Just a reminder that Beinart's beloved State of Palestine is an apologist for China's genocide of the Uighurs, to the point where they signed a letter with the following informative comments along with their Arab allies:
"We take note that terrorism, separatism and religious extremism has caused enormous damage to people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang, which has seriously infringed upon human rights, including right to life, health and development. Faced with the grave challenge of terrorism and extremism, China has undertaken a series of counter-terrorism and deradicalization measures in Xinjiang, including setting up vocational education and training centers. Now safety and security has returned to Xinjiang and the fundamental human rights of people of all ethnic groups there are safeguarded. The past three consecutive years has seen not a single terrorist attack in Xinjiang and people there enjoy a stronger sense of happiness, fulfillment and security. We note with appreciation that human rights are respected and protected in China in the process of counter-terrorism and deradicalization."
"We express our firm opposition to relevant countries' practice of politicizing human rights issues, by naming and shaming, and publicly exerting pressures on other countries." (LMAO!!!!)
Palestine and China: two human rights abusers, two dictatorships, two ethnostates, acting in solidarity with one another. You hate to see it. Has Beinart considered that maybe China is considered a threat not because it's not Christian (lol) but rather because of its horrific human rights abuses? But considering how rarely he speaks out against Palestine's horrific human rights abuses, maybe it's not a priority.
I see it differently. There is an isolationist wing of the Republican Party that wants to stop spending money on wars that don’t directly affect us. So it’s not about Russia’s race or religion.
With China, China’s unfair trade practices, support for the theft of intellectual property, and threats to democratic nations are major concerns for many countries. These practices are harming businesses and consumers around the world, and they are also raising concerns about China’s intentions.
China also engages in cyberwarfare against other countries, uses forced labor to produce goods, and violates human rights in Xinjiang and Tibet.
So Tucker Carlson is hostile to Russia because it's a Christian country and hostile to China because it isn't?
I am also perplexed by the Democratic/Republican disparity in their warmongering energies vis-a-vis Russia and China. Democratic Russophobia was relentlessly fostered by Russiagate, a poisonous concoction dreamed up by Democratic Party leadership to explain Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss to a clown. So it makes sense that Democrats are more hostile to Russia than China.
As for white, evangelical Christians, aren't they the most ferocious Trump supporters? Trump's 2016 campaign was a broadside against our rotten trade deals and the offshoring of our industry to China, in particular. And as president, Trump started a trade war with China which was enthusiastically supported by these voters.
Democratic voters are clearly following the lead of their political leaders. Aren't white, Christian evangelical voters doing the same?
Mr. Beinart’s analysis here and in The NY Times feels off the mark, but maybe it’s true. Who knows?
I think there’s more to right-wing American MAGA than white and/ or Christian flavors of nationalism. There’s also just plain old vanilla nationalism too. Communist China is an able stand-in for the Soviet Union as a nostalgistic retread of the post WWII Cold War morality play that many Americans kinda believe defined our “greatness” in the modern era. The desire to return to that mythologized golden era where “everyday men were heroes”, “good and evil” had clear boundaries, and everything in the world made sense is palpable among US conservatives.
Also, the Russian election interference & Putin = Trump political narrative since 2016 probably has more to do with hardening Democratic support for Ukraine and the odd soft-sympathy for Russia among the Republican base than anything else (other than the basic facts of the invasion, of course)
Thanks for the historical background, I mean parts of it, regarding the USA and China. I think that one core problem is that modern governments still have the term "foreign" regarding what is happening outside of a nation. Imagine for example the state of California having a foreign ministry for relations with other US states. It would be better with global and planetary relations and interactions because what happens in the USA and China is not foreign or external but happens on the planet.
... the myopic self-centered average income education American has no taken idea nor interest in knowing how many refugees European Canadian South America Central America Greece I rescued from the ocean and taken into their open
Could care less about landslides in Spain Greece burning down,
wildfires throughout, flooding raging through towns etc. etc.
Even just news from Canada
we could learn a lot about democracy learn a lot about decency
You claim "In Army of Shadows, Hebrew University historian Hillel Cohen notes that, “Most of the Palestinian Arabs who took up arms were organized in units that defended their villages and homes, or sometimes a group of villages.” They ventured beyond them “only in extremely rare cases.” He adds that, frequently, “local Arab representatives had approached their Jewish neighbors with requests to conclude nonaggression pacts.” When such efforts failed, Palestinian villages and towns often surrendered in the face of Zionist might. In most cases, their residents were expelled anyway. Their presence was intolerable not because they had personally threatened Jews but because they threatened the demography of a Jewish state." What is this based on. As I mentioned, Cohen says for example, and I'm leaving the spelling as is from the cut and paste:"Sources in many parts of the country reported that local Arab representatives had approached their Jewish neighbors with requests to conclude nonaggression pacts. ….
Local pacts and passivity were just one part of the picture. Palestinian Arabs were also involved in wide- ranging hostilities that cost hundreds of lives on both sides, including during the “civil war” that preceded the invasion by the regular Arab armies. Furthermore, beyond the few thousand that enlisted in the militias, there were many who took part in the ghting in the form designated by the Arab word faz‘a—appearing on the battleeld, to defend or attack, in response to an immediate call to arms. Our interest here is not, however, in the ghting forces but in the “traitors” and their motives. ….
The Zu‘biyya villages east of Afula—Nin, Na‘ura, Sulam, Tamra, al-Dahi, and Taybe, all within the boundaries of the decreed Jewish state—are prominent examples of those that surrendered of their own volition, consenting to live under Israeli rule. The ruling family in these villages, the Zu‘bis, maintained close relations with the Jewish settlements in the region over the course of many years. In the 1930s and 1940s the family’s leaders mediated the sale of some of the villages’ lands to KKL (over the objections of some of the inhabitants). After the outbreak of hostilities, these villages did not participate in the ghting, and in April 1948 they proposed a peace agreement. That same month the mukhtar of Nin met a Shai representative and presented the position of his village and its neighbors: “We will do all in our power to prevent the entry of the gangs [Arab irregular forces]. And if you [Jews] betray us and kill us, it is better for us to die at your hands than to be killed by the gangs. You at least will not abuse us.” He was assured that all eorts were being made to keep his family from harm.54
To this point, the story is similar to that seen in many other villages that signed pacts with the Haganah. But the Arab Liberation Army seems to have learned of the agreement between the Zu‘bis and the Haganah, and on the eve of the invasion by foreign Arab armies it ordered the inhabitants to evacuate their villages.55 When it became clear that al-Qawuqji and his forces could not harm them, most of the villagers returned to their homes. Through the mediation of Tzvi Wolf of KKL, who had worked with the Zu‘bis on land deals, the villages accepted Israeli rule. Some residents began to work for Israeli intelligence—among them, apparently, Sayf al-Din.56 In response, a local Arab Liberation Army commander ordered “the arrest of every man from the Zu‘biyya because they are traitors and recognized the state of Israel and are serving it.”
Just a reminder that Beinart's beloved State of Palestine is an apologist for China's genocide of the Uighurs, to the point where they signed a letter with the following informative comments along with their Arab allies:
"We take note that terrorism, separatism and religious extremism has caused enormous damage to people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang, which has seriously infringed upon human rights, including right to life, health and development. Faced with the grave challenge of terrorism and extremism, China has undertaken a series of counter-terrorism and deradicalization measures in Xinjiang, including setting up vocational education and training centers. Now safety and security has returned to Xinjiang and the fundamental human rights of people of all ethnic groups there are safeguarded. The past three consecutive years has seen not a single terrorist attack in Xinjiang and people there enjoy a stronger sense of happiness, fulfillment and security. We note with appreciation that human rights are respected and protected in China in the process of counter-terrorism and deradicalization."
"We express our firm opposition to relevant countries' practice of politicizing human rights issues, by naming and shaming, and publicly exerting pressures on other countries." (LMAO!!!!)
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-L1RMl7yHRaM/XWfOAly-heI/AAAAAAABT-Y/iQudCb75rJA5CcG15q6T-2Cm0EpfOluHwCLcBGAs/s1600/EDInt9rXYAALuNa.jpg
Palestine and China: two human rights abusers, two dictatorships, two ethnostates, acting in solidarity with one another. You hate to see it. Has Beinart considered that maybe China is considered a threat not because it's not Christian (lol) but rather because of its horrific human rights abuses? But considering how rarely he speaks out against Palestine's horrific human rights abuses, maybe it's not a priority.
I see it differently. There is an isolationist wing of the Republican Party that wants to stop spending money on wars that don’t directly affect us. So it’s not about Russia’s race or religion.
With China, China’s unfair trade practices, support for the theft of intellectual property, and threats to democratic nations are major concerns for many countries. These practices are harming businesses and consumers around the world, and they are also raising concerns about China’s intentions.
China also engages in cyberwarfare against other countries, uses forced labor to produce goods, and violates human rights in Xinjiang and Tibet.
Ok, and how are your views on the information and cyber war by the Russian government ?
So Tucker Carlson is hostile to Russia because it's a Christian country and hostile to China because it isn't?
I am also perplexed by the Democratic/Republican disparity in their warmongering energies vis-a-vis Russia and China. Democratic Russophobia was relentlessly fostered by Russiagate, a poisonous concoction dreamed up by Democratic Party leadership to explain Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss to a clown. So it makes sense that Democrats are more hostile to Russia than China.
As for white, evangelical Christians, aren't they the most ferocious Trump supporters? Trump's 2016 campaign was a broadside against our rotten trade deals and the offshoring of our industry to China, in particular. And as president, Trump started a trade war with China which was enthusiastically supported by these voters.
Democratic voters are clearly following the lead of their political leaders. Aren't white, Christian evangelical voters doing the same?
Mr. Beinart’s analysis here and in The NY Times feels off the mark, but maybe it’s true. Who knows?
I think there’s more to right-wing American MAGA than white and/ or Christian flavors of nationalism. There’s also just plain old vanilla nationalism too. Communist China is an able stand-in for the Soviet Union as a nostalgistic retread of the post WWII Cold War morality play that many Americans kinda believe defined our “greatness” in the modern era. The desire to return to that mythologized golden era where “everyday men were heroes”, “good and evil” had clear boundaries, and everything in the world made sense is palpable among US conservatives.
Also, the Russian election interference & Putin = Trump political narrative since 2016 probably has more to do with hardening Democratic support for Ukraine and the odd soft-sympathy for Russia among the Republican base than anything else (other than the basic facts of the invasion, of course)
Thanks for the historical background, I mean parts of it, regarding the USA and China. I think that one core problem is that modern governments still have the term "foreign" regarding what is happening outside of a nation. Imagine for example the state of California having a foreign ministry for relations with other US states. It would be better with global and planetary relations and interactions because what happens in the USA and China is not foreign or external but happens on the planet.
... the myopic self-centered average income education American has no taken idea nor interest in knowing how many refugees European Canadian South America Central America Greece I rescued from the ocean and taken into their open
Could care less about landslides in Spain Greece burning down,
wildfires throughout, flooding raging through towns etc. etc.
Even just news from Canada
we could learn a lot about democracy learn a lot about decency
You claim "In Army of Shadows, Hebrew University historian Hillel Cohen notes that, “Most of the Palestinian Arabs who took up arms were organized in units that defended their villages and homes, or sometimes a group of villages.” They ventured beyond them “only in extremely rare cases.” He adds that, frequently, “local Arab representatives had approached their Jewish neighbors with requests to conclude nonaggression pacts.” When such efforts failed, Palestinian villages and towns often surrendered in the face of Zionist might. In most cases, their residents were expelled anyway. Their presence was intolerable not because they had personally threatened Jews but because they threatened the demography of a Jewish state." What is this based on. As I mentioned, Cohen says for example, and I'm leaving the spelling as is from the cut and paste:"Sources in many parts of the country reported that local Arab representatives had approached their Jewish neighbors with requests to conclude nonaggression pacts. ….
Local pacts and passivity were just one part of the picture. Palestinian Arabs were also involved in wide- ranging hostilities that cost hundreds of lives on both sides, including during the “civil war” that preceded the invasion by the regular Arab armies. Furthermore, beyond the few thousand that enlisted in the militias, there were many who took part in the ghting in the form designated by the Arab word faz‘a—appearing on the battleeld, to defend or attack, in response to an immediate call to arms. Our interest here is not, however, in the ghting forces but in the “traitors” and their motives. ….
The Zu‘biyya villages east of Afula—Nin, Na‘ura, Sulam, Tamra, al-Dahi, and Taybe, all within the boundaries of the decreed Jewish state—are prominent examples of those that surrendered of their own volition, consenting to live under Israeli rule. The ruling family in these villages, the Zu‘bis, maintained close relations with the Jewish settlements in the region over the course of many years. In the 1930s and 1940s the family’s leaders mediated the sale of some of the villages’ lands to KKL (over the objections of some of the inhabitants). After the outbreak of hostilities, these villages did not participate in the ghting, and in April 1948 they proposed a peace agreement. That same month the mukhtar of Nin met a Shai representative and presented the position of his village and its neighbors: “We will do all in our power to prevent the entry of the gangs [Arab irregular forces]. And if you [Jews] betray us and kill us, it is better for us to die at your hands than to be killed by the gangs. You at least will not abuse us.” He was assured that all eorts were being made to keep his family from harm.54
To this point, the story is similar to that seen in many other villages that signed pacts with the Haganah. But the Arab Liberation Army seems to have learned of the agreement between the Zu‘bis and the Haganah, and on the eve of the invasion by foreign Arab armies it ordered the inhabitants to evacuate their villages.55 When it became clear that al-Qawuqji and his forces could not harm them, most of the villagers returned to their homes. Through the mediation of Tzvi Wolf of KKL, who had worked with the Zu‘bis on land deals, the villages accepted Israeli rule. Some residents began to work for Israeli intelligence—among them, apparently, Sayf al-Din.56 In response, a local Arab Liberation Army commander ordered “the arrest of every man from the Zu‘biyya because they are traitors and recognized the state of Israel and are serving it.”
Please read my substack! I write about foreign policy issues.
https://ajaypasricha.substack.com/p/saudi-arabia-should-wait-to-normalize
. Who put a black out a news from Israel?!