is “the people of gaza” worse than “gazans”? if it was “the people in gaza” i could see how that could enable israeli propaganda on indigeneity, but “of” does suggest some link to their land

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The typical way to describe people from a place is to use the demonym. An example is Californian. "People of California" sounds like something a pol would say. Or a poet or something. I think it's very notable that - as far as I know - the West Bank has no demonym. Everybody - including reporters - is forced to use a clumsy mouthful of syllables like "Palestinians in the West Bank". I'm not a linguist but it seems really weird to me that a simple demonym (West Bankers?) isn't used.

---

Edit

A comment to me at another site

A significant number of them are officially refugees and therefore not Gazan.

[–] JohnBrownNote@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

if they called them bankers somebody might bail them out

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Especially WEST bankers

load more comments (1 replies)