538
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
538 points (98.2% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3232 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It is truly insane to me that the one party in this country has moved into straight-up holocaust denial, but the only thing that will get you labeled an antisemite by either party is suggesting we politely ask Israel to do a little less genocide with the weapons we give them.
I also love the fact that saying we shouldn't allow one semitic group to eradicate another semitic group with our tax payer dollars, makes you antisemitic.
Careful buddy, if you keep talking like that, AIPAC is going to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Nazi-apologist to take your job.
To be fair both parties are currently engaged in genocide denial.
Well, you're not wrong.
You know it is possible that both you and they are antisemitic?
A made up political spectrum doesn't make it impossible for you to fall for the same politics of hate that they've fallen for.
Many in the pro-Palestinian movement have lost a sense of good judgment thinking their emotions justify anything they say or do. Others in the movement look the other way when this happens.
Take a good look at this Tucker Carlson drama unfolding. This is how most people see the pro-Palestinian movement right now. Rationalizing antisemitic shit. Does this help Palestinians? Nope. But that movement is going in a bad direction, and it's starting to be more focused on hating Israel (and Jews in general) than on actually helping Palestinians. A lot of similarities to the MAGA movement, which claims to be about helping the middle class, but in actual practice is more about hating people. Right now the MAGAs are hating on the same people that people in the pro-Palestinian movement hate.
Many in the pro-Palestinian movement today will become the MAGAs of the future. Antisemitism is a hard thing to shake and has a tendency to take over all other thoughts by people infected with it.
I'm curious to know what I've said that's antisemitic. From where I'm standing, there's only one comment here that's antisemitic. It's the one that's equating criticism of the nation of Israel for its ongoing slaughter of Palestinians with criticism of the Jewish people as a whole. All Jews are not Israeli's, and criticism of Israel is not criticism of the Jewish people. Implying otherwise is a bigoted and cowardly attempt to shield a nation from accountability.
Every nation can and should be held accountable when it commits atrocities. If I were to condemn the Taliban for their misogynistic, regressive theocracy, no one would assume that I was condemning Islam as a religion or Muslims as a people. So, how can I do the same for Israel? Tell me the right way I get to say, "Israel has killed at least 40,000 people (probably closer to 85,000 in reality), mostly civilians, and it is disgusting that both major parties support this slaughter." Let me know what way I can criticize Israel that doesn't offend your delicate sensibilities, so we can finally discuss the fact that our nation is funding a genocide.
I didn't say you were. Though promoting a false narrative about Israel committing a genocide (the casualty numbers are consistent with urban combat in other conflicts) is an indication that you aren't really questioning the narratives you're seeing on the internet.
Given that you're resistant to doing any kind of introspection on whether any of your views might be stemming from antisemitic biases you are more susceptible to antisemitic beliefs than those who are willing to stop and consider things carefully. I mean look at JD Vance making a joke about how him drinking Mountain Dew will probably be considered racist be Democrats. You're going down that line of thinking. It's not good to think like JD Vance thinks.
You can avoid these traps by actually considering the possibility that some of the things you see on the internet are racist in intent and designed to make you hate certain ethnicities. Not everything on the internet is that way of course, but there is a lot of content that is. Many times someone is unwittenly sharing something with racist dog whistles without know they're doing so.
The whole "they're probably going to say I'm racist for this..." mentality is preemptively dismissing any form of criticism of a position about it potentially being racist. You're creating a permission structure to be racist because anything that contradicts you is "just them making up lies about me being racist." Yeah it's the internet, people do falsely accuse others of being racist, just as people falsely accuse nations of genocide.
The right wing is constantly using rhetorical tactics involving getting the upper hand by making extreme claims. Preemptively declaring any opposition over potential racism in their narrative is automatically disingenuous. Constant appeals to emotion, selectively promoting facts that promote the narrative while ignoring facts that run counter to the narrative. These are the tactics of both the alt right and the pro-Palestinian movement. In fact it's becoming difficult to categorize the pro-Palestinian movement as anything other than an alt-right movement. Both are convinced that Jews are planning genocides, they just differ on who the Jews want to commit genocide on.
Oh, this is just a normal urban conflict? That's good. I thought that since a U.N. human rights expert said what was happening in Gaza was a genocide, the ICJ demanding Israel prevent Gaza from becoming a genocide, and that dozens of nations and NGOs recognize this as a genocide, this was probably a genocide. Luckily, you were here to tell me this was normal and that I shouldn't believe everything I see on the internet. Thanks, random account! Your empty words, backed by no evidence, have shown me the error of believing in the reporting I followed from actual journalists!
In all seriousness though, you disgust me. Attempting to convince me that facts I learned, from reading and listening to hours of reporting, is just an internet narrative would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous. Your attempts to make me believe my sympathy for the tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians that have been killed is actually rooted in antisemitism is cowardly and manipulative. And your false equivalence between calling for the end of a genocide and JD Vance's weird comments on Mountain Dew is just pathetic.
You've built in your head a narrative that criticism of Israel is antisemitic, and rather than consider the possibility that you may be incorrect, you've taken it upon yourself to chastise anyone who criticizes Israel. You demand that everyone else reevaluate their own beliefs so that you don't have to reexamine yours. And that's led you to genocide denial. Great job buddy, great fucking job.
Your links are from nearly 6 months ago. There were concerns from people that don't know what a war is. Yes, there were high casualty numbers when the IDF initially moved in, because there was a lot of combat happening between the IDF and Hamas. But after that the war became low intensity and the casualty numbers leveled off. If a country was committing genocide the civilian casualties would increase when there was no longer anyone there to defend them. We've seen the opposite trend in Gaza. High casualties in the initial stages when there was heavy fighting, casualties drop off when Hamas loses control of an area.
The UN expressed concerns about a potential genocide, but we haven't heard much in the last six months. It's because the genocide the UN had concerns about didn't happen. Check your wikipedia link again. They may soon change the page from "Gaza genocide" to "Accusations of Gazan genocide in the Israel–Hamas war" because.... well people are realizing the genocide narrative being heavily promoted didn't actually materialize.
What do you suppose it would be like to be on the wrong side of history? What will historians say about people that wanted a war to be called a genocide in an obvious effort to foment hatred against a country? Only time will tell I suppose.
But at any rate the pattern of behavior is undeniable. The pro-Palestinian movement have the exact same behavior as the alt right. There's a great many conspiracy theories shared between the pro-Palestinian movement and the alt-right, same distrust of media that doesn't conform to their biases, same misuse of terms like genocide to create a violent fervor. At this point the only thing the genocide narrative is accomplishing is helping Hamas and friends recruitment numbers which will result in more violence in the future. Is this what you want?
Well, maybe you haven't, but today I read in the AP that the the U.N. chief called the destruction in Gaza the worst he had ever seen. His exact words were:
He then went on to say that a two-state solution was the only path forward, and compared Israeli treatment of Palestinians to South African apartheid:
Anyway, I guess this must be one of those antisemitic dog whistles you're talking about. I must be a moron for believing every crazy thing being said by...[checks notes]...the Associated Press and the United Nations. I bet those are some of those racist conspiracy sources you're talking about. From now on I'll only trust reliable sources like yours, which is...[checks post]..."trust me bro!"
Also, speaking of sources, did you know that Wikipedia actually did the opposite of what you suggested? They voted to remove the words, "allegations of," from the article because they decided that there was enough evidence to call it a genocide. Thanks for bringing that up, I forgot about that!
What do you suppose it would be like to be on the wrong side of history? I'm guessing you're going to find out real soon, given that you're resistant to doing any kind of introspection on whether any of your views might be stemming from biases. It's a shame you lack the self-awareness to take your own advice and reevaluate your beliefs (beliefs which, again, include FUCKING GENOCIDE DENIAL). But maybe you'll feel a bit better if you keep calling everyone else antisemitic and comparing them to the alt-right. Then you won't have to think about the atrocities you're supporting.
There's nothing false about all the dead civilians.
Classic.
Just warning y'all about the dark path you may be heading down with all of this hatred. Pretending like a warning about where you're going is some kind of propaganda tactic is a sign you might be too far gone already. Not much anyone can do for you.
This is a horrible ad hominem attack and actively fuels racism.
Wanting Israel to stop its genocide is a good thing. Antisemitism is a bad thing.
If you insist on equating the two, antisemitism will stop being a bad thing. That would be bad.