Dante80
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2018
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Nothing in support of Jews or Christians; just a neutral perspective of what's fair and what not.
You are again using though moralizations to describe what is essentially an execution of national interest. When I was writing that said execution had nothing to do with morality or legality I was not insinuating that it was a priori immoral or illegal. I was simply stating that it was based on the capability to be executed. Because if that was not the case, it wouldn't have been. Moralizations or calls to truth, legality, fairness, history, religion or rights are simply tools that state actors utilize - since time immemorial - to better execute their self-determined interests.
Let me put it this way, to understand the fallacy of assigning a historic right to self-entitled policy actions. Do you feel that the forceful displacement of the Palestinian people from the lands they have been inhabiting for many centuries is fair, and part of an objective or neutral narrative on the subject at hand?
Have in mind that I am using the word Palestinian in its definition as the ethnonational group comprising the modern descendants of the peoples who have lived in Palestine over the centuries, including Jews and Samaritans, and who today are largely culturally and linguistically Arab.
Not in its modern national identity definition (which is indeed a construct born out of opposition to early 20th century Zionism).
This is how an argument becomes both circular and self-preserving in Real Politik.
Last edited: