Talk:Surrogate Colonialism

Indigenous People?

The article defines surrogate colonialism as “a type of colonization project whereby a foreign power encourages and provides support for a settlement project of a non-native group over land occupied by an indigenous people”, and then applies the phrase to Israel’s settlement in Mandatory Palestine, but the Arabs in Palestine are not indigenous people! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SapphireBrick (talk • contribs) 10:08, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The fact you disagree with an opinion presented by a scholar is not particularly important, if it can be sourced. Depending on what definition of indigenous you use, Palestinians might definitely be considered the indigenous people of the Palestine/Israel area.

They have certainly been there longer than the colonising population originating firstly in Europe, and the subsequent waves from Arab countries, America and elsewhere. However, in anthropology "indigenous" is generally applied to societies which were in the recent past outside of a Westphalian state paradigm, and which then underwent attempts to forcibly integrate them into a globalised political/economic model. That doesn't really work for Palestinians as they were under Ottoman rule for centuries before their brief period of British colonial rule. Given their society evolved as an integral part of the globalised world order of the time, it is a point of some debate as to whether we should call them "indigenous" or merely "colonised".Boynamedsue (talk) 16:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)