Firstly: isntrael idf-cool

Okay now for the post.

When Palestine is liberated, I think the vast majority of settlers will either be [redacted] or forced out of the region. There is no way that any Arab in the region will accept having a settler in their land, and the settlers know this. The plan will have to be a mass exodus for the west, both for their safety and livelihood (I can see many going into ghoul industries like defense, tech, and police training).

That being said, how would you react if your country decides to accept settlers? Would you support the move? If they were going to live in your community/ neighborhoods how would you feel?

  • Rx_Hawk [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    We're talking in hypotheticals, and the hypothetical situation is, from my understanding, occurring after the state of Israel has already been abolished. Your post is asking where to send the refugees, I stand by my stance to not kill refugees.

    Trying to paint me as being against revolution for not wanting to kill refugees seems a little disingenuous.

    • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]
      hexagon
      ·
      21 days ago

      I wouldn't call settlers who got rightfully kicked off indigenous land by indigenous people refugees. It's actually pretty problematic since it ends up confirming a lot of the right wing/reactionary myths about refugees and migrants. That they will take your land, and that they will treat you like 2nd class citizens in your own home.

      I left a comment below about this; the only reason I use the term "refugee" is bc I don't know what to call a settler that kicked off the land.

      • Rx_Hawk [he/him]
        ·
        21 days ago

        Which Israeli citizens qualify as a settler? Every single one? Fine.

        Unless you have a way to identify which settlers are real genocidal maniacs and which were just born in the wrong place at the wrong time, I don't think you can treat every single one as the former.

        I'm sure many Israelis don't necessarily "deserve" refugee status. However, I believe in immutable human rights, and until you can prove someone engaged in or enabled the genocide, those rights still stand.

        As for the optics of allowing settlers to be seen as refugees, I feel like that definitely takes a back seat to defending human rights.

        • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]
          hexagon
          ·
          21 days ago

          As for the optics of allowing settlers to be seen as refugees, I feel like that definitely takes a back seat to defending human rights.

          It's not about optics, you're doing every refugee and migrant a disservice by lopping ex-settlers with them. Refugees and migrants don't steal land and attempt to turn the native population into second class citizens, that's just a reactionary myth.

          Except the Israelis actually did do that, so you can't say they're the same thing as Syrians, Sudanese, Congolese, etc escaping war and genocide.

          You don't have to "punish" people on behalf of the Palestinians, but you also can't act like they're the same thing as South/ Central American migrants coming to the US to escape poverty and violence just for a chance to give their family a better life.

        • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]
          hexagon
          ·
          21 days ago

          I don't think settlers are genociders necessarily, but that doesn't mean that they have a right to any land either.