• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.




'Apartheid' Mindset Appears to be Alive and Well - Israeli Poll Indicates Support for 'Apartheid' Policies

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
'Apartheid' Mindset Appears to be Alive and Well - Israeli Poll Indicates Support for 'Apartheid' Policies

It is frequently the case that abuse and ridicule are hurled at those those who ascribe to the State of Israel policies redolent of Apartheid South Africa, a state that was treated as an international pariah. Numerous instances of such knee-jerk attacks on Israel's critics have surfaced on this forum among others.

It would appear that Apartheidist policies do after all enjoy substantial support among those who bask in their own much trumpeted 'democratic credentials'. Despite the deeply anti-democratic nature of Israeli rule in the territories it controls, Israel's sympathisers and supporters simply will not hear of any allegations that racism may underpin much of Israeli policy across those territories.

Israeli poll finds majority in favour of 'apartheid' policies | World news | guardian.co.uk

Three simple requests:

1. Can we discuss Israeli policies and actions, and not those of all 'usual suspects'. After all, few place the 'usual suspects' on pedestals in the way Israel's supporters do in the case of the object of their affections. Also, and this is significant, the 'usual suspects' are not cosseted, armed and given political cover by the European Union (and its member states), of which we in this state are an integral part.

2. Please keep it somewhat grown up, and refrain from deeply personal attacks on each other. A bit of bite is to be expected of course, but please avoid the excesses that sometimes dominate discussions of these issues. Attempts by supporters of Israel to derail this discussion down a side track should be avoided at all costs if they occur.

3. Remember that many Jews in Israel do their absolute utmost to hinder the worst excesses of the IDF, often putting themselves in danger in order to do so, and Jews are to be found throughout many of the international organisations dedicated to bringing justice to Israel/Palestine.

Is Israel becoming an openly 'Apartheidist' state? Discuss.
 


onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
Maybe it's a poor OP, and if so I put my hand up.

I'm still surprised that no supporter of Israeli policy has been peeved enough to have a go at an accusation that usually gets attempted short shrift.

Israeli Apartheid. OK?
 

PeacefulViking

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
2,506
Some disturbing findings but there are few things worth noting. Most people did not support annexing the West bank in the first place, which may be important to note when it they said that they would not want to give the Palestinians the vote in that case.

Furthermore the sample size of the survey is on the low side, only 503 interviewees, and the survey does not seem to have been carried out by a neutral organization.
 

pinemartin

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
6,731
Maybe the apartheid supporting attitude of a big chunk of Israelis is just a bridge too far for the Israeli supporters on this site.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,277
Some disturbing findings but there are few things worth noting. Most people did not support annexing the West bank in the first place, which may be important to note when it they said that they would not want to give the Palestinians the vote in that case.

Furthermore the sample size of the survey is on the low side, only 503 interviewees, and the survey does not seem to have been carried out by a neutral organization.
503 people is too small a sample. However attitudes have hardened in recent years.
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,972
Could someone please post the rules and regulations of the apartheid regime in South Africa so that we can compare apples with apples ?
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
Some disturbing findings but there are few things worth noting. Most people did not support annexing the West bank in the first place, which may be important to note when it they said that they would not want to give the Palestinians the vote in that case.
48% stated they "opposed annexation". Unfortunately for those who want a closer understanding of the issue, the respondents weren't asked if the opposite outcome was desirable i.e. would they support the return of the settled and closed areas to the Palestinians. I have a feeling there might be a bit more than 48% opposition to that proposal.

It's also likely that a sizeable portion of that 48% are happy with the status quo. Why the need for annexation when you continue to be able to expropriate land and water and build as densely as you want while restricting non-Jews from almost half of all the territory of the West Bank.

Furthermore the sample size of the survey is on the low side, only 503 interviewees
I agree. However, opinion polls in this state are frequently based on sample sizes proportionally similar, and would usually be based on no more than a thousand respondents i.e Red C. I'm unsure as to the statistical likelihood that a poll of a thousand people would be significantly more accurate than one half the size, or if the margin of error would be that much less than the smaller sample.

and the survey does not seem to have been carried out by a neutral organization.
The report states: "The poll was conducted by a public opinion firm, Dialog, which interviewed 503 people out of an Israeli Jewish population of just under 6 million".

I'm not sure what the problem is with the polling firm. Can you throw some light on your assertion?
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
Could someone please post the rules and regulations of the apartheid regime in South Africa so that we can compare apples with apples ?
The most important one was the allocation or denial of voting rights to people on the basis of their ethnicity. A majority of the Israelis polled appear willing for Israel to embrace such a measure if the increasingly inevitable happens i.e. Israel's conquest of the West Bank save for a few Palestinian 'bantustans'. A majority have expressed other views that would not have been out of place in Apartheid South Africa. That's why this poll is making news around the world.

Some might attempt a defence of Israel on the premise that Israel is not the same as/is different from Apartheid South Africa, and as it's different then the views of its people simply cannot be compared. Nobody is claiming that it's 'just like South Africa'. However, in some core areas of its policies in the areas within the borders it controls, Israeli policy is becoming ever more shamelessly segregationist. And this poll shows a substantial level of public support for those policies.
 

Own Arris

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
702
Could someone please post the rules and regulations of the apartheid regime in South Africa so that we can compare apples with apples ?
Here is a link to the crime of Apartheid as defined by the United Nations General Assembly in 1973 at the height of the apartheid regime in South Africa, and later as defined by by the International Criminal Court in 2002. I hope it shines some light on the attitudes expressed in the poll.

On 30 November 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.[1] It defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them." ........." apartheid was declared to be a crime against humanity, with a scope that went far beyond South Africa. While the crime of apartheid is most often associated with the racist policies of South Africa after 1948, the term more generally refers to racially based policies in any state."
The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity "committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.
Crime of apartheid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

yanshuf

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,076
The most important one was the allocation or denial of voting rights to people on the basis of their ethnicity. A majority of the Israelis polled appear willing for Israel to embrace such a measure if the increasingly inevitable happens i.e. Israel's conquest of the West Bank save for a few Palestinian 'bantustans'. A majority have expressed other views that would not have been out of place in Apartheid South Africa. That's why this poll is making news around the world.

Some might attempt a defence of Israel on the premise that Israel is not the same as/is different from Apartheid South Africa, and as it's different then the views of its people simply cannot be compared. Nobody is claiming that it's 'just like South Africa'. However, in some core areas of its policies in the areas within the borders it controls, Israeli policy is becoming ever more shamelessly segregationist. And this poll shows a substantial level of public support for those policies.

That this poll is making news is not because of its content but because of its wrapping - Gidon Levy wanted it to be echoed throughout the world, and since he is a Haarets "journalist", then he was quoted.

Add to that some anti-israeli enthusiasts and there you have it - sensational poll.

In fact it's not different from other polls ordered by leftist figures (in this case the Israeli far left), with the intention to bash Israel. It's quite evident in the way the decided to ask the questions (they never defined the word apartheid to the respondents).

[video=youtube;U4UTgaLXFR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4UTgaLXFR0&feature=related[/video]

Something to think about
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
That this poll is making news is not because of its content but because of its wrapping - Gidon Levy wanted it to be echoed throughout the world, and since he is a Haarets "journalist", then he was quoted.
"Not because of its content"? Hardly anyone outside Israel knows who the hell Levy is, nor do they care who he writes for. Believe me, there''l be many people around the world who have never heard of Levy and who will lose another layer of respect or sympathy for Israel.

Rest assured, it's the content. And the content will be disturbing to many, not me, who had accepted some of the assumptions about Israel - "it's the only democracy in the region" etc.

Add to that some anti-israeli enthusiasts and there you have it - sensational poll.
Is it not a bit "sensational" when it appears that a majority of the population of a major ally of the US and other western states, a state that is placed on a pedestal in the USA and lauded for its 'democratic' credentials, appears to embrace what can only be described as disturbingly anti-democratic views along with a fair dollop of racism?

In fact it's not different from other polls ordered by leftist figures (in this case the Israeli far left), with the intention to bash Israel.
Who carried out the poll? Leftist figures?

It's quite evident in the way the decided to ask the questions (they never defined the word apartheid to the respondents).
The word wasn't used in the survey. Others inferred an Apartheidist mentality on the part of many of the respondents.

[video=youtube;U4UTgaLXFR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4UTgaLXFR0&feature=related[/video]

Something to think about
I recommended that respondents on this thread "avoid attempts by supporters of Israel to derail this discussion down a side track".

I'm following my own recommendation Yanshuf, but I'm surprised at the openness of your attempt to dive down that side track. Why the tangent? I think most people know the answer.
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,972
Here is a link to the crime of Apartheid as defined by the United Nations General Assembly in 1973 at the height of the apartheid regime in South Africa, and later as defined by by the International Criminal Court in 2002. I hope it shines some light on the attitudes expressed in the poll.
Fair enough. here's para 6 from your link:-

# Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to form recognised trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;
Are you saying that Arab Israelis can't join a union, have no right to an education, no right to a nationality, no right of freedom of expression etc etc ?? And in the West Bank ? No vote ? No education ? No freedom of expression ? No right to peaceful assembly and association ? If so, how did the PA get elected ? How do the Palestinian police come to be the Palestinian police ? How come nearly 4000 Arab Palestinians in East Jerusalem have applied for and received Israeli citizenship ? How does their treatment by Israel differ from their treatment by the Arab nations where many reside ?
 

yanshuf

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,076
"Not because of its content"? Hardly anyone outside Israel knows who the hell Levy is, nor do they care who he writes for. Believe me, there''l be many people around the world who have never heard of Levy and who will lose another layer of respect or sympathy for Israel.

Rest assured, it's the content. And the content will be disturbing to many, not me, who had accepted some of the assumptions about Israel - "it's the only democracy in the region" etc.



Is it not a bit "sensational" when it appears that a majority of the population of a major ally of the US and other western states, a state that is placed on a pedestal in the USA and lauded for its 'democratic' credentials, appears to embrace what can only be described as disturbingly anti-democratic views along with a fair dollop of racism?



Who carried out the poll? Leftist figures?



The word wasn't used in the survey. Others inferred an Apartheidist mentality on the part of many of the respondents.

[video=youtube;U4UTgaLXFR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4UTgaLXFR0&feature=related[/video]



I recommended that respondents on this thread "avoid attempts by supporters of Israel to derail this discussion down a side track".

I'm following my own recommendation Yanshuf, but I'm surprised at the openness of your attempt to dive down that side track. Why the tangent? I think most people know the answer.
It's only becuase of the content. The Guardian people know exactly who Gidon Levy is and would jump on anything he writes if it fits them right.

Rest assured, it's the content. And the content will be disturbing to many, not me, who had accepted some of the assumptions about Israel - "it's the only democracy in the region" etc.
The content of another poll doesn't seem to bother those good souls, not you, who've been disturbed by this specific poll:

80% of the Palestinians - all jews should be killed


The word wasn't used in the survey. Others inferred an Apartheidist mentality on the part of many of the respondents
It was used, according to the Hebrew version of the article.


I recommended that respondents on this thread "avoid attempts by supporters of Israel to derail this discussion down a side track".
Well, you'll have to excuse those who don't follow your recommendations, now. And especially when it has direct connection to your virulent thread that is yet anothet anti-israel thread, counting makes it what? thread number 1001 since the start of the year?
 

L'Chaim

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
18,967
Are tortoises wise, in general, or just when they're old?
About thirty percent said "only when they're old".

So much for surveys :)
 

flavirostris

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
25,042
See this thread.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/foreign-affairs/168179-israel-now-road-apartheid.html

There's a widespread assumption that Apartheid is about racial discrimination. While the South African Apartheid system was undoubtably racist, it was really about denying democracy to the indigenous blacks. When people talk about Israel being an incipient Apartheid state, this is what they mean.

Incidentally, Jimmy Carter has said in the last week that he believes the two state solution to be "unviable" now because of Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

Read Professor Mearsheimer on what the death of the two state solution will mean in practice.
 

timhorgan

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
4,034
More and more people are talking about a 1-state solution - Professor Uri Davis is probably the most eloquent advocate from the PA side. It is clear that after 65 years Israel is a failed state and does not want a 2-state solution anyhow. The answer will probabably be based on the Swiss Canton model with Jerusalem as a federal capital like Canberra or Washington.


The death of the Israel-Palestine two-state solution brings fresh hope | Rachel Shabi | Comment is free | The Guardian


See this thread.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/foreign-affairs/168179-israel-now-road-apartheid.html

There's a widespread assumption that Apartheid is about racial discrimination. While the South African Apartheid system was undoubtably racist, it was really about denying democracy to the indigenous blacks. When people talk about Israel being an incipient Apartheid state, this is what they mean.

Incidentally, Jimmy Carter has said in the last week that he believes the two state solution to be "unviable" now because of Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

Read Professor Mearsheimer on what the death of the two state solution will mean in practice.

Brilliant Uri Davis article:

http://odspi.org/articles/davis'.html


Extract on Israel being an Apartheid State:

Apartheid, however, is a different phenomenon. Apartheid is a political system where racism is regulated in law through Acts of Parliament. In liberal democratic states, those victimized by racism have (if they can raise the money) legal recourse to seek the protection of the law under a democratic Constitution, namely a Constitution that embodies the values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In an apartheid state, on the other hand, the state enforces racism through the legal system, criminalizes expressions of humanitarian concern and obligates the citizenry through Acts of Parliament to make racist choices and conform to racist behaviour. After the demise of apartheid in the Republic of South Africa, Israel remains, to my knowledge, the only member state of the UN that is an apartheid state, and it is correct to single out Israel on this basis.
 
Last edited:

Seanie Lemass

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
20,159
And they will all be so much happier when the Israeli democratic state is replaced by a one state theocratic totalitarian monster run by Hamas. Happy days.
 

Tim Johnston

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
5,101
Maybe it's a poor OP, and if so I put my hand up.
No, it's not that. It's just I don't have a subscription to Haaretz to read the article that The Guardian is discussing, and ... lol ... it's really not like I'm going to take that rag's word for it.

On a slightly different note, hmm, let's ask people in a war zone what they think of the guys on the other side - we're sure to get a balanced and reasonable response!
 

Tim Johnston

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
5,101
It is clear that after 65 years Israel is a failed state and does not want a 2-state solution anyhow. The answer will probabably be based on the Swiss Canton model with Jerusalem as a federal capital like Canberra or Washington.
What a good idea. Could we have the same thing in Ireland then? or with the whole British Isles, a Swiss-style confederation with Ireland as a sort of canton. Could we have the guns and cuckoo clocks as well?
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,735
No, it's not that. It's just I don't have a subscription to Haaretz to read the article that The Guardian is discussing, and ... lol ... it's really not like I'm going to take that rag's word for it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-new-israeli-apartheid-poll-reveals-widespread-jewish-support-for-policy-of-discrimination-against-arab-minority-822

And from Oz:

Israelis back discrimination against Arabs: poll

I suppose any newspaper which reports on this inconvenient survey is a "rag".

On a slightly different note, hmm, let's ask people in a war zone what they think of the guys on the other side - we're sure to get a balanced and reasonable response!
As if that blank cheque is rolled out to the Palestinians in Gaza when they vote for Hamas.

The wriggling is intense.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top