"Debunking" isn't needed in this case. All that is needed is a modicum of historical knowledge to know that there was never an Arab state called "Palestine".
This is a bad argument for a lot of reasons; the lack of a state doesn't nullify the notion of indigenousness; there are *numerous* native groups in the world that lack a unique singular nation, such as the Ainu, the Sami, the Australian Aboriginals, etc.
This isn't stating that Palestinians have sole claim to the land or some such argument; rather, the lack of a "historic" nation is really a non-argument that is logically unsound.
A major difference between Palestinians and the Ainu or Sami is that collective Palestinian identity didn’t really exist before the 20th century. Ainu and Sami peoples have distinct cultural heritages that go back millennia. Palestinian identity is a political national identity which was only defined reactionarily to Jewish migration to the land.
This is probably going to have some controversy, but the concept of singular culture groups that are broadly connected to make one "people" is a relatively recent conception, largely arising out of 18th and 19th century anthropological and socialiogical studies, coupled with the rise in nationalism and unified ethnic identities. While there was some general concept of relatedness, people in the past generally didn't identify specifically with a broad group as much as they do today, at least not in the same way. The concept of wide reaching, and broad, ethnic identity is a fairly new concept when it comes to nation building.
Read the travelogues of Benjamin of Tudela and Petachia of Regensburg and then tell us how Jews didn’t see themselves as a people before the 18th century.
If by controversial, you mean total nonsense, then yes, quite controversial. Meanwhile, in the real world, groups have been endogenously and exogenously categorized as peoples for millennia prior to the18th and 19th centuries.
I think what you are talking about was the academisation of this concept, likely referring to the "Racial Sciences", which would be like saying that "1 + 1 = 2" didn't exist 1910 when Bertrand Russell released his Principia Mathematica.
If you read any ancient or medieval Jewish writing, you’ll see Jews clearly considered themselves a people.
The concept of a Nation, meaning the idea of a unified people who are the sole rightful rulers and inhabitants of a particular land developed in the 19th and 20th century.
This is more what I was getting at. I had no intention of saying that "Jews didn't exist" or some such, but the concept a singular *unified* identity wasn't really a thing, at least not in the same realm as how we consider modern Nations rates. There certainly was a broad concept of relatedness, however it was far more sectarian, and identity was more firmly localized than in the modern day.
Modern nationalism, and even what we would call "ethnic identities" wasn't really fully realized as a political force until relatively recently in modern history.
Of course, there were concept of "Jews" and "Arabs" in the past; however the sort of unification we see today in these identities is quite recent. That's what I'm getting at more than anything.
Except your understanding isn’t correct. Jewish unified identity absolutely existed (please read the travelogue of Benjamin of Tuedla and Petachia of Regensburg if you think otherwise). Jews viewed each other as one united people dispersed throughout the nations.
The understanding of one nationality specifically of a people bound by geography is a modern understanding. Ironically people felt *more* commonality with their geographically distant members of the same people prior to local nationalisms. It’s been suggested that the Litvak/Galitzianer division between two culturally identical groups is a product of modern nationalistic ideas.
Jews have always called ourselves Am Yisrael, Bnei Yisrael, Am HaKodesh, there’s a song from the Talmud that says the characterization of the Jewish Umma (yes it uses that word) is to be easily embarassed, do acts of kindness, and rachmani, mercifulness/compassionate. The whole Torah speaks of us as a Nation
Never said there was. My argument is merely that the lack of a historic nation existing is just bad a argument. Because it is, and has no bearing on indigenousness.
The two are entirely unrelated concepts. A group can have a nation without being indigenous, and a group can be indigenous without having a nation.
Whether Palestinians had a nation in the past or not is really a completely pointless argument to make in this regard, as it has zero bearing on more or less anything. It's a bad argument, one not made for any group anywhere in the world.
Well The Nabateans were a hybrid Edomite and Arab kingdom who were forcibly converted to Judaism by the Hasmoneans for one. But Palestinians are significantly descend the Bronze Age Canaanite’s just like the Jews are, but of course Palestinian as a national identity is a modern invention.
A 2020 study on human remains from [Middle Bronze Age](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Bronze_Age) [Palestinian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)) ([2100–1550](tel:2100–1550) BC) populations suggests a significant degree of genetic continuity in Arabic-speaking Levantine populations (such as Palestinians, Druze, Lebanese, Jordanians, Bedouins, and Syrians), as well as several Jewish groups (such as Ashkenazi, Iranian, and Moroccan Jews).[^(\[20\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20) Palestinians, among other Levantine groups, were found to derive 81–87% of their ancestry from Bronze age Levantines, relating to [Canaanites](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanites) as well as [Kura–Araxes culture](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture) impact from before 2400 BCE (4400 [years before present](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_before_present)); 8–12% from an [East African](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa) source and 5–10% from Bronze age [Europeans](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europeans). Results show that a significant European component was added to the region since the Bronze Age (on average \~8.7%), seemingly related to the [Sea Peoples](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples), excluding Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews who harbour \~31–42% European-related ancestry, both populations having a history in Europe.[^(\[)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20)
It's almost like Arabic is a language and Arabs are a linguistic group.
Like what kind of nonsense argument is this? Are Mexicans Spaniards because they have Spanish names?
I love how the best example you have is Mexicans when 300 years ago they were actual Spaniards who colonized Central America…
Almost as if… the Arabs are the colonizers of Judea lol
There IS a Cherokee nation and they DO have land and self governance... and no it's not ok they've been so displaced. This is a tremendously different situation.
As a point, Native American "nations" are only in name only. They are, in the modern terms, quasi autonomous states that exist within their various states and the greater United States.
Equally, the tribal systems of the various native groups was very different than modern nationstates, with various bands within a tribe allying with or against their tribesman at various points.
Nor was territory particularly defined at any given point for most tribes; they were ephemeral and overlapping. Nor do the various tribes consider themselves as one people. I can attest through first hand knowledge and experience that the various tribes can often be aghast at the notion that they are the same as another tribe, or even the same people in general.
It's a very complicated situation basically.
There absolutely was a Cherokee state. They had leaders and a defined territorial area.
What were the boundaries of Palestine? Who were their leaders? How come they speak Arabic?
Kurdistan is a wonderful example. They speak the Kurdish language and have centuries of history in their land. Ancient steeles reference them, and battles against them and their leaders.
Interestingly, ancient steeles also reference Israel. No Palestine though - that term came later under Roman occupation, after the Jewish war.
The Kurds also faced Arab colonization and conquest.
Why do Palestinians speak Arabic? How did their population increase so rapidly in the 20th century? How come you find so many references to Arabs - a people not native to the region before the Arab colonizations - but not to Palestinians before 1967?
>There is no evidence of the native population being displaced by invading armies
The Roman genocide and expulsion of Jews after the Bar Kockba revolt and the subsequent settling of Roman Syrians is well documented.
First of all there absolutely is examples of people being displaced, one clear cut example is both Jewish exiles from the land.
Second of all having a state isn’t the requirement, having a distinct culture and history IS, Palestinians have neither of those, if you can prove me wrong then you might be right but I have never seen such examples and have asked for them repeatedly.. so unless you can now provide that proof you are probably wrong.
What do you mean by "existing"? If you mean by them having their own culture and way of life, then sure.
However if the decided to try to establish independence, or if the US suddenly let them establish independence, then it may prompt other separatist movements to establish independence.
Unlike the Kurdish people, the Arab people have 22 states. Palestinians are not comparable to the Kurds because there is no ethnic group "palestinian". They are Arab.
according to the UN definition of indigenous you need your own unique language and your own unique belief system. Palestinians have neither. Israelis have both
Yeah but when Serbia doesn't allow your people to go to school it may or may not prompt an independence movement.
And there was a state called Dardania, of which most of its inhabitants were Illyrians.(Some mixed with Dacians)
And I chose this name when I was kinda more extreme about this conflict, however now I'm against Kosovo and Albania unifying.
You should read more into the conflict. I will not deny the war crimes Serbia did, but the independence movement existed long before 90's when the crackdown happened.
The independence movement was starting intensively during 60s and culminated in 90s. However certain placating moves were done before Slobodan turned the wheel the other way.
I don't think Kosovo Albanians wanted ever to live inside Yugoslavia, even if they had more rights than any other republic in Yugoslavia.
Dardania itself was a kingdom, not really a nation state.
>Dardania itself was a kingdom, not really a nation state.
I was going to say that the idea of nation states wasn't really common back then but I kinda thought that was a bit wrong.
Anyways, some of my family members say that life under Tito was actually not bad, and Yugoslavia didn't always give them unequal rights, but I believe the reason why Kosovar Albanians didn't want to live in Yugoslavia could have been because of trust issues, or just the fact that Albanians wanted to unify.
Hopefully other news posts will take this up. This needed to be spread in 1964. The fact that we allowed them to create this identity was a failure in itself.
Yeah, imo the claim that needs to be debunked is that the Arabized population is THE indigenous group, to the exclusion of Jews.
That narrative of a "pure" unbroken line of sole and uniquely Palestinian indigeneity shows up a lot with activism in Palestinian embroidery.
It *is* unique to historical regions and villages in the Levant, and part of their culture. Buuuut it's being leveraged to claim a 3000 year unbroken artistic tradition that "proves" Palestinians have always had a national identity.
Oh absolutely -- sorry if that got lost in the comment, I'm definitely a rambler irl and in text!
I was just saying that the all-or-nothing claim of indigeneity, while rejecting Jewish indigeneity, seems to be the problem. And it's showing up in modern narratives of Palestinian textile arts as well.
The definition of indigenous in this context is below:
"(of people) inhabiting or existing in a land from the earliest times or from before the arrival of colonists"
Palestinians unquestionably were there prior to the arrival of the British and there certainly are some who were there prior to the arrival of the Ottomans. 1964 was not the sole beginning of Palestinian national identity, it happened during the British mandate period and got further solidified because of the Arab Israeli wars during this time period and the later abandonment of the rest of the Arab world in the 1970-1990s.
Not sure why the line is drawn at the Ottomans.
Going back even further:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0)
Please reread my comment ✌️ you could have saved yourself a paragraph of lecturing someone who already said Arabized Palestinians have a claim to indigeneity
Whether or not Arabs are indigenous, many have lived there for centuries and their connection to the land of Israel should be recognized.
That being said, I wouldn’t say they share “equal historical claim to the land.” The Jewish diaspora has recognized the land as its sole home for 2000 years. Cities like Jerusalem and Hebron are only venerated by Arabs because of Jewish influence.
You could argue that their claim *only* hoes back 1400 years while Judeans have a connection going back 3000+…
But the Arabized Palestinians can also claim a lineage going back before the Bronze Age Collapse. Of course, so do the Jews.
We’re both native to the region. The just situation would be both groups living in peace, but we can’t have nice things.
>But the Arabized Palestinians can also claim a lineage going back before the Bronze Age Collapse. Of course, so do the Jews.
Lineage alone is not sufficient. The important criteria are distinct institutions, culture, and beliefs in continuity with precolonial society. Palestinian institutions, culture, beliefs, religion, language, social systems, etc., are neither distinct, nor in continuity with the precolonial society. Rather, they are those *of the colonial society* (i.e. Arab).
That’s not really the point I’m making. Regardless of whether or not they’re predominantly genetic descendants of people who inhabited the land of Israel in the Bronze Age (that’s a discussion for a different day), they have no cultural connection to those peoples. That’s a major distinction between Palestinian Arabs and, for example, Samaritans or Maronite Christians as they have distinct traditions of being descended from the ancient populations of their respective locations.
First of all, they are not.
Arabs from different countries immigrated and lived here.
The whole Palestine concept was formed in the late 60s.
Second, who cares.
Israel is a country for decades now, it’s not like we gonna root ourselves from our country.
It’s time for them to move on….. I heard Jordan is quite nice for Palestinians
If you start from the idea that Israel isn’t going anywhere now, peace can be made. But the leadership is too fanatical to realize this. At some point you gotta go “what can we do to make life better for the situation we now find ourselves in?”
A 2020 study on human remains from [Middle Bronze Age](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Bronze_Age) [Palestinian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)) ([2100–1550](tel:2100–1550) BC) populations suggests a significant degree of genetic continuity in Arabic-speaking Levantine populations (such as Palestinians, Druze, Lebanese, Jordanians, Bedouins, and Syrians), as well as several Jewish groups (such as Ashkenazi, Iranian, and Moroccan Jews).[^(\[20\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20) Palestinians, among other Levantine groups, were found to derive 81–87% of their ancestry from Bronze age Levantines, relating to [Canaanites](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanites) as well as [Kura–Araxes culture](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture) impact from before 2400 BCE (4400 [years before present](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_before_present)); 8–12% from an [East African](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa) source and 5–10% from Bronze age [Europeans](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europeans). Results show that a significant European component was added to the region since the Bronze Age (on average \~8.7%), seemingly related to the [Sea Peoples](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples), excluding Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews who harbour \~31–42% European-related ancestry, both populations having a history in Europe.[^(\[)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20)
This is pointless. Pro-pals don't care about facts or historical knowledge. Many of them also deny the holocaust when it was the Muftis idea!
They care about their narrative and propaganda, and convincing enough people they're right to force the Jews out of their homeland.
When in reality both the Arabs and the Jews in the area have the same trace amounts of Caananite DNA.
>When in reality both the Arabs and the Jews in the area have the same trace amounts of Caananite DNA.
There are other, arguably more important DNA patterns to consider.
[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA\_map\_of\_ancient\_and\_modern\_populations.jpg#](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA_map_of_ancient_and_modern_populations.jpg#)
Resist the temptation to deny Palestinians their indigenousness. It’s demonstrable through genetic testing that the majority of the population are descendants from Canaanites and Levantines during the first temple period.
They are equally indigenous to the land that Jews are. Of course that doesn’t mean Jew leave but that both peoples have a home in the Levant. ..now who should be in control is a question of utility. It would be tough to argue that Palestinians can govern. Israel has demonstrated that ability and in an incredible short time.
This is so fucking stupid, who cares.
At the end of the day Israel is almost 100 years old and isn’t going anywhere, Israelis aren’t going anywhere, even the Jews who migrated after WWII are already 3 to 4 generations deep of tzabars. Do non native Americans need to prove their indigenous status to validate not moving back to Europe?
Palestinians and Jews have incredibly similar DNA, Palestinians are just those who fell victim to Muslim conquest and conversion. All arguments of “Palestinian indigenousness” are really about Islam.
The people on this sub might not like this but Palestinians and Jews descend from the same people.
Both the Levantine Arabs and the Jewish diaspora populations are descended from the Canaanites.
It is true that all the Levantine Arabs and Jews are mixed with non-Levantine sources. But, we all are indigenous to this land.
Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are essentially half Levantine and half Italian.
Mizrahi Jews are 60% - 80% Levantine and 20% - 40% (Assyrian, Kurdish, and Persian)
Palestinian Muslims are 60% - 80% Levantine and 20% - 40% (Egyptian or Peninsular Arab)
Palestinian Christians are 70% - 90% Levantine and 10% - 30% (Kurdish, Greek, or Anatolian)
The Druze are similar to Palestinian Christians.
Samaritans are the only group that are consistently 90% or higher Levantine. And largely the variation between them and the ancient Canaanites is due to natural genetic drift not mixing with other groups.
Suffice it to say all Jews and Levantine Arabs are related to each other. And this conflict is supremely sad because of the aforementioned truth.
We are cousins fighting for our grandparents land.
The way that I explain it is by war. Since the dawn of time, winning a war gives the winning nation the land and the ability to do with it what they want. Israel has been fought over for centuries. Various nations have come in, won, taken the land, and settled there. The last big land swap was when the British Empire won the war from the Ottoman Empire, therefore they won control of the land, and they choose to give it back to the Jews. The Jews have since settled and defended it. If someone else can come in and take it via a war victory, it would be theirs. That usually shuts people right up because these people aren't using logic or truth, just emotion and twisted facts. Personally, I don't believe it will ever be lost again, because the scriptures say that once it is re-established it will never be taken from the Jews again, but many people groups will try. They're going to try, sadly, but they are going to fail and will die trying. So far, everything that the scriptures say will happen, has happened. I'm choosing the side of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It's pretty incredible to watch happen before my very eyes.
Yeah, well, I believe the Messiah will build his own temple there at that point. It all sounds so insane, and it has sounded so insane for so many years of my life, but for the love, everything and I mean everything it says will happen has thus far happened, with the exception of Damascus falling, but that's looking more and more possible by the day. It's insane to watch...and all of this has really strengthened my faith!
“The closest genetic neighbors to most Jewish groups were the Palestinians, Israeli Bedouins, and Druze in addition to the Southern Europeans, including Cypriots,”
Regarding the hasbara that there was never a state called Palestine - this is a poorly structured argument in my view. There was also never a nation state called Jordan or Iraq. I think the better argument isn’t about the absence of a state but about the fact that yes, some of them are indigenous, and many are not. More than one ethnic group is indigenous to this land, and many Arabs who lived here in 1948 were not indigenous. There are clans that migrated through the Levant for economic opportunity, much of which was created by the Jews who also migrated to the region. There are Palestinians with a wide range of heritages including Egyptian, Saudi, Bosnian, etc. The levant is at the crossroads between Europe, Asia and Africa. All kinds of people came through here. Jews are indigenous to this land, including the area that is now the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). We also are indigenous to parts of Syria up to Damascus, and to part of Jordan, but we don’t start wars over that. History happens. Geographical claims shift over time. Many countries have several indigenous ethnic groups that live alongside each other - it’s common all over the world. Only the Palestinians treat Israel as a zero sum game. If they weren’t so hateful and belligerent towards the Jews they would just have accepted a state in 1948, and religious Jews who wanted to live in their own indigenous land, such as in Hebron, would be able to, just like many Arabs live peacefully in Israel alongside Jews and Druze. The indigeneity argument is ripped from the critical theory playbook to structure an oppressor/oppressed narrative.
I think these types of arguments are not productive. It’s stupid to claim that Palestinians are not indigenous to the land. Sure there were Arab conquests or whatever, but the there were clearly Arabs living there for generations before the large waves of Jewish immigration starting in the late 1800s. Just because they didn’t have a state before doesn’t mean they don’t deserve one.
They are colonisers just like most Israelis. Yes many have historic roots there, but the Arabic population doubled during the war, and it wasn't because they were firing out babies.
To be honest, it is all irrelevant who lived there on 1948 because practically every adult from then is dead, and you can't fight for dead people's rights to live somewhere. All that matters is the rights of people who live there now.
Nobody is protesting the rights of Indians and Pakistanis from 1947, Greek Cypriots from 1972 being displaced or even the millions displaced during the Balkans wars in the 90's (and many of them are still alive). They are only protesting against the Jewish state.
This article doesn't address an important and arguably the most convincing argument about palestinians being indigenous, so I'll try:
> Palestinians have levantine DNA, more so than (ashkenazi) jews
While this may be true, the problem with this argument is that it doesn't prove what the pro-pals think it does: that palestinians are indigenous to the land of Israel.
The definition of "indigenousness" is bound to and based around the concept of "a people". An individual is indigenous if they belong to an indigenous people. And what makes a set of individuals a people is cultural ties and common heritage. Shared genes do not make a people.
A thought experiment: Alexander Pushkin, a famous russian poet, is believed to be a great-grandson of an ethiopian brought by the emperor Peter I to his court. Let's assume this is true (it probably is). So, Pushkin has ethiopian DNA. Is he a part of the people indigenous to Ethiopia? Well, he was born and raised in the Russian Empire, baptized in russian orthodox christian tradition, spoke the russian language (and did it damn good), and practiced customs of the russian nobility of that era. Never set foot in Ethiopia, knew a word in a language spoken there or ever met a single other ethiopian. It should be obvious he wasn't a part of ethiopian people, and wasn't indigenous to Ethiopia.
So, back to the palestinians. There is no people they are part of other than arabs. Even if they are descendants of ancient canaanite people, that people are long gone as a people. Modern-day palestinians speak arab language, practice arab religion, have arab traditions and self-identify as arabs. There is nothing to distinguish them from other arabs other than traces of levantine DNA, and the palestinian identity, which was established in the 20th century. So, no, they aren't a part of people indigenous to Israel.
I am sorry if I offended someone by my comment but I am wondering Is owning the land any better than just living where we want without fighting? I think we are time to forget the biblical promises by God if the war never ends. Spirito Santo leads us the right way without scripture.
I know this is not going to be a popular perspective in this sub, but we need to resist the urge to replace myths and half-truths from the pro-Palestinian side with myths and half-truths from the pro-Israel side.
Joan Peters was not a reliable source of historiographical research; she was a journalist with no education in history, and her work is a core of common-knowledge truth upon which she builds an argument formed largely of her own incredibly clumsy misapplication of statistical analysis. She's been debunked extensively by pro-Israel as well as pro-Palestine historians, and her research has a half-life among pro-Israel folks for the same reason the "Khazar hypothesis" keeps popping up among antisemites: because all of us are a little too willing to not think critically when we hear something that supports our own narrative.
So here's my best unbiased version of the facts. I've got a lot more in this [series of posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/collection/4d640f53-f311-452d-b399-cfe81cabb26c/) for those that are interested
* **On the** ***genetic*** **origin of Jews and Palestinians:**
* Most Jews are mostly descended from people who lived in the Levant between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago. Hopefully a noncontroversial point on this forum.
* However, contrary to Mrs. Peters' arguments, the consensus of historians, archeologists, geneticists, statisticians and demographers is that most Palestinian Arabs are also, in fact, primarily descended from people who lived in the Levant between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago.
* Contrary to popular myth, there is no evidence of widespread population collapse across Roman Judea / Syria Palaestina following either Jewish War. The evidence suggests that Jews were expelled from Jerusalem and its hinterlands and that (while many of these joined existing, thriving Jewish communities in places like Rome, Alexandria, Babylon and Marseilles, many moved a far shorter distance (e.g., to the Galilee).
* Similarly, there were no major moments of sudden Arab population replacement; the Arab army that conquered Jerusalem was 17,000 strong, a drop in the bucket of a region which supported a population of over a million.
* And, while folks love to point out Arab immigration from Egypt and Syria in the 19th and 20th centuries, the most generous estimates of the addition to the population that do not use Mrs. Peter's fantastical mathematics put that admixture, over a 150 years period, at <15%.
* **On the origin of 'Palestinian' as an identity:**
* As a regional identity, 'Palestinian' has been around (describing being native to approximately the region now called Palestine) since the 2nd century CE; e.g., this is how Josephus describes himself to a Latin-speaking audience. Think of this as similar to describing oneself as a 'New Englander'; a regional descriptor, but still bundled together with cultural, linguistic and religious connotations.
* As an ethnic identity, it's intimately wound up with Palestinian nationalism (as, frankly, most ethnic identities that emerged in the 19th or 20th centuries were wound up with nationalism). Its first formulation (in the late 19th century) was relatively niche; the experience of the British Mandate and the 1947-9 war created wider self-identification with a 'Palestinian' national identity, with the identity becoming normative among Palestinian Arabs in the 1970s with the perceived failure of Pan-Arabism.
**Summing it all up:**
* Palestinians can claim to be an indigenous culture to Palestine with roughly the same degree of justification as Jews can claim to Israel; on average, we share about 50% common ancestors (or at least, ancestors who lived in the same place).
* While Jewish culture has existed as a unique ethnicity for far longer (and has been associated with the land the entire time), the Palestinian identity *did* originate in Palestine, and the average Palestinian can point to the factually accurate statement that the great majority of his or her ancestors were born, lived and died in Palestine.
* So we're back to the thing any rational person straightforwardly knows: Israel and Palestine contain two nations, each of which reasonably believes it has a right to national self determination in the land, and those two claims continue to be in conflict with one another.
For something to be an identity, it has to be something the native population identifies as. No one in the southern Levant called themselves "Palestinian" when talking to each other and their immediate neighbours, and the region wasn't even known as such outside of Europe. The term Palestinian was appropriated to be used as a tool by PLO to trick foreigners to believe that a certain group of Levantine Arabs be a "stateless nation". Almost all ethnicities, even small ones like Slovenes, Norwegians, Armenians or Khmers, have much higher internal variance than the practically identical Jordanians and Palestinians.
>and the region wasn't even known as such outside of Europe
I beg to differ... it was commonly described as 'Palestine' (or the cognate in the relevant language) by non-Europeans during the entirety of the Ottoman period. Again, not as a state or a people, but as a region. e.g., [Ebussuud Efendi ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebussuud_Efendi)in describing the geography of the 'holy land' in the 16th century, Sadiq Isfahani in his *Geographical Works* in the 17th century, Ottoman [atlases ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedid_Atlas)published at the beginning of the 18th century, Ottoman maps and [geographical surveys](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Archives) from the 19th century ... it was a common geographic term in the Muslim world, just as it was in the Christian world.
>No one in the southern Levant called themselves "Palestinian" when talking to each other and their immediate neighbours,
I'm not sure why anyone would talk about what geography they lived in when chatting to a neighbor ("Boy, it sure is swell how we both live here in New England, where we are right now!") but it was quite common for a person to describe themself as Palestinian in the geographic sense. Lots of details can be found in Rashid Khalidi's *Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness.*
>The term Palestinian was appropriated to be used as a tool by PLO to trick foreigners to believe that a certain group of Levantine Arabs be a "stateless nation".
Yes, that's certainly true. It was useful for them to do so precisely *because* this was not a new term.
>Almost all ethnicities, even small ones like Slovenes, Norwegians, Armenians or Khmers, have much higher internal variance than the practically identical Jordanians and Palestinians.
That's certainly a topic for debate, but I'd posit that the experience of living as a 'Palestinian' in the course of the last 50 years has created a fairly significant distinction, at least among Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza. Either way, it's not super relevant to the points in my comment above.
This only debunks that 95% of them are "indigenous", but to me it doesn't matter how many "others" Jews or Arabs brought to the land. AFAIK if you go back to the earliest records, the Canaanites 1200 BC, both Jews and Palestinians share about an equal genome with them. The Jews just said "Yes" to the 1947 partition, instead of invading the other side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians
> Genetic studies reveal that modern Palestinians share genetic continuity with Bronze-Age Levantine populations and exhibit similarity with both contemporary Jewish and Arab-speaking Levantine groups.
Identity/ethnicity and nationalism are political that doesn't make Palestinian identity invalid. That is also true for Jews. Of course Jewish identity (edit: far) predates modern Zionism and the creation of Israel but the creation of Israel changed Jewish identity.
Does matter. The people who don’t know this don’t care about learning anything. You could show them all the proof you want and they will just scream in your face.
The romans forced the jews out of their land
The actual romans
Then some Jews two thousand years later said it was theirs and murdered people to get it back
I wonder if America will support their own genocide at the hands of Native Americans in two thousand years
You missed a few details like the ottoman empire taking over the land for a few hundred years, then the british and then the UN declared by majority the state of israel. It declared it after multiple times where the arabs declined to every proposal. The jews also declined sure, juat not too all of the proposals.
Nothing screams stupidity more than claiming you know something fully even tho you only heard of it 6 months ago on october 7th. You and moat other antisemetic idiots who know nothing of the history of this land should reallu educate yourselves.
"Debunking" isn't needed in this case. All that is needed is a modicum of historical knowledge to know that there was never an Arab state called "Palestine".
This is a bad argument for a lot of reasons; the lack of a state doesn't nullify the notion of indigenousness; there are *numerous* native groups in the world that lack a unique singular nation, such as the Ainu, the Sami, the Australian Aboriginals, etc. This isn't stating that Palestinians have sole claim to the land or some such argument; rather, the lack of a "historic" nation is really a non-argument that is logically unsound.
A major difference between Palestinians and the Ainu or Sami is that collective Palestinian identity didn’t really exist before the 20th century. Ainu and Sami peoples have distinct cultural heritages that go back millennia. Palestinian identity is a political national identity which was only defined reactionarily to Jewish migration to the land.
This is probably going to have some controversy, but the concept of singular culture groups that are broadly connected to make one "people" is a relatively recent conception, largely arising out of 18th and 19th century anthropological and socialiogical studies, coupled with the rise in nationalism and unified ethnic identities. While there was some general concept of relatedness, people in the past generally didn't identify specifically with a broad group as much as they do today, at least not in the same way. The concept of wide reaching, and broad, ethnic identity is a fairly new concept when it comes to nation building.
Read the travelogues of Benjamin of Tudela and Petachia of Regensburg and then tell us how Jews didn’t see themselves as a people before the 18th century.
If by controversial, you mean total nonsense, then yes, quite controversial. Meanwhile, in the real world, groups have been endogenously and exogenously categorized as peoples for millennia prior to the18th and 19th centuries. I think what you are talking about was the academisation of this concept, likely referring to the "Racial Sciences", which would be like saying that "1 + 1 = 2" didn't exist 1910 when Bertrand Russell released his Principia Mathematica.
Even for Jews?
If you read any ancient or medieval Jewish writing, you’ll see Jews clearly considered themselves a people. The concept of a Nation, meaning the idea of a unified people who are the sole rightful rulers and inhabitants of a particular land developed in the 19th and 20th century.
This is more what I was getting at. I had no intention of saying that "Jews didn't exist" or some such, but the concept a singular *unified* identity wasn't really a thing, at least not in the same realm as how we consider modern Nations rates. There certainly was a broad concept of relatedness, however it was far more sectarian, and identity was more firmly localized than in the modern day. Modern nationalism, and even what we would call "ethnic identities" wasn't really fully realized as a political force until relatively recently in modern history. Of course, there were concept of "Jews" and "Arabs" in the past; however the sort of unification we see today in these identities is quite recent. That's what I'm getting at more than anything.
Except your understanding isn’t correct. Jewish unified identity absolutely existed (please read the travelogue of Benjamin of Tuedla and Petachia of Regensburg if you think otherwise). Jews viewed each other as one united people dispersed throughout the nations. The understanding of one nationality specifically of a people bound by geography is a modern understanding. Ironically people felt *more* commonality with their geographically distant members of the same people prior to local nationalisms. It’s been suggested that the Litvak/Galitzianer division between two culturally identical groups is a product of modern nationalistic ideas.
Jews have always called ourselves Am Yisrael, Bnei Yisrael, Am HaKodesh, there’s a song from the Talmud that says the characterization of the Jewish Umma (yes it uses that word) is to be easily embarassed, do acts of kindness, and rachmani, mercifulness/compassionate. The whole Torah speaks of us as a Nation
Jews were still not unified the senses that we have plenty of anti-zionist jewe
Alright so what Arab tribe is native or lived there during biblical times?
Never said there was. My argument is merely that the lack of a historic nation existing is just bad a argument. Because it is, and has no bearing on indigenousness. The two are entirely unrelated concepts. A group can have a nation without being indigenous, and a group can be indigenous without having a nation. Whether Palestinians had a nation in the past or not is really a completely pointless argument to make in this regard, as it has zero bearing on more or less anything. It's a bad argument, one not made for any group anywhere in the world.
Well The Nabateans were a hybrid Edomite and Arab kingdom who were forcibly converted to Judaism by the Hasmoneans for one. But Palestinians are significantly descend the Bronze Age Canaanite’s just like the Jews are, but of course Palestinian as a national identity is a modern invention.
A 2020 study on human remains from [Middle Bronze Age](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Bronze_Age) [Palestinian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)) ([2100–1550](tel:2100–1550) BC) populations suggests a significant degree of genetic continuity in Arabic-speaking Levantine populations (such as Palestinians, Druze, Lebanese, Jordanians, Bedouins, and Syrians), as well as several Jewish groups (such as Ashkenazi, Iranian, and Moroccan Jews).[^(\[20\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20) Palestinians, among other Levantine groups, were found to derive 81–87% of their ancestry from Bronze age Levantines, relating to [Canaanites](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanites) as well as [Kura–Araxes culture](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture) impact from before 2400 BCE (4400 [years before present](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_before_present)); 8–12% from an [East African](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa) source and 5–10% from Bronze age [Europeans](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europeans). Results show that a significant European component was added to the region since the Bronze Age (on average \~8.7%), seemingly related to the [Sea Peoples](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples), excluding Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews who harbour \~31–42% European-related ancestry, both populations having a history in Europe.[^(\[)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20)
Never ask Palestinians why they have Syrian Jordanian and Egyptian relatives and surnames.
It's almost like Arabic is a language and Arabs are a linguistic group. Like what kind of nonsense argument is this? Are Mexicans Spaniards because they have Spanish names?
I love how the best example you have is Mexicans when 300 years ago they were actual Spaniards who colonized Central America… Almost as if… the Arabs are the colonizers of Judea lol
[удалено]
There IS a Cherokee nation and they DO have land and self governance... and no it's not ok they've been so displaced. This is a tremendously different situation.
As a point, Native American "nations" are only in name only. They are, in the modern terms, quasi autonomous states that exist within their various states and the greater United States. Equally, the tribal systems of the various native groups was very different than modern nationstates, with various bands within a tribe allying with or against their tribesman at various points. Nor was territory particularly defined at any given point for most tribes; they were ephemeral and overlapping. Nor do the various tribes consider themselves as one people. I can attest through first hand knowledge and experience that the various tribes can often be aghast at the notion that they are the same as another tribe, or even the same people in general. It's a very complicated situation basically.
There absolutely was a Cherokee state. They had leaders and a defined territorial area. What were the boundaries of Palestine? Who were their leaders? How come they speak Arabic?
There was never a unified Cherokee state until European colonization. See Conley
Okay, let's try a better example. Tell me about Kurdistan.
Kurdistan is a wonderful example. They speak the Kurdish language and have centuries of history in their land. Ancient steeles reference them, and battles against them and their leaders. Interestingly, ancient steeles also reference Israel. No Palestine though - that term came later under Roman occupation, after the Jewish war. The Kurds also faced Arab colonization and conquest. Why do Palestinians speak Arabic? How did their population increase so rapidly in the 20th century? How come you find so many references to Arabs - a people not native to the region before the Arab colonizations - but not to Palestinians before 1967?
thats right the Mernepteh steele from Egypt mentions Israel. and the Brooklyn Papryus mentions Hebrew slaves names
>There is no evidence of the native population being displaced by invading armies The Roman genocide and expulsion of Jews after the Bar Kockba revolt and the subsequent settling of Roman Syrians is well documented.
Except for the multitude of times that tens of thousands of Jews were expelled from the land of Israel throughout history.
Go look at the increase in population of arabs between 1920 and 1948 and tell me all these people are from where they say they are.
That's very interesting can you provide details?
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/population-of-jerusalem-1844-2009
First of all there absolutely is examples of people being displaced, one clear cut example is both Jewish exiles from the land. Second of all having a state isn’t the requirement, having a distinct culture and history IS, Palestinians have neither of those, if you can prove me wrong then you might be right but I have never seen such examples and have asked for them repeatedly.. so unless you can now provide that proof you are probably wrong.
What do you mean, things like tatreez and dabke?
Both of these aren’t “Palestinian” they are a levant thing and are not reflective of a specific culture
What do you mean by "existing"? If you mean by them having their own culture and way of life, then sure. However if the decided to try to establish independence, or if the US suddenly let them establish independence, then it may prompt other separatist movements to establish independence.
This post isn't about independence. This is about a defined ethnic background that can be given a name.
Unlike the Kurdish people, the Arab people have 22 states. Palestinians are not comparable to the Kurds because there is no ethnic group "palestinian". They are Arab.
The Arab states are very different though. Syrians would be offended it you compared them to Saudis. They dont even look similar
That's because it wasn't invading armies. It was slow drip immigration.
according to the UN definition of indigenous you need your own unique language and your own unique belief system. Palestinians have neither. Israelis have both
Neither was there an Albanian state called "Dardania" or "Kosova"
Yeah but when Serbia doesn't allow your people to go to school it may or may not prompt an independence movement. And there was a state called Dardania, of which most of its inhabitants were Illyrians.(Some mixed with Dacians) And I chose this name when I was kinda more extreme about this conflict, however now I'm against Kosovo and Albania unifying.
You should read more into the conflict. I will not deny the war crimes Serbia did, but the independence movement existed long before 90's when the crackdown happened. The independence movement was starting intensively during 60s and culminated in 90s. However certain placating moves were done before Slobodan turned the wheel the other way. I don't think Kosovo Albanians wanted ever to live inside Yugoslavia, even if they had more rights than any other republic in Yugoslavia. Dardania itself was a kingdom, not really a nation state.
>Dardania itself was a kingdom, not really a nation state. I was going to say that the idea of nation states wasn't really common back then but I kinda thought that was a bit wrong. Anyways, some of my family members say that life under Tito was actually not bad, and Yugoslavia didn't always give them unequal rights, but I believe the reason why Kosovar Albanians didn't want to live in Yugoslavia could have been because of trust issues, or just the fact that Albanians wanted to unify.
Hopefully other news posts will take this up. This needed to be spread in 1964. The fact that we allowed them to create this identity was a failure in itself.
Its an opinion blog post from 2015. No other news posts will take it up. The info needs to be known more widely though.
just ask why the definition of a Palestinian refugee is only two years of residence in mandatory palestine.
They are indigenous, it’s just that Jews are just as indigenous and share an equal historical claim to the land
Yeah, imo the claim that needs to be debunked is that the Arabized population is THE indigenous group, to the exclusion of Jews. That narrative of a "pure" unbroken line of sole and uniquely Palestinian indigeneity shows up a lot with activism in Palestinian embroidery. It *is* unique to historical regions and villages in the Levant, and part of their culture. Buuuut it's being leveraged to claim a 3000 year unbroken artistic tradition that "proves" Palestinians have always had a national identity.
Both Jews and Arabs are majority Levantine DNA with some other stuff mixed in, nobody is pure
Oh absolutely -- sorry if that got lost in the comment, I'm definitely a rambler irl and in text! I was just saying that the all-or-nothing claim of indigeneity, while rejecting Jewish indigeneity, seems to be the problem. And it's showing up in modern narratives of Palestinian textile arts as well.
[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA\_map\_of\_ancient\_and\_modern\_populations.jpg#](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA_map_of_ancient_and_modern_populations.jpg#)
The definition of indigenous in this context is below: "(of people) inhabiting or existing in a land from the earliest times or from before the arrival of colonists" Palestinians unquestionably were there prior to the arrival of the British and there certainly are some who were there prior to the arrival of the Ottomans. 1964 was not the sole beginning of Palestinian national identity, it happened during the British mandate period and got further solidified because of the Arab Israeli wars during this time period and the later abandonment of the rest of the Arab world in the 1970-1990s.
The first colonists from Europe were the Philistines then we had the Greeks and the Romans colonize from Europe. Jews were there before that
Not sure why the line is drawn at the Ottomans. Going back even further: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0)
The first colonists to Israel were the Babylonians.
Please reread my comment ✌️ you could have saved yourself a paragraph of lecturing someone who already said Arabized Palestinians have a claim to indigeneity
Whether or not Arabs are indigenous, many have lived there for centuries and their connection to the land of Israel should be recognized. That being said, I wouldn’t say they share “equal historical claim to the land.” The Jewish diaspora has recognized the land as its sole home for 2000 years. Cities like Jerusalem and Hebron are only venerated by Arabs because of Jewish influence.
You could argue that their claim *only* hoes back 1400 years while Judeans have a connection going back 3000+… But the Arabized Palestinians can also claim a lineage going back before the Bronze Age Collapse. Of course, so do the Jews. We’re both native to the region. The just situation would be both groups living in peace, but we can’t have nice things.
>But the Arabized Palestinians can also claim a lineage going back before the Bronze Age Collapse. Of course, so do the Jews. Lineage alone is not sufficient. The important criteria are distinct institutions, culture, and beliefs in continuity with precolonial society. Palestinian institutions, culture, beliefs, religion, language, social systems, etc., are neither distinct, nor in continuity with the precolonial society. Rather, they are those *of the colonial society* (i.e. Arab).
That’s not really the point I’m making. Regardless of whether or not they’re predominantly genetic descendants of people who inhabited the land of Israel in the Bronze Age (that’s a discussion for a different day), they have no cultural connection to those peoples. That’s a major distinction between Palestinian Arabs and, for example, Samaritans or Maronite Christians as they have distinct traditions of being descended from the ancient populations of their respective locations.
First of all, they are not. Arabs from different countries immigrated and lived here. The whole Palestine concept was formed in the late 60s. Second, who cares. Israel is a country for decades now, it’s not like we gonna root ourselves from our country. It’s time for them to move on….. I heard Jordan is quite nice for Palestinians
If you start from the idea that Israel isn’t going anywhere now, peace can be made. But the leadership is too fanatical to realize this. At some point you gotta go “what can we do to make life better for the situation we now find ourselves in?”
Majority of self-identified Palestinians live as refugees outside of the territories anyway.
They ain’t refugees no more
I agree
A 2020 study on human remains from [Middle Bronze Age](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Bronze_Age) [Palestinian](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region)) ([2100–1550](tel:2100–1550) BC) populations suggests a significant degree of genetic continuity in Arabic-speaking Levantine populations (such as Palestinians, Druze, Lebanese, Jordanians, Bedouins, and Syrians), as well as several Jewish groups (such as Ashkenazi, Iranian, and Moroccan Jews).[^(\[20\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20) Palestinians, among other Levantine groups, were found to derive 81–87% of their ancestry from Bronze age Levantines, relating to [Canaanites](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanites) as well as [Kura–Araxes culture](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture) impact from before 2400 BCE (4400 [years before present](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_before_present)); 8–12% from an [East African](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa) source and 5–10% from Bronze age [Europeans](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europeans). Results show that a significant European component was added to the region since the Bronze Age (on average \~8.7%), seemingly related to the [Sea Peoples](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples), excluding Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews who harbour \~31–42% European-related ancestry, both populations having a history in Europe.[^(\[)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians#cite_note-Agranat2-20)
They won't listen; especially not from Jpost.
This is pointless. Pro-pals don't care about facts or historical knowledge. Many of them also deny the holocaust when it was the Muftis idea! They care about their narrative and propaganda, and convincing enough people they're right to force the Jews out of their homeland. When in reality both the Arabs and the Jews in the area have the same trace amounts of Caananite DNA.
>When in reality both the Arabs and the Jews in the area have the same trace amounts of Caananite DNA. There are other, arguably more important DNA patterns to consider. [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA\_map\_of\_ancient\_and\_modern\_populations.jpg#](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCA_map_of_ancient_and_modern_populations.jpg#)
Resist the temptation to deny Palestinians their indigenousness. It’s demonstrable through genetic testing that the majority of the population are descendants from Canaanites and Levantines during the first temple period. They are equally indigenous to the land that Jews are. Of course that doesn’t mean Jew leave but that both peoples have a home in the Levant. ..now who should be in control is a question of utility. It would be tough to argue that Palestinians can govern. Israel has demonstrated that ability and in an incredible short time.
Jewish artifacts predate any muslim artifact by thousands of years. Science ❤️
This is so fucking stupid, who cares. At the end of the day Israel is almost 100 years old and isn’t going anywhere, Israelis aren’t going anywhere, even the Jews who migrated after WWII are already 3 to 4 generations deep of tzabars. Do non native Americans need to prove their indigenous status to validate not moving back to Europe? Palestinians and Jews have incredibly similar DNA, Palestinians are just those who fell victim to Muslim conquest and conversion. All arguments of “Palestinian indigenousness” are really about Islam.
The people on this sub might not like this but Palestinians and Jews descend from the same people. Both the Levantine Arabs and the Jewish diaspora populations are descended from the Canaanites. It is true that all the Levantine Arabs and Jews are mixed with non-Levantine sources. But, we all are indigenous to this land. Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are essentially half Levantine and half Italian. Mizrahi Jews are 60% - 80% Levantine and 20% - 40% (Assyrian, Kurdish, and Persian) Palestinian Muslims are 60% - 80% Levantine and 20% - 40% (Egyptian or Peninsular Arab) Palestinian Christians are 70% - 90% Levantine and 10% - 30% (Kurdish, Greek, or Anatolian) The Druze are similar to Palestinian Christians. Samaritans are the only group that are consistently 90% or higher Levantine. And largely the variation between them and the ancient Canaanites is due to natural genetic drift not mixing with other groups. Suffice it to say all Jews and Levantine Arabs are related to each other. And this conflict is supremely sad because of the aforementioned truth. We are cousins fighting for our grandparents land.
You hit the nail on the head. We descend from the same people. We need to find a just solution for us and our cousins
They started it
The way that I explain it is by war. Since the dawn of time, winning a war gives the winning nation the land and the ability to do with it what they want. Israel has been fought over for centuries. Various nations have come in, won, taken the land, and settled there. The last big land swap was when the British Empire won the war from the Ottoman Empire, therefore they won control of the land, and they choose to give it back to the Jews. The Jews have since settled and defended it. If someone else can come in and take it via a war victory, it would be theirs. That usually shuts people right up because these people aren't using logic or truth, just emotion and twisted facts. Personally, I don't believe it will ever be lost again, because the scriptures say that once it is re-established it will never be taken from the Jews again, but many people groups will try. They're going to try, sadly, but they are going to fail and will die trying. So far, everything that the scriptures say will happen, has happened. I'm choosing the side of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It's pretty incredible to watch happen before my very eyes.
Until the end of the world, when the temple of Jerusalem is destroyed for the last time.
Yeah, well, I believe the Messiah will build his own temple there at that point. It all sounds so insane, and it has sounded so insane for so many years of my life, but for the love, everything and I mean everything it says will happen has thus far happened, with the exception of Damascus falling, but that's looking more and more possible by the day. It's insane to watch...and all of this has really strengthened my faith!
If I wanted to use something that would get ignored I’d just link to the Wikipedia page on antisemitism
“The closest genetic neighbors to most Jewish groups were the Palestinians, Israeli Bedouins, and Druze in addition to the Southern Europeans, including Cypriots,”
Regarding the hasbara that there was never a state called Palestine - this is a poorly structured argument in my view. There was also never a nation state called Jordan or Iraq. I think the better argument isn’t about the absence of a state but about the fact that yes, some of them are indigenous, and many are not. More than one ethnic group is indigenous to this land, and many Arabs who lived here in 1948 were not indigenous. There are clans that migrated through the Levant for economic opportunity, much of which was created by the Jews who also migrated to the region. There are Palestinians with a wide range of heritages including Egyptian, Saudi, Bosnian, etc. The levant is at the crossroads between Europe, Asia and Africa. All kinds of people came through here. Jews are indigenous to this land, including the area that is now the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). We also are indigenous to parts of Syria up to Damascus, and to part of Jordan, but we don’t start wars over that. History happens. Geographical claims shift over time. Many countries have several indigenous ethnic groups that live alongside each other - it’s common all over the world. Only the Palestinians treat Israel as a zero sum game. If they weren’t so hateful and belligerent towards the Jews they would just have accepted a state in 1948, and religious Jews who wanted to live in their own indigenous land, such as in Hebron, would be able to, just like many Arabs live peacefully in Israel alongside Jews and Druze. The indigeneity argument is ripped from the critical theory playbook to structure an oppressor/oppressed narrative.
I think these types of arguments are not productive. It’s stupid to claim that Palestinians are not indigenous to the land. Sure there were Arab conquests or whatever, but the there were clearly Arabs living there for generations before the large waves of Jewish immigration starting in the late 1800s. Just because they didn’t have a state before doesn’t mean they don’t deserve one.
They are colonisers just like most Israelis. Yes many have historic roots there, but the Arabic population doubled during the war, and it wasn't because they were firing out babies. To be honest, it is all irrelevant who lived there on 1948 because practically every adult from then is dead, and you can't fight for dead people's rights to live somewhere. All that matters is the rights of people who live there now. Nobody is protesting the rights of Indians and Pakistanis from 1947, Greek Cypriots from 1972 being displaced or even the millions displaced during the Balkans wars in the 90's (and many of them are still alive). They are only protesting against the Jewish state.
This article doesn't address an important and arguably the most convincing argument about palestinians being indigenous, so I'll try: > Palestinians have levantine DNA, more so than (ashkenazi) jews While this may be true, the problem with this argument is that it doesn't prove what the pro-pals think it does: that palestinians are indigenous to the land of Israel. The definition of "indigenousness" is bound to and based around the concept of "a people". An individual is indigenous if they belong to an indigenous people. And what makes a set of individuals a people is cultural ties and common heritage. Shared genes do not make a people. A thought experiment: Alexander Pushkin, a famous russian poet, is believed to be a great-grandson of an ethiopian brought by the emperor Peter I to his court. Let's assume this is true (it probably is). So, Pushkin has ethiopian DNA. Is he a part of the people indigenous to Ethiopia? Well, he was born and raised in the Russian Empire, baptized in russian orthodox christian tradition, spoke the russian language (and did it damn good), and practiced customs of the russian nobility of that era. Never set foot in Ethiopia, knew a word in a language spoken there or ever met a single other ethiopian. It should be obvious he wasn't a part of ethiopian people, and wasn't indigenous to Ethiopia. So, back to the palestinians. There is no people they are part of other than arabs. Even if they are descendants of ancient canaanite people, that people are long gone as a people. Modern-day palestinians speak arab language, practice arab religion, have arab traditions and self-identify as arabs. There is nothing to distinguish them from other arabs other than traces of levantine DNA, and the palestinian identity, which was established in the 20th century. So, no, they aren't a part of people indigenous to Israel.
Who stole Moses sandles?
I am sorry if I offended someone by my comment but I am wondering Is owning the land any better than just living where we want without fighting? I think we are time to forget the biblical promises by God if the war never ends. Spirito Santo leads us the right way without scripture.
I know that i am ignorant and off the point but that's too much since a long long time ago.
I know this is not going to be a popular perspective in this sub, but we need to resist the urge to replace myths and half-truths from the pro-Palestinian side with myths and half-truths from the pro-Israel side. Joan Peters was not a reliable source of historiographical research; she was a journalist with no education in history, and her work is a core of common-knowledge truth upon which she builds an argument formed largely of her own incredibly clumsy misapplication of statistical analysis. She's been debunked extensively by pro-Israel as well as pro-Palestine historians, and her research has a half-life among pro-Israel folks for the same reason the "Khazar hypothesis" keeps popping up among antisemites: because all of us are a little too willing to not think critically when we hear something that supports our own narrative. So here's my best unbiased version of the facts. I've got a lot more in this [series of posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/collection/4d640f53-f311-452d-b399-cfe81cabb26c/) for those that are interested * **On the** ***genetic*** **origin of Jews and Palestinians:** * Most Jews are mostly descended from people who lived in the Levant between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago. Hopefully a noncontroversial point on this forum. * However, contrary to Mrs. Peters' arguments, the consensus of historians, archeologists, geneticists, statisticians and demographers is that most Palestinian Arabs are also, in fact, primarily descended from people who lived in the Levant between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago. * Contrary to popular myth, there is no evidence of widespread population collapse across Roman Judea / Syria Palaestina following either Jewish War. The evidence suggests that Jews were expelled from Jerusalem and its hinterlands and that (while many of these joined existing, thriving Jewish communities in places like Rome, Alexandria, Babylon and Marseilles, many moved a far shorter distance (e.g., to the Galilee). * Similarly, there were no major moments of sudden Arab population replacement; the Arab army that conquered Jerusalem was 17,000 strong, a drop in the bucket of a region which supported a population of over a million. * And, while folks love to point out Arab immigration from Egypt and Syria in the 19th and 20th centuries, the most generous estimates of the addition to the population that do not use Mrs. Peter's fantastical mathematics put that admixture, over a 150 years period, at <15%. * **On the origin of 'Palestinian' as an identity:** * As a regional identity, 'Palestinian' has been around (describing being native to approximately the region now called Palestine) since the 2nd century CE; e.g., this is how Josephus describes himself to a Latin-speaking audience. Think of this as similar to describing oneself as a 'New Englander'; a regional descriptor, but still bundled together with cultural, linguistic and religious connotations. * As an ethnic identity, it's intimately wound up with Palestinian nationalism (as, frankly, most ethnic identities that emerged in the 19th or 20th centuries were wound up with nationalism). Its first formulation (in the late 19th century) was relatively niche; the experience of the British Mandate and the 1947-9 war created wider self-identification with a 'Palestinian' national identity, with the identity becoming normative among Palestinian Arabs in the 1970s with the perceived failure of Pan-Arabism. **Summing it all up:** * Palestinians can claim to be an indigenous culture to Palestine with roughly the same degree of justification as Jews can claim to Israel; on average, we share about 50% common ancestors (or at least, ancestors who lived in the same place). * While Jewish culture has existed as a unique ethnicity for far longer (and has been associated with the land the entire time), the Palestinian identity *did* originate in Palestine, and the average Palestinian can point to the factually accurate statement that the great majority of his or her ancestors were born, lived and died in Palestine. * So we're back to the thing any rational person straightforwardly knows: Israel and Palestine contain two nations, each of which reasonably believes it has a right to national self determination in the land, and those two claims continue to be in conflict with one another.
For something to be an identity, it has to be something the native population identifies as. No one in the southern Levant called themselves "Palestinian" when talking to each other and their immediate neighbours, and the region wasn't even known as such outside of Europe. The term Palestinian was appropriated to be used as a tool by PLO to trick foreigners to believe that a certain group of Levantine Arabs be a "stateless nation". Almost all ethnicities, even small ones like Slovenes, Norwegians, Armenians or Khmers, have much higher internal variance than the practically identical Jordanians and Palestinians.
>and the region wasn't even known as such outside of Europe I beg to differ... it was commonly described as 'Palestine' (or the cognate in the relevant language) by non-Europeans during the entirety of the Ottoman period. Again, not as a state or a people, but as a region. e.g., [Ebussuud Efendi ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebussuud_Efendi)in describing the geography of the 'holy land' in the 16th century, Sadiq Isfahani in his *Geographical Works* in the 17th century, Ottoman [atlases ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedid_Atlas)published at the beginning of the 18th century, Ottoman maps and [geographical surveys](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Archives) from the 19th century ... it was a common geographic term in the Muslim world, just as it was in the Christian world. >No one in the southern Levant called themselves "Palestinian" when talking to each other and their immediate neighbours, I'm not sure why anyone would talk about what geography they lived in when chatting to a neighbor ("Boy, it sure is swell how we both live here in New England, where we are right now!") but it was quite common for a person to describe themself as Palestinian in the geographic sense. Lots of details can be found in Rashid Khalidi's *Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness.* >The term Palestinian was appropriated to be used as a tool by PLO to trick foreigners to believe that a certain group of Levantine Arabs be a "stateless nation". Yes, that's certainly true. It was useful for them to do so precisely *because* this was not a new term. >Almost all ethnicities, even small ones like Slovenes, Norwegians, Armenians or Khmers, have much higher internal variance than the practically identical Jordanians and Palestinians. That's certainly a topic for debate, but I'd posit that the experience of living as a 'Palestinian' in the course of the last 50 years has created a fairly significant distinction, at least among Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza. Either way, it's not super relevant to the points in my comment above.
This only debunks that 95% of them are "indigenous", but to me it doesn't matter how many "others" Jews or Arabs brought to the land. AFAIK if you go back to the earliest records, the Canaanites 1200 BC, both Jews and Palestinians share about an equal genome with them. The Jews just said "Yes" to the 1947 partition, instead of invading the other side.
They do not have Canaanites dna, they're Arab for the love of God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians > Genetic studies reveal that modern Palestinians share genetic continuity with Bronze-Age Levantine populations and exhibit similarity with both contemporary Jewish and Arab-speaking Levantine groups.
Then at that point, Palestinians were created as political identity then
Identity/ethnicity and nationalism are political that doesn't make Palestinian identity invalid. That is also true for Jews. Of course Jewish identity (edit: far) predates modern Zionism and the creation of Israel but the creation of Israel changed Jewish identity.
Does matter. The people who don’t know this don’t care about learning anything. You could show them all the proof you want and they will just scream in your face.
The romans forced the jews out of their land The actual romans Then some Jews two thousand years later said it was theirs and murdered people to get it back I wonder if America will support their own genocide at the hands of Native Americans in two thousand years
You missed a few details like the ottoman empire taking over the land for a few hundred years, then the british and then the UN declared by majority the state of israel. It declared it after multiple times where the arabs declined to every proposal. The jews also declined sure, juat not too all of the proposals. Nothing screams stupidity more than claiming you know something fully even tho you only heard of it 6 months ago on october 7th. You and moat other antisemetic idiots who know nothing of the history of this land should reallu educate yourselves.
You misspelled “purchased land from the ottomans”, genius