apparently i haven't been loud enough about palestine on this sideblog at all, because i already had to block one of those liberal zionists that was following me and liking my posts while only ever reblogging from "nooo i'm not a zionist i swear, i just hate palestinians for totally unrelated reasons" types. so, for the sake of complete clarity about my stance, here are some excerpts from decolonizepalestine.com about the myth of the two-state solution:
"What this approach to a solution neglects, is that Israel is not a normal state. It is a settler colony [You can read more about this here]. We are not talking about two naturally occurring populations which have a land dispute. Israelis are descended from settlers that arrived from abroad with the goal of erecting an ethnocratic settler state in an area that was already home to the Palestinians."
"This approach is also inadequate to right historical wrongs, as it focuses on the pre-1967 borders as a starting point, which are in themselves a product of this colonization, and not the root cause of it. It is thus preoccupied with finding solutions to symptoms, rather than dare address the root cause, which is Zionist settler colonialism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians."
"All of these shortcomings are often countered with the assertion that Palestinians must compromise to reach peace. Israeli control is treated as a fait accompli and that Palestinians must deal with it, rather than ask for justice. This is the whole premise of the two-state solution, that Palestinians must compromise on their rights to be granted a small, powerless sham of a state in part of their homeland. Israel, of course was not asked to compromise on anything substantial. The only compromise asked of Israelis is to stop its violation of international law, which it should cease regardless of any negotiation with the Palestinians. This attitude basically boils down to âwhatâs mine is mine, and whatâs yours is negotiable.â."
"Has it never once sounded suspicious to you how Israelis focus on the number of âpeace offersâ that were refused by the Palestinians, but never once discussed the actual parameters or substance in detail? Because when these parameters are discussed, it becomes clear that these are terms nobody could accept. So even when Palestinians accepted the 1967 borders, a very limited return of refugees, and other compromises, this was still not good enough for Israel that sought to shrink the Palestinian Bantustan even further. These arrangements seek to formalize the status quo with cosmetic changes. Netanyahu promised that no Palestinian state will emerge, and in the case of any limited self-rule arrangement for the Palestinians, he spoke about a permanent IDF presence in the West Bank, as well as Israeli control of the borders and airspace. These are the amazing âopportunitiesâ that Palestinians have been declining, and as a result are being painted as warmongering rejectionists for doing so."
"It should be mentioned that such arrangements were also concocted for the various Bantustans in Apartheid South Africa. What all of these arrangements have in common, is that they are designed specifically to dance around settler colonialism, and to try and find a âsolutionâ comfortable for the settlers which do not harm any expansionist ambitions. In this way Palestinians are pushed to compromise until there is nothing left to compromise on, they are now even being pushed to compromise on having actual borders."
"That we barely ever hear about the offers that the Yishuv/Israel rejected should be an indicator of the nature of mainstream discussions on Palestine and the silencing of Palestinian voices. The Palestinian Liberation Organization also called for establishing a secular, democratic unitary state for all its citizens. Naturally, none of these proposals included genocide, ethnic cleansing or mass murder."
"Underlying the logic of both of these approaches are racist assumptions that the colonized are barbaric, bloodthirsty and ruthless. It is a deeply dehumanizing logic, steeped in every colonial and Orientalist trope. The idea that a decolonized, free Palestine would inevitably lead to genocide comes from this same logic. As a matter of fact, for all the claims of the Palestinians wanting to push Israelis into the sea, only the opposite has occurred in reality."
