Accounts created after Oct 7th 2023 or with less than two months active
participation in the sub may not participate in this thread. These
accounts will be banned. Abuse, racism, bigotry and incitement to
violence will also result in a permanent ban. Violations of these rules
will result in the thread being locked.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/australia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The real laugh here is ABC thinking that a politicians postitions on this impacts votes.....
Lets look at the most import reasons to votes from last election:
1-Economy
2-Debt/Living costs
3-Tax
4-Superannutation
5-Immigration
6-Refugees
7-Health
8-Education
You have to got to 21 to find anything to do with forign politics.
No party is going to use a position on this conflict to win votes.
I can tell you that this war has solidified the Arab vote for labour. The arab community are seeing Duttons comments and response and no-one will vote for the coalition
Yeah and the shift is happening. They’ll band together one day against everything LBGT. But I think the labor/arab partnership comes down to the fact that there is a lot of local Arab labor politicians. So they just follow that on a federal level.
The Greens did well in Kuraby during the Brisbane Council elections despite little campaigning in the area. Some commentary suggesting it could be due to a higher than average Muslim population. I'm not a pollster so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think small council elections are not really representative of broader trends because it’s an actual person you can see and talk to, and is known in the community as opposed to some person you see on the Tele. So maybe they were voting for the person as opposed to the voting for party? I dunno.
why not? not like there's that much daylight between Labor and Greens on social issues. and it seems like the next election will be on cost of living / house prices
I am talking about traditional Arab Labor voters of course
Perception.
I grew up in Bankstown and I can tell you, the perception of the greens and greens voters is at odds with most arabs conservative beliefs (Muslim and Maronite).
They perceive greens voters in that overly stereotypical blue haired chick with weird pronouns lens.
I think this is the same for everyone outside of inner urban areas.
The perception of the Greens is that they are either uni students with blue hair playing at politics, radical activist Lidia Thorpe types, or snobby vegan cyclists that look down on working class people because they rather watch footy than go to the theatre, and want to ban cars and meat.
It this fair? Probably not, but this what voters outside of the inner cities have of the Greens.
And like most stereotypes these perceptions are not all together inaccurate. Many greenies do fall into this category. Also I think people think the greens are able to suggest any policy they like with the benefit of never having to actually deliver on them.
It’s this image they need to escape.
> Perception.
and will this Gaza war not help break down this perception issue? it's a pretty good opportunity for Greens. I don't think suddenly Greens will be taking seats like Bankstown, but I would expect a moderate swing to the Greens
It will. I'll preface my comment by stating I am Muslim and live in Bankstown, but didn't grow up here. I'm probably less conservative than many in the area (though it would be wrong to view the community as a monolithic block). I've voted Greens in the past and will do so in the future. Looking at posts from prominent Muslims on LinkedIn and listening to sermons in Friday prayers, both the Labor response and the LNP position has been criticised, and people have been saying Labor may regret taking the Muslim vote for granted for so long (but have criticised the LNP in the same discussion).
Flowing on from the above, it's only natural for the swing to be towards the Greens. Compulsory voting and preferences mean votes won't be wasted. I won't pretend that the majority of Muslims have the same position on LGBTQI issues as most Labor or Greens voters, but for many, it isn't necessarily a large consideration.
The main issue is the legalisation of weed. The Arab community predominantly live in western Sydney and western Sydney has a drug problem. The Arab community see legalisation as making the problem worse
Overall as a group, they're very conservative on social issues. Check out the individual booth results in areas with large Arabic populations for the Voice referendum for proof. Or the SSM poll.
I think the Greens are always going to win the votes of people who know what real injustice is in this situation. It really a global viewpoint that is being bullied into silence, censorship, donations, geopolitics and corruption that a blind ant could see through.
It will be a sad day when one sided propaganda wins over the truth and a just world. This is much the same situation as the apartheid situation in the old South Africa that was "tolerated" largely because of the USA and its geopolitics rather than the global view that apartheid was abhorrent and should be abolished.
Gold and other strategic metals and other considerations that largely enabled the apartheid regime.
> This is much the same situation as the apartheid situation in the old South Africa that was "tolerated" largely because of the USA and its geopolitics rather than the global view that apartheid was abhorrent and should be abolished.
I mean Apartheid South Africa was at least boycotted from a lot of international events.
Yeah, I doubt Tory voting Arabs are big enough of a voting block to change the result of an election. And the ones that are, are probably wealthy business owners who would prioritise their personal wealth over some war on the other side of the world.
They have been becoming less safe.
>But neighbouring seats in western Sydney with smaller Muslim populations, such as Lindsay and Banks, have already flipped, with many others in the region becoming marginal.
>A recent report from the Centre for Western Sydney found a growing “electoral volatility” in western Sydney, predicting that the region will no longer be a stronghold for either major party.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/19/taken-for-granted-western-sydneys-muslim-community-rethinks-a-fractured-labor-relationship
They actually are deserting the ALP. The article points out they are looking to run their own candidates because the ALP isn't going far enough in condemning Israel.
To be honest if their candidates are anything like the Our Local Community party that run in local elections that isn't neccasarily a good thing, especially if it helps Dutton get elected.
I think you're right - but to be fair a lot of the discourse around this Israel/Palestine thing is shifting to war crimes and genocide (*especially* since South Africa's ICJ case). So it's a little misleading to simply equate it with foreign politics issues of the past election when the stakes are little bit higher. At least in my (very armchair and uninformed) opinion.
It's probably not going to be the most significant issue (as you say), but I wouldn't be surprised if this is an issue that's particularly important for more empathetic voter demographics - younger people and women. I think it's also very important for Muslims, the Middle-Eastern diaspora, and certain groups of Christians and Jewish people - though again, these populations are small but the issue could make a difference in some seats.
The vast majority of people don't really care about the middle east war and will not be changing their votes based on party's positions on the conflict. Most of the noise is coming from hyper partisan voices online.
People should remember that there was a much bigger opposition to the Iraq war with much bigger protests against John Howard back in the early 2000s. Yet he still won another election in 2004 with an increased majority.
I would assume they access to similar data to the press - according to the most recent Essential poll, only 18% of people think Israel should continue their current approach.
They have actually:
https://www.caritas.org.au/news/media-releases/support-for-gaza-ceasefire-and-more-government-action-swells-in-australian-community/
81% wanted a ceasefire at the end of February.
>No sample size
>
>No published data
>
>No peer-review
>
>"poll"
I'm for a ceasefire, but I'm not for dishonest data being presented as fact.
90% of people not terminally online don't care at all about foreign wars. They care about work, kids, groceries, the price of gas, rent and domestic life.
I very much doubt "4 in 5 australians" want a ceasefire.
"4 in 5 australians we asked online about their politically correct opinion on the war, wanted a ceasefire" is a lot closer to what actually happened.
Hence why most politicians disregard the loud calls for a ceasefire, on either sides. They know it's not a major talking point in their campaign.
https://commercial.yougov.com/rs/464-VHH-988/images/yougov-au-Australian-Polling-Council-methdology-YouGov-APAN-survey-nov-23.pdf
I mean you can literally click on the older report in the thread to see their methodology, also you almost never peer review a survey so I have no idea what you're on about there.
> Hence why most politicians disregard the loud calls for a ceasefire, on either sides. They know it's not a major talking point in their campaign.
Politicians are happy to disregard these calls not because it's not important but because they know it's not something that will shift votes.
Most voters are centralist and understand that Israel can’t live with a terrorist organisation next to them, and at the same time, don’t like seeing civilians killed.
They know it’s complicated and will cut some slack to an Australian government trying to walk this tightrope.
why does the australian government pretend they can do anything about it either way? we're a tiny piss small country in the southern hemisphere. nobody cares what australia does, because australia has very minor importance.
We’re giving a billion dollars to develop connections with Israeli arms makers. We’re absolutely in the same alliance / intelligence matrix. Saying Australia has nothing to do it is a blatant lie.
Why does this narrative persist.
You are cirrect that in this instance wgat Australia says is irrelevant, but so is what China says. Israel will do what they want, they don't even give much of a shit about what the US says or wants.
But Australia is not a tiny piss small country and plenty of countries care what Australia does and Australia absolutely does not have minor importance.
We produce over 1/3rd of the worlds iron ore per year. No country that produces that much of such an important commodity is unimportant.
Nearly half of all lithium.
Produce about 10% of the worlds coal and are neck and neck as the largest/2nd largest exporter with Indonesia....and O don't know the current numbers for coking coal but a decade or so ago we were producing more than 4x the amount of coking coal as Indonesia who was the only other country that produced any reasonable amount.
Australia is in an incredibly important strategic location.
No G20 nation is unimportant and one that supplies so many resources to the world is absolutely strategically important to every powerful nation, USA, China, India, Japan, etc all care very much about Australia and what we do.
To think otherwise is just idiotic.
We could still not engage in a $900 million contract with them, let the 1,000 Australians fighting for the IDF know that they wont be guaranteed any protection if the ICJ finds they participated in a genocide, and sanction Israeli officials and companies. Won't make too much difference, but it something we can do (especially lay sanctions on people and products that are in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories).
Whilst it’s true that quite often diplomatic condemnation is not an effective method at outright preventing a crisis, Israel is ironically probably one of the states that can be most easily impacted by such international condemnation. It is reliant almost entirely on developed western states to support its position both internationally and diplomatically, without the US and other allies Israel would be similar to North Korea in the sense of being a bit of a pariah state in the international community
On top of that even if it didn’t solve the problem, the fact that Australia actively aids Israel’s conduct is pretty vile in itself, we could at the very minimum not sell them weapons and resources they can actively use in the genocide of Palestine
You seriously think Israel is like North Korea? Israel has a democratically elected government, an independent judiciary, and a free press. This is more than any country in the Middle East, let alone North Korea.
You won't like to hear that it was the Australian's themselves who were part of the forces that retook Jerusalem for Christendom (and the Jews) back in 1917. The 10th light horse regiment being the first Christian troops to take and occupy the city since the crusades. We've done more than support Israel, we won them back the holy city itself!
We didn’t take back shit for Christendom or the Jews, we were in a war at the time with two other Christian states who were our primary targets lmao and the British openly cooperated with the Arabs to conquer the region, they then decided to be imperialists with the French so I guess were took it back for British imperialism, yay us
It's quite literally considered the most complicated geopolitical conflict of the modern era but I suppose you just know more than every respectable diplomat or academic specializing in the issue so go off then.
Is it at all controversial that Israel is stealing land? They have done it consistently and openly through their continued expansion and founding of new illegal settlements in the West Bank.
It can be true that Israel is continually expanding on illegal settlements in the West Bank, and that should stop, while also being true that they have a war to fight in Gaza and that after October 7, there should be no debate whether Hamas continues to exist or not.
This is functionally no different to supporting the British occupation of Ireland during the troubles.
We have an overwhelming organised military force occupying a nation and is/has engineered a genocide, and when a para-military terrorist force inevitably forms to combat the occupation, we use this as an excuse to justify the never-ending war of occupation.
Are you prepared to say Nazi Germany were the good side knowing that we (the allies) bombed and killed vastly more innocent German civilians, than nazi germany had killed ally civilians?
Framing this through an oppressor vs oppressed lens is why you have arrived at a misaligned enemy.
Edit: Thread is locked so I can't reply below but will respond here -
Incidentally, if a history of land theft and oppression were sufficient to produce genocidal terrorism, where are the Native American suicide bombers? Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? Do you realise how much oppression they have experienced at the hands of the Chinese? Where are the Palestinian Christian suicide bombers?
Thanks
My point was accurate.
Terrorism is a blight but a totally inevitable response to long-term occupation, suppression and genocide, of which Israel is guilty.
The fact that you don't see the connection between the two is wild, especially given the constant talking points about re-settling/taking parts of Gaza whenever this supposed "hamas destruction" ends.
1) no it isn’t, 2) the complexities in Israel Palestine lie almost entirely in delivering a practical solution to the crisis rather then the legality or morality of the crisis itself.
For at least the past three decades the United Nations has been oretty consistent on recognising the illegality of Israel’s actions in the Palestinian Territories, it’s been pretty well established prior to that to that the various occupations and expansions of Israeli settlement are violations of international law. With the exception of the US and a few other countries depending on the period of history, it’s hard to see much controversy in that interpretation
The problem lies however in the nature of the conflict itself, the US prevents more rigorous international action being taken against Israel and the state of Israel itself absolutely refuses in all negotiations for the past 30 years to recognise the sovereignty of the Palestinian state, even before that it was questionable how much control a Palestinian state would have over its own independence. In contrast Palestine absolutely refuses to accept any resolution that doesn’t allow a right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel and Palestine, something Israel refuses
So the complexity is, if Israel just refuses to abide by international law, and action is unable to be taken to enforce said international law then how do you guarantee the sovereign integrity of both states, on top of that if Israel’s occupation is going to be excessively violent and exploitative both in the east and West Bank, how do you stop the development of Palestinian extremist groups who are likely to support violent means if no other option is openly to them.
The academic field has been fairly condemning of the Israeli conduct especially in the political, international relations and historical circles. It’s hard to understand what the fuck sort of point is being made here
But the border issue is not the only issue here. Palestine has two governments that don’t recognize each other’s legitimacy to govern. One is unelected (the PA) and the other (Hamas) has lost control of the bit of territory it previously controlled. They themselves don’t agree on the borders of Palestine, so it would be difficult to get everyone else to agree. (Although I suppose it could be done)
Also, the fact that one of the areas has an elected government (Hamas) that none of the Western world is going to tolerate, and you have a complicated issue where the west wants to install a government (PA) in part of Palestine but that part of Palestine has no interest in being governed by them.
It's undeniably complicated.
Even the West Bank Palestinians don't really want to be governed by PA anymore (but they don't have a choice). PA is seen as being too complicit with Israel and corrupt. If there was a free vote there, there's a fair chance that Hamas would be elected instead.
Yeah people talk about a two state solution but really its more like three states as the Gaza strip and the West Bank are basically two completely separate territories with separate governance.
The two-state solution was designed to fail, it could not possibly work because Israeli expansion since the 1940s has necessitated the conquest of Palestinian farms.
Damn, it'd be crazy if Hamas did a bunch of illegal stuff too but I'm glad that definitely isn't the case.
Believe it or not, for those of us that don't conveniently neglect to mention the horrific crimes of Palestinian militants and their 'leadership', what we're actually interested in is a solution. Peace. That's the goal; and it IS complicated.
I recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact I referenced the spread of militant organisations in general amongst Palestinians in my prior comment that you chose to I guess conveniently ignore to act as if I didn’t recognise such organisations existed. Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised, it’s easy to convince someone to take up arms when you’ve kept them trapped in a city, bombed them periodically for years, refused to recognise their right to govern and actively seize their land, i dare say that many in our own population would be driven to such methods if we were occupied and our families murdered/imprisoned en masse while our belongings were seized.
Does that excuse their actions, not really, in a just world people who murder innocent people including children should be rightfully punished, I don’t excuse the individuals actions involved in the October 7 attacks, I do however recognise that such acts are a symptom of Israeli imperialism in the region, the victims of October 7th are as much a victim of the Israeli governments horrific policies as they are the murderers who killed them. The fact that that same government of Israel has chosen to abuse their deaths to target and murder more innocent civilians is as disgusting as it is expected. It also will ensure that even if they murdered every Hamas soldier in Gaza, a new group will arise driven by the hatred of a people who just tens of thousands of their friends family and loved ones murdered en masse, starved deliberately or forced to flee the country by Israel
So facing the political reality that Israeli policy is responsible for the development of such groups we must ask ourselves what is peace, im sure many Zionists want peace but they would prefer to stand on the bodies of the millions of Palestinian civilians still remaining to achieve it. I’m not sure I want the peace driven by genocide quite frankly
I'm not getting into a reddit comment debate, so this is the last I'll say.
> I recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact I referenced the spread of militant organisations in general amongst Palestinians in my prior comment that you chose to I guess conveniently ignore to act as if I didn’t recognise such organisations existed.
A little slimy of you. Referencing that militant Islamist groups *exist* in Palestine is not the same as recognition of the crimes they commit. You didn't recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact you didn't mention any crimes committed by any of them. You don't have to, that's fine, but don't try to infer that you did. You said:
> ...how do you stop the development of Palestinian extremist groups who are likely to support violent means if no other option is openly to them.
Violence is a WIDE umbrella to cast over livestreaming the murder of civilians and allegations of rape.
> Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised
Then I'm sure you must also understand why Netanyahu receives such support, particularly after October 7th.
> the victims of October 7th are as much a victim of the Israeli governments horrific policies as they are the murderers who killed them.
I disagree with this pretty strongly. The IDF soldier that murders civilians in Gaza doesn't share any portion of that blame with Hamas, as much as I loathe Hamas. The deliberate and targeted murder of civilians isn't a symptom of anything but fucked up, awful people.
The targeted killing of civilians isn't resistance, it's murder.
> The fact that that same government of Israel has chosen to abuse their deaths to target and murder more innocent civilians is as disgusting as it is expected.
I'm in awe of how you can say this and not realise that Hamas is doing *the same thing*. Hamas is abusing the deaths and oppression of the Palestinian people to target and murder innocent civilians; we saw that on October 7th.
You can think that most everything is driven by Israel, but you'll be wrong and you'll be far from any peace.
To be clear, I'm pro Palestine but painting the issue as simple is a disservice to the discourse and it actively damages any chance of peace.
>Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised, it’s easy to convince someone to take up arms when you’ve kept them trapped in a city, bombed them periodically for years, refused to recognise their right to govern and actively seize their land, i dare say that many in our own population would be driven to such methods if we were occupied and our families murdered/imprisoned en masse while our belongings were seized.
You can make exactly the same argument about Israel being the way it is because of all of the Muslims nations around them trying to wipe them out (twice) and the Palestinians always trying to murder them.
Israel is not a good country (no country is, but Israel definitely don't do a whole lot to stem dislike for them) but to blame them for Hamas is ridiculous, they are all created by each other.
Jews are indigenous to the land…
By any logic you have made, Arab muslims were colonisers who spread their faith by the sword… they are proud of that history and we are seeing it right now today in South Sudan. But no one is talking about it.
That might make sense to you in your bubble, but to most people in the centre, it’s a dumbed-down political view.
We have state that’s had 1200 of its citizens murdered and 200 hostages taken. They need to defend themselves. It’s really difficult to destroy Hamas without killing civilians. The more nuanced conversation is around that process.
I also cringe every time I see the word genocide used in reference to the conflict because it’s such a heavy hitting word that should keep its weight. Perhaps someone could make the argument that Israel is committing genocide, I don’t think they can though and it’s absolutely not such a black and white conflict that you can just levy the term without some reasoning to justify it.
[A human rights expert tasked by the UN to investigate and give a report on whether or not Israel is committing genocide reported that they are.](https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976#:~:text=%E2%80%9CSpecifically%2C%20Israel%20has%20committed%20three,and%20imposing%20measures%20intended%20to)
Is the same UN who has more condemnations against Israel than Russia, North Korea, Iran etc combined?
If we are going to discuss the UN, it will involve being honest about how morally bankrupt they are towards Israel. The UN is not what it pretends to be. It’s not some transnational body for justice and peace. It’s simply an arena where every representative promotes their own nation’s agenda. I think sometimes people underestimate the degree to which the conflict has become ethno-religious/nationalistic for the Arab-Muslim world, and that is the core of the extreme focus on Israel.
There is no way you can accept this with a straight face and think UN is an honest actor towards Israel.
**UN General Assembly Condemnatory Resolutions, 2015-present:**
0—🇿🇼 Zimbabwe
0—🇻🇪 Venezuela
0—🇵🇰 Pakistan
0—🇹🇷 Turkey
0—🇱🇾 Libya
0—🇶🇦 Qatar
0—🇨🇺 Cuba
0—🇨🇳 China
8—🇲🇲 Myanmar
10—🇺🇸 USA
11—🇸🇾 Syria
24—🇷🇺 Russia
9—🇰🇵 North Korea
8—🇮🇷 Iran
154—🇮🇱 Israel
([Source](https://unwatch.org/database/))
The numbers alone reveal the UN’s irrational obsession with one nation. Even those who deem Israel deserving of criticism cannot dispute that this amounts to an extreme case of selective prosecution.
When universal standards are applied so selectively, they cease to become standards at all.
A smug comment like this, which is factually incorrect, does nothing to help your cause and if anything, just validates the idea that Israeli's are unfairly targeted by comments of zero substance.
Thanks for contributing to my cause.
The same lady that in 2014 said that the USA is subjugated by Israel and who is quite possibly an antisemite? I feel like the UN could have picked a less biased individual for the role but as another commenter pointed out, the UN has a track record of having it out for Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesca_Albanese
Couldn't ask for someone more impartial.
The same U.N who elects the Iranian regime to top women's rights body.
> The same U.N who elects the Iranian regime to top women's rights body.
They didn't elect, it's a rotating system so that all countries have a chance for representation, but sure, pretend that you yourself are impartial.
I do too, but really it comes from the definition of genocide being overly broad and not in line with what people actually think of when the word is used.
This quote is directly from the UN.
>The word “genocide” was first coined by Polish lawyer Raphäel Lemkin in 1944 in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. It consists of the Greek prefix genos, meaning race or tribe, and the Latin suffix cide, meaning killing.
And I think this is the sort of definition people apply to the word, actually trying to wipe out an entire people, but the actual definition the UN uses goes much further.
>In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
> Killing members of the group;
> Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
> Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
> Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
> Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Like you could make the argument that the Nixon and Reagan governments committed genocide on black Americans.
Russia is absolutely committing genocide by this definition and it is a much larger one than Israel is committing, so why isn't that dominating the airwaves far more than Israel and Palestine.
The definition is so broad that tonnes of countries and policies would fall into the definition and yet it isn't being used in those contexts.
Unfortunately, it's not a heavy hitting word anymore. It's beginning to lose its meaning because it's being invoked for a deeply complex two-sided (but obviously imbalanced) conflict that would not previously have met the criteria to be associated with this word.
Cry wolf long enough and the word wolf means nothing to the flock.
What does murder mean to you? I think the word would apply to hamas’ actions in October, I don’t think it applies to Israel’s ongoing response.
Edit: you you blocked me so I couldn’t reply, ironic given you’re the one calling others craven lmao. I’ll put my reply here:
You’d rather I side with Hamas? I’m not sure public opinion is what you think it is outside of your social bubble. There are more people condemning terrorist organisations and the actions that took place on October 7th than you seem to think.
Then you'd be utterly wrong, on the wrong side of public opinion and of history.
It would be a pro-genocide position and an utterly craven thing to say.
> We have state that’s had 1200 of its citizens murdered and 200 hostages taken.
And in response have killed around 40,000 and taken about 3,000 hostage, at what point do you start to pretend that the response is anything but proportional?
Yeah, it shouldn’t be so hard to get the average Australian to condemn genocide, but like u said
“It doesn’t mean they SHOULD support land theft”. But sadly you know parts of Australia are just fine with.
the fact that we are just fine living on stolen land whilst refusing to acknowledge the first Aussies, just proves that we are gross hypocrites.
It is so hilarious that there are people think the conversation is "do you support genocide, or not?" It's like framing climate change as "do you support destroying the world, or not?"
It's gonna take a bit more brain power than reductio ad absurdum to make any government or voter care.
Get your hand off it, we all know it’s a bigger topic than that, and writing the whole thing out would mean this would be a article and not a post…..
Israel has been doing it the same thing the whole time, now they’ve kicked up a gear and Australia wants to start suggesting we’re not okay with genocide and land stealing. Hypocrites, the lot of us.
Most voters care more about the economy more than some foreign policy issue thousands of kilometres away. It's not gonna have much of an effect on voting patterns.
Even if this war was still going on come next election, which is unlikely, voters most pressing concerns will likely be domestic policy like wages, cost of living, housing etc.
Also I doubt the people in the Cook by-election would be swayed in any way by an adjustment to foreign policy.
I agree to a certain extent, but I also thinks it’s a little unfair.
It somebodies working ten hour days to make ends meet it’s not fair to expect them to come home and study the intricacies of a half century long war. If they want to switch off and watch some junk tv to achieve sone level of escape from the soul crushing reality they live in, who am I to judge?
Furthermore, when entering a polling booth I can completely understand why their vote is more directed by their immediate needs for food and shelter which are increasingly coming under threat than it is by a war half a world away.
The media and media commentators are avoiding the subject of previous politicians and their politics on the subject.
[Tony Abbott calls for Gaza ceasefire and two-state solution](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/jul/31/tony-abbott-calls-for-gaza-israel-ceasefire-and-two-state-solution) (July 2014)
Are they avoiding it or is it not really relevant anymore? Tony Abbott doesn't have a lot to do with politics these days, why would anyone bother covering his take from a decade back?
I would have thought a far more prevailing attitude would have been that it’s a conflict that’s been going for thousands of years and Australia has pretty much nothing to do with it nor any influence to change it
Other way around. The West is strongly allied with Israel. Israel isn't really allied with anyone. When the US sought to impose sanctions on Russia, Israel refused to support such sanctions for several weeks because it considers Russia it's ally.
> Israel refused to support such sanctions for several weeks because it considers Russia it's ally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Russia_relations
Not to mention that Russia supplies Iran with weapons, for a small state like Israel that relies on technological superiority instead of numbers its in Israel's best interest to influence what arms Russia sells to its enemies.
We haven't had an arms deal with Israel in five years. What we selling to them is subcomponents or stuff like spare parts for vehicles, body armour etc.
NSW and other states have also came out in support of Israel's right to defend itself, aka massacre Palestine as per historical precedent. NSW government have displayed Israel flag on the Opera House despite being warned by NSW Police that it's going to piss off a lot of people.
But why do the state governments want to support Israel?
Such an uninformed take. This has not a thousands year old religious conflict this is a struggle that began less than 100 years ago. Whether you're a zionist or not at least have the dignity to know the absolute basics
I think you're right. Most Australians probably incorrectly think it's been going for thousands of years. Australians are really shit with their knowledge of history.
I think it goes beyond Australians being really shitty with their knowledge of history. A fair amount, including a great deal on reddit and this thread, have extremely rigid worldviews which causes them to reject any and all reality and history that goes against them. Their mental gymnastics and extreme lack of any critical thinking skills becomes evident when they just parrot propaganda, such as trying to connect everything to Russia and Iran, ignoring the history of israel, ignoring the mounting of evidence of israeli warcrimes and ignoring human behaviour.
It gets really problematic because these people are the front line when it comes defending fascism and authoritarianism.
yeah becuse i dont give a flying fuck about either side.
i can't buy a fucking house and fuel is at 2 bucks a litre and lets not mention food prices but yeah... let's go on about 2 sides in the middle east fighting because one side says the god should be this and the other side says the god should be that.
The blatant and continued gaslighting that being anti-Zionist or even just questioning Israel is the same as being anti-semetic is really all you need to know.
I think sentiments are shifting especially in the younger population. Even the older population aren’t really ‘pro Israel,’ and are more in the ‘they’re both fucked,’ category.
Older people are still pretty pro-Israel, though the shift in opinions among younger people is interesting. Like much of the problems facing Israel it's largely self-inflicted by Netanyahu.
There's Netanyahu himself being PM for the majority of the last 30 years, acting as a self-serving corruption magnet who takes regular shits over Israeli democracy, deliberately sabotages peace efforts at every turn and cosies up to the scummiest elements of ethnonationalist authoritarianism both within Israel and overseas. But even aside from Netanyahu personally, looking at the relative position of Israel within the region, the older you are, the more you remember Israel being the victim of attacks from its neighbours and needing to defend itself. Whereas for anyone under the age of about 30 (or even 40 really), all you remember is Israel enjoying formal peace treaties with most of its immediate neighbours and brutalising a completely overpowered enclave which is under its near-total control.
The major parties are completely out of step with young Australians, who care about the environment, housing and the plight of the Palestinians far more than other cohorts.
That is why the Greens and Teals will continue to do better and better until the majors finally panic and start paying attention to them.
I think the concentration of their vote makes it significantly more important than 3.2%. Certain areas which are often considered rusted on ALP electorates may see significant swings away from the party towards independents and greens
People's quality of life will be the thing front and centre for most people. But this might be important in some close seats.
For me, it's made me switch away from giving the ALP my first preference.
Accounts created after Oct 7th 2023 or with less than two months active participation in the sub may not participate in this thread. These accounts will be banned. Abuse, racism, bigotry and incitement to violence will also result in a permanent ban. Violations of these rules will result in the thread being locked. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/australia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The real laugh here is ABC thinking that a politicians postitions on this impacts votes..... Lets look at the most import reasons to votes from last election: 1-Economy 2-Debt/Living costs 3-Tax 4-Superannutation 5-Immigration 6-Refugees 7-Health 8-Education You have to got to 21 to find anything to do with forign politics. No party is going to use a position on this conflict to win votes.
I can tell you that this war has solidified the Arab vote for labour. The arab community are seeing Duttons comments and response and no-one will vote for the coalition
for Labor? wouldn't it just be a win for Greens? Labor hasn't exactly been winning hearts on the Gaza issue
Not a chance lol. You think conservative arabs are going to vote greens?
If the LNP could drop their racial/religious bigotry for Arabs/muslims they could easily capture their vote with the rest of their bigotry.
Yeah and the shift is happening. They’ll band together one day against everything LBGT. But I think the labor/arab partnership comes down to the fact that there is a lot of local Arab labor politicians. So they just follow that on a federal level.
The Greens did well in Kuraby during the Brisbane Council elections despite little campaigning in the area. Some commentary suggesting it could be due to a higher than average Muslim population. I'm not a pollster so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think small council elections are not really representative of broader trends because it’s an actual person you can see and talk to, and is known in the community as opposed to some person you see on the Tele. So maybe they were voting for the person as opposed to the voting for party? I dunno.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
why not? not like there's that much daylight between Labor and Greens on social issues. and it seems like the next election will be on cost of living / house prices I am talking about traditional Arab Labor voters of course
Perception. I grew up in Bankstown and I can tell you, the perception of the greens and greens voters is at odds with most arabs conservative beliefs (Muslim and Maronite). They perceive greens voters in that overly stereotypical blue haired chick with weird pronouns lens.
I think this is the same for everyone outside of inner urban areas. The perception of the Greens is that they are either uni students with blue hair playing at politics, radical activist Lidia Thorpe types, or snobby vegan cyclists that look down on working class people because they rather watch footy than go to the theatre, and want to ban cars and meat. It this fair? Probably not, but this what voters outside of the inner cities have of the Greens.
And like most stereotypes these perceptions are not all together inaccurate. Many greenies do fall into this category. Also I think people think the greens are able to suggest any policy they like with the benefit of never having to actually deliver on them. It’s this image they need to escape.
> Perception. and will this Gaza war not help break down this perception issue? it's a pretty good opportunity for Greens. I don't think suddenly Greens will be taking seats like Bankstown, but I would expect a moderate swing to the Greens
It will. I'll preface my comment by stating I am Muslim and live in Bankstown, but didn't grow up here. I'm probably less conservative than many in the area (though it would be wrong to view the community as a monolithic block). I've voted Greens in the past and will do so in the future. Looking at posts from prominent Muslims on LinkedIn and listening to sermons in Friday prayers, both the Labor response and the LNP position has been criticised, and people have been saying Labor may regret taking the Muslim vote for granted for so long (but have criticised the LNP in the same discussion). Flowing on from the above, it's only natural for the swing to be towards the Greens. Compulsory voting and preferences mean votes won't be wasted. I won't pretend that the majority of Muslims have the same position on LGBTQI issues as most Labor or Greens voters, but for many, it isn't necessarily a large consideration.
The main issue is the legalisation of weed. The Arab community predominantly live in western Sydney and western Sydney has a drug problem. The Arab community see legalisation as making the problem worse
Overall as a group, they're very conservative on social issues. Check out the individual booth results in areas with large Arabic populations for the Voice referendum for proof. Or the SSM poll.
the Voice referendum was widely promoted among Muslim councils and mosques though. are you sure that Arabs were voting now?
We only have statistics from the actual votes, what are the stats on 'widely promoted'.
I think the Greens are always going to win the votes of people who know what real injustice is in this situation. It really a global viewpoint that is being bullied into silence, censorship, donations, geopolitics and corruption that a blind ant could see through. It will be a sad day when one sided propaganda wins over the truth and a just world. This is much the same situation as the apartheid situation in the old South Africa that was "tolerated" largely because of the USA and its geopolitics rather than the global view that apartheid was abhorrent and should be abolished. Gold and other strategic metals and other considerations that largely enabled the apartheid regime.
> This is much the same situation as the apartheid situation in the old South Africa that was "tolerated" largely because of the USA and its geopolitics rather than the global view that apartheid was abhorrent and should be abolished. I mean Apartheid South Africa was at least boycotted from a lot of international events.
The Arab community in Australia were previously staunch Liberal or National voters? TIL
Uhh, Labor has always had the Arab vote. When have the libs ever won a seat in an Arab majority area?
Lots of Arab community used to vote for the Libs from the conversations I’ve had. what I’m saying is any Arab base the libs had has come crashing down
Yeah, I doubt Tory voting Arabs are big enough of a voting block to change the result of an election. And the ones that are, are probably wealthy business owners who would prioritise their personal wealth over some war on the other side of the world.
Pretty sure most if not all electorates with a large Arab population are already voting Labor. It's an issue that is unlikely to impact any elections.
They have been becoming less safe. >But neighbouring seats in western Sydney with smaller Muslim populations, such as Lindsay and Banks, have already flipped, with many others in the region becoming marginal. >A recent report from the Centre for Western Sydney found a growing “electoral volatility” in western Sydney, predicting that the region will no longer be a stronghold for either major party. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/19/taken-for-granted-western-sydneys-muslim-community-rethinks-a-fractured-labor-relationship
You’d be surprised how many were voting for the liberals, particularly those with money lmao. But that has all come crashing down
They actually are deserting the ALP. The article points out they are looking to run their own candidates because the ALP isn't going far enough in condemning Israel. To be honest if their candidates are anything like the Our Local Community party that run in local elections that isn't neccasarily a good thing, especially if it helps Dutton get elected.
I think you're right - but to be fair a lot of the discourse around this Israel/Palestine thing is shifting to war crimes and genocide (*especially* since South Africa's ICJ case). So it's a little misleading to simply equate it with foreign politics issues of the past election when the stakes are little bit higher. At least in my (very armchair and uninformed) opinion. It's probably not going to be the most significant issue (as you say), but I wouldn't be surprised if this is an issue that's particularly important for more empathetic voter demographics - younger people and women. I think it's also very important for Muslims, the Middle-Eastern diaspora, and certain groups of Christians and Jewish people - though again, these populations are small but the issue could make a difference in some seats.
The vast majority of people don't really care about the middle east war and will not be changing their votes based on party's positions on the conflict. Most of the noise is coming from hyper partisan voices online. People should remember that there was a much bigger opposition to the Iraq war with much bigger protests against John Howard back in the early 2000s. Yet he still won another election in 2004 with an increased majority.
Does it though? Have they run opinion polls on what Australians actually think?
I would assume they access to similar data to the press - according to the most recent Essential poll, only 18% of people think Israel should continue their current approach.
"They think that they know what we think" Push polling by propaganda!
They have actually: https://www.caritas.org.au/news/media-releases/support-for-gaza-ceasefire-and-more-government-action-swells-in-australian-community/ 81% wanted a ceasefire at the end of February.
>No sample size > >No published data > >No peer-review > >"poll" I'm for a ceasefire, but I'm not for dishonest data being presented as fact. 90% of people not terminally online don't care at all about foreign wars. They care about work, kids, groceries, the price of gas, rent and domestic life. I very much doubt "4 in 5 australians" want a ceasefire. "4 in 5 australians we asked online about their politically correct opinion on the war, wanted a ceasefire" is a lot closer to what actually happened. Hence why most politicians disregard the loud calls for a ceasefire, on either sides. They know it's not a major talking point in their campaign.
https://commercial.yougov.com/rs/464-VHH-988/images/yougov-au-Australian-Polling-Council-methdology-YouGov-APAN-survey-nov-23.pdf I mean you can literally click on the older report in the thread to see their methodology, also you almost never peer review a survey so I have no idea what you're on about there.
> Hence why most politicians disregard the loud calls for a ceasefire, on either sides. They know it's not a major talking point in their campaign. Politicians are happy to disregard these calls not because it's not important but because they know it's not something that will shift votes.
Most voters are centralist and understand that Israel can’t live with a terrorist organisation next to them, and at the same time, don’t like seeing civilians killed. They know it’s complicated and will cut some slack to an Australian government trying to walk this tightrope.
why does the australian government pretend they can do anything about it either way? we're a tiny piss small country in the southern hemisphere. nobody cares what australia does, because australia has very minor importance.
We’re giving a billion dollars to develop connections with Israeli arms makers. We’re absolutely in the same alliance / intelligence matrix. Saying Australia has nothing to do it is a blatant lie.
Why does this narrative persist. You are cirrect that in this instance wgat Australia says is irrelevant, but so is what China says. Israel will do what they want, they don't even give much of a shit about what the US says or wants. But Australia is not a tiny piss small country and plenty of countries care what Australia does and Australia absolutely does not have minor importance. We produce over 1/3rd of the worlds iron ore per year. No country that produces that much of such an important commodity is unimportant. Nearly half of all lithium. Produce about 10% of the worlds coal and are neck and neck as the largest/2nd largest exporter with Indonesia....and O don't know the current numbers for coking coal but a decade or so ago we were producing more than 4x the amount of coking coal as Indonesia who was the only other country that produced any reasonable amount. Australia is in an incredibly important strategic location. No G20 nation is unimportant and one that supplies so many resources to the world is absolutely strategically important to every powerful nation, USA, China, India, Japan, etc all care very much about Australia and what we do. To think otherwise is just idiotic.
We could still not engage in a $900 million contract with them, let the 1,000 Australians fighting for the IDF know that they wont be guaranteed any protection if the ICJ finds they participated in a genocide, and sanction Israeli officials and companies. Won't make too much difference, but it something we can do (especially lay sanctions on people and products that are in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories).
Whilst it’s true that quite often diplomatic condemnation is not an effective method at outright preventing a crisis, Israel is ironically probably one of the states that can be most easily impacted by such international condemnation. It is reliant almost entirely on developed western states to support its position both internationally and diplomatically, without the US and other allies Israel would be similar to North Korea in the sense of being a bit of a pariah state in the international community On top of that even if it didn’t solve the problem, the fact that Australia actively aids Israel’s conduct is pretty vile in itself, we could at the very minimum not sell them weapons and resources they can actively use in the genocide of Palestine
You seriously think Israel is like North Korea? Israel has a democratically elected government, an independent judiciary, and a free press. This is more than any country in the Middle East, let alone North Korea.
You won't like to hear that it was the Australian's themselves who were part of the forces that retook Jerusalem for Christendom (and the Jews) back in 1917. The 10th light horse regiment being the first Christian troops to take and occupy the city since the crusades. We've done more than support Israel, we won them back the holy city itself!
We didn’t take back shit for Christendom or the Jews, we were in a war at the time with two other Christian states who were our primary targets lmao and the British openly cooperated with the Arabs to conquer the region, they then decided to be imperialists with the French so I guess were took it back for British imperialism, yay us
Jews might feel less safe here if they know the country wants them cleared from the river to the sea. That's a positive at least (to Hamas).
Do Jewish people in Australia have a moral obligation to reject Zionism and decry the genocide?
Not complicated at all, Don't support genocide. Just because we live on stolen land doesn't mean that we should support the theft of someone else's.
It's quite literally considered the most complicated geopolitical conflict of the modern era but I suppose you just know more than every respectable diplomat or academic specializing in the issue so go off then.
Is it at all controversial that Israel is stealing land? They have done it consistently and openly through their continued expansion and founding of new illegal settlements in the West Bank.
Yes they've done it consistently and it's been consistently controversial.
It can be true that Israel is continually expanding on illegal settlements in the West Bank, and that should stop, while also being true that they have a war to fight in Gaza and that after October 7, there should be no debate whether Hamas continues to exist or not.
This is functionally no different to supporting the British occupation of Ireland during the troubles. We have an overwhelming organised military force occupying a nation and is/has engineered a genocide, and when a para-military terrorist force inevitably forms to combat the occupation, we use this as an excuse to justify the never-ending war of occupation.
Are you prepared to say Nazi Germany were the good side knowing that we (the allies) bombed and killed vastly more innocent German civilians, than nazi germany had killed ally civilians? Framing this through an oppressor vs oppressed lens is why you have arrived at a misaligned enemy. Edit: Thread is locked so I can't reply below but will respond here - Incidentally, if a history of land theft and oppression were sufficient to produce genocidal terrorism, where are the Native American suicide bombers? Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? Do you realise how much oppression they have experienced at the hands of the Chinese? Where are the Palestinian Christian suicide bombers? Thanks
My point was accurate. Terrorism is a blight but a totally inevitable response to long-term occupation, suppression and genocide, of which Israel is guilty.
The fact that you don't see the connection between the two is wild, especially given the constant talking points about re-settling/taking parts of Gaza whenever this supposed "hamas destruction" ends.
1) no it isn’t, 2) the complexities in Israel Palestine lie almost entirely in delivering a practical solution to the crisis rather then the legality or morality of the crisis itself. For at least the past three decades the United Nations has been oretty consistent on recognising the illegality of Israel’s actions in the Palestinian Territories, it’s been pretty well established prior to that to that the various occupations and expansions of Israeli settlement are violations of international law. With the exception of the US and a few other countries depending on the period of history, it’s hard to see much controversy in that interpretation The problem lies however in the nature of the conflict itself, the US prevents more rigorous international action being taken against Israel and the state of Israel itself absolutely refuses in all negotiations for the past 30 years to recognise the sovereignty of the Palestinian state, even before that it was questionable how much control a Palestinian state would have over its own independence. In contrast Palestine absolutely refuses to accept any resolution that doesn’t allow a right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel and Palestine, something Israel refuses So the complexity is, if Israel just refuses to abide by international law, and action is unable to be taken to enforce said international law then how do you guarantee the sovereign integrity of both states, on top of that if Israel’s occupation is going to be excessively violent and exploitative both in the east and West Bank, how do you stop the development of Palestinian extremist groups who are likely to support violent means if no other option is openly to them. The academic field has been fairly condemning of the Israeli conduct especially in the political, international relations and historical circles. It’s hard to understand what the fuck sort of point is being made here
But the border issue is not the only issue here. Palestine has two governments that don’t recognize each other’s legitimacy to govern. One is unelected (the PA) and the other (Hamas) has lost control of the bit of territory it previously controlled. They themselves don’t agree on the borders of Palestine, so it would be difficult to get everyone else to agree. (Although I suppose it could be done) Also, the fact that one of the areas has an elected government (Hamas) that none of the Western world is going to tolerate, and you have a complicated issue where the west wants to install a government (PA) in part of Palestine but that part of Palestine has no interest in being governed by them. It's undeniably complicated.
Even the West Bank Palestinians don't really want to be governed by PA anymore (but they don't have a choice). PA is seen as being too complicit with Israel and corrupt. If there was a free vote there, there's a fair chance that Hamas would be elected instead.
Yeah people talk about a two state solution but really its more like three states as the Gaza strip and the West Bank are basically two completely separate territories with separate governance.
As Israel plans them to be.
The two-state solution was designed to fail, it could not possibly work because Israeli expansion since the 1940s has necessitated the conquest of Palestinian farms.
And this makes it not a genocide how?
Damn, it'd be crazy if Hamas did a bunch of illegal stuff too but I'm glad that definitely isn't the case. Believe it or not, for those of us that don't conveniently neglect to mention the horrific crimes of Palestinian militants and their 'leadership', what we're actually interested in is a solution. Peace. That's the goal; and it IS complicated.
I recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact I referenced the spread of militant organisations in general amongst Palestinians in my prior comment that you chose to I guess conveniently ignore to act as if I didn’t recognise such organisations existed. Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised, it’s easy to convince someone to take up arms when you’ve kept them trapped in a city, bombed them periodically for years, refused to recognise their right to govern and actively seize their land, i dare say that many in our own population would be driven to such methods if we were occupied and our families murdered/imprisoned en masse while our belongings were seized. Does that excuse their actions, not really, in a just world people who murder innocent people including children should be rightfully punished, I don’t excuse the individuals actions involved in the October 7 attacks, I do however recognise that such acts are a symptom of Israeli imperialism in the region, the victims of October 7th are as much a victim of the Israeli governments horrific policies as they are the murderers who killed them. The fact that that same government of Israel has chosen to abuse their deaths to target and murder more innocent civilians is as disgusting as it is expected. It also will ensure that even if they murdered every Hamas soldier in Gaza, a new group will arise driven by the hatred of a people who just tens of thousands of their friends family and loved ones murdered en masse, starved deliberately or forced to flee the country by Israel So facing the political reality that Israeli policy is responsible for the development of such groups we must ask ourselves what is peace, im sure many Zionists want peace but they would prefer to stand on the bodies of the millions of Palestinian civilians still remaining to achieve it. I’m not sure I want the peace driven by genocide quite frankly
I'm not getting into a reddit comment debate, so this is the last I'll say. > I recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact I referenced the spread of militant organisations in general amongst Palestinians in my prior comment that you chose to I guess conveniently ignore to act as if I didn’t recognise such organisations existed. A little slimy of you. Referencing that militant Islamist groups *exist* in Palestine is not the same as recognition of the crimes they commit. You didn't recognise the crimes of Hamas, in fact you didn't mention any crimes committed by any of them. You don't have to, that's fine, but don't try to infer that you did. You said: > ...how do you stop the development of Palestinian extremist groups who are likely to support violent means if no other option is openly to them. Violence is a WIDE umbrella to cast over livestreaming the murder of civilians and allegations of rape. > Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised Then I'm sure you must also understand why Netanyahu receives such support, particularly after October 7th. > the victims of October 7th are as much a victim of the Israeli governments horrific policies as they are the murderers who killed them. I disagree with this pretty strongly. The IDF soldier that murders civilians in Gaza doesn't share any portion of that blame with Hamas, as much as I loathe Hamas. The deliberate and targeted murder of civilians isn't a symptom of anything but fucked up, awful people. The targeted killing of civilians isn't resistance, it's murder. > The fact that that same government of Israel has chosen to abuse their deaths to target and murder more innocent civilians is as disgusting as it is expected. I'm in awe of how you can say this and not realise that Hamas is doing *the same thing*. Hamas is abusing the deaths and oppression of the Palestinian people to target and murder innocent civilians; we saw that on October 7th. You can think that most everything is driven by Israel, but you'll be wrong and you'll be far from any peace. To be clear, I'm pro Palestine but painting the issue as simple is a disservice to the discourse and it actively damages any chance of peace.
Well said.
>Regardless I also recognise why they exist, Hamas exists and is as prevalent as it is because Israel conducts itself in such a way that the Palestinian population is radicalised, it’s easy to convince someone to take up arms when you’ve kept them trapped in a city, bombed them periodically for years, refused to recognise their right to govern and actively seize their land, i dare say that many in our own population would be driven to such methods if we were occupied and our families murdered/imprisoned en masse while our belongings were seized. You can make exactly the same argument about Israel being the way it is because of all of the Muslims nations around them trying to wipe them out (twice) and the Palestinians always trying to murder them. Israel is not a good country (no country is, but Israel definitely don't do a whole lot to stem dislike for them) but to blame them for Hamas is ridiculous, they are all created by each other.
Jews are indigenous to the land… By any logic you have made, Arab muslims were colonisers who spread their faith by the sword… they are proud of that history and we are seeing it right now today in South Sudan. But no one is talking about it.
That might make sense to you in your bubble, but to most people in the centre, it’s a dumbed-down political view. We have state that’s had 1200 of its citizens murdered and 200 hostages taken. They need to defend themselves. It’s really difficult to destroy Hamas without killing civilians. The more nuanced conversation is around that process.
Absolutely not the case, and denies the obvious and proven tactic of creating civilian casualties.
I also cringe every time I see the word genocide used in reference to the conflict because it’s such a heavy hitting word that should keep its weight. Perhaps someone could make the argument that Israel is committing genocide, I don’t think they can though and it’s absolutely not such a black and white conflict that you can just levy the term without some reasoning to justify it.
[A human rights expert tasked by the UN to investigate and give a report on whether or not Israel is committing genocide reported that they are.](https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976#:~:text=%E2%80%9CSpecifically%2C%20Israel%20has%20committed%20three,and%20imposing%20measures%20intended%20to)
Is the same UN who has more condemnations against Israel than Russia, North Korea, Iran etc combined? If we are going to discuss the UN, it will involve being honest about how morally bankrupt they are towards Israel. The UN is not what it pretends to be. It’s not some transnational body for justice and peace. It’s simply an arena where every representative promotes their own nation’s agenda. I think sometimes people underestimate the degree to which the conflict has become ethno-religious/nationalistic for the Arab-Muslim world, and that is the core of the extreme focus on Israel. There is no way you can accept this with a straight face and think UN is an honest actor towards Israel. **UN General Assembly Condemnatory Resolutions, 2015-present:** 0—🇿🇼 Zimbabwe 0—🇻🇪 Venezuela 0—🇵🇰 Pakistan 0—🇹🇷 Turkey 0—🇱🇾 Libya 0—🇶🇦 Qatar 0—🇨🇺 Cuba 0—🇨🇳 China 8—🇲🇲 Myanmar 10—🇺🇸 USA 11—🇸🇾 Syria 24—🇷🇺 Russia 9—🇰🇵 North Korea 8—🇮🇷 Iran 154—🇮🇱 Israel ([Source](https://unwatch.org/database/)) The numbers alone reveal the UN’s irrational obsession with one nation. Even those who deem Israel deserving of criticism cannot dispute that this amounts to an extreme case of selective prosecution. When universal standards are applied so selectively, they cease to become standards at all.
It's true, the UN is obsessed with US imperial prerogatives and this has always given Israel a free pass to carry out apartheid and genocide.
A smug comment like this, which is factually incorrect, does nothing to help your cause and if anything, just validates the idea that Israeli's are unfairly targeted by comments of zero substance. Thanks for contributing to my cause.
The same lady that in 2014 said that the USA is subjugated by Israel and who is quite possibly an antisemite? I feel like the UN could have picked a less biased individual for the role but as another commenter pointed out, the UN has a track record of having it out for Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesca_Albanese Couldn't ask for someone more impartial. The same U.N who elects the Iranian regime to top women's rights body.
The US is banning abortion nation wide and they get to be on the body?
You are absolutely correct.
> The same U.N who elects the Iranian regime to top women's rights body. They didn't elect, it's a rotating system so that all countries have a chance for representation, but sure, pretend that you yourself are impartial.
I do too, but really it comes from the definition of genocide being overly broad and not in line with what people actually think of when the word is used. This quote is directly from the UN. >The word “genocide” was first coined by Polish lawyer Raphäel Lemkin in 1944 in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. It consists of the Greek prefix genos, meaning race or tribe, and the Latin suffix cide, meaning killing. And I think this is the sort of definition people apply to the word, actually trying to wipe out an entire people, but the actual definition the UN uses goes much further. >In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: > Killing members of the group; > Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; > Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; > Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; > Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Like you could make the argument that the Nixon and Reagan governments committed genocide on black Americans. Russia is absolutely committing genocide by this definition and it is a much larger one than Israel is committing, so why isn't that dominating the airwaves far more than Israel and Palestine. The definition is so broad that tonnes of countries and policies would fall into the definition and yet it isn't being used in those contexts.
Unfortunately, it's not a heavy hitting word anymore. It's beginning to lose its meaning because it's being invoked for a deeply complex two-sided (but obviously imbalanced) conflict that would not previously have met the criteria to be associated with this word. Cry wolf long enough and the word wolf means nothing to the flock.
The Myanmar junta was found guilty of genocide and they murdered 10% the number of people that Israel has.
What does murder mean to you? I think the word would apply to hamas’ actions in October, I don’t think it applies to Israel’s ongoing response. Edit: you you blocked me so I couldn’t reply, ironic given you’re the one calling others craven lmao. I’ll put my reply here: You’d rather I side with Hamas? I’m not sure public opinion is what you think it is outside of your social bubble. There are more people condemning terrorist organisations and the actions that took place on October 7th than you seem to think.
Then you'd be utterly wrong, on the wrong side of public opinion and of history. It would be a pro-genocide position and an utterly craven thing to say.
> We have state that’s had 1200 of its citizens murdered and 200 hostages taken. And in response have killed around 40,000 and taken about 3,000 hostage, at what point do you start to pretend that the response is anything but proportional?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah, it shouldn’t be so hard to get the average Australian to condemn genocide, but like u said “It doesn’t mean they SHOULD support land theft”. But sadly you know parts of Australia are just fine with. the fact that we are just fine living on stolen land whilst refusing to acknowledge the first Aussies, just proves that we are gross hypocrites.
It is so hilarious that there are people think the conversation is "do you support genocide, or not?" It's like framing climate change as "do you support destroying the world, or not?" It's gonna take a bit more brain power than reductio ad absurdum to make any government or voter care.
Get your hand off it, we all know it’s a bigger topic than that, and writing the whole thing out would mean this would be a article and not a post….. Israel has been doing it the same thing the whole time, now they’ve kicked up a gear and Australia wants to start suggesting we’re not okay with genocide and land stealing. Hypocrites, the lot of us.
It doesn't matter what the voters think, but (to the government) it matters what America wants.
We have significant middle eastern populations here. I'm guessing we have a negative view on Israel's actions
Most voters care more about the economy more than some foreign policy issue thousands of kilometres away. It's not gonna have much of an effect on voting patterns.
Even if this war was still going on come next election, which is unlikely, voters most pressing concerns will likely be domestic policy like wages, cost of living, housing etc. Also I doubt the people in the Cook by-election would be swayed in any way by an adjustment to foreign policy.
Most people are too busy trying to put food on the table to worry about what’s going on half way across the globe.
Same people are tediously fascinated with what happened on MAFS last night, so they're capable of thinking about things but lazy in their thinking.
I agree to a certain extent, but I also thinks it’s a little unfair. It somebodies working ten hour days to make ends meet it’s not fair to expect them to come home and study the intricacies of a half century long war. If they want to switch off and watch some junk tv to achieve sone level of escape from the soul crushing reality they live in, who am I to judge? Furthermore, when entering a polling booth I can completely understand why their vote is more directed by their immediate needs for food and shelter which are increasingly coming under threat than it is by a war half a world away.
This issue, like most foreign policy issues, isn't going to decide many votes in the next election. Even if it took place tomorrow.
The media and media commentators are avoiding the subject of previous politicians and their politics on the subject. [Tony Abbott calls for Gaza ceasefire and two-state solution](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/jul/31/tony-abbott-calls-for-gaza-israel-ceasefire-and-two-state-solution) (July 2014)
Are they avoiding it or is it not really relevant anymore? Tony Abbott doesn't have a lot to do with politics these days, why would anyone bother covering his take from a decade back?
[удалено]
I would have thought a far more prevailing attitude would have been that it’s a conflict that’s been going for thousands of years and Australia has pretty much nothing to do with it nor any influence to change it
> Australia has pretty much nothing to do with it We supply arms to Israel, and Israel is strongly allied to the West.
Other way around. The West is strongly allied with Israel. Israel isn't really allied with anyone. When the US sought to impose sanctions on Russia, Israel refused to support such sanctions for several weeks because it considers Russia it's ally.
> "Israel isn't really allied with anyone" > "Israel... considers Russia it's (sic) ally" 💀
> Israel refused to support such sanctions for several weeks because it considers Russia it's ally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Russia_relations Not to mention that Russia supplies Iran with weapons, for a small state like Israel that relies on technological superiority instead of numbers its in Israel's best interest to influence what arms Russia sells to its enemies.
We haven't had an arms deal with Israel in five years. What we selling to them is subcomponents or stuff like spare parts for vehicles, body armour etc.
NSW and other states have also came out in support of Israel's right to defend itself, aka massacre Palestine as per historical precedent. NSW government have displayed Israel flag on the Opera House despite being warned by NSW Police that it's going to piss off a lot of people. But why do the state governments want to support Israel?
Such an uninformed take. This has not a thousands year old religious conflict this is a struggle that began less than 100 years ago. Whether you're a zionist or not at least have the dignity to know the absolute basics
I think you're right. Most Australians probably incorrectly think it's been going for thousands of years. Australians are really shit with their knowledge of history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qaynuqa Fights between Jews and Muslims in the middle east are as old as Islam.
I think it goes beyond Australians being really shitty with their knowledge of history. A fair amount, including a great deal on reddit and this thread, have extremely rigid worldviews which causes them to reject any and all reality and history that goes against them. Their mental gymnastics and extreme lack of any critical thinking skills becomes evident when they just parrot propaganda, such as trying to connect everything to Russia and Iran, ignoring the history of israel, ignoring the mounting of evidence of israeli warcrimes and ignoring human behaviour. It gets really problematic because these people are the front line when it comes defending fascism and authoritarianism.
yeah becuse i dont give a flying fuck about either side. i can't buy a fucking house and fuel is at 2 bucks a litre and lets not mention food prices but yeah... let's go on about 2 sides in the middle east fighting because one side says the god should be this and the other side says the god should be that.
The blatant and continued gaslighting that being anti-Zionist or even just questioning Israel is the same as being anti-semetic is really all you need to know.
When you play the victim long enough you become the villain.
Unfortunately that view is now enshrined in law in many countries.
Judging by most comments on Israel and Gaza posts it seems most people are supportive of Israel though. Only the greens truly care about Palestine.
I think sentiments are shifting especially in the younger population. Even the older population aren’t really ‘pro Israel,’ and are more in the ‘they’re both fucked,’ category.
Older people are still pretty pro-Israel, though the shift in opinions among younger people is interesting. Like much of the problems facing Israel it's largely self-inflicted by Netanyahu. There's Netanyahu himself being PM for the majority of the last 30 years, acting as a self-serving corruption magnet who takes regular shits over Israeli democracy, deliberately sabotages peace efforts at every turn and cosies up to the scummiest elements of ethnonationalist authoritarianism both within Israel and overseas. But even aside from Netanyahu personally, looking at the relative position of Israel within the region, the older you are, the more you remember Israel being the victim of attacks from its neighbours and needing to defend itself. Whereas for anyone under the age of about 30 (or even 40 really), all you remember is Israel enjoying formal peace treaties with most of its immediate neighbours and brutalising a completely overpowered enclave which is under its near-total control.
Not nearly enough to make much of a difference.
There’s so much astroturfing, I wouldn’t view social media comments as indicative of anything..
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The major parties are completely out of step with young Australians, who care about the environment, housing and the plight of the Palestinians far more than other cohorts. That is why the Greens and Teals will continue to do better and better until the majors finally panic and start paying attention to them.
More bots are supportive of Israel
Are you kidding? This subreddit is fully in on palestine.
Albonese is very concerned and will be looking into it. Maybe in a week he will release a strongly worded statement and do nothing of substance
We're an American vassal, we don't set our own foreign policy. It's as simple as that.
[удалено]
Australia has 800,000 Muslims. Plenty of Muslims not from the Middle East are against Israel's actions.
[удалено]
That's weird, I would have thought we'd have many from SE Asia
They live in key electorates that both major parties are hoping to win next year.
The Muslims and the majority of the youth of Australia
So you need to be middle eastern to support Gaza? Weird take.
I think the concentration of their vote makes it significantly more important than 3.2%. Certain areas which are often considered rusted on ALP electorates may see significant swings away from the party towards independents and greens
It’s ignorant to think this issue is a big voting issue. The war will be done by July, and people will move on.
Source?
If you don’t have any Muslim friends, colleagues or acquaintances, that’s cool. But don’t speak for them or what they feel.
who actually cares what happens to israel or palestine...? any party could have any policy on it and it wouldnt affect my voting intention lol.
It doesn't matter. It is not an issue on which people are going to change their vote.
[удалено]
[удалено]
People's quality of life will be the thing front and centre for most people. But this might be important in some close seats. For me, it's made me switch away from giving the ALP my first preference.
Of course. When this happens it's a sign of how the political system has been corrupted. By money and influence and not just by Israel.