PokeVideoPlayer v23.9-app.js-020924_
0143ab93_videojs8_1563605_YT_2d24ba15 licensed under gpl3-or-later
Views : 1,975
Genre: Entertainment
License: Standard YouTube License
Uploaded At Mar 11, 2024 ^^
warning: returnyoutubedislikes may not be accurate, this is just an estiment ehe :3
Rating : 4.922 (4/201 LTDR)
98.05% of the users lieked the video!!
1.95% of the users dislieked the video!!
User score: 97.08- Overwhelmingly Positive
RYD date created : 2024-03-17T21:16:26.520842Z
See in json
Top Comments of this video!! :3
You're the first person I saw actually talking in defence of Palestinian civilians after 7/10 and I already respected you a lot at the time but you'll always have that respect.
How to define indigeneity is a constant debate for anthropological academic work but the majority of definitions reference or centre the idea that who is indigenous or not is determined by the treatment of people groups by outside colonial and capitalist forces. Essentially, very loosely, you are indigenous if colonisers systematically oppress you. And that does get disputed, people don't like the idea they lose indigeneity if they gain future equality (I think the solution to that is to include historical oppression) or if they move from an area, and so on, but in any case, according to that framework of the definition, Palestinians became indigenous in 1948.
I personally like the idea of including historical or current systematic oppression or discrimination by colonial or capitalist systems of a group who lived in an area prior to the arrival of oppressive outsiders into the definition, because it makes indigeneity an easy way to coalition build politically, and the term is only even useful if it arms the people who use it with something that could help them. If it doesn't have a practical use it just becomes something to exoticise those whose cultures look particularly different to our own
And if we look at Raphael Lemkin's definition of genocide, it distinctly overlaps with this conception of indigeneity so I think it's fair to say that in many countries and societies being indigenous and being victims of genocide are inextricably linked
I'm sure that Eurovision will be used for the same sort of distraction as the Oscars, whether or not Israel is allowed to participate. I don't think kicking Israel will achieve anything - cancelling Eurovision entirely might.
1 |
I think part of the problem is that Burgis and co, see the world through the lens of a western anglo liberal paradigm that is impossible for them to overcome.
Everything is seen as essentially minorities fighting to become equal with the mainstream. It's a very anglo-American perspective. Where the problem with lets say, French colonization of Vietnam isn't the colonization itself, its that the Vietnamese didn't get some formal legal "rights" from their colonizers that makes them "equal" with their overlords.
The Algerian question wasn't about 100 years of French colonization, depopulation and erasure of the Algerian people and their culture of their way of life, its that the French were just not moral enough to give Algerians "equal rights" with the Pied Noir settlers.
The problem with this worldview, is that it already assumes the global hegemony of western liberal social systems as an inarguable axiom, and therefore it circumscribes the space within which colonized people can manuever to only accepting the colonial system in in its totality and merely fighting for a formal "equality" within it.
In other words, you don't get to fight for your own self determination, sovereignty and/or way of life, you only get to fights within the limits of the colonial western capitalist system itself. But the system and its basic power structures must remains intact.
Equating the victim with the victimized in one full swoop and just forcing everyone to accept it, only recreates the very sources of victimization itself.
Its an imperfect analogy, but its kind of like locking a rape victim with her rapist in a house and asking them to get along and accept "equality" where both get an "equal say" in how the house runs. That's just not how human nature works!
|
@Birbface
8 months ago
You can't have an Israel on Palestine that isn't fascist or genocidal. Israel isn't a person, it's a concept, and that concept, whilst settler colonial, imposes a relationship on its colonised people. The only point at which Israel ceases to be ontologically fascist is the point at which no Palestinian remains in Palestine, and the mission is 'complete', the land has been stolen and settled in its entirety. That's why people like John don't call it a war, because it isn't a war in the modern popular sense of the word. It's an imposing of a settler colonial relationship that is taking over a hundred years to complete. And it must be resisted and dismantled.
18 |