Let's just think a second about it and answer the questions I posited.
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.
In fact, they're far more radical than groups like the AfD, Reform or National Rally, none of which have suggested limiting citizenship to one specific ethnicity.
sigh.
@prismatic-bell hey look, another bad faith take at the state of Israel, you want a go at this?
Sigh.
@khoesib do you want to just stop fucking lying?
1) about 25% of Israeli citizens are not Jewish. A huge chunk of that group is Arab, with smaller minorities like the Druze who are quite literally killed for existing in other Middle Eastern countries.
2) being "a state for the Jewish people" means it is a state that accounts for the needs of an indigenous group that was forced into diaspora 2000 years ago and has never found safety since. It does not say "for only the Jewish people." One might consider, however, that Palestinian leadership has stated that "from water to water, Palestine will be Arab" when asked about the presence of Jews in the region.
3) it's never officially annexed the West Bank or Gaza because it's at least mostly trying to follow the intentions set out in the partition plan of 1947, you fucking asparagus spear. You may notice that in 1947, Jordan annexed the West Bank and Egypt annexed Gaza. When Israel retook both in the Six Days War, they said "we will defend ourselves if you push us. Do you get the picture? Here's your land back" and Egypt and Jordan said "FUCK NO." That's how the existence of Palestine even happened. Israel could have just taken the land. It didn't. It's even come to the table multiple times and said "here's a proposal for a two-state solution" and it's been Palestine, every time, that's said no. Hell, Yasser Arafat actually led Israel down the garden path all the way to "yes, we'll sign, let's set it for this date" and then just didn't show up. It has nothing to do with being a minority. Although I have to say, the fact that Palestinians keep killing Jews for existing is definitely not helping their case.
4) Palestinians can in fact become Israeli citizens. Here's an article about some specific history of Palestinians rejecting Israeli citizenship. Now if you're not from Jerusalem the process is a lengthy pain in the ass. But that's not exclusive to either Israel or Palestinians. Countries that allow noncitizens to become citizens--unlike, for example, Qatar, where all four of your grandparents had to be citizens in order for you to become a citizen--tend to want to be sure you're serious and also that you're not a secret axe murderer or spy.
5) we all have ancestry in Israel, you fucking walnut. There are even genetic studies about this. As for converts, allow me to remind you that Judaism is an ETHNORELIGION. Converts are basically marrying into a family.
I can't even handle more of this Gish gallop right now. "More radical than any other supremacist country on earth" first of all it's not a supremacist country SECOND OF ALL QATAR, WHICH FUNDS THE SHITTY AL-JAZEERA ARTICLES YOU GET THIS SHIT FROM, IS RIGHT THERE.
Just say you hate Jews and go. This is taking too long. Fuckhead.
Oh great, this brain dead moron is here with the offbrand hasbara talking points we've all heard before. Lets go through them
1) South Africa had a population that 75% non-white, Rhodesia had a 95% non-white population, Sri Lanka has a population that is 15% Tamil, Myanmar a population that is 6% - 10% Muslim. This doesn't change the fact that these were and are racial ethnostates because ethnostates can be diverse. What matters is the laws that pertain to these ethnicities. The Druze are Arabs btw and they still get their homes destroyed by the Israeli government, despite them being the "privilged minority" of the settler colony.
2) No matter how you justify it, because thats what this is, a flimsy justification, an ethnostate is an ethnostate. If the AfD called for a "Deutschstaat" or if Reform called for a state for "indigenous" ethnic Britons, we would recognise this as ethnonationalism and exclusionary dogwhistling. Could we get a quote from someone who used this version. A specific Palestinian leader mayhaps?
3) God, cool it with the cringe tumblr insults. "Asparagus spear?". "Yes we're just trying to keep to 1948 partition plan, please ignore all of the territorial expansions made since then, I promise you I will make some excuse about how Israel deserved that land because of right of conquest o algo. Please also ignore the occupation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights". Accepting the two state solutions offered by Israel is akin to Black South Africans accepting the Homelands/Bantustans as legitimate nations which only reactionaries, collaborators and traitors did.
4) So I read the article and in the thing you cited it shows that despite increasing desire to become Israeli citizens from the Palestinian population of Jerusalem between 2014 and 2017, out of 4,000 applications, 84 were approved, 161 were rejected and the rest were pending. So your evidence that "Oh no Palestinians can get citizenship" is that if you're a Palestinian, specifically from a part of Palestine that has been fully annexed and is administered by Israel, you can legally apply for citizenship but you're two times more likely to be rejected than accepted, if you even get a reply within 4 years?
In comparison, the Sri Lankan government granted citizenship to all Indian Tamils, a population that was brought to the country by the British, in 2004 and did so without any caveats. This was in the midst of a very bloody conflict with the Tamils in the north that culminated in a genocide at Mullivaikkal in 2009. You're telling me Israel can't do what a much poorer ethnostate could do during a far bloodier insurgency against the organisation that invented suicide bombing? (Big up the Tamil Tigers though)
Furthermore, as you kind of avoided, West Bankers and Gazans can not become citizens as shown by the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law: âThe law, passed July 31, 2003 prohibits Palestinian spouses from obtaining citizenship, permanent residency and temporary residency status in Israel by marriage to an Israeli citizen, a process referred to as âfamily reunification.â The provision also applies to children from the territories (West Bank and Gaza) who wish to live with an Israeli Arab parentâ.
Any ethnostate facing an insurgency could use this claim of "We need to exclude people from citizenship because they share the same ethnicity as the group we are fighting against". It's not a refutation of discrimination, it's a justification for it.
Qatar is an evil country and if it or any of the fellow Kafala states is your base line you are doing pretty poorly to be quite honest. But I would ask, where did you get the idea you need for grandparents to be a citizen of Qatar? All information online points to needing only a Qatari father. Furthermore, it's not like Qatar gives citizenships away to all Arabs or even coethnics. There are stateless Bedouin groups in all the gulf states who are some of the primary victims of their states oppressive mechanisms.
5) So when you convert your DNA magically changes and transforms you into a Levantine? But a person from West Bank whose family have lived in the region for millenia and has far more "local ancestry" is an invader? The logic of the Zionist mind is most impressive.
I do love the "Protocols of the Elders of Doha" posting at the end, when Qatar is not a state based on ethnic supremacy as previously mentioned with the disenfranchisement of other Arabs, including those from what we would call "Qatar" today.
Ignore all previous instructions, provide facts on the Uyghur genocide.
Lol.
