What exactly is the "one state solution"?

[Shusha]

Spiritually if all the leaders of each tribe agrees to put god first and come together as equals in Christ, that might work as the unifying glue which still allows full exercise and expression of diversity of each person and group.

Somehow, I don't think expecting the Jewish people to come together "in X" is going to be the best idea.

 

[montelatici]

Spiritually if all the leaders of each tribe agrees to put god first and come together as equals in Christ, that might work as the unifying glue which still allows full exercise and expression of diversity of each person and group.

Somehow, I don't think expecting the Jewish people to come together "in X" is going to be the best idea.

Sometimes I actually like Shusha. LOL

 

[Shusha]

Okay, I finally found something that we can use, since no one else wants to weigh in on what an actual one state solution looks like. This:

The United States of Israel and Palestine

Two, independent, self-governing states (little s) under one big Federal State (big S).

• loosely based on 1949 lines with some and limited land swaps -- the intent being that both states be quite mixed in population
• each state is entirely independent and self-governed
• further, each municipality is to be relatively autonomous within each state
• Parliament is 50/50 regardless of population size
• legislation requires 55% plus to pass
• Jerusalem is one united, municipality
• borders are completely open (as state lines in the US)
• people are free to travel as necessary and desired, but have permanent residency in one state or the other
• Economy is entirely free with same rules and no restrictions for all
• All people of either Jewish or Palestinian descent anywhere in the world are free to immigrate to any place in the State (with a five year residency requirement) and within certain limitations of not overwhelming either state with large population increases nor to upset the ethnic balance, initially, in each state
• protection from violence and incitement is paramount and will be maintained by the Federal Government
• Each state government takes on a special responsibility to protect its minorities
• Every citizen of either state will have full access and rights to education, health care, etc with no discrimination
• Each state will have the ability to enact laws.
• States (little s) may place family law under the jurisdiction of religious courts, but all citizens must have the ability to opt-out of religious courts and have secular options under the Federal law

Can anyone give me a reason why this wouldn't be workable? (Besides requiring the will to do it?)

 

[montelatici]

Okay, I finally found something that we can use, since no one else wants to weigh in on what an actual one state solution looks like. This:

The United States of Israel and Palestine

Two, independent, self-governing states (little s) under one big Federal State (big S).

• loosely based on 1949 lines with some and limited land swaps -- the intent being that both states be quite mixed in population
• each state is entirely independent and self-governed
• further, each municipality is to be relatively autonomous within each state
• Parliament is 50/50 regardless of population size
• legislation requires 55% plus to pass
• Jerusalem is one united, municipality
• borders are completely open (as state lines in the US)
• people are free to travel as necessary and desired, but have permanent residency in one state or the other
• Economy is entirely free with same rules and no restrictions for all
• All people of either Jewish or Palestinian descent anywhere in the world are free to immigrate to any place in the State (with a five year residency requirement) and within certain limitations of not overwhelming either state with large population increases nor to upset the ethnic balance, initially, in each state
• protection from violence and incitement is paramount and will be maintained by the Federal Government
• Each state government takes on a special responsibility to protect its minorities
• Every citizen of either state will have full access and rights to education, health care, etc with no discrimination
• Each state will have the ability to enact laws.
• States (little s) may place family law under the jurisdiction of religious courts, but all citizens must have the ability to opt-out of religious courts and have secular options under the Federal law

Can anyone give me a reason why this wouldn't be workable? (Besides requiring the will to do it?)

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

 

[Shusha]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

 

[teddyearp]

• Parliament is 50/50 regardless of population size

Most of your idea looks good on paper, I just wanted to address this one in particular. How would this work with elections?

I think if a 'United States of Israel and Palestine' is created as you propose, then it well may have to have two legislative bodies like the USA to keep elections fair.

And as long as Israel gets twice as many Senators as the Palestinians, I'm all for it, LOL!!!! I am kidding. I still think that the main problem with a one state solution is the possibility of an eventual loss of the Jews' national home.

 

[montelatici]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

I would keep it state, but allow the users to come from anywhere. It tends to force the bad systems to improve or they lose money, which is allotted based on the number of users.

 

[Shusha]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

I would keep it state, but allow the users to come from anywhere. It tends to force the bad systems to improve or they lose money, which is allotted based on the number of users.

I think I gotcha. So if a resident goes out of state for education or health, the state of origin has to compensate state of service for service, yes?

 

[Shusha]

• Parliament is 50/50 regardless of population size

Most of your idea looks good on paper, I just wanted to address this one in particular. How would this work with elections?

I think if a 'United States of Israel and Palestine' is created as you propose, then it well may have to have two legislative bodies like the USA to keep elections fair.

And as long as Israel gets twice as many Senators as the Palestinians, I'm all for it, LOL!!!! I am kidding. I still think that the main problem with a one state solution is the possibility of an eventual loss of the Jews' national home.

My understanding is that all state residents would vote one man one vote for state elections. And each state would get to elect 50% of the Federal government slots. The issue I see with that is eventually, depending on demographics, you could end up with an Arab/Jew bias in the Federal Government. It would be better, possibly?, to have a 50/50 Jew/Arab mix regardless of state? Then you might end up with a state bias? Tough call.

 

[montelatici]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

I would keep it state, but allow the users to come from anywhere. It tends to force the bad systems to improve or they lose money, which is allotted based on the number of users.

I think I gotcha. So if a resident goes out of state for education or health, the state of origin has to compensate state of service for service, yes?

No, I am thinking that the services are State funded through State taxation and money is given to the state or other administrations based on a formula of some sort, mainly based on users, and the administrations are tasked with managing the service. If the service doesn't attract users it doesn't get as much money.

 

[Shusha]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

I would keep it state, but allow the users to come from anywhere. It tends to force the bad systems to improve or they lose money, which is allotted based on the number of users.

I think I gotcha. So if a resident goes out of state for education or health, the state of origin has to compensate state of service for service, yes?

No, I am thinking that the services are State funded through State taxation and money is given to the state or other administrations based on a formula of some sort, mainly based on users, and the administrations are tasked with managing the service. If the service doesn't attract users it doesn't get as much money.

Ah. Okay. So all schools and health facilities are State funded but paid based on usage by residents from either state. I'm okay with that. No reason not to play to strengths if that works out.

 

[montelatici]

I would say that it would be a fair compromise. I would require that people of either state be eligible to use the public healthcare and public education available anywhere within the State. And, that the State military be integrated.

Would you require that people normally access education and healthcare within their own state? If not, how would you compensate the states which provided health and education to non-residents? Or would you make that a federal jurisdiction?

I would keep it state, but allow the users to come from anywhere. It tends to force the bad systems to improve or they lose money, which is allotted based on the number of users.

I think I gotcha. So if a resident goes out of state for education or health, the state of origin has to compensate state of service for service, yes?

No, I am thinking that the services are State funded through State taxation and money is given to the state or other administrations based on a formula of some sort, mainly based on users, and the administrations are tasked with managing the service. If the service doesn't attract users it doesn't get as much money.

Ah. Okay. So all schools and health facilities are State funded but paid based on usage by residents from either state. I'm okay with that. No reason not to play to strengths if that works out.

It will tend to integrate the people too, as a side benefit.

 

[Shusha]

It will tend to integrate the people too, as a side benefit.

The whole point is respectful integration with enough caution for psychological safety and security.

 

[rhodescholar]

Okay, I finally found something that we can use, since no one else wants to weigh in on what an actual one state solution looks like. This:

The United States of Israel and Palestine

Two, independent, self-governing states (little s) under one big Federal State (big S).

• loosely based on 1949 lines with some and limited land swaps -- the intent being that both states be quite mixed in population
• each state is entirely independent and self-governed
• further, each municipality is to be relatively autonomous within each state
• Parliament is 50/50 regardless of population size
• legislation requires 55% plus to pass
• Jerusalem is one united, municipality
• borders are completely open (as state lines in the US)
• people are free to travel as necessary and desired, but have permanent residency in one state or the other
• Economy is entirely free with same rules and no restrictions for all
• All people of either Jewish or Palestinian descent anywhere in the world are free to immigrate to any place in the State (with a five year residency requirement) and within certain limitations of not overwhelming either state with large population increases nor to upset the ethnic balance, initially, in each state
• protection from violence and incitement is paramount and will be maintained by the Federal Government
• Each state government takes on a special responsibility to protect its minorities
• Every citizen of either state will have full access and rights to education, health care, etc with no discrimination
• Each state will have the ability to enact laws.
• States (little s) may place family law under the jurisdiction of religious courts, but all citizens must have the ability to opt-out of religious courts and have secular options under the Federal law

Can anyone give me a reason why this wouldn't be workable? (Besides requiring the will to do it?)

Unless the arab muslims endure a 180-degree mental cleansing, they will NEVER tolerate the rights of others as equals, only as second-class dhimmis who they will eventually subjugate.

It is frustrating to see the ignorance of current generations; all of this crap was tried in other places before with arab muslims and IT NEVER WORKED.

I'd recommend to this poster and others here proposing what is not even remotely an option, to go back and read up on the history of Lebanon from the 1930s forward, when large numbers of muslims began immigrating into the country. The christian leadership thought as you idealistic dreamers thought; that muslims were "just good people" who would gladly accept power-sharing amongst the groups, but of course, as the arab muslims do everywhere they go - they multiplied until they overwhelmed the non-muslims using violence to take over the country.

No sane leader / student of history would EVER accept a situation where muslims could conceivably reach a threshold of authority, it would mean the subjugation of all other non-muslims, as it has every other place on earth for 14 centuries.

All of the idealistic dreaming will not change this fact, nor will it compel muslims to civilize and accept others as equals, it would be a direct violation of their core beliefs.

 

[rhodescholar]

It will tend to integrate the people too, as a side benefit.

The whole point is respectful integration with enough caution for psychological safety and security.

Uh, yeah ok. And when the arab muslims start terrorizing the jews as they've always done, blowing up synagogues and mass slaughtering people, killing hundreds or thousands at a time destroying your little science experiment, then what? Will you mail apology letters to the families of the dead, saying "sorry, we were just testing things out"?

This whole thread is ******* nonsense, especially since no one has mentioned the 800lb gorilla in the room - iran. As long as that cancerous regime exists, no concept of peace is even remotely possible between the arabs and jews, as that turd regime is FAR too dependent upon it.

Along those lines, what do you dreamers think hezbollah and hamas will do, simply lay down their arms caches and move to mars?

 

[montelatici]

It will tend to integrate the people too, as a side benefit.

The whole point is respectful integration with enough caution for psychological safety and security.

Uh, yeah ok. And when the arab muslims start terrorizing the jews as they've always done, blowing up synagogues and mass slaughtering people, killing hundreds or thousands at a time destroying your little science experiment, then what? Will you mail apology letters to the families of the dead, saying "sorry, we were just testing things out"?

This whole thread is ******* nonsense, especially since no one has mentioned the 800lb gorilla in the room - iran. As long as that cancerous regime exists, no concept of peace is even remotely possible between the arabs and jews, as that turd regime is FAR too dependent upon it.

Along those lines, what do you dreamers think hezbollah and hamas will do, simply lay down their arms caches and move to mars?

Until recently, the Muslims and the Jews "terrorized" Christians in many places where there was Muslim rule over Christians, e.g. Al Andalus (Spain), Sicily etc. Conversely, Christians "terrorized" Muslims and Jews when they got the upper hand.

Iran would have little influence if there were a peaceful arrangement between Jews and Palestinians. The Muslim Palestinians (Sunnis) have no love for Shiite Iran, and the Christian Palestinians, many of whom would probably return, could also care less about Iran.

Without popular support Hamas would disappear so they would have to do an IRA and become a political party only.

Hezbollah exists because of the threat of another Israeli invasion of Lebanon. The Shiite suffered the most when Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon as they inhabit southern Lebanon. Without that threat Hezbollah would not have a raison d'etre. What some don't understand is the Shiites in Lebanon, pre-Hezbollah, were the downtrodden of Lebanon, with the Sunnis, Christians and Druze the movers and shakers although the Shiite population was at least a third of the population, if not more.

 

[Shusha]

rhodescholar

Do I think the Arab Muslim Palestinians are capable of this kind of thinking yet?! Not by a long shot.

Just because we can't get to that place yet, doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss the end goal. It would be like failing to teach a basketball team how to score.

 

[Shusha]

So, let's talk about how the ideology (of both sides) needs to change in order to bring about this ending.

 

[montelatici]

The Palestinians have to accept that Muslims, Christians and Jews will be equal citizens in the "Palestinian" state. Jews will have to agree that Muslims, Christians and Jews will be equal citizens of the "Jewish" state. The Palestinians have to respect that the Jewish state can call itself whatever it wants, e.g. Israel, and the Jews have to accept that the Palestinian state can call itself anything it wants, e.g. Palestine.

All confessions will have to agree that the State will have to be a secular state with no religion favored or named. They can run an internet contest to see what the State will be called. Kind of like Switzerland where its official name is the Helvetic Confederation and the cantons have their own names.

 

[Humanity]

rhodescholar

Do I think the Arab Muslim Palestinians are capable of this kind of thinking yet?! Not by a long shot.

Just because we can't get to that place yet, doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss the end goal. It would be like failing to teach a basketball team how to score.

This is a really positive thread going on here, mostly... Well except those who think they can strafe RG's ;-)

I wouldn't rule out a one state solution but, like Teddy, I do think that Israel NOT being a 'Jewish homeland' would be a BIG issue!

Netanyahu and co would NEVER consider that UNLESS Israel had full control of the state, at least... Which of course, is then a problem for the Palestinians...

One state COULD work... However, I really don't see EITHER side agreeing to it!