this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
65 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22024 readers
87 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I used to like The Economist, but this is Nazis propaganda right on their page.

Israel, by contrast, does not meet the test of genocide. There is little evidence that Israel, like Hamas, “intends” to destroy an ethnic group—the Palestinians. Israel does want to destroy Hamas, a militant group, and is prepared to kill many civilians in doing so. While some Israeli extremists might want to eradicate the Palestinians, that is not a government policy.

This is not okay. This is Nazi logic. Nazi, fascist logic, from The Economist.

Even Nazi Germany did not make killing the official "intention" or government policy in my understanding. At least not always. It was announced as a safety guarantee, for example.

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 48 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

"It's not genocide because they're not trying to murder everyone. Yes, they are killing everyone but it's not intentional."

What a stupid fucking piece of shit excuse.

[–] Banzai51@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

When you can apply that same anger and outrage to the other side, then you might have some credibility.

[–] Quexotic@beehaw.org 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

How so? Is it a requirement that someone state at every turn that Hamas is genocidal as well? Who is dying right now?

[–] ram@bookwormstory.social 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There is little evidence that Israel, like Hamas, “intends” to destroy an ethnic group—the Palestinians

This particular line I keep seeing parroted. Yes, Hamas has said they wish to eradicate an ethnic group. Yes, that is egregious. No, that does not mean their rebellion against the occupying, more powerful force, is a genocide.

Beyond that, Israel has said "we are fighting against animals", painting Palestinians as inhuman to legitimize their warcrimes. While one may argue that they were just talking about Hamas, it's obvious that Hamas is composed of Palestinians, and while not elected by the Palestinians of today, represent them.

But to my initial point, the occupying force, physically erasing a people and systemically erasing their culture and ability to congregate and form community is genocide. Regardless of Hamas. They have the means, and they are enacting that means.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"It's not official government policy to kill Palestinians. It's official government policy that they all have to 'leave voluntarily', it's official government policy to be looking for places for them to go, and it's official government policy not to ask what happens if Palestinians fail to 'leave voluntarily', but it's not a genocide because during the killing no one said 'I'm doing this very genocidally'."

[–] Quexotic@beehaw.org 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Also there's a subtext I haven't seen news outlet calling out. Every time they put out one of those announcements for them to leave voluntarily (not that they actually have anywhere to go or any means to get there) somehow cell communications and internet went down simultaneously just prior. Almost as if, I don't know, somebody disabled communications and then put out a communication so that no one would find out and they would have an excuse. "They never left!"

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

I deffo noticed that the IDF tried to deliver a message to an arabic speaking population in an area where they had destroyed the internet, but that they did it in english on twitter. feels rather performative, no?

[–] itmightbethew@beehaw.org 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"um, akshully, it's not genocide, but it might still be bad or whatever." Ridiculous

Setting aside whether Israel's attacks, killings, civilian casualties and mass displacement meet a particular definition of genocide, what possible reason does the author have to quibble on this?

Either they're merely being pedantic (which I find hard to believe) or they're trying to blunt outrage over what I think any reasonable person would call a genocide. They're reaching for any means possible to make these crimes seem less heinous. Seems like a move of desperation to me.

[–] salarua@sopuli.xyz 5 points 8 months ago

genocide and ethnic cleansing were inevitable from the moment Israel was formed. ethnic cleansing is the inevitable result of an ethnostate, and Israel was formed to be a Jewish ethnostate. an ethnostate is an ethnostate, regardless of which ethnicity it's for

[–] ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There are considered to be 10 stages of genocide as described by Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_stages_of_genocide

The stages ramp up in severity until we're at full gas chamber Nazi status by stage 9 and stage 10 is denying any crime occurred.

I'd say Israel and Palestine were already at like stage 6 before this, now it's at like stage 8. It's not clear if Israel actually plans on exterminating all Palestinians, but it sure seems like that's where they're leading things.

[–] Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 8 months ago

It’s not clear if Israel actually plans on exterminating all Palestinians, but it sure seems like that’s where they’re leading things.

Well, obviously not ALL of Israel. The prime minister doesn't have 100% popular support, but the fascist ghouls he hangs out with have gone mask-off many times saying they want to kill as many Palestinians as they can.

[–] tardigrada@beehaw.org 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

In Israeli army camps, Gazan detainees subjected to torture and degrading treatment

New testimonies concerning the systematic torture and inhumane treatment meted out to Palestinian detainees in Israeli army camps—some of whom have been forcibly disappeared from the Gaza Strip—have been received by Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.

The Israeli army and Shin Bet investigators have treated the Palestinian detainees like “non-human animals”, according to testimonies received by Euro-Med Monitor from newly-released people who spent several days in Israeli custody.

The majority of the horrific torture operations, according to the testimonies, start as soon as people are taken from their homes or asylum centres, where many Gazans are sheltering from the ongoing Israeli attacks. Soldiers then beat the detained people and strip them naked, except for their undergarments, forcing them to sit on their knees in the street for hours while being harassed and treated with contempt.

It's should be unnecessary to say, but as here are some 'whataboutists' around: yes, Hamas is terrorist organisation. And so is the Israeli right-wing, racist government of Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no difference between the two.

[–] astral_avocado@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The stripping of clothes is done to determine whether they have a bomb vest on, which is a 100% legitimate concern with Hamas who has used adults and children for suicide bombers. I don't understand why this is so hard for people to grasp.

[–] tardigrada@beehaw.org 13 points 8 months ago

@astral_avocado, you appear to have (intentionally?) missed some details.

strip them naked [...] forcing them to sit on their knees in the street for hours while being harassed and treated with contempt.

How many hours does it take to "determine whether they have a bomb vest on," especially when they are naked?

Why exactly do they do that while people sit on their knees in the streets and treated with contempt?

This is really hard to grasp, maybe you can enlighten me.

[–] PaddleMaster@beehaw.org 3 points 8 months ago

I don’t understand why some people work so hard to fight others on this. I share your opinion. The victims are the civilians who end up suffering for these terrorists who don’t represent them.

[–] Remmock@kbin.social 5 points 8 months ago

The Economist is inherently fascist because it exists both as a product of and to foment capitalism.

[–] ConstableJelly@beehaw.org 5 points 8 months ago
[–] Lightrider@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The fuckingcapitalists support genocidejoe and the goddamnedfascists. Unsurprising.

[–] araneae@beehaw.org 1 points 8 months ago

This is quite obviously a bot. I derive no pleasure in the fact it's propaganda slogans hit at core truths, I merely urge my bruhs: consider the motive behind an account that thinks you're stupid enough to miss its complete inability to come off as human.

[–] wolfeh@beehaw.org 2 points 8 months ago

misused

There have been a slew of these articles from The Economist that blatantly side with Israel or distort facts. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't multiple members of Israel's far-right government openly calling for the destruction of as many Palestinians as possible?

[–] 0x815@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We even used to be subscribers of the Economist for a long time, but they have made a complete u-turn over the years. In the meantime they appear to just echo mostly pro-establishment opinions with weak research and an often weird approach of interpreting data and issues. So this does not come as a surprise unfortunately.

South Africa levels accusations of ‘genocidal conduct’ against Israel at world court are different as we know.

[–] anachronist@midwest.social 0 points 8 months ago

The Economist was founded as a bag carrier for neoliberalism (back then it was just called liberalism). They've become more shrill and less confident as their views have been shown to be utter bullshit.

[–] HumbleFlamingo@beehaw.org 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The intent is the most difficult element to determine. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group. It is this special intent, or dolus specialis, that makes the crime of genocide so unique. In addition, case law has associated intent with the existence of a State or organizational plan or policy, even if the definition of genocide in international law does not include that element.

Importantly, the victims of genocide are deliberately targeted - not randomly – because of their real or perceived membership of one of the four groups protected under the Convention (which excludes political groups, for example). This means that the target of destruction must be the group, as such, and not its members as individuals. Genocide can also be committed against only a part of the group, as long as that part is identifiable (including within a geographically limited area) and “substantial.”

--https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

Colloquially, it's genocide, but legally it does not appear to be. And that's a problem if you're trying to charge Israel with genocide in a court of law. Inevitably it's going to be found to not be genocide and that's one more thing Israel can point to. Crimes against humanity would probably been a better route.

It's going to be hard, if not impossible to show in court that Israel, as a policy, is deliberately targeting Palestinians. Showing Isael's actions is resulting in shit tons of civilian casualties seems pretty easy. Maybe there's super secret documents that show it's a deliberate act, but I highly doubt they'd be that dumb if genocide is their intention.

[–] Kwakigra@beehaw.org 1 points 8 months ago

I really recommend watching the case presented by South Africa earlier this week establishing that intent. De jure, there is clearly a case to be made.