Is it ok for Israel to have an ethnostate?

[Ranger Rick]

Israel seems to only want Israeli's to live in Israel. Is that okay? If so, is it also okay for other nations? Why or why not?

 

[alcoholbob]

Confusing post you have there.

*In regards to your title: the majority of countries on Earth are basically ethnostates. Is it ok for Israel to have an ethnostate? Who knows? But if it's not, then most countries should be dissolved.

*In your regards to your first sentence about Israel only wanting Israelis to live in Israel--Israel, like most first world countries, has border security and a deportation force. That's because most people in the third world want to move to the first world due to social safety nets. As Milton Friedman once said, you can't have open borders and a welfare state. If you don't have a way to discourage immigration, you'd have unlimited migration, and a very rapid disintegration of the social safety net. Part of the way a modern first world state limits migration is putting limits on naturalization. Every country has their rules and regulations for doing so.

*The rest of your question, every country decides what they want to do for themselves. What does "is it okay for other nations?" mean? Do you think there's some UN laws that bind sovereign states? Even if such laws existed, any country is free to ignore them.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I see no issues other than the issues coming from somebody who has only 3 posts who immediately under the guise of a supposed question asks a question that has been answered around the world by other countries!

 

[Ranger Rick]

Confusing post you have there.

*In regards to your title: the majority of countries on Earth are basically ethnostates. Is it ok for Israel to have an ethnostate? Who knows? But if it's not, then most countries should be dissolved.

I ask this because some conservatard friends I have say that Israel is all about having only Israeli's in their country but they (Israeli's) consistently claim that the U.S. should allow immigrants in. This kind of stumped me and I didn't know how to respond. It seems from a logic standpoint that whats good for the goose is good for the gander but on the other hand if Israel allowed every ethnicity into their country they'd at some point become a minority, right?

 

[Ranger Rick]

I see no issues other than the issues coming from somebody who has only 3 posts who immediately under the guise of a supposed question asks a question that has been answered around the world by other countries!

What do you think? You have an Israeli flag as an avatar so I'd assume you have a view on it.

Oh I see, you have no issues with it being an ethnostate. Ok but how does that jive with the U.S.? Immigration is a hot topic and seems to be ok but not for Israel? IDK what to think of this myself.

 

[sandorski]

Israel is quite the moral and ethical dilemma. It exists over the West's guilt regarding the Holocaust, because even though Nazi Germany was the nation that carried it out even the Allies ignored, to a large extent, the Jewish Refugees trying to leave Europe before the Holocaust started. So at the time after the War it seemed logical to let them establish their own Nation so they could defend themselves. In order to do that though we have decided to ignore the people that have been and continue to be displaced. That's an issue that won't go away anytime soon, eventually we will need to step in and have Israel stop, IMO.

 

[alcoholbob]

I ask this because some conservatard friends I have say that Israel is all about having only Israeli's in their country but they (Israeli's) consistently claim that the U.S. should allow immigrants in. This kind of stumped me and I didn't know how to respond. It seems from a logic standpoint that whats good for the goose is good for the gander but on the other hand if Israel allowed every ethnicity into their country they'd at some point become a minority, right?

Regarding the U.S. immigration law. Actually, there's fairly strict quotas on immigration. Yes, there's a lot of illegal immigrants in America. But for legal immigration, the vast majority of immigration to the United States today is the result 1965 immigration act, which created the loosest definition of "family reunification" of any major industrial power in the world. This allowed people from countries where the birthrate is extremely high to chain migrate through family ties. Simply repealing the family reunification portion of the 1965 law would drop legal immigration to the U.S. from around 1.5 million annually to likely something closer to 400k. It's basically a loophole in the immigration law that allows immigration to go over the immigration quotas that are set up. If you took out this portion of the 1965 act, the U.S. suddenly has pretty strict immigration quotas and taking legal immigrants at similar rates to the 1960s. I don't believe this will ever be repealed unless a Nativist/Populist gets elected and you get an anti-immigration movement like the 1920s again since the family reunification loophole basically sets a very high immigration floor and big businesses love cheap labor.

This was basically an argument that was hashed out in the 1960s. John F Kennedy wanted an immigration system that favored skilled labor, whereas Lyndon Johnson favored family reunification. The reason he did was because the majority of Southern and Eastern Europeans were irritated at the national origins quotas which favored Northern Europeans, and wanted a way to bring over their families. Also there was an understanding that poor Southern and Eastern Europeans tended to have large families, so the law would favor the Democrats long term since this would change the demographics of the country to favor Democratic votes, whereas Northern Europeans were more likely to vote Republican.

As far as Israelis, I know a few but none of that I know have expressed any opinion on U.S. immigration policy. However I imagine most people in the world would favor the U.S. having lax immigration laws since they probably want to find it easy to come to this country in case the shit hits the fan, lol.

 

[woolfe9998]

Everyone who is a citizen of Israel, Arab, Christian or Jew, is an "Israeli" by definition. I think what the OP meant to say was "Israel seems to only want Jews to live in Israel." Am I misunderstanding?

 

[woolfe9998]

What do you think? You have an Israeli flag as an avatar so I'd assume you have a view on it.

Oh I see, you have no issues with it being an ethnostate. Ok but how does that jive with the U.S.? Immigration is a hot topic and seems to be ok but not for Israel? IDK what to think of this myself.

Please define "ethnostate.".

 

[Ranger Rick]

Yeah thats what I meant. Sorry.

 

[woolfe9998]

Israel is quite the moral and ethical dilemma. It exists over the West's guilt regarding the Holocaust, because even though Nazi Germany was the nation that carried it out even the Allies ignored, to a large extent, the Jewish Refugees trying to leave Europe before the Holocaust started. So at the time after the War it seemed logical to let them establish their own Nation so they could defend themselves. In order to do that though we have decided to ignore the people that have been and continue to be displaced. That's an issue that won't go away anytime soon, eventually we will need to step in and have Israel stop, IMO.

Great Britain made a public commitment to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine in 1917. The Holocaust likely accelerated its inception, but was far and away not its sole cause.

The displacement of Arabs you are discussing occurred during the 1948 war, the cause of which you are ignoring.

So far as stepping in to "have Israel stop," I think what is needed is a two state solution. That solution requires good faith from both sides, not just one.

 

[Jaskalas]

Perhaps the answer to your question "is it right?" is found in the concept of Freedom of association.

IMO, you will find both positives and negatives in a homogeneous society.
Still being the stupid animals that we are, there's often a lot of strife and violence with certain diverse nations. People are easily pitted against one another. Homogeneity helps avoid the pitfalls of human behavior.

Ultimately a strong diverse nation is best, the trick is in achieving one.
The American melting pot cria mid 20th century is the best known example I am aware of. Before we broke it down.

 

[alcoholbob]

Perhaps the answer to your question "is it right?" is found in the concept of Freedom of association.

IMO, you will find both positives and negatives in a homogeneous society.
Still being the stupid animals that we are, there's often a lot of strife and violence with certain diverse nations. People are easily pitted against one another. Homogeneity helps avoid the pitfalls of human behavior.

Ultimately a strong diverse nation is best, the trick is in achieving one.
The American melting pot cria mid 20th century is the best known example I am aware of. Before we broke it down.

1950s America I would not call a Melting Pot. I would call it more of an illusion created by the National Origins Act of 1924. America was taking millions of immigrants from around the world from the 1840s when westward expansion began until the 1924 Immigration Act.

What happened was nativist reaction by the Anglo Saxon majority by the early 1910s to decades of mass immigration, and the result was the immigration act of 1924--leading to 30 years of drip drop immigration (until the immigration act of 1952 dropped all ethnic quotas), where ethnic quotas created a system where 86% of the immigrants came from "founding" nations like England and Germany. Immigrants from Eastern, Southern, and Central Europe had strong immigration quotas, and also forced immigrants to move inland instead of allowing the natural tendency for immigrants to settle on the coasts, which was an attempt to break down non-Anglo Saxon groups from forming ethnic enclaves. Essentially the law forced Southern/Central/Eastern Europeans to integrate into Anglo Saxon culture, by limiting family unification, immigration quotas, and resettling them inland. It also outright banned most nonwhites from immigrating.

Without the 1924 immigration act the US would look VERY different today, and most of the European ethnic groups would have formed large ethnic enclaves and probably never assimilated to the to the extent they did by the 1950s-60s.

 

[woolfe9998]

Yeah thats what I meant. Sorry.

You still haven't explained what you mean by "ethnostate." That is a serious definitional problem here, a threshold question that must be answered before an intelligent response can be made to your question. I could hazard a guess as to what you mean, but I'm going to. I'd rather you explain it.

 

[Ranger Rick]

You still haven't explained what you mean by "ethnostate." That is a serious definitional problem here, a threshold question that must be answered before an intelligent response can be made to your question. I could hazard a guess as to what you mean, but I'm going to. I'd rather you explain it.

You already did with your first post. I said so. what else you need?

 

[Ranger Rick]

I think what the OP meant to say was "Israel seems to only want Jews to live in Israel." Am I misunderstanding?

let me directly quote to reduce your confusion.

 

[JEDIYoda]

What do you think? You have an Israeli flag as an avatar so I'd assume you have a view on it.

Oh I see, you have no issues with it being an ethnostate. Ok but how does that jive with the U.S.? Immigration is a hot topic and seems to be ok but not for Israel? IDK what to think of this myself.

It`s Israel`s state! They can do as they please! Sorry the immigration issue is such a hot topic with you! But as a jew I would say that is your problem!

 

[theeedude]

The real question is what happens if it becomes minority Jewish and has to decide between being a democratic state and an ethnic state.

 

[Atreus21]

Israel seems to only want Israeli's to live in Israel. Is that okay? If so, is it also okay for other nations? Why or why not?

There are 1.5 million Arabs living in Israel. Not sure I understand. They vote, hold public office, and otherwise are no less citizens than Israeli Jews.

 

[1sikbITCH]

Please define "ethnostate.".

Ethnostate is when you make America Great Again. Cleaning out Muslims, blacks, and Hispanics so white people can relax their sphincters. And no the Jews in Israel are just as psycho as the Nazis when it comes to that stupid crap. Without intervention our children would be reading about the extinct Palestinians in history books by now.

 

[Oyeve]

I personally wish the US would stop funding israel. They want be left alone, then leave them alone. We should sever ties with the ME and especially israel.

 

[1sikbITCH]

I personally wish the US would stop funding israel. They want be left alone, then leave them alone. We should sever ties with the ME and especially israel.

Agreed. And I would clarify my earlier remark, the Jewish people in Israel are Zionists and many other Jews would also consider them to be religious fanatics to some extent.

 

[piasabird]

This is a lie.

 

[1prophet]

Ethnostate is when you make America Great Again. Cleaning out Muslims, blacks, and Hispanics so white people can relax their sphincters. And no the Jews in Israel are just as psycho as the Nazis when it comes to that stupid crap. Without intervention our children would be reading about the extinct Palestinians in history books by now.

And those that put up "state sponsored" signs like these as well as their apologists have no leg to stand on when it comes to Israel.