematic violence would foster violent responses after engaging in largely non-violent resistance, including acts of terrorism, is credible. Secondly, could Israel's response of launching genocidal assaults be predicted? Hard to say--though their efforts to push away Palestinians are clearly recognized. Third, it would be difficult to disengage from a long-planned commitment once started. Videos sent from the Palestinian fighters also show where and how they are fighting, and they demonstrate that the fighting is generally not in populated areas and that it is only directly against the Israeli army. Fifth, the strategy of hoping to trade prisoners for hostages is supportable, and who could guess how far Israel would let things go without trying to get back more hostages? Well, that's a lot for now. Thanks again.
i realize there’s a lot of fake stories out there on both sides, and i’m not above falling for them - but did you see the gopro footage from the hamas fighters? i generally never watch videos of people getting killed, but i forced myself before making this, and they’re shooting up homes on kibbutzes and throwing grenades inside of civilian bomb shelters, shooting into toilet stalls at the rave, shooting at civilian cars … the idea that they were mostly fighting in unpopulated areas just isn’t true, they were trying to kill civilians 100%. and they definitely took over military installations and there was a lot of fighting there, which the media tends to ignore because it’s such a total shame to israel that rando home made commandos could literally take control of part of the country for several days. for the rape stuff, i realize that the big NYT story is fake, but from what i could tell there were still some credible stories of rape and torture, mutilation, burning people to death even if it wasn’t systematic. i would be really surprised if that didn’t happen, that’s what angry people with guns do everywhere. for the nationalism stuff, i think it will become very clear next time why i went with this angle. i really wish i could have made this all into one episode, but there was just no way
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I know the guerrilla fighters committed atrocities on Oct 7, but as to their precise identity as Hamas, the extent and the number of victims they are responsible for, that is questioned. I hadn't seen /heard of those images. I have just watched a few presented by the Grayzone and Intifada which show the guerrillas in tunnels awaiting Israeli soldiers to appear at the entries or stepping out to launch at vehicles and individuals. Allegedly, there are videos being circulated which are tagged as Hamas fighting but which may be old images of other people fighting or Israeli forces. Could be H fighters are lashing out especially given the emotionality in responding to atrocities of the other side. Circle of violence. I do not condone Hamas or support it. I just understand the circumstances of the Palestinians and see some justification for resistance, even armed resistance. Wrongdoings bound to happen. This was found by the Truth and Reconciliation investigation into the Korean war, where N. Korean fighters were found to be responsible for some violations. Also, we could note wrongdoings committed by the anti-fascist resisters of WW2. In assessing, must consider the power imbalance, like the regular armies, more powerful states, situation of subjugation of the dominant over the dominated....
@@barbarawaldern1794 the stuff i saw is clearly hamas go pro videos, there’s teams, they’re speaking to eachother about how to proceed, and they’re in residential neighbouhoods, and throwing grenades into peoples’ home bomb shelters. I have no reason to doubt any of that is real sure you can consider the power imbalance and sympathize with lashing out, and also understand their ignorance of who they’re dealing with, but murdering civilians is just evil. they could have taken over the military installations and fought soldiers like they did without shooting up kibbutzes. even if all you care about is palestine they’re not doing themselves any favours that way. i don’t think you should judge the oppressed groups the same way you do the dominant groups, but sometimes the oppressed groups take over, and their behaviour in revolt is a good indicator what they’ll be like in power.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Anyway, I think the dichotomy of this fanatical nationalist/ religious entity v another is an idealization where context and relations between the "sides" are not considered and a false construction when the overall context is ignored. Like so many others, you are fixated on those incidents on Oct. 7 at the Kibutzim and Nova dance party. As many knowledgeable voices including Palestinians, Oct. 7 did not happen in a vacuum. Let's say some people from another town move into yours. They start occupying some houses. They are bullies. They start pushing people out and taking their property, denying them access to services and basic rights. This happens over a few years. A group of them storm your house one day and assault your family/ housemates, killing a couple. They start taking or destroying your stuff, too. So, you fight back, and kill an invader. You're not used to doing that and you fight dirty. How is that situation generally seen? The occupants being invaded are generally seen as defending themselves. Same re a someone who's been abused by her/his domestic partner for a long time; one day she snaps, or even she plots to kill her adversary--The case is seen as self-defense and the victim is not convicted. We have the situation of a population being subjugated and tormented, deprived, expropriated, policed ridiculously every day--of course, there are reactions, outbursts and some are violent, despite the efforts to protest peacefully, rally international support and so on. The are the occupied victims and seen as defending themselves. That is why law recognizes armed resistance. Do not fall into criminalizing dissenters and stereotyping them as terrorists. That is what all the fascists and imperialists are saying and it is dangerous propaganda. The mass responses around the world are extremely important for this reason. One does not have to support everything that resisters do and say to generally support resistance against occupation, discrimination and genocide.
@@barbarawaldern1794 you are wasting so much space writing all of this irrelevant stuff … go back to the beginning of the video where i explain that what i’m doing in this episode is explaining what either side thinks so that we can understand their motivations and behaviour, not so that i can say both sides are equal. im sorry getting fed up with this stuff, you guys seem like you lack basic reading comprehension, and you’re not even reading, it;s a video..
there is also the faction of "Commenders for the security of Israel" that argue for a formation of a palestinian state for security reason rather than a peace treaty. They argue that withdrawing from the settlements and recognizing Palestine as a state even if its without any treaty will eventually improve Israeli security because its much easier to secure borders than to secure occupied territories. They also say that for peace to be possible, there first need to be an entity to sign peace with, and not the other way around. Also, as an Israeli with a pro Israel leaning world view, even though Im not aligned to everything you said in this video, I thank you for doing the research and bringing an historically informed video on this subject, it is rare to find actually good faith speakers either on the Israeli side nor in the Palestinian one.
the commanders for the security of israel never explain exactly what their 2 states look like - that’s been the whole issue this whole time - for a long time there was agreement on 2 states, but the dispute was what they will consist of, so it’s a big omission. and thank you - you probably know everything in this episode already, the next one is when you’ll see something very different to what we hear on either side
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Thats pretty much middle school history class, but still, our version is pretty basic and white washed and the arabs/regional history are not taught at all when its not in relation to historical wars. As for the commanders, I think they go for the camp David with a little bit of land swaps approach (something like the Geneva imitative) . Before the war I used to be a fan of the federal one state (without gaza) but I think 1 state will be a real mess unfortunately (in a dream scenario I would prefer it)
The British left after they gave weapons to the Israelis and after they lied to the arabs and tricked them to recognizing the state of Israel, by saying to them if you recognize Israel we will recognise Palestinian a cheap shot from the British as usual, and the head of the PLO was assassinated by Israel not just ( dead) like you said These things and wordplay make a difference to the listener
none of this is true - the brits didn’t trick the arabs intro recognizing israel - the arabs did not recognize israel! and arafat was maybe poisoned or maybe not, and if he was we don’t know who did it, more likely another palestinian rival than israel - but we don’t know either way, or even if he was poisoned at all.
I've noticed a serious flaw in your reasoning, half an hour in. The Arab perspective is not, generally, that "Jews left 3000 years ago", that is silly. The Arab perspective is that a Jew, historically, is a practitioner of a religion. This is also the Orthodox Jewish idea. The European Christians decided that "Jew" was an ethnicity, codified this in the Nuremberg Laws, and then gave the land away to a bunch of Atheists who called themselves "Jews". I'd highly reccomend listening to Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro, Dovid Weiss, and others, on how Zionism is the absolute antithesis on Judaism. I'd also reccomend Arab Jewish historian Avi Schlaim. Many of the Palestinians can trace their ancestry back to the Jew who converted to Islam or Christianity. Likewise, the Ashkenazi (European Jews) are descended from converts to Judaism. There are also Sephardi, Mizrahi, Kaifeng, Beta Israel, etc - all of which are distinct Jewish cultures, with their own genetics, languages, food, customs, dress, etc, as "Jew" refers to a religion. Zionism was started by Atheists, who retrofitted a perversion of Judaism around it. The Antisemitism that happened in Europe did not happen in the Muslim world. This is precisely because the Muslim world did not allow Usury full stop, whereas the Christian world granted Jews a monopoly on Usury. I haven't gotten this far yet, but I suspect you fail to mention that the Balfour Declaration was offered to Lord Rothschild in exchange for Lord Rothschild and his allies pulling their money out of the Austro-Hungarian economy, in the middle of WWI. I'll let you work out the implications of that.
Also see historian Schlomo Sand's work The Invention of the Jewish People. The Jews were not expelled after the Bar Kochba revolt, the Palestinian population was eliminated. Roman's never exiled rebellious populations, they killed them. Judaism was an evangelical religion prior to Bar Kochba, and had communities of local converts throughout the Roman and Persian empires. The communities of converts remained loyal to Rome during Bar Kochba, and it is from those communities of converts that Judaism survived in the Roman Empire.
Also, with the Law of Return, and the 60+ laws based on it, affecting every facet of life, and the Nation-State law, it is absurd to claim that Arab Israelis have equal rights. Israel is an Apartheid State even within its 67 borders.
the nation state law got overturned by the supreme court - and sorry, you’ll hear people argue all the time on the palestinian side that just because they jews were a state here 3000 years ago doesn’t give them the right to come back and push the arabs out, as well as the argument about jews being a religion not a nation. the 2nd argument is more popular in west bank and gaza the first one among diaspora educated palestinians. a lot of the other stuff you’re saying is full of shit, but not interesting enough to argue about - for example, lots of genetic studies show middle eastern origins of jewish populations across the world with some exceptions, notably the falasha were converts, but not the majority of ashkenazim.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 haaretz reported that mitochrondrial DNA tests (Judaism being matrilineal) done by Johns Hopkins University shows Ashkenazi are descended from 2 women originating in the Caucasus region. DNA tests are illegal in Israel. But go ahead and call others full of shit, when they specifically point to their sources.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 also, note you glossed over the Law of Return. But, hey, you also repeat the debunked mass rape claim, and negate to mention Oct 7th's civilian casualties were mainly caused by a Mass Hannibal by the IDF, as has been reported in Israeli media. You also claim that there is a controversy over Gaza's occupied status, despite the 2004 ICJ finding that it is definitely occupied under international law. You neglect to mention also, that T.E. Lawrence was sent to the Arab lands by the British during WWI to promise the Arabs self determination if they revolted against the Ottomans, at the same time they were promising Rothschild the Balfour devlaration in exchange for crashing the Austro-Hungarian Empire. As Wilde made clear to the ICJ a couple days ago, there has never been a legal or moral basis for Israel's existence. Everything it has ever done is illegal. I'd also reccomend the book Holocaust Victims Accuse. Available on Torah Jews website. It was the Zionist lobby that caused doors to close in other countries for Jewish refugees.
I wonder how come there seems to be so little overlap between your audience and those of so-called Breadtube channels. I've seen the creator of Andrewism in the comments here, but not a lot of mingling otherwise. So many viewers of other leftist channels seem to be unaware of you, despite the frankly insane quality you crank out every single time. Anyways, another banger, keep 'em coming!
thank you! and not sure why - andrewism is because he recommended one or two of my episodes and he comments on my stuff sometimes - maybe it’s the style or positions or something? breadtube can be very bubblethink and petty gossipy - but let people know about it if you can!
@@DjinnandTonik True. I just watched another video and saw Anark and LuckyBlackCat in the comments as well. However, I don't feel like these videos come across as pushy or gratuitous about anarchism, at least not to the audience of the more popular "Breadtube" channels (ironically a term with explicitly anarchist origins). Of course, they will probably never be super popular with the tankies.
I think Daniel might come across as a class reductionist to many leftish liberals. Which seems ridiculous to me. Or they just don't like the video aesthetics (which are somewhat unusual).
The one thing I hate(?) about your channel is that you've made me extremely skeptical about absolutely everything that I read or listen to, including your content! Your series of videos analysing Graeber's book got me to reflect a lot about how no intellectual/scholar, even the ones you really admire, can be 100% trusted. I never liked Graeber as an anarchist; rather, he always came off to me as something between a radlib and socdem - he literally joined the UK's Labour Party a couple of years before his death despite eventually being expelled for being too much of a Corbynite. Despite all this, I've really fallen in love with anthropology because of Graeber, but your videos have been extremely useful in putting me on the right path. Also, reading the comments from haters on your videos is one of my favourite past times 😂.
haha thanks, yeah it’s hard being so skeptical - especially with something like this, every sentence i say i have to look it up, and then it still miss a few
Even though I’m not entirely convinced by the both-sidesism of the approach thus far, I have to recognize the incredible amount of work you’ve done on this subject. I’m interested to see where you go with this….
The one thing that caught my ear as something I feel qualified to critique is your overly restrictive definition of genocide. When Raphael Lemkin coined the word he was talking about what we today call cultural genocide; the mass killing is just a particularly ubiquitous side effect of the process. The UN legal definition was literally altered by the US and UK so they wouldn't be held just as liable as Germany (I mean, realistically, they still were, but it gave them enough of a tinge of plaisible deniability to serve as an aegis). I think the best counterexample to point to is American chattel slavery. There we clearly have a genocide by all reasonable definitions (notably including all elements of the rather restictive UN legal definition), where the goal is explicitly to avoid physically killing a majority of Black people so as to preserve the existence of a slave class. For more recent literature building on Lemkin's work you can look to researchers like Damien Short.
the thing is that in most peoples’ minds, genocide means physical extermination, and we now have the term “cultural genocide” for destroying a culture or identity (like you mentioned with slavery or residential schools in canada - i would not call slavery a plain “genocide” at all, because like you said, there was no attempt physical extermination). and we have the term “ethnic cleansing” for displacing or destroying part of a people, and mass murder or mass slaughter … and these terms are clear, coherent, cover all the concepts we want to discuss, and they are readily understood by everyone. that being the case, why should be go back to lemkin’s definition, or the idiotic and meaningless ICJ defintion, which just lead to confusion and make everything seem like hyperbole, and make people inclined to take the term less seriously? and note that the term “cultural genocide” was coined because regardless of lemkin’s original concept, everyone was using the term to mean physical extermination, which is why we needed a new one for cultural destruction!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Why go back to Lemkin's definition? Because to accept the current colloquial definition is to completely miss the point of his work. More than that, it is to accept the deliberate obfuscation of the whole point of his work. Now, I have enough training in linguistics to not be uptight about the colloquial usage. Language change is literally a more consistent property of language than language being used to communicate, so there's just no use in being precious about it. But in an academic context where we're being very deliberate with our language? When we're explicitly working to avoid worbs? When the whole thesis is building to a class analysis of the process and word in question? Then we really want to avoid making "cultural genocide" seem like a special case of or a separate process to "genocide", when in fact mass killing (never mind your particularly restrictive definition of even that overly restrictive definition) is an ultimately minor albeit particularly visible side effect of the process of genocide. That kind of shit framing very quickly gets into some actively dangerous places. You already took some time to quibble over the definition. You already interrupted your flow to go on a tangent. And you chose to reify the shit framing rather than actually educating your audience.
@watcher314159 well thats because i don’t agree with you, and so far i think that what you’re proposing is what is “shit framing”. in my view, what i’m doing is avoiding “worbs” and what you’re doing is insisting on worbs. Sometimes a colloquial usage is worbs, and sometimes the colloquial usage is more coherent than academic use, which I think is the case with genocide. you haven’t make any arguments so far that I find persuasive at all for why lemkin’s definition is better than what i’m doing, or why it’s better to not have separate terms for cultural and physical destruction. so, instead of making vague statements about how my framing is shit and takes us to dangerous places, why don’y you go ahead and explain *why* my framing is bad and *how* it takes us to dangerous places so we can have an actual discussion. are you saying that because a physical genocide will always include a cultural genocide, that to separate the two terms is somehow misleading or obfuscating? because i don’t find that to be true at all, because you can have cultural destruction without physical destruction, so you want a term for that. and also, speaking of going to dangerous places - for my entire life until about two weeks ago i understood “armenian genocide” and “rwandan genocide” and “bosnian genocide” to mean that there were extermination attempts at those people. now that i understand that the term is used to mean something else, my immediate gut reaction is to take those events less seriously and roll my eyes whenever someone says “genocide” - even though my brain understands that what you mean by “genocide” is still something extremely abhorrent. is this what you think is a productive result of the terms you want to use? because i can’t be the only one having these reactions. i think this is more dangerous than whatever you are proposing as the dangers of using genocide the way i think it should be used (given that you haven’t yet pointed out what you mean by “dangerous places”).
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 1. Class formation is predicated on genocide. This is your whole-ass thesis. 2. There exist trivial examples of class formation where cultural but not physical destruction is what the class formation is predicated upon. American chattel slavery being the most unambiguous I can point to. 3. Either your whole-ass thesis is wrong or you've fallen into a worb trap where you implicitly accept a Lemkinian definition of genocide, despite your explicit declaration of a very Churchillian definition. QED. As for the shit framing, as mentioned, the whole reason genocide was redefined by the ICJ (and further redefined in colloquial usage) was to obfuscate some heinous shit. It serves no other purpose, and never has. The shit framing lead to dangerous shit so quickly it was instantaneous. There's your trivial case, a small window into a well of rhetorical bullshit this margin is much too narrow to contain. Now, you do have a point about the emotional impact of the colloquial usage of "genocide". This, and the general process of the euphemism treadmill, is another reason why I can't really take umbrage with the colloquial definition in colloquial use; natural language gonna natural language. And there's an obvious practical difference in dicussing those aspects of genocide that can be easily captured in a photograph and those that need more elaboration that I'd be foolish to deny. But in academic use things are very different. The point is to avoid worbs, with preserving emotional impact and aligning with colloquial use being distant secondary concerns. Lemkin was exceptionally deliberate in avoiding worbiness when he defined genocide, and nobody has come up with anything equally or less worby that more closely aligns with the (deliberately worby) colloquial meaning.
haha - “class formation is predicated on genocide (meaning cultural genocide)” is not in any way my whole ass thesis. that idea has never occured to me, i don’t know what you mean by it, and i can think of all sorts of examples where that’s not true at all - class formation happens with neither cultural nor physical destruction. Please elaborate and give some examples so i can know what you mean in order to agree or disagree or argue back. You gave one example of american slavery, but there are a zillion examples that don’t conform to that model at all.
Excellent work. I think your audience doesn't see how you're trying to make your way into this subject in a way that hopefully can speak to a broader viewership. That said, the perspective laid out in this video begs for the context that's coming in Part II (as you've probably noticed from the passionate comments) so, filled with self-loathing for being that guy, any timetable for that one dropping? Not in the sense you should feel pressured from it, but hopefully in a sense of pride that comes with knowing someone feels a lot of excitement and anticipation for your perspective and insights and wants to share them in their complete form with others.
i started with the intent of making it all one episode, but it just was too damned long - realstically it wont be out for several months - it took me 4 months to make this and it almost bankrupted me and the rush to finish before march 1 while dealing with a dozen legal emergencies for clients has totally burnt me out - so before i do part 2 of this, im doing a QnA about this episode, and then finishing the intersectionality episode i was 2/3 of the way through when oct 7 happened.
Something I believe is very important about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Nobody wants a free Palestinian state. We as people and most Palestinians want freedom for the region. However most countries in the Middle East are muslim monarchies. Monarchies have no interest in having a working democracy based on the same religious values. The same happened 200 years ago after the Congress of Vienna, when Austria-Hungary, Prussia and Russia agreed in supporting each other to keep down democracies and liberalism. There monarchies like Qatar, Iran or Saudi Arabia are both anti-democratic and their leadership is anti-semitic. I am worried that any independent Palestine could fall to another far-right group financed by Syria or Iran. I believe this is a big reason why the Arab spring is a failure. Europe didn't want to help the population of North African countries and monarchies. If we talk about spreading democracy we can also see total failures by the West. I am an international politics nerd, but I honestly still don't understand what America tried to implement in Afghanistan, while I can understand the political system and factions of Somaliland, a country whose people decided to take actual parts of Western constitutions and multi-party democracy. For me the "taking of the land from Arabs"-argument is a bit odd, because I also have living family members that were displaced, illegally under international law and were part of a cultural minority that were almost fully displaced. Oddly in this case it was Germans that were displaced after WW2. Specifically Sudeten Germans in the historical Sudetenland. After WW2 the Allies agreed with some displacement, but Czechoslovakia essentially kicked out all Sudeten Germans. While I can understand why Czechs would want to Germans out, becaue they wanted to "Germanize" everything, they essentially did a full cultural genocide. I believe my grandpa actually has a very good way to deal with this historical fact. He holds absolutely no grudge to the Czechs, but also had a relation to the people that took over their farm which is unsually good to a point where he says he debated other Sudeten Germans, because they don't believe that the Czechs helped his family to smuggle things like family photos and other documents over the border. Today the line between Czechs and Germans is blending, as there are no borders in the EU. My grandpa is a big fan of Czech Beer and a Czech grandma actualy made socks for me and my brother. Because of this I am actually less sympethatic to the displacement argument of Arabs than most, because it will never solve the conflict for houses that now have generations of history for different ethnic groups. It should also be noted that muslim arabs (which is the Palestinian national identity) or jewish israelis, but also muslims that were pro-Israel against other muslims in 1948, Druze people, Christians and Atheists. I believe the ony fair may to end the conflict in modern day is a secular state that explictly claims to be the "state of jews, muslims, christians, druze and other groups" in its constitution. It would also definitely need international financial support to prevent hate based on reparations.
While I agree with a lot of what you said, your personal story doesn't really have any bearing on palestininians feelings of injustice at their displacement .for one thing sounds like your family ended up on their feet and were able to live. The majority of Palestinians on the other hand live under occupation without any citizenship or human rights and most of the rest languish in neighbouring countries as refugees, again mostly without proper citizenship. Therefore the original injustice and displacement has been a continuous experience, a prolonged suffering, which it doesn't sound like for your family. So I don't see why your families experience should mean "you don't get it" it seems pretty oblivious to me.
@@DjinnandTonik I was comparing my family story to the 1948 war, not current events. It was simply about how I build my argument and try to hold it consistently. Germans after WW2 were essentially refugees. A not insignificant of especially those in the North East had to literally walk over the Eastern sea and many died. Given that a majority of Palestinians supports the Hamas invasion, while I don't believe they would do it if given all information, things would be different.
Amazing effort. I'm only 52 minutes in but you've mentioned many things that aren't mentioned elsewhere. However I do feel like there's a glaring omission at this stage. You kind of treat the zionists' immigrating to palestine as just that: "immigration". Which would be innocent enough, but it was much worse than that. A very essential part of the conflict is that the zionists, from the very start, planned to invade Palestine and colonize it, against the will of the Arab society that had lived there continuously for almost 2000 years. Theodor Herzl literally tried to recruit the German Kaiser to help colonize it, and bribe the Ottoman Sultan in person in exchange for a colonial charter, the draft of which makes clear they we going to set up their own government and law enforcement. When that fell apart they lobbied Britain to help colonize the land, appealing to Christian Zionist sentiment, and succeeded in having prominent Jewish Zionists guarantee british support for taking over palestine. This then led to a program of massive "over-migration" where the existing arab society saw their land being flooded by a group of people who fully expected to start a country there. As Jabotinsky eventually explained in his "iron Wall" essay, this was going to predictably provoke the local population into a fight to defend their entire way of life. This would have played out the same almost anywhere else in the world. In this light, arab nationalism seemed more a matter of survival in the face of European colonialism. EDIT: You mention the 1939 white paper a few minutes later, but it's crucial to note that the proposal was for representative democracy with both Jews and Arabs sharing in a representative government. This should have been good for the zionists. But since they had planned to take the whole land over from the start this sent them into an explosion of terrorist violence that drove the british out. This is also a key part of the story I had no idea about but was shocked to learn: Peace could have come in 1939, but the Zionists launched a terrorist campaign instead to take over the whole land by force.
why are you siding with a colonizer in any way? it seems immoral and racist to me. i didn’t watch the whole video because i am not interested in the israeli perspective. being a settler is inherently immoral. i would probably reflect on your own subconscious racism. most countries are asking for a ceasefire and creating a video that is in anyway sympathetic to the israeli occupation is violent.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69I don't know if you have ever come across the youtuber @LonerBox but he also likes to talk about this conflict from a left-wing perspective and goes over a lot of the history on his live streams.
Phew! This was a challenging one to get through just because of the subject matter, but absolutely worth it. I am blown away by your level of detail here, no wonder it took so long and still has more story left to tell! Super looking forward to Part 2, your deconstruction of power dynamics is the reason I love your stuff and is what has inspired me to action in my local community. Side note, I didn't realize you had a monthly Ko-Fi, I'll be switching from Patreon to monthly contributions!
thanks so much - i need to advertize better about the monthly option, cause doing videos like this that take 4 months totally bankrupts me each time! glad you appreciated it and if it motivates you to be active that’s the most amazing thing i can hear about what im doing! thank you!
Question: Do you believe violent indigenous resistance against american settlers was morally justified a full 250+ years after first contact and 100+ years after the US was founded? Another question: Was the indigenous narrative of resistance against encroaching settlers stealing land and genociding their people equally as valid and worth consideration as the settler desire to escape chaos and oppression from europe and spread civilization in a savage new world?
For the first question, you need to be more specific. What kind of violent resistance? Against whom specifically? Make it analogous to israel/palestine. Violence against military or corporate forces taking your land? Sure. Violence against a civilian who is knowingly taking your land. Probably. Violence against a civilian living on land that was stolen 200 years ago, but who had nothing to do with that theft, and doesn’t know about it, even tough they currently benefit from it? Absolutely not. For the second question - i don’t even understand it. I’m not saying the narratives are equally valid. I’m saying that we want to understand them, and test them out so that we can determine what is and isn’t valid. We have both of these narratives floating around that people geniunely believe. I’m articulating them, so the audience can understand why there is so much vehement debate, and next time we’ll be finding out what’s real or not.
You keep saying "they dont know". They do know. The kids and grandkids of european settlers knew in the 1850s, and israelis know now. Thats why they continued to stay. They're not ignorant of the history. They understand it. They understand the material benefits. They are active participants in a continuous settler colonial state even tho they weren't literally on the frontier killing or displacing indians/palestinians. They may not *call* it settler colonialism or think its *bad*, but to plead ignorance is absurd and is borderline apologia for the continued expansion of the state of israel. If the nazis successfully colonized poland, would polish resistance 75 years later be illegitimate? If russia colonizes crimea and eastern ukraine over the next 75 years, would western ukrainian attacks on the descendants of russian colonizers no longer be legitimate? If china colonizes xinjiang over the next 75 years, would uyghur attacks on han chinese in xinjiang be illegitimate as well? This line of thinking leads to some pretty dark places. Colonization is no longer a terrible crime, but is only bad in its initial phases. After that, have at it!
@PinkoJack so what I get from this is that you’ve clearly never met one single israeli in your life, and you’ve probably never met a jew in your life either. They do not fucking know. Generations of people did not know. Go watch even videos with interview of former zionists, like Miko Peled or Ofer Cassif - they grew up with israeli propaganda, had no clue about the actual history, until they learned it later on their own and became anti zionist activists. You are the exact sort of ignoramus who needs to be watching this video, yet your ignorance is loaded with arrogance, and serious moral retardation, so it might as well being a donkey watching the video… If you think it’s legitimate to go and kill the grandchildren of nazis or of whoever else whose grandparents did something bad, then i’m sorry, you’re a fucking moron, who might as well be a nazi yourself or a chimpanzee. ooga ooga, kill the other tribe, ooga ooga. if your grandfather did a crime, do you deserve to die for it? what kind of fucking idiocy is that? And colonialism is bad as long as it’s going on for, as long as people are being dispossessed and killed. You can’t blame people for what their parents or grandparents did, everyone who’s alive deserves to live in equality and freedom. you don’t get to equality and freedom by going and doing mindless murders of people because they’re from the same tribe as someone else who did something bad. What makes you different than a “price tag” settler in the west bank? it’s the exact same mentality, except you’ve deluded yourself into thinking you’re a leftist, when you’re actually a right wing lunatic. Also, by your “logic” the berbers in north africa, and the christians in jerusalem, should all be doing violent resistance against arab civilians because their ancestors did settler colonialism there in 700AD…
@@PinkoJackI’m not Israeli, but Jewish. For most of my life I supported Israel. Every time I saw any footage, or talk of Israeli war crimes, genocide, apartheid etc. I would usually be under the belief that the footage was either exaggerated, left parts out, or doesn’t reflect most of Israel. I would mentally justify how Israel has the moral high ground. Since I had already had that conclusion since before I knew what a Palestinian was. It was easier. Even though most of the time, I sympathized with Palestinians upon seeing footage of the brutality of the situation. But I couldn’t admit to myself that Israel was in the wrong.
Always a blessing when you upload... What do you think of Ilan Pappé? I think from what i have seen, he seems to be very accurate, honest and not as biased (leninism) and polarizing as Norm Finkelstein for example.
i actually prefer finkelstein! he’s hilarious! i haven’t read pappé for a long time, and he’s interesting, but i got turned off once when i saw him speak because he was saying that as a historian he should be an active first and the cause is more important than the truth … like not as in he should make stuff up, but i wasnt impressed with that
I appreciate his analysis of the decades long conflict but he still is very reactionary and a rapid transphobe in his other positions. Bolstering him too much risks alienating other allies imo
@@johnwright7916 i don’t think someone needs to have the right opinions on every issue to have valuable insights into the issue where they’re an expert - but also i’m not bolstering him here, i’m giving him as an example of how someone with the pro palestine POV/narrative interprets oct 7 vs the other writer i showed with the israel POV
@johnwright7916 ahh you are referring to finkelstein, thought you meant Pappé. Pappe is incredible imo he literally studied his stuff in the archives in Israel, he was on the sources. "The ethnic cleansing of the people of palestine "and the "10 myths about Israel " are just two of his great books! I came across him in October, he was on the majority report with Sam seder. Highly recommended to watch that.
this is genuinally the best video i've seen about this, coming from a jew. you've put all what i've wanted to say into words. the way i've saw the other side is through reframing words, exactly what you said. praying for peace one day. thank you for really understanding and for all your research, its so so refreshing
It is sad that you didn't bring up Arabs Revolt, it's alliance with the Entente, and the Entente betrayal towards Arabs after the Ottoman Empires got defeated.
yes that’s important history, and very interesting, but I tried to just limit it to what people need to know to get the basic understanding of what’s happening today - like i also skipped the 1973 war, and the occupation of south lebanon, or the massacres in golan heights in 1967 even if these are very important events - and still it’s 2hrs long! and honestly am not super familar with it, maybe i should have learned more
36:36 The modern map of Palestine looks quite different today, wouldn't you agree? In fact, critical thought of the competing nationalism of that time could lead to a logical conclusion: One set of nationalists wanted to colonize a land. Telling those of like ethnicity from other lands who also had no legitimate claim to that land That they had historical ties to it, or that their nationalist religious book (torah) granted them divine right. That the inhabitants of that land were 'less than,' and deserved to live under their boot The other nationalists wanted to resist that colonization I draw the attention of the 1948 map once more Seems one side could be characterized as 'right wing' and one could be characterized as 'left wing' Have I missed anything so far? So far, you have but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt and watch the rest I do enjoy your videos
you seem to be missing the whole point of this video - it’s to explain what people on either side think and what their narratives are so we can know what motivates them, and then we will dissect them next time and see what is and isnt true
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I haven't watched the rest of vid yet. The israeli narrative is simple: Palestinians are human animals that don't deserve the land our ancestors abandoned over 2000 years ago, so we will take it. Even if it means bathing it in their blood. Not exaggerating, they've come out and said this themselves. The 1948 map proves that the Palestinian narrative has been dictated by the israeli one. They are being ethnically cleansed. The world is turning a blind eye, even condemning them for daring to resist. So far, it seems like an academic's "both sides" to people who think 'left' and 'right' can stand in the place of 'right' and 'wrong.' This isn't an attack. I realize you would have a different perspective than some lily-white more on from the American deep south. Put in the same context, it seems like blaming the natives for the colonization of the Americas.
1:35:50 I'm not seeing the promised link to the evidence. Would you mind either replying with it here, or, better yet, in the description? Are the show notes different from the description?
There is no peace under colonialism and occupation, it is never the fault of Palestinians it is 100% the fault of the west and Israel, and yes both ppl’s are paying the price.
haha, well i was 2/3 of the way through that when oct 7th happened, and then 4.5 months later i finally finished this one… Kimberlé Crenshaw ep coming relatively soon!
@@sztetter im going to do an QnA episode about this one, and then crenshaw (will be doing QnA episodes after each episode now so that i can respond to all the questions and produce stuff that doesn’t take 4 months each time!)
maybe in a week or two, im totally burnt out rn and have a huge backlog of emergency legal work. and the transcript i might need help with, i wrote a script and then kept adding and adding parts and theyre all in diffrent files…
Is there anyway one could get in touch wirh you? I am thinking a lot about political philosophy but there is no one that could estimate the value of it. I wonder if I could get in touch with you and exchange a few "letters"?
i’m a lawyer and i do this full time plus have a lot of family obligations so i don’t have time for long correspondence - like if you have some questions about the episodes i always answer them, but if it’s too complicated or involved i don’t have time to deal with it and it stresses me out - i usually give me email at the end of each episode
I do think the main inter-jewish opposition to zionism of the pre-israel period should at least be mentioned, even though an in-depth detailed explanation is not the focus of the video and would bloat it a lot: "the bund"/jewish labour bund, which was much more socialist then the "socialist" strands of zionism
holy fuck this is amazing. i’m doing TONS of research on this, and i really appreciate resources like this. thank you for doing this. it’s taken me 9 months to read a handful of books and to feel like i can explain it and write about it, so i can imagine how much work you put in here.
i definitely agree with that, though when people think they’re physically threatend and think “it’s my kids or your kids” they’ll usually pick “your kids” which is what people in israel think in israel right now, that oct 7 will happen over and over again unless they do this and “destroy hamas” which is impossible nonsense, and which isn’t true at all for the reasons I explained.
What you seem to not understand is that you cannot just expect the working class of Israel and Palestine to unite and put national differences aside when the Israeli working class directly benefits from stealing Palestinian land. This would be like, in the middle of the genocide of natives in the USA saying: omg! The natives should really put their national aspirations aside and unite with the people who benefit greatly from stealing their land! You think you have reached a higher plane of leftism by bringing nuance a both sides but you really just expose your liberal world view where both the colonized and colonizers are on equal playing field. Like if during the Algerian war of independence you would be saying: omg! The FLN are exploiting their national identity instead of unifying with the French who have colonized the, for 150 years
I guess i can’t blame you because i didn’t get into the class conflict dynamics that im talking about in this episode (i wanted it to be one episode but it’s too long) but i actually do understand that - i’ll be talking about this when i cover labour zionism next time and compare it to south africa’s white workers who are the one who demanded apartheid. but like i said in the video, it’s not about the working class vs the capitalist class, it’s about decision makers vs everyone else. and, what you’re saying is much more true of the early phase of the conflict, where the zionist movement and the working class zionists benefited directly from land theft - but today, they already got the land. the only ones who are benefitting from further land theft now are the west bank settlers, who are just 100% colonialists. for the rest of the population, they actually have a material interest in the conflict ending, but their leadership has been lying to them and pushing them into continuing the conflict indefinitely, which was very apparent in what happened in the aftermath of oslo. what differntiates this from like the FLN vs the french in algeria or even the nazis vs the jews in WWII is that most colonialists or expansionist empires don’t have a very profound moral justification for what they’re doing. At best it’s “we’re helping the natives but they keep rejecting our benevolence so we need to kill them!” or a the lowest level (south africa, nazi germany) it’s “we are superior, we need to take this land”. It’s hard to see this now from an outsider’s perspective because the Israeli government is just constantly mouthing off genocidal statements and plans for ethnic cleansing, and the population supports much of this, but this is very much the result of the narrative of self defence and historical moral virtue. In this situation in israel and palestine, there’s a profound ideology on the zionist side that it is not and never has been a colonialist, that they didn’t push anyone off their land except in self defence etc. So this is something that needs to be understood and adressed, it is a huge reason why this conflict was not resolved decades ago…
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 thanks a lot for taking the time to explain (and for tackling the topic too ) but I still don't understand the "equivalence of the two sides " view taken in the coverage similar to the first commentator. I am glad you mentioned algeria (even tho I don't understand what FLN vs algeria means if the FLN was the movement to end french occupation and settlement) . Let's take that example , moral justifications aside (the justification of french occupation was based as far as I remember on security concerns of piracy in that region that can only be stopped by french presence which I honestly don't find more or less justified then israeli settlement justifications either) what exactly is the fundamental difference? Algeria: French people and algerian jews received preferential treatment while muslims were brutalised during french occupation. The french consider themselves the righful owner of that place and were keenly interested in getting the right demographics. And once the FLN was able to push french military occupation out and offering everyone algerian citizenship the though of being equal to the arab muslims was enough to make the vast majority of them emigrate to france. Palestine: The conflict started as you said , purely historically , with zionist emigration, it has a clear beginning and the beginning is instigated by zionists. Now I don't know ofc the take you are going to take on that in detail so apologies . But on the fundamental level all zionist writings and speeches aside, if the aim is a majority jewish state in a place that till today doesn't have majority jewish demographics when counting the refugees entirely any legitimisation of zionism is a legitimisation of both ethnic cleansing and of a narrative of fundamental specialness of jews. Jews cannot be integrated in any country and are nowhere safe except with their own state and with their majority demographic but palestinian arabs those guys can go into diaspora, be absorbed and integrated and will forget being from there within a generation. All nuances aside, isn't one side eerily similar to any other ethonationalist movement obsessed with birth rates ? Whatever reaction arab people there develop , it remains a reaction to emigration of people that , by their own leaders aims at least, cannot tolerate coexistence with any non jewish majority ever.
oops the FLN vs algeria was a typo, corrected! nevermind nuances (i hate nuance!) - the difference here is that in the zionist narrative, that most zionists today believe, creating a jewish majority did not at all necessitate any ethnic cleansing. their story is ‘we just immigrated and became the majority over time, and then when you’re the majority, you deserve a state. and when the UN made a partition plan where we had a state in the jewish majority areas, the arabs tried to genocide us.’ you see the difference? the zionist leaders made all kinds of statements about transferring the population out, but 90% of zionists have never heard of these statements and then the ones who do will put it in the context of ‘well the arabs had been attacking and pogroming us since we started immigrating there, so eventually ben gurion realized that these people are too racist to coexist with us and accept us becoming a majority so we had to draw up plans to kick them out when they started genociding us’ - which is where Benny Morris ends up. Now this is full of shit in many ways, but that’s what I get in to next time. So the “both sides” is not that both sides are equally right or wrong, it’s that both sides have more or less equally coherent moral justifications, and next time we look at what’s the truth in all of that. and that’s interesting about the piracy angle in algeria, i need to look at more justifications for colonialism.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 first of all, it’s not just WB settlers who benefit from stolen land, ALL of Palestine was stolen and doesn’t become not stolen after 70 years. If Germany had won WW2 and colonized east Europe it would still be stolen 100 years later and that would 100% be beneficial to German settlers. I mean the people who were killed on Oct 7th literally live on ethnically cleansed land and the Hamas militants are the descendants of the ethnically cleansed people. How is it not in the benefit of those Israelis to farm that land? (Israelis have, by the way extremely high standards of living) Maybe when the reason why Israelis hate Arabs so much isn’t just because of propaganda by their elites but simply because they, like American settlers in the 19th réalise that it serves their material interests. On the point of colonialism you are just wrong. It is only today, since colonialism has a bad rep that all sorts of mystical tales are used to justify Israeli colonialism. The early Zionists were openly and proudly colonialists who used all the classical justifications you mentioned, which you must know since you mentioned Rashid Khalidi’s book.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 so what’s your point? If you know the “Israeli narrative” is bullshit is bullshit why not clearly say it instead of giving the impression that this is a nuanced issue? I’m not saying you cannot present a “devils advocate” but you need to make clear it is a “devils advocate”! Israel Palestine is the most simple conflict today: settlers stealing and settling the land of the natives
Epic! In the truest sense of the word. A labor of love. The analysis makes it possible to believe the conflict is resolvable, not intractable. It video helps us to understand why, specifically, people believe it is unsolvable and why that is false.
thanks - im not even sure why you feel that way at this point given that i didn’t even get to the stuff about who started it, and what the compromises are that come out of that yet!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 No doubt, sounds like the next episode will be really revealing in those senses. Maybe what I am reacting to is the way you laid out *what is behind* the extreme polarized thinking represented by Netanyahu and his lunatic cabinet on one side & extremist Hamas on the other side. in the sense, the video serves to demystify the conflict and the hideous point to which it has sunk. Somehow identifying that background gives me hope that it can be overcome, that it is not some ancient, mysterious, unsolvable riddle.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict boils down to the depiction of Jews in Islam. There was never a country called Palestine. Palestine is a colonial name , and was a British colony. There was never a point in history when a group of unified people who referred to themselves as “Palestinians” ever had sovereignty over this land or any land anywhere in the world. Even today, there is nothing that unifies the Palestinian people around something that could serve as a unified identity, ethnicity nationality or heritage. “Palestine” is a front by the Muslim Arab world to attempt to legitimise the destruction of the state of Israel and the annihilation of the Jewish people as prophesied in the Hadith in order for the day of judgement to arrive. You’ve needlessly over-complicated an already complicated conflict .
no. while those dynamics played a role in how opposition to zionism was expressed, to paint that as the cause of the opposition to zionism is ahistorial b.s. designed to blame the arabs for the whole conflict. it’s true that palestinian identity wasn’t very important, but not true that it didn’t exist (it existed more for some classes than others) and the religious stuff was just a rallying point against zionism, not the actual cause of the opposition. the elite arabs opposed zionism because they wanted to continue to be the ruling elite of that territory. meanwhile the peasants opposed zionism because zionist land agencies were buying land from wealthy owners who had stolen it from the peasants, and then evicted them in great numbers contributing to a catastrophic landlessness crisis that had been growing in palestine since the late 19thCentury but was made worse by zionist land acquisition practices. so different classes of people had different reasons to opposite zionism, and we’ll see next time how and why that played out the way it did. sadly for the past 80 years both jewish leaders and education system and the palestinian one have been lying to their people about the origins of the conflict, and you’re repeating some of the zionist versions of fake history.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a frist hand account what happened in 1948. The Jews of the Old YIshuv called themselves Palestinians, the Arabs designated themselves by their family names, clan names, and their countries of origin. Nationality is a European concept. the arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinian" until 1964 when a *carefully designed narrative* was constructed to delegitimize the existence of Israel. Zionism is not a steam, or a sect or some organization - it's Jews living in Israel. Hatred for the Jews and genocidal intent towards the Jews is inherent to Islam, as per Hadith Al-Bukhari 2926 the hadith of the rocks and the trees. The Jews even reached out to the Arabs offering to join forces when fighting off the British, and the Arabs refused, because of a very simple concept "Dar Al-Islam" and "Dar Al-Harb" the world is divided into Muslim land, and enemy land yet to be conquered. And when some Jews moved to Mandatory Palestine and purchased land Legally at "exorbitant prices" per the words of the Arabs, they saw that as their arch enemies based on their religion establishing a presence on the land they wanted to conquer. What are "acquisition practices?" have you ever heard of another way to acquire land other than purchasing it or winning it in a war? The Pro-Palestine crowd accuses us of stealing land at least you acknowledge we paid for it. It is 100% the fault of the Arabs for this situation, and the continuation of this situation because they simply refuse to entertain any sort of compromise for peace and prosperity, even though the Palestinian arabs already have a state - it's called Jordan which is 70% Palestinian arabs, and 22 Arab states. God forbid those greedy Jews have one. Look, I can understand your point of view, it's annoying that the Jews are always painted as something positive and the Arabs as something negative, especially given some of the Jews' incessant reliance on the notion of being "God's chosen people". Anything that opposes your predisposed notions about the conflict is considered propaganda or "fake history", but you can't address any of it. Even the leaders of the so called "Palestinian" Arabs were themselves foreign HItler's Nazi right hand man in the middle east, Hajj Amin Al-Husseini himself is from a wealthy family from Arabia, and Azzadin Al-Qassam is from Syria and PLO leader Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. If youre going to self-proclaiming yourself to be an objective expert voice on this matter, you need to do more than just be fair and deconstruct both sides equally, and simply regurgitate false narratives and passing them off as fact. There was never a point in history when a group of people who called themselves "Palestinians" had any sort of sovereignty over any land anywhere in the world at any point in time, they are arabs who came from other arab countries of which there are 22. I'll gladly have a livestream discussion with you about this topic.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a first hand account what happened in 1948. Jews bought land legally at "exorbitant prices" from landowners, they didn't steal land. aand what exactly are "Zionist Acquisition practices" lmfao ? Have you ever heard of any other way to acquire land other than paying someone for it or conquering it from war? The Arabs acquired land here by moving to the land and not buying it from someone they just moved and built villages when the ottomans and british were here. Even their own leaders are not from here : Hitler's right hand man in the middle east Hajj Amin Al Husseini is from a wealthy family from the Hejaz in modern day saui arabia, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam is from Syria, Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. Next, the only people who called themselves Palestinians were the Jews, Arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinians" until 1964, their identites were based on their clan names families and where theyre from. That's why AL-Masri literally meaning "the egyptian" is the thrid most common palestinian surname. Nationality is not a thing in the middle east. The Palestinians fabricate history and pass down fake historical narratives down to their children and indoctrinate them to believe that they have a history here. There was never a single point in history when a group of people who referred to themselves as "Palestinians" had sovereignty over any piece of land anywhere in the world. Even today they are not a unified people - the Palestinians in south Hebron are different to the Palestinians in Jericho or Jericho, or Khan Yunes. The Palestinians tell themselves that they lived in Villas here in peace and prosperity and ruled here justly, and welcomed the poor holocaust surviving Jews from Europe with open arms and the Jews kicked them out. That's the Palestinian narrative TO THIS DAY. Those terrible zionist Jews you speak of were "Palestinian" Jews of the old yishuv who fought the british to gain independence here and save the Jews from the Nazis in Europe and from the pogroms in the middle east and north africa and establish a jewish homeland, in the ancestral homeland of the jews. It is 100% the fault of the arabs who attacked with 5 armies the day after the jews gained independence from the british, because 22 arab countries is not enough for them - they just have to also have the land of the Jews. First and foremost because of the belief in in "Dar Al Islam" and "Dar al Harb" - land of islam, and land of war (land yet to be conquered), and secondly because of the prophesized genocide of the Jews at the hands of Muslims in the Islamic Hadith. If you're going to present yourself as an objective voice on this conflict at least don't omit the blatant facts behind this conflict. I'll gladly have a livestreamed discussion with you about this.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a first hand account what happened in 1948. Jews bought land legally at "exorbitant prices" from landowners, they didn't steal land. aand what exactly are "Zionist Acquisition practices" lmfao ? Have you ever heard of any other way to acquire land other than paying someone for it or conquering it from war? The Arabs acquired land here by moving to the land and not buying it from someone they just moved and built villages when the ottomans and british were here. Even their own leaders are not from here : Hitler's right hand man in the middle east Hajj Amin Al Husseini is from a wealthy family from the Hejaz in modern day saui arabia, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam is from Syria, Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. Next, the only people who called themselves Palestinians were the Jews, Arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinians" until 1964, their identites were based on their clan names families and where theyre from. That's why AL-Masri literally meaning "the egyptian" is the thrid most common palestinian surname. Nationality is not a thing in the middle east. The Palestinians fabricate history and pass down fake historical narratives down to their children and indoctrinate them to believe that they have a history here. There was never a single point in history when a group of people who referred to themselves as "Palestinians" had sovereignty over any piece of land anywhere in the world. Even today they are not a unified people - the Palestinians in south Hebron are different to the Palestinians in Jericho or Jericho, or Khan Yunes. The Palestinians tell themselves that they lived in Villas here in peace and prosperity and ruled here justly, and welcomed the poor holocaust surviving Jews from Europe with open arms and the Jews kicked them out. That's the Palestinian narrative TO THIS DAY. Those terrible zionist Jews you speak of were "Palestinian" Jews of the old yishuv who fought the british to gain independence here and save the Jews from the Nazis in Europe and from the pogroms in the middle east and north africa and establish a jewish homeland, in the ancestral homeland of the jews. It is 100% the fault of the arabs who attacked with 5 armies the day after the jews gained independence from the british, because 22 arab countries is not enough for them - they just have to also have the land of the Jews. First and foremost because of the belief in in "Dar Al Islam" and "Dar al Harb" - land of islam, and land of war (land yet to be conquered), and secondly because of the prophesized genocide of the Jews at the hands of Muslims in the Islamic Hadith. If you're going to present yourself as an objective voice on this conflict at least don't omit the blatant facts behind this conflict. I'll gladly have a live streamed discussion with you about this.
Good on you mate, always consider your videos to be the best on RUclips when it comes to explaining left wing politics, politics in general actually. Take it easy, and thanks.
@@richardfinlayson1524 right?? everyone keeps telling me to monetize the channel, but fuck it and fuck all those ads! it’s like a joke watching videos that want to abolish capitalism with 50 fucking ads in it interrupting you and making you run across the kitchen when youre doing dished to turn off the fucking ads…
Thank so much for this video, I wish I could like it multiple times! Literally everything I see online with regard to IL-PS is a kind of binary cartoon defending the one side while totally vilifying the other, and everyone seems to have such moral clarity with regard to what is going on at all times, on either side.
it’s funny because when i made this, it was supposed to just be a 20m intro to the *real* episode where i get into what actually happened and how much each narrative is true or false, and what they both leave out - and then when it turned out to be this long i thought it’d be boring to everyone because it’s standard “israelis think x and palestinians think y” stuff that you’d learn in any university 101 course when i went to school - but i didn’t realize how completely echo chambered is today and how most people have only ever heard one side or the other such that they don’t even know that there’s another perspective on it.
Looking at some of the comments here, I do feel the phrasing the video uses at some points is unfortunate, even if the title makes it clear the video is against the ongoing ethnic cleansing which has not stopped even after the ceasefire proclamation There probably could've been a better way to communicate some of the messages here without coming across as if the video was actively blaming both sides, rather than the actual general statement that the current state of the conflict has been influenced by two conflicting narratives which were formed from what is essentially similar foundational reasons, and that we have to understand how this happened and where to go from here The Israel-Palestine conflict is actually rather simple even if the finer details are complex, but problems stem from how people misconstrue colonialism as something that is based on people and not an institutional process, which leads to the misconception (most often seen amongst people who lean conservative) that "Land Back" means "kicking people out" which is utter nonsense That said, simple does not mean easy, because I am of the opinion that the USA outright needs to stop existing in its current form of authoritarian capitalistic governance (and to a lesser extent maybe even some neighbouring Middle Eastern countries need to shed away theirs, but I also oppose, say, a formal foundation of any Kurdistan, because internationalism and not nationalism is what is sorely needed) if there is to be a better solution than a shaky two-state one, because Hamas and Fatah are to me already failed states
despite the colonial aspect being very real, both “sides” are to blame for how the conflict started - except the sides aren’t the people, they’re the leaderships pretending to represent the people of either ethnic group. you’ll see what i mean next time, but the arab nationalst leadership completely screwed and exploited their own people to such an extent that there was a mass revolt against them in the 1930s - and then in 1947-1949 the vast majority on the arab side didn’t even bother fighting the war as much as they hated zionism. there were only 5000 fighters from the palestinian arabs, a tiny fraction of the population. and a proportionally low amount of those fighters were from the majority peasant classes. in contrast, the peasant revolt in the 1930s had many times that amount of fighters and it was 100% peasants. the israeli side had about 30,000 fighters for a similar sized population. this is an extremely underexplored aspect of the war. the israeli side was absolutely atrocious in the war - they actually had potential allies in much of the arab population, and just fucked them and killed them in a manner that is still shocking to me today. and the colonial wing of zionism definitely took over early on, but what ends up happening is by the end of WW2 and then especially by the early 1970s the large majority on the israeli side are recent immigrants frm the holocaust and then the arab world who knew nothing about colonialism whatsoever, and were taught a largely falsified history, which persists until today and animates israel’s turn to the right and to fascism etc. it’s so convincing that you have all these non jewish, non israeli people who believe it as well, like destiny or coleman hughes and many others. there are always lies told to colonial populations, but nothing on the level of israel from what i know. and they prevailed until today beacuse the population has become so racist and this assault is so egregious that there’s almost no other way to see it. what i want to do with the next episode is make it clear that the “sides” that we need to judge and evaluate are not “the palestinians” and “the israelis” but specific sectors of each population. and when i talk about the land acquisition policies you’ll see how the arab nationalist leadership can even be said to have collaborated with the zionist leadership in various respects to fuck over the populations on both sides, it’s incredible.
Amongst all the propaganda and misinformation, I must say that this video is a breath of fresh air. Even if there are points of yours that I'm not entirely sure about (though I'm currently in the process of reading more about things since all of this is so new to me), I greatly appreciate that you've taken the time to acknowledge the humanity of both the Israelis and the Palestinians. So many people think that acknowledging the humanity of one group means that you're denying the humanity of the other, but you've made it very clear that that's not at all how we should look at this case, which is something I wish more people took time to do. Wishing you well. This video is A LOT of info in just 2 hours but it gives me a lot to think about and read over, so I appreciate how much effort and care you put into it!
hi thanks - i think the next video on this will be the really enlightening one, but thought that first, people need to understand what’s in the minds of both israelis and palestinians and have some of the basic events in their minds before they can process how the conflict actually started
You said you would go through the more controversial events and lay blame on those who deserve it in future episodes. Has this already been done in the long unscripted episodes you have posted, or will you come up with scripted episodes on this topic in the future? I am asking this because i don't have much time to watch the long unscripted episodes, unfortunately.
The best channel on RUclips. Can’t wait to watch this
You're so right!
If you like genocide simp Hasbara from incredibly intellectually dishonest people, I can see why you might have this opinion.
The most insidious Hasbara on RUclips.
@@johnkayoss5422 Daniel's not pretending to do Hasbara, in fact, his video ends up being harshly critical with Israel and its policies (considered genocide or mass slaughter as a way to describe them). Even in the late beginning he talks about "silly revenge games" that IDF was doing in the West Bank instead of being alert in the Gaza Strip. The most he can do is a sort of accidental Hasbara because misaimed sources (NYT Mass Rape) and because he's explaining the Hasbara side in the video, but that's not the entire point.
@@davidlahozgil that he is pretending to not be Hasbara is the point.
He mentions the exodus of Jews from Iraq, without mentioning the well documented fact that it was Zionists bombing the synagogues and other Jewish gathering places that led to this. He has admitted he was aware of this, but made the choice to leave it out.
He mentions the closure of European countries to Jewish refugees, without mentioning this was done due specifically to the Zionist lobbies preventing it.
He mentions the Balfour declaration without mentioning that Balfour gave this to Lord Rothschild of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in exchange for Rothschild and his Zionist allies crashing the Austro-Hungarian Economy during WWI, creating the mass trauma on the population that was blamed on "the Jews", leading to the rise in power of the ideological twins of the Zionists, who openly allied with the Zionists throughout WWII, With Irgun proposing a formal alliance in Beirut at the height of the Holocaust.
He made no effort to distinguish between "Jew" and "Zionist".
He deliberately erased the arguments of anti-Zionist Jews along with their existance.
He did not mention the Mass Hannibal order on Oct 7 that had already been reported in the Hebrew edition of Ynet, and mocked me for pointing this out to him.
He claims that Arab citizens of JSIL (which is no more "Israel" than ISIL was "the caliphate") have equal rights, which is factually false, as the Law of Return and 60+ laws based on it, as well as the Nation-State Law exist. When this was pointed out to him, he falsely claimed the Nation-State Law had been overturned.
Rather than respond in a rational manner when his factual inaccuracies that expose his work as Hasbara are pointed out, he reacts with obscenities and "your mama" jokes.
It is precisely because he lacks the intellectual integrity to admit that he is Hasbara, of the type known as a "limited hangout", that I feel the need to point out to those whose ignorance he strives to maintain as to what he is.
Please feel free to make a rational argument that anything I have said is in any way less than accurate and precise
"“national” conflicts are often an illusion which mask more substantial class conflicts", here in México people tend to forget pretty quickly about this, it´s even worst when the US is involved
yes, the US makes this horror story possible, and has been keeping the conflict going strong since 1967
"National" conflicts are a PART of class conflict. A class conflict of the imperial core exploiting the global south. Most leftist liberation movements (including nominally anarchist ones) take on a nationalist character as, first and foremost, a pragmatic galvanizing force to deal with the more immediate oppression of colonialism over the broad, long term international class struggle.
No they are not. Struggle against colonialism always takes precedent over internal or international class struggle. The oppression of imperialism and colonial subjugation is a far more immediate concern. This is why most left wing liberation movements (even nominally anarchist ones) take on a nationalist character.
and then the leaders of the nationalist movement magically always warp their actions toward their own class aims, at the expense of the people that they’re liberating. See Zimbabwe for a very clear example one of a zillion. Or the USSR, or anything anytime anywhere.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69just so you understand, this rationale is functionally the same as openly supporting colonialism and/or imperialism.
"We shouldnt support imperfect national liberation movements because they will inevitably turn against the class interests of their own people" is functionally indistinguishable from supporting imperialism because colonized people arent civilized enough for self determination.
Very informative.
I am not a strict materialist, but this channel is probaby the best on the platform at delivering a knowledgable and non-dogmatic materialist perspective. Great work.
Almost every day I refresh my podcast app hoping for another What Is Politics episode - today is the day!!
I'm so appreciative of all the time and effort you put into this work. I have learned so much. Thank you!
the podcast version will hopefully be up by tuesday! i had to rush to get this out before march 1 so i could get paid!
@@jpdenford1473 Do you get paid in cash to pump up this channel.
Hands down the best, most balanced, and detailed take on the conflict I have heard or seen. You are an incredibly clear thinker and presenter, don’t stop what you’re doing!
And you now have a (tiny, but I hope they add up!) monthly donation from me
thank you! next one won’t be as balanced, because we start to lay blame where it belongs…
Their is NO BALANCE in an UNBALANCED "CONFLICT"
@@khubza8999 Hamas is a party of Billionaires who steal UN Aid and care nothing about the refugees their war creates who they say are the UN's problem.
And incorrect about a lot.
I just can't wrap my head around punishing the entirety of Palestinian population over who they voted.. Should not this same judgement be cast to those here in America? Who voted for Bush Sr? Even if it was your parents who voted for him? How come no one ever says that is okay to apply to ANY other set of human beings... Just Palestinians. The Ukrainians get taught how to make molotovs, but Palestinians? They should be happy to just be alive..
somehow missed this comment 5 months ago! it’s kind of worse than that even - only 45% of palestinians voted for hamas in 2006. half that vote was an anti corruption vote. they had 18% support left in gaza on october 6th 2023… half of the population of gaza were toddlers when hamas was elected.
but in the israeli imagination, 100% of palestinians either support hamas and the objectives of hamas and are responsible for oct 7 on some level. it’s insane.
Collective responsibility
🇺🇦🇮🇱🇺🇦🇮🇱🇺🇦💛💙
Ukrainians are defending themselves 🇺🇦💛💙
@@PeakPeakPeakPeakPeak collective responsibility is the mentality of chimpanzees.
Most underrated channel on this website. I always learn so much from these videos.
As an Israeli I must say this is one of the most well informed and clear videos I have seen over the recent months. I agree that things have never looked worse but we must still strive towards a brighter future 🇮🇱❤🇵🇸
Of course you would enjoy it. You are a putrid Israeli
Palestinian here, peace 🕊️
what kinda future, do israelis really believe they can live together and accept palestinians, cuz for me a one state (secular, democratic,equal rights) solution is the best, but both should be ready to give up their fantasy scenarios.
1.8% Israelis think IDF is going too far, there's no hope in this
@@oussamarofaik8545 that sounds amazing but it would never work without changing the deep state. Even if both sides were singing kumbaya, nothing will systematically change
I’ve missed this show. One of the most clarifying.
I can't believe the amount of work that went into this video!! thanks for making such a clear overview of the conflict, it helps a lot to get a better understanding of what's been going on, without all the propaganda :S looking forward to part two !!
thank you! it’s nice to get recognition for the amount of work this stuff takes - this one was especially brutal to put together!
hey, i think you bought a zoom recorder from me this summer! you make good music and videos as well! i guess it takes someone who makes videos to understand how much goes into it!
On the YT channel: The Balfour Project watch Dr Ralph Wilde’s webinar on how Britain broke international law to prevent Palestinian Independence. All the other neighboring countries were given independence after the defeat of the Ottoman Turks after WW1. The British plan for Palestine was to give the land to Russian and European Zionist Jews with preferential immigration policies (Jews only) and forced land exchange to favor the Zionist Jews over the Palestinians. We would not have anything like all the endless wars in the Middle East nor the genocide in Gaza without this interference by Great Britain.
Leave it to the British to always screw up _royally._
You helped me understand politics more than anyone else on youtube, I wish I had the money to show you how much this channel means to me❤
thank you! no worries about the money, think of those words as good motivational money for me! love to hear stuff like that!
If you are Jewish you automatically have citizenship in Israel, some IDF soldiers are US citizens they have dual citizenship
The reason is due to refugee crisis similar laws are present in india and some African and middle eastern nations
And no most mizrahi jews are far right , jews from Europe and usa are mostly left wing :)
@@rap1897 thank you for clarifying this for me, now I understand better ✡️☪️🕎
@@conniedean3787 thank you , most soilders in this war are israeli citizens , some have double citizenships ty!
@@rap1897 Also Ireland. I have 3 passports :p
I discovered your channel because of your critique of the DofE and it got me hooked on other videos. Your clarity and capability to explain and articulate very complex issues and terminology is really astonishing. Thank you so much for all the work
I do disagree with the narrative.
The conflict is not two sided. I am Palestinian and lived under the apartheid ocupation and experienced the injustice and brutally of it. Further more my family experience . For example my father village near the city of lid was demolished and the inhabitants of it either forced to flee or died like many villages in western Palestine Just to make room for colonizers.
So that narrative of both sides are equally guilty is not true, while it is true that some Palestinian committed crimes that is only a drop in the bucket.
I also want to note the the rape allegation most likely is completely fabricated as noted by isreali press and the fact that isreal couldn't produce evidence. And if you want to view real allegation of rape look at the UN and major human rights organizations reports of rape and torture in isreal prisons.
If you want to speak from a humanity perspective please try to see Palestinian as humans first, look at the facts not omitted.
maybe i didn’t explain clearly enough, but i’m not at all saying both sides are equal, or equally guilty. i’m saying both sides have a version of history which mix truth and myths, that justifies their cause and denigrates the cause of the other one, and i’m explaining these versions while presenting the basic uncontested events of the conflict, leaving out the more contentious or controversial events that would surprise people. Before challenging anyone’s view, I’m presenting the view of both sides.
next time is when i will go over what actually happened, and then we will see where the guilt and responsibility lie for this. some of it will be just as you are saying above, and some of it will probably surprise you.
i would have preferred to do it all at once, and this was my initial plan, but it was just too long, so i’m doing it this way.
for the rape, it seems that the mass systematic rape was fake, but from what i saw there were still some real ones, which is to be expected - just as it’s to be expected from the israelis, ive seen the accusations of prisoner abuse etc, i posted some of it in the video, but i found out about the faked NYT article after i posted it.
one thing i should have mentioned was the civilian massacres in 1948 by the hagannah forces, deir yassin, etc, because it’s not contentious but i will discuss it next time
Honey a new 'WHAT IS POLITICS?' just dropped!
I don’t take issue with the factual content of this video, but it strikes me as a bit of a dodge to halfway imply that basically every non-class-based in-group’s self-justifying narrative is roughly equal in terms of factual and ethical content because they all contain distortions and elisions. If the point of the vid is more to persuade hardcore Israel boosters and Western “read Settlers!” teens to reconsider their understanding of the conflict, I get the rhetorical choice, but given universal class consciousness has failed again and again to transcend ethnic, national, and other chauvinisms, it’s a little pat to argue that the conflict would seem different if it were analyzed with a frame that does not overlap much with the cognitive content of what people actually thought they were doing in the moment they were doing it. If we’re actually moving toward a post-class world, there is value in this kind of analysis, but if we’re moving toward a world of fortress politics around a deteriorating climate, we’re going to have to sift through a lot of bullshit and make rough, dirty determinations about which class-based social formations ultimately have superior claims to being wronged or being in the wrong in conflicts over land and resources.
Also, fwiw, settlers from North American nation states were not blind to the fact that they were displacing people, yet they did it anyway. They weren’t even necessarily blind to the fact they were serving elite interests, yet they perceived themselves as ultimately benefiting from that social order and so did it anyway. I’m not sure how much of a difference the counterfactual of Zionist settlers being aware of unethical land acquisition practices by Zionist firms would actually make.
ack no no no, you’re missing the point. i’m not saying the two narratives are equal in any way, except that they’re both relatively equally coherent and make sense. the point is to understand the two narratives so that we know what’s motivating peoples’ behaviour. one might be 100% accurate and the other 0% or the reverse, or anywhere in between.
Next time is when i’ll look at what really happened and who’s to blame for what. I’m just avoiding taking positions (aside from what’s happening today) because i’d like everyone to get these basic ABCs regardless of their position, and to be interested in seeing the next part.
As for people being blind to what they’re doing, you’ll see next time how that works, and who was blind and who wasn’t and how that affected what happened, and where we are today.
12:13 - "and once we put some class analysis back into the story, *and by class I don't mean capitalists or proletarians I mean a more fundamental type of class meaning: the class of people who make decisions versus the class who has to suffer the consequences of those decisions,* once we do that then the conflict which at first glance is seemingly all about identity politics becomes a conflict about something very different. Instead of a story about Jews and Arabas fighting each other, *the story becomes one about Jews elites and Arabs elites competing to see who gets to be the administrative elite of a new state. Using identity politics (i.e., nationalism) to portray themselves as representatives of their respective identity groups while they're actually needlessly putting their own population in harm's way, lying to them, exploiting them and generating conflict where there could have been peace and cooperation had it been left up to the majorities of the people on both sides."*
Why do you assume someone who says "read settlers" is a teen? Im in my thirties and I just recently read it and I think its insightful. I also happen to be a white guy. I understand t has problems.
This was so damn good. I can’t believe I watched it AFTER this Reddit post I made saying many of these same things. It is so frustrating to see such important developments in this history omitted from the general discourse about it. By far the best introduction to the topic I have seen.
One thing I noticed is that you said you had difficulty finding decent books discussing the land purchases of the early Zionist movement. My main source for that had been “Palestine and the Palestinians” by Farsoun and Zacharia. I haven’t read the sources you cite so maybe they’re even better, but it’s another source to add to the list where data is presented and some basics are covered. Studying the Tanzimat also helped me a lot, which I assume will make its way into your later and more focused videos on that piece of the history.
i haven’t read that i will check it out thanks - i have a zillion sources on land purchases, but they’re all written for academics - found very little popular writing besides dowty and some passing mentions in other books. it used to almost never get mentioned, now it seems to be mentoned more but never examined in depth as a source of the conflict. and yes tanzimat is a big part of it
Could I get a link to the reddit post?
@@cheezburger2000 youtube hates links but it’s from two weeks ago and it’s called “How should we think about nationalism that isn’t Zionism?” - posted to the JewsofConscience subreddit.
It always is and always will be a pleasure to come back to this channel; ìt one of the most insightful amongst the entire internet ❤
Hi Daniel, I just subscribed on Patreon. I wanted to say how much I appreciate your dedication to not only justice for working people (vis a vis being a lawyer for tenants and educator here) but also providing a balanced and rigorous interrogation of history. I love how your approach focuses not so much on large groups of people whose values are at odds but on the decisions of specific elites and how they shape the common narratives below. Not just in this video but across your work. It is a vital perspective to have in politics and one that, sadly, I do not see echoed much elsewhere on the internet or in reality. Please keep up the good work!
thank you i really appreciate that and also the support! the next ep on this subject will blow your mind i think, and everyone’s and i’ll get a lot of flak but worth it…
Even running at 2 hours this is one of the best and shortest video I watched explaining the history of this conflict. It’s not exhaustive but it puts the history into a much better picture, complete with opinions from both sides including from the elites, political groups and general population alike
thank you - the next one will be very different and provide a totally different point of view than what you’d normally hear i think
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 it probably will! It’s because of how different everything about your content is from most bs on this platform that I watch it, and it’s not just full of analysis I could find elsewhere or figure out by myself without taking years of research.
As someone who plans to organize in the future it’s really really satisfying to find concise videos like this that change your whole perspective on all the moving pieces in our world bc I really dont wanna spend years of my time not organizing if someone else already put in the work with intent of informing people like me so we dont contribute to these political mistakes in the future. It’s definitely the sort of content I hopefully wont forget and would watch a couple of times again in the future as a reminder of what not to do and not to fully unquestioningly support
excellent, yes it’s made to refer to again and look at the bibliography etc (which i will get up there in a week or two…)
I was so excited to see What is Politics in my feed this morning. Its such a joy to explore these topics with you. You do such a good job of getting us to think about important things at the core of politics and empower us to make a more thoughtful political impact. Thank you for tackling such difficult issues with such honesty.
I hope you will do lots more in depth historic videos of various conflicts in the world
this one took me 4.5 month of hell to do, and it’s only the first part of three, so i kind of never want to do another historical conflict video ever, but i very much appreciate the sentiment, and hopefully will do more - it’s interesting to compare this to south africa, which I will do next time
@@WHATISPOLITICS69Are you a Communist?(Just curious I don't mean it as an insult)
@@khosrowanushirwan7591 that’s complicated to answer because there are many different definitions of that word, but i believe that forms of dominance of some people over other should be eliminated, so landlord tenant, owner employee etc should not exist, but i also think markets are ok so long as they don’t create classes of owners and people dependent on the owned property. property should be owned by those who depend on it. i’ll talk more about it in future episode. it’s sort of a 19th century idea of socialism before bolshevism and european social democracy took over the meaning of socialism. and btw, when i said i don’t want to cover more conflict, i will still be covering this conflict - the episode i’m working on now goes into depth about the origins of the conflict.
Really excited for the next episode, great work as always. I will admit as one of those pro-Palestine college leftists you mentioned I do indeed find the both-sides rhetoric at the beginning of the video challenging as I believe the responsibility in the situation overwhelmingly falls on Israeli elites who have been involved in ethnic cleansing and discrimination from the beginning and increasingly so now. That being said I understand that as part of how you chose to present this series and I’m interested to see where you go with the rest of the series.
However a different and more encompassing analysis of Israel/Palestine is sorely needed in today’s left and I am thankful you are doing that. As an aforementioned college leftist I am irked by my local pro-Palestine leftists and organizations, many of whom get their perspectives almost entirely from Hamas and aligned channels. They seem unwilling to consider any possibility of wrongdoing by Hamas on October 7th and either say it never happened (“most civilians were actually killed by Israel”) or if it did its their fault (“settlers ≠ civilians”).
While I absolutely abhor the Israeli state and as an anarchist think it should be destroyed, a leftist analysis that only takes the Palestinian perspective into account to me feels like poor solidarity. At this point, the biggest group of Israeli Jews are from non-European countries despite simplistic characterizations of Israelis as Europeans with dual citizenship (in fact, I’ve heard only about 10% of Israelis have dual citizenship), and as you mentioned many Jews came to Israel fleeing antisemitic persecution. Does that mean Israel has a right to exist as an ethnostate and carry out ethnic cleansing? Absolutely not. However, it does mean that leftist proposals for justice must go beyond blindly supporting Palestinian resistance organizations like Hamas. Its simply untenable for leftist organizations to say that the needs of 7 million Jews living in Israel are either beyond our concern since they are privileged settlers or openly say they should pack up and leave. Any proposed solution must clearly state that the needs and rights of all residents between the river and the sea will be respected and uphold the Palestinian right of return.
Furthermore, many of those who most ardently support Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups either won’t stand in solidarity with those oppressed by Hamas’s allies (mainly Iranians and Syrians) or outright tar them as western-backed traitors. Syria’s Assad regime has actually killed many Palestinian refugees, but to many Hamas supporters the Assad regime is unquestionable as a funder of Hamas. If our solidarity with Palestine means that we must ignore or silence the voices of all others whose suffering is inconvenient to Hamas, then we’re clearly doing solidarity wrong.
Anyways, mostly I’m venting because all these narratives are things I’ve seen across the internet since October 7th. I believe we desperately need strong non-campist narratives which support Palestinian liberation. And I thank you for continuing to create nuanced media that looks beyond nationalist rhetoric!
this is super interesting - my friend who’s super involved in pro-palestine activism in europe tells me that most of the activists have zero awareness of any of the history whatsoever, and have all these laughably misinformed ideas of how we got here, if they even know at all - which is one reason why I did the ABC’s instead of jumping straight into the more interesting story about how the conflict started, and who was responsible for it.
I didn’t realize people were just swallowing hamas pronouncements whole, which is almost hilarious, but i realize one should never underestimate the childishness and naitivité of students…
the idea that educated students would think it makes sense to deport the 3rd and 4th and 5th generation of israelis is so insane to me - like where does that end? should the berbers (who are like 40-60% of the maghreb countries - no one even knows because the government falsely counts them as “arabs” even if you have whole regions where arabic is a 2nd language, and villages where no one even speaks arabic) or the south saharans seek to deport the arabs back to saudi arabia? total insanity. all those students themselves would end up back in england or wherever they came from before taking over the USA…
even if it was WWII going on i would still want to explain the point of view of the germans because don’t we need to know what we’re dealing with? but in the case of israel it’s so much more interesting - germany, south africa etc, didn’t have very coherent moral justifications for what they were doing - just “we’re better, we came here first, we brought the blacks here” or whatever thin excuses. in israel you have a very compelling narrative, an also even if you were to assume the early zionists were all 100% factory made colonialists, you have the WWII refugees, and all the arab world refugees, who were 75% of country by the 60s all together, plus basically anyone who went to school since 1948 (i.e. 100% of the current population) who learned nothing about colonial attitudes and justifications, and learned that they gained the country by pure immigration and then by beating off a genocidal war in 1948 - you can’t just ignore that, it’s a huge factor in why this keeps going on, and why the current generation have turned into total racist genocidal maniacs, while thinking they aren’t. and when we look at what happened on the arab side in 1880s-1948 it really explodes the whole nationalist narrative on that side as well.
i wish i could have made these episodes all at once, because it sucks to have people wait another 5 months before they understand where i’m going with this…
maybe i’ll talk about it more in the QnA episode i’ll be putting out soon.
this whole thing also illustrates what recipe for disaster states are…
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I guess I’ll clarify what I’m saying about student activists, I’m just pointing out the worst of them (who happen to be more involved in a lot of the organizations organizing protests etc)… I see a lot of these narratives online, and the people I know in pro-Palestine student activism are either the sort I’m talking about or generally pro-Palestine but without a deeper ideology/perspective. I see no one challenging the more harmful narratives from the left. It seems to be either hardliners or people who stick to current news + the basics without a deeper analysis
And no one seems to ever think the deportation thing through, its more lots of one-off online statements that Israelis should just pack up and leave which makes no sense. People who go more in-depth often point to Algeria as a precedent of what should happen, but clearly there are far more Israeli Jews than French settlers + Jews in Algeria at that time and it’d be a horrible catastrophe if there were millions of Jewish refugees from Israel. But few on the left seem interested in considering an Israeli Jewish perspective at all since they’re painted as privileged settlers who overwhelmingly hate Palestinians (and unfortunately recent polls do show how widespread hateful thinking is in Israel as you go into)
@@paco.effective.dreamer yeah, doing a “there are two narratives” video like this is a bit rough when the majority in israel now have lost their minds and just sound like fascists - like no one wants to hear the fascist narrative of WWII … but i think it’s important for pro palestine activists to understand the israeli perspective, if only just to be more effective at what they’re doing, but also because i think it makes justice more likely, and also because things aren’t caricatures, there’s a lot to understand about any situation in life when you want to go in and change something, you need to know what you’re dealing with, for moral reasons and for basic competence.
for the deportation thing - the idea that people don’t belong somewhere is just wrong to me. people belong wherever they are. if you’re occupying a stolen house, then sure, be forced out of the house and have the house given back to the rightful owner, but to leave a country entirely is just nonsense. especially in israel where so few peopel have any idea that they stole anything. maybe the exception is the settlers, who moved there on purpose in order to take land away from the arabs, but even they can leave on their own if they don’t like living in a democracy. i don’t know enough about algeria, but suspect deportation wasn’t a good thing there either. one algerian guy on here was sayingthat was a mistake.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 to clarify, my understanding from reading about Algeria was that it was less a literal policy of deportation than increasing hostility and violence that led to most people leaving (and the French colonists could have more secure and comfortable lives back in France). That also involved a policy which only gave citizenship rights to Muslims, so Jews also left en masse (+ hostility they faced since they were given a higher class status by the French). But yeah I’d always advocate for a just solution that doesn’t entrench ethnic or nationalist divisions if at all possible
I always get so excited when I see you release a new video
I also love that you have so many comments and so many likes already
Great work is always my friend
thanks so much man, always good to hear from you!
I'm so happy you dropped another video, I can tell from the quality of your videos that they must take a lot of effort and I was a bit worried for your health. Thank you for making another one on this issue, your well researched but accessible explanations are very appreciated. Sending love from Nigeria.
thank you! they do, and your concern and good wishes are much appreciated. very cool that I have some viewers in nigeria. currently hard at work on the next one on this same subject…
Am so glad I got your video in my recommendation
While I don't agree with all points and views you share you gave a refreshing middle ground unbiased view of the conflict
I instantly subscribed
everyone is biased, but i do think that if you want to fix something, it’s important to understand what motivates people on both sides, and why they think and act the way they do
I'm glad you made this. Extremely worth watching.
Truly nothing worth objecting to because this was actual unbiased coverage, plus understanding of both sides.
Need this to be seen by more.
It's *_Extremely Simple_* .
The solution is however "complex" because no one will tackle "Voldemort" head on.
1) Land given away from an organization that never had the right to give it away.
2) UN conventions on annexation of land during war ignored, no repercussions for ethnic cleansing.
3) Ongoing occupation, extra-judicial killings and imprisonments and dejure+defacto apartheid.
I'm not even addressing the current crimes against humanity which would have absolutely isolated and sanctioned any other country but "Voldemort".
(Even the mention of certain buzzwords gets some us deleted/shadow banned)
this time i was persenting the main narratives and the main events that everyone agrees happened - next time i’m getting into what actually happened
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Sorry, it wasn't a dig at your content. Just a statement of facts for people that have bought into the narrative that this is "complex".
You do great work. I've subbed. Cheers.
@@Emanon...brooks would smile at this, even if it was behind the rage and tears of the day, he’s smile reading that. Or I liked to think. Cheers
@@Emanon...
For solutions to be "complex" doesn't mean harm has mutually been done to both sides.
The end of slavery was complex, the end of Apartheid was too (heck, we are still dealing with the circumstances of both) even the de-nazzification of Germany was complex.
even if you think Israel is literally star wars Empire level of evil (which I would dissagree but it doesn't matter) at the end of the day most of the Israeli people are just common people and therefore the solution is complex because it has to be one the ensure the least harm to both palestinians and israelis .
@@kupeart3746
Common people can be misinformed or even willfully approve of the horror their country is committing, as long as they're beneficiaries or afraid to lose everything if they speak up. History has shown this over and over again.
Here's an apt analogy, since you brought it up yourself:
The Empire destroyed Alderaan because it supported the rebels - and to punish the people collectively. Rebels, who in all accounts would be considered terrorists by the Empire. What sequence of events does that remind you of?
With regards to complexity, it means that to achieve true peace, the road is long and hard. But it starts with a measure of justice for the harm that has been done.
Can we at least agree that Palestinians have suffered far greater, and for far longer, than Israelis? And that they also deserve a right to exist? Yes?
Now go tell that to the Israeli government and the majority of Israelis that are consenting to the horror we are witnessing right now.
woah, I was hoping you'd make a video on this topic! can't wait to watch it
yup, started it on oct 7th after i was 2/3 of the way through a video on intersectionality, thinking it would be an EZ episode to make and instead it took me 4.5 months and it’s only the 1st part of 3…!
I cannot express how much I'm looking forward to the next episode of this! Since Oct 7 and the ensuing war in Gaza, I've been trying my best to do my own independent research into the history - where the narratives agree, disagree and what might be missing from the story. I've been trying to find stuff on land acquisition and have been fascincated by the Arab revolt of '36, but, as I'm sure you've found, there is very little in the way of actual analysis of that period. This video was everything I was looking for and I don't doubt that the next episode will be just as good! Thank you so much for all your hard work!
thanks! most of this will be gone into depth next time, but this time, when i get the bibliography up, i’ll put a few sources on land acquisition, the ones i showed in this episode in the graphics
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 great, thank you so much!!
i didnt yet listen to this one, nor did i finish listening to all the podcast episodes yet, but i just wanted to thank you for what you are doing.. been looking through the bibliographies of some of your episodes and i didn’t even realise such a wealth of information was available to us. i feel like a child on Christmas day. ive shared this podcast with any friend i thought would be interested and plan on continuing to do so. thank you! all of this is still blowing my mind.
I'll admit this was a difficult watch. I appreciate that you're trying to present a simplified account of events so people cam better grasp the overall history, but it's akin to listening to liberal media narratives of the history - completely whitewashing the real material and class dynamics at play.
I get that you're saving that for the next video, but personally I didn’t feel like this approach was a good one given that we're in the middle of a propaganda war (on top of the actual onslaught in Gaza).
Also, I'm a little surprised that you personally wouldn't call what's happening a genocide. This is as textbook as it gets.
This comment literally proves the point I was making above about why this video's approach is not a good one lmao.
@@harrypmayYou're an idiot. Don't fucking both sides a conflict in which the majority of the deaths are on one side. The definition of genocide is: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." Even the whitewashed facts of this video are evidence of genocide based on the Israeli governments actions and their stated objectives (to drive Palestinian out of Gaza and the west bank). Which would be, in addition to "the deliberate killing of a large number of people," be a destruction of "a nation or group" specifically the Palestinian nation and thus a literal dictionary definition genocide.
Agreed
Nobody else who posts a 2+ hour piece has me excited about actually watching it. Great job as always!
75 years....but Jordan owned west bank till 1967 and Egypt owned Gaza...little bits of misinformation adds up to a big lie....thanks
Palestine is from the river to the sea. Palestine is not the west bank only or Gazza only.
Also, the egyptian leadership and the Jordanian leaderhsip are enemies for Egyptians and Jordanians, especially the Jordanian state elite.
I am about halfway through and will continue watching later. I just have one major issue so far. At 1:02:00ish you say that there were orders to evacuate by Arab leaders to advance Arab war aims, but the book you put up by Benny Morris says "Many... left as a result of orders or advice from Arab military commanders and officials. Fears for their safety rather than a grand strategy of evacuation underlay these steps." So, your statement is only true if by war aim you mean safety of the Palestinians. But this not what Zionists mean when they say that Palestinians left at the behest of Arab leaders, they say it to mean that it was so the Arab militaries could attack more strongly which, based on the sources I read and the one you put in the screen at that time, just isn't true. Also, I'd recommend reading Ilan Pappé, he is another new Israeli historian, and he has criticized Morris in the past for not using Arabic sources (since he can't read Arabic) which basically means Morris is missing one sides voice in all of his work.
I know it is a bit if a nitpick but it is a point I recently read up about after arguing with some family about it. Overall though I am impressed so far, you've covered a lot of the history in such a short time. Looking forward to finishing the video tomorrow and hearing your analysis in the next video!
i don’t think that contradicts what i said though? “fears for their safety rather than a grand strategy of evacuation” - they didn’t want to kill a bunch of arab civilians so they asked them to move so they could fight more effectively .. no? what’s a “grand strategy of evacuation” anyhow?
maybe it wasn’t clear the way i said it but arab armies telling arabs to evacuate was a thing, but it wasn’t a major cause of flight - most of the flight was people afraid of being in a war zone and expulsion by israeli soldiers. i was vague about it here because again, im not trying to challenge the narratives in a big way here.
and sure morris doesn’t read arabic, and he’s got other flaws, but as far as i know morris’ book is still the main book on this subject, most detailed etc. you see people on all sides referencing it. and it’s not friendly at all to the previous zionist narrative - later he came out and said the zionist forces were doing ethnic cleansing but they should have done more! his turn really reflect israelis’ turn in general to the right at that time.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Oh, I interpreted it as fear for their safety because Israeli forces were destroying villages, but I could see how it could be interpreted either way now. And yeah, I agree that based on what I've read you got the big picture right, like I said it was a bit of a nitpick, though now I see it was even more of a minor thing.
Yeah, Morris' book is longer than Pappe's, but Pappe doesn't describe the Nakba as a "justified ethnic cleansing", so I chose to read his book. Maybe that was a mistake, and I will read it eventually.
@@andrewlipnick8131 a lot of morris’ book is pretty borring, just detailing this unit went to this area and fought and this many people were killed, or more interesting this unit went and cleared out this village. and at the time he wrote the first edition, he wasn’t saying it was good, he was in part writing it to convince israelis to support Olso, that they had caused some of the problems and needed to compromise - but by the second edition it was after oslo failed, and he and most of israelis blamed the palestinians, and he then declared they should have cleared out more villages etc. which always strikes me as insane, because you have very little terrorist activity from the arabs in israel. you have more crime and poverty related problems, but very rare that someone joins hamas or PLO militant factions and carries out any militant operations etc.
pappe i might agree with a lot more politically but dont trust him to cover different sides of an issue, he’s always going to present whatever agrees with his goals, and ignore whatever contradicts his position.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 oh, well then maybe I won't read it, sounds pretty dull and not super important for the bigger picture. Though I do think I need to read more from people I disagree with. Thanks for the detailed responses btw!
@@andrewlipnick8131 it’s still worth reading, because it’s not all like that, but you can skip through lots of it so it’s not as daunting as it seems in terms of length
I love your channel, I will pay you money as soon as I have some to spare! you deserve to be paid for this incredible work, these videos should be airing on public tv
thank you! that’d be cool! but if they did i’d be suspicious of what i was doing wrong!
I am a Muslim ,and i think that when religon and nationalism meet it becomes very dangerous and i can see that on both sides ..I am against hamas horrific attack on inoccent israeli but i am also against the occopation and the killing and abuse of the inoccent Palestinians ..I think its a never ending cycle good ppl from both side can stand up and just end this cycle ..both sides need leaders that would work for peace and both sides need to abandon hate and radicaliztion ..i m all for two state solution or one state solution and equal rights for all (maybe a secular state instead of a religious state )Both parties deserve peace security and a good future.
What kind of Muslim would say that lsraeI is innocent when they've attacked our brothers and sisters in the past before October? What kind of Muslim says they would favor a secular state over a religious one? You are clearly misguided and you are saying everything that a liberal would.
I agree with the one state model and agree with it being a secular state. Israel’s current model would work best, but they’d have to bring a separate Sharia court in for Muslims with such a large population (like how they did with the Rabbinate) but I think that has a chance to get messy.
You’re one of the few Muslims that acknowledge what Hamas did was horrific and evil tbh. I mostly see the entire thing dismissed or praised by Muslims. I hope for a one state solution that Palestinians have a large say in forming and for reparations to all those that have suffered from this violence
@@emmettdonkeydoodle6230 yes u r right israel current Model is good only they have to give the Palestinian's same rights and citizenship as Israeli maybe they can rename the country as palestine Israel so both parties are happy 😊...The sharia law is only implemented when 99 percent ppl all Muslims otherwise Muslims are highly incouraged in islam to respect and obey the law of the land (if they have full religious and human rights in that land )..I and my family think that these militant groups should not stay in power coz it's a threat to democracy and usually they are dictators and they have nothing good to offer ...There should be judicial and political system in a country but again it's only possible when a country is free only then they can make their judicial and political system .
@@emmettdonkeydoodle6230lmao yeah right Israel's current model definitely works the best
@@JhoneSigma the renaming is what exactly I've been thinking too!! Palestine israel fuse both words and make a name for the new country
Mostly commenting for thr algorithm and cuz everything else's been said in some other comment here, but thank you for the extraordinary work and the extraordinary production that came out of it
I don't think both sides are Equal and I think that you are being pro Israel because you recognise the right of a Jewish state in historic Palestine when this is illegal under internal law because: 1) settlers don't have right of self determination, it is very dangerous giving right lf self determination because is approving colonisation (like is happening now in historic Palestine). Secobd the existabce of the state of Israel is a violation of the self determination right of palestians people even if the Jewish settlers have right of self determination (which they shouldn't as i explain), because israel by law is a etnonacionalist Jewish state. Third the Balfour declaration is illegal because bypass the self determination and independence right give by the luege covenant in the Versailles. The league council try to bypass this right of self determination with incorption of the Balfour declaration but it is not legally relevant because they don't had the legal authority to do it. even more the portion of Palestine is it illegal in accordance of the self determination right stablish in the league covenant, because Palestine was legally a single territory with a single population enjoying a right of self determination in a unitary basis. Despite of it a Jewish state was stablish 1948 by those controlling 78% of Palestine accompany by a etnic cleansing (the nakba) , and despite of violating internacional law Israel was accepted in the United nation.
dude, watch the beginning again because you missed the entire point of this. i never said the two sides are equal, and i never gave my position on anything, except the current destruction of gaza. the point of this video is to look at what each side believes so we can understand what motivates them, and then look at basic uncontested facts. next time i’ll look at what actually happened and give my very strong opinions on all of it.
New subscriber and will definitely help fund your efforts! What an excellent and thoroughly researched video! Thank you so much!
Kudos for presenting a very balanced report of this unholy mess...
well this one was just “israelis think X but palestinians think Y” - next one will get into what actually happened and won’t be so balanced!
A hard watch tbh, as someone who didn't feel at all like listening to an Israeli side, hearing 'both sides' again and again hurt my ears haha. Specially frustrating when knowing that the second part intends to deconstruct(?) this sides in the first place.
I sympathize with the narrative of zionism as a settler colonial project from the get go. But yhea, looking at the narrative I heard, in retrospective i can see that earlier period when an actual "conflict" existed being glossed over, and the interests of the palestinian nationalist side being obscured or just taken for granted.
I'm confused by the aside on the word genocide. I think a political conception of genocide should prioritize identifying it and acting on it way before it's obvious than the majority of a population is definitely going to die or be displaced. And afaik no group has literally wanted nor attempted to have every single drop of blood of a given ethnicity to go cold. This is not to say that the legal definition as it is can't be dumb, as an example some argue Gringoland's blockades fit the bill and while i agree those are ridiculously inhuman I agree the word starts to be stretched into meaninglessness.
Looking forward for next vid. I wonder where it will eventually land, i don't think people are that stupid nor braiwashed, from palestinians siding with (or tacitly consenting to) nationalism, to zionist doing the same for their colonial state. Those narratives need at least a bit of truth, to somewhat align to the interests of the people, in order to be effective. I mean, #1 trick on the settler book is that the people living in stolen land won't have their interests ever aligning with something like land back or right to return, they're in to the neck.
I'm not expecting a (long) response or anything, dear reader may have a better thing to do with their time than educating a non politically active armchair.
Have a good day.
i wanted to do it all in one episode, present the narratives, the ABCs and then show what actually happened - but as you can see this one ended up being 2h15m and took me five months to do, and almost bankrupted me, and i dont get paid until it’s released so i had to do it this way or else end up on the street!
for genocide, i think these terms need to be precise and be close to popular understanding or else it ends up being hyperinflated cancel kid type rhetoric that no one takes seriously.
this is very clearly a mass murder, mass slaughter, evil, senseless, intent of ethnic cleansing, killing of civilians on an enormous scale - but i don’t see that they’re trying to exterminate the population as a whole. i wouldn’t put it past them morally, but i don’t think that’s what they’re doing at the moment… it doesn’t need to be genocide for it to be a an inexcusible mass atrocity people should mobilize to stop immediately.
I'm sorry about your struggles dude, whatever changes you intend to make to go more sustainable (if any, you look veru stubborn haha) I'm in. Sadly i ran out of people to promote your work to, not like there were a lot to begin with.
Also this video covered a lot anx i can still appreciate your work, it's just the nature of the topic causing strong reactions despite all the disclaimers. I was stressed even before clicking.
The only way to resolve this conflict is to get out of Arab land if you have a dual passport. Land back
ok, canadians go back to england and scotland, arabs go back to saudi arabia, half the english go back to france - nonsense. good luck with this mentality, you’re as bad as the israeli settlers and government.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Comparing countries that are for all intents and purposes "settled" to a region being settled are two entirely different things. You may think Israel is settled, that's fine. Your western privileged thoughts on the matter are completely irrelevant. What matters is what the Palestinians themselves think AND are willing to do. You either support them or get out of the way. They think otherwise and are engaging in armed struggle to resist colonialism. I'm sorry it's not to your taste. Nice to know you've rolled over for the US, Zionists and settlers. There is very little reason to believe you would not have felt the exact same way about Australia, Canada or the US during their early days when there was still a spirit and will amongst the indigenous peoples to fight back for their land. There is a real possibility for Palestinians to achieve land back. For Palestinians to finally achieve freedom and the right to self determination. Between armed resistance to colonialism, pressure being placed on western governments by good people (not you) for supporting "Israel", BDS and embargos, a coalition of indigenous militias and other Arab neighbours. The momentum and awareness is finally here. And look at you
FREE PALESTINE 🇵🇸
You are comparing Palestine to countries, which are for all intents and purposes, "settled". Palestine is not, you may think it is settled, which is fine, because what you as a privileged westerner thinks regarding Palestinians resisting colonialism is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what Palestinians think and are willing to act on. As we speak the indigenous peoples of the region who are being held in captivity by "Israel" are engaging in armed resistance to reclaim their land. If not for their commitment and unrelenting desire to not be colonised, occupied and have their basic human rights violated on a daily basis they have agitated and reminded the world that their cause is alive and well. You however don't think it's real and mock/belittle their aspirations. There is no reason to think you would not have taken the same position on Canada, Australia or the US during their early settler days. There is a real possibility of Palestinians being free from the most oppressive regime and dehumanising state we have seen in quite sometime. Finally we are here, through armed resistance, a coalition of Arab militias, BDS, westerners showing out week to week (not you) to pressure their governments who are endorsing this genocidal project, we could very well see land back and a free Palestine. And here you are...
@@shabbaranks7968 how am i comparing palestinians to countries? i’m comparing them to native americans and berbers and native british before the norman invasions…
land doesn’t belong to any people. land is for everyone to share. no one is taking back “their land”. to think land belongs to one or another collectivity is to be a tribal brained ape who wants endless war forever, everywhere on earth.
i am not mocking the aspirations of palestinians who want and deserve freedom. i support all the efforts to stop israel form what it’s doing and to force it into compliance with human morality.
but i don’t thnk you know what human morality is unfortunately.
No matter how hard you try to abstract things you must reckon with the fact that your version of decolonisation or freedom is laughable especially in the face of those being colonised. It's pretty putrid that you can't see that Palestinians have been left with no options but violence.
Wait, two hours? 😲 Will there still be a part 2 of this?
unfortunately, there will be part 2 AND 3…
Nice good thing to listen to in background
@@WHATISPOLITICS69
If only the truth was as quick and easy to explain as the rhetoric
Thank you so much for your hard work and sharing it with the world.
22:33 ok, just to be clear, there is going to be a part in the video where you clarify that Israel never actually offered the Palestinians a full state, RIGHT!?
that’s the oslo episode
Seeing a new video from this channel is always such a good surprise! This whole podcast really helped me see through the narrow view of current and local politics and understand politics at a more fundamental level, which has helped me in all sorts of surprising ways. If I ever have the money to give support to creators, you're at the top of my list.
So glad that you are back! Truly my favorite person on this website, so insightful.
Also love all the Ashley Wood art in the background
haha, so few people have noticed it! it’s action figure boxes mostly
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 As someone who collects action figures and comic books, I appreciate your taste. Also wanted to say thank you because I started going to protests in my community and getting involved with non-profits from watching your videos. I tell all my friends and family who will listen about your early human history and how it relates to modern hierarchies stuff, I find it so fascinating. You’re making a real difference with this education!
@@Noobslayar to find out that someone started getting involved with politics and activism because of my show is the best possible think i could hear! thank you so much!
Thank you. Using archaeology and anthropology to precisely reveal the history of Arabs and Jews and Palestine is very helpful. I think I understand the main argument you make about two competing nationalism producing conflict and violence. FIRST POINT Nationalism is poison. Still, the context of nation states and the assumptions about them and international cooperation means that talking about nations and nationality must go on. Indigenous people and others are bound by the nation state framework and the incumbent assumptions about property, especially when sorting out legalities and rights. National liberation struggles informed by class analysis are superior and better equipped. I think in the context of colonial history and its outcomes as they manifest today, and the facts of monopoly capitalism reaching to grab, plunder and subjugate abroad, must be acknowledged. So, I do believe that national liberation struggles for liberation from direct occupation and the strangleholds of transnational corporations and the local ruling class that enables and profits by them must be supported. Their shackles have to be lifted before class struggle can advance further. I think there are historical cases of national liberation struggle and class war happening simultaneously and succeeding....SECOND POINT Perhaps you should review what happened in Israel on Oct. 7. Evidence is emerging to debunk the claim of systematic rape by Hamas. (Though rape is often systematic weaponry in war arsenals, and incidences of rape in the course of armed battle.) See Aaron Mate's articles and today's videos by Democracy Now!. Also, evidence is emerging suggesting that the panicking Israeli military fired on everybody, such as a public statement by an Israeli general and clips of Israeli military videos and analysis of published photos of the aftermath (Max Blumenthal's articles). Then there is the much understated reality that there is a Palestinian armed resistance front of 12 factions, with Hamas being the biggest and acting as the representative. Furthermore, the main events of that day are the successful attacks and takeovers of at least 5 Israeli military installations, though the media and L and R commentators seem to refer to the attack on the Nova dance party and Kibutzim as the main and only event. We have yet to know what exactly happened that day, though resistence fights certainly attacked some people and kidnapped others there (took hostages might not be the most precise term). About the argument that Hamas is using the Palestinian people (allowing the genocide to happen) to carry out its war is questionable. Israeli forces and settlers have been regularly assaulting the Palestinian residents in Gaza and the West Bank all the time for decades. That deplorable conditions and systematic violence would foster violent responses after engaging in largely non-violent resistance, including acts of terrorism, is credible. Secondly, could Israel's response of launching genocidal assaults be predicted? Hard to say--though their efforts to push away Palestinians are clearly recognized. Third, it would be difficult to disengage from a long-planned commitment once started. Videos sent from the Palestinian fighters also show where and how they are fighting, and they demonstrate that the fighting is generally not in populated areas and that it is only directly against the Israeli army. Fifth, the strategy of hoping to trade prisoners for hostages is supportable, and who could guess how far Israel would let things go without trying to get back more hostages? Well, that's a lot for now. Thanks again.
i realize there’s a lot of fake stories out there on both sides, and i’m not above falling for them - but did you see the gopro footage from the hamas fighters? i generally never watch videos of people getting killed, but i forced myself before making this, and they’re shooting up homes on kibbutzes and throwing grenades inside of civilian bomb shelters, shooting into toilet stalls at the rave, shooting at civilian cars … the idea that they were mostly fighting in unpopulated areas just isn’t true, they were trying to kill civilians 100%.
and they definitely took over military installations and there was a lot of fighting there, which the media tends to ignore because it’s such a total shame to israel that rando home made commandos could literally take control of part of the country for several days.
for the rape stuff, i realize that the big NYT story is fake, but from what i could tell there were still some credible stories of rape and torture, mutilation, burning people to death even if it wasn’t systematic. i would be really surprised if that didn’t happen, that’s what angry people with guns do everywhere.
for the nationalism stuff, i think it will become very clear next time why i went with this angle. i really wish i could have made this all into one episode, but there was just no way
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I know the guerrilla fighters committed atrocities on Oct 7, but as to their precise identity as Hamas, the extent and the number of victims they are responsible for, that is questioned. I hadn't seen /heard of those images. I have just watched a few presented by the Grayzone and Intifada which show the guerrillas in tunnels awaiting Israeli soldiers to appear at the entries or stepping out to launch at vehicles and individuals. Allegedly, there are videos being circulated which are tagged as Hamas fighting but which may be old images of other people fighting or Israeli forces. Could be H fighters are lashing out especially given the emotionality in responding to atrocities of the other side. Circle of violence. I do not condone Hamas or support it. I just understand the circumstances of the Palestinians and see some justification for resistance, even armed resistance. Wrongdoings bound to happen. This was found by the Truth and Reconciliation investigation into the Korean war, where N. Korean fighters were found to be responsible for some violations. Also, we could note wrongdoings committed by the anti-fascist resisters of WW2. In assessing, must consider the power imbalance, like the regular armies, more powerful states, situation of subjugation of the dominant over the dominated....
@@barbarawaldern1794 the stuff i saw is clearly hamas go pro videos, there’s teams, they’re speaking to eachother about how to proceed, and they’re in residential neighbouhoods, and throwing grenades into peoples’ home bomb shelters. I have no reason to doubt any of that is real
sure you can consider the power imbalance and sympathize with lashing out, and also understand their ignorance of who they’re dealing with, but murdering civilians is just evil. they could have taken over the military installations and fought soldiers like they did without shooting up kibbutzes. even if all you care about is palestine they’re not doing themselves any favours that way.
i don’t think you should judge the oppressed groups the same way you do the dominant groups, but sometimes the oppressed groups take over, and their behaviour in revolt is a good indicator what they’ll be like in power.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Anyway, I think the dichotomy of this fanatical nationalist/ religious entity v another is an idealization where context and relations between the "sides" are not considered and a false construction when the overall context is ignored. Like so many others, you are fixated on those incidents on Oct. 7 at the Kibutzim and Nova dance party. As many knowledgeable voices including Palestinians, Oct. 7 did not happen in a vacuum. Let's say some people from another town move into yours. They start occupying some houses. They are bullies. They start pushing people out and taking their property, denying them access to services and basic rights. This happens over a few years. A group of them storm your house one day and assault your family/ housemates, killing a couple. They start taking or destroying your stuff, too. So, you fight back, and kill an invader. You're not used to doing that and you fight dirty. How is that situation generally seen? The occupants being invaded are generally seen as defending themselves. Same re a someone who's been abused by her/his domestic partner for a long time; one day she snaps, or even she plots to kill her adversary--The case is seen as self-defense and the victim is not convicted. We have the situation of a population being subjugated and tormented, deprived, expropriated, policed ridiculously every day--of course, there are reactions, outbursts and some are violent, despite the efforts to protest peacefully, rally international support and so on. The are the occupied victims and seen as defending themselves. That is why law recognizes armed resistance. Do not fall into criminalizing dissenters and stereotyping them as terrorists. That is what all the fascists and imperialists are saying and it is dangerous propaganda. The mass responses around the world are extremely important for this reason. One does not have to support everything that resisters do and say to generally support resistance against occupation, discrimination and genocide.
@@barbarawaldern1794 you are wasting so much space writing all of this irrelevant stuff … go back to the beginning of the video where i explain that what i’m doing in this episode is explaining what either side thinks so that we can understand their motivations and behaviour, not so that i can say both sides are equal.
im sorry getting fed up with this stuff, you guys seem like you lack basic reading comprehension, and you’re not even reading, it;s a video..
commenting for the algorithm . Thank you for the extraordinary work and the extraordinary production that came out of it
there is also the faction of "Commenders for the security of Israel" that argue for a formation of a palestinian state for security reason rather than a peace treaty. They argue that withdrawing from the settlements and recognizing Palestine as a state even if its without any treaty will eventually improve Israeli security because its much easier to secure borders than to secure occupied territories.
They also say that for peace to be possible, there first need to be an entity to sign peace with, and not the other way around.
Also, as an Israeli with a pro Israel leaning world view, even though Im not aligned to everything you said in this video, I thank you for doing the research and bringing an historically informed video on this subject, it is rare to find actually good faith speakers either on the Israeli side nor in the Palestinian one.
the commanders for the security of israel never explain exactly what their 2 states look like - that’s been the whole issue this whole time - for a long time there was agreement on 2 states, but the dispute was what they will consist of, so it’s a big omission.
and thank you - you probably know everything in this episode already, the next one is when you’ll see something very different to what we hear on either side
@@WHATISPOLITICS69
Thats pretty much middle school history class, but still, our version is pretty basic and white washed and the arabs/regional history are not taught at all when its not in relation to historical wars.
As for the commanders, I think they go for the camp David with a little bit of land swaps approach (something like the Geneva imitative) .
Before the war I used to be a fan of the federal one state (without gaza) but I think 1 state will be a real mess unfortunately (in a dream scenario I would prefer it)
The British left after they gave weapons to the Israelis and after they lied to the arabs and tricked them to recognizing the state of Israel, by saying to them if you recognize Israel we will recognise Palestinian a cheap shot from the British as usual, and the head of the PLO was assassinated by Israel not just ( dead) like you said These things and wordplay make a difference to the listener
none of this is true - the brits didn’t trick the arabs intro recognizing israel - the arabs did not recognize israel!
and arafat was maybe poisoned or maybe not, and if he was we don’t know who did it, more likely another palestinian rival than israel - but we don’t know either way, or even if he was poisoned at all.
I've noticed a serious flaw in your reasoning, half an hour in. The Arab perspective is not, generally, that "Jews left 3000 years ago", that is silly.
The Arab perspective is that a Jew, historically, is a practitioner of a religion. This is also the Orthodox Jewish idea. The European Christians decided that "Jew" was an ethnicity, codified this in the Nuremberg Laws, and then gave the land away to a bunch of Atheists who called themselves "Jews".
I'd highly reccomend listening to Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro, Dovid Weiss, and others, on how Zionism is the absolute antithesis on Judaism.
I'd also reccomend Arab Jewish historian Avi Schlaim.
Many of the Palestinians can trace their ancestry back to the Jew who converted to Islam or Christianity.
Likewise, the Ashkenazi (European Jews) are descended from converts to Judaism. There are also Sephardi, Mizrahi, Kaifeng, Beta Israel, etc - all of which are distinct Jewish cultures, with their own genetics, languages, food, customs, dress, etc, as "Jew" refers to a religion.
Zionism was started by Atheists, who retrofitted a perversion of Judaism around it.
The Antisemitism that happened in Europe did not happen in the Muslim world. This is precisely because the Muslim world did not allow Usury full stop, whereas the Christian world granted Jews a monopoly on Usury.
I haven't gotten this far yet, but I suspect you fail to mention that the Balfour Declaration was offered to Lord Rothschild in exchange for Lord Rothschild and his allies pulling their money out of the Austro-Hungarian economy, in the middle of WWI. I'll let you work out the implications of that.
Also see historian Schlomo Sand's work The Invention of the Jewish People. The Jews were not expelled after the Bar Kochba revolt, the Palestinian population was eliminated. Roman's never exiled rebellious populations, they killed them.
Judaism was an evangelical religion prior to Bar Kochba, and had communities of local converts throughout the Roman and Persian empires. The communities of converts remained loyal to Rome during Bar Kochba, and it is from those communities of converts that Judaism survived in the Roman Empire.
Also, with the Law of Return, and the 60+ laws based on it, affecting every facet of life, and the Nation-State law, it is absurd to claim that Arab Israelis have equal rights. Israel is an Apartheid State even within its 67 borders.
the nation state law got overturned by the supreme court - and sorry, you’ll hear people argue all the time on the palestinian side that just because they jews were a state here 3000 years ago doesn’t give them the right to come back and push the arabs out, as well as the argument about jews being a religion not a nation. the 2nd argument is more popular in west bank and gaza the first one among diaspora educated palestinians.
a lot of the other stuff you’re saying is full of shit, but not interesting enough to argue about - for example, lots of genetic studies show middle eastern origins of jewish populations across the world with some exceptions, notably the falasha were converts, but not the majority of ashkenazim.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 haaretz reported that mitochrondrial DNA tests (Judaism being matrilineal) done by Johns Hopkins University shows Ashkenazi are descended from 2 women originating in the Caucasus region. DNA tests are illegal in Israel.
But go ahead and call others full of shit, when they specifically point to their sources.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 also, note you glossed over the Law of Return.
But, hey, you also repeat the debunked mass rape claim, and negate to mention Oct 7th's civilian casualties were mainly caused by a Mass Hannibal by the IDF, as has been reported in Israeli media.
You also claim that there is a controversy over Gaza's occupied status, despite the 2004 ICJ finding that it is definitely occupied under international law.
You neglect to mention also, that T.E. Lawrence was sent to the Arab lands by the British during WWI to promise the Arabs self determination if they revolted against the Ottomans, at the same time they were promising Rothschild the Balfour devlaration in exchange for crashing the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
As Wilde made clear to the ICJ a couple days ago, there has never been a legal or moral basis for Israel's existence. Everything it has ever done is illegal.
I'd also reccomend the book Holocaust Victims Accuse. Available on Torah Jews website. It was the Zionist lobby that caused doors to close in other countries for Jewish refugees.
I wonder how come there seems to be so little overlap between your audience and those of so-called Breadtube channels. I've seen the creator of Andrewism in the comments here, but not a lot of mingling otherwise. So many viewers of other leftist channels seem to be unaware of you, despite the frankly insane quality you crank out every single time.
Anyways, another banger, keep 'em coming!
thank you! and not sure why - andrewism is because he recommended one or two of my episodes and he comments on my stuff sometimes - maybe it’s the style or positions or something? breadtube can be very bubblethink and petty gossipy - but let people know about it if you can!
maybe its the long format video he puts out that differentiates his content tbh
He's specifically an anarchist I think. Breadtube is more so topical and pop critical than this or andrewism
@@DjinnandTonik True. I just watched another video and saw Anark and LuckyBlackCat in the comments as well. However, I don't feel like these videos come across as pushy or gratuitous about anarchism, at least not to the audience of the more popular "Breadtube" channels (ironically a term with explicitly anarchist origins). Of course, they will probably never be super popular with the tankies.
I think Daniel might come across as a class reductionist to many leftish liberals. Which seems ridiculous to me. Or they just don't like the video aesthetics (which are somewhat unusual).
The one thing I hate(?) about your channel is that you've made me extremely skeptical about absolutely everything that I read or listen to, including your content!
Your series of videos analysing Graeber's book got me to reflect a lot about how no intellectual/scholar, even the ones you really admire, can be 100% trusted. I never liked Graeber as an anarchist; rather, he always came off to me as something between a radlib and socdem - he literally joined the UK's Labour Party a couple of years before his death despite eventually being expelled for being too much of a Corbynite.
Despite all this, I've really fallen in love with anthropology because of Graeber, but your videos have been extremely useful in putting me on the right path.
Also, reading the comments from haters on your videos is one of my favourite past times 😂.
haha thanks, yeah it’s hard being so skeptical - especially with something like this, every sentence i say i have to look it up, and then it still miss a few
this is one i need to rewatch like 10 times because its so in depth.
oh boy apologies for making it so long then! big time investment!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 i appreciate it being all in 3 parts. a 20 part watch would be harder to keep track of
Oh please 😂😂
As always, thank you for this great content you are making! Your work is insipreing and sparked my interest in anthropology as a research topic!
Even though I’m not entirely convinced by the both-sidesism of the approach thus far, I have to recognize the incredible amount of work you’ve done on this subject. I’m interested to see where you go with this….
it’s really not “both sidesism” - im presenting what both sides think, but then we’ll dissect it next time to see what actually happened
YESSSS, NEW WHAT IF POLITICS!!! Le meilleur show de politique du web. Je vous salue depuis St-Michel, Montréal 😤
salut! merci bien!
The one thing that caught my ear as something I feel qualified to critique is your overly restrictive definition of genocide. When Raphael Lemkin coined the word he was talking about what we today call cultural genocide; the mass killing is just a particularly ubiquitous side effect of the process. The UN legal definition was literally altered by the US and UK so they wouldn't be held just as liable as Germany (I mean, realistically, they still were, but it gave them enough of a tinge of plaisible deniability to serve as an aegis).
I think the best counterexample to point to is American chattel slavery. There we clearly have a genocide by all reasonable definitions (notably including all elements of the rather restictive UN legal definition), where the goal is explicitly to avoid physically killing a majority of Black people so as to preserve the existence of a slave class.
For more recent literature building on Lemkin's work you can look to researchers like Damien Short.
the thing is that in most peoples’ minds, genocide means physical extermination, and we now have the term “cultural genocide” for destroying a culture or identity (like you mentioned with slavery or residential schools in canada - i would not call slavery a plain “genocide” at all, because like you said, there was no attempt physical extermination). and we have the term “ethnic cleansing” for displacing or destroying part of a people, and mass murder or mass slaughter … and these terms are clear, coherent, cover all the concepts we want to discuss, and they are readily understood by everyone.
that being the case, why should be go back to lemkin’s definition, or the idiotic and meaningless ICJ defintion, which just lead to confusion and make everything seem like hyperbole, and make people inclined to take the term less seriously?
and note that the term “cultural genocide” was coined because regardless of lemkin’s original concept, everyone was using the term to mean physical extermination, which is why we needed a new one for cultural destruction!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Why go back to Lemkin's definition? Because to accept the current colloquial definition is to completely miss the point of his work. More than that, it is to accept the deliberate obfuscation of the whole point of his work.
Now, I have enough training in linguistics to not be uptight about the colloquial usage. Language change is literally a more consistent property of language than language being used to communicate, so there's just no use in being precious about it. But in an academic context where we're being very deliberate with our language? When we're explicitly working to avoid worbs? When the whole thesis is building to a class analysis of the process and word in question?
Then we really want to avoid making "cultural genocide" seem like a special case of or a separate process to "genocide", when in fact mass killing (never mind your particularly restrictive definition of even that overly restrictive definition) is an ultimately minor albeit particularly visible side effect of the process of genocide. That kind of shit framing very quickly gets into some actively dangerous places.
You already took some time to quibble over the definition. You already interrupted your flow to go on a tangent. And you chose to reify the shit framing rather than actually educating your audience.
@watcher314159 well thats because i don’t agree with you, and so far i think that what you’re proposing is what is “shit framing”. in my view, what i’m doing is avoiding “worbs” and what you’re doing is insisting on worbs.
Sometimes a colloquial usage is worbs, and sometimes the colloquial usage is more coherent than academic use, which I think is the case with genocide.
you haven’t make any arguments so far that I find persuasive at all for why lemkin’s definition is better than what i’m doing, or why it’s better to not have separate terms for cultural and physical destruction.
so, instead of making vague statements about how my framing is shit and takes us to dangerous places, why don’y you go ahead and explain *why* my framing is bad and *how* it takes us to dangerous places so we can have an actual discussion.
are you saying that because a physical genocide will always include a cultural genocide, that to separate the two terms is somehow misleading or obfuscating? because i don’t find that to be true at all, because you can have cultural destruction without physical destruction, so you want a term for that.
and also, speaking of going to dangerous places - for my entire life until about two weeks ago i understood “armenian genocide” and “rwandan genocide” and “bosnian genocide” to mean that there were extermination attempts at those people.
now that i understand that the term is used to mean something else, my immediate gut reaction is to take those events less seriously and roll my eyes whenever someone says “genocide” - even though my brain understands that what you mean by “genocide” is still something extremely abhorrent.
is this what you think is a productive result of the terms you want to use? because i can’t be the only one having these reactions.
i think this is more dangerous than whatever you are proposing as the dangers of using genocide the way i think it should be used (given that you haven’t yet pointed out what you mean by “dangerous places”).
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 1. Class formation is predicated on genocide. This is your whole-ass thesis.
2. There exist trivial examples of class formation where cultural but not physical destruction is what the class formation is predicated upon. American chattel slavery being the most unambiguous I can point to.
3. Either your whole-ass thesis is wrong or you've fallen into a worb trap where you implicitly accept a Lemkinian definition of genocide, despite your explicit declaration of a very Churchillian definition. QED.
As for the shit framing, as mentioned, the whole reason genocide was redefined by the ICJ (and further redefined in colloquial usage) was to obfuscate some heinous shit. It serves no other purpose, and never has. The shit framing lead to dangerous shit so quickly it was instantaneous. There's your trivial case, a small window into a well of rhetorical bullshit this margin is much too narrow to contain.
Now, you do have a point about the emotional impact of the colloquial usage of "genocide". This, and the general process of the euphemism treadmill, is another reason why I can't really take umbrage with the colloquial definition in colloquial use; natural language gonna natural language. And there's an obvious practical difference in dicussing those aspects of genocide that can be easily captured in a photograph and those that need more elaboration that I'd be foolish to deny. But in academic use things are very different. The point is to avoid worbs, with preserving emotional impact and aligning with colloquial use being distant secondary concerns. Lemkin was exceptionally deliberate in avoiding worbiness when he defined genocide, and nobody has come up with anything equally or less worby that more closely aligns with the (deliberately worby) colloquial meaning.
haha - “class formation is predicated on genocide (meaning cultural genocide)” is not in any way my whole ass thesis. that idea has never occured to me, i don’t know what you mean by it, and i can think of all sorts of examples where that’s not true at all - class formation happens with neither cultural nor physical destruction. Please elaborate and give some examples so i can know what you mean in order to agree or disagree or argue back. You gave one example of american slavery, but there are a zillion examples that don’t conform to that model at all.
Excellent work. I think your audience doesn't see how you're trying to make your way into this subject in a way that hopefully can speak to a broader viewership.
That said, the perspective laid out in this video begs for the context that's coming in Part II (as you've probably noticed from the passionate comments) so, filled with self-loathing for being that guy, any timetable for that one dropping?
Not in the sense you should feel pressured from it, but hopefully in a sense of pride that comes with knowing someone feels a lot of excitement and anticipation for your perspective and insights and wants to share them in their complete form with others.
i started with the intent of making it all one episode, but it just was too damned long - realstically it wont be out for several months - it took me 4 months to make this and it almost bankrupted me and the rush to finish before march 1 while dealing with a dozen legal emergencies for clients has totally burnt me out - so before i do part 2 of this, im doing a QnA about this episode, and then finishing the intersectionality episode i was 2/3 of the way through when oct 7 happened.
Something I believe is very important about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Nobody wants a free Palestinian state. We as people and most Palestinians want freedom for the region. However most countries in the Middle East are muslim monarchies. Monarchies have no interest in having a working democracy based on the same religious values. The same happened 200 years ago after the Congress of Vienna, when Austria-Hungary, Prussia and Russia agreed in supporting each other to keep down democracies and liberalism. There monarchies like Qatar, Iran or Saudi Arabia are both anti-democratic and their leadership is anti-semitic. I am worried that any independent Palestine could fall to another far-right group financed by Syria or Iran.
I believe this is a big reason why the Arab spring is a failure. Europe didn't want to help the population of North African countries and monarchies. If we talk about spreading democracy we can also see total failures by the West. I am an international politics nerd, but I honestly still don't understand what America tried to implement in Afghanistan, while I can understand the political system and factions of Somaliland, a country whose people decided to take actual parts of Western constitutions and multi-party democracy.
For me the "taking of the land from Arabs"-argument is a bit odd, because I also have living family members that were displaced, illegally under international law and were part of a cultural minority that were almost fully displaced. Oddly in this case it was Germans that were displaced after WW2. Specifically Sudeten Germans in the historical Sudetenland. After WW2 the Allies agreed with some displacement, but Czechoslovakia essentially kicked out all Sudeten Germans. While I can understand why Czechs would want to Germans out, becaue they wanted to "Germanize" everything, they essentially did a full cultural genocide. I believe my grandpa actually has a very good way to deal with this historical fact. He holds absolutely no grudge to the Czechs, but also had a relation to the people that took over their farm which is unsually good to a point where he says he debated other Sudeten Germans, because they don't believe that the Czechs helped his family to smuggle things like family photos and other documents over the border. Today the line between Czechs and Germans is blending, as there are no borders in the EU. My grandpa is a big fan of Czech Beer and a Czech grandma actualy made socks for me and my brother.
Because of this I am actually less sympethatic to the displacement argument of Arabs than most, because it will never solve the conflict for houses that now have generations of history for different ethnic groups.
It should also be noted that muslim arabs (which is the Palestinian national identity) or jewish israelis, but also muslims that were pro-Israel against other muslims in 1948, Druze people, Christians and Atheists.
I believe the ony fair may to end the conflict in modern day is a secular state that explictly claims to be the "state of jews, muslims, christians, druze and other groups" in its constitution. It would also definitely need international financial support to prevent hate based on reparations.
While I agree with a lot of what you said, your personal story doesn't really have any bearing on palestininians feelings of injustice at their displacement .for one thing sounds like your family ended up on their feet and were able to live. The majority of Palestinians on the other hand live under occupation without any citizenship or human rights and most of the rest languish in neighbouring countries as refugees, again mostly without proper citizenship. Therefore the original injustice and displacement has been a continuous experience, a prolonged suffering, which it doesn't sound like for your family. So I don't see why your families experience should mean "you don't get it" it seems pretty oblivious to me.
@@DjinnandTonik I was comparing my family story to the 1948 war, not current events. It was simply about how I build my argument and try to hold it consistently.
Germans after WW2 were essentially refugees. A not insignificant of especially those in the North East had to literally walk over the Eastern sea and many died.
Given that a majority of Palestinians supports the Hamas invasion, while I don't believe they would do it if given all information, things would be different.
Amazing effort. I'm only 52 minutes in but you've mentioned many things that aren't mentioned elsewhere.
However I do feel like there's a glaring omission at this stage. You kind of treat the zionists' immigrating to palestine as just that: "immigration". Which would be innocent enough, but it was much worse than that.
A very essential part of the conflict is that the zionists, from the very start, planned to invade Palestine and colonize it, against the will of the Arab society that had lived there continuously for almost 2000 years. Theodor Herzl literally tried to recruit the German Kaiser to help colonize it, and bribe the Ottoman Sultan in person in exchange for a colonial charter, the draft of which makes clear they we going to set up their own government and law enforcement. When that fell apart they lobbied Britain to help colonize the land, appealing to Christian Zionist sentiment, and succeeded in having prominent Jewish Zionists guarantee british support for taking over palestine. This then led to a program of massive "over-migration" where the existing arab society saw their land being flooded by a group of people who fully expected to start a country there. As Jabotinsky eventually explained in his "iron Wall" essay, this was going to predictably provoke the local population into a fight to defend their entire way of life. This would have played out the same almost anywhere else in the world.
In this light, arab nationalism seemed more a matter of survival in the face of European colonialism.
EDIT: You mention the 1939 white paper a few minutes later, but it's crucial to note that the proposal was for representative democracy with both Jews and Arabs sharing in a representative government. This should have been good for the zionists. But since they had planned to take the whole land over from the start this sent them into an explosion of terrorist violence that drove the british out. This is also a key part of the story I had no idea about but was shocked to learn: Peace could have come in 1939, but the Zionists launched a terrorist campaign instead to take over the whole land by force.
some of this is true, some of this isn’t and there’s alot missing .. that’s why there’s episode 2 coming
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Which part isn't true?
@@Kprywatne too much work, not enough time to get into this here
why are you siding with a colonizer in any way? it seems immoral and racist to me. i didn’t watch the whole video because i am not interested in the israeli perspective. being a settler is inherently immoral. i would probably reflect on your own subconscious racism. most countries are asking for a ceasefire and creating a video that is in anyway sympathetic to the israeli occupation is violent.
@whatispolitics69
Glad to see you back! hope you are well.
i’m very glad to be finished this episode! it was a rough go! thank you!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69I don't know if you have ever come across the youtuber @LonerBox but he also likes to talk about this conflict from a left-wing perspective and goes over a lot of the history on his live streams.
Phew! This was a challenging one to get through just because of the subject matter, but absolutely worth it. I am blown away by your level of detail here, no wonder it took so long and still has more story left to tell! Super looking forward to Part 2, your deconstruction of power dynamics is the reason I love your stuff and is what has inspired me to action in my local community. Side note, I didn't realize you had a monthly Ko-Fi, I'll be switching from Patreon to monthly contributions!
thanks so much - i need to advertize better about the monthly option, cause doing videos like this that take 4 months totally bankrupts me each time! glad you appreciated it and if it motivates you to be active that’s the most amazing thing i can hear about what im doing! thank you!
This channel, religion for breakfast and SD signifier are the best channels for me.
Question:
Do you believe violent indigenous resistance against american settlers was morally justified a full 250+ years after first contact and 100+ years after the US was founded?
Another question:
Was the indigenous narrative of resistance against encroaching settlers stealing land and genociding their people equally as valid and worth consideration as the settler desire to escape chaos and oppression from europe and spread civilization in a savage new world?
For the first question, you need to be more specific. What kind of violent resistance? Against whom specifically? Make it analogous to israel/palestine.
Violence against military or corporate forces taking your land? Sure. Violence against a civilian who is knowingly taking your land. Probably.
Violence against a civilian living on land that was stolen 200 years ago, but who had nothing to do with that theft, and doesn’t know about it, even tough they currently benefit from it? Absolutely not.
For the second question - i don’t even understand it. I’m not saying the narratives are equally valid. I’m saying that we want to understand them, and test them out so that we can determine what is and isn’t valid. We have both of these narratives floating around that people geniunely believe. I’m articulating them, so the audience can understand why there is so much vehement debate, and next time we’ll be finding out what’s real or not.
You keep saying "they dont know". They do know. The kids and grandkids of european settlers knew in the 1850s, and israelis know now. Thats why they continued to stay. They're not ignorant of the history. They understand it. They understand the material benefits. They are active participants in a continuous settler colonial state even tho they weren't literally on the frontier killing or displacing indians/palestinians. They may not *call* it settler colonialism or think its *bad*, but to plead ignorance is absurd and is borderline apologia for the continued expansion of the state of israel.
If the nazis successfully colonized poland, would polish resistance 75 years later be illegitimate?
If russia colonizes crimea and eastern ukraine over the next 75 years, would western ukrainian attacks on the descendants of russian colonizers no longer be legitimate?
If china colonizes xinjiang over the next 75 years, would uyghur attacks on han chinese in xinjiang be illegitimate as well?
This line of thinking leads to some pretty dark places. Colonization is no longer a terrible crime, but is only bad in its initial phases. After that, have at it!
@PinkoJack so what I get from this is that you’ve clearly never met one single israeli in your life, and you’ve probably never met a jew in your life either.
They do not fucking know. Generations of people did not know. Go watch even videos with interview of former zionists, like Miko Peled or Ofer Cassif - they grew up with israeli propaganda, had no clue about the actual history, until they learned it later on their own and became anti zionist activists.
You are the exact sort of ignoramus who needs to be watching this video, yet your ignorance is loaded with arrogance, and serious moral retardation, so it might as well being a donkey watching the video…
If you think it’s legitimate to go and kill the grandchildren of nazis or of whoever else whose grandparents did something bad, then i’m sorry, you’re a fucking moron, who might as well be a nazi yourself or a chimpanzee. ooga ooga, kill the other tribe, ooga ooga.
if your grandfather did a crime, do you deserve to die for it? what kind of fucking idiocy is that?
And colonialism is bad as long as it’s going on for, as long as people are being dispossessed and killed. You can’t blame people for what their parents or grandparents did, everyone who’s alive deserves to live in equality and freedom. you don’t get to equality and freedom by going and doing mindless murders of people because they’re from the same tribe as someone else who did something bad.
What makes you different than a “price tag” settler in the west bank? it’s the exact same mentality, except you’ve deluded yourself into thinking you’re a leftist, when you’re actually a right wing lunatic.
Also, by your “logic” the berbers in north africa, and the christians in jerusalem, should all be doing violent resistance against arab civilians because their ancestors did settler colonialism there in 700AD…
@@PinkoJackI’m not Israeli, but Jewish. For most of my life I supported Israel. Every time I saw any footage, or talk of Israeli war crimes, genocide, apartheid etc. I would usually be under the belief that the footage was either exaggerated, left parts out, or doesn’t reflect most of Israel. I would mentally justify how Israel has the moral high ground. Since I had already had that conclusion since before I knew what a Palestinian was. It was easier. Even though most of the time, I sympathized with Palestinians upon seeing footage of the brutality of the situation. But I couldn’t admit to myself that Israel was in the wrong.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 Savage.
1:33:47 fkn THANK YOU! YES! America has had a key role in the expansion of Islamist fundamentalism! Thank you for pointing that out! 💯
Always a blessing when you upload... What do you think of Ilan Pappé? I think from what i have seen, he seems to be very accurate, honest and not as biased (leninism) and polarizing as Norm Finkelstein for example.
i actually prefer finkelstein! he’s hilarious! i haven’t read pappé for a long time, and he’s interesting, but i got turned off once when i saw him speak because he was saying that as a historian he should be an active first and the cause is more important than the truth … like not as in he should make stuff up, but i wasnt impressed with that
I appreciate his analysis of the decades long conflict but he still is very reactionary and a rapid transphobe in his other positions. Bolstering him too much risks alienating other allies imo
@@johnwright7916 i don’t think someone needs to have the right opinions on every issue to have valuable insights into the issue where they’re an expert - but also i’m not bolstering him here, i’m giving him as an example of how someone with the pro palestine POV/narrative interprets oct 7 vs the other writer i showed with the israel POV
@johnwright7916 ahh you are referring to finkelstein, thought you meant Pappé.
Pappe is incredible imo he literally studied his stuff in the archives in Israel, he was on the sources. "The ethnic cleansing of the people of palestine "and the "10 myths about Israel " are just two of his great books!
I came across him in October, he was on the majority report with Sam seder. Highly recommended to watch that.
From what I know of his talks and works, your portray of Pappé actually is simplistic and inaccurate.
this is genuinally the best video i've seen about this, coming from a jew. you've put all what i've wanted to say into words. the way i've saw the other side is through reframing words, exactly what you said. praying for peace one day. thank you for really understanding and for all your research, its so so refreshing
It is sad that you didn't bring up Arabs Revolt, it's alliance with the Entente, and the Entente betrayal towards Arabs after the Ottoman Empires got defeated.
yes that’s important history, and very interesting, but I tried to just limit it to what people need to know to get the basic understanding of what’s happening today - like i also skipped the 1973 war, and the occupation of south lebanon, or the massacres in golan heights in 1967 even if these are very important events - and still it’s 2hrs long! and honestly am not super familar with it, maybe i should have learned more
This video really reinforces my belief that there is no war, but a class war.
reserve your judgment for next time because i haven’t even explained why that would be yet in this episode!
36:36
The modern map of Palestine looks quite different today, wouldn't you agree?
In fact, critical thought of the competing nationalism of that time could lead to a logical conclusion:
One set of nationalists wanted to colonize a land. Telling those of like ethnicity from other lands who also had no legitimate claim to that land
That they had historical ties to it, or that their nationalist religious book (torah) granted them divine right.
That the inhabitants of that land were 'less than,' and deserved to live under their boot
The other nationalists wanted to resist that colonization
I draw the attention of the 1948 map once more
Seems one side could be characterized as 'right wing'
and one could be characterized as 'left wing'
Have I missed anything so far?
So far, you have
but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt
and watch the rest
I do enjoy your videos
you seem to be missing the whole point of this video - it’s to explain what people on either side think and what their narratives are so we can know what motivates them, and then we will dissect them next time and see what is and isnt true
@@WHATISPOLITICS69
I haven't watched the rest of vid yet.
The israeli narrative is simple:
Palestinians are human animals that don't deserve the land our ancestors abandoned over 2000 years ago, so we will take it. Even if it means bathing it in their blood.
Not exaggerating, they've come out and said this themselves.
The 1948 map proves that the Palestinian narrative has been dictated by the israeli one. They are being ethnically cleansed. The world is turning a blind eye, even condemning them for daring to resist.
So far, it seems like an academic's "both sides" to people who think 'left' and 'right' can stand in the place of 'right' and 'wrong.'
This isn't an attack.
I realize you would have a different perspective than some lily-white more on from the American deep south.
Put in the same context, it seems like blaming the natives for the colonization of the Americas.
1:35:50
I'm not seeing the promised link to the evidence. Would you mind either replying with it here, or, better yet, in the description? Are the show notes different from the description?
it’s in the description where it says BIBLIOGRAPHY
There is no peace under colonialism and occupation, it is never the fault of Palestinians it is 100% the fault of the west and Israel, and yes both ppl’s are paying the price.
Agreed
true
Nope the land belong to the jews end of the story 😂
I was expecting a video that injects class back into Kimberle Crenshaw's work but it all makes sense now why that's not the case lol
haha, well i was 2/3 of the way through that when oct 7th happened, and then 4.5 months later i finally finished this one… Kimberlé Crenshaw ep coming relatively soon!
Also waiting for that one. But it's good he did this more current Palestine episode first.
@@sztetter im going to do an QnA episode about this one, and then crenshaw (will be doing QnA episodes after each episode now so that i can respond to all the questions and produce stuff that doesn’t take 4 months each time!)
when is the transcript and bibliography coming?
maybe in a week or two, im totally burnt out rn and have a huge backlog of emergency legal work. and the transcript i might need help with, i wrote a script and then kept adding and adding parts and theyre all in diffrent files…
I might be able to help on that.@@WHATISPOLITICS69
Is there anyway one could get in touch wirh you? I am thinking a lot about political philosophy but there is no one that could estimate the value of it. I wonder if I could get in touch with you and exchange a few "letters"?
i’m a lawyer and i do this full time plus have a lot of family obligations so i don’t have time for long correspondence - like if you have some questions about the episodes i always answer them, but if it’s too complicated or involved i don’t have time to deal with it and it stresses me out - i usually give me email at the end of each episode
I do think the main inter-jewish opposition to zionism of the pre-israel period should at least be mentioned, even though an in-depth detailed explanation is not the focus of the video and would bloat it a lot: "the bund"/jewish labour bund, which was much more socialist then the "socialist" strands of zionism
I think he talks about that a bit in the video, but we will have to wait for 12.1 to listen more.
that’s stuff we’ll talk about next time
Thank you for the work; I will read every source to this video to try and build as effective a basis for the problem as you given your insights.
My new favorite channel👂🏾
holy fuck this is amazing. i’m doing TONS of research on this, and i really appreciate resources like this. thank you for doing this. it’s taken me 9 months to read a handful of books and to feel like i can explain it and write about it, so i can imagine how much work you put in here.
thanks! and this is nothing, wait till you see the next one on this that i’m working on now
1:18:28 gee, just kinda "yadda yaddaed" the specific ways the state of Israel "tried to encourage" all that immigration 💀💀💀
The Muslims encouraged it too by ethnically cleansing their Jewish populations in reaction to the forming of the State
Could I ask how they did and perhaps could u send a link to any sources?
The thing is, no narrative should make you justify shredding children to pieces.
i definitely agree with that, though when people think they’re physically threatend and think “it’s my kids or your kids” they’ll usually pick “your kids” which is what people in israel think in israel right now, that oct 7 will happen over and over again unless they do this and “destroy hamas” which is impossible nonsense, and which isn’t true at all for the reasons I explained.
What you seem to not understand is that you cannot just expect the working class of Israel and Palestine to unite and put national differences aside when the Israeli working class directly benefits from stealing Palestinian land. This would be like, in the middle of the genocide of natives in the USA saying: omg! The natives should really put their national aspirations aside and unite with the people who benefit greatly from stealing their land!
You think you have reached a higher plane of leftism by bringing nuance a both sides but you really just expose your liberal world view where both the colonized and colonizers are on equal playing field. Like if during the Algerian war of independence you would be saying: omg! The FLN are exploiting their national identity instead of unifying with the French who have colonized the, for 150 years
I guess i can’t blame you because i didn’t get into the class conflict dynamics that im talking about in this episode (i wanted it to be one episode but it’s too long) but i actually do understand that - i’ll be talking about this when i cover labour zionism next time and compare it to south africa’s white workers who are the one who demanded apartheid.
but like i said in the video, it’s not about the working class vs the capitalist class, it’s about decision makers vs everyone else.
and, what you’re saying is much more true of the early phase of the conflict, where the zionist movement and the working class zionists benefited directly from land theft - but today, they already got the land. the only ones who are benefitting from further land theft now are the west bank settlers, who are just 100% colonialists.
for the rest of the population, they actually have a material interest in the conflict ending, but their leadership has been lying to them and pushing them into continuing the conflict indefinitely, which was very apparent in what happened in the aftermath of oslo.
what differntiates this from like the FLN vs the french in algeria or even the nazis vs the jews in WWII is that most colonialists or expansionist empires don’t have a very profound moral justification for what they’re doing.
At best it’s “we’re helping the natives but they keep rejecting our benevolence so we need to kill them!” or a the lowest level (south africa, nazi germany) it’s “we are superior, we need to take this land”.
It’s hard to see this now from an outsider’s perspective because the Israeli government is just constantly mouthing off genocidal statements and plans for ethnic cleansing, and the population supports much of this, but this is very much the result of the narrative of self defence and historical moral virtue.
In this situation in israel and palestine, there’s a profound ideology on the zionist side that it is not and never has been a colonialist, that they didn’t push anyone off their land except in self defence etc. So this is something that needs to be understood and adressed, it is a huge reason why this conflict was not resolved decades ago…
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 thanks a lot for taking the time to explain (and for tackling the topic too ) but I still don't understand the "equivalence of the two sides " view taken in the coverage similar to the first commentator. I am glad you mentioned algeria (even tho I don't understand what FLN vs algeria means if the FLN was the movement to end french occupation and settlement) . Let's take that example , moral justifications aside (the justification of french occupation was based as far as I remember on security concerns of piracy in that region that can only be stopped by french presence which I honestly don't find more or less justified then israeli settlement justifications either) what exactly is the fundamental difference?
Algeria:
French people and algerian jews received preferential treatment while muslims were brutalised during french occupation. The french consider themselves the righful owner of that place and were keenly interested in getting the right demographics. And once the FLN was able to push french military occupation out and offering everyone algerian citizenship the though of being equal to the arab muslims was enough to make the vast majority of them emigrate to france.
Palestine:
The conflict started as you said , purely historically , with zionist emigration, it has a clear beginning and the beginning is instigated by zionists. Now I don't know ofc the take you are going to take on that in detail so apologies . But on the fundamental level all zionist writings and speeches aside, if the aim is a majority jewish state in a place that till today doesn't have majority jewish demographics when counting the refugees entirely any legitimisation of zionism is a legitimisation of both ethnic cleansing and of a narrative of fundamental specialness of jews. Jews cannot be integrated in any country and are nowhere safe except with their own state and with their majority demographic but palestinian arabs those guys can go into diaspora, be absorbed and integrated and will forget being from there within a generation. All nuances aside, isn't one side eerily similar to any other ethonationalist movement obsessed with birth rates ? Whatever reaction arab people there develop , it remains a reaction to emigration of people that , by their own leaders aims at least, cannot tolerate coexistence with any non jewish majority ever.
oops the FLN vs algeria was a typo, corrected!
nevermind nuances (i hate nuance!) - the difference here is that in the zionist narrative, that most zionists today believe, creating a jewish majority did not at all necessitate any ethnic cleansing. their story is ‘we just immigrated and became the majority over time, and then when you’re the majority, you deserve a state. and when the UN made a partition plan where we had a state in the jewish majority areas, the arabs tried to genocide us.’
you see the difference? the zionist leaders made all kinds of statements about transferring the population out, but 90% of zionists have never heard of these statements and then the ones who do will put it in the context of ‘well the arabs had been attacking and pogroming us since we started immigrating there, so eventually ben gurion realized that these people are too racist to coexist with us and accept us becoming a majority so we had to draw up plans to kick them out when they started genociding us’ - which is where Benny Morris ends up.
Now this is full of shit in many ways, but that’s what I get in to next time.
So the “both sides” is not that both sides are equally right or wrong, it’s that both sides have more or less equally coherent moral justifications, and next time we look at what’s the truth in all of that.
and that’s interesting about the piracy angle in algeria, i need to look at more justifications for colonialism.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 first of all, it’s not just WB settlers who benefit from stolen land, ALL of Palestine was stolen and doesn’t become not stolen after 70 years. If Germany had won WW2 and colonized east Europe it would still be stolen 100 years later and that would 100% be beneficial to German settlers. I mean the people who were killed on Oct 7th literally live on ethnically cleansed land and the Hamas militants are the descendants of the ethnically cleansed people. How is it not in the benefit of those Israelis to farm that land? (Israelis have, by the way extremely high standards of living) Maybe when the reason why Israelis hate Arabs so much isn’t just because of propaganda by their elites but simply because they, like American settlers in the 19th réalise that it serves their material interests.
On the point of colonialism you are just wrong. It is only today, since colonialism has a bad rep that all sorts of mystical tales are used to justify Israeli colonialism. The early Zionists were openly and proudly colonialists who used all the classical justifications you mentioned, which you must know since you mentioned Rashid Khalidi’s book.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 so what’s your point? If you know the “Israeli narrative” is bullshit is bullshit why not clearly say it instead of giving the impression that this is a nuanced issue? I’m not saying you cannot present a “devils advocate” but you need to make clear it is a “devils advocate”! Israel Palestine is the most simple conflict today: settlers stealing and settling the land of the natives
47:00 napoleon's conquest of egypt was in 1798-1799, not 1787
yikes - thanks, i wonder where i got that date from??
Free all original christians and native muslims in holy land. Free all religions in holy land. Free Palistine from wrath of PM Benjamin Satanyahu rule
Epic! In the truest sense of the word. A labor of love. The analysis makes it possible to believe the conflict is resolvable, not intractable. It video helps us to understand why, specifically, people believe it is unsolvable and why that is false.
thanks - im not even sure why you feel that way at this point given that i didn’t even get to the stuff about who started it, and what the compromises are that come out of that yet!
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 No doubt, sounds like the next episode will be really revealing in those senses. Maybe what I am reacting to is the way you laid out *what is behind* the extreme polarized thinking represented by Netanyahu and his lunatic cabinet on one side & extremist Hamas on the other side. in the sense, the video serves to demystify the conflict and the hideous point to which it has sunk. Somehow identifying that background gives me hope that it can be overcome, that it is not some ancient, mysterious, unsolvable riddle.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict boils down to the depiction of Jews in Islam. There was never a country called Palestine. Palestine is a colonial name , and was a British colony. There was never a point in history when a group of unified people who referred to themselves as “Palestinians” ever had sovereignty over this land or any land anywhere in the world. Even today, there is nothing that unifies the Palestinian people around something that could serve as a unified identity, ethnicity nationality or heritage. “Palestine” is a front by the Muslim Arab world to attempt to legitimise the destruction of the state of Israel and the annihilation of the Jewish people as prophesied in the Hadith in order for the day of judgement to arrive. You’ve needlessly over-complicated an already complicated conflict .
no. while those dynamics played a role in how opposition to zionism was expressed, to paint that as the cause of the opposition to zionism is ahistorial b.s. designed to blame the arabs for the whole conflict. it’s true that palestinian identity wasn’t very important, but not true that it didn’t exist (it existed more for some classes than others) and the religious stuff was just a rallying point against zionism, not the actual cause of the opposition. the elite arabs opposed zionism because they wanted to continue to be the ruling elite of that territory. meanwhile the peasants opposed zionism because zionist land agencies were buying land from wealthy owners who had stolen it from the peasants, and then evicted them in great numbers contributing to a catastrophic landlessness crisis that had been growing in palestine since the late 19thCentury but was made worse by zionist land acquisition practices. so different classes of people had different reasons to opposite zionism, and we’ll see next time how and why that played out the way it did. sadly for the past 80 years both jewish leaders and education system and the palestinian one have been lying to their people about the origins of the conflict, and you’re repeating some of the zionist versions of fake history.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a frist hand account what happened in 1948. The Jews of the Old YIshuv called themselves Palestinians, the Arabs designated themselves by their family names, clan names, and their countries of origin. Nationality is a European concept. the arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinian" until 1964 when a *carefully designed narrative* was constructed to delegitimize the existence of Israel. Zionism is not a steam, or a sect or some organization - it's Jews living in Israel. Hatred for the Jews and genocidal intent towards the Jews is inherent to Islam, as per Hadith Al-Bukhari 2926 the hadith of the rocks and the trees. The Jews even reached out to the Arabs offering to join forces when fighting off the British, and the Arabs refused, because of a very simple concept "Dar Al-Islam" and "Dar Al-Harb" the world is divided into Muslim land, and enemy land yet to be conquered. And when some Jews moved to Mandatory Palestine and purchased land Legally at "exorbitant prices" per the words of the Arabs, they saw that as their arch enemies based on their religion establishing a presence on the land they wanted to conquer. What are "acquisition practices?" have you ever heard of another way to acquire land other than purchasing it or winning it in a war? The Pro-Palestine crowd accuses us of stealing land at least you acknowledge we paid for it. It is 100% the fault of the Arabs for this situation, and the continuation of this situation because they simply refuse to entertain any sort of compromise for peace and prosperity, even though the Palestinian arabs already have a state - it's called Jordan which is 70% Palestinian arabs, and 22 Arab states. God forbid those greedy Jews have one. Look, I can understand your point of view, it's annoying that the Jews are always painted as something positive and the Arabs as something negative, especially given some of the Jews' incessant reliance on the notion of being "God's chosen people". Anything that opposes your predisposed notions about the conflict is considered propaganda or "fake history", but you can't address any of it. Even the leaders of the so called "Palestinian" Arabs were themselves foreign HItler's Nazi right hand man in the middle east, Hajj Amin Al-Husseini himself is from a wealthy family from Arabia, and Azzadin Al-Qassam is from Syria and PLO leader Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. If youre going to self-proclaiming yourself to be an objective expert voice on this matter, you need to do more than just be fair and deconstruct both sides equally, and simply regurgitate false narratives and passing them off as fact. There was never a point in history when a group of people who called themselves "Palestinians" had any sort of sovereignty over any land anywhere in the world at any point in time, they are arabs who came from other arab countries of which there are 22. I'll gladly have a livestream discussion with you about this topic.
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a first hand account what happened in 1948. Jews bought land legally at "exorbitant prices" from landowners, they didn't steal land. aand what exactly are "Zionist Acquisition practices" lmfao ? Have you ever heard of any other way to acquire land other than paying someone for it or conquering it from war? The Arabs acquired land here by moving to the land and not buying it from someone they just moved and built villages when the ottomans and british were here. Even their own leaders are not from here : Hitler's right hand man in the middle east Hajj Amin Al Husseini is from a wealthy family from the Hejaz in modern day saui arabia, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam is from Syria, Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. Next, the only people who called themselves Palestinians were the Jews, Arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinians" until 1964, their identites were based on their clan names families and where theyre from. That's why AL-Masri literally meaning "the egyptian" is the thrid most common palestinian surname. Nationality is not a thing in the middle east. The Palestinians fabricate history and pass down fake historical narratives down to their children and indoctrinate them to believe that they have a history here. There was never a single point in history when a group of people who referred to themselves as "Palestinians" had sovereignty over any piece of land anywhere in the world. Even today they are not a unified people - the Palestinians in south Hebron are different to the Palestinians in Jericho or Jericho, or Khan Yunes. The Palestinians tell themselves that they lived in Villas here in peace and prosperity and ruled here justly, and welcomed the poor holocaust surviving Jews from Europe with open arms and the Jews kicked them out. That's the Palestinian narrative TO THIS DAY. Those terrible zionist Jews you speak of were "Palestinian" Jews of the old yishuv who fought the british to gain independence here and save the Jews from the Nazis in Europe and from the pogroms in the middle east and north africa and establish a jewish homeland, in the ancestral homeland of the jews. It is 100% the fault of the arabs who attacked with 5 armies the day after the jews gained independence from the british, because 22 arab countries is not enough for them - they just have to also have the land of the Jews. First and foremost because of the belief in in "Dar Al Islam" and "Dar al Harb" - land of islam, and land of war (land yet to be conquered), and secondly because of the prophesized genocide of the Jews at the hands of Muslims in the Islamic Hadith. If you're going to present yourself as an objective voice on this conflict at least don't omit the blatant facts behind this conflict. I'll gladly have a livestreamed discussion with you about this.
also stop deleting my comments its incredibly cowardly
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 you continue to refer to Zionism as if its this distinct, organized all-encompassing ideology and movement when in reality it's simply Jews wanting to have a homeland, and not in some random plot of land but in the only land on earth that the Jews have any connection to. Zionism is not even a movement or an ideology any more because it achieved its goal already. Saying you're a zionist today is akin to saying "I want this country to exist". Anyone who agrees to the existence of Israel is a zionist. There are no carefully designed narratives or dogmas or propaganda that is passed down generations to Israelis, the leadership in 1948 didn't have time to do that, they didn't even have time to construct a constitution because the day after Israel declared independence from the British, 5 arab armies attacked the Jewish state. Israel is a free country , sometimes to its own peril, everyone can do their own research and is free to believe whatever they want. My Palestinian grandfather told me from a first hand account what happened in 1948. Jews bought land legally at "exorbitant prices" from landowners, they didn't steal land. aand what exactly are "Zionist Acquisition practices" lmfao ? Have you ever heard of any other way to acquire land other than paying someone for it or conquering it from war? The Arabs acquired land here by moving to the land and not buying it from someone they just moved and built villages when the ottomans and british were here. Even their own leaders are not from here : Hitler's right hand man in the middle east Hajj Amin Al Husseini is from a wealthy family from the Hejaz in modern day saui arabia, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam is from Syria, Yasser Arafat is Egyptian. Next, the only people who called themselves Palestinians were the Jews, Arabs didn't start calling themselves "Palestinians" until 1964, their identites were based on their clan names families and where theyre from. That's why AL-Masri literally meaning "the egyptian" is the thrid most common palestinian surname. Nationality is not a thing in the middle east. The Palestinians fabricate history and pass down fake historical narratives down to their children and indoctrinate them to believe that they have a history here. There was never a single point in history when a group of people who referred to themselves as "Palestinians" had sovereignty over any piece of land anywhere in the world. Even today they are not a unified people - the Palestinians in south Hebron are different to the Palestinians in Jericho or Jericho, or Khan Yunes. The Palestinians tell themselves that they lived in Villas here in peace and prosperity and ruled here justly, and welcomed the poor holocaust surviving Jews from Europe with open arms and the Jews kicked them out. That's the Palestinian narrative TO THIS DAY. Those terrible zionist Jews you speak of were "Palestinian" Jews of the old yishuv who fought the british to gain independence here and save the Jews from the Nazis in Europe and from the pogroms in the middle east and north africa and establish a jewish homeland, in the ancestral homeland of the jews. It is 100% the fault of the arabs who attacked with 5 armies the day after the jews gained independence from the british, because 22 arab countries is not enough for them - they just have to also have the land of the Jews. First and foremost because of the belief in in "Dar Al Islam" and "Dar al Harb" - land of islam, and land of war (land yet to be conquered), and secondly because of the prophesized genocide of the Jews at the hands of Muslims in the Islamic Hadith. If you're going to present yourself as an objective voice on this conflict at least don't omit the blatant facts behind this conflict. I'll gladly have a live streamed discussion with you about this.
any online resources(youtube/podcast) suggestions for more well researched materialists analysis of world history?
no, not that i can think of, but definitely read Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel for a materialist world history
Good on you mate, always consider your videos to be the best on RUclips when it comes to explaining left wing politics, politics in general actually. Take it easy, and thanks.
Not getting interrupted by adds was so refreshing, and made it easier to take everything in, 👍take it easy man.
@@richardfinlayson1524 right?? everyone keeps telling me to monetize the channel, but fuck it and fuck all those ads! it’s like a joke watching videos that want to abolish capitalism with 50 fucking ads in it interrupting you and making you run across the kitchen when youre doing dished to turn off the fucking ads…
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 I wouldn't blame you if you did but it's great as is.☮️☯️❤️
Very glad to see you weigh in on this! Going to watch over the next couple days.
Thank so much for this video, I wish I could like it multiple times! Literally everything I see online with regard to IL-PS is a kind of binary cartoon defending the one side while totally vilifying the other, and everyone seems to have such moral clarity with regard to what is going on at all times, on either side.
it’s funny because when i made this, it was supposed to just be a 20m intro to the *real* episode where i get into what actually happened and how much each narrative is true or false, and what they both leave out - and then when it turned out to be this long i thought it’d be boring to everyone because it’s standard “israelis think x and palestinians think y” stuff that you’d learn in any university 101 course when i went to school - but i didn’t realize how completely echo chambered is today and how most people have only ever heard one side or the other such that they don’t even know that there’s another perspective on it.
Looking at some of the comments here, I do feel the phrasing the video uses at some points is unfortunate, even if the title makes it clear the video is against the ongoing ethnic cleansing which has not stopped even after the ceasefire proclamation
There probably could've been a better way to communicate some of the messages here without coming across as if the video was actively blaming both sides, rather than the actual general statement that the current state of the conflict has been influenced by two conflicting narratives which were formed from what is essentially similar foundational reasons, and that we have to understand how this happened and where to go from here
The Israel-Palestine conflict is actually rather simple even if the finer details are complex, but problems stem from how people misconstrue colonialism as something that is based on people and not an institutional process, which leads to the misconception (most often seen amongst people who lean conservative) that "Land Back" means "kicking people out" which is utter nonsense
That said, simple does not mean easy, because I am of the opinion that the USA outright needs to stop existing in its current form of authoritarian capitalistic governance (and to a lesser extent maybe even some neighbouring Middle Eastern countries need to shed away theirs, but I also oppose, say, a formal foundation of any Kurdistan, because internationalism and not nationalism is what is sorely needed) if there is to be a better solution than a shaky two-state one, because Hamas and Fatah are to me already failed states
despite the colonial aspect being very real, both “sides” are to blame for how the conflict started - except the sides aren’t the people, they’re the leaderships pretending to represent the people of either ethnic group. you’ll see what i mean next time, but the arab nationalst leadership completely screwed and exploited their own people to such an extent that there was a mass revolt against them in the 1930s - and then in 1947-1949 the vast majority on the arab side didn’t even bother fighting the war as much as they hated zionism. there were only 5000 fighters from the palestinian arabs, a tiny fraction of the population. and a proportionally low amount of those fighters were from the majority peasant classes. in contrast, the peasant revolt in the 1930s had many times that amount of fighters and it was 100% peasants. the israeli side had about 30,000 fighters for a similar sized population. this is an extremely underexplored aspect of the war.
the israeli side was absolutely atrocious in the war - they actually had potential allies in much of the arab population, and just fucked them and killed them in a manner that is still shocking to me today. and the colonial wing of zionism definitely took over early on, but what ends up happening is by the end of WW2 and then especially by the early 1970s the large majority on the israeli side are recent immigrants frm the holocaust and then the arab world who knew nothing about colonialism whatsoever, and were taught a largely falsified history, which persists until today and animates israel’s turn to the right and to fascism etc. it’s so convincing that you have all these non jewish, non israeli people who believe it as well, like destiny or coleman hughes and many others. there are always lies told to colonial populations, but nothing on the level of israel from what i know. and they prevailed until today beacuse the population has become so racist and this assault is so egregious that there’s almost no other way to see it.
what i want to do with the next episode is make it clear that the “sides” that we need to judge and evaluate are not “the palestinians” and “the israelis” but specific sectors of each population. and when i talk about the land acquisition policies you’ll see how the arab nationalist leadership can even be said to have collaborated with the zionist leadership in various respects to fuck over the populations on both sides, it’s incredible.
Amongst all the propaganda and misinformation, I must say that this video is a breath of fresh air. Even if there are points of yours that I'm not entirely sure about (though I'm currently in the process of reading more about things since all of this is so new to me), I greatly appreciate that you've taken the time to acknowledge the humanity of both the Israelis and the Palestinians.
So many people think that acknowledging the humanity of one group means that you're denying the humanity of the other, but you've made it very clear that that's not at all how we should look at this case, which is something I wish more people took time to do.
Wishing you well. This video is A LOT of info in just 2 hours but it gives me a lot to think about and read over, so I appreciate how much effort and care you put into it!
hi thanks - i think the next video on this will be the really enlightening one, but thought that first, people need to understand what’s in the minds of both israelis and palestinians and have some of the basic events in their minds before they can process how the conflict actually started
Good morning ☀️
‘ello!
i'm just happy you're back
Huge, huge thanks to all the time and effort you put into these great videos. Much appreciated!
You said you would go through the more controversial events and lay blame on those who deserve it in future episodes. Has this already been done in the long unscripted episodes you have posted, or will you come up with scripted episodes on this topic in the future? I am asking this because i don't have much time to watch the long unscripted episodes, unfortunately.
it’ll be in the scripted episode coming up, working on it …
@@WHATISPOLITICS69 thanks for the reply!!