Comment

"Yes, I would agree with you in a sane world. I'd be nice, but you're not going to get that solution. This is impossible"

It can be a sane world, NC, if we fought together to make it a sane world. Resigning ourselves to things not being a sane world is just an excuse to justify brutality based on competing factions of ethno-centric or theological-centric ideologies, the fact that this is ultimately driven by the war-profiteering machine and the pursuit of profit in general, continued support of a global system based on this, and then demanding that civilians & politicians alike take sides with one or the other -- with the side chosen invariably being based on which identity group you happen to belong to or which appeals to you more emotionally.

The "it sucks, but there is no alternative" justification to "stay the course" on a destructive, counterproductive, human rights-unfriendly policies and ideologies only guarantees continued and escalating catastrophe on a global scale for *everyone* on the planet, not just one particular group, and it's pure madness for us to resign ourselves to this. There will be no "winner" in this -- save for those few on any given "side" making a profit off it, and only then for as long as someone doesn't start deploying the nukes.

In other words, madness. We can collectively forge a better path if we stop leaving things to be controlled by a handful of billionaires across the globe -- be they from the U.S., the U.K., Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Timbuktu -- and stifle dark emotional impulses on our end and take charge ourselves as a united international people.

It will only continue to be an insane world for as long as 99% of us resign ourselves to it and continue getting thrills out of seeing bombs dropped on people we dislike, and insisting that "our" demographic deserves more than another demographic. And if we stay this course, there eventually no longer be a habitable world at all. Please think about this.

"What you're talking about is idealism."

What I am talking about is *realism* and a belief in a better world rather than being a cheerleader for insanity and brutality based on the "there is no other alternative" narrative.

"It's not going to work.Islamic countries don't work because of the setup that they have, because Islam becomes the first rule over and above democracy. over and above human rights! Iraq was never secular."

So, we need to bomb them out of existence and kill, maim, or displace billions of innocent people? That's funny, NC, but I don't see Zionism being any less insane, and in fact, I currently see it launching more mayhem than any Islamic nation. I don't see a nation with policies based on Judaism and Zionism being any less secular or any less brutal on human rights issues.

And this is NOT defending Sharia Law or Islam. It's opposition to any type of ethnocentric doctrine or any form of theocracy. We can find a better and more democratic way to eliminate theocracies or ethnocentrist states -- by simply letting all people live together in equality with equal rights and establish a democratic, secular system that respects no one ethnic group, race, or religion above any other. I live in the USA, and I see Muslims, Jews, Christians, and Pagans living together without hatred and tolerating each others' cultural and religious differences. In other words, we keep these matters on a personal level and do not enshrine them into law. Identity politics of any sort -- to which Zionism is one such example -- compromises this.

Zionists like yourself are not trying to achieve this type of peace and secular democracy. You are fighting in favor of one particular type of ethnocentrism and theocratic doctrine by insisting others are "worse." This type of antagonism bodes ill for everyone who is not a Zionist or practitioner of Judaism, and it incites acts of retaliatory violence against Jewish people because the vicious and oppressive acts required to sustain it are *connected* to the Jewish people, despite many of them rejecting Zionism out of principle.

Also, many people are making a lot of money supporting Zionism. Few are making money opposing it.

"The Middle East does not do secular. It does not do freedom of speech."

I do not see Zionism as being remotely secular for insisting one group is respected and catered to above all others. And you most certainly do not do free speech if your lobby group pressures the U.S. government into passing laws prohibiting criticism of Zionism & Israel and attempting to ban TikTok because it cannot be controlled enough to cease having users who protest the Zionist narrative.

"It does not do freedom of religion, not well."

A Zionists system that prohibits and restricts marriage on the basis of religion is not doing freedom of religion either.

"None of those countries have women as equal to men again."

Being against that type of inequality does not have to equal bombing people we disagree with. It means leading by example. Showing that you allow feminists and gay people to help perpetuate capitalist control over the world and operate drones that drop bombs on hapless civilians is not doing the cause of civil rights very good. It comes off as just another form of identity-pandering.

"Your support. the wrong side."

These are the sides I support:

The working class over the capitalist class.

Democratic solutions over war.

Egalitarianism over any form of ethnocentrism, identity politics, or theocracy.

Zionism clearly violates every principle I stand for, as does the brutal actions of Israel. None of that translates into support for Sharia Law or Islam over and above Judaism. None of that equates to support of Palestinians over Jews.

The side I take is the sane, realistic, humanistic, and democratic one. And that includes opposition to ideologies or excuses to keep fostering an insane world based on profit over people and brutality over democracy.