Don’t misconstrue antizionism (and idk anti genocide?) as antisemitism. The two are different. There’s also lot of messy alt-left garbage on here that’s likely astroturfed/in bad faith, you have to ignore those as well.
Which isn’t to say there can’t be leftist antisemites. But it does seem like a lot of anti genocide people are unjustly treated as antisemitic.
Yeah, im sure they exist. But the “ree antisemitism!!1” thing has been the most common reflexive defense I’ve seen any time the topic comes up, where any valid criticism of “hey maybe Israel doesn’t need to be flattening the entirety of Gaza and starving an entire race to death” is dismissed as “Oh you hate jews”. The US government, colleges, and cities trying to shut down protests have also branded it as such, when it’s really not.
I think it’s more the shocking number of people comfortable protesting alongside Hamas flags and people chanting “globalize the intifada” that makes Jewish people a little uncomfortable.
Left wing politics has had a long history of antisemitism.
Anti zionism in 2024 is literally calling for the dismantlement of the Israeli state. I’m sorry, I’m not going to pretend like this a realistic solution to the current conflict, especially when there is an absolutely massive gap between that, and condemning Israeli treatment of Palestinians and condemning Israeli settlements. There is literally no reason to evoke this language if those things are your goals.
Jesse what are you talking about?
Hot take: being Jewish is bad just like being Muslim is bad just like being Christian is bad.
Religion is poison, Abrahamic faiths particularly so. Free yourself.
At least that’s consistent.
Hot take: every individual is in worship of something, whether that be a higher power, abstract moral ideals, money, vices, or even self. All worshipers have the capacity for extremism, even If you think you worship nothing. Take care of yourself and your fellow man.
Religion is different from the others you mentioned, because it has institutions of people telling their followers what to do
Jews are great. Zionists can have mutual annihilation with Hamas.
Are you a Jew or a Zionist?
And to add onto this, Hamas is like a few hundred or a few dozen people. The rest of Palestine seems cool, they can stay and chill with us.
Hamas is definitely quite a bit larger of an organization than that.
Maybe their funders like Iranian state officials or the Muslim Brotherhood splinter groups are larger than that, but the gaza strip is like 99.9% not Hamas is the point I’m making.
I don’t think you would be able to back that up if you tried, 100 guys wouldn’t have been able to pull off the attack Hamas performed on Israel.
Yeah obviously they had more people in the gaza strip before this war began. Tens of thousands of deaths later, how many are probably left? Nobody knows.
Worst case scenario is those tens of thousands were almost entirely civilians, like 99%, and there are still thousands of fighters, but if that were the case then I imagine Israeli Losses would be higher than 1,478 Israelis.
Thanks for letting us know you have absolutely no knowledge of the middle east.
What are you going to do about it? Disproportionately bomb me out of existence? Get fucked.
Cool, thanks for letting us know who the “good Jews” and “bad Jews” are. Without this helpful comment, we might have thought calling for the annihilation of 80-90% of an ethnic minority was problematic. /s
Anyone who thinks god gives them a right to kill is a bad person. Full stop.
Agreed. Good thing that Zionism doesn’t mean any of that.
Zionism doesn’t mean any of that.
Yeah except, that you are entire wrong because you just made that up. Zionism was absolutely founded on the idea of an inherent right to commit violence for the perception of something owed: specifically, Palestinian land.
https://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf
Read that essay, The Iron Wall, 1923, by Zionist author Ze’ev Jabotinsky, considered to be a foundational document of political Zionism, and then lie to me again telling me that Zionism isn’t founded on political violence.
If you’ve read Jabotinsky, I assume you’ve also read the far better known Theodor Herzl, whose Old New Land envisions a multicultural Zionist nation of peaceful coexistence between Jews, Arabs and other peoples.
Zionism does not require violence. That’s like saying that liberalism requires violence because of the writings of the French revolution.
Herzl himself certainly did. Zionism is Settler Colonialism, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough needs to be ‘Transferred’ so that the demographic majority is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.
Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of Euro pean imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for the newcomers. The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat. An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.
-
10 myths of Israel by Ilan Pappe, summerized and full book
Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.
liberalism requires violence
Liberalism required violence because its built on the principal of a class segmentation. So I’m not sure your point is the point you think you are making.
Jabotinsky and Herzl are different schools of thought in Zionism, but its absolute historical revisionism to suggest that the advocate of violence wasn’t foundational to the formation of Zionist philosophy.
liberalism requires violence
I’m sorry, but we are just not going to find common ground on that.
Alot of us Jews hated Zionism when it first came out and continue to do so.
Zionism isn’t Judaism.
Yes, 10-20% of 15 million people is still a lot of people.
Why did you write left on the right and right on the left?
Hebrew is right to left 🧌
The fact that you posted that incredibly disingenuous jpost piece from foxman yesterday makes me very skeptical of your ability to identify what is and is not antisemitism.
By “antisemitism from left wingers” do you mean criticism of Israel Nazi government?
Say what you will, at least when right wingers rant about Zionism they don’t pretend it’s anything other than calling for violence against Israel.
You spelled Jews, wrong. Twice.
