I usually agree with Francesca Albanese, but I feel like dissociating from her statements about Hamas. She's right when she says that Hamas, as the de facto authority in Gaza, has built and maintained schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
-
I usually agree with Francesca Albanese, but I feel like dissociating from her statements about Hamas.
She’s right when she says that Hamas, as the de facto authority in Gaza, has built and maintained schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
And she’s also right when she says that it won the 2006 elections, which were considered fair by all international standards.
But she doesn’t mention that no elections have been held since then. Nearly 20 years ago. A whole generation has grown without even knowing what voting means.
Israel is wrong to say that Gaza=Hamas, not only because not everyone who lives there voted for Hamas in 2006 (it won with 44.4% of the votes), but also because nobody has bothered to ask those in Gaza what kind of government they would like for the past 20 years. Hamas has all the interest to stay in power indefinitely, and Netanyahu has all the interests for it to stay in power - otherwise his brittle Gaza=Hamas equality that justifies his process of dehumanization of a whole ethnic group and the imperialist goals of the post-Kahanist terrorists in his government would crumble.
And Albanese doesn’t mention that, just because you’ve got the Zionist terrorist regime bombing you, it doesn’t mean that you’re allowed to make deals with the Iranian terrorist regime. Nor kidnap civilians to make your point. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
And she doesn’t mention that any “from the river to the sea” rhetoric that doesn’t take into account the two-people, two-States solution advised by the UN (her employer) sits at odds with any peace process, regardless of the party that upholds it.
And she doesn’t go as far as saying that any future peace in that corner of the world must happen both without Netanyahu and without Hamas, that the end of this conflict must be marked by fair and free elections on both sides, and that none of those who has blood on their hands is allowed to participate. The representatives of the governments on both sides need to be in jail while someone else fixes the mess that they’ve made.
Just because you’ve built schools and hospitals it doesn’t mean that you should keep doing your job.
-
I usually agree with Francesca Albanese, but I feel like dissociating from her statements about Hamas.
She’s right when she says that Hamas, as the de facto authority in Gaza, has built and maintained schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
And she’s also right when she says that it won the 2006 elections, which were considered fair by all international standards.
But she doesn’t mention that no elections have been held since then. Nearly 20 years ago. A whole generation has grown without even knowing what voting means.
Israel is wrong to say that Gaza=Hamas, not only because not everyone who lives there voted for Hamas in 2006 (it won with 44.4% of the votes), but also because nobody has bothered to ask those in Gaza what kind of government they would like for the past 20 years. Hamas has all the interest to stay in power indefinitely, and Netanyahu has all the interests for it to stay in power - otherwise his brittle Gaza=Hamas equality that justifies his process of dehumanization of a whole ethnic group and the imperialist goals of the post-Kahanist terrorists in his government would crumble.
And Albanese doesn’t mention that, just because you’ve got the Zionist terrorist regime bombing you, it doesn’t mean that you’re allowed to make deals with the Iranian terrorist regime. Nor kidnap civilians to make your point. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
And she doesn’t mention that any “from the river to the sea” rhetoric that doesn’t take into account the two-people, two-States solution advised by the UN (her employer) sits at odds with any peace process, regardless of the party that upholds it.
And she doesn’t go as far as saying that any future peace in that corner of the world must happen both without Netanyahu and without Hamas, that the end of this conflict must be marked by fair and free elections on both sides, and that none of those who has blood on their hands is allowed to participate. The representatives of the governments on both sides need to be in jail while someone else fixes the mess that they’ve made.
Just because you’ve built schools and hospitals it doesn’t mean that you should keep doing your job.
@fabio Yeah right, because clearly the Gazans will have the time to ponder their government when they're starving to death and being bombed. That is the most reasonable thing I've ever heard. In the broad spectrum of things, Hamas can be seen as a rightful resistance against the Israeli invasion at best, and a necessary evil at worst.
-
@fabio Yeah right, because clearly the Gazans will have the time to ponder their government when they're starving to death and being bombed. That is the most reasonable thing I've ever heard. In the broad spectrum of things, Hamas can be seen as a rightful resistance against the Israeli invasion at best, and a necessary evil at worst.
@mechanomon@tweesecake.social I’m not talking about the past 2 years, I’m talking about the past 20 years.
Not all the time in these two decades has been marked by acute conflict.
Hamas had chances to organize new elections, but they never did.
And it’s actually a diplomatic card that they failed to play.
The 2006 elections were scheduled after Israel was forced to retreat from those territories. They were a way of legitimizing Gaza as its own independent thing.
New elections would have surely been met with indignation by the Israeli regime, which would have seen them as a further way of legitimizing the independence of Gaza.
Which would have forced Israel to show all of its contradictions to the world - it claims to be the balward of democracy in the region, but then it would have opposed democratic elections that would have further legitimized the independency of the territory that it wanted to occupy.
Instead, by not scheduling new elections and staying in power indefinitely, they have simply given fuel to Netanyahu’s propaganda that Hamas is a terrorist and undemocratic regime.
-
R ActivityRelay shared this topic
-
I usually agree with Francesca Albanese, but I feel like dissociating from her statements about Hamas.
She’s right when she says that Hamas, as the de facto authority in Gaza, has built and maintained schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
And she’s also right when she says that it won the 2006 elections, which were considered fair by all international standards.
But she doesn’t mention that no elections have been held since then. Nearly 20 years ago. A whole generation has grown without even knowing what voting means.
Israel is wrong to say that Gaza=Hamas, not only because not everyone who lives there voted for Hamas in 2006 (it won with 44.4% of the votes), but also because nobody has bothered to ask those in Gaza what kind of government they would like for the past 20 years. Hamas has all the interest to stay in power indefinitely, and Netanyahu has all the interests for it to stay in power - otherwise his brittle Gaza=Hamas equality that justifies his process of dehumanization of a whole ethnic group and the imperialist goals of the post-Kahanist terrorists in his government would crumble.
And Albanese doesn’t mention that, just because you’ve got the Zionist terrorist regime bombing you, it doesn’t mean that you’re allowed to make deals with the Iranian terrorist regime. Nor kidnap civilians to make your point. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
And she doesn’t mention that any “from the river to the sea” rhetoric that doesn’t take into account the two-people, two-States solution advised by the UN (her employer) sits at odds with any peace process, regardless of the party that upholds it.
And she doesn’t go as far as saying that any future peace in that corner of the world must happen both without Netanyahu and without Hamas, that the end of this conflict must be marked by fair and free elections on both sides, and that none of those who has blood on their hands is allowed to participate. The representatives of the governments on both sides need to be in jail while someone else fixes the mess that they’ve made.
Just because you’ve built schools and hospitals it doesn’t mean that you should keep doing your job.
@fabio @palestine non devo difenderla io,ma mi sento di aggiungere che,non a sua discolpa,se mai ne avesse,è che votare nel rispetto delle regole della democrazia(dove esiste)è già complicato,se aggiungiamo la repressione continua israeliana, e Hamas a cui poco interessa,infine,la statica indolenza e la vergognosa posizione nella storia della politica europea, credo che sin possa dire che proporre come fattibilità elezioni democratiche è utopistico, servono due stati,difficile ma possibile?forse
-
I usually agree with Francesca Albanese, but I feel like dissociating from her statements about Hamas.
She’s right when she says that Hamas, as the de facto authority in Gaza, has built and maintained schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
And she’s also right when she says that it won the 2006 elections, which were considered fair by all international standards.
But she doesn’t mention that no elections have been held since then. Nearly 20 years ago. A whole generation has grown without even knowing what voting means.
Israel is wrong to say that Gaza=Hamas, not only because not everyone who lives there voted for Hamas in 2006 (it won with 44.4% of the votes), but also because nobody has bothered to ask those in Gaza what kind of government they would like for the past 20 years. Hamas has all the interest to stay in power indefinitely, and Netanyahu has all the interests for it to stay in power - otherwise his brittle Gaza=Hamas equality that justifies his process of dehumanization of a whole ethnic group and the imperialist goals of the post-Kahanist terrorists in his government would crumble.
And Albanese doesn’t mention that, just because you’ve got the Zionist terrorist regime bombing you, it doesn’t mean that you’re allowed to make deals with the Iranian terrorist regime. Nor kidnap civilians to make your point. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
And she doesn’t mention that any “from the river to the sea” rhetoric that doesn’t take into account the two-people, two-States solution advised by the UN (her employer) sits at odds with any peace process, regardless of the party that upholds it.
And she doesn’t go as far as saying that any future peace in that corner of the world must happen both without Netanyahu and without Hamas, that the end of this conflict must be marked by fair and free elections on both sides, and that none of those who has blood on their hands is allowed to participate. The representatives of the governments on both sides need to be in jail while someone else fixes the mess that they’ve made.
Just because you’ve built schools and hospitals it doesn’t mean that you should keep doing your job.
@fabio @palestine
Shall we revisit exactly how Hamas came to represent the Palestinians? Hmm? -
@fabio @palestine
Shall we revisit exactly how Hamas came to represent the Palestinians? Hmm?@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe sure, but after 20 years in power all people should be allowed to get a say.
-
@fabio @palestine non devo difenderla io,ma mi sento di aggiungere che,non a sua discolpa,se mai ne avesse,è che votare nel rispetto delle regole della democrazia(dove esiste)è già complicato,se aggiungiamo la repressione continua israeliana, e Hamas a cui poco interessa,infine,la statica indolenza e la vergognosa posizione nella storia della politica europea, credo che sin possa dire che proporre come fattibilità elezioni democratiche è utopistico, servono due stati,difficile ma possibile?forse
-
@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe sure, but after 20 years in power all people should be allowed to get a say.
@fabio @palestine
Democratic elections may be a bit of a challenge while the people in question are being slaughtered in a US-backed genocide. -
@fabio @palestine
Democratic elections may be a bit of a challenge while the people in question are being slaughtered in a US-backed genocide.@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe not all the time in these 20 years has been marked by acute conflict. They could have had a chance to plan new elections.
Of course Israel would have opposed them, as they would have further legitimized the independence of a territory that they want to occupy, but that would have just further exposed their contradictions (the democratic balward of the Middle East that opposes free elections in their neighbour’s house), all while gaining more support from other Western democracies.
They didn’t even have to successfully run the elections, if eventually the conditions didn’t permit them, but sometimes even showing the intention suffices.
Instead, by clinging onto power for so long, they have just fueled the rhetoric of their opponents who depict them as an undemocratic regime - and alienated many from their cause.
-
@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe not all the time in these 20 years has been marked by acute conflict. They could have had a chance to plan new elections.
Of course Israel would have opposed them, as they would have further legitimized the independence of a territory that they want to occupy, but that would have just further exposed their contradictions (the democratic balward of the Middle East that opposes free elections in their neighbour’s house), all while gaining more support from other Western democracies.
They didn’t even have to successfully run the elections, if eventually the conditions didn’t permit them, but sometimes even showing the intention suffices.
Instead, by clinging onto power for so long, they have just fueled the rhetoric of their opponents who depict them as an undemocratic regime - and alienated many from their cause.
@fabio @palestine
My aim is not to defend Hamas, but to avoid distractions from the more pressing issue at hand, which is the ongoing genocide.If that were immediately resolved, then we could focus on the broader political issues, going back to the original, western-backed, settler colonialism that started this conflict 80 years ago.
-
@fabio @palestine
My aim is not to defend Hamas, but to avoid distractions from the more pressing issue at hand, which is the ongoing genocide.If that were immediately resolved, then we could focus on the broader political issues, going back to the original, western-backed, settler colonialism that started this conflict 80 years ago.
@fabio @palestine
Also seems a bit tone-deaf for us Westerners to be lecturing Palestinians on democracy given the current political trends in Western countries. -
@fabio @palestine
Also seems a bit tone-deaf for us Westerners to be lecturing Palestinians on democracy given the current political trends in Western countries.@freediverx @fabio @palestine It should be them lecturing us instead, because they have been through more grassroots uprisings from below, while too many of us are held hostage by liberal counterinsurgency so our efforts are diverted into ineffective dead ends.
-
@fabio @palestine
Also seems a bit tone-deaf for us Westerners to be lecturing Palestinians on democracy given the current political trends in Western countries.@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe I criticize authoritarianism and authoritarian tendencies regardless of where they happen, including the US (especially the US).
But just because democracy is endangered worldwide it doesn’t mean that we should turn a blind eye, just because nobody is the position to cast the first stone. Because that’s exactly what causes the degradation.
-
@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe I criticize authoritarianism and authoritarian tendencies regardless of where they happen, including the US (especially the US).
But just because democracy is endangered worldwide it doesn’t mean that we should turn a blind eye, just because nobody is the position to cast the first stone. Because that’s exactly what causes the degradation.
@fabio @palestine
I suspect you have good intentions, but I think it’s a mistake to choose this moment to focus on that particular narrative. -
@freediverx @fabio @palestine It should be them lecturing us instead, because they have been through more grassroots uprisings from below, while too many of us are held hostage by liberal counterinsurgency so our efforts are diverted into ineffective dead ends.
@tortitude@kolektiva.social @freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe I wouldn’t call holding free elections an act of liberal counterinsurgency.
And let’s not mix the ability to run grassroot uprisings with the ability to run a State. Most of the illiberal regimes in history were born as grassroot uprisings which used their initial intentions in order to justify their permanent permanence in power.
-
@fabio @palestine
I suspect you have good intentions, but I think it’s a mistake to choose this moment to focus on that particular narrative.@freediverx@mastodon.social @palestine@a.gup.pe quite the opposite.
Israel doesn’t have a way out of this. The only thing they see is their plan to build a genocide riviera to please the political representatives elected by the most fanatic squatting terrorists among their people, and they use Hamas as a scapegoat that justifies their own fanatical violence.
The West is increasingly divided, many are now recognizing the Palestinian State, but nobody is stepping forward to lay out how that State would look like, what kind of governance it should have, who will pay for rebuilding everything, how coexistance with the State that surrounds them would look like, etc.
This is exactly the moment to have these talks. Without concrete plans on how the near future should look like the West will be stuck on symbolic recognitions that don’t change anything on the ground.
When we say that the near future of Gaza must be reconstruction and free elections without Hamas we are pulling fuel away from the most brittle and demonizing Zionist rhetoric. If Hamas is really the reason why they’re doing this, then once Hamas is gone they must acknowledge that they have no reason for doing this.
If instead the world keeps acting by picking opposing sides in mutually exclusive “from the river to the sea” narratives, while having no vision of what should change for things to change, then there’s no way to end the conflict, no way to take fuel away from Netanyahu’s narratives and let the world see his contradictions, and no way to let Palestinians choose what kind of State they want.
