You could also organize outside the electoral system. In fact it’s the only way to keep politicians accountable

Not voting for Trump doesn’t take a stance against genocide either. Both support genocide and you can argue back and forth about who wants more genocide in Palestine. In the end the argument is pointless because if you want to actually prevent genocide you need to organize outside the electoral system.

I think you need to look up the word secular. It means not religious

I said they were secular? They are more palatable then Hamas in the wests eyes. I don’t think that is controversial even.

Do you normaly just insult people when you loose arguments? I guess it makes sense when you have nothing to contribute

I never said they were saints?

You should definitely work on your reading comprehension if you think I said You have the power to end apartheid lol. Israel does

So why not just end apartheid if hamas benifits from it. Or are you just being vague on purpose?

You do realize you’re just creating a situation where whatever Israel does is always justyfied? They help create a terrorist group, create an open air prison where the people who live there can’t leave and then bomb their schools, hospitals, refugee camps etc. Always with the excuse that Hamas might be there. So what’s the excuse for murdering Shireen Abu Akleh in cold blood? Or for the settler colonialism in the west bank? What is about colonialism you don’t understand that leads to more and more violence?

Hamas has asked for a ceasefire many times. Also why would they not agree to end the apartheid system? The only reason I could think of would be so they could garner more hate towards Israel. Hmm, but doesn’t that mean that it would be in Israel interest to end it to weaken Hamas?

Israel funded Hamas and their policies basically created them. They’re an easier target for westernes than the secular PLO. Maybe the solution is ending apartheid and the illegal occupation? Maybe, and I know this is really crazy but, bombing the shit out of a group of people isn’t going to lead to less retaliation?

There are examples of libeterian socialist societies today (chiapas, rojava) and historically (spain, ukraine etc.). What’s common with both is that they have to put up with relentless attacks from capitalists and fascists. Yet despite that they, in the case of rojava and chiapas, have prevailed.

If you think anarchism can only work in small communities then there are anarchist theories focusing on smaller communities, like Bookchin.

Revolution also isn’t something that happens in a day and suddenly you have to re-strucure all of society. During and before the revolution you are already creating these anarchist structures so when you get to that point you are prepared. Working with mutual aid for example doesn’t just help people now but train ourselves to live a different life based on solidarity. I believe that even if anarchism will never happen it still worth pursuing these different forms of organisation. This is partly because I am fairly confident capitalism, at least globally, will collapse. Climate change among other things will see to that. What will come after might truly be horrific but I believe anarchism is going to be the only real alternative to it if we want to live truly free.

It’s better because it’s a society based on mutual aid instead of exploitation. There are different theories about how exactly it will look like or how you get there. But overall most agree that it’s a non-hierarchical society, based on self-management and federalism. Decisions are made through direct democracy. If you want to read more there is a good chapter about it here Final Objectives: Social Revolution and Libertarian Socialism.

So? Rotating certain roles in society is part of anarchist theory and common practice in anarchist organizations. Besides anarchists aren’t opposed to assigning certain roles or managing resources. The point is how you do it i.e by actual democratic means.

It was actually ended by LGBTQ activists occupying the swedish national board of health and welfare. The myth even comes from activists calling in sick to attend the occupation.

I wouldn’t say it was exactly paradise but many jews fled to the ottoman empire to avoid european prosecution. The region was centralised or more autonomous depending on the era I think

The Ottomans took control of palestine after a war with the Mamluk empire. Palestine hasn’t been and independent country for much of it’s history. It’s still a form of occupation but if you were muslim, christian or jewish you still had access to certain rights (unless you were a slave). Mostly if you were muslim.

Palestinian side? What the fuck are you talking about. Stop conflating hamas with all of palestine. It’s like conflating israel with all jews. You’re just being racist. Hamas has also repetedly requested a cease fire that israel always refuses so you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. Stop trying to act like an enlightened centrist in a conflict you clearly know nothing about.

Except literally the hundreds of years those same religions lived peacefully together during ottoman rule…

Except jews, christians and muslims lived pretty much peacefully together during ottoman rule. The violence worsened when britian controlled palestine and then became a lot worse during the nakba and israeli occupation. It’s not about ‘having clean hands’. It’s about stopping genocide and understanding that occupation and colonialism leads to violent pushback. It always has and always will.

You can’t ‘both sides’ an issue where one side is commiting genocide and settler colonialism and the other doesn’t have access to clean water and electricity. That shouldn’t really be that hard to understand either