But more importantly, I'm not sure how actually relevant it is today. Israel was founded and for sure did some things that weren't great, just as the surrounding Arab countries did things that weren't great. Just as like 50% of the countries today have been through stuff that isn't great.
If no one can live in peace and a joint future because of things that happened in 1940, how is there any peace with Germany? With Japan? WW2 didn't just ethnically cleanse a lot of people - 50 million people died in that war. Yet there is peace, because people chose to stop fighting and figure out a way to coexist.
> It doesn’t make sense to “share the land” with people who ethically cleansed your family from said land.
For the sake of argument, let's assume your idea of what happened in the Nakba is spot on. What exactly is the alternative? What do you imagine should happen to the millions of Israelis that have been born and raised in Israel? If the land isn't "shared", what should happen?
This idea of trying to roll back the existence of countries is antithetical to the entire relatively-peaceful world order since 1945.
> You say that you represent “leftist Zionism” but such a thing doesn’t exist as evidenced by your argument against basic human rights.
Where did I argue against basic human rights?
