The party favored to win calls Israeli "settlers" what they actually are: terrorists.

Don't listen to all the propaganda about how "everyone is the same", it's all propaganda to depress turnout and let the worst options win.

Especially from all the .ml accounts that have a renewed interest in mainstream communities right before important elections.

correction, he calls the outpost settlers (Hilltop youth) terrorists, not the settlers. He supports the illegal settlements and the ethnic cleansing they cause.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good

point being that besides the couple arab parties, they are all pro apartheid.

Actually some of the Arab parties are also pro apartheid, just from the other end. It's a really weird place over there

2 state solution is technically them accepting apartheid too. But come on.

It is a major concession and basically "Please stop killing us".

Can you provide a source for him saying that?

Last time I checked he disapproved building Israeli settlements everywhere only because it'd lead to more Palestinians on Israeli land.

“People who fail to understand… will lead [us] to a bi-national state,” Eisenkot said, joining a long list of former Israeli generals who have sounded the alarm against unlimited settlement expansion and continued control over millions of Palestinians, which they argue threatens Israel’s ability to remain a majority-Jewish and democratic state.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/eisenkot-slams-settler-agenda-putting-him-at-odds-with-own-partys-right-wing-flank/

Same guy who says any two-state solution is 'delusional', and fully supports extermination of Palestinians btw.

Don't let people make you think he's a bad guy though. I'm sure he's cool under all that genocide and crimes against humanity.

No sure what was hard, I searched his name, "settler" and "terrorist" and this is the first result:

Yashar chair Gadi Eisenkot says settler attacks in the West Bank are “Jewish terror under the auspices of the government of Israel,” after European diplomats were assaulted in the West Bank today.

“Once again, within a single day, squads of violent lawbreakers attack foreign citizens — and this time, diplomats and official officeholders,” he says.

Eisenkot says the attacks are “burning up the last shreds of legitimacy the State of Israel has left, endangering security forces, and harming the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria, and national security.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/eisenkot-calls-settler-attacks-jewish-terror-under-the-auspices-of-the-government-of-israel/

Edit:

Since I answered your question, can you tell me why you spend so much time saying voting is pointless and people on the left should never vote?

Because man, it seems like that's most of your post history from a glance

Why spend so much time trying help fascists in multiple countries?

some of the Arab parties are also pro apartheid

Which ones? Name them

Eastern European colonizers aren't gonna stay there forever.

They're there because European white supremacists wanted to get rid of their circumcision-lovers.

Arabs are not alien to Judaism or Jesus-ism. They are semites and original christians of the original creed. Long before Blue-Eyed-Blonde-Haired "white jesus" was invented.

They've tried again and again to coexist. The eastern european colonizers in West Asia refuse to treat locals with dignity and respect. They are exactly similar to the nazis they had ran away from.

I think you're misinterpreting this quote, because it's no different from current Israeli government stance. He's not against settlers. He's against the specific settlers that attack officials and police. That's it.

Since I answered your question, can you tell me why you spend so much time saying voting is pointless and people on the left should never vote?

Give me one example where I said this.

Unfortunately we're near American voting time, so half the posts on my main page are pure delusions about democracy.

I guess calling for public executions of certain fascists is helping them. Alright, I'll be sure to send them love letters in the future instead.

https://lemmy.world/post/53673725/26561763

Telling that the Zionist parties won't partner with the Palestinians, even though they both want to unseat Netanyahu, because Zionists are fundamentally racists who want Palestinians gone, one way or another.

so the folks being genocided, apartheided, discriminated are allowed to vote

something doesn't compute

Where does it say "voting is pointless and people on the left should never vote"?

At best, you can interpret it as voting being pointless specifically in the US, which honestly sounds about right to me, but that's not what was said.

The message was not even about voting itself, but about people's expectations built on illogical foundations.

Expecting voting to produce meaningful change in the US, because it did so in Serbia, is like expecting a movie to do well by using the same composer's music as another movie that did well. Except one is a psychological horror and the other is a romantic comedy.

I mean, sure, go vote. Can’t hurt, probably.

But if you’re expecting it to fix anything, because it did in completely different countries, with vastly different histories and corcumstances… you’re in for some serious disappointment.

These are the Palestinian citizens of israel who are allowed to vote as long as they have no influence whatsoever over the Zionist government. The 5 million Palestinians under military occupation in Gaza and the West Bank are the ones being genocided and pogromed.

You claim that I said one thing, then you quote another. Is this the average American reading comprehension?

Oddly enough, it is reading comprehension that's the issue, I just don't know if you're American or not...

can you tell me why you spend so much time saying voting is pointless and people on the left should never vote?

You said voting is pointless and people who think it will work will be disappointed, meaning it won't work:

I mean, sure, go vote. Can’t hurt, probably.

But if you’re expecting it to fix anything, because it did in completely different countries, with vastly different histories and corcumstances… you’re in for some serious disappointment.

If that's not what you meant. Then what do you think your comment means?

But you're already just resorting to insults, in all honesty I'm probably going to just block you instead of replying if this doesn't turn around soon

Im sure a lot doesn't compute to a person as shit eatingly stupid as you.

They are a beard. So the zionists can say "look see! We aren't racist/apartheidist/genocidal we let the arabs vote/live here."

(Notice that "let" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Every time I hear someone say that or something similar I cringe.)

Scratch even a little below the surface and it becomes super obvious. This election is a perfect example, the "arab citizens" didn't vote the way the zionists wanted and there have been some just awful quotes and threats lobbed around.

Again, where did you see me saying voting is pointless?

people who think it will work will be disappointed, meaning it won't work

Yes, this part is accurate, mostly. I did say they will be disappointed, but what makes you say it equates with the action of voting being pointless?

What I said is they'll be disappointed if they 'expect it to fix anything because it did in completely different countries, with vastly different histories and circumstances' [specifically in the context of US midterms, which are generally less impactful].

Not that they'll be disappointed if they expect it to have a point, in which case your interpretation would obviously be correct.

Of course, the point I made is pretty general and vague. To 'fix anything' doesn't mean anything particular, unless you take it literally, word for word. Which is silly, because any election is nearly guaranteed to result in fixing literally anything, such as a pothole.

Also note the focus on comparing vastly different countries, which was the entire point, not voting itself.

I can see why you'd jump to the conclusion, which is why I explained it to you. I don't particularly disagree with your version. Not strongly enough to argue against it, anyway. The problem is it was never stated, which makes any claims that it was, false.