you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Using "apartheid" for this really detracts from the argument here, in my opinion. "Apartheid" is an Afrikaans word for a very specific system built around skin color. It is not suitable (whatever one thinks of Israel and their system) as a catch-all descriptor for anything that one finds oppressive. It appeals to young people because they've been brought up on a historical narrative built around grievance-redress, but not everything can be "our Apartheid" (or "our Watergate" or "our WWII," etc.).

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

What do you call a system where ethnic groups can't marry and can't purchase property if it's in the ruling group's area? That's apartheid.

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

It isn't an ethnic group effected. Israeli Arabs can to all those things. It's people without Israeli citizenship who can't.

[–]gibberishx 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, and Israeli citizenship is race-based. Immigration is barred except to people who are ethnic Jews.

This is known as an ethno-state. Nazi Germany had one. The alt-right wants one.

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think those things were aspects of Apartheid in South Africa, though.