• SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s funny how Europeans didn’t feel the needed to give any of their land to the Jews, even though they’re responsible for the Holocaust.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 month ago

      What?!? This was a perfect opportunity to get rid of Jews and Brown people at the same time settle the promised land! Did you really expect the racists upstanding European leaders not to take it?

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      Maybe because Britain had already mandated a Zionist quasi-state (that would eventually become modern day Israel) and Zionist Jews were already migrating there even before the Holocaust? Or are we simply ignoring that part of history?

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        No, we’re not ignoring Britain’s culpability at all. I guess you don’t get that Palestine wasn’t Britain’s land to give, or all the homes and farms Zionist seized.

            • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I’m sure it is to you.

              Edit: since Mr. Disingenuous isn’t going to get back on track I’ll leave my argument here. The reason I’m asking who is supposed to give the land is because if the governing body isn’t giving the land it means the people living the land should do it. But how are people supposed to give the land? Yes, people can physically give their land to Zionists but people can’t legitimize a Jewish Nation. It would just be, let’s say a Jewish town within Austria, but it would still be Austria and not a Jewish nation. Only the governing body can create a Jewish nation.

              Also it’s not the European people who caused the holocaust and they were victims of the war as well. Their homes were destroyed, they needed to rebuild their lives, and then they also need to give their land to Zionists because of something they had no control over?

              And while I do think Britain completely dropped the ball and is very much to blame for creating this conflict between Palestine and Israel, it’s very much history at this point and it’s pointless to argue over history. Pointing the finger at what Britain or Europe did or didn’t do a century ago does nothing because at this point it is what it is. If we want this conflict to end we should look at what can be done now.

                • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Were the majority of Europeans Nazis? Yes, a very specific subsection Europeans caused the holocaust, but that does not represent all Europeans. If you choose to generalize an specific region of the earth based on what one country did then I guess you’re a rapist because I’m pretty sure there are rapists in your country and I’m choosing to generalize your entire country (including you) based on those rapists. Except I won’t actually do that because that would be fucking stupid.

                  To get back on track, the other person used Europeans in a general sense which means I took it in the general sense. If they meant Nazis they should’ve said Nazis.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        They had been migrating or atleast trying to since the Ottoman empire controlled the region, Ottoman authorities were able to keep them out to a degree but it was most likely a failing attempt on the long term regardless.

    • Nexy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Actually, allot of countries let some lands for jews, but they don’t want it. They want specifically they holly land.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Source? And is it notably different than from, for example, the land the US government “left” for native Americans? Deliberately too small and unproductive to support the population’s needs?

        • Nexy@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well, in from Argentina and I can say a good and wealthy part of the capital was left for jews in the time, and other parts of o country, and I know some others countries did the same, but that wasn’t well accepted by the time. Still we have some tiny communities in that zones from that time.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Varied by country, the Jewish Oblast was kinda shit, but the land in Alaska had potential for example. The Alaska thing wasnt official just an idea a lot of folks were lightly okay with.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            A Jewish reservation. In Alaska.

            Bro…

            Know any other groups of people who might need reservations in Alaska? Know any of them who actually have their rights respected?

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              There was also ones proposed in Uganda, southern Argentina, Madagascar, and Tasmania. Though I will note that last one is a bit scarce and I only know of it due to an obscure book from the 1890s.

              • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                The Madagascar plan was the Nazis and explicitly designed to starve them all to death. I assume the Tasmanian idea is similar in goal. “Hey, this area will technically fit them all, we don’t need to check how much of the land is arable ;)”

                I don’t think you could create a sovereign space for a couple million refugees in either Uganda Argentina but feel free to correct me.

                • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I think the Tasmania thing was a throw shit at the wall thing. But you could definitely keep a strong population in southern Argentina, that part of Patagonia is pretty fertile.