←back to thread

724 points simonw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.23s | source
Show context
0points ◴[] No.44529722[source]
> Israel ranks high on democracy indicies

Those rankings must be rigged.

Nethanyahu should be locked up in jail now for the corruption charges he was facing before the Hamas attack.

He literally stopped elections in Israel since then and there's been protests against his government daily for some years now.

And now, even taco tries to have the corruption charges dropped for Nethanyahu, then you must know he's guilty.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/29/world-news/israeli-court-postp...

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/netanyahu-corrupti...

replies(3): >>44529811 #>>44529954 #>>44530188 #
Asafp ◴[] No.44529811[source]
Almost none of what you wrote above is true, no idea how is this a top comment. Israel is a democracy. Netanyahu's trail is still ongoing, the war did not stop the trails and until he is proven guilty (and if) he should not go to jail. He did not stop any elections, Israel have elections every 4 years, it still did not pass 4 years since last elections. Israel is not perfect, but it is a democracy. Source: Lives in Israel.
replies(4): >>44529850 #>>44530008 #>>44530351 #>>44530493 #
DiogenesKynikos ◴[] No.44530008[source]
Israel is a democracy (albeit increasingly authoritarian) only if you belong to one ethnicity. There are 5 million Palestinians living under permanent Israeli rule who have no rights at all. No citizenship. No civil rights. Not even the most basic human rights. They can be imprisoned indefinitely without charges. They can be shot, and nothing will happen. This has been the situation for nearly 60 years now. No other country like this would be called a democracy.
replies(4): >>44530079 #>>44530190 #>>44530481 #>>44530584 #
thyristan ◴[] No.44530079[source]
Afaik those 5 million Palestinians are not Israeli citizens because they don't want to be, and rather would have their refugee and Palestinian citizen status. There are also Palestinians who have chosen to be Israeli citizens, with the usual democratic rights and representation, with their own people in the Knesset, etc.

And shooting enemies in a war is unfortunately not something you would investigate, it isn't even murder, it is just a consequence of war under the articles of war. In cases where civilians are shot (what Israel defines to be civilians), there are investigations and sometimes even punishments for the perpetrators. Now you may (sometimes rightfully) claim that those investigations and punishments are too few, one-sided and not done by a neutral party. But those do happen, which by far isn't "nothing".

replies(3): >>44530182 #>>44530236 #>>44530290 #
DiogenesKynikos[dead post] ◴[] No.44530182[source]
[flagged]
akoboldfrying ◴[] No.44530246[source]
> Israel is a democracy (albeit increasingly authoritarian) only if you belong to one ethnicity.

> You're referring to the small minority of Palestinians who were not expelled by Israel in 1948. They and their descendants number about 2 million now.

Your initial statement was highly sensational, strongly negative if true, and yet easily debunked. Statements like this on a contentious topic reduce one's credibility and the overall quality of discussion. Why do it?

replies(1): >>44538741 #
DiogenesKynikos ◴[] No.44538741[source]
If the United States were to strip 40% of its population (targeted on an ethnic basis) of citizenship and subject them martial law, would you consider it a democracy?

The answer is obvious. You can pretend to be worried about credibility, but you know what you're defending.

replies(1): >>44539740 #
1. akoboldfrying ◴[] No.44539740[source]
I haven't so far defended anything other than the principle (in fact, merely the utility) of making arguments in good faith.

You could have initially made the observation that a large fraction of Israel's population lack voting rights, and all of those people share an ethnicity -- but you chose instead to make a stronger and more alarming claim that you knew to be wrong.

Arguing in good faith is a prerequisite of useful discussion, it's that simple. Until you accept this, statements you make will tend to undermine your position in readers' minds, not strengthen it.