The destruction of Palestine is breaking the world
The destruction of Palestine is breaking the world
The rules of the institutions that define our lives bend like reeds when it comes to Israel – so much that the whole global order is on the verge of collapse
Israel’s war in Gaza is chipping away at so much of what we – in the United States but also internationally – had agreed upon as acceptable, from the rules governing our freedom of speech to the very laws of armed conflict. It seems no exaggeration to say that the foundation of the international order of the last 77 years is threatened by this change in the obligations governing our legal and political responsibilities to each other.
You're viewing a single thread.
Zionism is a destructive toxic ideology of fascistic bloodlust and racial supremacy. It is the true descendent of Nazi ideology.
Given that the Zionist movement was founded decades before the Nazi movement, I would say Nazis are the descendants.
More accurately, they’re both separate descendants of ethnonationalism which was a popular ideology at that time. And still today, evidently, though it seemed to be in decline for a bit during the post-war period.
Nazis had nothing to do with the Jewish people establishing a homeland in Palestine. Joining those two groups is ridiculous and rude to Jewish people.
The Jewish people began by buying the land legally in the late 1800s as a way to escape persecution. That pissed off the local Arabs (understandably) and both of them started arguing—which was not usually violent until 1920-30ish.
That said, after it became a British Mandate (1917), Israel got a ton of international support. And obviously after WWII, they got whatever they wanted…. Which, was choosing violence.
A lot of the reason the Arabs got little support was because they were fragmented, with no leadership. Each of their revolts were seen as a threat and not a legitimate push back against colonization. And, after the Ottoman Empire fell, England and France “stole” that land, so revolts were more or less terrorism (in their eyes, of course).
The Jewish people began by buying the land legally in the late 1800s as a way to escape persecution.
This is completely ignoring the boycott and parallel society angle. What Zionists did in pre-mandate Palestine was also forced expulsion of Palestinians; the forcing part was simply delegated to the state. Had they simply wanted to settle in Palestine nobody would've minded, but that was fundamentally not what the Zionist project was.
According to Israeli historian Benny Morris, Zionism was inherently expansionist and always had the goal of turning the entirety of Palestine into a Jewish state. In addition, Morris describes the Zionists as intent on politically and physically dispossessing the Arabs.
The World Zionist Organization established the Jewish National Fund (JNF) in 1901, with the stated goal "to redeem the land of Palestine as the inalienable possession of the Jewish people." The notion of land "redemption" entailed that the land could not be sold and could not be leased to a non-Jew nor should the land be worked by Arabs.[145] The land purchased was primarily from absentee landlords, and upon purchase of the land, the tenant farmers who traditionally had rights of usufruct were often expelled.
-Wikipedia
Nazis had nothing to do with the Jewish people establishing a homeland in Palestine.
Nazism had a lot to do with the German people expanding their homeland to Eastern Europe and Russia and murdering the inhabitants. Starting to see the similarities now? Nazism and Zionism are sister ideologies, both fruits from the same rotten tree that is European settler colonialism.
Anyone could argue that “my people deserve this” is a similar ideology. That’s just false equivalence. You are cherry picking, and ignoring a whole lot of history and intention.
Has Israel moved towards a similar ideology? Yes. But to claim in started out with that intent is just angry jaw flapping.
Anyone could argue that “my people deserve this” is a similar ideology.
"My people deserve this land at the expense of its current inhabitants" is fascism, or at least the underpinning thereof, so you're not wrong there. Nazism, Zionism, Manifest Destiny, it is literally the same thing manifesting in different ways. Look up "blood and soil" and "Lebensraum". Ben Gurion is literally on record saying "we must remove the Arabs and take their place". The Nakba started before the founding of Israel. If you have an argument for how the Nakba was anything but fascism, let's hear it, but so far you're not saying anything of substance.
But to claim in started out with that intent is just angry jaw flapping.
Okay let's try this. Try this online quiz and see if you can get more than 15/21.
It’s really easy to cherry pick similar statements from people and compare them and make a whole website. Anyone could do the exact opposite.
If you’re going to quote people, you need to use dates because as I have said before dates matter.
It’s really easy to cherry pick similar statements from people and compare them and make a whole website.
My dude non-fascists don't say "when we settle [region], [group] will have no choice but to scurry like drugged cockroaches" (dated 1983 btw). Also the site has dates and sources for the quotes; most Zionist quotes are recent but a few are from the 20th century with two from before WWI. They even have one by Herzl himself. Zionism was and continues to use and be predicated on downright Nazi antisemitic propaganda about how Jews can never live with non-Jews and how diaspora Jews are sickly and weak and all that shit. That's why they shit on Holocaust victims, for instance.
1937 is how many years after 1897? Have I not been saying this entire time that the original idea was lost? Yes.. pretty sure I did… yup checked I did.
My dude? Okay have a good day if you’re going to talk like that.
Well obviously if you define your "original idea" early enough there'll be nothing to criticize because they'll have done nothing yet. But fine. Is plain antisemitic propaganda in 1904 early enough for you? What about "a land without a people for a people without a land" in 1898?
“A Jew brought up among Germans may assume German custom, German words. He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish, because his blood, his body, his physical-racial type are Jewish. … It is impossible for a man to become assimilated with people whose blood is different from his own. In order to become assimilated, he must change his body, he must become one of them, in blood. … There can be no assimilation as long as there is no mixed marriage. … An increase in the number of mixed marriages is the only sure and infallible means for the destruction of nationality as such. … A preservation of national integrity is impossible except by a preservation of racial purity, and for that purpose we are in need of a territory of our own where our people will constitute the overwhelming majority.”
-Ze'ev Jabotinsky (né Vladimir Yevgenyevich Zhabotinsky), Revisionist Zionist leader who co-founded the Jewish Legion of the British Army in World War I, on June 06, 1904
‘National Judaism’ will make the ancient soil fertile. It seems miraculous. Everything natural is miraculous. Once the nation which we Zionists are arousing is fully awakened, things will happen swiftly and dynamically. Then the nation will behold its ancient land beautifully situated on the Mediterranean, with regions of cold, moderate and warm climate – a land suited for any kind of cultivation, with long-dormant natural resources.”
-Literally Theodor Herzl, 1896.
who bombed the king david hotel again and became leaders of israel? was it the palestinians? No?
Gee and its a wonder why they aren't called terrorists. Could it be, could be it be racism and colonialism?
Zionists are similar tool of oppressiom to nazis
The Jewish people began by buying the land legally in the late 1800s as a way to escape persecution. That pissed off the local Arabs (understandably) and both of them started arguing—which was not usually violent until 1920-30ish
Arab was pissed of when the zionists plan became clear. Owning lands do not give you right to declare a state
There was a group of Yemeni jews who settled in palestine and people was fine with them. Arabs and those jews was going to each other festivities.
The state declaration was in 1948. Zionism was established in 1897.
That leaves 51 years for things to go wrong—and they did.
If things got pretty bad around 1920, that’s just a few years after Britain put its dirty cock in the mix. And I think we can both agree British colonialism has been the cause of a ton of problems.
Zionism was a solution to Jewish statelessness and persecution. In its early conception, Zionism was not a tool of oppression, but rather a form of self-determination.
Did Zionism become a genocidal maniac? Yes.
Zionism was a solution to Jewish statelessness and persecution. In its early conception, Zionism was not a tool of oppression, but rather a form of self-determination.
Zionists had no right to impose a state in any country. Even if the state was in Argentine or Japan or the USA, the population would have not accepted either. Facing a persecution is not a valid argument against imposing a state on the land of people who had nothing to do with the oppression .
No matter how peaceful the ideology started , fact is fact Zionism became violent and is the source of the whole conflicts with the help of the British empire.
I agree with you. Zionism did not start out similar to Nazism, and overtime, with the help of the British government, it became something significantly terrible and has lost all focus of the original intention: to escape persecution.
And… over years there have been more and more Pointless deaths – mostly caused by Israel. And in 2025, I don’t think anyone could argue against it being full on genocide against non-Jewish people in Palestine.
lost all focus of the original intention: to escape persecution.
They could have escaped percussion and live as normal citizens of Palestine but no the plan of Herzl was always to impose a state and displace the local population
Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
The property owners will come over to our side. According to my conception, the majority of the local population will have to be transferred elsewhere.
We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Nazi was quickly in position of power so they was able to execute their plan very fast at first Nazism exclusion, discrimination, and the removal of Jews from German society then the final solution and the holocaust . Zionism needed more time to do it. Now in 2025 we are in the final stage of Zionism , the complete eradication of Palestinians in Gaza and slowly continuing eating the west bank
The Nazis were doing mass shooting, the IDF did mass shooting and mass bombing. Both the Nazis and the idf are starving people. The Nazis used gas chambers, the idf is shooting at people seeking aids with the new terrorist organization claiming to be an aid organization.
I am not saying both are equally the same and that the genocide in Gaza is worse than the holocaust but i think it is still fair to compare both rhetoric and methods
Zionists collaborated with Nazis to help them deport Jews to Palestine.
Well, 19th century zionism was a different thing. Edit: or rather, a more diverse collection if things. Optionally but not necessarily evil. Sometimes it was as benign as 'lets all go somewhere and join a community together ajd bring the ways that we're cool to that community and even if they dont totally like us, they can't hate us more than these assholes'.
So it is fair to say that the idea of zionism that 'won', the genocidal theocratic ethnostate, is at least to some extent based on both the nazis, and some of the same esoteric bs the nazis were into.
It was always about stealing local people land and displace them
Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
The property owners will come over to our side. According to my conception, the majority of the local population will have to be transferred elsewhere.
We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Hertzel's version, yes. He also tried to get literally cecil rhodes to help. There were others, and people who hated that guy. It didnt quite mean just one thing til a few years later, though.
In the modern definition of the word, yes, its herzel's that won. I woukd never defend what it is in earnest, only point out that before it started to congeal, it could have been/meant other things.
He didn't win. Antisemite is still a big problem and isrsel is making it even worse. Jews are still not safe anywhere
Which version was not sbout forcing a state on other people and could realistically work without mass displacement and ethenic cleansing?
he didnt win
Feels like he got to sieze the definition, do all his atrocities.
antisemitism is still a big problem
To you, maybe. To zionists, that's a feature!
jews are still not safe anywhere
Nobody is, dear. Safety does not grow in walled gardens, and we firebomb the commons pretty regularly.
which version was not about explicitly being a fucking monster
I forget their main advocates or if they were calked specific things, most of what i know about this was chatting with an old historian and an article i read a billion years ago, but there really were different ideas of it as recently as the thirties, like joining already extant communities somewhere. They were, like any 19th century european idea, never completely unproblematic, but some of them tried and at least read as genuinely well intentioned, and there was a lot of schismy bitterness as the meaning of thr word crystalized around hertzel's thing. Now of course it's one of tge most vile words in English, but he did not invent it. Mightve been the one who imported it to english.
It was always about stealing land and displace local people
**Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895 > The property owners will come over to our side. According to my conception, the majority of the local population will have to be transferred elsewhere.
> We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country. - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
> Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly - Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895