#and developed in an era greatly informed by indigenous rights (see: vietnam and algeria)

[aacme]

the problem ultimately with trying to both-sides the nakba is that it’s not israeli history. at least, not in the sense that it really deserves their input. the nakba, in israeli history, is merely a detail. and so they only ever feel it’s necessary to get their side of the story when palestinians tell theirs. they would never feel inclined to tell the story if palestinians didn’t. in fact, they would rather it not be included in history books at all (and it isn’t). but americans, of course, will always feel they need to get the israeli side, which inevitably invites the only zionists who have a perspective on the matter: propagandists.