#what settler status do we have

[7amaspayrollmanager]

A long time ago some person made a post that made this ridiculous post

And I commented on it like...not fucking true and of course no reply and I wouldn't have remembered this post if someone hadn't replied to my comment talking about the coptic ppl of Egypt and like okay uhm u can talk about arab supremacy and the conquerings and the ethnic cleansings in north africa and the middle east without like calling populations like palestinians Syrians and Iraqis and other ppl being driven from their lands settler colonialists. And even if they were not being ethnically cleansed does not make us inherently settlers for iding as arab. Think. Use your brain. No maybe not everyone is indigenous to that region but that assumes that all human migration is inherently colonialist. Like what if palestinians weren't being displaced you'd consider us colonialists?? Who replaced a previous population that a majority of Palestinians are probably descended from? Again like no degree necessary to not make such infactual claim

Don't rb

[heritageposts]

if you support israel right now, you're supporting the extermination of the palestinian people.

it really is that simple.

this isn't a 'complicated conflict,' it isn't a situation that 'requires nuance,' it's not a 'geopolitical event' that requires us to condemn the 'bad actors' on 'both sides.'

it's a genocide.

there is no 'nuance' to be had here. it's a genocide, committed by the israeli state against the palestinian people, and it's happening right now as we speak. you don't have to infer anything: israel has openly, with next to no pushback from so-called liberal democracies, cut off gaza's access to water, food and electricity. that's more than two million palestinians denied even the basic necessities for life. a million of them, children.

what is that, if not a genocide?

and that's only the latest escalation. we could go all day, listing the atrocities the palestinian people have been subjected to. the killings, the beatings, the children sexually abused in detention center, all the hospitals and ambulances being blown up, videos of palestinians being heckled by settlers as they're driven from their homes, israelis gathering on hilltops to cheer as their military drops bombs on gaza...

but all westerns want to talk about, is hamas.

because the murder of palestinians by the IDF is status quo; it doesn't affect them. what's one more dead palestinian but a statistic? but if hamas has killed a handful of israelis — if they've go as far as to even kill babies — then that justifies the extermination of two million palestinians, children and infants included.

westerns will even say that the palestinians brought it on themselves; that they should have know that a drop of israeli blood requires a river in return.

and just so we're clear, you don't have to like hamas. but when you equate hamas with the IDF, when you derail every conversation by demanding a condemnation of 'both sides,' or when you, god forbid, agree that israel is justified in dismantling hamas — which, as israel themselves have outlined, will involve the complete destruction of gaza and the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians — then either wake up, or own up to the fact that you're a participant in the extermination of the palestinian people.

do you think i'm being harsh? then imagine how it's like living under constant aerial bombardment. with no food, no water, no electricity. constant air-raid sirens. a bomb, dropping every minute. never knowing a moment a peace, always wondering if today is going to be your last day, if you and your family are still going to be here tomorrow.

could you stomach living in gaza, for even a day? i doubt it.

and still, now, on the eve of what might be the ground invasion of gaza — with one million palestinians being told to flee, with nowhere to go — i'm getting messages from people who demand my sympathy... for israel.

well, you're not getting it.

i'm not even humoring your hand-wringing.

if you live in israel, and you're one of the ones who've turned a blind-eye to the suffering of the palestinian people, if you've fought for the IDF or tacitly supported them, if you've callously called upon the memory of the holocaust thinking the death and suffering of your ancestors would wash the blood of your own hands....

then yeah, i think you deserve every single hamas rocket lobbed at you and so much more.

[fairuzfan]

AMAZING article about what it means to participate in anti-Zionism work both online and in person.

If your anti-zionism does not in any way acknowledge that it is a way of thought and practice led by and for Palestinians, then you need to reevaluate your "anti-zionism" label.

Some passages that felt especially relevant to tumblr:

If we accept, as those with even the most rudimentary understanding of history do, that zionism is an ongoing process of settler-colonialism, then the undoing of zionism requires anti-zionism, which should be understood as a process of decolonisation. Anti-zionism as a decolonial ideology then becomes rightly situated as an indigenous liberation movement. The resulting implication is two-fold. First, decolonial organising requires that we extract ourselves from the limitations of existing structures of power and knowledge and imagine a new, just world. Second, this understanding clarifies that the caretakers of anti-zionist thought are indigenous communities resisting colonial erasure, and it is from this analysis that the strategies, modes, and goals of decolonial praxis should flow. In simpler terms: Palestinians committed to decolonisation, not Western-based NGOs, are the primary authors of anti-zionist thought. We write this as a Palestinian and a Palestinian-American who live and work in Palestine, and have seen the impact of so-called ‘Western values’ and how the centring of the ‘human rights’ paradigm disrupts real decolonial efforts in Palestine and abroad. This is carried out in favour of maintaining the status quo and gaining proximity to power, using our slogans emptied of Palestinian historical analysis.

Anti-zionist organising is not a new notion, but until now the use of the term in organising circles has been mired with misunderstandings, vague definitions, or minimised outright. Some have incorrectly described anti-zionism as amounting to activities or thought limited to critiques of the present Israeli government – this is a dangerous misrepresentation. Understanding anti-zionism as decolonisation requires the articulation of a political movement with material, articulated goals: the restitution of ancestral territories and upholding the inviolable principle of indigenous repatriation and through the right of return, coupled with the deconstruction of zionist structures and the reconstitution of governing frameworks that are conceived, directed, and implemented by Palestinians.  Anti-zionism illuminates the necessity to return power to the indigenous community and the need for frameworks of justice and accountability for the settler communities that have waged a bloody, unrelenting hundred-year war on the people of Palestine. It means that anti-zionism is much more than a slogan. 

[...]

While our collective imaginations have not fully articulated what a liberated and decolonised Palestine looks like, the rough contours have been laid out repeatedly. Ask any Palestinian refugee displaced from Haifa, the lands of Sheikh Muwannis, or Deir Yassin – they will tell that a decolonised Palestine is, at a minimum, the right of Palestinians’ return to an autonomous political unit from the river to the sea. When self-proclaimed ‘anti-zionists’ use rhetoric like ‘Israel-Palestine’ – or worse, ‘Palestine-Israel’ – we wonder: where do you think ‘Israel’ exists? On which land does it lay, if not Palestine? This is nothing more than an attempt to legitimise a colonial state; the name you are looking for is Palestine – no hyphen required. At a minimum, anti-zionist formations should cut out language that forces upon Palestinians and non-Palestinian allies the violence of colonial theft. 

[...]

The common choice to centre the Oslo Accords, international humanitarian law, and the human rights paradigm over socio-historical Palestinian realities not only limits our analysis and political interventions; it restricts our imagination of what kind of future Palestinians deserve, sidelining questions of decolonization to convince us that it is the new, bad settlers in the West Bank who are the source of violence. Legitimate settlers, who reside within the bounds of Palestinian geographies stolen in 1948 like Tel Aviv and West Jerusalem, are different within this narrative. Like Breaking the Silence, they can be enlightened by learning the error of colonial violence carried out in service of the bad settlers. They can supposedly even be our solidarity partners – all without having to sacrifice a crumb of colonial privilege or denounce pre-1967 zionist violence in any of its cruel manifestations. As a result of this course of thought, solidarity organisations often showcase particular Israelis – those who renounce state violence in service of the bad settlers and their ongoing colonisation of the West Bank – in roles as professionals and peacemakers, positioning them on an equal intellectual, moral, or class footing with Palestinians. There is no recognition of the inherent imbalance of power between these Israelis and the Palestinians they purport to be in solidarity with – stripping away their settler status. The settler is taken out of the historical-political context which afforded them privileged status on stolen land, and is given the power to delineate the Palestinian experience. This is part of the historical occlusion of the zionist narrative, overlooking the context of settler-colonialism to read the settler as an individual, and omitting their class status as a settler. 

It is essential to note that Palestinians have never rejected Jewish indigeneity in Palestine. However, the liberation movement has differentiated between zionist settlers and Jewish natives. Palestinians have established a clear and rational framework for this distinction, like in the Thawabet, the National Charter of Palestine from 1968. Article 6 states, ‘The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.’ When individuals misread ‘decolonisation’ as ‘the mass killing or expulsion of Jews,’ it is often a reflection of their own entanglement in colonialism or a result of zionist propaganda. Perpetuating this rhetoric is a deliberate misinterpretation of Palestinian thought, which has maintained this position over a century of indigenous organising.  Even after 100 years of enduring ethnic cleansing, whole communities bombed and entire family lines erased, Palestinians have never, as a collective, called for the mass killing of Jews or Israelis. Anti-zionism cannot shy away from employing the historical-political definitions of ‘settler’ and ‘indigenous’ in their discourse to confront ahistorical readings of Palestinian decolonial thought and zionist propaganda. 

[...]

In the context of the United States, the most threatening zionist institutions are the entrenched political parties which function to maintain the status quo of the American empire, not Hillel groups on university campuses or even Christian zionist churches. While the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) engage in forms of violence that suppress Palestinian liberation and must not be minimised, it is crucial to recognise that the most consequential institutions in the context of settler-colonialism are not exclusively Jewish in their orientation or representation: the Republican and Democratic Party in the United States do arguably more to manufacture public consent for the slaughtering of Palestinians than the ADL and AIPAC combined. Even the Progressive Caucus and the majority of ‘The Squad’ are guilty of this.

Leila Shomali and Lara Kilani

[palipunk]

do you know anything about native wildlife or plant life in palestine? particularly interested in primates because that's always what i'm most interested in but i'd really like to know more about what the animals and plants native to the land are like. what they were like pre israeli occupation and what sort of animal and plant life will need repairing when palestine is free. i hear a lot about the people and the human palestinian culture and it's wonderful but it's difficult for me to find anything regarding nonhuman life and i would like to learn more about it.

Honestly, the topic of Palestinian wildlife and its intersection with colonialism has been something that has increased a lot over the past couple of years. I can't offer anything about primate species (Palestine doesn't have any) but we do have lots and lots of very cool native animals like Gazelle and Caracal and Sand foxes and lots of bats and gerbils and snakes.

The Palestine Wildlife Society actually has a website with lists of all the animals found in Palestine and what level of conservation status they are at (plus the Arabic names): https://www.wildlife-pal.org/en

The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics also reported back in 2012 that:

There are about 51,000 living species (flora and fauna) in historical Palestine, constituting approximately 3% of global biodiversity. In the West Bank and Gaza Strip there are an estimated 30,904 animal species, consisting of an estimated 30,000 invertebrates, 373 birds, 297 fish, 92 mammals, 82 reptiles, and 5 amphibians. Recent studies on birds in Palestine indicated that there are 373 species, which represent 23 Orders, 69 families, 21 Subfamilies, and 172 genera. The country also hosts 2,850 species of plants from 138 families.

And also added in 2014:

Israeli Violations are the main causes of Biodiversity deterioration Based on 2012 data from ARIJ Research Institute, the Expansion and Annexation Wall has a total length of about 780 kilometers, of which 61% has been completed. The route of the Wall has isolated 680 km2 of Palestinian land between the Wall and the Green Line, comprising approximately 12.0% of the West Bank. This land comprises about 454 km2 of agricultural, pasture land and open areas, 117 km2 that were confiscated for Israeli settlements and military bases, 89 km2 of forest and 20 km2 Palestinian built-up land. During 2013, more than eight thousand dunums of land were confiscated from Palestinians and more than 15 thousand horticultural trees were destroyed, causing considerable damage to the Palestinian environment and biodiversity.

The Israeli settlements and military bases also contribute in the biodiversity deterioration since there were 482 Israeli settlements and military bases in the West Bank at the end of 2013 contained around  563,546 settlers at the end of 2012. Climate change is the most important natural factor that contributes to biodiversity degradation in Palestine. More animal and plant species have become under serious threat of becoming rare due to low rainfall, high temperatures, and the changing characteristics of the four seasons, in which drought is creeping into winter and spring.

The mountain Gazelle is currently endangered and this is due mostly to the building of roads and fences as well as predation and collisions with cars (the article also references the building of housing units in Mitzpeh Nafto'ah, which one of the areas where, in 2012, Israeli developers wanted to 'build up Jerusalem'). As of 2015, there were around 2,000 identified Gazelles within the Palestinian territories and historic Palestine. The mountain Gazelle look like this:

There have also been efforts for plant conservation in Palestine like the Iris Atrofusca, which has an extremely fragile population and is found almost exclusively within Palestine - a botanical garden was established for this particular Iris in the North Eastern Slopes of Palestine and in 2021, 120 clones of Iris Atrofusca were planted. Here is what they look like:

(also very interesting, sheep do not eat it!)

Probably most famous is the extinction of the Palestinian Crocodile, the last rhetorical circulation to 1935. Elizabeth Bentley wrote a great piece on it, you can read the full PDF on the Institute of Palestine Studies website or the edited (with permission) one published to Science for the People Magazine, I copied a segment from the latter here:

Colonial zoologists and collectors saw and appreciated Palestine’s bountiful plants and animals as objects of scientific inquiry. This scientific appreciation was inextricable from imperialist ambitions and the drive for profit. There were no wildlife protection laws in Palestine until 1924, which was after crocodiles’ likely regional extinction, and even then, the laws were loosely enforced. Colonial zoologists not only observed and wrote about Palestinian animals in their natural habitat. These zoological works were one of extraction and commodification. Euphemistically termed processes of “collection” involved a network of human and nonhuman actors, whereby colonial zoologists hunted and killed Palestinian animals, studied them, and transported their remains overseas. Disemboweled, stuffed with wire and flax, and then displayed in glass cases, Palestinian animals were reanimated as spectacles for the viewing pleasure of museumgoers in London and Berlin. While aligned with the broader trends in colonial zoology, the allure of the last Palestinian crocodile surpassed the confines of scientific inquiry; it adapted a symbolic, even mythical quality. Colonial zoologists’ ongoing speculation about Palestinian crocodile extinction necessitated a degree of willful (or internalized) unknowing about Palestine and Palestinians. Colonial zoologists were heavily dependent on Palestinians’ ecological expertise. Despite this, their writings convey mistrust and condescension toward Palestinians, along with a detachment from how local populations lived alongside Palestinian ecology. Colonial scientific literature on Palestinian animals frequently perpetuated the racist, historically inaccurate outlook of “science for the West, myth for the rest.” Yet colonialist writings on the last Palestinian crocodile reflected their own symbolic attachments and investment in mythical thinking.

So there is a lot of work to do in regard to animal and plant conservation and several extinct animals I didn't bring up here but It is a deep dive and goes a lot farther than a lot of people consider. The Palestine Wildlife Society has a massive catalog and I hope you look through it!

[intersectionalpraxis]

https://twitter.com/BlakPantherBabe/status/1763547986691227749?t=36pCCx3Lx7qgRnTkq6q83g&s=19

more land stolen in the West Bank while Gaza was being slaughtered over flour

I did find it very interesting that the IOF released footage of what happened, but I am sadly not surprised, since the IOF has been doing things discreetly and openly in West Bank while they bomb and terrorize Palestinian people in Gaza. From kidnapping Palestinian young boys and men to stealing homes. Many Palestinian creators and activists have said keep your eyes on West Bank, and it's important we always do. The fact that the IOF is committing massacres to further their settler-colonial agenda everywhere in Palestine is just beyond horrific.

[familyabolisher]

Before electing to name himself for the state to which he owed a significant portion of his family tree, Tennessee Williams toyed with penning his work under the pseudonym of Valentine Sevier. To do so would be to take the name of an ancestor and early settler of the Tennessee frontier who fought both in the American Revolutionary War and in the series of battles against indigenous populations that constituted the process by which the land was claimed and settled by Europeans and their descendants, and naming himself as such would have marked his corpus of work as a continuation of the process that the first Valentine Sevier started — that of negotiating the frontier with ultimate intent to conquer it.

The echo of such an impulse continues to reverberate even in the name he ultimately selected for himself. Williams was from Mississippi — whilst we can attribute his choice of pseudonym in no small part to the common-sense fact that ‘Mississippi Williams’ simply lacks the musicality that ‘Tennessee’ manages to carry, the flicker of the frontier and the desire to posit himself as agentive within a family mythology cannot be entirely disappeared; indeed, such a desire bleeds into his writing in forms that are often weird, and contradictory, and indulgently horrifying. The individual Williams is articulated through and within the land, and the process of individual identity-making (through his infamously heavy autofictional tendencies) is carried out in negotiation with the process of settlement; long after the disappearance of a traditional ‘frontier’ as the whole American continent came under the control of the agents of settler colonialism, the lingering presence of a space which is conquered, ordered, and sustained and a space which exists beyond the processes of ordering and sustention is the key ingredient in articulating anxieties of American sexuality. In name, Williams as the momentum behind such figures as Blanche and Laura and Maggie the Cat becomes not just a man but a body of land; moreso, he becomes the ideology baked into the naming of that body of land as ‘Tennessee.’ As such, Williams’ plays, so frequently preoccupied with the artificial yet brutally enforced social limits of desire against the plenitude of the human spirit, necessarily anchor themselves in the landed space through which those same paradigms of desire that sway their movement must be understood.

What does it mean to read Williams’ plays in such a manner? Certainly his major scholars have shied away from the suggestion that anything of serious political import might be read into his work; Williams was a deeply emotive writer who tended to mete out his appeals to social issues very lightly and sparingly and reserved the best of his grandiosity and conviction for statements about the condition of the individual human heart, and though he was a self-proclaimed ‘Socialist’ in name, he was no political firebrand and certainly no communist. Yet this question of land — lost land, settled land, land that was sacrificed to ‘epic fornications’ — pervades his work and haunts his very particular imaginary, and provides an easy point of reference by which those very same questions of desire and the human heart can be teased out and re-examined from a differently illuminating angle.

Ko-Fi / Patreon

hello, at long last, here is my piece on tennessee williams; questions of desire and literary production and how american writers attempt to uneasily negotiate the land they write on. thanks!

[elder-millennial-of-zion]

Heya! Just wanted to mention the American/global definition of "left" might be kind of shit vis a vis Jews and Zionism (fucking apparently), but leftism in Israel very much means "we deserve to live here and so do Palestinians let's be responsible adults and fix this please". The party I vote for, Meretz (who have a charter PDF in English if anybody's interested) represents this interest very well in my opinion. In general, a lot of the Israeli anti-government protests, which started far before the war and were decried by the government as The Extreme Left, expressed this opinion - being a functioning country with actual morals means both not having a corrupt government, AND not maintaining the ridiculous, dangerous and demeaning status quo with Palestinian territories, and that this is what actual Israeli patriotism and Zionism looks like. I hope this might help with your definition, because the "right" definitely does not have our best interests at heart :D

Thank you for pointing that out! I’m definitely aware of this, but I obviously haven’t communicated it clearly enough. When I complain about “the left” I’m referring to the American/global/basically-anywhere-outside-of-Israel left.

The Israeli left is the faction I admire most, especially right now. You have worked longer and harder for Palestinian liberation, in more concrete ways, at much greater cost, than anyone in the world besides actual Palestinians. And you’re still doing it even in the wake of 10/7.

It makes me so angry that non-Israeli “leftists” for whom this cause is just the latest trend, totally ignore the work of the actual Israeli left in favor of labeling you all “settlers.” It makes me so angry that many of the victims of 10/7 were those leftist Israeli activists, because those people who were making a real difference are gone, and because their memories are being desecrated as “colonizers who aren’t really innocent.” The non-Israeli, non-Jewish left could learn a lot from the Israeli left’s conviction and courage and integrity. It’s too bad they probably won’t.

This got a bit long winded but all this to say: thank you for being on the front lines and doing the actual work.

[jewishvitya]

I repeat that zionism saw itself as a colonialist movement because it's true, it's the language they used to describe themselves. But I keep being told that the word can't be correct because it's our historical homeland. If that makes us indigenous is a matter of what definition you use, the relationship between a colonizer and the colonized, or a question of origin. But what I do know is that Palestinians are definitely indigenous and our actions towards them are in line with colonization.

If everyone were to agree we are indigenous, all this does is turn the conversation into this:

"Here's what colonialist powers all over the world did. Conquering lands, ethnic cleansing, genocide, apartheid, and more."

"Awful stuff. And they didn't even have a historic connection to the lands they stole."

"None at all. It hurt the indigenous populations, it hurt the land and the ecosystem, the damage is ongoing."

"But what if they did have a connection to the land? What if I behave the exact same way, but in the country where I originally come from?"

"You mean hurting people, taking lands...?"

"And creating an ethnostate! But it's my ancestral homeland, so that can't be a bad thing."

"That's still... Ethnic cleansing is ethnic cleansing, that land is a home to more than just you. People have been living there."

"Can't call me a colonizer though! It's my homeland!"

I grew up in the settlements and I saw the settler-colonialism first hand. So regardless of our status, regardless of where we come from, I still define what we do to be colonialist. I don't use these terms lightly.

Because how do you create an ethnostate in a land with a different ethnic group already established? How do you prepare the space for all the refugees of the "correct" ethnic group that you intend to bring?

You kill, you expell, you conquer, you destroy, you take over. And the people left there, you very carefully keep under your power, without granting citizenship that would threaten the ethnic majority you worked so hard to create. You enforce a majority.

That's why, even when we supposedly "offered peace to the Palestinians," we offered them an arrangement where we have a measure of control. The checkpoints that exist now, no control over their borders, etc. - occupation, but with their signature on it. We wanted to control them without making then citizens, because if they aren't citizens we have a Jewish majority. Controlling the lands without including the people.

I don't tend towards overstating my case. I use these words because I believe they're correct. I can use hyperbole or be dramatic, just like anyone, but that's not what I'm doing here. I'm trying to describe realities that people are living. I don't have better terminology to explain what's happening and what's been happening for decades.

Our history can't excuse this. Neither can the present. Not our oppression in diaspora, and not our connection to this land. The Jewish love for our ancestral homeland shouldn't be an excuse to spill innocent blood. It's an insult to millenia of longing.

[fallout4-reacts]

An actual prompt this time! I know you're busy and have plenty of things to write yet, take your time.

Soo I was thinking that maybe companions (and Maxson) horribly failing at confessing to Sole. Like for example they could clear out some Raiders, companion is impressed, tries to confess BAM Sole gets fucking decked by random raider they didn't kill. I feel like you could get pretty creative with that one. Like deathclaws, something exploding, just settlers running in, other companions interrupting etc.

Yeah! Sorry for my waiting list but this one just take me out of my bed literally Maybe it's better then just writing nothing and you all will forgive me... I will not taking it as an habit but it was just what I needed I think And maybe an EPIC ask... I think it will be (not in the sense I'll do an epic job, in the sense hmmm Titan Quest like the F.E.V. one and all) Oh, and take note you ask for... horribly

Part 1

Danse / Deacon / Nick Valentine

(Part 2 : Hancock, Preston, Strong)

(Part 3 : X6-88 alone because of a bug)

(Part 4 : Gage, MacCready, Piper)

(Part 5 : Cait, Curie, Codsworth, Dogmeat, Elder Maxson)

Danse : Sole returns. Sole returns to the bunker after a few days. Danse had time to clean and make the space more comfortable. He didn't consider establishing his new camp there because, after all, he didn't consider living at all.

But now he did.

And Sole came back.

Danse kept himself occupied during his few days alone, trying not to worry about what was happening to him. But he pondered his new envision of himself. Beyond the initial distaste, he felt a sense of conviction, similar to how Sole stood.

Whatever he is, he is a person with convictions for which he fought. He was a man of honor —a synth?— whose his brothers and sisters could trust.

He'd come a long way. His damned way into this group that turned his back on him after he had dedicated his blood and soul for them. And Maxson, whom he almost considered a friend, treated him as if he were a worm to be crushed.

After being reassured that he agreed with Sole on his right to life, his thoughts couldn't help but wander.

He recalls Sole standing in front of him, defending him against Maxson.

And even more.

More, a lot more.

He can't help but replay in his mind all of these events, all of these moments. When Sole emerged as an avenging angel, slaying all the ghouls in their way, Danse was convinced that his squad's final hour had arrived. They entered the paladin's life as a mythical entity, too great for regular mortals, an enigmatic spirit of the times sent to save them.

Then there's how they forced a comedy at Fort Strong while killing mutants. Danse had admonished them a few times for their lack of seriousness in the face of a critical assignment, but he couldn't keep a smile from rising on his face in the midst of their antics.

And all of their nonsense, every time they could.

Danse had pieced together Sole's intentions and the horror of their past, and he couldn't help but admire this person's trustworthiness. When Danse expressed concern about Sole's moral status following such heinous ordeals, Sole merely grinned and remarked that the companionship they were blessed with helped them get through.

Even after they returned from the Institute, learning the injurious truth, they had held on, had rounded the corner, and Danse felt better to know he had been by their side to help. To morally support them.

And now that Sole is standing in front of Danse again, slightly smiling and wondering what's next for him, Danse feels his throat tighten.

Because Danse has realized that he has strong affections for Sole.

Much more than a simple friendship.

He nods slowly.

"Perhaps we should consider venturing to Sanctuary. I am unable to endure it any further. First and foremost, I am a soldier, and a soldier without a purpose doesn't progress very far. I humbly express my desire to align myself with the esteemed Minutemen's structure. In the utmost, their cause is righteous, and they shall not forsake me nor open fire upon me. I have received word that their General harbors a troubling acceptance towards synths."

"They tolerate and love them a lot," Sole admits with a half-smile.

They proceed without adding anything. Thus far north, there is no road that crosses directly, at least not according to Sole. As best they can, they cross the countryside in wreckage, cutting valleys and hills.

And Danse remains quiet, lost in introspection.

Yes, he likes Sole a lot more than simply as a friend. There's a lot more. Soon, Sole will return to their Rail Road operations, to which Danse has never been requested (and he now understands why), while Danse will begin his Minutemen duties, most likely limited to the Castle for the time of his training. And, while it appeared to him at first to be the finest way to fill his days, he now has a peculiar uneasiness at the prospect of leaving Sole without delivering anything of what he feel upon them.

They are in the midst of the wreckage of a plane that crashed there two centuries ago. They passed through a few Minutemen (apparently, it is in the profession to check out every nook and cranny of the Commonwealth), but they are now alone and isolated in front of the cabin of the downed craft.

He clears his throat slightly in an attempt to catch the attention of his partner.

Sole looks at him.

"Something's wrong, Danse?"

When the realization occurs to the fallen Paladin that he would never again have his title before his name, he swallows hard. But that's not the issue he's having right now.

"I…I'm not really a man of words but…"

Sole erupts in laughter.

"Are you not a man of words? Yes, you ate a dictionary at birth!"

For a few whiles, the poor man panics, unable to restore balance after the sting of Sole. He had seized his courage in both hands in an attempt to open his heart, and his partner had fallen back into amusement. But he needs to tell them. He has to. He knows deep down that he has to.

"Sole, please."

They instantly calm down, recognizing that the man in front of them appears to be death serious.

"Oh, sorry."

"Don't be like that. What I'm trying to say is this—

Sole's expression shifts from calm to dread in an instant, while Danse hears the anger of a beast he despises beyond all in his back. He despises her much more now that she's interfering in such an important situation.

He turns, weapon in hand, to fully answer to the deathclaw, and then follows a long and deadly combat. The beast is fierce and perhaps ancient, and it not easily defeated.

When they eventually prevail against the monster, with a few bites and scratches here and there, Danse don't dare trying again to express himself. And Sole now has to patch them up as soon as they find out a settlement, so they regretfully didn't think to inquire furthermore.

Deacon : His deathly bunny and he jumped into a plethora of wolf dens. Nothing, however, tops being in his favorite den.

The spy like it when Sole stays for the evening and then retires to the back of the HQ for a well-deserved rest. Despite the fact that he does not require sleep himself —as a synth, eh— he enjoys lying on the mattress next to Sole when they ask it, with a roll of the eyes at his answer.

They normally spend a few more moments on their mattresses talking about everything and nothing until one of them falls asleep —more often then none Sole, because Deacon is a synth, yup.

"Tell me again how he almost swallowed his beard."

Sole bursts out laughing.

"I told him to go to hell. That I was only in their camp for my friend Danse, and that by turning their back on him, the entire organization may roast, I would never support them again. Anyway, it's irrelevant now. Let them go to fight like the big boys they are against this blasted Institute and get the heck out of my territory."

Deacon like it when Sole becomes engrossed. The fire in their eyes awakens his heart's hearth. He would never have confessed to them. Never. Never previously has it's not have seems important.

There is still a serious moment, which Sole elaborates on.

"It's very little Deacon, to remain silent and, moreover, serious. What's the matter with you?"

"Nothing, you know. There isn't much to eat here. Perhaps a programming error. Perhaps I should run a diagnostic."

Sole's chuckling is priceless. Deacon smiles quietly as he listens to the pleasant melody in his ears. They stare at him again when his friend grows still serious.

They sit on the mattress and motion for Deacon to do the same. As he straightens, the spy stares down. Sole is right. He has words on the tip of his tongue, but he doesn't dare to voice them for the first time in his holy life. Sole gently takes his hands in their, searching for his eyes.

"Deacon, you know you can tell me anything?"

The man glances into the other side and swallows cautiously. Yes, he has the right to tell Sole anything. But what about that? Can he? He has to. He has a debt to Sole. He owes them a frank and honest sincerity. And even the thought seems weird to him. A straightforward and open sincerity? He has no recollection of what it tastes like.

"I'll be honest then," he says, hesitantly, as if he must step into the void. "It's been a while since I should have told you."

He takes a deep breath, ready to blow it all, when an unusually powerful vibration is noticed.

Sole turns their gaze towards the headquarters, and suddenly they hear screaming and gunshots.

"But…"

Deacon leaps to his feet. This kind of roar his still heard in his worst nightmares. Just like the day the Coursers assaulted the old HQ. But isn't Tinker Tom meant to put cameras? How did the Coursers gain access to the facility, this time?

"The Brotherhoods!" yells someone from within.

Sole and Deacon are already on the front lines of defense, positioning themselves to hold the soldiers for as long as it takes for the others to flee. They didn't even need to talk. With Gloria, they hold the line and exchange gunshots with their enemies, keeping them in respect for so long that Deacon is confident their friends will have no problem to disappear in the ruins of Boston. Gloria then makes a strangled gasp and collapses to her knees, her gun no longer firing shots. Deacon peers at her, fear on his face as he realizes his friend has been badly shot.

"Glo!"

A grunt and a thud behind his back make him fear the worst. He attempts to hold the BoS at bay, but his weapon is too slow without Gloria's gatling and Sole's assault rifle.

Desperate, he throws a couple of grenades into the tunnel to gain time, and he manages to push the invaders back slightly.

He rushes alongside Sole right away.

"Eh!"

His friend clutches their bowels in agony, or what remains of them. Deacon wraps his arms around them and softly cradles them.

"Don't worry, everything will be alright. Let's go locate Carrington."

As he glances around, searching in the room... he realizes that the doctor is among the casualties. He growls and attempts to drag Sole further away, hoping to hide them.

"We're going to get through this," he said. "We're going to get through this, I promise" he repeats dejectedly.

“Liar,” breaths Sole before becoming limp in his arms.

Nick Valentine : They came to a halt near the GNN, in the ruins of an abandoned house of which he believes was once a settlement.

He finds it weird that the occupants simply vanished overnight, leaving no trace.

It happens occasionally, such as at University Point, although there are traces. There are dead settlers, downed synths, evidence, and clues.

But here, just the emptiness of tranquility, as if no one had lived there since the war.

But Sole is worn out, hungry, and thirsty, and all he wants is one evening off, possibly one night.

While his companion actually runs aground on a dingy old mattress in the living room of the modest house, Nick ensures that nothing threatens them. When the synth returns from his excursion, his partner hasn't moved one inch.

He moves careful closer.

"Well, ya gotta keep that belly of yours satisfied. And imbibing a beverage would assuredly be a wise course of action."

He was met with a growl in response. He looked around. The previously residents provided a fire pit. He reaches over, takes Sole's bag, and begins cooking something for them.

"I'll rouse you from your slumber once the soup is ready."

Another grunt joins in. He can't help but sneering. Of course, he finds a cauldron (even two) and every necessary instrument in Sole's backpack to prepare the thrifty dinner. Water canes, carrots, and a piece of meat that he starts cutting into small cubes. He whistles merrily, converting himself into a maid of the household, as he frequently does with Sole.

"Ah, the pangs of nostalgia for the flavors of garlic and cilantro doth visit me on occasion. Parsley and mint!

“Salt, pepper,” Sole mumbles under their arm, their head shifting slightly to reach a more comfortable position.

Nick digs deeper into the bag and uncovers a pepper and salt shaker.

"Well, I must say, this here stuff seems to possess quite the remarkable dose of radiation, and it should lacks any discernible flavor."

“Still good,” corrects the other.

Nick chuckles a little and adds the condiments, pleased to be able to improve the soup he's making.

He sits down and glances around the room while waiting for the meal to be ready. It had to have been a nice house. Here had to live a lovely little family. He takes note of the stairs. The bedrooms should be on the second floor. Children, most likely. A pleasant existence.

Normal.

His gaze is drawn to the limp figure on the mattress. His artificial lips slowly form a tiny smile. Sole, in all their magnificence, is a stunning, authoritarian, and noble individual. But the visual of Sole spread out, blindly trusting their companion for safety, entirely abandoned to the sleep that stole them, is something that few can boast of seeing.

And Nick owns it.

He has it all and meticulously details his friend.

And once more, this odd sensation arises in the hollow of his components.

It happens from time to time. Often. More and more. When their gazes cross. When they cheer at a triumph. When a file is closed. When they're simply the two of them at the end of an evening by the fire. When Sole departs for a while and then reappears on his doorstep.

And Nick can no longer mislead himself.

He experiences a feeling. This is not a programming error. His circuits are flawless in that. It's just a true, intense, genuine emotion.

He serves a bowl of soup and kneels next to Sole, softly shaking their shoulder.

"Stand up, Sleeping Beauty, lunch is served!"

Sole scolds and growls but sit in front of Nick, gratefully taking the bowl that their friend hands them. They begin to eat it carefully, as if lost in contemplation. And Nick can't stop admiring them, always fascinated by the elegance of their features and the brightness in their eyes.

His companion frowns as they glance back at him. "I got something stick in my teeth?"

Nick sighs and laughs a little.

"There's absolutely nothin' on here. None of it, pal."

"So what?"

"It seems that this, ah, old carcass of mine hasn't been spinning as smoothly as I'd prefer for quite some time now."

Sole places the dish on the ground, their face etched with anguish and earnestness.

"Nick, what's wrong?"

The synth is astonished.

"Oh, nothing to be awry. Not quite how you're envisioning it. It's just a tough nut to crack."

"Say so, and we'll figure it out together. Perhaps I am able to help you."

He places a sympathetic hand on Nick's metal one, the synth constantly amazed at how tactile Sole is with him despite his nature.

"How can you…help me?"

Even though Sole is the organic, it's Nick who swallows with difficulty. He lowers his head, his eyes hidden by the brim of his fedora, but Sole's hand rises from his to tuck beneath his chin.

"Hello, I'm here. I will always be there for you. No matter what."

After getting some good breaths, Nick takes the plunge to opens his bag. He opens his mouth to respond, but then a radroach erupts between them, knocking the bowl of soup over and driving both to rush to their feet and draw their weapons.

After the "vicious" opponent is dispatched, a nice laugh and a new bowl of soup, Sole raises an eyebrow.

"But what did you want to tell me, before our surprise guest wasted your delicious soup?"

Nick swallows and makes a dismissive hand motion.

"Nothin', absolutely nothin'. Drop it..."

[historia-vitae-magistras]

How are Jack and Arthur in modern day? I feel like Jack would be a little bit of a daddy’s boy

Jack takes revenge for the Bodyline series every time they play backyard cricket.

But they do play that backyard cricket. Sometimes, we have this image of Alfred as the rebel, the free thinker, the 'real' protagonist of any story, but any story is complicated, including Jack's and Arthur's role. He is the product of his father; he can't look at his money or his flag or into a mirror and not see whose son he is. But he's also much more than that, pooled from so many places. Who he is as an individual. Like they have some of their music tastes and a lot of their sports in common, it does mean a lot when Arthur says something proud to Jack. There's a tenderness there, especially on Arthur's part, but of Arthur's three sons, he's arguably the one with the most challenging relationship. He got neither the devoted but extremely fucked up version of Arthur Alfred's childhood got nor is he highly motivated by abandonment issues like Matt. He wants things from Arthur, but he's been incredibly independent-minded from a very young age with a strong sense of himself. He knew the key to respect and prestige was his father's love, and so, of course, he wanted it, but as he grew up after WW2, that faded and failed. He's the third child, and unintentionally, after Arthur was done with the settler colonialism projects of the first empire. He never got a whole hell of a lot of priority or thought until Canada made a stink and raised the three of them to the status of dominion.

If you look at the products of British imperialism, it's easiest for Jack to look at himself and what produced him. There is no treaty or a third cultural blend of empire and indigenous like the Metis. A whole hell of a lot of penal deportees and a face that looks most like his father's when he's angry. The most visible parts of his inheritance in himself as a person are the negative ones. And he knows that. So, no relationship he has with his father will be free of those things.

[fairuzfan]

im trying to ask all different kids of accounts bc i can't get one solid answer - how would u specifically define zionist? do you think the people who are currently israelis (and are not west bank settlers, may they all be tried for their crimes) should be able to live in a decolonized palestine?

I had to take a couple of days mostly because I was trying to find a single concise answer for you in a citation. Before I give you a definition of a Zionist, I must first describe what Zionism and it's implications are. Here is Ismail Zayid's "Zionism, the myth and the reality" (click).

The very first couple of paragraphs of the book, he says:

Zionism, as a modern political creed, grew in close association with three interacting major forces which exercised a profound influence on the character and nature of the Zionist movement, resulting in three basic qualities characterizing this movement, namely: settler colonialism, expansionism and racism.

The first of the three major forces was the growth, in the nineteenth century, of European colonialism and imperialism and the expansion of the colonial settler regimes. The alliance made between Zionism and European colonialism is clearly attested to by both sides, identifying reciprocal benefits in the alliance. Herzl, in his "Der Judenstat," expressed clearly both the racist nature of Zionism as well as its role as a settler colonial outpost: "We should, there, form a portion of the rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should, as a neutral state, remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence."

There's more in the book that I can't type up lol, but in essence a Zionist subscribes to the idea of Zionism itself, and insists on the establishment of a settler colonial entity whether passively or actively.

Zionism is a settler colonialist movement, as stated by the founder of the movement for Zionism, Theodore Herzel (quoted above in the smalltext). It modeled itself after much of the European colonialist strategies, enforcing borders and nationalities on a previously border-lose world. I mention the making of borders as a fundamental part of colonialism because by rejection of those borders as a concept, we start to imagine the world in a post-colonial universe. Sherene Seikaly makes this point in her book "Men of Capital" in the introductory chapter:

But in such a search, it is almost inevitable that nationalism—its “lack,” its “strength,” or its “weakness”—will stand as a metonym for politics. In some renditions, the weakness of normative nationalism—a “political deficiency” and a lack of a national “spirit”—resulted in, as the leading historian of collaboration continues to argue, the catastrophe of 1948. In response, scholars have documented a national project among the Palestinians. This work is invaluable and has shifted the terms of debate as well as our understanding of the social and cultural geography of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Palestine. However, to continue reveling in the marriage between national consciousness and politics reifies colonial epistemologies. Moving beyond nationalism as both the means and ends of politics is long overdue. Certainly, nationalism was one aspect of subjectivity formation, but it was not the only way to make politics. What I seek to destabilize here is not whether Palestinians were sufficiently national, but to ask why that sufficiency and/or its lack continues to be the measuring stick for whether people can remain on the land they resided on for centuries. Must people’s investment in the random and shifting borders that imperial and colonial officials drew determine their status? Are there other ways to think about politics outside, beside, underneath, and alongside this national prism?

I've said this multiple times before on this blog in different ways, but I'll state outright: I reject the notion of nationalism as a way for us to authenticate Palestinians' claim to the land they've lived on for centuries, as Seikaly mentions. Zionism's core goal is the establishment of such borders is aligned with European colonialism's core goals: division of the world so that they may categorize itself within the world's hierarchy.

Now, the core saying in the Free Palestine movement you often hear is "From the River to the Sea." This, basically, is a rejection of the establishment of those borders as a necessity for the Palestinians to be recognized. Zionism relies on border-making for it to be an actual thing. Without borders, Zionism would not exist. Which is why the "Balfour Declaration," that had essentially districted and redistributed Palestine is often referenced by both Zionists and antiZionists. Balfour, a well known racist and antisemite, had advocated for the establishment of a "Jewish State" not because he really cared what happened to either party — but specifically so that he could get the Jewish people of Europe.... out of Europe.

Seikaly mentions this in "Men of Capital":

However, we should qualify its meaning to get at the specific condition of Palestinian invisibility in colonial epistemologies. Zionists of the late nineteenth century did not imagine that there were no people on the land of Palestine, but rather that they were not a people. Theodor Herzl described a set of caricatures that inhabited what he called the land of Israel: the wealthy effendis who could be had for a price and the remaining impoverished peasants who could be smoothly removed without incident. These people were a motley crew without anything defining or unifying them. Zionists from various political leanings did not share Herzl’s confidence that the people who lived in Palestine would not be attached enough to its land to resist their displacement.  However, the Zionist emphasis on the lack of a politically coherent and distinct people in Palestine who deserved to make claims to the land on which they had resided for hundreds of years would continue apace. The caricatures of the effendi and the peasant, as well as the depiction of the Palestinians as insufficiently rooted, continue to have currency. In the meantime, Zionists were hard at work shaping a cohesive settlement community around a new ethno-national understanding of what it meant to be Jewish. They called themselves the Yishuv. Zionism promised Jews who had suffered religious, political, and racial persecution for centuries in Europe that they could finally become European but only by leaving Europe. Anti-Semitism and Zionism had one thing in common: the belief that Jews could never assimilate in Europe. The process of becoming European by realizing a settler colony would be an abundant source of persecution: For the Palestinians it entails ongoing erasure; for the eastern (Mizrahi) Jews who did not fit the Ashkenazi (European) mold, it has meant decades of marginalization; and for the Ashkenazi, it required killing centuries of tradition, language, and culture to fit the template of the new Jew.

So now you know that Zionism is, at it's core the establishment of borders to reinforce itself as a colonialist entity — thereby enforcing a separation between the colonized and the colonizer that can seem material, but is, in fact, immaterial. Zionists are people who ascribe to the ideology that a Settler Colonial "Jewish State" must exist, and that its establishment is necessary for whatever reason, thereby enacting those borders and displacing the indigenous populations. But what does a post-colonialist society look like if we no longer have these regional borders and nationalism as we've come to understand it?

Palestinians argue for the Right to Return to their homes. I have family members that cannot see the places they were born in because they were kicked out and not allowed to return. I think, for these people especially, it's only natural that they be allowed to return.

You ask if people who are currently live in Israel should be able to live in a decolonized Palestine. Short answer: yes. Of course. There is no reason to reject these people who are willing to live in a decolonized Palestine.

Long answer: still yes but I'm going to re contextualize it a little.

We've established that a decolonized Palestine is one in which borders are irrelevant, as is the current version of nationalism, and no need for categorization. In a decolonized Palestine, as long as you are not a perpetrator of a "crime" (I put that in quotations because of the current colonial implications, but I lack a better word for it) that makes you — and not your grandparent/parent — directly responsible for colonization — like as you mention, settlers who violently expelled Palestinians — and willing to participate in a Palestinian society in which there is equality of all peoples regardless of race, ethnicity, economic status, or religion, then it is possible to become Palestinian.

Israelis are all, to a certain extent, culpable in colonization. There are antiZionist Israelis, but nevertheless, it doesn't change the fact that they are settled on land that was acquired violently. Of course, the same can be said for many USAmericans. To a certain extent, I am a settler in Turtle Island despite being a refugee. I willingly participate in a colony, whether I actually agree with it or not.

I think from hereon, to live in Decolonized Palestine as well as a Decolonized Turtle Island, we must make the reparations necessary to the communities who have suffered systematic violence at the hands of the colonial entity to truly live in a post-colonial world. You might be asking how I think that's going to be conducted — I am not sure. But what I do know is that living without borders — or in other words living without colonialist labels and all sorts hierarchies that arise — will require a reframing of the understanding of our world as well as how we interact with each other in it.

[phoenixyfriend]

Jedi arranged/political marriage pretext I'd like to see more of: Jedi DO leave the Republic, and the marriage is of a Jedi, probably a council member, to secure the safety of their members on their new home planet.

The Mandalorian angle has the benefit of being less closely tied to Republic rule, and could be very tasty and easy to justify with either Obitine or Jangobi, both of which I enjoy. Depending on where in the timeline it happens, the spouse varies.

But I think that if it's Mandalore, especially Jangobi, a heavy part of the argument for getting the Jedi settled and making up for 'draining resources' is shoveling as many people as possible into Agricorp work on the deserts of Manda'yaim.

As an Obitine fic that takes place between TPM and AotC, it's really easy to justify?

Like just. The Jedi Council going "okay do we have any planets where we could move, and there's a primary ruler that would be open to marrying a Jedi for protection from the Republic and… wait. Someone get Kenobi."

(This also works for BailObi, but Alderaan is unfortunately still staunchly Republic territory, while Mandalore's status is a lot more vague.)

With the Jangobi angle, it would be a lot more "Mand'alor Fett captures a Jedi because he's been hearing rumors about them expanding their influence, gets the story that they're actually looking to move, and are basically going to be refugees, and decides that there would be no power move that would secure Mandalore's independence from Republic bullshit like getting their best warriors on his side, but he needs to prove that he's in control to the Death Watch-style extremists, so he's going to have to marry a Jedi for. Reasons."

IDK it's arranged marriage fic, we don't need a whole lot of justification.

God it's so easy to make these about Obi-Wan (consider: Quinlan/that one force-sensitive Stewjoni prince he saved and messed around with a few years ago), but it would be really funny to make this Anidala by shifting ages around a bit or starting the war later. Just like.

Naboo, the planet the Chancellor of the Republic is from, has taken in the Jedi, threatening secession, and refusing to give them back. Senator Amidala has married one of them. Everyone has questions but none of those questions are getting answered. Count Dooku of Serreno has made overtures to join the CIS but Naboo is uninterested. Amidala has been unavailable for her comment due to being on her honeymoon. Master Jedi Obi-Wan Kenobi has only offered that this entire situation is a headache and he'd love to know where he went wrong.

I'm trying to figure out what other ships I could do with this. I think "senior padawan Barriss saves Tatooine's accidental ruler-through-incredible-violence Anakin from an attempt at retaking the planet by the Hutts, spills some personal woes while tending to his wounds (she can't leave the planet yet anyway and wasn't even supposed to be here), and he wakes up like 'hey if you need to move somewhere you can come to Tatooine, I'd marry you in a heartbeat'" would be a fun one, and also immediately collapse as like. A'Sharad overhears Barriss's report and goes to fight Anakin about it personally for inviting more settlers to a planet that's already trying to crowd out the native populace. That would need some tweaking... maybe Anakin's actually already done something similar, and led an exodus of Hutt slaves from Tatooine and settling them on a new planet, and needs help keeping Hutts and other slavers away from trying to take back their slaves? Not sure Anakin would suggest a marriage, though. Someone else might, but not him.

I considered Blyla, but IMO the plot only works if the Jedi are in decent standing (instead of suffering from war propaganda) with the galaxy at large and only need to escape the Senate's influence, not widespread hate.

OH wait if Anakin took over Tatooine when he was a teenager and then gave control to his mom, because she's the smartest obviously, and Qui-Gon survived Naboo, then maybe Qui-Gon/Shmi???

I'm struggling to think of more ships or pick one to drag on an AU adventure. Help. My brain is trying to argue that Obi-Wan marries Hondo and the entire Temple ups and leaves for Florrum.

[intersectionalpraxis]

We all know this is their endgame -as well as stealing Gaza's gas- but holy fuck a memorial park? A TOURIST COMPLEX? A FUCKING BOARDWALK?

https://twitter.com/ireallyhateyou/status/1748444830458364009?t=JXKH_yeLgIKTAQy92znAaw&s=19

How do you build a "memorial" for the dead on the graves of children?

"A plan for the future of the Gaza Strip"

"A map of the Gaza Strip envisioned by violent zionists after they mercilessly and massively displace and genocide Palestinian people."

The IOF knows no moral bounds. They have been talking about turning the Gaza Strip into their paradise for a long time now, and this doesn't surprise me one bit. They're taking selfies around areas that have been heavily bombed, are wearing Palestinian women's lingerie to mock and objectify them -they are finding many ways to pose on camera to show what proud settler-colonizers they are. They have uprooted 70% of the trees in Gaza, and have created many ecological disasters. Palestine will never 'belong' to Israhell -and it never will. Looking at this makes my skin crawl.

[bfpnola]

image description by @swosheep

ID 1: All images are screenshots of a post made by walidalwawi on Instagram. They are all of black text on a plain white background. The first image is titled "Indigeneity in Palestine and Israel's Co-Opting of Indigenous Struggles" in large font. The body text, much smaller, reads: "Any discussion of Indigeneity regarding a group of people must delve into colonialism, particularly settler colonialism." Below the body text there is text reading: "1/10", with an arrow pointing left.

ID 2: The second image is titled: "1. What Is Indigeneity?" in underlined text. The body text reads: "In a broader scientific context, the term 'Indigeneity' or 'Indigenous' refers to the origin of a species or organism from a specific location. However, when referring to a people in the context of human rights and international law, 'Indigenous' refers to the original inhabitants of a particular region who have lived there for generations before the arrival of colonial settlers from another country. The immigrants view the natives as detrimental to the colony; therefore, they dispossess them of their lands, resources, and cultural heritage and marginalise or suppress their rights and identities."

ID 3: The third image reads: "In 2007, The UN formally recognised the rights of indigenous peoples by adopting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The working definition of 'Indigenous Peoples': '…those communities, peoples and nations who, having a 1. historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves 2. distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They 3. form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are 4. determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples…'"

ID 4: The fourth image reads: "Example of indigenous people: - First Nations, Inuit and Métis in Canada - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia A group is not referred to as indigenous if they are not within or experienced a colonial power structure, even if they practically originate from their current locality, for example: - Frankish People in France - Anglo-Saxon Englishmen in the British Isles - Dutch, Italians, Germans. In face, Indigenous groups may cease to be referred to as indigenous if their colonial relation is dismantled. Thus, to Identify the Indigenous we must identify the coloniser as the two are often closely intertwined."

ID 5: The fifth image is titled: "2. Israel, A Proud Colonial State." In underlined text. The body text reads: "Historically, colonial expansion was a source of European pride, with no understanding of Indigeneity as a right to land but as a negative status indicating savagery and backwardness. Political Zionism, a movement that emerged in late 19th century Europe, was heavily influenced by colonial ideologies of the time, a fact that is well- documented in the writings of Zionist thinkers and politicians, including Theodor Herzl, regarded as the 'Father of Modern Zionism.' In his quest for support and recognition, Herzl sought alliances with colonial powers such as France and the United Kingdom and other settler colonial states like the United States and Canada."

ID 6: The sixth image reads: "In 1902, Herzl famously wrote to Cecil Rhodes, one of the most significant British colonial figures in Africa, seeking support for his Zionist endeavour:". A block quote, all in underlined text, reads: "You are being invited to help make history. That cannot frighten you, nor will you laugh at it. It is not in your accustomed line; it doesn't involve Africa, but a piece of Asia Minor, not Englishmen but Jews. But had this been on your path, you would have done it by now. How, then, do I happen to turn to you, since this is an out-of-the-way matter for you? How indeed? Because it is something colonial.!" Body text continues: "In his address to the first Zionist Congress, Herzl rationalises his colonial mission in Palestine:". Another block quote with underlined text reads: "It is more and more to the interest of the civilised nations and of civilisation in general that a cultural station be established on the shortest road to Asia. Palestine is this station and we Jews are the bearers of culture who are ready to give our property and our lives to bring about its creation."

ID 7: the seventh image reads: "Jabotinsky, a Russian Jewish Zionist leader and founder of the Zionist terrorist organisation Irgun which helped establish israel. Wrote in his book The Iron Wall:". A block quote, all in underlined text, reads: "'Zionist colonisation must either be terminated or carried out against the wishes of the native population. This colonisation can, therefore, be continued and make progress only under the protection of a power independent of the native population an iron wall, which will be in a position to resist the pressure to the native population. This is, in toto, our policy towards the Arabs…' "'If you wish to colonise a land in which people are already living, you must find a garrison for the land, or find a benefactor who will provide a garrison on your behalf…. Zionism is a colonising venture and, therefore, it stands or falls on the question of armed forces.'" Body text continues: "This colonial history is not limited to the past, as we can see it vividly today in israel's colonial practice of daily oppression against the Palestinian natives."

ID 8: The eighth image reads: "Examples of standard methods used by settler colonies to oppress indigenous peoples: a. Land Theft and Dispossession: 1948, upon the establishment of israel, around 700,000 Palestinians were forced to flee or were expelled from their homes by israeli forces 1950, israel established the "Absentee Property Law", which allows the israeli government to seize control of land belonging to Palestinians who fled or were forced to leave during the 1948 war. b. Forced Assimilation: The "Judaization" of Palestinian neighbourhoods by promoting Jewish settlement and adopting Hebrew as the official language in education and public life while restricting Palestinian cultural expression, including banning books, films, and other media that are critical of israeli policies. E.g. The ban of the Palestinian flag in the occupied Gaza Strip and West Bank in 1967 and the prohibition of artworks containing the flag's four colours in 1980. c. Economical Exploitation: israel controls the majority of the water resources in the region as well as exploits Palestinian natural resources, including minerals, quarries, and agricultural land. Palestinian farmers have reported that israeli settlers have uprooted their olive trees, destroyed their crops, and polluted their farmland."

ID 9: The ninth image is titled: "Israeli Exploitation Of Indigeneity." in underlined text. The body text reads: "The international community's significant shift towards acknowledging indigenous people's struggles against colonisation, and the broad negative sentiment towards colonialism, forced israel to rethink its history and create a new narrative to legitimise its presence in the region and strip Palestinians from their indigenous status. By reframing its colonial mission as one of indigenous people's decolonisation of their rightful territory, israel appropriates the rhetoric of indigenous empowerment while in contradiction continuing to seek funding and legitimisation from other settler colonial states, who continue to suppress other indigenous groups, as well as openly and publicly practices settler colonial oppression against the Palestinians."

ID 10: The tenth image reads: "israel bases its argument on a supremacist ethno-nationalist and misleading definition of Indigeneity, claiming it to be an innate Jewish characteristic and not one imposed by colonialism. Such a claim severely harms indigenous groups on their mission to decolonisation by providing a legitimising framework for colonial tactics like ethnic cleansing, land theft and genocide to any group that claims ancestral ties to the land. Yet, even if one was to entertain the Zionist claim of Indigeneity through lineage, multiple genetic studies have already shown that many Jews and Palestinians share ancestry, rendering such claim unjustifiable, as the ethnically cleansed Palestinian are population shares the same ancestral history."

[communistkenobi]

something i’ve never liked is how, when people talk about dealing with the problems indigenous people face, there’s always this assumption that we shouldn’t “punish” non-indigenous people by involving them in the solution. just because their ancestors did something wrong that doesn’t mean they have blood on their hands and that their ancestors’ intentions aren’t their intentions.

i’m not somebody who thinks we should take responsibility for running society instead of the government, but, the situation just just rubs me the wrong way. like if your ancestors wronged people and the people they wronged have to deal with the consequences of of said wrongs everyday, do you not owe it to society to be part of the solution?

i don’t know what to do about this situation, but i just feel like society teaches non-indigenous people they are not responsible for pursuing justice here and i was wondering what your thoughts on the matter. tysm in advance if you reply 🤍

Even if you accept that current settlers are not in any way responsible for or benefit from past colonial violence (which I don’t, but we will sit with this hypothetical for a moment), then the same reasoning must be extended to indigenous peoples. If my wealth and privilege in a settler colonial state is not morally linked to the history of said state, then the oppression of indigenous peoples are doubly not their own faults - which is all the more reason to resolve current inequalities! But this line of reasoning is not logically extended to indigenous people because in the Canadian imaginary (and other settler colonial contexts, but I’m most familiar with Canada so I will speak on this context) indigenous people are considered to be subjects stuck in history, always “behind” us in time. Of course, indigenous people are treated as indigenous in every conceivable way, but they are treated as if they are in the wrong time period. The only acceptable version of this for settlers is for there to be no more indigenous people - only then will there be no debts to repay.

But obviously this is not the case, and can never be the case. I think concepts of individual punishment or retribution are a flawed way of understanding decolonial efforts. A more productive understanding is what Fanon says - for decolonisation to happen, the last must come first. This can be in the form of wealth and land redistribution, legal autonomy, official apologies, the abolition of various colonial institutions, and so forth. This can include stripping institutions of their wealth which consequently means powerful people will lose status and power (the church, for example, which was one of the primary architects of residential schools), but this is not based on individual punishment. Obviously this isn’t immediately realisable in the current state of affairs, and so supporting current indigenous struggles (such as blocking oil pipelines, the MMIWG project, etc) is of prime importance.

And also like just on a general note, settlers do still directly benefit from settler colonialism. Like whenever you hear about a new pipeline being built on indigenous land, the argument is always about how many jobs it will create (for settlers). Churches profit fucking massively from indigenous genocide and every settler Christian directly benefits from this. The RCMP is an arm of the Canadian state that is constantly used to conduct massive amounts of violence and suppression of indigenous people. etc.

And this is also a deeper disease of white supremacy: this open denial of history allows white people today to believe their accomplishments, their privileges, their wealth, are entirely of their own doing, ignoring the mountain of colonial architecture that affords them these privileges in the first place. This also has the dual effect of individually blaming indigenous people for their own oppression. At the heart of this sentiment is an existential white insecurity - white supremacy promises what it says on the tin, and while many white people buy into it wholeheartedly, deep down there is an anxiety about the true nature of white supremacy, because white supremacy only works if it is constantly, violently reinforced at every turn. White supremacy, contra to the claim of white supremacists, is not naturally occurring, it has to be fought for at every moment, it has to constantly add bodies to the pile to justify itself. So when (especially white) settlers claim they are not responsible for the sins of the past, this is motivated reasoning, because if the past does not exist then their privilege as a white person is a result of some biological process outside of history, emerging naturally and organically. 

So like you, I don’t buy this argument, I think it’s deeply racist, and I don’t think it’s arguing the thing people think it is - of course Joe Average on the street is not individually responsible for his government’s genocide, because settler colonialism is an institutional project, but calls for decolonisation are not calls for white genocide or whatever other nonsense. It is like all serious left wing projects an aim towards the abolition of class, the abolition of the settler as a historical subject that exerts power over the indigenous subject. and while decolonisation is a violent process (and I use violence in an expansive, inclusive sense, not just interpersonal physical violence - many indigenous struggles you see today are violent in some sense or another because they are confronting the state), it is only that way because settler colonialism itself is an eternally violent machine and must be sloughed off violently 

[trainer-blue]

there are three terms i see being thrown around in a ton of posts "supporting" palestinians that don't actually apply. if you're someone who calls israel an apartheid colonial state committing genocide and you either actually believe it or have seen those terms often enough to copy them yourself, i encourage you to think a little more deeply about what these words mean:

apartheid:

this term isn't one that you use for just any form or extent of racial discrimination. i have never seen anyone use this term in reference to the united states, and i think everyone reading this can acknowledge that racism is extremely prevalent and systemic here. in fact, i've only ever seen this term used in regards to south africa and israel. if you use it about israel, think about what policies are in place that make it an apartheid state in your view, and then think about whether any other country in the world has comparable ones. if so, why is israel considered apartheid when others aren't? here is some information about the term and why it does not apply. why israel isn't an apartheid state arab political parties and participation in israeli government

colonial state:

to most people, colonization involves taking land from indigenous peoples so that people who are not indigenous to the area / have no ancestral ties to that area can control it instead. colonial settlers could, in theory, return to a country of ancestral origin in which they would be a cultural majority or be safe and not expect to be subject to hate crimes because they are of majority status. one can acknowledge that palestinians have been displaced without it being colonialism. jewish people are indigenous. yes, even the white ones. no, not all jews are white. if any of these claims seem far-fetched to you, or you don't understand how jewish people can be indigenous to israel, i recommend reading these posts: jewish indigeneity from an archeological perspective history of jewish presence in israel

genocide:

"the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." if israelis-- even the israeli government, which even "zionists" consider right-wing, fucked, and nonrepresentative of their values-- wanted to wipe out palestinians, we would have seen very different actions from them throughout history. one can acknowledge and mourn the loss of innocent palestinian life during wartime without framing it as something it's not. growth of palestinian population rates

"why does it matter what terms we use? isn't it GOOD to exaggerate or use buzzwords to catch people's attention? how else can we make people understand the true plight of palestinians?"

there is no reason to use terms that don't apply, actually. when so many people parrot these terms without understanding whether or not they're accurate:

1. this actual situation gets muddled, leading to people who have done no research of their own jumping to pick sides because they think they’re rallying against "the new nazis." These people may then support Hamas as “freedom fighters,” attack Jewish people around the world, and celebrate the rape, torture, and death of Israeli women and children because they’re “complicit in colonial apartheid genocide” and no longer considered human.

2. you imply that it is impossible to care about or support civilians affected by war if they’re NOT victims of genocide, colonialism, or apartheid states. Why do you need to rely on these terms to feel empathy for palestinians? If you acknowledged that they’ve been displaced by other indigenous people and are being killed in and affected by war, would your fervor for their cause die out? if so, is that a reasonable response to the realization that the real world isn't cut and dry, and not every conflict has a completely evil side and a side that is completely innocent?

3. ACTUAL instances of genocide, apartheid, and colonialism get watered down. I’ve seen people compare this to the Holocaust, calling Jewish people Nazis. Look back at the resource I linked to above. When you compare steady growth of Palestinian populations with the brutal erasure of ⅔ of the jewish population in europe, you are not only overexaggerating current events, but you’re also saying that the holocaust wasn’t all that bad, actually. To weaponize a people’s own genocide against them is. Gross. Especially when recent events have been catalyzed by Hamas beheading and burning babies–rather reminiscent of the Holocaust–and when people continue to deny that the 10/7 attack even took place. Also. rather. Reminiscent of non-jewish refusal to believe accounts of concentration camps.

similarly, when you water down terms like “apartheid” to mean any form of inequality for racial minorities, you deny the realities of apartheid south africa and imply that that’s “pretty much the same” as racism experienced in other countries around the world

hamas calling for jewish (NOT ISRAELI) death

perspective on equating israel to apartheid south africa

thank you for reading. this is not a call to abandon support for palestinians. this is a call to think about the terms you use and the misinformation you've seen.