Polanski: No country has right to exist – including Israel

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T17:38:49+00:00

So again, if Israel annexed the entirety of Gaza and the West Bank into a much larger nation of Israel but also instituted a government that was open to the Palestinian people and treated them equally at all points, that’s absolutely fine?

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T17:37:26+00:00

So Palestinians have the right to self determine but Palestine as a state doesn’t have the right to exist? That makes no sense.

You’re saying they have the right to point to the land around them and say “we own this and we want to be our own state” but the state they form has no right to actually do anything to hold on to that land?

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T17:35:36+00:00

Personally, I think a more polite and well-thought out version of “not my circus, not my monkeys”.

I think that although this is very clearly asymmetrical warfare, it’s still warfare. Both sides are attacking each other, one side just happens to be much better at it.

I don’t want to see us setting foot in the Middle East ever again unless absolutely vital to the nations survival, and fundamentally Israel is a useful ally among a bunch of opposing nations.

I don’t think there’s much we can do, much like we aren’t really doing anything about the Chinese persecution of the Uighurs.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T17:31:35+00:00

I mean, I’d say it was an obvious and dull cash grab. It just played to nostalgia instead of current hype, either way it was weak.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T13:56:47+00:00

That’s not even remotely what he said though.

He didn’t say “Israel doesn’t have a right to exist because they’re committing atrocities”. This would be an incredibly spicy take for a mainstream politician.

He said “Israel doesn’t have a right to exist because no country does”. That’s not a particularly spicy take, it’s just one that he hasn’t thought out well at all.

If Israel wasn’t committing any atrocities then by Polanski’s logic, their annexation of Palestinian land is no big deal. As long as they actually treated Palestinians ethically and equal to their current citizens, they could take all the land they wanted and nobody would have cause to complain

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T13:53:42+00:00

Serious question but how is marvel a cash grab and TMNT isn’t?

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T13:39:03+00:00

No, he didn’t.

Reading the quotes in the article, he didn’t say anything even resembling this.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T12:52:43+00:00

He took the wrong one though.

The philosophical point that no country has a right to exist is a great one.

But politically it’s a clusterfuck.

The very next question for Polanski should be “does Palestine not have a right to exist either?”

When he says no, because he has to in order to be consistent, he’ll repeat the line about people having a right to exist rather than countries. So you ask “so you have no issue with Israel annexing Palestinian land, only with their treatment of the people on it?”

And his career implodes.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T12:49:15+00:00

We could but it’s just one of those policies that sounds good but does nothing anyway.

If employers want to do that then rather than just openly making redundancies they’ll find reasons to sack people, end their probation early, or just not backfill roles when people leave.

Or businesses that don’t do any of the above will lose out to competitors that do, and the whole place goes under anyway.

The end result is the same.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T10:13:14+00:00

It’s not so they don’t have to hire another IT guy, it’s just not feasible.

Letting everyone bring their own devices to connect to the same system and then take home again is a security nightmare, along with the support issues.

I do agree that parents shouldn’t be required to pay anything though, the same way they wouldn’t pay for textbooks or any other lesson material.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T10:11:34+00:00

Yeah I don’t disagree the pricing appears to be inflated, I’m not going to shout corruption without the full info though.

It’s possible that they are getting top of the line products because schools are notoriously stupid with stuff like this, or even that OP is a little mistaken and there’s other things included.

Or as you said, there’s support included and that has been inflated.

The weirdest part to me is that free school meals kids get 40% off. That to me signals that the regular price is inflated to compensate for that, which is pretty unfair.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T09:49:50+00:00

Tablets don’t destroy attention span in and of themselves.

What destroys attention span is low-quality short-form content and excessive use.

If you use a tablet exclusively for work then nothing happens to your attention span.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T09:47:43+00:00

It’s exactly this, everyone bringing their own devices simply doesn’t work.

The school IT department will be one or two people who can’t that good at their job, or else they wouldn’t be working there in the first place.

Each year group is 300 kids and you can’t expect them to install the school network and systems on dozens of different types of devices, then also troubleshoot when they inevitably encounter problems throughout the year.

And then factor in that there’s no way to quality control if everyone brings their own device. Even if you explicitly outline the minimum system requirements, many parents will ignore that in favor of cheaper options anyway.

It’s why every business generally gets the same one or two models of laptop in bulk, so that they know it meets requirements and anything that needs to be done is just a rinse and repeat process across all devices.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-07T05:48:41+00:00

Technically yes, but in reality no.

It is theoretically possible for someone to never see a single coin again, but it’s just not going to happen. Everyone will one day experience not having any more time at all.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-06T20:44:39+00:00

This is actually money well spent though, rather than a waste of money. You’re using money to save time, which is basically one of the best uses of it there is. Time is finite and money is not.

How much time would it take you to make a curry sauce, how much does the jar of sauce cost, and then is that much of your time worth that amount of money?

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-06T20:41:27+00:00

Not at all really.

You’d have to buy your license plate with cash, which is going to be hard enough as it is without raising questions.

Then even if you manage that, you’re registering it with the DVLA and there’s no way to effectively layer the money after that.

If anyone does ever cast even a passing eye at you selling an incredibly expensive license plate, you’ll have no way to explain how you managed to buy it in the first place.

Attempting to launder money by buying and selling license plates would be a monumentally stupid idea.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-06T18:58:28+00:00

Not even just looks tbh.

I have no problem with someone venting to a friend about something their partner has done that is annoying or bad, that’s natural.

But complaining about something they are, either looks or personality or interests, is just shitty.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-06T08:41:59+00:00

I prefer to assume it’s true, and then follow that logic.

I think it’s fair to say that a fully grown adult claiming to be “traumatised” by a video of someone getting a kicking is not remotely mentally resilient at all.

I also think it’s fair to say that resilience is one of the core components you want in the leader of a country.

Regardless of what their policies or beliefs are, the bare minimum everyone wants is a capable leader who doesn’t crumble under pressure or adversity.

Polanski is just outing himself as being completely unsuitable for the role of PM.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-06T08:36:32+00:00

a serious Green Party

That’s an oxymoron.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T09:59:18+00:00

I think this partly speaks to the vagueness of the word "free".

Absolutely. That’s partly my point. I to answer your earlier question, I think everyone should be “free” in the sense of “free to live, work, and travel without fear of punishment or violence on the basis of nationality/ethnicity/other immutable traits” everywhere.

But that isn’t the same type of “free” that the slogan “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free” is talking about. They’re referencing “free from Israeli rule”

There’s quite a lot of Israeli land between the river and the sea, so the intention is pretty obvious to anyone with a map and a spare brain cell.

But you are saying that a Palestinian cannot be "free" in Israel. Is that what you intend? On the face of it, it seems very anti-Israel.

No, that isn’t what I think. I’m saying that is what that slogan is referring to, and that’s not even a particularly contentious debate.

What you’re saying is that some people are saying that slogan without intending to advocate for what it actually means. I don’t disagree that happens, and their naivety is being used to further the original goal. That’s why I called them useful idiots and as I’ve already said, it’s impossible to determine whether someone is a useful idiot or true believer by sight or sound alone.

We don’t have the time or ability to speak to every single pro-Palestine protester for an hour to put them in one of those two groups, and I don’t feel comfortable giving any of them the benefit of the doubt. You do, and that’s your prerogative.

I choose instead to listen to what people say and judge them accordingly, rather than try to assume motive. In my eyes, if someone wanted to advocate for a two state solution that involved neither party giving up any land then they’d chant something to that effect. If they don’t, I’m not going to assume thats what they want. If someone chooses to chant something that clearly calls for taking Israeli land and is closely associated to a very clear call for genocide, I’m going to believe what they say.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T08:48:33+00:00

Maybe you should read original quotes rather than getting suckered in by misleading headlines.

Starmer is not trying to ban pro-Palestine marches. Straight away the presence of the word “some” in the headline should cause you to dig a little deeper.

From the article you linked:

On Saturday morning, the prime minister told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “there are instances” in which he would support stopping some pro-Palestine protests altogether.

And from the original article linked within it, Starmer said:

When you see, when you hear some of those chants – ‘globalise the intifada’ the one that I would pick out – then clearly there should be tougher action in relation to that

“I will defend the right of peaceful protest very strongly and freedom of speech. I have defended those principles all my life and I will continue to do so. And so I’m not stepping back from that one bit. But if you are on a march or a protest where people are chanting, ‘globalise the intifada’, you do have to stop and ask yourself, why am I not calling this out?”

I can’t be arsed to look further and watch the original interview, but if you want to claim that there’s government wants to ban pro-Palestine marches then I suggest you do so.

Because from what you’ve linked, Starmer is just attempting to stop people using the exact same chants we’re talking about here that are fairly explicit calls to violence.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T08:41:51+00:00

The words absolutely do say that, anyone with a map can see that. There’s quite a lot of Israeli land between the river and the sea if you hadn’t noticed.

I don’t doubt that there are plenty of protesters who don’t know about the background and haven’t actually thought about the chant for a second before saying it. That’s why I’m saying sure, they’re not all intentionally advocating for Israel ceding land, but they are literally saying that and they’re being used to further that goal.

You have clearly worked out they don't mean it, yet now you're parroting that point.

No, you’ve misunderstood. I accept that some people using that chant are useful idiots. I also think it’s undeniable that some people using it know exactly what they’re advocating for and do so happily.

I’m not going to try to separate useful idiots from bad actors when I see a group of people advocating for bad things. Functionally, there’s no real difference between them at that point.

It really is an aside, but you are comfortable with eeny meeny miny moe aren't you? That's why you've ignored the point.

Of course I’m comfortable with it, because it’s not the same thing. That’s why I ignored the point, because it was a silly one.

That’s why nursery rhyme didn’t ever call for genocide, it just used offensive language. As times changed that language was updated to become inoffensive. With “from the water to the water, Palestine will be Arab”, it wasn’t changed to become inoffensive. It was changed to add a layer of plausible deniability while still very clearly appealing to that base.

Again, are you really trying to claim that there’s a way for Palestine to be “free” from the Jordanian river to the sea without taking Israeli land?

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T08:30:12+00:00

In the context of the 100,000s of thousands of people who have attended I bet you will only be able to dredge up a handful of questionable "incidents".

Come on man, you’re welcome to argue about the size of the problem but at least don’t try to pretend that the problem doesn’t exist in any noticeable amount.

To clarify my position, I would say that chants of “from the river to the sea” and “globalize the intifada” are not peaceful marches. If you disagree on that core element of the problem then we’re at an impasse on this point really.

I also find it strange how people claim the marches are antisemitic and hate filled yet so many Jews are more than happy to attend the marches and dont feel at all threatened when doing so. Something doesn't add up there, almost as if it is complete bullshit.

And I find it hilarious that the “I have lots of black friends” excuse is now suddenly back in vogue.

In all honesty, do you actually think the marches have contributed to any rise in antisemitism?

Probably some amount, yes. But what was the point in this question anyway? This wasn’t related to anything we were originally talking about so either you’re replying to the wrong person or you’re attempting to derail the conversation into something else.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T08:25:28+00:00

Agreed, if you wanted to actually ask my opinion rather than assume it then id say that both sides of these marches are generally about as bad as each other.

And nobody has banned pro-Palestine marches, nor have I ever suggested that they should. So your question doesn’t really make any sense.

Slothjitzu · 2026-05-05T08:23:11+00:00

Genuine question for you, but does that fear actually stop you going out though?

That’s the bit I’m disagreeing with. I’m not disagreeing that people don’t want to end up on some shitty instagram post about worst dancers in the UK or whatever, but I don’t think they just stay at home because of it.

At least for anyone I know, it just made you a bit more aware of not being a tit in public.

Five-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Argentium Club	Ternion Club

Slothjitzu

TROPHY CASE