Netanyahu: (Israel) is the national state, not of all its citizens, but (...)

[Velasco]

He did not say Israel is only for Jews.

This is true.

There's nothing wrong with the "it's Bibi or Tibi" slogan and Netanyahu is essentially right: while every citizen is equal, there can be no other national aspirations within the State of Israel than Jewish national aspirations.

However, Netanyahu deliberately put his statement in the most unfortunate way possible, engineering a left-wing frenzy with the aim to attract right-wing voters. And doing all this while disregarding Israel's international reputation. Really starting to think it may be time for him to go. Also afraid we'll see more such stunts before April 9th. That said, I'll still take him over his haters, here and elsewhere.

This is true (except of the part I striked ). People here just don't get the context and meaning behind these words- in Israel, the phrase "country of all its citizens" means a non-national state- that is, not a Jewish state, that is, not Zionist.

Rotem Sela, the actress who said what Bibi responded to, was right in most of what she said, but that's not accurate- Israel isn't a "country of all its citizens" (and I'm sure she doens't believe it). It's a Jewish State, where all citizens should be equal and treated equally, something Bibi harms with his incitement against Arabs. I can see why people wouldn't understand the meaning behind his words, especially internationally, but I'd implore people on Atlas who want to think they're smart and do their research to try and understand these things.

Well, the sentence "all citizens are equal but there are no other national aspirations than ours"shows a contradiction that possibly is at the core of the whole conundrum

Bibi, Ecce Homo. Trying to understand the rationale that leads to Apartheid policies is not so difficult, if you try a little hard

(Are you asking that seriously, or is it a joke?)

I'm speechless, truly

[Velasco]

I hate him but that's taking a quote out of context.

He was contrasting between the ethnic nation state and neutral ethnic state (like the US or other western countries), which is labeled "a state of all its citizens" in Hebrew. That in itself is not a problematic statement in general context as even Meretz don't support a neutral state.

But this notion of ethnic nation state is at the core of the problem, especially when that state is not ethnically homogeneous and is the product of... er... particular historical circircumstances.

Honestly, I'm fed up with certain victimhood and the inevitable double standards. I think that most of the people agree that the Jewish people is entitled to have a state. The problem, of course, is that you share the land with other people with the same or more entitlement than your people. If the foundations of the ehnic nation state are built on the negation of the other (Arabs or Palestinians in this case), there's somerhing inherently wrong in them.

As for the national aspirations, I'm Spaniard and my country has a problem with separatism in certain regions. Even though I don't support separatism, I believe that separatists are entitled to have their own aspirations and fight for them by democratic means. I consider separatists full citizens, not second class half aliens. I would oppose sending the tanks and the military occupation of rebel regions, as well as the creation of Bantustan-like ghettos for separatists deprived of citizenship, granting them a fictional autonomy or independence within their narrow borders.

Is Bibi the problem or just a symptom?

I suspect there exists a huge lack of empathy

[Velasco]

I don't think that Israel is comparable to Germany and the United Kingdom due to the aforementioned "particular historical circumstances". Also, you ignore deliberately the existence of the other national community living in the same territory. My point is not denying the right of Israel to exist. Rather, it's that the very existence of Israel cannot be founded on the negation of the Other: i.e the Palestinians. On the one hand, the others are not going to disappear. On the other hand, depriving their right to exist is permanently tarnishing your reputation, as well it's an intolerable burden from a moral point of view. It might seem that the ethnic nation state of Israel was founded on an empty wilderness from the scratch, but it occurred otherwise.

I read this news yesterday: "Gaza's generation blockade: young lives in the ‘world’s largest prison’. "prison’. Anger and frustration for generation of Palestinians who have spent their entire lives in the fenced-off territory"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/12/generation-blockade-gaza-young-palestinians-who-cannot-leave?fbclid=IwAR1bHqNJDfzKMk4ND5XcWnuGde_QQpd0kpE6xLwY-dY_r0IXVa0jH1Y9J0Y

Cruising south along Israel’s coastal highway, there are almost no signs that you are approaching Gaza. Two million people live trapped on a thin slice of land along the Mediterranean, but someone could easily drive right past and miss it altogether.

visitors to the strip, restricted mainly to diplomats, aid workers and journalists, the last stop in Israel is a service station, where Red Sea-bound tourists and commuters sip lattes and eat chocolate croissants at an American-style coffeehouse. Walking back to their cars, they may glimpse the only hint of Gaza’s existence – a white orb high in the southern sky, a tethered surveillance balloon that provides the Israeli army with a 24-hour overhead view of the enclave (...)

These are the kind of things that I'm referring to when I say "intolerable moral burden". Whatever efforts you make to deny the reality, this is your burden and your responsibility. I guess that decades of brutality dull the senses, but sometimes I wonder how can you sleep at night in Israel. Have you forgotten the existence of the open-air jails, either in Gaza or the West Bank?