There’s a big difference between being against Israel and being antisemitic, and people need to see that. Heck, I’m literally Jewish and I don’t support Israel.
And, as I’ve heard someone else point out - isn’t it literally anti-Semitic to assume that Jews and Israelis are, like, the same thing? And/or that Israel is, like, the global mouthpiece for Jews everywhere? Seems a bit reductive, to me… Seems on the same level as thinking the leader of Kenya, or Nigeria, or any African nation speaks for Black people everywhere.
Netanyahu isn’t the Emperor of Jews!
Wouldn’t it be more like “king of the Jews”? Btw, does anyone know where I can get a large cross and nails? Asking for a friend.
Between the username and the shopping list, I believe we’ve got a Roman on our hands here…
Romanes eunt domus!
What’s this, then? ‘Romanes Eunt Domus’? ‘People called Romanes they go the house’?
Romans go home (?)
No, it doesn’t. What’s Latin for ‘Roman’? Come on!
I’ve always felt the nation of Israel is squatting on the name. Like, aren’t there people outside of Israel-the-nation that also claim to be Israel (in the Biblical sense)?
Israel, the state, tries to conflate the two in order to have an impenetrable shield against all scrutiny.
“Jesus Christ, Israel, why are you playing soccer with dead babies?!”
“Excuse me? What, do you hate Jews or something? What, are you some kind of Nazi?”
Israel has weaponized antisemitism, it’s not even a secret and they admitted it a while back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weaponization_of_antisemitism?wprov=sfla1
Do you have a source for Israel admitting it? That Wikipedia article is long!
Rubenberg 1989, p. 358: “The labeling of individuals who disagree with the lobby’s positions as “anti-Semitic” is a common practice among Israel’s advocates. For example, when Senator Charles Mathias [R., Maryland] voted in favor of the AWACs sale to Saudi Arabia, a Jewish newspaper in New York commented: “Mr. Mathias values the importance of oil over the well-being of Jews and the State of Israel. The Jewish people cannot be fooled by such a person, no matter what he said, because his act proved who he was.” Former Congressman Paul “Pete” McCloskey [R., California] also has had the charge of anti-Semitism leveled at him: “When I ran for reelection in 1980, I was asked a question about peace in the Middle East, and I said if we were going to have peace in the Middle East we members of Congress were going to have to stand up to our Jewish constituents and respectfully disagree with them on Israel. Well, the next day the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith accused me of fomenting anti-Semitism, saying that my remarks were patently anti-Semitic.” Indeed, it may be that the weapon of greatest power possessed by the pro-Israeli lobby is its accusation of anti-Semitism. George Ball comments: “They’ve got one great thing going for them. Most people are terribly concerned not to be accused of being anti-Semitic, and the lobby so often equates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. They keep pounding away at that theme, and people are deterred from speaking out.” In Ball’s view, many Americans feel a “sense of guilt” over the Holocaust, and the result of their guilt is that the fear of being called anti-Semitic is “much more effective in silencing candidates and public officials than threats about campaign money or votes.””
From the Wikipedia article
Being against, doesn’t make you hateful anyway.
I am “against” religion as I think it does more harm than good but I am pro religious freedom for everyone and a peaceful cooperative global society. So I think that makes me hardly hateful towards religions or the believers. Well tbh I have a hard time accepting religious extremist positions in societies, but everything comes with a price… I take religious freedom for everyone if that means someone thinks a book with instructions on how to abort a baby is against abortion and that it should be law.
Most extremists are worrisome. Some cause more trouble for those around them than others, though. An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn’t, for instance, and that isn’t great, but it’s a more personal problem than trying to force your views and behaviors on others, which many other types of extremists try to do.
An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn’t, for instance
Don’t know whether I’d qualify as extreme, but yeah, pacifism tends to be equated with all sorts of deliberate harm by some people who consider things like war and violent retribution necessary evils if not even inherently good 😮💨
Also, there’s the “sticking to your principles in spite of popular sentiment is the same as naïveté” crowd 🤦
What’s funny is how media and Zionists call Jews antisemitic.
I’m against the Israeli government’s murder of children and murder of all the other innocent people in Palestine.
Should I be against Israel itself?
Note I’m [US] American, so I’m against the incalculable harms we’ve perpetrated on the world and our own citizens over the past couple hundred years. I would hesitate - pending some replies to me here - to say “I don’t support the USA” given the very cool people and the Bernie Sanders types and the benevolent US aid organizations and the National Parks and so on (some fediverse developers)… but have an open mind and curious to hear your thoughts on semantics.
At this point, when someone says they are ‘against Israel’, what they mean is that they are against the genocide the Israeli army is carrying out in Gaza. Maybe there are some who want the country itself toppled - neo-Nazis, for example, or those detached from reality - but they are a small minority (outside of Iran, perhaps).
Yes.
This reminds me of republicans in early 2000s equating bashing on the Iraq war with not supporting the troops.
Fuck them genocidal fascist troops
Yup. And there’s also a HUGE difference between being anti-Semitic and just being against genocide. And our “news media” is determined to deliberately conflate the two.
Zionism has big “go back to where you came from” energy
maybe they should consider doing that instead
What the fuck is a Zionist? I been seeing this on lemmy past few days and have no idea what gen Z bs this even is.
Zionism is a lot older than Gen Z.
that’s not how this template works at all.
idk, seems fine to me.
That’s exactly how it works.
I don’t get the name calling.
I support Israel right to defend itself (and by logic, Hamas will defend as well), but fully acknowledge challenging the methods, actions and propaganda of each side.
This is a conflict, there is enough shit going around - we don’t need to bring religion into this. Call out shit people, call out bias, and absolutely call out people who think they can hide behind religion.
(Love the meme, great not seeing the same repeated crap).
Except Israel isn’t just defending themselves anymore. They’re carpet bombing Gaza trying to turn it into a parking lot.
If Israel was just defending themselves, nobody would have an issue with that.
Instead, they’re bombing hospitals, and murdering children in cold blood. And the president of Israel has made some very concerning comments indicating that he doesn’t see Palestinians as people.
So, yeah, saying Israel has a right to defend itself is a complete mischaracterization of what’s going on right now over there.
And I can also argue that when you have a neighbor that launches soo many rockets across the border that you have one of the best and most expensive anti-rocket defenses in the world, that has proven in the last few day that it still exists, you won’t stop until its gone.
This conflict exists because politicians and the intl community failed miserably - Rwanda level failed. I blame the UNSC personally.
As I’ve said in other comments before, I seriously hope that regardless of who you support, at the end of this conflict the acts above and beyond proportionality are thoroughly investigated, and I hope to see militants and politicians on both sides swinging in prison by the end of it.
Wonder what happened to make Palestinians want to launch rockets across the border?
Removed by mod
What’s the date of that charter?
deleted by creator
Link the part of the Hamas founding charter that says anything about America. I’ll wait, good luck.
On the other hand, “from the river to the sea” (the feared slogan) is a direct reply to the Likud’s election manifesto from 1977 which stated: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”
You said in another comment that Israel is justified in their violence because Hamas is their neighbor that has been launching bombs across the border.
And in this comment you blame Hamas violence on bigotry.
Until you acknowledge the decades of unprovoked violence to the Palestinian people by Israeli settlers, you will not be taken seriously.
Israelis are capable and have shown clear bigotry towards the Palestinians. And Hamas is violent because they were forced to be neighbors with settlers that were often violent.
You can keep pretending to be unbiased, but your bias is showing very clearly.
They’re committing genocide now, which is ironic given who’s doing it.
Assuming yes, I don’t know if I’d call it ironic. Any group is just as capable as any other regardless of history.
And before you call me a genocide denier, there is a good reason I’ve reserved that statement at this stage. I wouldn’t be surprised if that changes shortly.
Will you be surprised when that statement doesn’t change?
Israeli Professor on Rafah: “We Are Witnessing an Unfolding Genocide”
I want to say yes, but also aware that legal definitions take a long time to work through. Current discussions by those much further in the know are “allegations” of genocide, “could amount” to genocide, “could lead to” genocide.
Are the flags there - absolutely. The hold out (as far as im aware) is the intent vs causality aspect. I suspect investigation will start to lean to intent existing.
Legal definitions in the end are trying to turn a hammer into a scalpel.
They don’t fucking matter for moral judgments.
Israel is committing a genocide to anyone with even a highschool level knowledge of history. Want a simple definition that is very effective?
Any government that intentionally withholds food, medicine, and potable water from a population it considers undesirable is intentionally committing genocide.
Starvation is historically the most effective method and most used method of committing genocide. Everyone knows what the outcome is. Anyone trying to use legal definitions at this point is an asshole genocide denier trying to pretend they’re not.
Like you.
I personally blame the failure of the United States, United Kingdom, and United Soviet Socialist Republics for their failure to deal with the humanitarian crisis of 1930s Germany (read: accept all Jewish refugees) resulting in a traumatized stateless people feeling they needed to reclaim their ancestral home by any means necessary as an existential crisis. From there we have seen failure after failure to attempt peaceful coexistence from either side or to attempt safe and peaceful decolonization from the Israeli government or any other world government or for the world to accept Palestinians’ right to create a nation
I think that a pretty fair belief.
That being said Israel is a colonizer state and an apartheid state. Who is to blame for what is currently happening? Israel and Hamas. Who is the victim? The people of Palestine. A people who are overwhelmingly too young to have voted in the last election. Since that point Hamas has refused to hold elections and has moved from moderate anti colonial to this. Furthermore Israel has spent the time since the nakba more or less going full USA on their colonized people.
Except the Zionists have been working to conquer the place since the 19th century. They even wanted an arrangement with the Nazis to settle in Judea… but not for the Jews that were poor. Only the rich ones.
And I repeat: Zionists. Not Jews. Zionists.
Not against you personally, but your premise sounds like a weak bothside-ism that justifies the cycle of violence. “He did first” kind of argument. “An eye for an eye makes us all blind.” as Ghandi put it.
The most rational and objective bothside advocacy is the two-state solution. It seems like the mainstream neglect this and does not think outside the box. I understand that there is so much bad blood between Palestinians and Israelis, but if both sides realise they are blinded by rage, they could emulate the Northern Ireland peace agreement that ended the 20 year cycle of violence between the Irish nationalists and British unionists. Many scholars and activists from both Israeli and Palestinian side advocate for two state solution and a Northern Ireland-style peace agreement. It is just a matter of ordinary people to look past the rage. Israel is there to stay and advocating to rid Israel is like trying abort a baby. And Israel stepping on Palestinians is repeating what the Nazis did to them and thus Israel could not claim the higher moral ground.
There has to be a united civilian will to accept that both sides are here to stay, like the Irish nationalists and British unionists have done. But both Israeli and Palestinian sides have internal divisions and many support their own radical groups representing their own beliefs.
While I get your understanding from my comment, I don’t know if I’d call it both-sideism as much as I would neither is innocent. Either was quite capable of taking steps to stop this before it happened.
If it wasn’t for the fact it had happened before in Ireland I would 100% say there is no way the differences could be reconciled to a permanent two-state solution - but clearly there must be a pathway to peace. Unfortunately I don’t hold much confidence in it actually happening and more will continue to suffer because of it.
If it is peace that the Israeli politicians want, why do they fund Hamas?
Also, ever wondered where Hamas - living in a place under such a strict embargo that people don’t have enough food to eat - gets the explosives for its rockets?
we don’t need to bring religion into this.
My friend i cant wait for you to learn about zionism and why israel even exists.
Zionists pretending to be both sides moderates is truly hilarious.
Consider making a new account instead of the one you used to shill for 6 months straight
Oh look, first word in the post
Truly a mystery why people keep calling you that. We’ll never know.
Na, its pretty obvious why, even to you.
Quick mental exercise - the conflict is suspended in the next 10 minutes, a “permanent ceasefire”. Every aid truck is permitted in, Israel withdraws to their state, intl community is released.
Do you think Israel will go “we achieved everything we want to, Hamas is no longer a threat, let’s disband our Iron dome, cease CMT, live our best lives”.
Do you think Hamas will unify Palestine and usher in a new era of peace and stability, cease attacks on Israel because its not worth it, join the international community in rebuilding Palestine to be prosperous.
Do you think the intl community is shocked enough to never let this happen again?
Dude don’t expose yourself in this comment chain you’re supposed to feign ignorance here.
Do you think Hamas will unify Palestine and usher in a new era of peace and stability, cease attacks on Israel because its not worth it, join the international community in rebuilding Palestine to be prosperous.
Yes
If you truly think Hamas is not as bad or worse than Israeli counter-actions, you should reflect on your own beliefs. In this conflict, the military wings of both sides ARE deplorable and deserve universal condemnation. Hamas’s goal is the eradication of Jews; any benefit to the Palestinians under their thumb is accidental at best. If you support Hamas, you support genocide. If you support the IDF’s actions, you support genocide. Full stop.
Palestine has no state, has no military, no AI Surveillance killing tech, no armored vehicles, tanks, artillery, missiles, planes, helicopters, and warships…
Hear me out, the Dresden bombing during WW2 was justified. /s
Educate yourself. The kids your united terrorist state of Israel is killing are becoming Hamas. Hamas didn’t fall from the sky to kill Jews. Palestinians are Muslim, Christians and Jews. But you don’t care about Palestinian Jews because they’re not white; they’re Arab.
Then Bibi shouldn’t funnel money to them.
While I agree on the statement of Hamas goals, we can’t deny a number of Israeli politicians have said comparable things.
