When dealing with uninformed/misinformed people, what are the most important things (statistics, historical events, etc) to educate people on in discussions about occupied Palestine? Is it even worth engaging in the "discourse"?
I posted earlier in the week about a coworker asking me for education, and I think the most important part for her understanding was how it started with the British conquering part of the middle east and later moving Palestinians out of their homes to make room for Jews. That context makes it clear later down the line when your talking about the numerous attacks by and against Israel that Israel has always been the aggressor, even when others have attacked it.
Begin with the core framing that the dominant narrative is crafted around avoiding: the Zionist state is a settler-colonial project premised on apartheid and genocide. Personally knowing the history is valuable but the most important thing is to not be on the defensive from the get-go, as the true power of pro-Zionist narratives is in the implicit establishment of the validity, goodness, and justifiability of the Zionist state and presenting it as simply a victim of attacks rather than an oppressor facing resistance. It is also difficult, though not impossible, to respond to my framing using false accusations of antisemitism.
With this framing you can also draw analogies using other anti-settler colonial sympathies they might have. The fundamental nature of the project is not different than the white settler apartheid/genocide regimes in:
The United States and Canadian genocide and apartheid of indigenous Americans
The Australian genocide and apartheid of Aboriginal Australians.
The New Zealand genocide and apartheid of Maori.
The South African apartheid (not without its genocidal elements, but it's where the term apartheid comes from so I'll leave it there).
In theory, liberals are against apartheid and genocide and can recognize the absurdity of, say, trying to lecture indigenous Americans about how they shouldn't have fought back.
implicit establishment of the validity, goodness, and justifiability of the Zionist state
Is it worthwhile and accurate to compare Zionism with the 'justifications' given at the time for other settler colonial projects e.g. Manifest Destiny for the USA, Terra Nullius assumption for Australia?
Sometimes. There is 100% a disgusting Zionist claim that Palestinian identity has never existed and the land was not being used. But I don't know if I'd lead with that.
Thanks for your reply. Sorry, I deleted my comment earlier as I was rethinking my phrasing, but am restoring it for context. I've seen that line, namely that Israel 'made the desert bloom' and it's horrifically pervasive.
There are some threads to draw upon when relating the situation to the country I live in (so-called Australia) and I guess I'll adapt my arguments as I go depending on who I'm talking to.
Good luck to you.
I find it very rarely worth engaging in the discourse. It just gives heartburn, headache and frustration for all the effort.
If you insisnt on engaging then pick and choose, Conrad.
In 2019, Benjamin Netanyahu said at a meeting of his Likud party: "Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas. This is part of our strategy — to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank." Whatever faction you favor, blame for this situation can only be placed on the government of Israel, which is now in the process of murdering and terrorizing the victims.