Israeli General Election: April 9, 2019

[Velasco]

I would say with hindsight that the killing of Yitzhak Rabin marks the demise of progressive zionism, as well as the early  end of the hopes raised by the Oslo agreements. In my opinion resurrection is impossible. I think that Labor and Meretz should consider seriously a refoundation based on a serious revision of the zionist dogma.

[Velasco]

Maybe the revision of zionism requires the same kind of courage and vision displayed by Rabin, back in the day.

[Velasco]

I think that Labor and Meretz should consider seriously a refoundation based on a serious revision of the zionist dogma.

If they wish to become electorally marginalized, sure. By now it should be clear that left-of-center voters are all but married to Labour. If Labour are perceived as untrustworthy on the long-term security of the state, these voters will simply jump ship and vote for another, more credible contender to Likud - Kadima, Yesh Atid...

The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Jewish Israelis want to live in a Jewish state. They disagree on the borders and size of this state, but even most (and I would perhaps say especially) supporters of a two-state solution want this, with a lot of people supporting the two-state solution because it would preserve the Jewish character of the state. "Revising" Zionism means calling into question Israel's raison d'être, which is something most Israelis have no interest in at all. So a party that does this would simply become electorally irrelevant.

Yep. Besides, Zionism is just Jewish nationalism- not that different from the wish of Germans or Italians to live in a German/Italian country (although Zionism is unique in some ways). Revising it means we don't believe in our right of self-determination.

We had this discussion before and I don't want to engage in another. Anyway I read "Zionism is just Jewish nationalism" and this is a flawed sentence.

Zionism is Jewish nationalism, but not only. In late XIX century early zionists advocated the colonization of lands in Palestine, in order to pave the ground for the establishment of a Jewish State. Hence Zionism is also a colonialist ideology, because its primary goal was the colonization of a country inhabited by the Palestinians.

I'm not going to delve into Zionism. Maybe there are positive aspects in what regards national and cultural building, but the negative aspects of Zionism weigh like heavy stones. Forced displacement of Palestinians during the Nakba, military occupation after the Six Days War with the aubsequent establishment of isolated ghettos, discrimination within Israeli borders and the unstoppable march towards the apartheid state are consequences of Zionism.

I would say that the murder of Rabin (a "hawk" turned into "dove") was a turnung point. Anyway the evolution of Zionism over time and the increasing power of the ultranationalist faction seem logical consequences. The Zionist "left" has became increasingly marginal and it is very unlikely that "doves" and "progressives" regain power anytime soon. Also, there is huge cintradiction between the ideals of fraternity and social justice unherent to the left, and even the foundational principles of Israel, and the reality on the ground. Discrimination, occupation, colonization, apartheid are not compatible with such principles. Therefore historical analysis, self-crticism and revision of core idrological principles seem necessary to me. Engaging this debate could be a good decision in terms of vision and long term strategy, even if it seems tactically wrong in the short term. Also, it's a matter of justice.

[Velasco]

I said in a previous post which was, in my opinion, the turning point in the demise of the Zionist Left. That is appropiate for an election thread  It wasn't my intention to make an exhaustive historical revision. Anyway the few historical facts that I mentioned are true (if I remember well you deny the Nakba, but that's not my problem) . Reality is much more nuanced than a few facts, that's for sure. However, I'm not Donald Trump and I  never put dishonest arguments in a discussion. Should I feel outraged by your claim? I'm sorry if you don't like my opinions, but I would say with total honesty that I'm more concerned about any villager in the West Bank (not to mention the Gaza hellhole). Anyway this is only an internet forum and what we say here is totally irrelevant...

 In my opinion the policies of the sIsraeli government are increasingly indefensible and it's becoming increasingly clear that Israel heads towards a Jewish-only state in open contradiction with the nation's foundational pronciples...

[Velasco]

Blue and White is such a trash name, they should've gone with Israeli Future

Blue and white are Israeli flag colours so maybe they thought it's "patriotic" or something.

If I ever become GodEmperor, I'm passing a law forbidding lame names and forcing parties to choose a name that at least somewhat relates to what they're about.

Israeli Labor Party? Great. United Torah Judaism, sure. "Vigour", "Consolidation", or freaking "Blue White"? Hell no.

"Blue and White" is an "empty signifier". The colours of the national flag in addition to the profile of the candidate are working, according to the polls. I think it's perfect, in terms of electoral marketing

[Velasco]

The younger generation in America is maybe one of the most liberal in the West. Israel's is one of the least. Americans only have to wait and their country will be massively different. A huge number of liberal Israelis, on the other hand, have already left or are leaving the country to escape the future. I'm not sure that this election changes that, but there are very few people that are truly optimistic about the future. Turnout this year may not even get to 65 percent, in an election that nearly everyone believed was a referendum on the future in a way most elections here are not. People, right and left, didn't even bother showing up. The thing is that nobody here really believes in the future. It's all despair. The Haredim believe it,. The settlers believe it. Nobody else does. You feel that in our politics. People, right and left, have given up on peace, on Zionism, etc. In America I think there is a lot more optimism.

So a renewed mandate for Netanyahu will be something like a self-fulfilling prophecy

[Velasco]

Bibi's annexation idea included only the actual settlements, probably includeming area c. This would add all of the Jews in the West Bank but only a fraction of the Palestinians. It's a profoundly dumb idea, but it's not nearly as radical and demographically meaningful as annexing the whole West Bank.

I think posting a map of Area C might help to get the idea. This is Atlas Forum afer all

[Velasco]

And even that is a confusing map at best, since it includes nature reserves and non-populated areas.  I currently have downloaded a land use shapefile (to map the election to cities and produce geographic analysis deeper then the ynet map) and its the closest map  to whats probably 'annexable.' Settlement zones with israeli rather than arab names, and their connecting roads - there are more then on the election map. There a bunch of areas there for security or ecological reasons. It frankly would end up looking like a gerrymander, what with the much more limited tentacles reaching to every place with Israeli names and the associating residents.

I don't think so. The map's legend already says Area C incorporates nature reserves. I think the idea of annexing Area C (thus leaving encircled Areas A and B unincorporated) is annexing the maximum amount of territory (settlements, connecting roads, empty spaces in between) with the minimum amount of Palestinians. It's not so difficult to get the logic behind this.