First of all, I’d say we’re on the same side. Israel is acting like a disgusting piece of shit. Also, many Israelis are abusing the term “antisemitic” to discredit people that they dont like. But I think we still need to differentiate. Therefore let me answer your question:

If the vanalism is against Israeli officials/buildings/state institutions, thats fine! Like ambassies, consulates, (international) representatives, politicians, economic figures, IDF members, etc… They are waging war and genocide, they deserve our anger + protest.

But If it hits religious institutions, private folks, jewish communities, holocaust memorials, etc. with no Israeli state background or links to the IDF, then maybe dont attack them, because otherwise it really is nothing but antisemitism. And that’s the point. If it was really only about the state of Israel, then why do so many “protests” explicitly target Jewish religious institutions (like synagogues, cemeteries, schools) rather than Israeli ones? It is not even rare thing to happen, thats why I wonder why you are asking. Examples:

Moldova, Kasauti. A Holocaust memorial was vandalized with ‘free Palestine’ graffiti.

Ukraine, Uman. A swastika was painted on a Jewish café.

UK, Glasgow. “Free Palestine” and “Fuck the no really Jews” were painted on a wall.

Italy, Milan. A man shouted “murderers” in front of a Jewish nursing home.

Italy, Milan. An elderly Jewish man, wearing a hat with a Star of David, was walking his dog, when a man tore off his hat, trampled it, and called the elderly man “dirty Jew.”

Italy, Milan. An Orthodox Jewish man was insulted on his way to a synagogue by an Italian couple who said to him, “F—king Zionist! You kill children!” On his way home he was shoved by a young man who shouted antisemitic epithets at him.

Germany, Oldenburg. An incendiary device was thrown at the door of the Oldenburg synagogue.

Belgium, Fleron. The home of Belgian Holocaust survivors was vandalized with “Gaza Free” and a swastika.

Munich, Germany. A man stood in front of the main synagogue, shouted antisemitic insults and give Hitler salutes.

Montevideo, Uruguay. A doll depicting a Jewish women with a Star of David and a spear piercing her forehead was displayed during a march for International Women’s Day.

Paris, France. A man wearing a kippah was attacked as he left a synagogue.

Babenhausen, Germany. A Jewish memorial column was smeared with paint.

Geneva, Switzerland. “Exterminate the Jews” and “Death to Zionists” graffiti were found in Geneva after a pro-Palestinian rally.

https://newengland.adl.org/resources/article/global-antisemitic-incidents-wake-hamas-war-israel

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2026/02/13/maryland-synagogue-antisemitism-vandalism/

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/san-leandro-high-school-lawsuit-22220489.php

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/my-synagogue-is-seen-as-too-dangerous-for-kids-72ndg5cdb

Countdown-Timer on e.g. Amazon that try to FOMO-pressure me into buying the item. Edit: typo

Additional note: Your framing is somewhat binary, relying on a “if you’re not with me, you’re against me” logic. I understand the emotions that come with this topic, but your logic reduces complex positions to two options despite the existence of intermediate views. Nuanced actors might then be pushed into opposing camps, therefore intensifying conflict.

Edit, for context: Damned be Israel for everything they are doing right now. I am just trying to maintain some discourse quality.

Restricting certain forms of speech can be interpreted in two ways: As suppression of legitimate political critique. Or as boundary-setting to prevent generalizations or escalation.

Whether specific political positions are restricted depends not on how you see them, but on how moderators classify them. “Anti-Zionism” is not a single, defined category. It ranges from policy criticism against Israel, to positions that some moderators may interpret as targeting jews.

Your ID identifies you as Australian, mate. Afaik public hospitals are free / publicly funded in Australia, just as it should be. But that’s unfortunately not true for everyone.

Came here for that answer. Large concentrations of wealth generate structural power that can distort political decisions and markets in a way that serves to perpetuate itself. This creates a virtuous circle in which capital shapes return conditions / regulation / access advantages in such a way as to systematically favour further capital growth.

“Rubber” - It’s a (french?) movie about a car wheel that suddenly becomes aware of its own existence. It then starts rolling around, and somehow it has the ability to KILL telepathically. It starts small with squirrles or rats exploding, but at some point even the military needs to intervene.

I like trash :)

Same with Cuba right now. The US claims to be concerned about Cuba’s democratic deficits and human rights violations. All while ignoring their own democratic backsliding and ICE’s gestapo-like racial cleansing of the population.

I’m convinced that MAGA is attracting many people who live a rough life. Poorly educated, resentful, low income people whose attention is fixed on the next paycheck and the cost of groceries. Again and again, I see that many of them seem to view society as a zero sum game. Meaning “if those foreign looking people get punished now, I will surely be better off next month, right???”

The problem is systemic. I blame the chronic failure of political education across the country. Because of that, I do not expect meaningful political change unless it is triggered by some kind of major rupture, crash, or shock.

Of course, and occasionally I also poop in the shower. It’s always funny to stomp it down the drain.