Read on Twitter
1/ I'd like to see those defending "river to the sea" as if it means nothing more than "one democratic state" be more forthright in acknowledging what it really means. To both proponents and critics.
Why skirt the central issue? https://twitter.com/rabbijilljacobs/status/1333938926495666178
Why skirt the central issue? https://twitter.com/rabbijilljacobs/status/1333938926495666178
2/ Both "river to sea" and "one democratic state" are slogans. The former is chanted more often by people who shake their fist, and latter by those who seek a more refined look, but both describe the same broader idea: Disempowering a historically oppressed people, the Jews.
3/ How is it that "one democratic state" amounts to disempowerment? It sounds so nice!
Because democracy isn't the end being demanded. When you understand that "one democratic state" is a euphemism for "one democratic Jewish-minority state" is the demand, the debate more sense.
Because democracy isn't the end being demanded. When you understand that "one democratic state" is a euphemism for "one democratic Jewish-minority state" is the demand, the debate more sense.
4/ "One democratic state" here means the same as Palestinian control from "river to the sea," which means the same as "no room for such Jewish control anywhere." How so? Because virtually nobody who demands one state accepts that it could sustainably have a Jewish majority.
5/ There is today a democratic state where Jews and Arabs vote. Why isn't that okay with those who demand "one democratic state"? Precisely because it isn't a Palestinian-majority state.
The "one" in "one democratic state" means zero-sum. It means racial gerrymandering.
The "one" in "one democratic state" means zero-sum. It means racial gerrymandering.
6/ That's why "one democratic state" is invariably coupled with a demand for the "return" of the grandchildren of Palestinian refugees from 1948. Again: "One democratic state" means "one democratic state IF AND ONLY IF democracy allows a Palestinian majority to rule everywhere."
7/ What's so wrong with a Palestinian majority? Aren't those upset by "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free" bothered precisely because they want to keep the current democracy that has a Jewish majority?
Remember what I said above: "one" is meant as "zero sum."
Remember what I said above: "one" is meant as "zero sum."
8/ Those who advocate for two-states-for-two-peoples want two democratic states. Why two? To care for the aspirations of two peoples. There would be a Jewish majority. AND a Palestinian majority.
The "river-sea" and "one democratic state" folks reject that. Fundamentally.
The "river-sea" and "one democratic state" folks reject that. Fundamentally.
9/ I'll fix the typos here for the sake of reiterating:
Democracy isn't the end being demanded. When you understand that "one democratic state" is a euphemism for "one democratic Jewish-minority state," the debate makes more sense. https://twitter.com/GileadIni/status/1334163096865222657
Democracy isn't the end being demanded. When you understand that "one democratic state" is a euphemism for "one democratic Jewish-minority state," the debate makes more sense. https://twitter.com/GileadIni/status/1334163096865222657
10/ It depends on the speaker or the audience, but those who use the slogan "one democratic state" will sometimes be more explicit. Like when Omar Barghouti, a leader of the anti-Israel BDS movement, admitted "one state" is one where "BY DEFINITION Jews will be a minority."
11/ Barghouti is hardly the first to admit the implications and purpose of his desired demographic engineering. Note how leaders in the Arab world used to talk about the so called "right of return":
"Extermination." "Annihilate." "Cease to exist." https://www.camera.org/article/noura-erakat-rewrites-hamas-and-rebrands-return/
"Extermination." "Annihilate." "Cease to exist." https://www.camera.org/article/noura-erakat-rewrites-hamas-and-rebrands-return/
12/ The public relations value of those phrases today are, let's say, not so much. Today's audience calls for different messaging.
But to circle back around: If you want to be honest and discuss in good faith, be forthright about what the slogans mean, and how they're seen.
But to circle back around: If you want to be honest and discuss in good faith, be forthright about what the slogans mean, and how they're seen.
13/ To put it in terms that are easier for locals to relate to: Why don't the people of Ireland jump at the opportunity for "one democratic state" encompassing the British Isles? Because it's completely, utterly obvious that this amounts to their disempowerment.
14/ Do Canadians want to be part of one democratic state from the (Baffin) Bay to the Gulf (of Mexico)? Yeah, 0.11% of them do. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_movements_of_Canada#Modern_annexationist_groups) Many more don't even want to be part of Canada!
15/ Do the people of Pakistan want to be part of "one democratic state" with India? Pass.
16/ It's easy to understand, then, why most Jews think it's immoral to insist that, against their wishes, they become part of "one democratic state" with neighbors who most recently voted into power a Holocaust revisionist and a virulently anti-Jewish terror organization.
