Right now, Palestinians, Israelis and all of us with family on the ground are terrified for loved ones. We grieve the lives of those already lost and remain committed to a future where every life is precious, and all people live in freedom and safety. Following 16 years of Israeli military blockade, Palestinian fighters from…
I did, they are opposed to zionism, which the ADL says could spread to antisemitism. I don’t see any point where they make an antisemitic argument directly, that comes from people who intrinsically link zionism and Isreal to being Jewish.
In addition to JVP’s promotion of messaging that descends into the antisemitic vilification of “Zionists,” the group has expressed support for violence and, occasionally, classic antisemitic tropes. Some JVP members, leaders and chapters propagate rhetoric or sponsor events where participants express support for violence or terror against Israelis and vilify Zionist Jews. In a few instances, they have espoused blatant antisemitic tropes, including modern manifestations of the blood libel and allegations of Jewish dual loyalty to the countries in which they live
It then lists three examples. One of Israeli soldiers drinking the blood of the dead, one of Netanyahu eating children, and someone saying that a quote is built on the pretense of ethnic cleansing. The first two don’t specifically say anything about the blood libel, and are more provocative imagery that isn’t unusal for representation of oppression. Especially when you’re talking about oppression from a group that routinely kills children. The dual loyalty claim is also spurious. You could say something similar about manifest destiny and American exceptionalism as a criticism to the people who espouse those beliefs without saying those things about Americans broadly.
Those are clearly examples of blood libel — in what sense are they not? Like how much of that is okay before it’s antisemitic hate speech? (answer: zero.)
You could but Americans aren’t Jewish so it isn’t antisemitism. When the context is different the meaning is different. That’s how words work.
But you are also saying here Israelis routinely kills children so I guess you basically just agree with the source. Good to know where you stand I guess.
Okay, this debate is falling apart. You’re not looking past your idea that Isreal=Jewish, nor are you interpreting my arguments correctly.
There’s propaganda from World War 2 of Hitler eating people, but I guess in your interpretation, you’d say it doesn’t matter because he’s not Jewish, when the symbolism is the callous disregard for people in treating them like cattle through oppression. Blood libel doesn’t need to factor into anything here when you say that Isreal is enacting violence against a group of people.
Here is where you misinterpret my argument. I’m not saying criticism of Americans is antisemitism? I’m saying that a group of Jewish people who hold a belief isn’t representative of the whole, and criticism of that group isn’t criticism of Jews. So anyone (or any government) that’s using an argument of being a “light to the world” to spread belief, or “manifest destiny” to take over land, is worth criticizing. It doesn’t matter the race of an authoritarian, authoritarianism is the problem here.
According to B’Tselem, by 2021, 2,171 Palestinian children had been killed by Israeli military action. I’m not sure how you can deny that’s happening. But it’s clear by your response that you’re not interested in actually talking about this, and want to make assertions.
I did, they are opposed to zionism, which the ADL says could spread to antisemitism. I don’t see any point where they make an antisemitic argument directly, that comes from people who intrinsically link zionism and Isreal to being Jewish.
From the same page:
I guess you didn’t read it very closely?
It then lists three examples. One of Israeli soldiers drinking the blood of the dead, one of Netanyahu eating children, and someone saying that a quote is built on the pretense of ethnic cleansing. The first two don’t specifically say anything about the blood libel, and are more provocative imagery that isn’t unusal for representation of oppression. Especially when you’re talking about oppression from a group that routinely kills children. The dual loyalty claim is also spurious. You could say something similar about manifest destiny and American exceptionalism as a criticism to the people who espouse those beliefs without saying those things about Americans broadly.
Those are clearly examples of blood libel — in what sense are they not? Like how much of that is okay before it’s antisemitic hate speech? (answer: zero.)
You could but Americans aren’t Jewish so it isn’t antisemitism. When the context is different the meaning is different. That’s how words work.
But you are also saying here Israelis routinely kills children so I guess you basically just agree with the source. Good to know where you stand I guess.
Okay, this debate is falling apart. You’re not looking past your idea that Isreal=Jewish, nor are you interpreting my arguments correctly.
There’s propaganda from World War 2 of Hitler eating people, but I guess in your interpretation, you’d say it doesn’t matter because he’s not Jewish, when the symbolism is the callous disregard for people in treating them like cattle through oppression. Blood libel doesn’t need to factor into anything here when you say that Isreal is enacting violence against a group of people.
Here is where you misinterpret my argument. I’m not saying criticism of Americans is antisemitism? I’m saying that a group of Jewish people who hold a belief isn’t representative of the whole, and criticism of that group isn’t criticism of Jews. So anyone (or any government) that’s using an argument of being a “light to the world” to spread belief, or “manifest destiny” to take over land, is worth criticizing. It doesn’t matter the race of an authoritarian, authoritarianism is the problem here.
According to B’Tselem, by 2021, 2,171 Palestinian children had been killed by Israeli military action. I’m not sure how you can deny that’s happening. But it’s clear by your response that you’re not interested in actually talking about this, and want to make assertions.
This was way too measured a response, and too eloquently put together. You’re going to break their brain, and short circuit their programming.
You know Mr. Suave, I’m really really trying.