Zionism by its very definition means not supporting equal rights, because it’s based on Jewish surpremacy. Zohran says he will support sanctions on Israel until it abliges by international law. Which we both know Israel will never do.
This is giving Israel a condition which we know it will never abide by. It’s like saying “I support China’s right to exist as a neoliberal capitalist country”.
See that’s where the Liberal Zionism spin comes in, Liberal Zionism suggests that land claims to Palestine by Euroanglo-Zionazi are steadfast and not impeded, current and future settler-colonialists are welcomed while advocating for Western style “democracy”, “human rights”, “equal rights” and other Western lib horseshit for both Palestinians and Euroanglo-Zionazis.
Both in theory and practice, it’s a completely contradictory “ideology” that only serves to justify settler-colonialism where Palestinians obviously get the short end of the stick, if they get to get any at all.
Suggesting that progressive politics should be implemented to a settler-colonial entity that he already agrees should exist won’t change the fact that it is a settler-colonial entity occupying indigenous land rightfully belonging to Palestinians in full. No amount of “equal rights” will change that, only resistance by the occupied will. This isn’t the smart move we think it is, it’s just obvious Liberal Zionism wordvomit from Mamdani to appeal to his audience whom are, at the very least, Liberal Zionists.
Yeah they do… As much as I’d want to cast my feelings about that aside (I have a lot), I don’t think I can muster a coherent thought about it without my blood boiling in the process…
From what little I know and from my understanding, it’s a goal that, once attained, would (hopefully) eventually change. The reality is that Palestinian resistance groups are not only facing against the Euroanglo-Zionazi entity, but also against compradors like the PA, against US MIC and NATO. My best guess here is that they’re keeping their goals grounded in terms of what is realistically achievable, relative to their material conditions…
Someone who knows better could probably tell you more than I could, though…
. My best guess here is that they’re keeping their goals grounded in terms of what is realistically achievable, relative to their material conditions…
Well yeah but Zohran kinda does the same here. He’s giving some small platitudes but in policy what it would mean is full on BDS. And Israel will never oblige by any international law similar to Apartheid South Africa. Zohran literally wrote BDS papers.
What happens in reality instead of equal rights kumbaya is the Apartheid will simply fall apart and most of the colonists will go back to Europe and the US because they don’t get free money anymore to colonize Palestinian land.
Zohran is not perfect but he’s not Matt Duss or Graham Platner. I don’t see a reason to actively oppose him yet.
Zionism by its very definition means not supporting equal rights, because it’s based on Jewish surpremacy. Zohran says he will support sanctions on Israel until it abliges by international law. Which we both know Israel will never do.
This is giving Israel a condition which we know it will never abide by. It’s like saying “I support China’s right to exist as a neoliberal capitalist country”.
See that’s where the Liberal Zionism spin comes in, Liberal Zionism suggests that land claims to Palestine by Euroanglo-Zionazi are steadfast and not impeded, current and future settler-colonialists are welcomed while advocating for Western style “democracy”, “human rights”, “equal rights” and other Western lib horseshit for both Palestinians and Euroanglo-Zionazis.
Both in theory and practice, it’s a completely contradictory “ideology” that only serves to justify settler-colonialism where Palestinians obviously get the short end of the stick, if they get to get any at all.
Suggesting that progressive politics should be implemented to a settler-colonial entity that he already agrees should exist won’t change the fact that it is a settler-colonial entity occupying indigenous land rightfully belonging to Palestinians in full. No amount of “equal rights” will change that, only resistance by the occupied will. This isn’t the smart move we think it is, it’s just obvious Liberal Zionism wordvomit from Mamdani to appeal to his audience whom are, at the very least, Liberal Zionists.
Here you make a good point but don’t Palestinians resistance groups also advocate for an equal-rights solution?
Yeah they do… As much as I’d want to cast my feelings about that aside (I have a lot), I don’t think I can muster a coherent thought about it without my blood boiling in the process…
From what little I know and from my understanding, it’s a goal that, once attained, would (hopefully) eventually change. The reality is that Palestinian resistance groups are not only facing against the Euroanglo-Zionazi entity, but also against compradors like the PA, against US MIC and NATO. My best guess here is that they’re keeping their goals grounded in terms of what is realistically achievable, relative to their material conditions…
Someone who knows better could probably tell you more than I could, though…
Well yeah but Zohran kinda does the same here. He’s giving some small platitudes but in policy what it would mean is full on BDS. And Israel will never oblige by any international law similar to Apartheid South Africa. Zohran literally wrote BDS papers.
What happens in reality instead of equal rights kumbaya is the Apartheid will simply fall apart and most of the colonists will go back to Europe and the US because they don’t get free money anymore to colonize Palestinian land.
Zohran is not perfect but he’s not Matt Duss or Graham Platner. I don’t see a reason to actively oppose him yet.