Israel-Palestine is Just the Tip

img

by CyberDandy

A lot of leftists and anarchists have accepted a narrative about Israel-Palestine that is pretty warped. The basic problem isn’t limited to anglophone ignorance about Jews and/or Palestinians; it’s a problem that leftists and anarchists seem to have in comprehending multinational conflicts in general. The comfortable lense through which leftists/anarchists see the world don’t help them see the power dynamics of these sorts of situations clearly. That lense sees the world as divided between oppressors and oppressed, rulers and ruled, indigenous and settler, and other dichotomies that provide a sharp picture of the most intense regions of conflict at the expense of blurring the larger and more significant forces that make those conflicts possible.

The result of this worldview is a psychogeography composed almost entirely of conflict regions and a historical knowledge limited to a knowledge of the most belligerent parties to the conflicts. This is a model of the world and the relations of power in that world which is very different from models one constructs through a more formal study of international relations, geopolitics, and political geography. While those mentioned academic disciplines are often turned towards constructing models that are useful to specific powers, usually governments and transnational corporations, those models are at least constructed from a greater wealth of facts.

All of what I have said so far has been said as if I am not one of these leftists or anarchists. However, the opposite is true. I’m speaking mostly of the worldview that I have constructed throughout my time as an anarchist and only secondarily speaking about what I see on social media platforms from familiar names. Indigenous struggles have been a personally important issue for me going back to my childhood. I was raised with the notion that as a Jew, I am living in diaspora and living under the rule of a nation-state that has oppressed local indigenous populations in different, but terrible ways comparable to what my own ancestors had been through. My parents both worked with indigenous communities in different capacities and exposed me to some tribal leaders and rituals, but nothing too substantial. But it didn’t take much because as a result, my anarchism had always been thought about with regard for indigenous issues.

Unfortunately, none of that had led to me becoming especially knowledgable about even the local tribes and the details of the many fronts they fight on, against the situation that colonization has put them in. I developed a superficial understanding of the basic moral problems and a very rough knowledge of the histories. The same can be said when it came to decolonization struggles around the world. Whether it was Algeria, South Africa, Palestine, or where ever else, my focus on the major battles plotted the supposedly important points of geographical and cultural interest. Those points became my focus to try and self-educate. But over and over again, that self-education would come up against the same sort of problem I began this piece by describing.

What I eventually realized – and only over the past few years – is that indigenous peoples often become useful for greater powers. Meaning that indigenous struggles are seen by powerful states as opportunities to advance their own agendas and at the expense of those indigenous people. That situation is all over the history of indigenous resistance in the Americas, in Africa, in the Middle-East, and yes it is also Israel and Palestine’s history too. Colonization in its classic form and settler-colonialism in its contemporary form seem to almost always be a collaborative effort to colonize by imperialist powers. While this does generate resistance to colonization by the original inhabitants, that resistance also becomes a collaborative effort with assistance from other powers that oppose the colonial ones for their own political reasons. This is usually obvious in wars, but the dynamic seems to get obscured in decolonization narratives.

After realizing this, I decided that I needed to learn more about Israel and Palestine than just the history of Israelis and Palestinians. I needed to learn about the other forces involved just as much and sometimes even more than those most visible forces engaged in battle. Sometimes leftists and anarchists will do this when it comes to the support that Zionists were provided by the British, the UN, and the United States (among others), but I almost never see any analysis of the support that Hamas, Fatah, the PLO, and others have been given by Middle-Eastern states and non-state actors. The problem of course is that just as British support for the Zionists led to subjugation of the Zionists to British priorities, that lesson applies to the Palestinians and the organizations that support their fight against Israel.

The picture that comes out of extending this focus changes the way that the events of October 7th, 2023 deserve to be analysed. Israel isn’t just Israel and Hamas isn’t just the elected leadership of Palestinians in Gaza. Both Israel and Hamas are front-line forces in a much larger conflict between Western powers and different powers in the Middle-East, Syria and Iran specifically. So instead of seeing only the back-and-forth between the IDF and Hamas, other things deserve our attention too. The recent efforts by President Biden to buttress Israeli-Saudi Arabian Normalization is something that I thought about before I even saw the video of the music festival near the Gaza border that Hamas attacked. My mind turned to thoughts about Iran before it turned to thoughts of naked Israeli corpses paraded in the streets of Gaza.

In other words, the Israel-Palestine conflict looks more like an instance of a larger conflict to me than a liberation movement carrying out armed struggle to win its autonomy from the State of Israel. This multinational conflict is one that generates Islamophobia, anti-Arab racism, and antisemitic sentiment organically, but those things are also fueled by state actors for propagandistic purposes. This multinational conflict has produced narratives about Jewish indigeneity to Israel along with myths about Ashkenazi ancestry emanating from Khazar, but those stories come from institutions and not from generational knowledge. Powerful institutions push narratives that erase Palestinian indigeneity and suggest that Palestinians are foreign because of Arab ancestry and religious beliefs. They also build grand narratives about Israel as a stronghold of Western democracy in the Middle-East or Palestinians as freedom fighters for an authentic and justified Arab and Islamic state in Palestine. I think it is up to us as anarchists, socialists, or otherwise radical thinkers to challenge all of this.

Ultimately, I think that this is a tragic situation. I do not see liberation for Palestinian people coming from this conflict. For Hamas to attack Israel at the height of its racist, authoritarian, and openly genocidal political composition is like kicking the worst hornets nest that could be kicked. Intuitively, it feels more like the sort of attack one would launch to provoke a war on a much grander scale. It brings back memories of 9/11 and the blind rage that filled Americans, leading to over a decade of murder in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is sad to see Israeli civilians murdered by Hamas, but I can’t hold that thought in my mind for long before it is overtaken by worry for Palestinians who will pay the greater price in blood.

Due to the larger forces involved in the conflict, I’m also worried about a war that involves the currently involved parties but then extends even beyond them as each appeals to potential allies to support them. And at the same time, and for the same reasons, what I worry about is how lost actual Palestinian liberation will get in the mess of all of this.

Anyway, the leftist and anarchist cheerleading for Hamas’ attacks is quite embarrassing. And as an anti-Zionist and anarchist Jew, of course I feel a bit distraught. Irrational concerns for my own safety come and go. Less irrational but still irrational concerns for my family – who are practicing Jews – also come and go. It infuriates me to see leftists and anarchists rationalize attacks that by the same logic would make me and my family targets for Islamist terror should it come to the United States. To be fair, it would also make most of these leftists and anarchists targets as well. Even more, by this logic they wouldn’t be targets of only Islamist terror. Should indigenous tribes here ever embrace such ideologies and tactics it would clearly put these leftists and anarchists in the category of colonizers with colonial beliefs originating in colonial countries.

As a final thought, I hope that this won’t escalate much further in the direction it is going. But we really never know for sure and I certainly don’t have the information or understanding to know what I imagine is even a little.

There are 59 Comments

“leftists and anarchists are dumb and have bad opinion. academics, while serving power, are smart and have better more informed opinions.”

even if i was going to say something that contained that as a grain of truth, i would take care so as not so say anything that sounded like that. and it took too long to say that to frame what was going to be said afterward. but it’s valid rant if the people you see around you are like that, but the question is always: are non-leftists and non-anarchists any better? is the comparison ignorant laypeople on twitter vs your favorite scholar on the subject?

I see no reason to take any care about that, even though you've distorted what I was saying quite a bit. Leftists and anarchists aren't dumb, but we often don't have the privilege of giant institutions collecting data and summarizing it for us, then teaching it to us directly and personally. Part of what I wrote is about my own difficulties teaching myself these things. What has helped me overcome those difficulties is to think about the way that I was trying to learn those things in general: studying this or that insurrection, revolution, protest, etc. instead of beginning from a big picture comprehension of shit like the Westphalian System or trading blocs or things that I assume they teach in college.

As to the second thing, I don't know if non-leftists or non-anarchists are better at any of this. Some are, some aren't? The goal is to improve anarchist analysis regardless of how good or bad non-lefitsts or non-anarchists are at it. The comparison is really between my old way of thinking and my way of thinking now. There's another comparison following that between my way of thinking about it now and the media I see Leftists and anarchists producing for some years now. Yes, Twitter and YouTube discourse has informed some of this, but it doesn't need to. The same things could be said without them.

Anyway, what I said about Leftist and anarchist thinking about it was that you get clarity in some ways but distortion in other ways. Unless clarity is dumb and bad, then I don't know why you'd think I was saying it's dumb and bad. A lot of high-level geopolitics and sociology shit misses a lot of important details that matter when it comes to events that anarchists tend to care about. That isn't better. Anarchists have produced some of the best on-the-ground analysis of things. But too much concern with the scale of events and organizations that anarchists usually have a role in also misses things about very large-scale events and organizations.

one might say it is proxy conflict all the way down. still, as someone said elsewhere, what is the ethical way to climb out of hell?

Honestly, I get big sad about things that are happening but I think it's kind of pointless to make any ethical statements about it. If it was anarchists fighting for Hamas or the IDF, ok I'd have an ethical thing to say. And that is what I said about the cheerleading I was seeing. But I don't know if there is anything really unethical about nationalists doing what nationalists do or Islamists doing what islamists do. I'm neither of those things and I have no advice for them. My humanitarian feelings are just feelings. My ethics are an anarchist ethics that begin from a choice of what means and ends make sense for an anti-authoritarian.

hey CyberDandy,
i agree. i think that comment means that there are no ethical ways of climbing out of hell, (or unethical for that matter). i was trying to emphasize the sad entanglement in effect here.

oh yeah I got that, just in a typing stuff mood

Palestinians could climb out to Egypt or even across Israel everyday 'til their Islamic fascist junta gave the Israeli fascists a casus belli to blockade everything around Gaza and further devastate the area and its sorry people. Of course, beforehand, there were conditions to be admitted into either Egypt or Israel, but it was possible. So I dunno, maybe an ethical thing to do would have been to get rid of this Palestinian Authority in the first place... as per *anarchy*!?

As CD is implying... such a recklessly stupid, brutal, bloody offensive last Saturday couldn't have just been justified by "Israel". Coz they could have done it anytime. There is a motive for doing that at this precise moment that could be a lil more than just the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War... but sure, our usual lazy-thinkers of the Western Pro-Palestine crowd are just too busy atm so I won't dare disturbing them from supporting the Holy War.

On my part, as an anarchist (but with a different view from CD's anarchism, without really diverging too much from it) I think our "jihad" does imply fighting these forced imperatives, spooks, binaries and historical narratives that

The War of Independence and the Nabka are just two antagonistic POVs of a same event, serving their own specific, nationalist political agendas.

These aren't serving my interests.

Most likely not *yours* (the reader), unless you got paid by the Muslim Brotherhood or something...

....aaaaand not even the interests of these poor people now stuck in Gaza who didn't wanted a part in this war between authoritarians, but will, as too often in history, fall prey of the latters' organized violence.

"My ethics are an anarchist ethics" You're obviously not an individualist, you have alreaded coded in a mode of behaving, a simulation of emotional response. I Am spOntAneOusly swEpt wiTH my authEntic iNnAte anImAL emOtions in InfinIte cOmbinAtions!!

I'm distinguishing between -ism and authenticity that's all. I still respect your stance.

“Should indigenous tribes here ever embrace such ideologies and tactics …” deranged. Your settler guilt is showing. Try again.

I’m really sick of these takes that “anyone interested in geopolitics is a tankie.” Really? My first real baptism into anarchism was the anti-war movement 20 years ago. I was and still am quite aware that saddam Hussein and Baathism are bad, and almost everyone at the time said that if you oppose the US imperial project you support saddam. I guess a lot of todays anarchists would have taken that as an excuse to sit out that struggle because they don’t seem interested in opposing what the US, World Police, does in places like Ukraine and Palestine because “the other side isn’t anarchist either.” I guess someday when there’s an anarchist revolution somewhere and the US invades, THEN you’ll care about anti-war organizing? Or will the mainstream media have you convinced that those anarchists did “bad things” too and you will have another excuse to pronounce your passivity morally correct.

I was also active in the anti-war movement down to the last protests of 12 anarchists alone in the streets. I don't know what you're talking about. Anarchists should definitely be anti-war and organizing against it. How the fuck do you organize against war though if you don't recognize who is waging the fucking war?

It's unfortunate that tankies get credit for geopolitical focus, but it kind of makes sense since their analysis of shit comes from geopolitical-scale actors so they think about things as if they are or will someday be a member of one of those actors. But that definitely shouldn't stop anarchists from thinking about IR, geopolitics, etc.

Telling a Jew about their settler guilt is pretty shitty when there's a war happening right now where Jews are considered by many to be settlers no matter where they live.

The reason why anarchism doesn't do well in heavy geopolitical noise is that it is a discourse built for everyday life radicalism. If you look at the anti-war spurts that happened they essentially correlate with @ discourse declines(the early 70s anti-war movement that followed the more @ beat/situationist everyday life boredom critiques as well as the 00s compared to the 90s)

Anarchism and anarchy being anti-war is uncontroversial. However the formal anti-war movements tend to always attract very non-@ positions like anti-imperialism(weak state in waiting with less leviathan game A power) The marches tend to be a shit show medley of non-@ things. Being interested in geopolitics does not make one a tankie, but they and other authoritarians tend to flock to those kind of discourses.

here's a gem of nuance that fell out while i was talking with anarchists and leftists bout this the other day

enemy combatants are pretty different from just butchering unarmed people and FUCK NO, their complicity in settler colonialism doesn't meaningfully effect that distinction ... follow up statement, WHY ISN'T THAT OBVIOUS?!

PS the reason why this isn't "moralizing"? so you aren't somebody who ends up arguing in favour of war crimes, you weird, LARPing, cringelord nerds... holy shit, theoretical limitations much?

ok, end of rant

It would be easier to either agree or argue with you lumpy if one could figure out what you mean. try saying what you mean without the ad hominem and ALL CAPS yelling.

ever think experiencing capitalized letters as actual yelling might indicate you spend too much time online?

srsly, why would that impact reading comprehension?

If the assumption is that this is barreling down the path toward oblivion I'm far more interested in what to do as anarchists. I can platitude all day. But it doesn't help me consider the immediate future and what we can do.

What I do know is, liberals have gone full far right. The right wing is split between hating Jews and thinking they are gods chosen people. All the while most western countries people support palestinian rights generally. This is not 2003.

Seems like there's a large space for anarchist opinion and action.

There's a lot that can be done, especially if anarchists can avoid worldviews that erase diversity, think a bit more long term, center themselves as anarchists in their narratives, and set realistic expectations. There's anarchists all over the world and the easiest thing we could do for each other is boost each other. Israeli and Palestinian support happens all over the place too. Anarchists can interact with those support groups, whether that's in a nice way or a mean way. Anarchists can point out why nationalism as a project has been a failure for Jews, for Palestinians, and in its religious form for Islamists. Anarchists can build organizations that can fund travel to places for reporting or for whatever other reasons, like alternatives to UNRWA.

"Seems like there's a large space for anarchist opinion and action."

Most of this space is to be created, as online anarchyland is still predominated by the same bran-warped, closet antisemite positioning that liberals share. I've read may comments here, on Raddle and on other anarchist-adjacent sites that are justifying the Hamas offensive of last weekend, including the mass murders. The moment you get people taking such stance we're no longer into anarchist space, but any of those you mentioned above.

The only REAL indigenous peoples of the Middle-East are the nomadic Bedouin tribes who traversed the area before the Phonicians, Hittites, Judeans, and last but not least the uncircumsized PHILISTINES!
"And our Lord sayeth, let the Israelites occupy the heathen Philistine lands and bring our sacred ritual Brit Milah upon their primitive cohabitations" Book 1, Chapter 6, verse 89.

Indigenous just means where something is originally from. When it comes to people, it means where a group of people first constituted themselves as a people. Jews are from that region, whatever you feel like calling it, because that is where they constituted themselves as a people from some variety of tribes.

Yeah I know identity politics always terminates at a mythical ancestral homeland rich in spooky ritual and superstition, fantasies which for some strange reason place borders and boundaries and title to a piece of geography which is traversed by myriad other species and nomadics.
Interesting and banal. Thx.

that people belong wherever they reside; that moving to another location makes you belong there as well. what does this mean re: your concept of indigeneity?

I think there's something important about people collectively constituting themselves in relationship with local climates, flora, fauna, and past relations with others in an area. It takes a long time for generations to develop practices and cultures based on those regional characteristics. I think that's something human beings do that should be respected. Now does that mean an individual person only belongs somewhere if their ancestors were part of one of those collectives? I don't know how often that's an expectation to begin with, but conversion or acceptance into a tribe or people definitely exists. But I do think that there is something wrong with expecting people to make you feel like you belong if you don't respect the ways of relating to a region that they've developed over generations. All of that applies to Jews and Palestinian non-Jews. The Jerusalem Talmud is full of agricultural practices specific to that region. Judaism is unthinkable without Israel as its spiritual (if not material) center. So I think the arguments about indigeneity are absurd a lot of the time, especially when "indigenous" means "first known inhabitant". The substance of what makes indigeneity important to me isn't some shit about property rights based on first occupancy, it's about how interconnected a people are with a region's unique characteristics.

1- The Bedouin tribes were nomadic, and had not relationship to a national territory.

2- Official Palestine was the creation of Roman Emperor Hadrian, who btw committed the first genocide of Jews. This Imperial province lasted 'til the Eastern Roman Empire (Constantinople) fell into shit.

3- While it's true the Philistines have been there for thousand of years, they nowhere monopolized the region or had it under an official national denomination, 'til the Roman Empire (ah yes, a Euro empire btw).

If the British and Muhrican capitalists hadn't gone after the Ottoman's oil reserves after WWI, the Sunni Turkish dictator would have continued to suppress the Shia obsession with Jihad and the whole of the Middleast world have been a beautiful paradise full of Turkish delights.

CyberDandy's analysis seems thoughtful and relatively fair, but they are leaving out some very basic and obvious facts: The area known as the Gaza Strip has been under siege for decades, with the state of Israel having complete control of the borders by land, sea and air, except for a single crossing at Rafah on the border with Egypt, which is often closed, and difficult for Palestinians to use, as the Egyptian and Zionist governments collude with each other. Hence, people in one of the most densely-populated urban areas in the world cannot travel freely, have their food, energy, and other necessities rationed or denied at the whim of the Israelis, are subjected to constant brutalization by the IDF, and generally have a very poor quality of life. One can only imagine the level of rage that must exist in Gaza.

Whatever one may think of Hamas, this latest operation took a great deal of careful, secretive planning, and it was carried out at a time when it is clear that the Israeli state has no intention of treating the Palestinians in Gaza with even a shred of dignity, and would be perfectly happy to bomb, shoot or starve them all out of existence, if they thought they could get away with it. It is a desperate gamble to shock Israel out of its smug complacency and perhaps involve regional allies like Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran. Violence is being answered with violence, for now, which seems to be the only language the Israeli military and government understand.

I feel like this is an analysis that is true on one hand (other than anarchists taking non Anarchist stances) but purposefully vague on the other. It's like responding to getting punched in the face with philosophy.

you did the thing! this is what i just mentioned earlier.

you skimmed over it real quick at the end but there it is, just the same!

"violence is being answered with violence" as in... massacring noncombatants.

very strange to omit that detail. VERY strange... and yes, of course the zionist state is guilty of the same and much worse.

I like you

Better than your haters

Now kiss

praise from the best writer on @news, the infamous anon themself!

"Someone who is permanently surprised that depravity exists, who continues to feel disillusioned (even incredulous) when confronted with evidence of what humans are capable of inflicting in the way of gruesome, hands-on cruelties upon other humans, has not reached moral or psychological adulthood.
- Susan Sontag" - Wayne Gretsky

There's a shit ton of facts I left out. I didn't mention Fatah, the West Bank, the history of the PLO, the protests against Netanyahu's judicial overhaul, etc. I don't think that including the facts you mentioned in the text itself would change what I said. They're worth repeating and I wouldn't say not to repeat them.

Brah, your history being missed teh Crusades and Saloman, aaargh! Martyrdom, Jihad, The Judgement, Escatological spOOks, a promise of eternal life in heaven. Most brutality is morality derived and the Abrahamic trio Judean, Islamic, Christian which exist off their merchant based cultures, very cold lacking empathy, back to business ethos and values, particularly property, land, money handling etc.Not very intellectual or individually endowed with self-awareness.

Ah here comes Makhno and his FACCS...

And are you this dumb to believe that Hamas did that all on their own? Thousands of guided missiles and (literal) death squads armed with guns I've never seen before in the Middle-East? Are you really this dumb as to believe that it's all gotta do with Israel's oppression, and not some historically-rooted antisemitism, with kids learning in school that the Holocaust is a big lie and Hitler was really the savoir of Europe and the Arab world?

I'm afraid... answers are in mah qiuestions!

"savior", lol

"For Hamas to attack Israel at the height of its racist, authoritarian, and openly genocidal political composition is like kicking the worst hornets nest that could be kicked"

I think this is the biggest problem with what cyber dandy wrote. The reality is Isreal mops the floor with any Palestinian resistance up to shooting at IDF soldiers. Isreal can tolerate and is not bothered by Palestinians shooting a few IDF soldiers. That limited resistance is weak enough that Isreal can easily colonize Gaza and treat them as poorly as they want.

The hamas attacked happened bc of how repressive Isreal is. The attack wouldn't have happened is Isreal had enough humanity to allow some sort of Palestinian resistance outside of killing civilians. And rather than empathize with and understand how Isreal caused this conflict by giving Palestinians the choice between killing Isreali citizens or being wiped out.

It's just a victim blaming of Palestinians for doing the only tactics that makes the open air prison conditions of Gaza not comfortable. It's calling for and saying the only acceptable Palestinian resistance is Palestinians continuing to do efforts that don't hurt isreal and the consequences are execution. Expecting Palestinians to die so they can maintain the moral high ground is an absurd expectation.

If I steal will kill any paleatians who resists in any way then of course ppl will turn to terrorism so they can inflict some damage before they die. And if u hate mass killing os Isralis blame the group responsible. Isreal

I understand why that sentence reads that way, but really that’s not what I’m getting at. It isn’t really even the tactics themselves that I’m questioning, it’s the timing. As I mentioned, I have been following the Israel-Saudi Arabia Normalization process and writing that on the 8th, it seemed to me like the two things were related. There isn’t a solid answer on Iran’s involvement yet either. Some Canadian diplomat said Iran was involved, but reading his reasoning it didn’t seem sound.

Anyway, I’m not trying to make a moral argument in any of this about the tactics Hamas used, the most important of which seems to be the kidnappings. Important, as in it can have more of an impact on how things develop. But in addition to the form of victim blaming that you point out, there is another form of victim blaming that erases diversity of Palestinian opinion and sums it all up in Hamas’ actions. Yes, Palestinians are victims of Israel, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t also the victims of Hamas. Israel has most of the responsibility, but Hamas doesn’t have zero responsibility. And who even knows who else is involved yet, if we ever really will.

There is also the responsibility of the United States and on a more personal note, of American Jews. American Jews are the largest population of Jews in the world. I’m concerned with how that impacts the situation in Israel-Palestine. Probably not a lot? But it wouldn’t hurt if there was stronger opposition to Israel, especially with this government it has now, from American Jews.

Oh if I misunderstood what u were trying to say. My apologies. I retract what I said

You aren't a neutral observer, you admit to being Jewish, so how can the reader hope to get a truly anarchist view about this whole conflict. This is where identity and identifying with cultural constructs automatically jeopardizes authentic discussion.
I would like to hear what a Bedouin has to say about this statist hellfest.

no one is a truly neutral observer.

and if you are an anarchist do you not then have a anarchist view of this whole conflict?

ah, the old enduring antisemitic dual loyalty trope. or perhaps in this case, would the allegation would be triple loyalty? nice one, fuckface

No, you brought 2 too many camels to the semitic invasion numb-nuts.

Partially accurate, Palestinian Bedouin were originally from the Negev Desert. In the course of the 1948 Palestine war, they fled or were displaced from their land. Other Bedouins were expelled from the Negev in 1953 and had relocated to the West Bank, which at the time belonged to Jordan.Today, there are 40,000 Bedouins in the whole of the West Bank, including 27,000 people under Israeli military control in Area C. Unlike Negev Bedouins, West Bank Bedouins are not Israeli citizens. Bedouin communities in the West bank have been targeted with forcible relocations to townships to accommodate the growth of Israeli settlements on the outskirts of East Jerusalem. Bedouins also live in the Gaza strip, including 5,000 in Om al-Nasr. However, the number of nomadic Bedouins is shrinking and many are now settled.

BEHEADINGS FOR AUTHORITARIAN MODERATORS WHO KEEP DELETING COMMENTS FOR NO ANARCHIST REASON

I hate you bang bang,
And I hate you bang bang to,
You dead me dead dumb!

Genetic population studies suggest that Palestinian people have been there for thousands of years and may be descended partly from ancient Israelites.

But actually it’s really gross trying to turn ongoing genocide into a philosophical, scientific or whatever kind of argument about “indigeneity” and land ownership claims. A sign that as Logan Roy said “you are not serious people.”

These are terms that tend badly or not properly defined. Being indigenous as I see it simply living in a 100-1000 mile context. USA cowboys are and were just as indigenous as ancestral americans. Now ancestry is a little different as that is being indigenous combined with time(1000 years or more). I certainly don't think ancestry should be defined by some silly first dibs on land nonsense as that reflects statist propagandistic war games. Most of both Palestinians and Israelis are both indigenous AND ancestral to that part of the world.

The American landscape is no different. IF the Solutrean hypothesis turns out to be correct(I think it might be partially correct) that will not mean that Clovis based ancestral Americans are not ancestral to America(the continent not the retarded Washington construct).

"The comfortable lense through which leftists/anarchists see the world don’t help them see the power dynamics of these sorts of situations clearly"
It isn't a comfortable lens, maybe for smug leftists, however the contrarian anarchist has the whole of Leviathan to deal with. Anarchists strive for autonomous life and thus detach themselves from the futile pursuit of understanding and commiserating with identity/nationalist/statist arguments and policies. We aRe a power unto ourselves and do not bother with the toxicity of even contemplating these constructs.

We peer into an abyss and what stares back is some sort of right and wrong when it's all geopolitical bullshit of greater states of policed nationalists pretending to be freedom fighters. The social contract is broken. The future is naught and set upon something remotely far from anarchy and bent on nationalism disguised w short term historical points that cry genocide in 2023 but Deny the eternal Graves its paved upon. There are Indigenous ancient people whom are merely a footnote, a fart waved off by ideology of 21st cheerleaders for whom gets to wave the biggest flag as paraded under the guise of decolonization.

Thanks for sharing your opinion, but there are things that make me confused. I mean, yes, you said no to this that, this that, and you criticize almost all of the things about anarchist and leftist belief, even you said about psychogeography, but anyway, how's your analysis? What and how do we, the leftists and anarchists, analyze? Care to share your own analysis? If all the leftist and anarchist analysis are wrong, so which one is right? Which analysis? Yours? Care to share? Help me to understand. Thank you.

Who ya talkin' to, buddy? If you can't figure out how to thread your replies you can't really expect a girl to reply. Beneath every comment there is the word "reply". If you're replying to a particular comment you may with to click that beautiful blue "reply" link. You could ALSO quote or reference whomst you are replying to.

The point of ALL analysis is to pee on the poop. Think about it.

plus we've now taught AI to pee on the poop for us! thus humans are completely obsolete

Add new comment