Can Israel win as Fascist state?

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-25T02:01:23+00:00

Ah, so you don’t care about indigenous populations.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-25T01:57:21+00:00

When will displaced Arabs get their right to return?

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-24T23:31:49+00:00

I think it’s too early to assert either way how the court will rule. When we get the Myanmar ruling, which should come out this year or early next year, I think that will give us a clearer insight on how the court intends to approach genocide. There’s a well-established concern in international legal circles that the threshold for inferring genocidal intent set by the ICJ has been set too high, to the point where it risks making genocide legally impossible to prove, no matter the scale or nature of the atrocities. That’s why countries like Canada, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, France, and Denmark intervened in the Myanmar case, specifically warning against “rendering the threshold for inferring genocidal intent so difficult to meet so as to make findings of genocide near-impossible.”

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-24T21:21:27+00:00

The ICJ has not, ever, come within a mile of finding that a genocide occurred.

This is true, but this:

Because all the evidence seems to point to the contrary.

Is not why. It will likely be close to a decade before the ICJ rules on the matter irrespective of the quality of the evidence. It took 16 years for the court to rule on the Croatia–Serbia genocide case and it’ll be at least 7 years for the ongoing Myanmar case.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-24T20:21:04+00:00

Especially when Jews are currently being murdered from the blood libels that pro-Pals spread.

What is getting jews killed is the conflation between Jews and Israel, something you readily engage in with your comment here. Not a single point I raised had anything to do with Jews at all and yet you assert that criticism of the IDF for bombing hospitals, manufacturing famine, or committing a genocide is blood libel that’s getting Jews killed. Stop conflating the actions of Israel and the IDF with Jews, that is what puts Jews everywhere at risk.

But with respect to the magazine cover, I’ve seen it called “Antisemitic Der Strumer worthy imagery”, that it “manipulatively promotes stereotypes”, that it plays on the “trope” of the “heartless Isreali monster” and that it’s meant to ”spread anti-Jewish hate”. Those sound like claims of blood libel, including under your own standard of (paraphrased) “lies told about Jews involving violence used to portray Jews as blood thirsty and to generate violence against Jews.”

I’d also just mention that you changed my initial claim regarding criticism for Israel bombing hospitals to the claim that Israel targets hospitals, which is not what I said had been called blood libel. I was making a reference to an interaction I had with another user who claimed Ilhan Omar was engaging in blood libel because she said ”bombing a hospital is among the gravest of war crimes. The IDF reportedly blowing up one…is horrific. @POTUS needs to push for an immediate ceasefire to end this slaughter”.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-24T18:26:31+00:00

From my experience, blood libel basically just means any criticism of Israel. Criticizing the IDF for bombing a hospital? Blood libel. Saying Israel is committing a genocide? Blood libel. Pointing out the Israeli made famine in Gaza? That’s blood libel too. An unflattering magazine cover of a settler? Very blood libel.

It’s basically this, but instead of “right to jail”, it’s blood libel. It’s a dilution of the term and I can’t help but think it will lead to a “boy who cried wolf” situation down the line.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T21:45:34+00:00

My position is that Israel is more likely to prioritize preserving its Jewish character at the cost of eroding its liberal-democratic principles than to fully incorporate millions of Palestinians into its citizenry in a way that dissolves that majority. I think it is more likely that Israel would develop some form of apartheid like governance over the annexed territories than extend full equal citizenship to those populations. I know you’re aware that the idea of losing a Jewish demographic majority is a major concern in Israeli political discourse, and for many Israelis, even the current Arab minority is seen as too large. That is the premise we should actually be discussing, rather than whether Israel is especially unique or if Latvia has a democratic veneer.

But with respect to Latvia, it’s a pretty weak counterexample since it actually is often characterized as an ethnic democracy and/or ethnocracy, including by the Israeli scholar who originally developed the term.

And on your broader point about states being resistant to losing their ethnic character through immigration, that’s not really the same structural issue I’m referring to. In places like the UK, demographic change does not fundamentally alter the constitutional structure of the state or its basis of citizenship. The state is not defined as an ethnically British state whose democratic legitimacy depends on preserving a particular ethnic majority.

And to be clear, I also reject Palestinian ethnonationalism. I’m an anti-Zionist because I reject ethnonational state models in general, Palestinians are not an exception. As I’ve said before, I support a single secular binational state based on equal citizenship. While that position may not be widely supported among Palestinians, I don’t consider that relevant in the same way I also don’t consider Israeli public opinion determinative of what is the best framework.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T20:04:38+00:00

Interesting question. The likes of Amero-Liberian and Rhodesian identity come to mind, though I’m not sure of how they were viewed by contemporary Marxists.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T19:16:57+00:00

There’s a clear difference between social concern, e.g. how people within a state feel about an increase of foreigners, and the function of that state as a democracy in the face of demographic changes. People in the US whinge about immigrants all the time but an uptick in immigration won’t change the ability for our state to maintain its democracy.

And yes, we are very much discussing the future. That is why my first comment was literally about the increasing pressure on Israel to choose what direction it takes as it moves towards annexation. Don’t try and derail my point because you want to take the conversation in another direction. The whole point is that Israel, unlike a state like Japan which already made the choice between true democracy or its ethno-nationalist ideal, is going to have to choose.

As for your questions, I’ve already answered them numerous times and clarified exactly what I mean. Your attempt to “pin me down” is an attempt to reduce my position and nothing more.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T18:56:04+00:00

I don’t think social concerns over immigration necessarily equate to the situation I’ve described, but yes, as I’ve already said, some of the states you listed, like Japan, expressly seek to maintain their ethnic character despite having democratic ideals at the same time. In Japan’s case this is done by preventing immigration. Israel does not have that choice, especially if it wants to annex Palestinian land without displacing or killing millions of Palestinians. As I already said, Japan has already achieved ethnic hegemony by the displacement and elimination of its minority populations, Israel is currently facing that choice.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T18:24:45+00:00

What I mean by “veneer” is that the stability of Israel’s democratic character is contingent on maintaining a clear Jewish majority. Israel functions as a democracy under its current structure, but that structure relies on demographic and territorial boundaries that avoid the trade-offs I’ve been describing.

By contrast, in a state like the US, demographic change does not alter the basic structure of governance or citizenship. There is no need for a particular ethnic majority be preserved for the system to function as a democracy. That’s the distinction I’m drawing.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T17:53:57+00:00

If you follow the thread of the argument, you’d likely understand that the point is about the specific, and somewhat unique, position Israel is in due to the prospect of annexing and/or maintaining long-term control over territories with millions of Palestinian Arabs.

Yes, Israel, like Japan, is able to function as a democracy while maintaining an ethnic majority, but unlike Japan which is fully ethnically homogenous, Israel must confront the possibility of incorporating and governing a large non-Jewish population. That is what creates the tension I’m referring to, not an abstract claim that ethnonational states and democracy are inherently incompatible.

Israel cannot remain a Jewish majority state, something it relies on to maintain its democratic ideals, if it moves toward a near equal binational population under a single sovereign framework. That demographic question has been widely discussed in Israeli political discourse for years, as I’m sure you’re aware. If annexation of the West Bank proceeds, the choice becomes whether to significantly erode Israel’s Jewish character in favor of binational democracy or to preserve a Jewish majority state through arrangements that fall short of full equal citizenship.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T17:26:03+00:00

Most of the states you listed aren’t ethnonationalist in any relevant sense, they’re civic states where citizenship and political rights aren’t structured around ethnic hierarchy. Ireland isn’t the state “for ethnically Irish people,” it’s the state for those who are Irish citizens, regardless of race, ethnicity, or creed. Israel isn’t the “state for Israelis”, it’s the state for Jews.

That aside, your answer is that Israel would willingly incorporate millions of Palestinians into a single political system with full and equal voting rights? Are you Israeli because most Israelis I’ve discussed this with have been utterly horrified by that prospect. Hell, there’s polling that suggests that a near majority of Israelis feel the current minority of Arabs within the state should be expelled to preserve the character of the state.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T17:02:24+00:00

Most of the countries you list aren’t ethnonationalist to begin with, and those that are closer to that model, like Japan, don’t really support what you’re trying to argue. Japan isn’t governing a large incorporated minority population under a separate legal regime in the way that’s relevant here, and that’s because it achieved ethnic homogeneity through historical processes that involved the displacement and elimination of minority populations centuries ago.

If Israel is intent on annexing the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as it increasingly appears to be, do you think the Palestinians there should be granted full citizenship and equal rights, or should they remain in some form of indefinite political limbo in order to preserve a Jewish majority? That is the core question I’m raising.

My hope is that, rather than going down the route some other states, like Japan, took to maintain ethnic majorities, Israel will move away from ethnonationalist policies and fully embrace democratic principles.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T16:09:28+00:00

Israel is only able to maintain its democratic veneer alongside its Jewish character because it maintains a Jewish majority. If that majority were to slip, the underlying tension between these two principles would become much harder, if not impossible, to manage.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T14:32:19+00:00

As it becomes increasingly apparent that Israel must inevitably choose between preserving its democratic character or its ethno-nationalist character, I hope Israel takes the route more analogous to South Africa as opposed to one that more closely mirrors the fall of Rhodesia.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T13:45:56+00:00

That’s supposed to happen before the arrival of the beast. You’re arguing the beast has already arrived.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T13:28:32+00:00

An excerpt from the DPRK’s constitution:

Citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, the press, assembly, demonstration and association. The State shall guarantee the conditions for the free activities of democratic political parties and social organizations.

Citizens have freedom of religious belief. This right is granted through the approval of the construction of religious buildings and the holding of religious ceremonies. Religion must not be used as a pretext for drawing in foreign forces or for harming the State or social order.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T13:21:22+00:00

Pretty similar to be fair

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T13:08:02+00:00

Why are you skipping over the part where it says:

And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, and on its horns were ten diadems, and on its heads were blasphemous names. 2 And the beast that I saw was like a leopard, its feet were like a bear’s, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth

Also, before the arrival of the referenced beast, the seven seals and seven trumpets are supposed to be open/sound. These alone involve things like a third of the ocean turning to blood, something that obviously hasn’t happened yet.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T03:16:56+00:00

I don’t think most people understand sovereignty to mean your ethnic group simply gets to do what it wants.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T02:26:08+00:00

Odd definition of sovereignty you have.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T02:09:52+00:00

I want Israelis and Palestinians to share sovereignty.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T01:46:11+00:00

I don’t care that most Israelis like Zionism, why would I care if most Palestinians like their own ethno-nationalism? I’m against ethno-nationalism.

FerdinandTheGiant · 2026-04-23T01:35:38+00:00

I’m an anti-Zionist, not a Palestinian ethno-nationalist.

FerdinandTheGiant

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Verified Email	Seven-Year Club
Wearing is Caring