I am not confusing anything, you (or the other poster that shares your exact same style) wrote three paragraphs previously about how it is disallowed to attribute responsibility to the Palestinians.

That seems very racist to me, why would you think a people capable of conducting an attack such as was done on October 7, is incapable of choosing more peaceful leadership? Why even the mere thought of the Palestinians being able to affect their future amounts to heresy?

Removing agency from natives is the mark of colonial thought, and it is no surprise that western thought that is stuck in colonial times (post-colonialism) kept the old colonial racist stereotypes

Another blatant reversal of reality. You are deliberately twisting my words. Acknowledging that Palestinian resistance is the direct, inevitable consequence of your century of colonial violence is not "removing agency." It is the ultimate respect for their agency. It treats them as human beings who refuse to be objects of your ethnic cleansing. The real colonial mindset is your demand that they must politely submit to their own extermination.

And your question about choosing "peaceful leadership" is nauseatingly cynical as it is ironic. You are defending a genocidal apartheid ethno-state whose own Prime Minister, Netanyahu, admitted on record that his strategy was to fund Hamas precisely to ensure Palestinians would never have a unified leadership capable of negotiating for a state.[1] You assassinate their diplomats, jail their leaders, and prop up Hamas, and then you have the audacity to blame them for how they resist your genocidal colonization campaign. Don't you dare project your colonial project's inherent, documented racism onto others. Your rhetoric is nothing but manipulative deflection and projection.

[1] https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-...