From: David Lubkin (extropy@unreasonable.com)
Date: Tue Apr 09 2002 - 14:16:04 MDT
CurtAdams@aol.com wrote:
>Our calls for "reasonable behavior" on the part
>of the Israelis and Palestinians rings a bit hollow when we degenerate
>into personal attacks. It's really offtopic for this list to discuss
>the Palestinian topic, but I think it would be on topic if we could
>demonstrate how people with deeply held, emotionally important
>opinions could have civil and productive discussion. It's a skill
>we need to be widespread for our own goals, no?
Agreed. Part of that skill, which you did not follow in the posting that
directly preceded that one, is to avoid inflammatory language. Which not
only encourages the discussion to devolve into flames but is usually an
inaccurate way of expressing what you mean to say.
>Unfortunately, I don't expect the Israeli government to then act against
>the Jewish nuts, especially the settlers, who are mostly on stolen land.
In an attempt to both shed light on the Middle East conflict and get more
on-topic, I'd like us to pull back to discuss issues that relate to the
societal end-state and dispute resolution we're after and how we get there
from here.
What is your factual basis for asserting that a majority of Jewish West
Bank settlements are built on stolen land? What makes land stolen -- under
current laws, or in Anarchotopia or Libertopia?
If Arab residents were voluntarily compensated for the land, it is not
stealing. But if the land was unclaimed, is it stealing? If the Arab
residents were involuntarily compensated, is it stealing?
The Arab residents of the West Bank were citizens of Jordan in
1967. Jordan fought a war against Israel and lost the West Bank.
If A initiates violence against B, B is justified in defending themself
against A. If in the course of defense, A obtains the property of B, is A
justified in keeping that property?
If A and B are states, and B obtains the property of citizens of A in the
course of a lawful defense against aggression initiated by A, what should
happen? Should B have to give back private property? Should B get to keep
it but A has to compensate its citizens for their loses? Does it matter
whether A is a dictatorship, a democracy, a voluntary association, or
private contracted protective services?
How imminent and incontrovertible must a threat of violence be before you
are justified in taking preemptive action? Israel launched preemptive
attacks against Jordan and other Arab nations in 1967 based on their claims
of proof that those nations were days away from initiating attacks against
Israel.
Is there a time limit on assertions of property rights?
If Mike robs Spike and gives the signed, first edition of _Engines of
Creation_ to Gina, who sells it to Russell, we might hold Gina and Russell
harmless and even compensate them, but Spike gets his book back.
What if Mike robbed Spike, and then Perry robbed Mike? Is it a crime to
rob a robber? Then Spike took a vow of poverty, turned himself into an
M-brain, and disappeared without a trace. What should happen to Mike,
Perry, and to the book?
There is not a clear personal provenance for any of the West Bank (or
really, for nearly all of the planet). We know that it was part of Jordan,
which was given it by the British, who took it in the course of prosecuting
WW I. We can trace back through the Ottoman Empire ultimately to the
eviction of Jews from the provinces of Judea and Samaria. If we continue
the story through the Bible, the Jews obtained the land from the original
inhabitants through divinely-sanctioned warfare. However, recent
archaeological research casts doubt on certain of the stories.
So how far do we go back? When do we decide the historical record is too
uncertain, and stop? What rights do the descendents of the original
landowners have? Is there such a thing as tribal rights? If you assume
that the Jews *were* forcibly evicted from Israel, and that they had a bona
fide claim to the land there, do people who assert an ethnic, racial, or
religious identity with them have any rights? (Similar to the question of
slavery reparations: who has a valid claim against whom?)
A side issue: Jordan is a fairly strong monarchy. I'm guessing that, as
such, all the land technically belonged to King Hussein, not to the
inhabitants of the West Bank.
-- David.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:21 MST