My Q was deleted on a basis which I think it was biased, full of misjudgements

Question

my question, titled "Why Israeilis are politically granted the right to declare Palestine as their own land and state?", was first closed with the justification that "It is not a place to advance opinions or debate, but rather for exchanging objective information about the policies" and "seem to be mostly rhetorical questions with the intention of making a point about some political issue". I tried my best to show it was not the case. The situation was still good enough for me, as I have already raised my own answer to be critically criticized with opinions from people of different backgrounds and different beliefs, even if as comments, and there was still another answer to my Question which itself together with the comments below which was so informative for me.

This was good, even if the Q was closed (and not to say that I don't care much about the DVs, at least not as much as I used to care for the reasoning behind the DVs, which was the reason why I asked the Q and answered it by myself), but then the question was deleted. Maybe it's not so bad, as maybe I have already got enough info and feedback, but maybe it could be more informative for me if it was still (and at least for weeks to go) open, so maybe others could contribute as well.

The reason for deleting my Q was probably stated to be:

[@the gods from engineering:] "Politics is to be Secular". Sounds somewhat strange coming from someone living in an Islamic Republic, with a religious Supreme Leader. I don't mean to disparage your personal views of how politics should be, but clearly plenty of people think otherwise. So it's a bad premise for a Q to appeal to that. Even in the US, with a secular-ish constitution (at least in terms of separation), the influence of religion on politics is significant: the Christian right etc.

and

[mod @Philipp ♦] It doesn't seem that there is any intention to fix this question. I am ending this. If you want to have a debate, then a more debate-oriented website might be the place to go. If you are looking for a place to tell the world your personal political views, why not start a blog?

It doesn't seem fair to me as judged above. Being born in Iran and grown as a Shia Muslim provides a religious background for me, together with all cultural, historic and moral attitudes gained in such a society, but that's not the whole story. There are people in Iran who are against the its leader, governments, and even Islam, thanks to all the hate-speeches and cheap-freedoms advertised and promoted by media mostly supported by US, Israel and Saudi Arabia, in the name of human rights, and Secularism as a corner-stone of modernism. Such people are far from being the majority, but exist anyway and even from time-to-time appear as to be considerable, as their manifestation is sometimes more than those who are not alike. These people are even present at the ruling levels of the country, or many as Journalists and some as think tanks. So it is not strange that a variety of different doubtful ideas spread in the mind of people. I, personally, am firmly ground on my own beliefs but with no bias, that's a result of years of studying and experimenting the life from several perspectives and view points, and having conversations with many individuals of several different view points, many even in Stack Exchange, whether being of different sects of Islam, or Christianity, or Secular Jews and etc. .

Now I have some ideas in my mind. I want them to be criticized as much as possible, so that I can recognize the possible logical, historical, and other flaws in them. This will not happen if I open a blog, and I'm not at the level to "tell the world your personal political views". I'm merely sharing my ideas here with others, learning from other view points, and maybe help the others to see the world from my own viewpoint. That would be constructive for all, win-win.

That I said I'm not anti-Semite and some users seemingly thought I'm joking, was not a lie, as I don't lie due to my beliefs. Even in Quran Jews are respected as e.g. in:

لَيْسُوا سَوَاءً مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ أُمَّةٌ قَائِمَةٌ يَتْلُونَ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ آنَاءَ اللَّيْلِ وَ هُمْ يَسْجُدُونَ * يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَ الْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَ يَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَ يُسَارِعُونَ فِي الْخَيْرَاتِ وَ أُولَئِكَ مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ * وَ مَا يَفْعَلُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلَنْ يُكْفَرُوهُ وَ اللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ بِالْمُتَّقِينَ

Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration. * They believe in Allah and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten (in emulation) in (all) good works: They are in the ranks of the righteous. * Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for Allah knoweth well those that do right. [3:113-115]

This does not mean among the Jews will never be people who are severely enemy toward Muslims, but interesting is that Muslims are so much free from hate of the other common people that Allah warns Mulsims not to take their enemies as friend. Maybe those who hate Jews in Western countries is due to a majority of them having Christian beliefs, assuming the Jews responsible behind how Jesus, the Christ, was sentenced to death, and murdered accordingly, but in Islam we don't thank it was the case, as we don't accept that Jesus, the Christ, was killed at all, but still alive living in the second level of the Heaven, and who will return in a near future.

Also my roots, or part of them, are Semite, and believe it or not Jews are respectable in Iran. Once I was talking on Islam.SE with a religious Zionist Jew living in US, and he said he very much likes to travel to Iran and visit Hamedan for Ister, but he will not due to his fear of Iranian people hating Jews, and I simply said he is wrong, and nobody (not in the strict sense, as there always exists exceptions) accuse a Jew in Iran for him being a Jew. What people in Iran mostly hate about, is the oppression from Israel (and its Western supporters) toward Palestinians (and Muslims, and people of the Middle East, and particularly Iran even before the Islamic revolution), many of the people in Israel being Jew at all (Jew as in Judiasm I mean, that is, religious), but mere secular Zionist.

With all that being said, returning back to my Question and answer, I still see no problem in them, no sever logical flaw, nor any disrespect against Jews. The only thing there is that I have not presume Israel as a holy state, or US (and other Western) government(s) always have good intentions or tell always the truth. So I pretty much like I am misjudged in Politics.SE. The question as appears to me really is around a political issue, not historical, nor legal or even moral, asking open-mindedly (as far as I can say) and asking to receive objective answers, beside my own answer being critically criticized.

Answer 1

The Q was IMHO rightfully deleted (although I'm one of two such votes) because it's a scattershot attack on the existence of the State of Israel, which as discussed here meets a def of antisemitism.

The Q also lacks focus and advanced various red herrings:

• that secular supporters of Israel somehow do so because of the biblical claims of the Jews;

• that because other countries don't get all their territorial claims fulfilled, Israel shouldn't exist;

• it also compares Israel with ancient Mongol or Macedonian empires, while ignoring the realities of Jewish immigration to Palestine by the mid 20th century;

• proposes that Jews should have been "sent" to an uninhabited territory.

Some of these can be perhaps excused by a poor command of English, but overall the post reads too much like anti-Israel propaganda (laundry list of complaints), and at the very least asks too many questions at once--there are 10 question marks in body of the Q. (I wrote several comments under the Q on some of these issues, but the OP selected only one in their post above.)

Answer 2

I don't think we need to make this this complicated. One of the - valid - goals here is to prevent antisemitism.

Which begs the question of what antisemitism consists of. One of the - contentious, I'll admit - criteria is denying the right of the state of Israel to exist.

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Or, to take another definition of antisemitism, suggested by the Guardian instead:

Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish, collectively and individually, as Jews, in accordance with the principle of equality.

And the very core of this question consists of doing just that. So, it is not, by that definition of antisemitism, a salvageable question.

Now, of course, maybe some site, somewhere, can discuss what alternatives could have been considered in 1948, rather than supporting the state of Israel's existence in its current location. And then they can maybe move on to the question of how to "correct" that nowadays. River to the sea and all that.

But I see no great reason why we should be that site and that's why the question deserves deleting.

p.s. using a specific definition of antisemitism would be an improvement, IMHO, on lettings users loudly, and sometimes abusively, accuse others of being so, without any formal basis.

p.p.s. Considering denial of the right of Israel to exist, by itself, as antisemitism is consistent with much of the way Western press and politicians approach this subject. That leaves one plenty of leeway to criticize the Israeli government, as long as they don't run afoul of the other antisemitic markers. Which shouldn't be that hard if a user is posting in good faith: most of these markers are rather crude in nature.

Answer 3

This site seem following a pro-israel liberal democrat line (inside of the USA politics).

Your question essentially questioned the right of Israel to alienate the former land the of former British colony called Palestine. In their view, you questioned Israels right to exist, as the whole state is built up on part of this land.

Thus, the direct answer of your problem is that you can not ask such questions here as the decision-makers will vote to delete it.

The deeper root of your problem is that the model of the Stack Exchange site simply can not handle a political forum like this, and this site will likely degrade to a VLQ political newsletter soon.

At the moment I see no mechanism to stop it.

I do not know, what to do.