• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    9
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This will go over like a lead balloon here, but I do in fact think “from the river to the sea” is neither an acceptable or advisable thing to say and truly is a dog whistle for the destruction of Israel. I’ll say “free Palestine” all day long but will never use the other slogan.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      352 months ago

      I do in fact think “from the river to the sea” is neither an acceptable or advisable thing to say

      “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an unacceptable or inadvisable thing to say in the midst of a genocide of the Palestinian people, because it suggests that the state responsible for the genocide shouldn’t exist?

      I’ll say “free Palestine” all day long but will never use the other slogan.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        42 months ago

        “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an unacceptable or inadvisable thing to say in the midst of a genocide of the Palestinian people, because it suggests that the state responsible for the genocide shouldn’t exist?

        Uh… yes. Germany exists. Turkey exists. Russia exists. Unless there’s something about Israel in particular that you especially don’t like but aren’t willing to say in public?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          302 months ago

          Unless there’s something about Israel in particular that you especially don’t like

          Not a big fan of the genocide.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          302 months ago

          Nazi Germany didn’t have a right to exist, nor did Apartheid South Africa, nor Rhodesia.

          People have a right to exist.

          Apartheid has no right to exist. Genocide has no right to exist. Ethnic cleansing has no right to exist.

          You can either prioritize that people have a right to exist, or that an ethnosupremacist state committed to ethnic cleansing of native populations has the right to exist.

          That is the situation. You are clearly choosing the latter. Maybe because there’s something in particular about the people being exterminated that you especially don’t like but aren’t willing to say in public?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          12 months ago

          Urss used to exists now it decomposed to many countries, we are fine witb it so what is the problem to have a one state solution ? Israel made the mess and occupied gaza and the west bank in 67 then nevwr stopped building settlements making the two state solution a non viable solution

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      262 months ago

      Congratulations, Zionists also consider “free Palestine” a dog whistle for the destruction of Israel, so you’d better stop saying that too.

      Though at this point, hand ringing about whether people are calling for the destruction in Israel is like hand ringing about whether people were calling for the destruction of Nazi Germany in 1942.