zlacker

[return to "The pro-Israel information war"]
1. jdross+15[view] [source] 2023-12-08 19:20:04
>>anigbr+(OP)
Pro-Palestinian views outrank Pro-Israeli online by around 36 to 1 on TikTok and 8 to 1 on other online platforms. https://twitter.com/antgoldbloom/status/1721561226151612602

If anything the skew within the platforms is to prioritize pro-palestinian views https://twitter.com/committeeonccp/status/173279243496103143...

It also seems like these platforms create (rather than support) anti-Israeli views: https://twitter.com/antgoldbloom/status/1730255552738201854

US views skew pro-israel, and GenZ is closer to 50/50, so if there's something going on online, it's not in favor of Israel.

It's probably relevant that there are 1 billion Muslims to 16 million Jews, and that the largest relevant population of pro-Israeli internationals is India and Indian Hindus, and they are not on TikTok (blocked in India).

◧◩
2. A1kmm+gP[view] [source] 2023-12-08 22:57:29
>>jdross+15
I think the fundamental assumption of the analysis that there are two mutually exclusive groups, 'pro-Israel' and 'pro-Palestine' is flawed. It is possible to simultaneously support the interests of Palestinian and Israeli civilians (and support a peaceful Israel within the 1967 boundaries), while condemning the massacre of civilians under the orders of Likud (and other far right parties) and Hamas.

I think it is currently about an order of magnitude more civilians deaths have resulted from the actions of Likud (Netanyahu etc..., who control the government and hence the IDF) than from the actions of Hamas. IDF is apparently disrupting civilian aid, destroying infrastructure including hospitals, and causing mass population movements into areas that cannot support them, so the risk of death from starvation and infectious disease at a massive scale as an indirect result is high. The Likud-controlled IDF are also apparently enforcing a 'lock down' of Palestinian civilians in the West Bank while allowing Israeli citizens to seize land by force and further expand the occupied territories.

So the scale of the atrocities seems to be much higher on the Likud side than the Hamas side, covers both the West Bank and Gaza, and it makes sense that the Palestinian victims of those atrocities would receive more support. That doesn't mean that all the people who care about the plight of the Palestinian population are anti-Israel (they are just not posting about it because they are likely prioritising issues).

◧◩◪
3. The_Co+DT[view] [source] 2023-12-08 23:19:32
>>A1kmm+gP
I think that forcing this dichotomy is part of the deliberate pro-Israel media strategy - if you despise Hamas inhumane acts, then of course you need to be pro-Israel. They want you to focus on Hamas to steer away your attention from what Israel has been doing. (this is also one of the reasons why Hamas has historically been an asset for the Israeli right)
◧◩◪◨
4. YZF+ma1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 01:05:44
>>The_Co+DT
Hamas has been an assset for the Israeli right because it helps prevent a two state solution. The goal is really to weaken the Palestinian Authority. In recent years most of Hamas' crimes were against Palestinians and nobody cared. Forcing this dichotomy today is certainly a strategy but I don't think that was really a strategy pre-Oct 7th. I.e. I don't recall ever Israel trying to justify settler violence against Palestinians in the west bank as being a response to Hamas- wouldn't make any sense.

In some perverse way, the objection to the two state solution forces the one state solution, which is likely the only solution that would ever work. Jews and Arabs living side by side in the same country as equal citizens. Hamas isn't interested in that solution either.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. zozbot+Ha1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 01:08:23
>>YZF+ma1
> Jews and Arabs living side by side in the same country as equal citizens.

Except that Israel has Arabs already, living side by side with the Jews there. Palestinians have rejected that.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. YZF+4b1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 01:11:27
>>zozbot+Ha1
Yes yes. I'm from Israel. I know that story.

Palestinians did not reject a one state solution. Most Israelis don't want that. I.e. annex the West Bank and Gaza and have a single country, let's call it "Israel-Palestine".

I think the Israeli Arabs are a model/proof that it can work. It might need a generation or two to get there.

If you want more radical ideas then if all Palestinian Arabs convert to Judaism we can also solve the problem pretty quickly...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. skissa+Lq1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 03:16:30
>>YZF+4b1
> Palestinians did not reject a one state solution. Most Israelis don't want that. I.e. annex the West Bank and Gaza and have a single country, let's call it "Israel-Palestine".

Hardliners in the current Israeli government (e.g Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, Amichai Eliyahu) want to "annex Judaea and Samaria". There seems to be a bit of ambiguity about whether they mean only Area C, or the whole of the West Bank (or even annex Area C now as a precursor to annexing A and B later.)

If they did that, what would happen to the Palestinians living in those areas – would they become Israeli Arabs? Would they first have to request Israeli citizenship? Would they be entitled to it, or would it be up to the Israeli government to decide whether to extend it to them?

"One state solution" is an idea primarily associated with Israel's peacenik far left, but maybe the best way to achieve it might (paradoxically) be to let the Israeli far right get a big chunk of what it wants?

> If you want more radical ideas then if all Palestinian Arabs convert to Judaism we can also solve the problem pretty quickly...

Speaking of radical ideas, I find the "cantonization" proposals [0] for the future of Israel rather fascinating. Basically convert it into a federation of different "cantons" representing the different sectors of Israeli society (secular, religious, Haredi, Arab). These cantons might be partially geographical and partially personal – i.e. every citizen belongs to a canton personally, the canton also controls the territory where its members are a majority, but has to protect the rights of minorities from other cantons in its territory; individuals will receive some government services from the canton of residence (e.g. public utilities), others might be provided by their personal canton (e.g. education, family law)

[0] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-05-05/ty-article-ma...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. stjohn+504[view] [source] 2023-12-10 01:18:51
>>skissa+Lq1
I don't know what the fix is but that's impossible. Israel has to stay a relatively united nation with a powerful military and nuclear power status or the Arab nations will immediately bulldoze it.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. skissa+h54[view] [source] 2023-12-10 02:12:18
>>stjohn+504
> I don't know what the fix is but that's impossible. Israel has to stay a relatively united nation with a powerful military and nuclear power status or the Arab nations will immediately bulldoze it.

Under the "canton" proposal, there would still be a national government in charge of the military, intelligence agencies, diplomacy, foreign trade, the currency, the banking system, etc. The "cantons" would primarily control local matters, schools, housing, family law, religious affairs, etc. So I don't think it would make much difference to military.

It would basically be transforming Israel from a unitary state (like New Zealand) to a federal state (like the US, Canada, Australia, Germany, Switzerland) - however, with the added factor that the top-level national subdivisions would be based on cultural factors rather than purely geographical ones – which would be a system more like that of Belgium.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. theonl+PB8[view] [source] 2023-12-11 21:30:29
>>skissa+h54
You would wonder if there would be sufficient unifying factors for government to remain functional or it'll end in stalemate. At best leading to stagnation or at worst leading to near failed state. An example of how it could go wrong would be Lebanon. Also a certain faction could play the long game with end goal of constitutional change.
[go to top]