• empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    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.

    • davad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      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.

      • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        27 days ago

        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.

  • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    27 days ago

    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.

    • Anti-Antidote@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      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.

      • Zwiebel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        27 days ago

        Religion is different from the others you mentioned, because it has institutions of people telling their followers what to do

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    Jews are great. Zionists can have mutual annihilation with Hamas.

    Are you a Jew or a Zionist?

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      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.

    • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      27 days ago

      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

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            27 days ago

            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.

            • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              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.

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                27 days ago

                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.

                Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.