Is it right for states to be racialized?

[Al B. Sure!]

Is it right that there are countries organized specifically for one ethnic group?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Yes for Antarcticans

[MichaeltheGreat]

Right or wrong depends on how the state got that way - if you have a contiguous area more or less exclusive to a particular ethnic group, there's no particular reason not to.

If you have to resort to genocide to get rid of others to create an ethnically "pure" state, it's a totally different story.

[Sirotnikov]

Depends what does it mean.

If it means giving all non-ethnical groups the finger - then it's wrong.

But if it means that the country's tradition, symbolics, holidays and school programs have elements of ethnicity - then yes it's ok.

I wouldn't for the world expect polish or russians or germans to not mark ethnic events, and not have ethnic rules.

there are non-ethnical (purely political) states, for those who wish it (basically america, somewhat britain and australia).

[Al B. Sure!]

The United States and a few other countries in Latin America and lesserly England are ethnically diverse... most of the rest of the world is not. they are racial states

[monkspider]

Alb: Israel is great.

[GePap]

As long as such a state grants full equality to all citizens regardless of ethnicity, no.

[Al B. Sure!]

the thing that bothers me about Israel is that it is a racial state but is artificially one... Sweden is filled with Swedes and is Swedish culturally but Swedes have been living there continuously for centuries. Israel, however, was sanctioned to be a racial-based state (look at the name of the country which hardly is religious neutral) though most jews at the time lived no where near the middle east


thanks

[Felch]

Well, those aren't really ethnic states, now are they GePap?

[Hueij]

Ah, so this is another anti-Isreal thread...

Well, like it or not, Isreal exists and it's not going away, like it or not.

And change your f*****g nick!

[GePap]

Originally posted by Felch X
Well, those aren't really ethnic states, now are they GePap?

A state could be based around a notion of ethnicity without having to place one group above the other. France sees itself as a French state, trying mightily to defend French culture.. but it gives full equality to all citizens of France.

But in short, I do object utterly to any state designed around the notion that it should cater slely towards the beenfit of one single etho-cultural group, however they decide to define themselves.

[Sandman]

No, ethnic states are not right. It's almost as basic as separation of church and state, the separation of culture and state, IMO.

[Al B. Sure!]

Hueij:

I just dont see why Israel can't be a multiethnic state like the US...

[Sirotnikov]

Hu - since when did you become a pro-israeli? or i my memory playing tricks?

speer - i agree that it's problematic.

but then again, the jews were so dispersed that they couldn't practically create a normal state anywhere.

if anything, israel is the best place, because we have alot of historical roots here.

all of our national and religious history pretains to here. archeological evidence prove that more and more of the biblical tales are based on some truths.


what i do agree with, is that the union between state and religion is bad, and in israel especially.

that's why i voted for a centrist liberal party, that promotes personal liberties and asks to seperate religion from state in israel, as much as possible without hurtin the jewish nature of the state.

[Sirotnikov]

also, alot of the inherited problems with regarding arabs in israel, is problematic because all of our neighoubring enemy countries are also arabic, and many have family ties there or would consider some sort of anti-israeli actions.

i agree though, that israel has made every mistake in the book, and instead of making arabs feel welcome - made them feel closer to other countries.

i'm all for joining them into israel and eventually somehow merging them into judaism