gershy

6 ms·

1.
by gershy 1mo ago
Completely agreed
2.
by gershy 1mo ago
Positive? I come off very robotic in text but I'm friendly in person! Realtime is much more effective for this kind of stuff.
3.
by gershy 1mo ago
- I assume you agree israel can't be physically displaced - I assume you agree that as britain's displacement of the ottomans was valid, so too is the jewish terrorist/renegade displacement of britain - I assume you agree bri
4.
by gershy 1mo ago
I guess github is kind of a shared garden. Interesting that, like in game theory, if everyone is using it too much, no one gets to use it.
5.
by gershy 2mo ago
Also, would you be interested to continue this conversation by phone or video call? We've been at this for more than a month now and I admire your respectfulness and tenacity and perspective, and I think we could get to the core of our
6.
by gershy 2mo ago
Israel is a nuclear power; it can't really be displaced. It sounds like the terms "ingratitude" / "ingrate" are not relevant to your stance and are just emotive distractions; I suggest we avoid those terms. Isr
7.
by gershy 2mo ago
Israel is physically immune to being displaced, and there is good reason to think it would be a fine western-style steward when not under duress. Even israeli jewish radicalism has historically been far less prevalent in peacetime. On the s
8.
by gershy 2mo ago
I'm losing your overall point. You imply indifference when you say "it might as well be china". My followup would be, "you don't seem indifferent about israel" Then I would expect you to say, "well israel
9.
by gershy 2mo ago
Justice (justification) and practical reality are fundamentally linked. If no previous state is interested, the land stateless - correct?
10.
by gershy 2mo ago
I am not an antiabortion crusader. I'm offering what I understand to be the antiabortion position here. By ":(" I wanted to imply "Unfortunately there are seemingly lots of people who seem to hold this view genuinely and
11.
by gershy 2mo ago
And if none of the previous legitimate sovereign authorities of that territory are interested to administer its present-day property rights claims? The people of that land are effectively stateless, no?
12.
by gershy 2mo ago
Some would argue there are too many harms that occur if antiabortion measures aren't taken :(
13.
by gershy 2mo ago
Outside of states there is no law - only survival. I would expect stateless people to use force to preserve and increase their resources, and I would of course do so myself in such a situation. I'm not sure if the concept of private ow
14.
by gershy 2mo ago
(I'm canadian - not israeli.) "Would you disagree with shooting illegal settlers who are right now robbing others lands?" Who is doing the shooting?
15.
by gershy 2mo ago
That's a remarkable position, thanks for being honest about it. So israel is currently pursuing what is in your eyes the only possible route to legitimacy - i.e., maintaining ownership while the ~200-year clock counts down?
16.
by gershy 2mo ago
So we just need to wait, and you'll reverse your stance on israel?
17.
by gershy 2mo ago
Would you argue that most states worldwide are false/invalid and should be relitigated? (As just about all of them were constructed in areas containing prior people, and against the will of some of those people.)
18.
by gershy 2mo ago
If your objections are that parties are elected rather than leaders, and that non-israelis can't vote, it sounds like you are straining very hard to deny that israel is a democracy.
19.
by gershy 2mo ago
I don't understand how you can disagree that generally, "territory unencompassed by anything strongly resembling a state is a favourable place to construct a state". Surely you don't agree with its negation?? I'm gu
20.
by gershy 2mo ago
You're branching off in a lot of directions. Is there a specific point you'd like to focus on? Do you agree "territory unencompassed by anything strongly resembling a state is a favourable place to construct a state"?
21.
by gershy 2mo ago
I think there are plenty of ethnostates that function well internally, and do little unjustifiable harm to others. So your question is "how to justify the movement of newcomers into the midst of former residents of british palestine an
22.
by gershy 2mo ago
Breadth-first discussion is not effective. Are citizens of israel able to vote for their leadership?
23.
by gershy 2mo ago
I'm interested in your very general stance ("seeds of harm") as I suspect it either classifies too many or too few states as undesirable, but I want to let you push your questions too. No sane (and non-ideological) person wil
24.
by gershy 2mo ago
It sounds like you don't specifically oppose ethnostates, but rather more broadly, any state which contains "the seeds of harm". What test do you use to determine whether or not a state has "the seeds of harm"?
25.
by gershy 2mo ago
What right/justification do you have to prevent people from organizing on any basis they determine is important to them (so long as they aren't unjustifiably harming others in the process)?
26.
by gershy 2mo ago
Any non-convert jew (the vast majority of jews are non-converts) will have a lineage going back to ancient israel / judea. Can you elaborate on what you mean by "don't believe in ethnostates"? Are you saying that you per
27.
by gershy 2mo ago
Caveman speak make compression not brevity
28.
by gershy 2mo ago
You say you don't understand "the literature" well enough to know if jews have a valid claim to israel, but when you describe early jewish zionists as "ingrates" it seems like you're saying you do understand, a
29.
by gershy 2mo ago
There are two points here: 1. Do jews have an arbitrary or valid interest in israel/palestine? 2. Do other peoples have a valid, nonzero amount of interest in the same land? On #1 we seem to agree - of course the jewish interest in the
30.
by gershy 2mo ago
Jewish ethnogenesis occurred in ancient israel plus judea. Yes or no?

More ›