The flux was both Arab and Jewish, neolib.
Just plot the %Jews and %Arabs vs. time to understand the issue. I can't make it any simpler than that.
It would have been extremely difficult for English settlers in North America, even if they had had good will towards the natives, to recognize the land claims inherent in 2000 people riding through 5 million acres once every year or so. The two methods of societal organization are incompatible.
Let me see if I can understand your POV. European land was pretty much all owned by somebody. So the Europeans thought, Gee, lets go to other places where the Natives don't have our idea of land ownership and the concept of a State and property laws, and we will take their land and impose our notion of State and property laws on them, at which point land ownership will now be legal and enforced, and we will own most of the place. Damn, what a smart idea.
Contrast this to the notion that the inhabitants of those places, no matter what their notions of State and property laws were, should be left alone.
For example, what if the NA had gone over to Europe and told the europeans to ditch their notions of State and property laws, and adopt the ways of the NA. Do you think that would be valid? Why not? If your reply comes down to the ability to force change, then you should clearly understand that is just what the Europeans did in NA. It is also what various powers did in Palestine, which is why we have the mess we have.
BTW, I do agree that given enough calm thinking, the Arabs should have understood that the creation of a Jewish state with well thought out policies might be a benefit for the region. But I've never seen any group of people cede much of their homeland to intruders with a happy smile anywhere else. If you expect the Arabs to do that, you should expect the Rednecks of America to welcome Mexicans. |
