> Jewish and Jewish Israeli people are raised to be afraid of the entire world [...] This is due to a 1,000 year history of exactly that
Actually it goes way further. It seems that a large part of Jewish religion and culture is centered on the idea of being persecuted. A quick list goes from the Egyptian slavery, to the attack by the Amalekites, to the Babylonian destruction of the First Temple, to Haman's plot to exterminate Jews in Persia... and we're still at the book of Esther, 5th century BCE. The list goes on and on. Each of these is commemorated in a religious or civil ceremony: Passover, Purim, Hanukkah, etc.
This is to say, Judaism is built around grievance. And grievance in turn, if kept unchecked, is dangerous because it can justify unethical behaviours that are seen as reparatory.
You don't know your history. Zionism started in the late 19th century as a nationalist and colonialist movement; by 1917 it had already secured the support of the (soon to be) British administration of Palestine for the creation of a Jewish state there; mass immigration was already underway and flooded with hundreds of thousands of colonists a territory that had had almost no Jewish presence for a thousand years or more. Ethnic cleansing of the native population was already in the plans, as shown by the private diaries of the father of Zionism Theodore Herzl.
When in 1948 the UN formulated its partition plan (i.e. the proposal to expropriate the Palestinians of half of their land to give it to the Jewish immigrants), the land that the proposal assigned to the Jewish state had a 45% Palestinian population, which the newborn state immediately proceeded to ethnically cleanse. Besides, Israel never formally accepted the borders of the partition plan and immediately set to conquer new territory (plan Dalet).
In the 40s, Jewish migration was restricted by Britain, which changed after WWII because of the Holocaust. As already stated, the political landscape shifted when the Holocaust came to light.
As of today, 20% of Israel population are Arabic. Compare that to how Jewish population developed in Arabic countries i.e. Egypt, with practically zero Jews left. Not saying they did ethnical cleansing, but you don't end up with 20% when doing that. We will never now how the numbers had turned out without Arabic countries attacking Israel multiple times, but for sure with more than 20%.
> immediately set to conquer new territory
That's rewriting history. The initial borders and border changes happened while defending against attacks from other countries. Regarding the six day war, from what I have read, there are serious signs that support the view of the six day war being a preemptive strike.
Lol. While of course Zionism was conceived also as a solution to the persecutions that Jews were facing in Europe, it was born within the European ideology of nationalist movements of that period (which gave birth to several of the European nations of today) and of colonialism- also a widespread and uncontroversial feature of the time. Nothing specifically bad about Zionism in this respect, it's simply a product of the ideas of its time.
All the rest, about Israel existence today, is irrelevant. We can recognize the mistakes of the past to at least understand how we got to this point and what's the best and correct way forward. It's not about reverting history but at least knowing it.
Biggest problem is that many strive to revert history in some sense. You can't just dismantle a country like Israel. Israel isn't going away without a genocide on the Jewish population.
It's sad that there hasn't been any good faith decision makers for roughly 20 years. Everybody just fueling the conflict, making it miserable for everybody who directly faced the consequences. Lately, the mass murdering in 2023, followed by bigger scale killing / mass murdering.
The terrorist group Hamas as well as Netanjahu and his fascist clique must both be removed for the people in the region having a chance of a peaceful live.
The creator of Zionism, Teodore Herzl was very clear that it was a colonial project dependent on ethnic cleansing:
> We must expropriate gently the private property on the state
assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back. (Theodore Herzl, 12 June 1895)
So, anyone who had owned a plot of land was at least deserving of property rights - but given that lots of people's in the 20th century were unfairly stripped of their property rights and never compensated, I wouldn't expect anything.
As they did not possess sovereignty in the region, I don't recognize any sort of collective national claim of ownership to the overall region.
Yes, it describes ethnic cleansing. As for colonialism it doesn't need to be described, moving en masse to a country inhabited by an indigenous population to settle it is the definition of colonialism.
This is blatantly false. Palestinians are indigenous to Palestine. No one is indigenous to Israel, which was created in 1948. Israel is a colony, defined by its non-indigenous population.
Unfortunately it isn’t. The Palestinian national identity has only sprung into being in the late 1960s. Until then they were simply Arabs, just like the Arabs from the surrounding nations. Furthermore Jewish indigeneity in Israel is well established by historical, archaeological, genetic, and scriptural evidence (it’s in the Quran!)
> Although I do think throwing "pro-Palestine" in is a cheap insinuation. Pretty much everyone is against genocide
Uh? The US government and many of the EU governments (i.e. "the West", the world's most powerful economic, diplomatic and military bloc) are either fine with Israel doing whatever it wants or too scared to speak up. All are, in fact, supporting Israel with money and weapons, and it's in Israel's supreme interest to keep the money and the support flowing by damaging any movement and politician that declares to be "pro-Palestine".
That said, I also don't like the (widely used) 'pro-Palestine' label, which implies some kind of partisanship. You don't call the anti-apartheid people "the pro-Blacks".
This is a very interesting perspective. However we always thought that the diffusion of ever stronger AIs was practically guaranteed by its competitive value- you might restrict what AIs are available in your country, but the impact on your economy can be dramatic if other countries have access to better models. In the end, it's hard to imagine governments blocking access to any AI that is just a bit better than what other countries have.
> Our solar system and its planets, the millions of other solar systems that constitute our galaxy, and the island universes themselves all lie within the boundaries of the station. The station is coeval with the cosmos [...]
> Estimated diameter: 15,000 light years.
Uhmm..
Yes I know, the entire construction is not striving for realism and neither should be taken literally.
But here it's not about a generic lack of realism (there's plenty of details you could point to, but it would be of course silly) but simply the internal contradiction in what the main character says: claims that the station is "as big as the cosmos" and two lines later provides an estimate for its diameter that is grossly inconsistent with that same assessment. Unless they live in a universe that is only 15k years old, which is also possible (but clearly not serving a purpose in the story).
No, the main character isn't confused at all in his last message, he's very confident in saying that the station "is coeval with the cosmos, and constitutes the cosmos." That's why the "estimated diameter: 15k ly" feel like a writer's oversight. Unless it's intentional, but then I'd like to understand why.
The report writer also failed to realize they'd looped back to their starting location until much after they had done so. They're clearly unreliable, an inconsistency like that doesn't need to be explained by anything other than that the author is losing their grip on reality. The other explanation is that their instruments are indicating a diameter of 15,000 light years and that that is all they are recording (as they were recording in previous reports, the numbers came from instruments), and the report writer has failed to recognize the inconsistency between their belief and the facts available to them.
> No, the main character isn't confused at all in his last message, he's very confident in saying that the station "is coeval with the cosmos, and constitutes the cosmos."
The main character is in the midst of a religious fervor. The station does not constitute the cosmos.
> "estimated diameter: 15k ly" feel like a writer's oversight.
Every time the instruments were checked, the instruments jumped in estimated diameter. Are you confused because the speaker got to the conclusion that the station is the universe before the instruments did? No doubt if there were more reports, it would be reported as being larger. Probably it wouldn't stop at the size of the universe, either.
In any event: neither the speaker, nor their instruments, were correct. Both are deeply confused about what the station is.
The whole thing was already stretching realism, when the initially assumed 500 metre object "covered by a fine vapour obscuring the rest" suddenly became estimated at 500 miles across. When they were approaching to land, by the time they were a few miles out, they'd surely have wondered how a 500 metre structure was obscuring their entire field of view.
I've also given some thoughts to why Microsoft ships (shipped?) for decades stuff like notepad instead of some advanced text editor. My hunch was that as a platform provider you don't want to occupy the ground that should be left to third party developers- you need them to fill your platform with applications. So you provide the absolute basic and let others compete to produce the advanced apps.
Terrible? Incredibly bad? Something tells me you are not very familiar with poetry, literature or writing in general. This exercise gets its inspiration and tone from one of Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad short stories ("Trurl's electronic bard"). Besides, what did you expect from a "10 pages epic rhyming poem about a haircut where every word starts with the letter S"? Robert Frost?
Not sure about this- Windows laptops have been a disaster for a decade- consumers have basically no clue of what they're buying and how it will work- will it be a piece of cheap, creaky plastic; will the basics actually work (e.g. audio in and out); will the speed be acceptable, will its fans constantly sound like a jet taking off, etc. A well made cheap laptop with guaranteed quality is a godsend.
The case of smartphones is completely different: Android is actually a good OS and there's plenty of excellent devices and high quality brands in the mid range.
Actually it goes way further. It seems that a large part of Jewish religion and culture is centered on the idea of being persecuted. A quick list goes from the Egyptian slavery, to the attack by the Amalekites, to the Babylonian destruction of the First Temple, to Haman's plot to exterminate Jews in Persia... and we're still at the book of Esther, 5th century BCE. The list goes on and on. Each of these is commemorated in a religious or civil ceremony: Passover, Purim, Hanukkah, etc.
This is to say, Judaism is built around grievance. And grievance in turn, if kept unchecked, is dangerous because it can justify unethical behaviours that are seen as reparatory.
reply