Aelyx’s Manor

Israel was founded as a state for a specific ethnicity, the Jews.

It has never officially annexed Gaza and West Bank specifically because doing so would increase the Palestinian population of Israel. This is also why Israelis, even Liberal ones, find the idea of a one state solution abhorrent, because they'll be a minority.

The "Nation State Bill" declares Israel to be a nation for the Jewish people. Imagine if a country with a significant minority like the US or Australia declared that the nation was meant for White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Would this be racist?

Palestinians can not get Israeli citizenship even if they can provide proof of having lived in Israel in living memory. People point out countries like Polands "citizenship by decent" law but Poland doesn't only do so for ethnic Poles. A descendant of Jewish or German Polish citizens has the same rights as a descendant of Polish citizens.

On the other hand, Jews with 0 known ancestry in Israel (including converts who have very little ties to the "imagined Jewish people") have the right to move to Israel.

"Arab Israelis" can not pass their citizenship onto their spouse or children if their spouse is from Gaza/West Bank. This has led to Palestinians born in Israel to an Israeli parent and with an Israeli spouse and children being deported. If they were Jewish that would not occur. These are legal discriminations based solely on whether you are Jewish or not.

A Palestinian born in West Bank does not have the right to Israeli citizenship. A Jewish settler in West Bank does have those rights. They live in the same territory, under the same government but the sole difference in their rights is their ethnicity.

This is not even really discussing the occupation of West Bank and the de facto occupation of Gaza but these facts are already far more radical than any other supremacist state on earth. Not Sri Lanka (which gave Indian Tamils citizenship in 2004), not Myanmar, not India, Malaysia or Bhutan. Definitionally, not the pseudo-ethnostates of Botswana, Lesotho and Eswatini.

Audio: A recording of Leonard Nimoy reading it on Internet Archive.

Text: A PDF version.

The PANC movement is a latin-american based botanical movement (started out in Brazil) focused on researching and cataloguing non-conventional edible plants, and man. There are so many straight up ornamental plants that just. are edible. you can eat them. you can grab a daylily and eat it. You can grab a begonia and eat it. Hibiscus, lavender, dandelions. And those are just the flowers. So many little herbs out there that are fully edible (Shout out to lamb's ear, that one tastes really nice imo).

Like straight up there is free food out there. foraging is so cool but it's so hard to find actual sources not made by either some AI fucker that's gonna end up killing you or by some crunchy "eating grass will cure your cancer" influencer. PANC is made by actual scientists that specialized in botany that have fully researched and found out that These Plants Are Fully Safe to Eat.

And not only that, but they're legitimizing native knowledge. They're taking the plants that our native populations have been eating for centuries and are proving, in a lab, that yeah, these plants ARE safe to eat - which is incredible. It might sound stupid (like ooo NOW you're willing to believe the native people) but this is so, so important, because having ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC PROOF of their knowledge is a way to combat the still pervasive idea that natives are "stupid savages", or that their traditions are just "wacky spirituality nonsense".

Starting a conversation by informing the other person that you KNOW their feelings, and you are acting based on the feelings you assume they have, without giving them a chance to tell you what feelings they ACTUALLY have… No one likes this!

You may have learned it from your parents doing it to you, in which case I can only imagine you didn’t like it either, but you still internalized it as an acceptable mode of communication because we are always internalizing stuff from our parents even though we don’t like it. It’s kind of a quintessential passive-aggressive parent move: “well, you never want to help me, you don’t appreciate everything I do for you” etc. It puts the addressee in the position of defending themselves and their actual feelings instead of inviting them to SHARE those feelings.