Don't worry about the typos, no prob. OK, you've written a long apologia for Israel and Zionism with some good details and others I'd contest. But it's neither here nor there: We're discussing what a person has the right to say about a nation-state (that is, Israel) that privileges one ethno-religious group over others. This is the explicit state of affairs in Israel, as Netanyahu's government made super-duper clear in 2019. In Netanyahu's words, Israel is “the nation state not of all its citizens but only of the Jewish people."
Can a person say "I don't think that system is just, it should be dismantled and replaced with something else. I suggest a secular democratic state with equality among all residents" -- or is that a call for genocide? (Btw your stat about 90+ percent of Palestinians wanting an Islamic state is hogwash and a red herring. If you think Palestinians don't want democracy I don't think you've spent much time among Palestinians.)
If you say such a position is, actually, a call for genocide, you're contorting yourself through a set of intellectual hoops to arrive at a pre-baked conclusion. It amounts to putting words in people's mouths.
To be clear I don't like the sloganeering of lots of Palestinian activists. And I'm all for calling out those who are obviously trying to intimidate and harass. But, with respect, you're saying: Criticize Israeli policy, but not its intellectual foundations. That is not free speech. And frankly, these arguments are allowed in Israel (more during peaceful times than right now) and they take place in Israel. Should they be allowed in Israel and not the U.S.?
As for the point that the "dismantling" of Israel's basic laws would involve violence: Right now, that would be true. But on the level of allowed speech: Are are you saying that advocating any position involving violence is banned? Then advocating military aid for Ukraine?--that would be banned. Condemning a cease-fire in Gaza and saying Israel needs to keep up the fight against Hamas?--that would be banned. You can only justify banning the advocacy of a secular state by saying it amounts to genocide. And it just doesn't.
I apologise for the many typos. This keyboard is new and atrocious.
Don't worry about the typos, no prob. OK, you've written a long apologia for Israel and Zionism with some good details and others I'd contest. But it's neither here nor there: We're discussing what a person has the right to say about a nation-state (that is, Israel) that privileges one ethno-religious group over others. This is the explicit state of affairs in Israel, as Netanyahu's government made super-duper clear in 2019. In Netanyahu's words, Israel is “the nation state not of all its citizens but only of the Jewish people."
Can a person say "I don't think that system is just, it should be dismantled and replaced with something else. I suggest a secular democratic state with equality among all residents" -- or is that a call for genocide? (Btw your stat about 90+ percent of Palestinians wanting an Islamic state is hogwash and a red herring. If you think Palestinians don't want democracy I don't think you've spent much time among Palestinians.)
If you say such a position is, actually, a call for genocide, you're contorting yourself through a set of intellectual hoops to arrive at a pre-baked conclusion. It amounts to putting words in people's mouths.
To be clear I don't like the sloganeering of lots of Palestinian activists. And I'm all for calling out those who are obviously trying to intimidate and harass. But, with respect, you're saying: Criticize Israeli policy, but not its intellectual foundations. That is not free speech. And frankly, these arguments are allowed in Israel (more during peaceful times than right now) and they take place in Israel. Should they be allowed in Israel and not the U.S.?
As for the point that the "dismantling" of Israel's basic laws would involve violence: Right now, that would be true. But on the level of allowed speech: Are are you saying that advocating any position involving violence is banned? Then advocating military aid for Ukraine?--that would be banned. Condemning a cease-fire in Gaza and saying Israel needs to keep up the fight against Hamas?--that would be banned. You can only justify banning the advocacy of a secular state by saying it amounts to genocide. And it just doesn't.
I owe you a good long answer, will hopefuly get there in the coming day
I understand wanting to comment but not having time. In any event don't feel that you owe me, no problem.