The same reason speakers on Palestinian rights often can. While they may be on the right side of the issue, it's also very easy for closed discussion spaces to rapidly devolve into pretty viciously anti-semitic tropes.
The roots of this behavior as well as the fear of this behavior lie in a logical fallacy called composition, which is spelled out at the Nizkor Project (a site on the history of the Holocaust):
> The first type of fallacy of Composition arises when a person reasons from the characteristics of individual members of a class or group to a conclusion regarding the characteristics of the entire class or group (taken as a whole). More formally, the "reasoning" would look something like this.
> Individual F things have characteristics A, B, C, etc.
> Therefore, the (whole) class of F things has characteristics A, B, C, etc.
Just because the Israeli government is highly repressive towards the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza, and treats non-Jews as second-class citizens within Israel proper, does not mean that all Jews around the world share this behavior. Similarly, just because some Arabs have carried out acts of terrorism does not mean most Arabs approve of terrorist attacks on civilian populations. These notions can certainly be extended to caste conflicts among Indian peoples.
For example, Jews and Muslims live side-by-side in New York City in relative peace and harmony, as do European and Arab descendants.
The reason for this is that the American tradition of strict separation of church and state prevents any one religious group (or ethnic class) from seizing political power and using that power to repress other groups. This is one American tradition that the rest of the world would be wise to embrace, if they wish to minimize such conflicts.
> Just because the Israeli government is highly repressive towards the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza, and treats non-Jews as second-class citizens within Israel proper, does not mean that all Jews around the world share this behavior.
This is a rather hilarious statement as almost no one believes that. You are committing the same fallacy that you repudiated.
Anyway inference is kind of predicated on guessing with some facts isn't it? If Israel is "the only democracy in the middle east", and they elected a government that is openly apartheid, and commits atrocities the jewish people themselves have been victim to, doesn't that make the whole of Israel's voters complicit?
If Israel (and Saudi Arabia) were to adopt American democratic norms than all members of their population (by which I mean, populations under their military control) would have a right to vote in national elections, yes? So everyone in the West Bank and Gaza would get one vote, same as everyone in Israel proper, for electing members to the national legislative body. Perhaps some degree of federation (as with American states vs American federal) would be appropriate.
Now there was a period in American history when only white male landowners really had opportunity to vote, but that notion has been soundly repudiated, hasn't it? Even then there was a significant group who advocated for the expansion of voting rights to all. See composition fallacy again.
Similarly, the right to emigrate or own land would not be restricted to members of certain religious groups (imagine if that was the case in the United States!). Hence Israel doesn't actually meet the basic requirements of 'democratic norms and values', does it - and nor does Saudi Arabia. Curiously however, these two states are often referred to as "America's closest allies".
As far as repression, well the targeted assassination of an American-Palestinian journalist in Jenin is just one more example of this. See also the targeted assassination of a Washington Post op-ed columnist Jamal Khashoggi, ordered by Mohammmed bin 'Bone Saw' Salman in the Saudi embassy in Turkey, for comparison.
> American democratic norms [meaning] all members of their population (by which I mean, populations under their military control) would have a right to vote in national elections
Since when can non-citizens vote in US national elections? Let alone people living in Iraq, Afghanistan, or wherever else is/was under US military control.
I think you'd want to look at the definition of who is and who isn't a citizen, and what constitutes a nation-state. Clearly everyone in the West Bank is under the control of the Israeli state, and the same is more-or-less true of Gaza. Palestinians in these regions are not immigrants, they're citizens under any rational view of what a citizen is, and hence deserve the right to vote in Israeli national elections.
A valid comparison would be claiming that Native Americans were not citizens of the US government and hence had no right to vote for members of Congress, wouldn't it?
Notice that you completely dodged my question. There are lots of non-citizens living in the US who cannot vote. And during the US military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan none of the people living there were granted voting rights. Hell, look at how many senators Puerto Rico and Guam get
Nobody born in the United States lacks the right to vote in U.S. elections. I don't see how that's dodging the question; clearly visitors don't have the right to vote, and immigrants have to go through a legal process to obtain citizenship to obtain the right to vote.
To be more specific, my view is that all people born in the West Bank/Gaza/Israel should have the right to vote in Israeli elections, and Palestinians outside Israel should have the same right to emigrate to Israel as New York Jews do. Some will disagree, but that's basically how the American system works, and I think it's a better system.
If you think that anyone can simply emigrate to the US and then just go through some straightforward process to obtain the right to vote... you may be a bit out of touch with how the US immigration system works these days.
Further, there's been plenty of people born in and living in the US (under your definition of "a country includes any territory under its military control") who weren't able vote in US elections. There's residents of US territories who are technically citizens but cannot vote unless the migrate to the mainland. And the US has never granted voting rights to people living in countries under US military occupation.
Clearly not all Jews in Israel believe that Arabs, Muslims, Palestinians etc. should be treated as second-class citizens. I'm also not sure that religious identity is to be viewed as 'racial identity' unless you want to revive the definition found in the German Race Laws of the 1930s.
> I'm also not sure that religious identity is to be viewed as 'racial identity' unless you want to revive the definition found in the German Race Laws of the 1930s.
Personally, I'd suggest using the definitions that people use for themselves. And if you do that, you'll find that there are both religious and ethnic components.
The roots of this behavior as well as the fear of this behavior lie in a logical fallacy called composition, which is spelled out at the Nizkor Project (a site on the history of the Holocaust):
> The first type of fallacy of Composition arises when a person reasons from the characteristics of individual members of a class or group to a conclusion regarding the characteristics of the entire class or group (taken as a whole). More formally, the "reasoning" would look something like this.
> Individual F things have characteristics A, B, C, etc.
> Therefore, the (whole) class of F things has characteristics A, B, C, etc.
http://www.nizkor.com/features/fallacies/composition.html
Just because the Israeli government is highly repressive towards the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza, and treats non-Jews as second-class citizens within Israel proper, does not mean that all Jews around the world share this behavior. Similarly, just because some Arabs have carried out acts of terrorism does not mean most Arabs approve of terrorist attacks on civilian populations. These notions can certainly be extended to caste conflicts among Indian peoples.
For example, Jews and Muslims live side-by-side in New York City in relative peace and harmony, as do European and Arab descendants.
The reason for this is that the American tradition of strict separation of church and state prevents any one religious group (or ethnic class) from seizing political power and using that power to repress other groups. This is one American tradition that the rest of the world would be wise to embrace, if they wish to minimize such conflicts.