Is it real antisemitism or just not supporting Israel?
About when they start going on about “Zionists” Is where I draw the line and where it typically takes a turn.
As a Jewish person, I find it healthy to criticize the Israeli government. Most young Israelis do. Their government has been steamrolled by a wannabe dictator that is corrupt as hell and his team of racist, backwards conservative orthodox buddies.
They were just protesting in the streets weeks ago and now we’re expected to turn around and support the government? Nah. This doesn’t change anything.
I also disagree with many things the Israeli government does. But when people ignore the complete history of Israel and exclusively ventilate the pro-Palestinian propaganda, a red line is crossed for me.
The christian churches around the world would hate that. He'd hand their asses to them for being backwards bigots and overall betrayers of his message.
The complete history of Israel forcing Palestinians into ghettos and systematically slaughtering them? The fact that they told civilians to flee to the south and then bombed the very area they claimed would be safe? The fact that they claim the right to self determination but refuse to allow the Palestinians the same right? The fact that netanyahu funded Hamas to destabilize the region so that he’d have pretense to carry out his war crimes?
I don’t condone the attacks by Hamas, but to pretend that Israel isn’t trying to carry out a genocide is crossing a red line for me.
This whole conflict has just always felt like a massive grey area as an outsider. Both sides have done horrible things over the years, with the retaliation often being even worse. Most governments (including mine) are actually supporting both sides, for example through humanitarian aid. That’s just kind of weird when you think about it, in a way they’re enabling both sides to keep going. And I just don’t know if there’s any way out of this besides one side completely destroying the other. Peace talks have been had so many times and it just doesn’t lead anywhere. It just feels inevitable.
There is no argument for “both sides bad” when one side is currently right now this instant blowing up hospitals, schools, and children. One side is objectively worse and it’s the side hiding behind the skirts of “antisemitism” as they carry out an Arabic genocide
Both sides are bad, no matter who is currently the aggressor.
Now because there is aggression, the aggressor has an obligation to stop it, and we have an obligation to force a stop in the conflict as well. But that doesn’t make the other party less Bad in this. Both sides killed a lot of innocent people, both have inhumane ulterior motives and both are supporting further escalation. But ofc if there’s only one party doing the fighting, then that’s the party that acutely needs to be stopped.
This distinction is very important to me, because you are not suddenly the good guy because you stopped killing civilians. You are just not actively doing war crimes which means we don’t have to intervene because of you anymore, which is at least one less reason. But you are not holy because “this year it was only 300 war crimes”.
So forcing an entire people’s into ghettos and taking their land, while putting them under blockade and only reluctantly letting I’m small amounts of aid and food, all while bombing them weekly is actually good, because sometimes they fight back, making them the aggressor?
The post you replied to called no actor in this good. That's your own forced dichotomy. To condemn an act does not mean you condone every act taken in response.
Israel wants to genocide Palestine and live in their homes
Yes I can see how wanting liberty and self governance is exactly the same as wanting more land for your historically landless people regardless of how many natives you have to kill. Completely balanced
The attacks weren’t perpetrated by a free Palestinian people or some recognized advocacy group, but by an extremist wing of the Muslim Brotherhood that has been pushed by Israel for decades.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. Palestine doesn’t have a strong democratic tradition to begin with. Additionally, Hamas is only governing Gaza, not the West Banks. Hamas also suppresses secular Freedom organizations. And ~50% of the people in Gaza wouldnt even be able to vote out Hamas since they are under 18. Then we have the case of Hamas indoctrination, which finds fertile soil in the impoverished and destitute Gaza youth.
All of that isn’t to say I support Hamas. I am quite vocal in my disdain for them. But Israel plays a significant part in their success. So does Iran. And let’s not forget that the religious right has been torpedoing a resolution aswell, not just the Jihadist organization Hamas. Rabin wasn’t killed by a palestinian hardliner.
Being attacked by a terrorist isn’t an excuse to act like a terrorist. You don’t get to murder children because someone else did. And you don’t get to use war as an excuse.
When did the Palestinians vote last? What were the demographics of that vote? Are you completely confident it was a purely democratic vote or was it the kind of democracy Putin got voted by? Perhaps the kind kim was voted in by? Or do you think Palestinians have an electoral college like the US?
Lmfao that hasn’t been true since Athens invented democracy. Alcibiades was elected plenty and still turned traitor. The average Palestinian doesn’t support Hamas, but they’re not going to denounce one of the few factions actually fighting towards their goals. Get Israel out of Palestine and you’ll be amazed how few rockets will fly
As a native American in modern America, tell me more about how the terrorists won. Lmao my people also fought back, were labeled “terrorists” (read “savages” for old timey historically accurate racism flavor), and were damn near driven to extinction. There’s a reason I’m French Indian instead of just Indian.
I must admit, it’s quite refreshing to hear a critical take on the Israeli government from an actual Israeli. I don’t know if it’s due to the news sources and forums I typically frequent, but I feel like it’s quite rare to hear an opinion from someone who actually lives there.
who actually lives there or who practices the religion.
There are a lot of Jews that don’t fit into either of those categories. Ethnic and cultural Jewish people that don’t practice or believe in Judaism as a religion are very common. I call myself Jewish, because my mother and my grandmother are Jewish, but I don’t practice the religion. I’d recommend googling Jewish Atheism and Jewish Secularism for more info.
The problem is a lot of people don’t differentiate between the israeli government and the israeli people as a whole - i’ve seen some straight up ‘they had it coming’ style bullshit that is verrry careful to place Good Jews and Bad Jews (the festival goers) to try and get a pass on antisemitsm and maaaan it is transparent as fuck.
But that’s how politics work nowadays. You need to assume that every group is homogenous and when someone from that group points out that it isn’t, you call them a hypocrite.
No child is to blame about any of this. And when I think about this (i’m sorry) very stupid conflict, all I can think is people killing children because of land. FUCKING DIRT. Not a specific people, just people, humans, killing children becuase a piece o land, that to be fair it fits everyone! That is of a stupidity that I can not fathom
Yes, it’s really just about how the land is called and who makes the rules. There are Israelis living in Palestine and Palestinians are citizens of Israel already.
What are you talking about? I know Jewish people that openly condemn the behavior of their gov. A person is good or bad depending on their actions - you cannot lump everyone together based on whatever characteristics you want and after that starting a genocide campaign.
The festival goes were just normal people like you and me that were trying to live and enjoy life. Same with the innocent people that are dying in Gaza.
and I was pointing out that some people are using this as an opportunity to be antisemitic. Calling israel out on its bullshit is one thing, but we’re legit seeing people saying the victims of the attack had it coming for being israelis having a festival relatively near gaza.
Then how about your government stop killing and abusing Palestinians. It’s almost as if decades of apartheid oppression, murder, and human rights abuses have consequences
Do you think it’s a normal request to ask 1 million people to evacuate in 24 hours? Do you think shutting off water and electricity to Gaza is justified? Should hospitals continue to get bombed?
Well now we’re talking. That would result in the apartheid ending, which is a good thing. It weird that you’re framing the end of the apartheid as a bad thing.
Awh that’s great! They’ve attended anti government protests. I guess we can ignore the call for a heavy handed ruthless response in retaliation in that same comment or the implicit support of their government’s ongoing role in the bombing and murder of civilians. Also, nowhere did I see them specifically decrying their government over the Gaza response, only in response to “corruption”
You cannot separate Zionism from the formation of the state of Israel and how the history of the conflict has been shaped since.
In order to obtain a more holistic perspective of the conflict people need to know about Zionism, it’s history, and how it currently affects Israeli leadership.
There are still people alive on both sides that lived through Zionist conflicts with the British Mandate and the Nakba.
Could you elaborate on the “zionist” thing? I haven’t really followed the Israel situation (I tried, but it’s just so complicated). What I heard, is that “zionist” is used when talking about the Israel activity in “taking” territory from the surrounding area, is that correct or did I just misunderstand? If I’m not wrong, then what happens when people start going on about it?
The idea that discussing Zionism is a sign of an anti-semite is a shit take. The Zionist movement worked very hard to establish a colony in the middle east, in an area where they knew there were already natives and those natives were hostile to being colonized. It’s impossible to truly study the founding of Israel without learning about the Zionist movement.
This isn’t about religion, or even very much about race. It’s about the powerful asserting their will over the powerless. To some extent you could argue that the Zionists were used by the British to screw over the Arabs, but that doesn’t make the Zionists innocent.
Equating discussions of Zionism with anti-Semitism is part of the Israeli propaganda playbook for dismissing all criticism of Israel’s founding.
The idea that discussing Zionism is a sign of an anti-semite is a shit take.
There is some history to back this up, especially among older folks. I know I’ve heard a few irl antisemitic tirades start off with a testing of the waters by complaining about Zionists
Although for real, Jewish people are cool and great, but fuck Zionists.
I’m a big proponent of understanding folk better. Zionism is one of those terms with subtext. Acquaintances I know who use it (some of whom I can believe not understanding the subtext) do a better job explaining that they don’t support ethnostates rather than they don’t support zionism.
But to be fair my experience is mostly people half a globe away trying to look like they’re staying current and relevant in the news and trying to show sympathy with people they view as oppressed and hurt, without taking the time to truly dig into the history of the conflict and having never even heard the word intifada. I try to give them the benefit of the doubt while sharing with them the tiny bit I’ve learned. They do the same for me. We’ve got a wide variety of views at one of my lunch groups and it’s phenomenal.
People should really stop conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Unfortunately it’s very common and even part of the official classifications used by some countries. To me it seems obvious that this is another attempt to cut off any criticism of the state of Israel by labeling critics as anti-Semitic. Here’s an interesting read about how flawed that logic is:
Is it real antisemitism or just not supporting Israel?
Nothing lemmy.world loves more than bagging on the *.ml instance, so I’m going to take a wild guess at the latter. If it was self-referential “Me looking at all the antisemitism on lemmy.world” it never would have received this much positive attention.
I stick to this instance, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this is another person calling anyone who doesn’t blindly support Israeli genocide efforts antisemitic.
It is, but then Hamas actually launched an operation whose entire goal was to slaughter civilians. Kinda hard to feel any sympathy for them after that.
Not my experience. If you’re talking about Israel a lot of people are getting really fast really mad. If you try to talk rational about other states people stay mostly calm. I would call this behaviour a double-standard because of antisemitism. There’s no rational reason why people focus so much about this little state.
Sorry I’m having a moment. In your experience Lemmy.ml does not crack down on racists in a hard manner? Because a lot of the anger towards Israel comes from an antisemitic place since other states don’t get criticized so harshly?
It sounds believable since it would be pretty hard to differentiate why exactly someone is reacting in a harsh manner and ban them accordingly. Just my brain is refusing to parse words atm
I disagree with authoritarians and leninists vehemently. However. It’s the way many of them are speaking about Israel right now is not at all that different from how they speak about the United States in general. The major differentiating factor is that Israel is performing a new fuck up on the world stage live for all to view. Very much current events and on everyone’s lips right now. America has a huge back catalog of it. But Israel is not getting treated anymore harsher or hypocritically by them than places like the United States Etc.
Phone calls are rude. They demand your immediate attention with a loud alarm and no regard for where you might be or what you are doing. Texts/email are respectful. They make a small chime just to let you know they are around, then wait patiently for you to read and respond.
In my experience, the younger you are, the more likely you are to find phone calls to be irritating at best. People in their 20s and under almost always would prefer you to text them than call them. And I’m in my 40s and I agree. I’ve never liked the phone. I didn’t like it when it was all landlines and I don’t like it now. Texting was a godsend.
Yeah and there are also times when texting makes the situation a lot more annoying but a 2 minute phone call does the opposite. People sometimes text about things that should be a phone call and it’s just silly. As someone who has always had social anxiety especially around phone calls, I’ve learned we often ought to prioritize context over one minute of feeling anxious
I always find it weird that this issue comes up online over and over and everyone is tripping over each other to damn phone calls. Seems childish to me
Yeah and there are also times when texting makes the situation a lot more annoying but a 2 minute phone call does the opposite.
I honestly can’t think of one. I’d rather spend five minutes writing a text than two minutes on the phone. That’s two minutes I have to talk to someone without looking at them.
You live a very limited life if you can’t think of a way that writing a text message could be more difficult than speaking for a minute or two. In fact, are you a robot?
Occasionally we have to set up events and doing a conference call is a hell of a lot less annoying than doing a group chat. Anyone who doesn’t want to be part of the planning can just opt out of the call rather than have their phone bing a million times in five minutes.
Also no of course it’s not rude for you to need to adjust to other people. That’s just called society and it’s kind of weird you could be old enough to write these comments but not get that
The onus is not on me to have to debunk a position that’s only popular in certain circles. This opinion runs counter to the last 100 years of common sense.
if you find a comment on an anonymous message board saying “maybe explain” personally demanding and rude you may want to seek therapy. And no that’s not an insult, most people probably should be in therapy but if something so benign is upsetting, you might wanna prioritize it.
Because there is no reason for a company to call me unless it’s urgent, at that point it is perfectly fine to call.
Some companies call regardless of the reasons with no care at all about the customer, all just to make sure to force a response. Just send the damn message instead and If I have any sort interest, opionion, or care what so ever, then I’ll get in touch at my own discretion.
Having customers isn’t a “right” for companies, but they do seem to believe so.
Yeah I get not wanting companies to call. I just don’t really find it a huge deal. Unfortunately we get asked for our number all the time and it’s usually not needed. But in my experience they rarely ever use it at least. there are definitely times I wish they would. For example, FedEx thinks I’m not home two days in a row with a huge box of wine. If they just called I’d come out and get it and save everyone trouble. They have my number, but instead they choose to lug around a very heavy package a second day then I end up having to drive somewhere and get it later.
Which is great when people use a phone call in situations where an immediate response is warranted – not so great when I realize I’ve had the device occupying one of my hands and my attention for 10 minutes, and the speaker has yet to make a point
There are certain people who when I see calling, I just won’t pick up. On the other hand, when the phone rang at 4am and it was my brother, I knew something terrible had happened. If he had been a frequent caller/offender, I’d have silenced and ignored the call, but I’m really thankful that I picked up. It’s like a “boy who cried wolf” situation.
Why not just mute the phone while you’re not interested in being contacted synchronously, and rejecting calls when you don’t have the ability to talk synchronously?
Wild take to be honest, it’s essentially the equivalent of saying that in-person conversations are rude and that people should send you a physical letter instead.
Yeah, it’s not like we have complex social rituals, informal rules and elaborate signs and calls designed to establish the appropriateness of in-person interactions. I just punch anyone in the face that I don’t want to talk to me, that usually gets the message across. And if I want someone attention I just scream my demands at the top of my lungs an inch away from their face. If they don’t punch my face I assume they are fine with the conversation.
Because some things warrant my immediate attention, and most don’t. I am never interested in being contacted synchronously unless it’s something actually urgent. And because of that I can tell people that if they need me, they can call me and if I’m at all able I will answer immediately, otherwise I will probably answer later, aka whenever I happen to see it.
Personally, this kind of thing is part of how I control the phone rather than have the phone control me, all of which reduces stress and even increases productivity at a professional level.
An SMS or similar kind of message always gets stored, and I can check it when its convenient for me.
Phone calls only get stored if the other side actually records a voice mail, so there is pressure to pick up a phone call immediatelly, “just in case they don’t leave a voicemail” which might very well be interrupting work on a complex task that shouldn’t be interrupted.
Yeah, I’ve also use that to further segregate things by level of importance: if a person on the other side can’t be arsed to leave a voicemail, it’s not important enough.
The SMS option just allows further segregation of important-non-urgent from important-urgent: for me an SMS might have something I should know (say, confirmation of a doctor’s appointment) but have plenty of time to deal with (say, it’s in 2 weeks) so it works well for automated messages.
In the old days of WFH I would further segregate it by “if it’s really really urgent come to my desk” which further filters for importance based on the effort others are willing to put on coming to me with it…
In my professionally life I’ve concluded a lot of unecessary stress comes from unimportant, important and urgent and important but not urgent coming in via the same channels and me having to treat everything as “possibly important and urgent” when most of it is no such thing, hence my filtering by-effort-required, which is not perfect but works way better than most people’s approach to it.
I’m using the most trimmed Windows installs I can find (and manually trimming bits myself) to try and keep overhead as low as possible, but it’s still… rough. Don’t know how far I’ll actually be able to get. Once I get to XP I may just skip to 95, but we’ll see.
I got sidetracked trimming Windows services on my primary install, lol.
One or none. Electricity is hard to predict though. It tries to find the easiest way to complete a circuit, but the easiest way isn’t always easy to predict.
lemmyshitpost
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.