BDS is a Settler Colonial Ideology

[shira]

....This post is about how BDS itself has become a settler colonial ideology, which imposes itself on other peoples and other struggles, conquers, and subjugates the goals of others, particularly people of color, to the anti-Israel agenda. We have documented this hijacking of other movements many times, and described the damage BDS leaves behind. The most glaring example is how anti-Israel BDS activists have infiltrated and redirected the Black Lives Matter movement...

But it doesn’t stop there. BDS activists have taken over the radical fringe of the LGBT movement, tried to turn it against Israel under the demented claim that Israel publicizing its fair treatment of LGBT people is actually worse, and more necessary of condemnation, then the abuse of LGBT people in the Arab world, including the Palestinian territories. It’s the doctrine of “pinkwashing” and it is the rage in leftist radical and BDS circles...

But wait, it doesn’t stop there. BDS activists have attempted to take over the environmentalist, water conservation, and indigenous rights areas with claims of “greenwashing” “bluewashing” and “redwashing” — seriously... The international human rights movement is another victim. The obsession of U.N. agencies in demonizing Israel beyond rationality is matched by groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International...Even sports events are hijacked for use against Israel, such as recently happened in Scotland...

...And we could go on and on with attempts by BDS to conquer and subjugate other disciplines, groups, ideologies, and movements … and the damage and destruction left behind. There is another excellent example of how BDS settler colonialism has damaged the interests of others, the effective destruction of the American Indian Studies Department at the University of Illinois as Champaign-Urbana. There have been recent news articles on how the American Indian Studies Department at the University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign at best is on life-support, and more likely, is gone forever. A once vibrant department with seven full time professors now has none.

more...
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/09/bds-is-a-settler-colonial-ideology/

[Little Tich]

1. Racist crap.

[shira]

2. LoL. This is a great article to use against the Zionism = Colonialism racist crap.

Last edited Wed Sep 7, 2016, 07:08 AM - Edit history (2)

The only reason to call Israel a settler colonial state is to deny Jews are indigenous to the land, deny their history there, etc.

The BDS movement is far and away a proven settler, colonial movement. No doubt about it.

Own it.

[Little Tich]

3. The author of this stinker is promoting the myth that Palestinians are descended from Arab invaders

who magically replaced the original population. It's a complete lie and he knows it. This "replacement theory" is popular among racists, and is a Palestinian version of the "Jews are Khazars" theory. I've never encountered this myth outside of racist argumentation, including this OP.

If the OP is spreading racist lies, what's the point of discussing it?

[shira]

4. The Palestinians describe themselves as Arabs. Here's Hamas for example...

Spokesman saying Palestinians are Saudis and Egyptians

Why would he lie? If I were to define myself as an Arab from the great Arab nation, I'm talking specifically about originating from Arabia, now Saudi Arabia. What's so difficult about this? Palestinians are Arabs according to both the PA and Hamas charters. Argue with them for denying Palestinian history within historical Israel.

[Little Tich]

5. I hope you know what you're doing. n/t

[FBaggins]

7. Are you saying that you don't think that Palestinians are arabs?

They're racially distinct in some way from Jordanians/Syrians/etc.?

[shira]

8. 1964 PLO Charter, Article 1....

Article 1: Palestine is an Arab homeland bound by strong Arab national ties to the rest of the Arab Countries and which together form the great Arab homeland.

Apparently, they didn't get the memo in 1964 that this was/is racist.

Article 3...

Article 3: The Palestinian Arab people has the legitimate right to its homeland and is an inseparable part of the Arab Nation. It shares the sufferings and aspirations of the Arab Nation and its struggle for freedom, sovereignty, progress and unity.

[Little Tich]

12. Have you even read the OP?

In fact, the Muslim conquerors who replaced the indigenous Jewish and other populations are the settlers who colonized the area. Zionism is the liberation movement of the indigenous People of the region. That many centuries have passed since Arabs from Arabia and northern Africa settled the area through force does not change the fact that they are not the indigenous Peoples.

That passage is a blatant racist lie!

[shira]

13. How is that anymore racist than claiming the same against Jews?

Jews being colonist invaders, non-indigenous, not a people, etc...

[Little Tich]

31. Would it be correct to assume that you think the quote in my post #12 to be factually incorrect? n/t

[shira]

34. The OP is factually accurate. Now will you answer me? n/t

[Little Tich]

35. The Khazar myth is no better than the lies propagated in the OP.

Fortunately, technological advances in DNA analysis has made both myths obsolete.

[shira]

36. Please stop obfuscating. I'm talking about claims that Jews aren't indigenous....

...are colonial settlers, Jews are not a people, therefore there should be no Israel in existence.

Nothing to do with Khazars.

Now what's your answer?

[aranthus]

9. What's more important is Arab as a cultural distinction.

There isn't much difference between Palestinians and Jordanians or Syrians in their language, history, and culture. That's what makes nations.

And that is why it doesn't matter much that some Palestinians are descendants of Canaanite tribes. (So are the Jews). What matters is that the Jews are the CULTURAL descendants of the Israelites, who were the Canaanite tribes unified by the Hebrews into a single nation. Palestinians are the cultural descendants of Arabs from Arabia.

Another point is that the Palestinians don't need to prove that they are the genetic descendants of the Canaanites to establish that they have a right to a state in some part of the Holy Land. They have that right by virtue of being a separate people (even if they are closely related to other Arabs). The only reason that they "need" to prove that they were there before the Jews is to deny the Jews their right to a state. Unfortunately, that is what Palestinianism is about.

[Little Tich]

10. Are you suggesting that Palestinians don't have a right to live in their ancestral homeland?

It seems as if most Palestinians want to live there, and that you think that they shouldn't be allowed to do so...

[aranthus]

21. Apparently you didn't read the post you responded to.

I will quote the relevant part again:

"Another point is that the Palestinians don't need to prove that they are the genetic descendants of the Canaanites to establish that they have a right to a state in some part of the Holy Land. They have that right by virtue of being a separate people (even if they are closely related to other Arabs)."

It is a mystery to me how you can ask if I am, "suggesting that Palestinians don't have a right to live in their ancestral homeland?" I very plainly said the opposite. What seems to be clear from your posts is that you don't believe that the Jews should be allowed to have a separate national identity (that means a Jewish state) in some part of their homeland, all so that the Arabs can have it all.

[Little Tich]

23. I'm sorry - I didn't realize that you haven't read the OP. n/t

[aranthus]

27. I get it.

You're a Leftist, and anyone who disagrees with you is a racist. What a load of crap. No the OP is not a lie. It is historical fact. Yes, genetic connection between Palestinians and Jews, but I really don't understand why you are so enamored of that. The truth is that most of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine are descendants of Arabs who arrived after the indigenous inhabitants were expelled. Many during and after the 1800's. So what? Why does that give them the exclusive right to all of the land?

[Little Tich]

33. Please just look at the evidence in my post #30 and form your own opinion. n/t

[shira]

37. A little late, but this is a great post. Bookmarking. n/t

[Little Tich]

11. Palestinians are descended from the people that have lived in Palestine since prehistory,

just like Jordanians and Syrians are descended from people living in Jordan and Syria since prehistory - at least that's what science has taught us.

Perhaps drinking too much hasbara Kool-Aid has dulled your senses?

[shira]

14. Can you define indigenous status for the classroom? n/t

[Little Tich]

15. The term "indigenous" is a vague concept that seems to have lost its original meaning.

Do you think Palestinians are indigenous to Israel?

[shira]

17. Kinda worthless discussion if we can't agree on simple definitions. n/t

[Little Tich]

18. It seems as if you're trying to avoid saying that you think that Palestinians are not indigenous

to Israel...

But in your opinion, do you think that Jews are indigenous to Israel?

[shira]

28. You keep bringing up Palestinians being descended from Canaanites, etc...

But for some reason you don't want to say they're indigenous. You don't want to define Indigenous.

Why?

And once again - without deflecting - why is it racist to question Palestinian indigenous status but not Jewish?

[FBaggins]

16. You still having trouble answering simple questions?

Because it sure looks like you know what the answer is and it's just inconvenient.

[Little Tich]

19. Arab is a both cultural identity and an ancestral heritage.

Just because a person is an Arab doesn't mean that they're descended from Arabs. There are Arab Jews, you know...

But please tell what you think about the part of the OP that I posted in #12 - is it a lie?

[FBaggins]

20. And the Palestinians are Arabs in both senses... so that's still dodging.

But please tell what you think about the part of the OP that I posted in #12 - is it a lie?

Nope. It's certainly less of a "blatant lie" then the claim that the Jews are the invaders/colonizers and not indigenous to the area. There are certainly large numbers of Palestinians (about half IIRC) whose ancestors trace back to Arabs who were brought there by the British a century ago. They certainly aren't as "indigenous" as the Jews are. Many more are from Arabs who took the land from the Romans in the 7th century.

But that wasn't the point of my question. You can't call something "racist" when it isn't the race that distinguishes the way that they are viewed. IOW - there are people of the same race who have been at peace with Israel for decades now.

[Little Tich]

24. As I've stated before - I've never encountered this myth outside of racist argumentation. n/t

[FBaggins]

29. And as has been pointed out to you in the past...

... you seem to have your own definitions for lots of words.

[Little Tich]

30. Perhaps we could dispense with the customary insults and provide evidence for our claims instead?

My claim #1 - Palestinians are descended from the original population in Palestine:

Genetic studies on Jews
Source: Wikipedia
(snip)

Comparison with the genetic heritage of non-Jewish populations
Levantines

Many genetic studies have demonstrated that most of the various Jewish ethnic divisions and Druze, Palestinians, Bedouin, Lebanese and other Levantines cluster near one another genetically. One study found that Jews and Palestinians are closer to each other than the Palestinians or European Jews are to non-Jewish Europeans or Africans. They also found substantial genetic overlap between Israeli and Palestinian Arabs and Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. A small but statistically significant difference was found in the Y-chromosomal haplogroup distributions of Sephardic Jews and Palestinians, but no significant differences were found between Ashkenazi Jews and Palestinians nor between the two Jewish communities, However, a highly distinct cluster was found in Palestinian haplotypes. 32% of the 143 Arab Y-chromosomes studied belonged to this "I&P Arab clade", which contained only one non-Arab chromosome, that of a Sephardic Jew. This could possibly be attributed to the geographical isolation of the Jews or to the immigration of Arab tribes in the first millennium. The Druze people, a "genetic sanctuary" for the diversity of the Near East in antiquity, have been found in genetic studies to be the closest to Jews of the populations in the Levant. Lebanese also cluster closely with Jewish ethnic groups, closer than Syrians and Palestinians, according to a 2010 study by Behar et al. The single archeogenetic study of the southern Levant (Salamon et al, 2010) explored mtDNA haplogroups of Chalcolithic period from a cave in the Judean Desert. The prevailing mtDNA haplogroups were those in U3a, H and H6 haplogroup. "U3 is quite frequent in contemporary mtDNA from Near Eastern and Levantine samples suggesting some temporal continuity in mtDNA haplogroups from as far back as the Chalcolithic Era (circa 4500-4000 BCE). In addition, the authors found that the U3a and H6 haplotypes from the ancient DNA samples were present in a broad range of contemporary Jewish populations".

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Jews#Comparison_with_the_genetic_heritage_of_non-Jewish_populations

---

My (new) claim #2 - The Arab immigration to Palestine under the British Mandate period was not significant:

Demographic history of Palestine (region)
Source: Wikipedia
(snip)

The Question of Late Arab and Muslim immigration to Palestine

Demographer Uziel Schmelz, in his analysis of Ottoman registration data for 1905 populations of Jerusalem and Hebron kazas, found that most Ottoman citizens living in these areas, comprising about one quarter of the population of Palestine, were living at the place where they were born. Specifically, of Muslims, 93.1% were born in their current locality of residence, 5.2% were born elsewhere in Palestine, and 1.6% were born outside Palestine. Of Christians, 93.4% were born in their current locality, 3.0% were born elsewhere in Palestine, and 3.6% were born outside Palestine. Of Jews (excluding the large fraction who were not Ottoman citizens), 59.0% were born in their current locality, 1.9% were born elsewhere in Palestine, and 39.0% were born outside Palestine.

According to Roberto Bachi, head of the Israeli Institute of Statistics from 1949 onwards, between 1922-1945 there was a net Arab migration into Palestine of between 40,000-42,000, excluding 9,700 people who were incorporated after territorial adjustments were made to the borders in the 1920s. Basing himself on these figures, and including those netted by the border alterations, Joseph Melzer calculates an upper boundary of 8.5% for Arab growth in the two decades, and interprets it to mean the local Palestinian community's growth was generated primarily by natural increase.

Martin Gilbert estimated that 50,000 Arabs immigrated to Mandatory Palestine from neighboring lands between 1919 and 1939 "attracted by the improving agricultural conditions and growing job opportunities, most of them created by the Jews". According to Itzhak Galnoor, although most of the local Palestinian community's growth was the result of natural increase, Arab immigration to Palestine was significant. Based on his estimates, approximately 100,000 Arabs immigrated to Palestine between 1922 and 1948.

The overall assessment of several British reports was that the increase in the Arab population was primarily due to natural increase.These included the Hope Simpson Enquiry (1930), the Passfield White Paper (1930), the Peel Commission report (1937), and the Survey of Palestine (1945). However, the Hope Simpson Enquiry did note that there was significant illegal immigration from the surrounding Arab territories, while the Peel Commission and Survey of Palestine claimed that immigration played only a minor role in the growth of the Arab population. The 1931 census of Palestine considered the question of illegal immigration since the previous census in 1922.[50] It estimated that unrecorded immigration during that period may have amounted to 9,000 Jews and 4,000 Arabs. It also gave the proportion of persons living in Palestine in 1931 who were born outside Palestine: Muslims, 2%; Christians, 20%; Jews, 58%.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)#The_Question_of_Late_Arab_and_Muslim_immigration_to_Palestine

---

Arab and Jewish immigration to Palestine from 1920-1945, prepared by the British Mandate to the United Nations
Source: Palestine Remembered, May 12, 2002

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Books/Story835.html

[aranthus]

22. Where is the proof of this?

And let's be clear. There is no doubt that at least some of the Palestinians can trace at least some of their ancestry to the Canaanite tribes. But what does that mean? How much of a connection is there? If Palestinians are say, 5% Canaanite and 95% Arab, is that enough for them to have a right to the whole territory? More importantly, why don't the Jews have a right to a state? It seems as if you are more interested in the genetics of people rather than their culture and national identity. Not only is that truly racist; it doesn't make any sense with regard to the right to statehood. States are cultural artifacts aren't they? Aren't they designed to promote and protect cultural and national ideals and values? So why should genetics trump culture?

[Little Tich]

25. Racial purity isn't my favourite subject, but as it seems important for you, I guess you need to

learn the facts:

Blood Brothers: Palestinians and Jews Share Genetic Roots
Source: Haaretz, Oct 20, 2015

Jews break down into three genetic groups, all of which have Middle Eastern origins – which are shared with the Palestinians and Druze.

Confronted by the violence sweeping over Israel, it can be easy to overlook the things that Jews and Palestinians share: a deep attachment to the same sliver of contested land, a shared appetite for hummus, a common tradition of descent from the patriarch Abraham, and, as scientific research shows - a common genetic ancestry, as well.


Several major studies published in the past five years attest to these ancient hereditary links. At the forefront of these efforts are two researchers: Harry Ostrer, professor of pediatrics and pathology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, New York, and Karl Skorecki, director of medical and research development at the Rambam Health Care Campus in Haifa. Back in June 2010, and within two days of each other, the two scientists and their research teams published extensive analyses of the genetic origins of the Jewish people and their Near East ancestry.


“The closest genetic neighbors to most Jewish groups were the Palestinians, Israeli Bedouins, and Druze in addition to the Southern Europeans, including Cypriots,” as Ostrer and Skorecki wrote in a review of their findings that they co-authored in the journal Human Genetics in October 2012.

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.681385

Note: I personally think that trying to promote political arguments with the help of genetics is pointless - but it's not pointless to refute them.

[aranthus]

26. You have completely missed my point.

Maybe you think that you need to believe that those who disagree with you are racist (perhaps to cover your own racism). I don't know and I don't care. In fact I don't much care about race at all. But you seem to care very much that the Palestinians are lineal genetic descendants of the Canaanites. I'm trying to understand why. What does it matter?

For the record, the studies you incompletely cite don't prove your point. All they show is that the closest genetic neighbors of Jews include Palestinians. Since both Jews and Palestinians are semites that's something anyone should expect. So what? Why does that give the Palestinians the right to all of Israel?

[Little Tich]

32. I'm very concerned about the spreading of racist lies.

Any other arguments in the OP are completely unimportant. And I'm not dumb enough to make any political arguments based on the ancestry of anyone. Political arguments based on the ancestry of people are always meaningless.

[Ken Burch]

38. On the Israeli side of the Green Line, it isn't colonialism.

But the West Bank settler project can't be called anything else.

Settling the West Bank does nothing to make Israel a more secure country, and is a major drag on the Israeli economy. It's not about anything but an ideological "want".

The settlements were never worth making it harder to achieve peace.

[shira]

39. Criticizing settlements is fine but calling it colonialism as if Jews don't belong....

....in their historic homeland is bigotry. And let's face it, those who do call it colonialism want nothing less than the ethnic cleansing of all Jews from every part of historic Judea. Pure antisemitism.

[Ken Burch]

40. It has nothing to do with anyone being Jewish.

It would have been the exact same reaction if any OTHER group had come in and started acting as if the land was theirs and no one else's, and as if the people who were being dispossessed had no connection to the land of their own.

Ben-Gurion spent his last years opposing the idea of settling the West Bank(the government waited until AFTER he died to start).

Look, I agree that the original pre-1948 Jewish inhabitants of the area, the people who were driven out by Jordan, not the Palestinians(a group that had no real say over the matter and who themselves had never wanted those folks driven out)should be allowed right of return(and should get the "acknowledgment, apologies, compensation" package that I've called for for Palestinian exiles), but why bring in people from other countries on other continents who themselves had no direct connection to what the right wing calls "Judea and Samaria" to treat the place as if it should be their personal and exclusive domain? Why bring in religious and political extremists, some of whom wanted nothing BUT conflict? Why not just send in the pre-1948'ers and leave it at that?

Can you not see how sending in over 250,000 people, letting those people divert much of the available water supply, take the best land, uproot the ancient olive trees Palestinians had tended for centuries to be replanted ON the setlements, and lay out their settlements in such a way as to make it impossible for Palestinians to get from one part of their homeland to another without having to go through checkpoint after checkpoint after checkpoint just MIGHT make the situation worse?

Could you at least concede, if nothing else, that the whole settlement project was carried out in a far more heavy-handed and insensitive manner than it needed to be?

We're coming very close to the situation in which the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank will be impossible, due to all the land the settlements hold. If the creation of a Palestinian state is made impossible, any possibility of peace forever vanishes. Are you ok with that?

[shira]

41. I don't have a problem with legit criticism of settlements, but colonialism goes too far.

I'm not disagreeing with you on the wisdom of settlements.

But when colonialism is brought up, the implication is that Jews aren't indigenous to parts of their historic homeland. That Jews don't belong in Judea. The BDS movement doesn't believe Jews have a right to any homeland of their own, even within the '67 lines. It's pure antisemitism.

[Ken Burch]

42. I'm not sure they're against the existence of Israel within the pre-1967 lines.

And remember, BDS is not going to be a party to any negotiations, so they can't actually impose anything on anyone.

They are nonviolently protesting the injustices done to Palestinians.

I'm not sure anyone could still do that within all the constraints YOU want to impose on dissent on that subject.

And the right to a homeland for the world's Jewish communites is covered, to my mind, by the right to the pre-1967 state, with that state allowed to live in peace.

Why should it HAVE to include "Judea and Samaria&quot other than repatriating the pre-1967 Jewish population)when those areas have had an Arab majority for 1400 years? Why is asserting the right to live in THAT specific area more important than creating the conditions in which Israel COULD live in peace with the countries around it? And why is it worth life nearly intolerable for everyone else who lives there?

[shira]

43. Seriously? You don't believe BDS is against the existence of Israel? Come on Ken...

No point continuing this silliness.

Hamas and the PA have made it clear they hate Jews and support terrorists who target Jews. They don't want any living in Gaza or the W.Bank & they do not believe the Jews are entitled to a homeland of their own in any part of Israel. The BDS movement sympathizes with that racism & agrees with it, so at least be honest about that.

And no, it's not about hating Israel or Israelis as the PA and Hamas don't have a problem with Arab Israelis, just the Jewish ones. Just be honest, okay?

[Ken Burch]

44. BDS is not Hamas and Fatah. It's totally separate from them.

And Fatah DID recognize Israel in 1994, so it's not as simple as you paint it.

It's not possible to end this by either an Israeli OR a Palestinian military victory.

[shira]

45. BDS has no problem with racist Hamas, Fatah goals.

And Fatah DID recognize Israel in 1994, so it's not as simple as you paint it.

LoL. For the next year, Fatah is trying to get the Brits to apologize for the 100 year old Balfour Declaration. So much for recognizing the Jewish homeland.

Face it, this conflict has always been about denying Jews their homeland, ethnically cleansing them, killing them. IOW, pure hate. Anyone with any shred of decency would admit that.

[AsianActivist]

6. A very cogent and thoughtful article

I know little about the Israeli-Palestine conflict but this seems to be a well ballanced and thoughtful article.