Zanimljivi su ovi trolovi, koliko ih se vec nastancalo... Ovaj Ashe je samo elegantno izignorisao moj upis i postavljena pitanja. Vidim da se nesto uzdize, daje sebi na vaznosti, nesto lamentira o poznavanju materije koje niko osim njega, na ovom forumu, ne posjeduje... Uputio bih ga onda na nekoga s kim bi mogao na nivou diskutovati, recimo na Petera Beinarta:
The consequences of this linguistic move are profound. Palestinians are a people, and a collection of human beings. Hamas is a political and military organization that in American and establishment Jewish discourse is synonymous with terrorism. So when defining the conflict as Israel versus Hamas, you do two things: First, you erase ordinary Palestinians. You divert attention away from the popular resistance—against Israel’s impending evictions in Sheikh Jarrah, against Israel’s violent raids in the Al Aqsa Mosque, against Israel’s entire system of discrimination and expulsion—that began to surge this month before Hamas launched its first rocket. Secondly, you imply that if only Hamas could be eliminated, things would grow calm. It’s the Israel-Palestine version of the way American segregationists used to talk about “outside agitators.” If not for those radicals, who rile everyone up, Palestinians would quiet down and accept things as they are.
All this is profoundly wrong. If Israel eliminated Hamas, nothing fundamental would change.
Three decades later, with Mahmoud Abbas overseeing the security cooperation that helps Israel control the West Bank, Hamas is still making the same basic argument. In the words of Rabbi Michael Melchior, who has spent more time with Hamas leaders than almost any other Israeli, “There are many people in Hamas who want their organisation, together with Fatah and the other parties, to be part of peace here…But they also want something to come out of it so that down the road they won’t look like Palestinian President Abbas, who doesn’t get any response from the Israeli side.”
It’s not Hamas’s Islamism that keeps it from recognizing Israel. It’s simply good politics. In the eyes of most Palestinians, Fatah’s strategy of recognizing Israel has failed. It has led not to Palestinian statehood but to deepened occupation. That creates a market for a more hardline alternative. Eliminate Islamism from Palestinian politics and some leftist or nationalist faction would fill that same hardline niche and become America’s new bogeyman.
Nor would eliminating Hamas eliminate Palestinian violence. After all, Palestinian leftist and nationalist groups fought Israel violently for decades before Hamas was born.
But whether Hamas exists or not, some Palestinians will continue responding to the violence of state oppression with violence of their own. There’s nothing unusual about this. Nelson Mandela supported violence—in the 1960s he helped turn the African National Congress from a nonviolent organization into one that employed armed struggle. The Irish Republican Army planted bombs across England. Malcolm X and the Black Panthers said Black Americans needed guns. The American revolutionaries used violence. Some of the activists opposed to Myanmar’s brutal military regime are taking up arms as we speak.
Eliminating Hamas won’t eliminate Palestinian violence any more than eliminating the ANC or IRA would have eliminated Black South African or Irish Catholic violence in the 1980s. The only way to stop oppressed people from responding to the violence of oppression with violence of their own is to end their oppression. When Black South Africans and Irish Catholics gained political equality, the ANC and IRA ceased committing acts of violence—not because their leaders became saints but because they now enjoyed the basic freedoms that allowed them to pursue their people’s interests in a peaceful way.
https://peterbeinart.substack.com/p/if- ... as-nothing
Evo mu i twitter naloga, pa, onako s visoka, prodiskutuj s njim
Napomena - Peter je i sam Jevrej, ima prestiznu visokoskolsku naobrazbu i univerzitetski je profesor. Ovo o cemu pise mu je, uostalom, struka.
