A picture of the same place, Gaza, before and after the war.
Please, life and its hardships are very difficult. Please don’t abandon us.
#Palestine #ceasefire #FreePalestine #FWC26 #WorldCup2026
@palestine@a.gup.pe
@palestine@lemmy.ml
@palestine@fedibird.com
And how exactly does that alter the reality that the vast majority people living in Israel are not Western Europeans or the descendants of those, hence the values of most Israelis are not those of Western Europe?
You’re just providing a reason for the present reality which is that the vast majority of Israelis do NOT have the kind of trauma from being victims of a Genocide which the previous poster expected would stop them from inflicting the same trauma on others.
Your “Israel ended up with the bad guys because all the good guys were killed” point doesn’t alter the reality that Israelis are mostly bad guys doing evil shit, and it sure as hell doesn’t excuse them for the evil shit they’re doing.
Entirelly different people getting mass murdered doesn’t excuse the actions of these people who are unrelated to them in any way form or shape except practicing the same religion.
… What? I said nothing even close to that, where on earth did that come from?
To my point that only a small fraction of the Israeli Jewish population (which overwhelmingly supports the Gaza Genocide) has Western European origins and thus were directly or indirectly victoms of the Holocaust, and hence that’s why Israel is more likely to commit Genocide than otherwise, you added that most Western European Jews were murdered by the NAZIs.
That logically adds to the same as saying that “Israel ended up with people more likely to commit Genocide because those less likely to do so were killed”.
Granted, I assumed that for you “people who commit Genocide” are “evil people” and people “who are against commiting Genocide” are “good people”, so just replaced the former with the later.
Guess I was wrong in my assumption that you see Genocide as a universal bad thing no matter who commits it. My bad.
Buddy, what in the waffle-posting goddamn are you talking about? I made a comment about demographic representation and you’ve managed to twist that into me making a moral statement about genocide. I am perplexed.
What was your objective in adding that very specific piece of VERY well known information to the comment I made?
Because adding a reminder of the victimization of some Jews at the hands of the NAZIs into a discussion about the evil actions of totally different Jews in the present day when that past event is totally irrelevant for said present day evil actions (which was EXACTLY the point I was making in the comment you replied to), is a incredibly common Hasbara technique.
To point out that your argument included a bit of a tautology, really - of course most of the people who moved to Israel were the people who weren’t killed. But looking into it, its also kinda wrong? Or at least, it’s heavily dependent on time period: only 1/2 of the jews that moved to israel from '48 thru '53 (promptly post-nakba) were from the middle east/asia, and that’s depending on how you define the Soviet Union - which is where the demographics of Israel become largely Asian-originated following the collapse of the USSR (side note: this is an aggravatingly unhelpful generalization of origin when discussing the 3rd largest empire in history. It’s like calling the population of Naī Dillī british in origin…)
The population of modern israel is very different from the demographics right after statehood yes, but to present the country as being primarily non-european jews is fairly disingenuous for all the above reasons. It was shaped by european jews, the “good ones” to borrow your phrasing, and those “good ones” similarly started the genocide that Israel has continued till today. By your own metric, 80 years later 10% of the population are either direct victims or related to direct victims of the holocaust - meaning that 1 in every 10 people you meet is going to have a direct connection to this shared trauma, and that’s using the highly restrictive definition of holocaust that excludes the impact on russian non-jewish civilians (another ~5.5 million people). That’s a really large portion of your citizens to have influencing a population, and that value has only been decreasing so it’s historical impact was already higher.
Bottom line, no it’s pretty reasonable to conclude that Israelis should fucking understand both the immediate & lasting impact a genocide has on a group of people.
side note 2
I’m setting aside the dismissal of the idea of generational/societal trauma right now because that’s a much more interesting discussion and I am a boring person. Also glossing over the implication that non-european jews are inherently more prone to genocide; I’m pretty sure that’s just poorly phrased.
According to this what you state about the origin of the Jews who moved to Israel is incorrect.
You can see that over the years only a small fraction of people who moved to Israel came from Western Europe who are the most likely to have been or having family who were victims of the Holocaust. The other group most likely to have Holocaust survivors or their descendants is people form Eastern Europe ex-Russia, which whilst a much bigger group is still only about 10-15% of immigrants to Israel.
The rest are much less likely to have been directly or indirectly victimized by the Holocaust, including Jews from America since most living there were already there before the Holocaust (to were many Jews moved long before the Holocaust because Europe in general was very anti-semitic and treated Jews as second class citizens) and thus weren’t European Jews who fled it to America and then moved to Israel.
Specifically with Russia, there was a massive influx of people from there in the period from 1990-2001. If I remember correctly this is when the growth of the more Far-Right parties in Israel started. I vaguelly remember something about Jews from Russia being mainly from the countryside and more orthodox than those living in Israel at the time, but I could be wrong on either of this since these are just old recollections.
Mind you, that as you say “10% of the population [of Israel] are either direct victims or related to direct victims of the holocaust” tracks very close with the polls showing that a little over 80% of Israelis support what was being done in Gaza.
In fact it all dovetails with the point I’m making as well as the point the poster I originally responde to was making: they expected that people who have suffered because of a Genocide would be much more against commiting a Genocide that other people and I actually agree with it, with my point being that only a small part of the people in Israel are such people, which you yourself just confirmed with you own number that only 10% of the population there “are either direct victims or related to direct victims of the Holocaust”.
Seems to me it’s all entirelly consistent.
The only weakness in my argument is the notion that to be more against commiting Genocide than the average person one needs to having suffered from one or that somebody one cares about deeply having suffered from one and told you about their feelings (so, in my expectation, family and very close friends). I’m going from the assumption that one needs to have suffered directly or empathised with the suffering of others in such a situation, to turn against inflicting such suffering on any people and that mere being told and showed that “this has happenned to people like you” isn’t enough to turn somebody against all forms on Genocide only against Genocide against “people like me”.
Coming at it from multiple sides, the “10% of the population [of Israel] are either direct victims or related to direct victims of the holocaust”, the massive preponderance of Holocaust Rememberances in Israel and last but not least Israel actually commiting their own Genocide of hundreds of thousands which is still ongoing, reinforce my theory that only the emotional trauma from Genocide (as a direct victim of via empathy with a victim) turns one against inflicting such thing on anybody (i.e. against ANY AND ALL Genocides) whilst merelly receiving knowledge about the Holocaust as information is not enough to turn people against all forms of Genocide. Granted, this just supports my theory and IMHO is not enough to prove it.
Minor points:
Yes, I even directly addressed that. If you look at the table from this section instead of the initial infographic, you’ll have the context my comments were made within.
Setting aside that America wasnt any more friendly to jews than Europe at large at the time, wouldn’t that have literally made them jews that fled to america, then moved to israel? I’m genuinely confused how they wouldn’t count as culturally european jews soley because they fled to america first (though as far as I can tell this is a sidebar since those people are counted separately in the statistics anyways?).
Prior to the dissolution of the USSR, those people would just be counted as Russian/USSR, not as eastern european. Hence my side note about the definitional complexity with immigration comparisons from pre/post fall of the soviets.
(Just to be clear, I was using your 10% value for convenience. I have no idea if that’s actually true.)
Okay, thats out of the way!
I’m… sorry, I am genuinely confused. This reads to me like your requirement for ‘empathy enough to think genocide is wrong’ requires that family or extremely close friends were personally affected?
This whole community serves as an example of that being wrong, though. Most people here, statistically you included, do not have a direct personal connection to Palestine, yet they stand in opposition to the current genocide. I’m sorry, I really hope I’m misunderstanding because otherwise this is a very bad take.
(edit: spelling)