this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
193 points (98.0% liked)

A Comm for Historymemes

2344 readers
467 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism, atrocity denial, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Lemmy.world rules.

Banner courtesy of @[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 58 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Explanation: The borders of the states of Palestine and Israel were drawn by a UN committee a few years after WW2. It was the great hope that, whatever the issues of the past, rational discussion and neutral arbitration could resolve future problems without war and without bloodshed.

It, uh, satisfied neither party, immediately started a shooting war, and we're still riding this atrocity carousel to this day.

In the UN's defense, at that point, tensions were so high and everything so utterly fucked by the past ~25 years that there was probably no division they could've offered that would've gotten both parties to lay down their arms.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I forget the details, but weren't the Brits fucking it up too before they shoved everything off on the UN?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Yeah, they made promises to the Jewish community about Zionist projects during WW1, and then after the war was over were in an awkward position of "We promised to do this to gain political support, but now we actually have to carry through 😬" and spent the next 25 years with an absolutely directionless policy regarding the Mandate of Palestine, which only contributed to the confusion and lawlessness and the increasing determination of both Zionists and Palestinians that matters could only be resolved by force of arms.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

To make things even more awkward, prior to making promises to the Jewish community, the UK had already made promises to the Arab community to provide independence to Arab Palestine in exchange for fighting the Turks.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You shouldn't make promises you can't keep.
Home Alone 2 taught me that.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago

Awesome detailed post!
I love learning with memes!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago

“We promised to do this to gain political support, but now we actually have to carry through 😬”

Sounds a lot like Brexit.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

Yeah, there was actually Israeli terrorism on British government buildings in the region.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In the UN's defense, at that point, tensions were so high and everything so utterly fucked by the past ~25 years that there was probably no division they could've offered that would've gotten both parties to lay down their arms.

In the UN's not-defense, neither side wanted a division in the first place (the Zionist side was very clear they intended to take over all of Palestine no matter what the partition plan said) and both were pretty vocal about it. The Palestinians more so, but still.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I mean, yeah, but "I'm going to pick one of you to be the total winner" is pretty much a non-starter as far as diplomatic solutions go, whereas "Everyone is going to end up disappointed" sometimes works.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

Zero state solution. Y'all couldn't behave, now nobody gets it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago

neutral arbitration

Everybody immediately picked a side and started pumping money and weapons into it

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago

If you would like to learn a more accurate representation of this period of history, this chapter which has been made freely available and is thoroughly sourced is something I would recommend reading. An extremely relevant excerpt:

In a 1938 diary entry, the leader of the Jewish community in Palestine (the Yishuv) and later Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, underlined the “necessity” of “removing the Arabs from our midst”. But he recognised that timing was critical. “What is inconceivable in normal times”, he wrote, “is possible in revolutionary times.” When the 1948 Arab-Israel War broke out, Zionist forces seized the opportunity to bring about what Ben-Gurion euphemistically referred to as “great changes in the composition of the population of the country”. During the war, some 700,000 Palestinians – two-thirds of the population – fled or were driven from their homes in what became Israel. Historians debate the extent to which this displacement unfolded according to a central plan. What cannot plausibly be denied is that Zionist massacres as well as expulsions were a major catalyst of Palestinian flight, that Zionist leaders welcomed the exodus, and that military commanders carried out evictions within an ideological context that had broadly legitimated population transfer as a strategic desideratum.

After the dust settled, Israeli authorities moved to consolidate Jewish domination within the new state whose expanded boundaries (established by armistice agreements in 1949 and known as the “Green Line”) encompassed 78 percent of historic Palestine. Israel refused to allow the return of Palestinians displaced during the war and killed thousands of unarmed refugees who made the attempt. Multiple Arab communities within Israel were expelled long after the war was over, while more than four hundred Palestinian villages, towns, and neighbourhoods inside Israel were destroyed to make way for Jewish settlement. Property owned by Palestinian refugees as well as Palestinians who remained to become citizens of Israel was systematically confiscated. This vast expropriation left the Israeli state in possession or control of fully 93 percent of the land within the Green Line, which authorities allocated almost exclusively for use by Jews. In the half-century after independence, the state established more than seven hundred Jewish localities and zero Arab localities, excepting several townships built to facilitate the concentration and dispossession of Bedouin Arabs. Even as Israeli administrators relentlessly promoted Jewish immigration, they directed Jewish settlement strategically to encircle Arab villages and restrict the Arab minority to “small enclaves”. The overarching policy was to “Judaize” the entire territory by “concentrating the Arabs and dispersing the Jews.”

and another, which illuminates what happened before even WW2.

As Jabotinsky prophesied, expanding Jewish settlement frequently provoked Palestinian opposition as well as resistance. Such opposition was typically overruled by means of discriminatory administration while resistance was suppressed by force. In the Mandate period, the Zionist leadership rejected the democratic principle of majority rule in Palestine so long as Jews comprised a minority, on the correct assumption that an Arab electoral majority would vote to end Jewish immigration and settlement. Between 1936 and 1939, British armed forces along with Jewish paramilitaries viciously crushed a Palestinian national revolt. After the 1948 War, Israel subjected some 90 percent of its Arab citizens to military rule. This emergency regime facilitated the destruction of Arab property and expropriation of Arab land until it was lifted in 1966, by which time the state’s demographic objectives within the Green Line had been substantially accomplished. The pattern repeated in the OPT from the following year. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have lived under Israeli military rule since 1967: three-quarters of Israel’s lifespan as a state. The occupation has been enforced through harsh repression including deportation, arbitrary detention, collective punishment, and unlawful killings. By one estimate, Israel jailed more than 800,000 Palestinians from the OPT between 1967 and 2016; those detained were “routinely subjected to torture”.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Iirc the Israelis were happy with this. Right or wrong, their Arab neighbors and Palestine immediately declared war on them while they were celebrating.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The Israelis were actually very unhappy with it. Both the Palestinian and Israeli sides immediately rejected the partition plan.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Israelis because they demanded an ethnostate and Palestinians because they had been forced off their land that was now supposedly going to be called "israel"

The commenter above even mentions a Jewish majority in Jerusalem. I don't know the validity of it, but this is evidence of the fact that British Palestine, before being subjected to colonial invasion, was a multicultural society with different religions living within the territory just fine. The destabilization came from zionists moving in with the explicit, stated purpose of killing Palestinians to make room for more Jewish settlers in order to entrench an ethnic Jewish majority in their occupied territory.

The only reason this is an issue is because zionists openly proclaimed they were not willing to live in community with the native population of the land they were trying to colonize. Nobody opposed jews in Israel until zionists showed up committing genocide.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm in agreement with the main thrust of the comment, that Zionist settlers were the primary cause for tensions and the eventual breakout of war in the Mandate, and that the Palestinian cause was the more just of the two, but you're really softballing what is a long history of antisemitism and antisemitic violence in the Levant.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I agree, I'm more just using the comments further up in the thread. I wouldn't have said the thing about Jerusalem had it not been commented above. I was trying to weave that into my comment to form an argument based on what everyone here seemed to be talking around. I know antisemitism is a real thing that doesn't just exist because of zionism. I'm not excusing real antisemitism of jews for immaterial reasons, just to be clear.

We seem to be in agreement for the most part, I was hesitant to even put the Jerusalem comment in there but someone had proclaimed it so confidently in the thread I was like alright since yall seem to think this let me just say this

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh, good! Yeah, I think we're on the same page.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Hell yeah 😎 hope you have a great weekend, thanks for the honest reply

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

You're talking 1947? The wiki article differs unless I'm misunderstanding you.

It's been a while since I've read about this, so I genuinely may be misremembering. Apologies if so!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#%3A%7E%3Atext=The+Partition+Plan%2C+a+four%2Cnumbering+twice+the+Jewish+population.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hmm. I remember reading on it differently. It may have been that whatever account I read emphasized the hardliners. I'll have to look into it later, try to figure out if it was just a misfire in my brain or if there's some basis to what I thought.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

I mean the hardliners were definitely opposed, and Ben Gurion had misgivings.