MigL

More philosophy than physics, but from a practical point of view, we can never know reality other than through our interactions with it ( as Swansont has noted ). These interactions both limit our understanding of 'reality', and, yes Geordy, affect our reality. All we have are mathematical descriptions of 'reality' modelled on the observed interactions, and so our perceived reality changes with our models. For us, 'reality' is the model, and so is subjective, Markus. But reality would still be there without a model/interaction/observer.

I only wish...

The quote function can sometimes be dishonest, as it gives an out of context interpretation of what the original poster intended. ( I hardly ever quote anyone ) And I can see why you would ignore some of my post, as you still haven't explained why protecting cultural identity is a bad thing. ( see #2 in one of your previous posts on this page ) In Canada we firmly believe in protecting our British derived heritage, but we also protect the culture of immigrants through tax-payer funded Multiculturalism. ( the only one that used the 'notwithstanding' clause of the constitution to get around that, and favor French-Canadian culture, is Quebec ) Our Multiculturalism seems to work much more harmoniously than your American 'melting pot' model. But why ignore your own post and link. State religions aren't only found in the Middle East ( as you quickly dismissed in your post ). They are also in countries like Argentina, Poland, Greece, England, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Some of these are not bad company at all. ( I can see the OP now, "Sweden evolving into a fascist state" ) When you hold one country to a different standard than others, and chastise their 'evil' acts while giving a pass to others who do the same, that is not 'whataboutism', it is preferential treatment. ( and no, I will not start tossing around labels like anti-Semitism; I hope we're above that ) But your link also states that Judaism is considered a 'culture' in Israel, and all other religions are free to be practiced, as are most likely, all other cultures. I have previously conceded that I don't agree with expanding settlements, and the fact that this bill offers 'support' for such, could be a bad thing, and further destabilize the area. But the fact that this bill makes Israel the 'homeland' and 'unique' to the Jewish people ( not religion ) doesn't prevent/exclude any one else from making it their home with equal rights to everyone else.

Read your own link... Israel defines Judaism as a culture. Not a religion. Other religions are free to be practiced. It is the Jewish heritage they are trying to preserve. And you'll call it 'whataboutism' again but I don't see any threads being opened as to how any of the other countries mentioned in your link are slipping into fascism. Why is Israel being singled out ? ( again !!! ) Edit: You're right the US doesn't have an 'official' language. But try going into any government office and demanding service in anything other than English. See how you make out.

1: The Palestinians have elected governments and a constitution. The internal squabbles ( and outside instigators ) that prevent the government of the West Bank from getting along with the one governing the Gaza Strip doesn't change that. Neither does the fact that some countries don't recognize the legitimacy of the government democratically elected by the Palestinians. 2: The US considers itself an English speaking country, yet there is a large percentage of Hispanics whose native tongue is Spanish ( Mexican ). Hispanics are free to speak their native tongue if they so choose. Italy is a Roman Catholic country, yet immigrants are free to practice whatever religion they choose. Quebec denies its English speaking citizens the right to post signage in one of the two official languages. I can see how the third example is wrong, but you're going to have to explain how the first two are.

Disregarding all other aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict... Article 4, of the Palestinian constitution, states that Islam is the official religion of Palestine, with respect for all other religions. I haven't actually read the bill passed by Israel, so I'm making a few assumptions. But what, then, is so upsetting about declaring that Israel's religion is officially Judaism, as long as other religions are also allowed and not forced out ?

You may be able to define 'here'; but you cannot define a universal 'now'. relativity doesn't allow for that.

When speaking about two different issues, it makes a world of difference. I really shouldn't need to explain that to you.

I don't know. Maybe they should try it. I don't know whether it would improve their living conditions. If Israel does not need to worry about attacks and arms influx into the Palestinian areas, maybe aid could get through. more easily At the very least Israel would loosen their control over what is supposed to be a self-ruled area. Edit: Way to go Dimreepr, you just made a liar out of me by making me post again.

My comments were directed at ( and somewhat dismissive ) of Argo's post.

This will be my last post on the matter Ten oz. You are descending into your usual style "you're either unaware or don't care much for Palestinians" And I'm really not that concerned about this Israeli cultural bill's passing. As for your other points, the whole world was up in arms and clamoring that Israel should grant the Palestinians areas of self rule. If they didn't, Israel would be an oppressor state and vilified by the world. So they did. And The Palestinians went and made a right mess of it, all the while continuously attacking other areas of Israel. Tet when Israel responds to these attacks by what is now essentially a foreign state, They are again vilified. They are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. No other country in the world would live under such conditions, yet Sensei expects Israel to just take it without retaliation. Meanwhile the Palestinians who chose to remain Israeli citizens and stay, have a much better life/standard of living than ones who chose to leave, or Arabs living in Jordan , Lebanon, Syria, etc. Some of those Palestinians holding Israeli citizenship, and political office, probably even voted on this bill.

Definitely a Palestinian living in Israel today, Ten oz. As an Israeli citizen they have the same rights as Jewish citizens. Some are even in political office. Sure Zap, but most people prioritize, and worry about things that do the most harm.

Soooooo... Reality is subjective ? Everyone experiences a different reality ? There is no reality unless someone is there to experience it ?

Are you suggesting the others aren't ? You're in trouble now.

I think Dimreepr just adopted your 'solution', Ten ox.

I studied French all through Junior and high school, CharonY. I don't speak much of it ( no reason to ), but I understand it extremely well. I draw the line at becoming Jewish. I'm not getting circumcised; every little bit helps. I'm sorry but I really don't think this bill is that big a deal. Certainly not the beginning of an Israeli 4th Reich. ( people should worry more about the expanding Israeli settlements ) I would sooner be a Palestinian living in Israel, than a Jew living in any neighboring country

That is a funny sense of justice, YaDinghus. Retribution in kind is wrong ( for all the usual reasons ), yet the word of the accuser should deny the right of the accused to question the evidence ? The problem is not that one is assumed to be more truthful than the other. The problem is that we, as a society, associate a certain stigma ( sexual, I suppose ) to an act of violence. If someone beat up another person, there would be no problem with cross-examination in court; it is expected. Why the difference ? This stigma seems even more entrenched in some more puritanical societies. So much so that the woman who is raped/assaulted is automatically put at fault. ( yes, some Middle Eastern and Indio/Pakistani societies )

That is a valid point Ten oz. I don't consider the settlements lawful either. Israel should not expand beyond its mandated lands. It has no right to force others out; but the ones who have been in Israel since/after 1948 don't seem to be in any hurry to leave. As a matter of fact they are steadily increasing in numbers. Maybe Israel offers them an opportunity they can't get in neighboring Arab countries ? Yes CharonY, when those policies involve forced relocation or extermination, they are rightfully called 'fascist'. When they are more in line with what Quebec is doing to its English minority, then that term is a bit much. Or are you gonna call French-Canadians fascists also ? Sorry Stringy, I failed to notice the 'slippery slope' part of your argument. You are right. But Israel has a long way to go before it descends to the level of its neighbors, who want to destroy it.

No, it didn't happen overnight. It took 3 to 4 years. Meanwhile the Palestinian/Arab citizenry of Israel has been slowly increasing for over 60 yrs. Estimates are that the Jewish and Palestinian/Arab populations will be equal by the second half of this century. That doesn't sound like a solution, or very final. ( hey, you said I could be sarcastic ) @CharonY No comparison is 100% equivalent. And yet over 20% of the Israeli citizenship identifies as Palestinian/Arab. Have any attempts been made to make these people leave ? Or exterminate them ? If not, I don't see a policy of cultural preservation as 'fascist'. ( or comparable to Hitler's final solution )

A quick Google search reveals that there were 1,6 million people who identify as Palestinian or Arab, living in Israel, as citizens, in 2913. That is over 20% of the population. I hadn't heard that 1.6 million people had been killed in Israel ( sorry Stringy, just being my usual sarcastic self, ). If, on the other hand, if you mean people running border crossings, I don't think a region that has regular suicide bombings and missile attacks can be too careful in the protection of its Israeli ( and Palestinian ) citizens.

Well, they were nearly exterminated when a minority in Germany ( and Europe ). Maybe they don't want to be a minority again, in their own country ( Jewish birth rates are lower than Arab ). I'll give another example ( the previous may have been a little controversial )... Here in Canada the 'laine pure' Quebecois ( pure wool ) have long argued for partial separation, where they keep all the advantages of confederation, but are free to preserve their own 'separate' culture from the rest of Canada; Even to the extent of limiting immigration into the province. While the rest of Canada is bilingual, it is actually illegal in Quebec to have ANY English signage, even if accompanied by the French equivalent. Now, I realize this is Canada, and we're pretty 'laissez faire', but nobody considers that a 'fascist' agenda. Why does Israel get labelled 'fascist' when they try to preserve their ( Jewish ) culture ?

Not necessarily affirmative action, but steering the ship in the opposite direction, Zapatos. If we can give opportunities to people who have previously been denied those opportunities, in education, employment etc., and we see that as a good thing, why is it then a bad thing when a group of people, that was nearly exterminated because of their culture, decides to protect that culture, by 'over-correcting'.

Keeping in mind that I'm making an attempt to drive discussion ( civil please )... Why do we question how long the Israeli Jews are going to play the victim card when their distress happened 70 odd years ago, and have since been involved in several wars with aggressive neighbors, and a constant state of siege by said neighbors. Meanwhile, slavery was abolished in the US over 150 yrs ago, yet Black Americans still play the victim card. Everything is to do with racism. Correct the 'path of the ship by steering in the opposite direction' as Phi once put it ( affirmative action ? ) Black lives matter, but if you mention the two orders of magnitude greater murder rate of Black on Black violence, then you're a racist. If we as a society agree that these steps are necessary to correct past wrongs, make the field more level, and prevent future wrongs, then, why doesn't this apply to the Jews in Israel ?

Just to be 'cheeky'... That's Christians who believe in "turn the other cheek', Stringy. Jews believe " an eye for an eye'.

Maybe D Trump should have been asking the questions C Wallace asked of V Putin. I can't believe Fox news shows more integrity than the President, Koti. That rant by S Colbert about D Trump being V Putin's 'holster' finally makes sense.