And, notice, if the latter counterfactual was not more compelling to the Palestinians than the former counterfactual to the Israelis, this would further support Israelis’ aversion to the Palestinians’ cause, because it’s not peace they are looking for.

Well one can speculate, however we are talking of an occupying force (U.K.) gifting occupied land to a newly introduced occupying force (Israel). Perhaps the Palestinians were already unhappy about the situation beforehand.
So to speculate, if one were to swap the Palestinians for the Israelis and visa versa, we would possibly have the same issue, but with Palestinians as the occupying force. It doesn’t change anything, it’s just on the other foot.

I don’t see what you take to be “hotting up” but the US as the main hegemon while going through an internal political crisis has to intervene in Ukraine, then ALSO in Israel, then ALSO in the Red Sea is the example of hotting up I was talking about. And the multiplicity of these issues are draining and dividing energies from the main ally of Israel. This is not weakening but increasing (so hotting up) Israeli’s security concerns.

Ok, but these issues, where they affect Israel, occurred after the fact. After the Israel began their campaign in Gaza as a response to 7th October.
Unless you are drawing a link between US involvement in Ukraine and the escalation in Israel/Palestine?
I agree it does increase Israel’s security concerns, but in this regard Israel (Netanyahu), is his own worst enemy.

Besides, I question cause-effect reasoning in geopolitics for more reasons. One is that security concerns are not just about single (fac)actual threats but also anticipated threats (because it may be already to late to respond to an actual threat effectively, and because threats can come in combination with other threats). For example, Russia invaded Ukraine allegedly because of the anticipated threat of Ukraine joining NATO.

Agreed.

So you like discussing politics but then when challenged you responded with one line (“Israel is conducting an apartheid state. The responsibility for the outcome lies with them”) which doesn’t even look very much as an argument, nor addresses any of the many objections I previously made to question your views? Indeed, that’s the kind of response I would expect by anybody who wanted to end a political discussion, not engage in one.
But I guess the root cause of this is in my psyche, right?

I gave that response after being requested to steer clear of the word psyche. So I didn’t respond to your detailed post as that would have involved that word.

if the problem of the Israeli is best understood IN RELATION TO numerous others issues around the world (which is what I'm claiming), then we have a compelling reason to not assess Israelis’ actions in isolation from such numerous others issues around the world, don’t we?

Yes, but I’m not convinced that any of these issues played much of a role here. Rather I see this crisis as deeply intertwined between the Israeli’s and Palestinians.

The “others issues around the world” I was referring to are the ones that I and others kept talking about until now:

Yes, I see this. Perhaps these issues will come into play due to actors in these arenas capitalising on the crisis. Like the Houthi’s for example. But as I say, I don’t see how any of these were causal in the crisis.
It could be argued that Isreal and Hamas have backers, the US and Iran respectively. And that there were some pressures exerted in relation to the efforts to achieve normalisation between Isreal and Saudi Arabia. But I would attribute this far more to the increasing and violent occupation of the West Bank over the past few years. Also tensions between Isreal and Gaza had been increasing over the same period. These are the main drivers of this crisis.

I return to my point about Israel, Isreal is conducting an apartheid state with an oppressed population who they treat badly. The blame and responsibility for what results from this crisis lies squarely with the Israeli’s

What is “appreciate” supposed to mean here? These are two of your one-liners:

To appreciate, I mean to understand, to be aware of.

My arguments question such claims, and none of my arguments have even been addressed by you to come to the above conclusions, even though you claim to appreciate them.

I do understand the security concerns, however I am of the view that Israel’s security would have been secure had Israel not conducted it’s settlement policy and treating of Gaza’s as second class citizens over the last few decades.

I talk about Israeli security concerns, dead-lock nation-state struggle by Israelis and Palestinians, wider and hotter international hegemonic competition, the threat of Islamism, the political weakness and compromised credibility of International Law.

I don’t see a hotting up of hegemonic competition which would inflame the situation in Israel. One could possibly say something about Russian actions, or Trump’s actions in regard of Iran, or Afghanistan when he was in office. But I don’t see much cause and effect going on here. Islamism has faded into the background recently with the occasional terrorist action in Western countries. Again, little cause and effect. Unless it is code for Hamas.

So everybody else has to (kindly?) shut (the fuck?) up and listen.

I’m just someone who likes discussing politics and philosophy on a forum. What you depict here must just be in your head, it’s not in mine.

if the problem of the Israeli is best understood IN RELATION TO numerous others issues around the world (which is what I'm claiming), then we have a compelling reason to not assess Israelis’ actions in isolation from such numerous others issues around the world, don’t we?

Feel free to link this crisis with things happening elsewhere around the world, I don’t see much of it from where I’m standing. But if there is something, I’d like to know.

Something weird is going on in Australia. They’re gonna fry in a few years. Must be that problem with populism I was talking about.

Saudi is investing big time in solar, they know their oil is going to become a stranded asset soon enough. Russia knows this too, so want to grab Ukraines grain producing plains before it’s to late.

The Israeli propaganda machine was glorifying the victims of 7th October from day one, to justify the planned destruction of Gaza.

They obviously are AS other considerations. What I’m questioning and solicit people in this thread to give a more serious thought about is whether the considerations you seem to cherish so much (as many privileged white Westerners) are the main driving motivations of main involved parties’s decision makers with their supporters like Netanyahu with its Israeli supporters, Hamas with its Palestinian supporters

I don’t see the interlocutors you mention failing to appreciate this. I don’t, but I remind you that Israel is and is portraying itself as part of the West. Israeli citizens have strong links with all Western countries and move freely back and forth. This is one of the main reasons why those in the West are exercised over this issue rather than numerous others around the world.

So an hourglass changes its identity as each sand grain drops.

A moment of clarity.

What if the self is the linguistic heritage? This question is as confused as any other, but then, we are trying to communicate and only have words, our linguistic heritage, to do so. And that is where my "question" lives - only a mind can make any sense of these words at all. I would agree that maybe I don't know the language to properly ask myself "what are you?" (already this sentence is absurd) but I do not agree that because I don't know the language, I can't even conceive my question. Whether I can express it or not, something is being straight-jacketed; therefore, there is something beyond the words. I disagree that meaning is simply use. Use ties meaning to the words, but it does not tie the words back to anything else, and I don't agree that meaning is merely use.

There is a heritage of mystical traditions which address this and have developed schools of thought for enquiring minds to explore the issues. It goes beyond philosophy in the strict sense in that it relies on religious, or theological traditions, which are adopted as a framework on which to construct one’s enquiry.

Another point I thought of regarding anti-semitism: Could you think of another country whose hostage posters would be torn down if its citizens were kidnapped by another group? I struggle to think of one. Israel is regarded as the nexus of worldly evil for so much of the world, especially on college campuses and among the youth. It's disturbing.

Moreover, why are so many of the pro-Palestinian protests violent and destructive while in the pro-Israel ones I've never heard of any vandalism and everyone's sitting around singing "HaTikvah." The difference in "culture" between the two groups is stunning. The Palestinian crowd disturbs cancer wards with their bullhorns. It's self-righteous psychopathy. Extremely dangerous.

Special pleading.

A low level of anti-semitism is endemic in Western countries. It’s a hang over from the last few hundred years of persecution and prejudice against them.

If it weren’t there and Isreal were conducting the same actions against the Palestinians there would still be the same level of outrage across the globe. Outrage at a so called civilised country, a Western country confining a population and then starving them to death and bombing indiscriminately.

The only real question left is how we’re going to solve this existential problem. The solutions are already being employed and they’re worth looking at and engaging with, whether individually or, better, within a community or organization.

There are issues that come with the speed of transition to net zero. Due to the inertia in the system and how late we have reached a point where significant change is happening. Many of the changes are now going to have to be more rapid than a seamless transition would expect.

A case in point is the role out of charging points for electric vehicles in the U.K. There are massive hiccups in the role out. This is resulting in big hiccups in the introduction of electric vehicles and a slowing of the transition. For the role out to go smoothly there needs to be a sufficient number of charge points in sufficient locations for drivers to be confident that they will be able to make their journeys without the problems of not finding a charging point, or finding a queue at the charging point they need to use.

This has resulted in lots of people deciding not to buy an electric car until these problems have been solved. Also the inadequacies of the electrical grid systems have been revealed meaning there is a requirement for massive national upgrades in infrastructure.

Now this is just one case, there are similar issues across the board in the transition. Many of them converging in pinch points, or bottlenecks. This trips up the progress, resulting in frustrations, liquidations, unrest and protests.

The more rapid these issues have to be dealt with the greater the barriers and obstacles there are. The greater the upheaval.

There is also a political fallout from this. The rise of far right populism and the miss information they promote. In the U.K. the Conservative Party has failed to invest in the required infrastructure, failed to provide incentives, failed to put necessary laws and regulations in place for over a decade, to speed up the transition. Now we are in the position where all this has to be done at breakneck speed and the Conservatives are split with a faction insisting on reneging on our net zero commitments. This plays into the climate denial that is sweeping the Western democracies.

Divide and rule politics and far right conspiracy theories threaten to derail our efforts to tackle the climate crisis and the more the necessary changes are delayed the greater the upheaval.

Quite, a distraction. Often people get diverted onto plastics and recycling so that they continue using fossil fuels. While thinking they are doing their bit for the planet.

I will wait on micro plastics until there are firmer research results.

I can see that there might be some leaching of chemicals into the body from micro plastics. But if there is toxicity, where has it come from? Are plastics made of toxic ingredients? Also how come all the other micro particles in the environment haven’t caused similar problems?
I can see that there is a food chain issue, but has it been demonstrated that they accumulate at the top of the food chain and stay there?

I was wondering, there were already micro particles in the environment before plastics were invented. How come they are not a problem?

The Trump family doll collection.
https://x.com/Roshan_Rinaldi/status/1759088710627299375?s=20

Israel is conducting an apartheid state. The responsibility for the outcome lies with them.

It is horrific and for citizens in the West, very disconcerting. Because our so called just, compassionate, fair nations are complicit, or have their hands tied and we just have to all sit and watch while a pariah state runs amuck with extremists at the helm.

Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, framing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in terms of “humanitarian concerns”, “international laws”, “war crimes”, “equal rights” to obfuscate the above considerations is kind of a noble mystification, to be kind.

Yes there is a mystification, it’s not intentional though. It’s a cultural clash, between Western values and Arabic values. The power brokers in the region, on the one hand and the U.S. (taking Israel out of this equation) on the other, do understand each other, can negotiate and reach agreement which is honoured by both sides.

The fly in the ointment is Israel and its persecution of the Palestinians. Egypt and Jordan have an understanding with the U.S. and the power brokers in the region. They are not involved in this.

If we distill the issue down to its root cause, we find there is a problem in the psyche of the Israeli’s. Blame can’t be put on the Palestinians, they are an occupied, oppressed population, of which Hamas is a symptom. If we are going to find a solution to this it is going to be in the minds of the Israeli people and the diaspora which lives in the West and holds Western values.

Israel is an adolescent outpost of the west in and surrounded by the Middle East.

I would demand iron clad treaties with both Israel and the US on a right of return for all civilians before I'd do so.

It’s gone beyond that now. Israel has become a pariah state. They can’t be trusted to adhere to treaties.

Like, Russia should be totally isolated. China should be totally isolated. With the only key to the door being that they stop oil. If not, they can hunger until the people storm the leader's castles.

Who is in charge in this situation?


All the strategies you list will fail, resulting in martial law and authoritarian police, or military states. While the activists would be thrown in jail and vilified as extremist terrorists. Used as whipping boys for divide and rule populists. All action towards net zero will be abandoned. Carbon emissions might drop, but there would be global economic collapse. So no one will be able to develop the required technology and infra structure for a return to normality. More likely would be a Mad Max outcome. During a period of mass extinction and climate turmoil.

As I say, it’s important to retain a functioning economic and industrial system in safe areas for as long as possible. To give us a hope of pulling through as a civilisation with the appropriate technologies in place. Which are being rapidly developed now.

It's too late for some consequences, but giving up would be far more catastrophic. There's no point in just stop mitigation. But we have to speed up the change and do it fast.

This is equivocation. It is not the case that not following your prescribed actions equates to giving up.

Yes it’s going to be a rollercoaster when the AMOC circulation collapses. Rapid ice melt on Greenland could tip the balance during the next few decades. Resulting in much colder weather for Europe and global consequences. Followed by a rapid warming at a later date when it catches up with the rest of the world.
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2024/02/new-study-suggests-the-atlantic-overturning-circulation-amoc-is-on-tipping-course/

Or just change course now. If that's our future and people would start to realize this to be a very likely outcome, then they will pick up guns and remove anyone who do not actively work to fix it. It's easy to ignore it now, but when enough people get the short end of the stick, they will soon organize and do something. We might see billions of them. Billions who have nothing else they can do but storm the castles of immorality.

If it were that simple to change course, I would be out there now with my gun. But that is more likely to be counterproductive. The problem is that any breakdown in civil order would inevitably disrupt commerce and turn politics more authoritarian. Resulting in a slowing down in the development of carbon neutral technology and infra-structure and the transition and the activists who took up arms thrown in jail and labelled terrorists.

Programmes of education to educate the population in the severity and pressing nature of the threat would be effective in spreading the word. There is already lots of media aimed at achieving this. In the U.K., the work of Sir David Attenborough has been very effective and the majority of the population is on board.(to the extent of understanding the issue and prepared to act)
But really what is required is for large numbers of people to be struck with the realisation, the road to Damascus revelation, as I said. This is much more difficult and I don’t see a way of achieving this in the absence of a catastrophic natural event. Something which is likely not far off happening now.

You say we are able to make the necessary changes and prevent catastrophe. But I would say it is too late now, we should have been at our current state of readiness at the time of that Carl Sagan lecture in 1990.(I was onboard at that time). The situation is much more critical now and catastrophic effects and states collapsing will be happening soon. The best that we can do until then is keep things on a stable footing as long as possible, while nations transition to national sustainable energy generation infrastructure and make big reductions in fossil fuel usage, as has been done in China and France for example.

It looks as though the transition to carbon neutral transport is not going to be rolled out in time and may fail, with either a move back to oil, or a collapse of transport systems.

I also expect the powerful nations of the world retreating into fortresses in an attempt to survive. This would likely be in North America, Europe and China. The rest of the world would be cut loose and would have to fend for themselves. I think Putin is trying to make a move in this direction, thinking that Russia would become warmer and become an empire. (Edit. this would require the Ukraine plains for food production). This will of course fail.

The rise of fascism and libertarianism around the world is another symptom with the powerful already trying to asset strip nations, or looking to hide away in bunkers.

Nice, next we just need to turn down the dial on greed, power games etc.

I was there 30yrs ago, but was seen as a crank.

Thanks, a true visionary.

A pity we didn’t all get on board at that point.

I agree with everything you say, short of “ripping the bandaid”. You and I have reached the realisation of the seriousness of the issue. It’s a road to Damascus moment for people who realise this. Unfortunately it is very difficult to explain this, or convey it to people who are just getting along with their lives, or are being lead down another road.

The number of people coming to this realisation is increasing rapidly along with the number of people who realise there is a problem that needs addressing and are ready to act. But there is an enormous inertia in the system and the culture. Many of us are banging our heads against this wall of inertia.

Eventually one realises all we can do is play our part from the position we are in within society. Ideally one would become a politician run for office and change things. Or figure out a way to change peoples minds through some kind of media organisation, or protest group. But again the inertia hits home and many people are already doing these things. In fact some of these people are pushing so hard that media campaigns are growing to discredit them as extremists and pull more people into climate denial.

So one reaches a point of acceptance, an acceptance that the crisis is enormous and irreversible and we as a species are to weak to prevent it. This is quite normal, the list of species extinctions in the fossil record is long and there is an inevitability to it.

The task of intelligent beings as I see it is to overcome these cycles and reach a point of long term survival through working with natural cycles and adopt a custodian role within the ecosystem.

It is too late now to overcome this current cycle of climate change, however if some portion of humanity can survive, adapt and preserve our intellectual and technological achievements sufficiently that they can be conveyed to the next flourishing of civilisation. There is an increased chance of achieving a that custodial role.

This is the natural cycle as I see it, with many failed attempts, collapses, until at some point in the future, the species adapts, or grows up sufficiently to overcome these obstacles and achieves a long term survival and develops into an advanced civilisation to take its place among other advanced civilisations in the cosmos, if they exist (to be confirmed). In this humanity is still in its infancy.

Personally, I will play my small part in improving our lot. While enjoying the life I have built for myself and my family.

Are you saying that the existence of sceptics shows that there are people who are not feeling the impacts of climatic change?

No, I’m accepting that there are always some people who genuinely think the science is wrong. Just like there were people who insisted the world was flat.
Having said that, I don’t remember ever meeting, or hearing of one.

I see through you.

Does that mean that I’m a lounge lizard?

I'm all for education, but we don't have time to educate people in order for them to support solutions to a damn comet on collision course with earth. In such a situation you simply ignore the ignorant and take the necessary action that is needed right now.

Of the people who are sceptical of climate change, or adopt an attitude, or conspiracy theory regarding it. Most are swayed by a political populism which spoon feeds them a populist narrative or conspiracy theory to keep them on board. Some are old and don’t want to change their lifestyle, fewer still are young and don’t want to change their lifestyle. There may be a handful of sceptics who genuinely don’t accept the science. But they will fade away soon as the climactic impacts start to be felt.

These people can be disregarded because even if they do form groups which reach positions of power and influence. The impacts of climate change will change their minds soon enough and industry is already making the required adaptations and changes to address the issue. Albeit a bit late to the game, but there was always going to be a great deal of inertia.

Yikes. Biden stole classified documents and gets off.

Now we know what Trump needs to do to get off the majority of his indictments. Prove he is old and with a poor memory. Better still demonstrate that he is not of sound mind.

A walk in the park.

he could be far better than Biden or he could do something absolutely crazy and start a world war.

Fair enough.

I have on occasion thought he (Trump) could be better than Biden on foreign policy. But it only ever lasts a second or two, until I reflect on his policy on some key geopolitical issues, their incoherence and his megalomania.

The obvious question is what does far better than Biden look like, regardless of who it is we’re talking about?

It’s not just you. I couldn’t find the climate change thread earlier. I went via my comments.

Somehow, I am not totally reassured.

It will give us a bit of breathing space on the climate front. But won’t protect us from civilisation collapse. But I think we’re alright. We will be dead and buried by then.

Don’t worry, here in the U.K. we will be saved by the cold blob.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_blob

That would be Trump.

And what about the “I would be a dictator for one day” comment?

(I’m not looking for an argument, just curious)

Rather, the position climate change should be about at this time in history should be about the strategies and mitigation solutions and how to practically implement them into society in a smart way. Everything else is just pointless and every denier should just be ignored just as much as they ignore the severity of the subject.

Precisely, if civilisation is to survive intact, the priorities should be these. The twin path of reduction in the severity of climate change, the transition to zero carbon asap and the bold strategies of mitigation globally.

This will in itself be a gargantuan task. While not following this course will result in more severe climate change. More radical mitigation. With the added complication of civilisation collapse, initially local collapses, but followed by wider systemic collapse.

Or in other words, we have no choice if we want to preserve the achievements of civilisation, rather than return to the Bronze Age.

The preservation of capitalism would only be where it can help in this task.

I find no virtue in protecting the planet for the planet's sake. I don't care if we lose thousands of polar bears if it means the promotion of human life, the continued promotion of the capitalistic system, and the continued centralization of power in the hands of the United States. I don't believe in equality.

You’ve got that the wrong way round Hanover. The planet will be fine whatever we do. There might not be many people left though.

Yes, I see Israel pulling the U.S. into the region. They will not feel secure until there are more U.S. airbases around them. Their control over the U.S. can be seen in the response to the ICJ acceptance of the plausibility of South Africa’s charge of genocide. Within a few hours the world’s media was flooded with revelations of UNWRA employees being involved in 7th October attack with the response being that the Western power coalition stated that they will withdraw funding of UNWRA.

Israel calls the shots and we follow like a dog on a lead.

I’m not going to pretend I have a clue - but at face value, colonialism.

I don’t think colonialism is appropriate to describe what’s going on here. It’s forced displacement, sanctioned and funded by the state with no concern, or provision for where the displaced people are to go, or how they are to feed themselves. Not only this, but the entire mentality of the oppressors (again state sanctioned) dehumanises the victims and is actively hostile to their human dignity. Their rights as citizens of Palestine, under Israeli control as an apartheid state are disregarded, ignored denied (again state sanctioned).

The story depicted in that tweet is happening all over the West Bank and wholesale in Gaza. It’s accelerating and the oppressors are becoming more vocal and bold in their actions. A humanitarian catastrophe could happen at any time.

This is clearly ethnic cleansing and is open to the charge of genocide. Genocide is a specific charge which must be ruled on by the ICJ before it can be established definitively whether the bar has been reached.

As far as I’m concerned, the primary worry for us is not Palestinians or Jews getting their nation-states (neither are perceived as necessary to people other than them themselves) because we can’t write their history for them, it’s about keeping us as far as possible from WW3. And the dilemma for the US as global hegemonic power remains: how is it possible to deter rivals without escalating or risking an overstretch?

I don’t see much likelihood of this conflict leading to WW3. There are a number of reasons for this conclusion. Primarily that there isn’t a powerful army ready to march and overcome any other significant territory. The likely candidate is presumably Russia, but Russia is struggling to hold onto a small area of land in southern Ukraine. While its fighting age population is being decimated and economically Russia is near collapse.
The U.S. and China will steer well clear of any large scale war. For the U.S. there is a move towards isolationism and focusing on internal problems. Plus they remember how all their previous campaigns, especially in the Middle East, have not gone well. For China, why would they take such a risk when they are going to surpass the U.S. economically and they see the U.S. in decline. Basically, they will inevitably achieve world domination through commerce soon enough.

Who else would agitate for a world war. Or be capable of conducting a large scale war?

What may happen though, is a wider regional war with power brokers conducting proxy wars and more of the Middle East left in ruin and failed states.

I think I just need to leave you in your box.

Take a look at this tweet about a farmer being told to leave his land.

https://x.com/amwogakhalwale/status/1741842955059523653?s=20

Can you tell me what is going on here?

Yes and people who have been campaigning for the end of the oppression of Palestinians have been labelled as anti-Semitic, or smeared with anti-semitism, for decades too.

The smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. is a good example. Many Labour voters were convinced not to vote Labour (2019) because Corbyn was dangerous. Would invite the worlds despots and terrorists into the country.