Is this anti-semitism?

I recognize that simply banning "the Z-word" doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It's a pretty complex issue.

mh was right. i meant using it as a pejorative. the word can mean different things in different contexts, it doesn't mean someone supports israeli policy

https://www.nydailynews.com/2023/10/18/woman-punched-in-unprovoked-antisemitic-attack-in-midtown-manhattan-subway-station/

gonna say this one is anti-semitism

https://ibb.co/kGMf9JK

https://ibb.co/kGMf9JK

broken links.

I'd say this is antisemitism: https://www.mediaite.com/online/uc-davis-professor-under-fire-over-posts-threatening-zionist-journalists-and-their-families/

This is the kind of shit that should get attention, vs this dumb UPenn blowup. A professor publicly stating that journalists and their kids should be killed because they are Zionist? what the fuck, lady.

Yeah. And a tenure track prof, not just some random instructor.

Also pertinent to antisemitic usage of “Zionist” discussion.

Absolutely psychotic.

It’s like a strawman came to life

That's just demented enough for me to think she's a project veritas plant

I have to admit when I clicked the link I was surprised it wasn’t about Joshua Clover

so far this story is mostly floating around right-wing circles which is disappointing, frankly, because this shit should be repudiated by everyone.

UC Davis has issued a statement which is probably as forthcoming as it can be, legally :

https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/statement-chancellor-may-comments-attributed-faculty-member

That’s good. It would be pretty insane if that wasn’t cause for immediate action. Legitimately psychotic behavior.

Q: is there a difference between what that prof said and just saying that the people killed in Israel weren’t civilians because they are “settlers”? I guess the difference is that it isn’t an open call for violence, but it seems pretty open ended in terms of who is a justified target of violence.

I don't like or agree with the view that no Israeli are truly civilians but it's a big leap to endorse publishing "Zionist journalists" home addresses

There's a big difference between callously dismissing the deaths of people who are already dead and outright advocating the murder of people who are still alive.

voting-age Israelis bear some measure of culpability for their democratically elected government's actions, which obv doesn't make them justified targets. but parties that are calling for an end to occupation get miniscule support from Jewish Israelis.

the word "settler" is also taking a beating these days, I get the sense many people ranting on social media don't understand its very specific meaning in the Israeli context.

what does that first sentence mean?

i understand all of the words in it but after that im utterly lost

the word "settler" is also taking a beating these days, I get the sense many people ranting on social media don't understand its very specific meaning in the Israeli context.
——

I don’t think the Yale prof I was thinking of didn’t understand the context. There is definitely a popular view that all Israelis are settlers. Some don’t understand the context but others do. And I think some deliberately blur it.

Sort of like “occupation”

Settler Colonialism is a hip term these days

This may be covered in the hidden bit above (not opening this gigantic thread to find out) but on that Know Your Enemy episode with the Jewish Currents crew they talked about how the ADL adopting its position that "anti-Zionism is antisemitism" was a significant change and departure from past decades.

Among other things, it seems to me (a goy) like a deliberate sidelining of secular Jews.

what does that first sentence mean?

just that Israelis have the power to end the occupation

This seems antisemitic, also a good example of "Zionist" used as a pejorative which I'd be inclined to classify as antisemitic rather than as an expression of a principled stance in favor of a secular democratic one-state solution

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/10/19/23924737/illinois-comptrollers-office-attorney-fired-over-anti-semitic-comments-on-instagram

yeesh

Definitely antisemitism. It's tricky because you can use it factually and nonprejudicially. But also can use it for racism.

Given 3-4 centuries of solid Protestant heritage (my grandparents were Mennonite, Anglican, Presbyterian and Southern Baptist, god knows when we even had a Catholic in the direct line), I feel like I don't get to say 'Zionist' unless I'm talking about Theodor Herzl specifically or something. It's hard to think of a scenario where I wouldn't be able to find less charged language no matter how critical of Israel I was aiming to be.

One person's scum is another person's cream I guess

I appreciate that..

just that Israelis have the power to end the occupation

― symsymsym, Friday, 20 October 2023 04:02 (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

ive been reading the conversations across both threads and appreciating most perspectives but i dont think the sentiment im picking up from the original post and the terse response (both of which are open somewhat to a lot of interpretation so possibly this is on me) are at all good ones.

do palestinians "have the power" to sway hamas? that's a line we're hearing to justify the ongoing collective punishment.

was every US citizen of voting age culpable in this way for the iraqi war and fallout? every uk citizen?

Plus I'm not sure any Israeli government in the last 30 years has ever had a majority, they all appear to be tortuous coalitions of sometimes very disparate parties.

I recognize that simply banning "the Z-word" doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It's a pretty complex issue.

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Thursday, 19 October 2023 bookmarkflaglink

Yes, it's absolutely useful and at the front and centre, but I recognise that enough has been said (by me for sure), for now.

XP it’s worth remembering that leading up to this, Israelis had been in the streets for almost a full year protesting the Netanyahu government, and while I think the disparate views among the protesters would not necessarily match those of the Free Palestine movement 1:1, many of them support an end to settlements in the West Bank, opposed curtailment of minority rights and free speech, opposed theocratic moves by the government, and were even refusing to do reserve duty over this. Very few of them would likely be in favor of an immediate move to a binational state but many would say Israel has gone too far in its treatment of Palestinians.

And ironically the communities where the October 7 massacre was carried out were much more likely to be Netanyahu opponents.

ive been reading the conversations across both threads and appreciating most perspectives but i dont think the sentiment im picking up from the original post and the terse response (both of which are open somewhat to a lot of interpretation so possibly this is on me) are at all good ones.

I think I see what you're getting at, and I don't think my original post was very clear at all. I certainly didn't mean that Israeli culpability for the occupation justifies violence against Israeli civilians. It was in the context of comparing two loathsome perspectives, which is a pointless exercise really.

do palestinians "have the power" to sway hamas? that's a line we're hearing to justify the ongoing collective punishment.

Palestinians haven't had an election in fifteen years, and they don't live in an independent state. President Herzog said Gazans should have done a coup on Hamas, which just seems unrealistic. otoh A majority of Israelis could vote tomorrow for someone whose top priority was ending the occupation, and it's the only non-violent way I can ever imagine this ending.

was every US citizen of voting age culpable in this way for the iraqi war and fallout? every uk citizen?

George Bush didn't even win the popular vote...Do Trump voters or Boris voters bear any culpability for the actions those leaders took? Their culpability doesn't justify collective punishment but it does make them fair targets for criticism.

Israel's been voting to maintain the occupation for at least 20-30 years. Americans voted en masse for politicians who promised to end the war on Iraq. There are a lot of reasons why Israelis vote the way they do, but the outcome of their collective decision making has been a disaster.

I grew up in Israel and I have close family there. I think I'm more comfortable critcizing Israelis directly than a lot of people on these threads. But trust me that I've been very upset over all these horrific events in the last two weeks.

xp that's a very fair description of the mass protests, and I was really encouraged to see that there was a point that the Israeli public would start rising against their extreme government. I just wish they hadn't voted for this govt in the first place - nothing in the Likud or Ben Gvir platform was a secret. And I did still feel they were missing the point - protests for democracy that weren't calling for Israel to become a full democracy.

In one of the Chotiner NYer interviews, this is what Nathan Thrall said about it:

I very much disagree with the entire premise of the protests over the judicial reform, which are based on the assumption by both sides that Israeli democracy is at stake. I do not see how any definition of democracy can include a situation in which one in ten Israeli Jews lives in the occupied territories and has full rights—voting rights, civil rights—and, when they go to and from their workplaces and their homes, they do not cross an international border. When the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics publishes the number of Jews and Arabs in the country, it lists the Jews living in the settlements. It doesn’t say that they’re living abroad. When the people vote in the settlements, they do not cast absentee ballots; in every sense, these people live inside the state of Israel alongside millions of people of a different ethnic group who are deprived of basic civil rights. That has existed for decades.

Appreciate your clarity and the context symsymsym

yes!

ironically the communities where the October 7 massacre was carried out were much more likely to be Netanyahu opponents

A lot of the people in those kibbutzes in the South were peace activists who devoted their life to helping people in Gaza, against all sorts of internal opposition from Israeli society. What happened to them is heartbreaking, and it's another reason why the idea that the death of Israeli civilians is something to celebrate is so infuriating - there just isn't much more any Israelis could be doing to end these injustices.

it's also a terrible irony that their deaths are being used to justify this invasion. Their relatives' pleas for peace have been very moving:

Noy Katsman knew the eulogy for their murdered brother would anger some who came to mourn, but did not want the violence of Hayim Katsman’s death to eclipse his life as a peace activist.

Grief and loss at Hayim’s slaughter was magnified by watching Israel launch a war in his name, said Noy, who is non-binary. So at the funeral, relying on a Jewish tradition of respect for the bereaved, Noy called for it to stop.

“Do not use our death and our pain to bring the death and pain of other people and other families,” Noy told the hundreds-strong crowd, as the government bombed Gaza and prepared for a massive ground invasion. “I have no doubt that even in the face of Hamas people that murdered him … he would still speak out against the killing and violence of innocent people.”

Arguing against retaliation in Gaza, as Israel reels from the scale and brutality of the massacres by Hamas on 7 October, is unpopular. At one point in the eulogy the mourners tutted in anger and disapproval.

But afterwards Hayim’s friends came to thank Noy. “One told me: ‘It’s exactly what your brother would have wanted you to say.’”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/19/do-not-use-our-death-to-bring-death-plea-to-israel-from-peace-activists-grieving-families

idk. thinking about it, i respect that a lot. the ones who speak when nobody's listening. i was in a bad headspace this morning, hell, am still in a bad headspace, but it's nice to be reminded that speaking up for what's right is worth doing, even if nobody really wants to hear it.

In one of the Chotiner NYer interviews, this is what Nathan Thrall said about it:

I very much disagree with the entire premise of the protests over the judicial reform, which are based on the assumption by both sides that Israeli democracy is at stake. I do not see how any definition of democracy can include a situation in which one in ten Israeli Jews lives in the occupied territories and has full rights—voting rights, civil rights—and, when they go to and from their workplaces and their homes, they do not cross an international border. When the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics publishes the number of Jews and Arabs in the country, it lists the Jews living in the settlements. It doesn’t say that they’re living abroad. When the people vote in the settlements, they do not cast absentee ballots; in every sense, these people live inside the state of Israel alongside millions of people of a different ethnic group who are deprived of basic civil rights. That has existed for decades.

― symsymsym, Friday, October 20, 2023 11:27 AM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

I think this is right in a certain analytical sense and yet I don't completely agree with it. Because democracy doesn't exist in any perfect state and is always in flux, and even where it has not been realized, having more freedom to push for it is better than having less freedom to do so. It's still better to live in a democracy that isn't a democracy for all but where it is still possible to push to make it a democracy for all, vs living in a totalitarian state where any dissent is quashed. The judicial reforms would have moved Israel significantly closer to the latter. I don't think that the protests "prove Israel is a true democracy" or "prove that Israel is good" but it proves that people are not ready to completely give up on the possibility that it can become more democratic for all.

I think this is right in a certain analytical sense and yet I don't completely agree with it. Because democracy doesn't exist in any perfect state and is always in flux, and even where it has not been realized, having more freedom to push for it is better than having less freedom to do so. It's still better to live in a democracy that isn't a democracy for all but where it is still possible to push to make it a democracy for all, vs living in a totalitarian state where any dissent is quashed. The judicial reforms would have moved Israel significantly closer to the latter. I don't think that the protests "prove Israel is a true democracy" or "prove that Israel is good" but it proves that people are not ready to completely give up on the possibility that it can become more democratic for all.

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive)

hell, maybe the protesters have different reasons or feelings about democracy! collectively they might form some of, i don't know. popular front, or something!

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/montypython/images/e/e6/JudeanPeoplesFront.png/revision/latest?cb=20210409144838

Goddamit

https://themoviescreenscene.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/aaaaaaaa-4.jpg?w=1024

fair point man alive

Appreciate both your comments.

From the article Tom D. posted in the Israel-Palestine thread:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/21/its-simply-a-call-for-freedom-marchers-defend-contentious-slogan-at-london-palestine-protest

Ruhal Tarafder had arrived with his family to register “disgust with the UK government and its complicity in war crimes”. The 49-year-old said he was happy not to sing “From the river to the sea” if it offended the Jewish community. “It’s not a problematic term for me, but if people have a problem with it, then there are millions of other things that could be sung.”

His two children were more preoccupied with stopping the killing. Five-year-old Ibrahim – barely audible over the roar of a police helicopter – pleaded: “Let Gaza live.”

His brother Salahadeen, seven, shared a similarly pithy message for global politicians: “I just wish they would debate more.”

Ibrahim and Salahadeen otm

fair point man alive

― symsymsym, Sunday, 22 October 2023 01:45 (thirty-one minutes ago) link

And yours are fair too -- I mean there are reasons my wife's family left Israel. And unfortunately there's a kind of vicious cycle that has occurred where people who are less ideologically driven and open to compromise are also less likely to stay there, whereas the ideologically driven are more likely to move there.