Archeological findings from 2000 years ago do not matter. You cannot go somewhere 2000 years later and say your ancestors used to live there and claim the land for yourself. If we go by that logic, the indigenous people of Canada, can acquire weapons tomorrow and drive you out of Canada because they have lived here longer than any Canadian has. Neither the archeological findings, nor what your religion tells you - that you are a chosen people etc., is a legitimate reason for Israel to even exist.
So what makes Israel legitimate?
a) 10M people live there. Have a home, businesses, infrastructure and most importantly an identity.
b) Sufficient time has passed and Israel is recognized by the majority of the international community.
This is what makes Israel a legitimate state. That's it. People live there, and the world agrees they can live here. Nothing else.
The world also agrees, atleast the majority of it, that Palestine is also a legitimate state. It is time for Israel to recognize them and give them back their statehood.
The occupation is defined variously. But in my opinion, the settlements etc are occupation. At the very least the 1967 borders should be given back to the Palestinians. "We conquered this land" is not a legitimate argument, because by conquering the land, you have occupied it. That is not helping your argument at all.
Yes, Israel is a racist, apartheid state. The crime of Apartheid as defined by the Rome statute. Citizenship is not a criteria for a crime of apartheid to happen.
The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity "committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime".
There are different legal systems for Palestinians in the West Bank, where civil and criminal law does not apply to Palestinians but only to Israelis. Israel controls the land, builds walls, checkpoints, institutes ID systems and so on and restricts movement of people. All of these are features of apartheid. Granted some where brought in for security purposes, but at the end of the day it is apartheid.
Also, the very premise of Israel, that it is a Jewish ethno-state, "we are a chosen people" etc is inherently racist. Going by your definition of Zionism - that Jews have a connection to this homeland and are indigenous to this land, is inherently racist too because it denies Palestinian connection to the land. It rejects their identity, nationhood and many Israelis say that it is the Palestinians that are occupying their lands!!! When in reality, Palestinians have been there longer than present day Israelis have. So in sum, Zionism is racist.
I have spoken to several Israeli friends in my personal life and I have also watched videos from Corey Gil Shuster on YouTube (Ask Project), and other videos of everyday Israelis, one of which I will link below. If these views aren't racist, violent, cliquey and colonial, then what is?
