I don’t know of any cases of imperialism recently, though I see what appear to be conflicts incorrectly framed as such.
For example, many say this about the Israeli/Arab conflict. However, this conflict is thousands of years old. The Israelis solidly lost a war to keep their land in the BC era, then after WWII, leaders decided to undo the loss, again by force. Predictably, the Arabs, having lived there for thousands of years now (since they were Babylonians!) were not happy. It is not simple.
The Israeli return may have been orchestrated by the imperial powers, but I would argue this is not imperialism or even a bad thing. Consider the colonial invasion of the Americas. That was clearly imperialism because my ancestors had never lived there, and had no claim to the land. We just wanted it. At best, we thought we could make better use of it than the natives. That was not the case with Israel, whose ancestors largely were the natives.
Of course, persecuting Palestinians is wrong. Imagine if thousands of years from now, the American Indians, supported by the international community, forced Americans to adopt their customs and religion or leave. That would not be right either, even though maybe they should have their land back!
We need to share in these cases, and are unfortunately bad at sharing.
For example, many say this about the Israeli/Arab conflict. However, this conflict is thousands of years old. The Israelis solidly lost a war to keep their land in the BC era
This is incredibly historically illiterate on multiple fronts. The Israeli/Palestine conflict only dates back to 1948, with precursors in 1930s. First, Israel wasn’t lost to “Arabs” in “the BC”. The Babylonians were not Arab and the exile of Jews in the 6th century BC were cultural elites and not the broader population. It was part of an attempt to assimilate Judah into the broader Babylon empire. That was defeated by the Persian empire and Judeans were allowed to return to Judea (now Southern Israel). The traditional idea of the beginning of the Diaspora was the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD and the violent expulsion of parts of Jerusalem by the Romans. Though the vast majority of the real diaspora was from immigrants to major Roman cities predating the destruction of the Second Temple and not Jerusalem exiles.
The majority of people that were living in what is now considered Israel were not Arab invaders, but the native peoples that have always lived there that, after the Arab conquest of the 8th century, started to speak Arabic and convert to Islam. The difference between a Mizrahi Jew and a Palestinian is most likely whether one of their ancestors converted to Islam in the last 13 centuries.
Not that Iron Age Philistines, Samaritans, Canaanites, etc. were secret proto-muslims secretly waiting for the Romans to purge Jews so that two millennia later “real Arabs” could occupy the “promised land”.
The Israelis solidly lost a war to keep their land in the BC era, then after WWII, leaders decided to undo the loss, again by force.
[snip]
That was clearly imperialism because my ancestors had never lived there, and had no claim to the land. We just wanted it. At best, we thought we could make better use of it than the natives. That was not the case with Israel, whose ancestors largely were the natives.
Absolutely fucking unhinged.
You can’t get kicked out of a land 2000 years ago and claim you’re still the natives. Israel has 0 claim to the land aside from their religious mythos, and the “christians” are supporting this for similar reasons since their mythos suggests that the second coming is after Israel holds the land.
AT BEST this is imperialism using religion as the excuse (you know, fairly standard imperialism). But claiming it’s not imperialism is still carrying water for a genocidal ethnostate trying to handwave away the fact they’re stealing land and slaughtering natives while still trying to play the victim.
Except Russia also did and is doing settler colonialism, inasmuch they have been moving Ukrainians out and Russians into Ukraine for the past century at least, as they did with other Soviet republics, as they are doing to neighbouring states, with the aim of eroding their national identity.
Just like they are doing now. The only marginal difference is that there are not enough Ukrainians to alter electoral balances, and Russia would be able to dissolve the population of Ukraine via forced relocations instead of just killing them all. Both are genocide by the way.
That they are not merely trying to make Ukraine Russian-aligned.
They are trying to move 5 million Russians into Ukrainian territory, and have confiscated tens of thousands of homes after making their owners war refugees and are giving them to Russians.
They have kidnapped tens of thousands of Ukrainian children, and they are not just educating them to be Ukrainians accepting Russian rule, but they want to completely Russify them as a further attempt of erasing the Ukrainian nation.
Elaborate. You too @grue@lemmy.world Have there been mass deaths of civilians in Russian-occupied areas? Are they segregating the population or practicing apartheid based on ethnicity? Are they sterilizing Ukainians? Have marriages between Russians and Ukrainians been outlawed?
What kind of extermination campaign are they running? I’m not seeing it, besides relocating children out of the war zone. I suppose that could be argued as ethnic cleansing, but it can also be justified as protecting children from war so this alone isn’t enough imo
It’s not ethnic cleansing in your book, but who cares? It is according to the ICC, which is why there’s an arrest warrant for Putin for ethnic cleansing.
In the past nights Russia fired thousands of rockets and drones at civilian targets. The only reason Ukraine doesn’t entirely look like Gaza (and some parts do) is because of the population density and the air defense systems.
I don’t know of any cases of imperialism recently, though I see what appear to be conflicts incorrectly framed as such.
For example, many say this about the Israeli/Arab conflict. However, this conflict is thousands of years old. The Israelis solidly lost a war to keep their land in the BC era, then after WWII, leaders decided to undo the loss, again by force. Predictably, the Arabs, having lived there for thousands of years now (since they were Babylonians!) were not happy. It is not simple.
The Israeli return may have been orchestrated by the imperial powers, but I would argue this is not imperialism or even a bad thing. Consider the colonial invasion of the Americas. That was clearly imperialism because my ancestors had never lived there, and had no claim to the land. We just wanted it. At best, we thought we could make better use of it than the natives. That was not the case with Israel, whose ancestors largely were the natives.
Of course, persecuting Palestinians is wrong. Imagine if thousands of years from now, the American Indians, supported by the international community, forced Americans to adopt their customs and religion or leave. That would not be right either, even though maybe they should have their land back!
We need to share in these cases, and are unfortunately bad at sharing.
.
This is incredibly historically illiterate on multiple fronts. The Israeli/Palestine conflict only dates back to 1948, with precursors in 1930s. First, Israel wasn’t lost to “Arabs” in “the BC”. The Babylonians were not Arab and the exile of Jews in the 6th century BC were cultural elites and not the broader population. It was part of an attempt to assimilate Judah into the broader Babylon empire. That was defeated by the Persian empire and Judeans were allowed to return to Judea (now Southern Israel). The traditional idea of the beginning of the Diaspora was the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD and the violent expulsion of parts of Jerusalem by the Romans. Though the vast majority of the real diaspora was from immigrants to major Roman cities predating the destruction of the Second Temple and not Jerusalem exiles.
The majority of people that were living in what is now considered Israel were not Arab invaders, but the native peoples that have always lived there that, after the Arab conquest of the 8th century, started to speak Arabic and convert to Islam. The difference between a Mizrahi Jew and a Palestinian is most likely whether one of their ancestors converted to Islam in the last 13 centuries.
Not that Iron Age Philistines, Samaritans, Canaanites, etc. were secret proto-muslims secretly waiting for the Romans to purge Jews so that two millennia later “real Arabs” could occupy the “promised land”.
Absolutely fucking unhinged.
You can’t get kicked out of a land 2000 years ago and claim you’re still the natives. Israel has 0 claim to the land aside from their religious mythos, and the “christians” are supporting this for similar reasons since their mythos suggests that the second coming is after Israel holds the land.
AT BEST this is imperialism using religion as the excuse (you know, fairly standard imperialism). But claiming it’s not imperialism is still carrying water for a genocidal ethnostate trying to handwave away the fact they’re stealing land and slaughtering natives while still trying to play the victim.
Well…good luck getting passed Abrahamic religious mythos…
ignores Ukraine
welcome to Lemmy.ml
It’s almost like Ukraine is not a house, nor is annexation settler colonialism.
Except Russia also did and is doing settler colonialism, inasmuch they have been moving Ukrainians out and Russians into Ukraine for the past century at least, as they did with other Soviet republics, as they are doing to neighbouring states, with the aim of eroding their national identity.
Just like they are doing now. The only marginal difference is that there are not enough Ukrainians to alter electoral balances, and Russia would be able to dissolve the population of Ukraine via forced relocations instead of just killing them all. Both are genocide by the way.
Before i answer just tell me:
Is Israel doing settler colonialism?
Yes. And so is Russia.
What is your evidence that Russia is doing settler colonialism instead of imperialism?
That they are not merely trying to make Ukraine Russian-aligned.
They are trying to move 5 million Russians into Ukrainian territory, and have confiscated tens of thousands of homes after making their owners war refugees and are giving them to Russians.
They have kidnapped tens of thousands of Ukrainian children, and they are not just educating them to be Ukrainians accepting Russian rule, but they want to completely Russify them as a further attempt of erasing the Ukrainian nation.
19.500 according to Ukrainian sources. Incidentally Israel has killed more children than this.
The goal of settler colonialists is to wipe out the native population and replace it with their own race, not forcibly assimilate it.
Is Russia trying to exterminate Ukrainian people in the annexed regions and replace them with Russian settlers?
Yes.
Definitely
Elaborate. You too @grue@lemmy.world Have there been mass deaths of civilians in Russian-occupied areas? Are they segregating the population or practicing apartheid based on ethnicity? Are they sterilizing Ukainians? Have marriages between Russians and Ukrainians been outlawed?
What kind of extermination campaign are they running? I’m not seeing it, besides relocating children out of the war zone. I suppose that could be argued as ethnic cleansing, but it can also be justified as protecting children from war so this alone isn’t enough imo
It’s not ethnic cleansing in your book, but who cares? It is according to the ICC, which is why there’s an arrest warrant for Putin for ethnic cleansing.
In the past nights Russia fired thousands of rockets and drones at civilian targets. The only reason Ukraine doesn’t entirely look like Gaza (and some parts do) is because of the population density and the air defense systems.
Oh fuck off you fucking brainwashed moron.
As an example, they are declaring the homes of war refugees abandoned, and are giving it to Russians, specifically excluding Ukrainians.
No