8 ms·

People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. Theoretically, I guess, but it's really strange how the one tiny country in

People can be critical of the state of Israel, but they should not be antisemitic. Theoretically, I guess, but it's really strange how the one tiny country in the whole world that has a Jewish-dominated society is so often a target for complete destruction. Many of the same countries that have all but eliminated their own Jewish populations somehow find Israel's very existence to be unpalatable, going after them in the UN, in their state-sponsored media, and through military/terroristic acts. So, sure. You could be critical of Israel but not be antisemitic. But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic.

kmonsen 5y ago
That’s a huge straw man. I am critical of some of Israel’s behavior, but by no means calling for its complete destruction.
- bern4444 5y ago
  I believe you, but too many people use the line, I'm not antisemitic, I'm just criticizing the government as a scapegoat to excuse obvious antisemitic behavior.
  - Retric 5y ago
    ‘too many’ is rather shifting the goalposts here. The vast majority of people are criticizing the government not the population. It’s unusual for people to consider a nation’s population rather than their government because a nation’s population is largely irrelevant. It’s not random Americans that have a history of overthrowing democratically elected governments, it’s the US government that does so etc. Israel’s government, like all governments, does plenty of things people disagree with and as such often gets legitimate criticism on it’s own merits.
    - bern4444 5y ago
      Sure, but Americans aren't randomly attacked when abroad or out doing normal things, like getting food out or drinks. And yet, Jews are today. It wasn't too long ago that people marched in Charlottesville chanting jews will not replace us. Now there's a massive rise in violence
      - kmonsen 5y ago
        Jews and Israel should have no connection. Attacking Jews for what Israel does is just incredibly wrong. Let’s be very clear, any criticisms of Israels actions should not apply to Jews as a race, people or religion and even more so not be used as an excuse to harm or treat any single Jewish person negatively.
      - Retric 5y ago
        > Sure, but Americans aren't randomly attacked when abroad or out doing normal things, like getting food out or drinks. Yes, they are. The US State Department issues travel advisories over such issues. It’s safer to travel in many places as a Canadian rather than American.
        kmonsen 5y ago
        That’s true but severely understates antisemitism both historically and currently. Americans does not and have not faced the kind of discrimination that Jews have.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - plutonorm 5y ago
    I've not met many. But I have met plenty of people who deliberately conflate criticism of Israel with criticism of Jews in order to easily dismiss criticism of the former. I'm part Jewish.
- Ozzie_osman 5y ago
  This. You can be critical of Israel's actions. You can also be critical of Israel's existence specifically as a nation that discriminates against non-Jewish citizens. None of this means you are an anti-semite who wants the destruction of Israel, let alone Jews. By and large, for example, the UN security council resolutions that the US keeps single-handedly vetoing are not calling for any destruction. They simply condemn Israel's violent behavior.
  - bern4444 5y ago
    Of course one can. Except for the fact that often people scapegoat their criticisms with a line like I'm not antisemtic, I'm just criticizing the government. Which typically comes just before an anti semetic comment is made. It's also an entirely an uneven playing field. No other country is condemned and attacked by the international community as often, and as widely despite other countries' far worse offense. Criticisms of Israel is unique and direct and no other country is held to the same standard. How much of a joke is it that Saudi Arabia was on the human rights commission at the UN for so long. Or the lack of similar statements against China for their decimation of Uighurs. This isn't a finger blaming game, its recognizing that the UN demonstrates a massive bias against a single country with standards that no other nation has to face
  - vasilipupkin 5y ago
    This is technically true but ignores the complexity of the situation, which is that Israel is essentially at war with groups such as Hamas, which call for Israel's destruction and deny its right to exist. When Hamas starts firing rockets at Israeli civilians, it just isn't clear what response critics prefer Israel show. Israel has little choice but try to destroy and degrade the infrastructure used to fire those rockets. Israeli violent behavior is in response to attack on its civilian population. Ignoring this while criticizing Israel seems strange to me
    - kmonsen 5y ago
      We will never know but I believe this current conflict was provoked by Israel with heavy police presence outside the mosque in Jerusalem. For what it is worth I have visited Israel and the West Bank, and my sympathies are with Israel as the only democracy in the region. That does not mean I cannot criticize when it acts wrongly. Sure the whole conflict is incredibly difficult with no easy solutions, but some people want to use it to stay in power. Of course Hamas is not better, but that is not the expectation for Israel.
- myfavoritedog 5y ago
  Your comment is a straw man because I never claimed that you couldn't be critical of Israel but not be antisemitic. In fact, I said it's theoretically possible. I just find that in practice, people who show their hand at being antisemitic seem to try to hide behind the whole anti-zionist/antisemitic distinction. Based solely on the merits, you'd think that Israel's ethno-state bona fides wouldn't be any worse than dozens of other countries'. In fact, they're far less problematic. You can be Arabic/Muslim in Israel and rise to the highest levels of government with full rights of citizenship. I can point to many other countries where that wouldn't be the case for ethnically/religiously mal-aligned individuals. But somehow those other countries aren't constantly in the news cycle for defending their ongoing right to exist.
Redoubts 5y ago
it’s really strange… You don’t think there’s anything about it’s recent creation that makes this a special case?
- varjag 5y ago
  I don't think so. There's plenty of states with ongoing ethnic strife, and they do face a lot of deserved criticism. However I can't really recall popular, internationally supported calls for their abolition altogether. The age of state again has not much to with it: for example Lebanon is younger than Israel and has a rich history of ethnic/sectarian conflict. Now there must be people who want to abolish Lebanon, but somehow you never hear them.
  - treeman79 5y ago
    Seems like a lot of people forget there was a goal in a big portion of Europe to exterminate all Jews. So when some are shouting to end Israel, it’s not unreasonable to think the next step is finish the genocide.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    > for example Lebanon is younger than Israel What people usually find particularly offensive is the de-facto annexation and settlement of territories that exceed the UN resolution that created the State of Israel, along with the complete imbalance in both military power and casualties of both sides. It's not just ethnic/sectarian conflict. In many aspects, it would qualify as genocide.
    - varjag 5y ago
      Well, Syria is just across the border with genocide (not just as rhetorical device) very much ongoing. Military imbalance a plenty. Anyone up for dissolving it yet? Hell, even outright Nazism wasn't deemed a reason enough to dissolve Germany (although at some point it was seriously considered).
      - 5y ago
door101 5y ago
> Theoretically, I guess, but it's really strange how the one tiny country in the whole world that has a Jewish-dominated society is so often a target for complete destruction. Because it’s a colonial ethnostate, with massive support from the United States. Israel (the colonial ethnostate) should not exist. Palestine is not an ethnostate, it is the name for the multicultural, multi-ethnic state who rightfully controls the area occupied by Israel, before British colonialism and subsequent invasion and occupation of the territory.
- lawnchair_larry 5y ago
  This is incredibly ignorant of the history of the region. It’s also patently untrue. The amount of misinformation that westerners propagate about Israel and “Palestine”, which has never been a country, constantly amazes me.
  - junon 5y ago
    Yes, except for the "westerners" bit. People from everywhere conflate this issue - even people living in the region. Check out The Ask Project on youtube, tons of people on all sides of the issue are misguided or simply wrong - and they live there.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    "never been a country" -> except for the 138 countries that do recognize it as a country. Moreover, why is this a strong rejoinder? Black South Africa was never recognized as a country either, does that mean there was no moral concern?
- bushbaba 5y ago
  This is off topic. And getting away from root article. However Before Israel there was the British mandate. Before that Ottoman Empire. The Palestinians in Gaza never controlled the land.
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    > The Palestinians in Gaza never controlled the land. Doesn't that just mean “they were never powerful”? If they were living there, does it matter who was in power? English rule never stopped the Welsh being Welsh, or Wales from “belonging to” them. (I don't know how applicable this analogy is to this situation – probably not very, given there isn't a territorial dispute over who should have Wales.)
austincheney 5y ago
I have known devote Jewish Americans who are extremely critical of Israeli politics. I would be hard pressed to call them antisemitic.
asidiali 5y ago
Such strong arguments, such as “I guess,” and my personal favorite, “as a matter of probability.” Just fanning the flames, let’s work together to find a solution instead of gaslighting.
chevill 5y ago
>But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic. This is a meaningless statement though. We can expect that nearly anyone that's antisemitic would be critical of a country run and mostly inhabited by Jewish people. It becomes a problem when people try to extrapolate that fact to dismiss every criticism of Israel as "this guy's probably just antisemitic." Its only true as a matter of probability throughout the entire world because its true in a particular region that has an enormous population padding those statistics. There is antisemitism everywhere in some amounts and it is wrong like all forms of bigotry. However, in many countries, such as the US, you are just as likely to run into a person that criticizes Israel for reasons that have nothing to do with the religion of its inhabitants. You are still free to think that they are wrong, but people should stop using accusations of bigotry as a weapon to silence people simply for disagreeing with them. If you want to call someone a bigot, its pretty important to make sure you are right about it. And for the record when it comes to that Israel/Palestine conflict I think neither side is even close to being innocent. I don't give a shit about their religions I just want families to stop being murdered by the actions of two shitty governments.
- davemel37 5y ago
  "people should stop using accusations of bigotry as a weapon to silence people" Huh? Are you seriously calling someones words who feels victimized, a weapon? Are you seriously holding fear of actual violence to an unsubstantiated standard? "If you want to call someone a bigot, its pretty important to make sure you are right about it." Please show me one other form of bigotry accusation you hold to the same standard. This perspective is almost certainly a blindspot. Im not certain - but I definitely would not rely on you to stand up or defend folks from actual antisemitism. How do people even think, let alone say these things and not get called out by everyone immediately? Do you actually and critically think this is true or even appropriate to say?
  - chevill 5y ago
    >Huh? Are you seriously calling someones words who feels victimized, a weapon? Are you seriously holding fear of actual violence to an unsubstantiated standard? The idea of figuratively describing something as a weapon isn't new or unusual. I'm not even sure what you mean by the second sentence. I was talking about people defaulting to claims of bigotry at any sign of criticism. If every criticism of Israel, even legitimate criticisms not coming from a sense of bigotry, makes a person feel victimized then there is something wrong with that person. If words cannot be used as a weapon exactly how do criticisms of Israel make a person feel victimized? >Please show me one other form of bigotry accusation you hold to the same standard. I hold all forms of bigotry accusations to the same standard. The example given was basically "a lot of people exist that are antisemitic so we can assume that criticism of Israel is probably antisemitic." Which is an argument that's basically uses the same sloppy logic that actual bigots use to justify their beliefs. Calling someone a bigot can have severe consequences for that person whether they are actually bigots or not. The key part of that sentence is that it can have consequences when they are not guilty. Yet people throw accusations around assuming someone's intentions simply because they said something they don't like. That's wrong so its important to try to only make those accusations against people that are actually bigots. I'm not sure how that's controversial. Some people do this because they genuinely think that anyone that criticizes a thing they like is a bigot. However, some people know better and intentionally falsely accuse people of being antisemitic because they know that it makes people afraid to voice their opinions. Thus, I called it a figurative weapon. >but I definitely would not rely on you to stand up or defend folks from actual antisemitism. Well whether you rely on me or not I will do the right thing if a genocidal antisemitic political party attempts to take over US politics. In the meantime, if I see people doing bigoted things I will stand up for people being targeted. Like I always have. This is kind of what I was talking about though, you seem to have labelled me as an enemy of yours simply because I suggested that there are people that criticize Israel for reasons other than antisemitism. There is no government in the world that doesn't sometimes deserve to be criticized. >Do you actually and critically think this is true or even appropriate to say? I don't understand. Are you saying its impossible to be critical of Israel without being antisemitic? To be clear, what I was saying wasn't intended as a defense of the person OP was about. I think that the Google employee's letter was poorly worded and offensive. I don't know if he's antisemitic, but the phrasing saying that "Jews have an insatiable appetite for war" comes across as bigoted to me. It could be the result of poor phrasing causing someone to say something that they didn't mean, but it might not be. I can't blame someone for interpreting his statement as antisemitism because it was an overtly antisemitic statement. He could be a different person today, but no one made him publish that.
alichapman 5y ago
I disagree with this. There are certain things that the Israeli government have done that are worthy of being criticised - the same can be said for every government in the world. Brushing off all criticism as antisemitism is unhelpful.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
devtul 5y ago
> how the one tiny country in the whole world This tactic of saying "oh try to find Israel on the map, it's so tiny, oh poor state of Israel" is often pushed by Zionists, also often trying to link anti-zionism with anti-semitism. I saw a talk with Ruth Wisse, a professor at Harvard University pushing this narrative.
- myfavoritedog 5y ago
  Because the argument has validity. If Israel weren't Jewish, nobody would care about it. You can go line by line describing Israel and its so-called "atrocities" and I'll show you countries that are far more appropriately accused of those types of atrocities... yet those other countries never make it into the international news cycle. I'm not Jewish. I'm not religious. But the singling out of Israel by political/antisemitic forces has not escaped my notice.
  - Macha 5y ago
    China vs the Uighurs and Tibetans? India vs Pakistanis? Pakistan vs Indians? Russia vs Chechnya? Spain vs the Basque people? Canada in the 80s vs native people (we had an article just the other day)? The US vs black people? Plenty of countries get criticised for their treatment of minorities when they do something wrong.
    - myfavoritedog 5y ago
      You're making my point. China is literally wiping out the Uighurs. There's no hair-splitting or propagandizing about it. They're committing actual genocide. But besides a few mentions here and there, the international community is doing nothing about it. If it were at all proportional, the stories and condemnation should be in the news every day. But instead, we see more media coverage in a single day of Israel's counter attacks from rocket fire than we do for a year of Uighur genocide.
      - Macha 5y ago
        The news gets bored. It's why settlements don't make the news but it makes the news when it rises to armed conflict. Israel has already been pushed out of the news cycle by Belarus here. There were plenty of news stories about the Uighurs last year. The international community is not doing much about Israel either.
throwaway894345 5y ago
> But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic. Agreed. In practice, antizionists (folks who believe that Israel shouldn't exist) virtually are virtually always antisemitic. Whatever you think of him, Bret Stephens makes a pretty insightful analogy that it's like how there could theoretically be segregationists that aren't racist, but they don't exist in practice. That said, there's a distinction to be made between antizionism (i.e., "Israel shouldn't exist") and criticism of Israel (e.g., "Israel's settlement policy violates human rights"). The former is de facto (but not de jure) antisemitism while the latter is not. EDIT: I'm getting a lot of downvotes for this, I'm guessing I've offended a lot of people who identify strongly with antizionism/antisemitism. My intention wasn't offense, but rather observation. That said, I make no apology for any offense taken--enjoy my Internet Points! (:
world_peace42 5y ago
You are terribly correct. It reminds me of the left claiming Islam is a peaceful religion because only a ~third (whatever the numbers they allege) support violence and a much smaller fraction perpetrate it. Unfortunately, your claim is unquantifiable, so, as evidenced by your replies, the people who hate Israel vehemently deny any anti-semitism.
- 8note 5y ago
  If you're taking the position that the actions of some people who follow some version of a religion to be defining for it, every religion is the religion of war, including atheism. At that point, it's not a very interesting statement
  - world_peace42 5y ago
    I'm most certainly not "taking the position that the actions of some people who follow some version of a religion to be defining for it", and I'm perplexed as to how you reached that conclusion. That's quite a ridiculous claim and quite a ridiculous inference as well. But we agree that that particular statement is not very interesting!

kmonsen 5y ago

That’s a huge straw man. I am critical of some of Israel’s behavior, but by no means calling for its complete destruction.

bern4444 5y ago
I believe you, but too many people use the line, I'm not antisemitic, I'm just criticizing the government as a scapegoat to excuse obvious antisemitic behavior.
- Retric 5y ago
  ‘too many’ is rather shifting the goalposts here. The vast majority of people are criticizing the government not the population. It’s unusual for people to consider a nation’s population rather than their government because a nation’s population is largely irrelevant. It’s not random Americans that have a history of overthrowing democratically elected governments, it’s the US government that does so etc. Israel’s government, like all governments, does plenty of things people disagree with and as such often gets legitimate criticism on it’s own merits.
  - bern4444 5y ago
    Sure, but Americans aren't randomly attacked when abroad or out doing normal things, like getting food out or drinks. And yet, Jews are today. It wasn't too long ago that people marched in Charlottesville chanting jews will not replace us. Now there's a massive rise in violence
    - kmonsen 5y ago
      Jews and Israel should have no connection. Attacking Jews for what Israel does is just incredibly wrong. Let’s be very clear, any criticisms of Israels actions should not apply to Jews as a race, people or religion and even more so not be used as an excuse to harm or treat any single Jewish person negatively.
    - Retric 5y ago
      > Sure, but Americans aren't randomly attacked when abroad or out doing normal things, like getting food out or drinks. Yes, they are. The US State Department issues travel advisories over such issues. It’s safer to travel in many places as a Canadian rather than American.
      - kmonsen 5y ago
        That’s true but severely understates antisemitism both historically and currently. Americans does not and have not faced the kind of discrimination that Jews have.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- plutonorm 5y ago
  I've not met many. But I have met plenty of people who deliberately conflate criticism of Israel with criticism of Jews in order to easily dismiss criticism of the former. I'm part Jewish.
Ozzie_osman 5y ago
This. You can be critical of Israel's actions. You can also be critical of Israel's existence specifically as a nation that discriminates against non-Jewish citizens. None of this means you are an anti-semite who wants the destruction of Israel, let alone Jews. By and large, for example, the UN security council resolutions that the US keeps single-handedly vetoing are not calling for any destruction. They simply condemn Israel's violent behavior.
- bern4444 5y ago
  Of course one can. Except for the fact that often people scapegoat their criticisms with a line like I'm not antisemtic, I'm just criticizing the government. Which typically comes just before an anti semetic comment is made. It's also an entirely an uneven playing field. No other country is condemned and attacked by the international community as often, and as widely despite other countries' far worse offense. Criticisms of Israel is unique and direct and no other country is held to the same standard. How much of a joke is it that Saudi Arabia was on the human rights commission at the UN for so long. Or the lack of similar statements against China for their decimation of Uighurs. This isn't a finger blaming game, its recognizing that the UN demonstrates a massive bias against a single country with standards that no other nation has to face
- vasilipupkin 5y ago
  This is technically true but ignores the complexity of the situation, which is that Israel is essentially at war with groups such as Hamas, which call for Israel's destruction and deny its right to exist. When Hamas starts firing rockets at Israeli civilians, it just isn't clear what response critics prefer Israel show. Israel has little choice but try to destroy and degrade the infrastructure used to fire those rockets. Israeli violent behavior is in response to attack on its civilian population. Ignoring this while criticizing Israel seems strange to me
  - kmonsen 5y ago
    We will never know but I believe this current conflict was provoked by Israel with heavy police presence outside the mosque in Jerusalem. For what it is worth I have visited Israel and the West Bank, and my sympathies are with Israel as the only democracy in the region. That does not mean I cannot criticize when it acts wrongly. Sure the whole conflict is incredibly difficult with no easy solutions, but some people want to use it to stay in power. Of course Hamas is not better, but that is not the expectation for Israel.
myfavoritedog 5y ago
Your comment is a straw man because I never claimed that you couldn't be critical of Israel but not be antisemitic. In fact, I said it's theoretically possible. I just find that in practice, people who show their hand at being antisemitic seem to try to hide behind the whole anti-zionist/antisemitic distinction. Based solely on the merits, you'd think that Israel's ethno-state bona fides wouldn't be any worse than dozens of other countries'. In fact, they're far less problematic. You can be Arabic/Muslim in Israel and rise to the highest levels of government with full rights of citizenship. I can point to many other countries where that wouldn't be the case for ethnically/religiously mal-aligned individuals. But somehow those other countries aren't constantly in the news cycle for defending their ongoing right to exist.

Redoubts 5y ago

it’s really strange… You don’t think there’s anything about it’s recent creation that makes this a special case?

varjag 5y ago
I don't think so. There's plenty of states with ongoing ethnic strife, and they do face a lot of deserved criticism. However I can't really recall popular, internationally supported calls for their abolition altogether. The age of state again has not much to with it: for example Lebanon is younger than Israel and has a rich history of ethnic/sectarian conflict. Now there must be people who want to abolish Lebanon, but somehow you never hear them.
- treeman79 5y ago
  Seems like a lot of people forget there was a goal in a big portion of Europe to exterminate all Jews. So when some are shouting to end Israel, it’s not unreasonable to think the next step is finish the genocide.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  > for example Lebanon is younger than Israel What people usually find particularly offensive is the de-facto annexation and settlement of territories that exceed the UN resolution that created the State of Israel, along with the complete imbalance in both military power and casualties of both sides. It's not just ethnic/sectarian conflict. In many aspects, it would qualify as genocide.
  - varjag 5y ago
    Well, Syria is just across the border with genocide (not just as rhetorical device) very much ongoing. Military imbalance a plenty. Anyone up for dissolving it yet? Hell, even outright Nazism wasn't deemed a reason enough to dissolve Germany (although at some point it was seriously considered).
    - 5y ago

door101 5y ago

> Theoretically, I guess, but it's really strange how the one tiny country in the whole world that has a Jewish-dominated society is so often a target for complete destruction. Because it’s a colonial ethnostate, with massive support from the United States. Israel (the colonial ethnostate) should not exist. Palestine is not an ethnostate, it is the name for the multicultural, multi-ethnic state who rightfully controls the area occupied by Israel, before British colonialism and subsequent invasion and occupation of the territory.

lawnchair_larry 5y ago
This is incredibly ignorant of the history of the region. It’s also patently untrue. The amount of misinformation that westerners propagate about Israel and “Palestine”, which has never been a country, constantly amazes me.
- junon 5y ago
  Yes, except for the "westerners" bit. People from everywhere conflate this issue - even people living in the region. Check out The Ask Project on youtube, tons of people on all sides of the issue are misguided or simply wrong - and they live there.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  "never been a country" -> except for the 138 countries that do recognize it as a country. Moreover, why is this a strong rejoinder? Black South Africa was never recognized as a country either, does that mean there was no moral concern?
bushbaba 5y ago
This is off topic. And getting away from root article. However Before Israel there was the British mandate. Before that Ottoman Empire. The Palestinians in Gaza never controlled the land.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > The Palestinians in Gaza never controlled the land. Doesn't that just mean “they were never powerful”? If they were living there, does it matter who was in power? English rule never stopped the Welsh being Welsh, or Wales from “belonging to” them. (I don't know how applicable this analogy is to this situation – probably not very, given there isn't a territorial dispute over who should have Wales.)

austincheney 5y ago

I have known devote Jewish Americans who are extremely critical of Israeli politics. I would be hard pressed to call them antisemitic.

asidiali 5y ago

Such strong arguments, such as “I guess,” and my personal favorite, “as a matter of probability.” Just fanning the flames, let’s work together to find a solution instead of gaslighting.

chevill 5y ago

>But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic. This is a meaningless statement though. We can expect that nearly anyone that's antisemitic would be critical of a country run and mostly inhabited by Jewish people. It becomes a problem when people try to extrapolate that fact to dismiss every criticism of Israel as "this guy's probably just antisemitic." Its only true as a matter of probability throughout the entire world because its true in a particular region that has an enormous population padding those statistics. There is antisemitism everywhere in some amounts and it is wrong like all forms of bigotry. However, in many countries, such as the US, you are just as likely to run into a person that criticizes Israel for reasons that have nothing to do with the religion of its inhabitants. You are still free to think that they are wrong, but people should stop using accusations of bigotry as a weapon to silence people simply for disagreeing with them. If you want to call someone a bigot, its pretty important to make sure you are right about it. And for the record when it comes to that Israel/Palestine conflict I think neither side is even close to being innocent. I don't give a shit about their religions I just want families to stop being murdered by the actions of two shitty governments.

davemel37 5y ago
"people should stop using accusations of bigotry as a weapon to silence people" Huh? Are you seriously calling someones words who feels victimized, a weapon? Are you seriously holding fear of actual violence to an unsubstantiated standard? "If you want to call someone a bigot, its pretty important to make sure you are right about it." Please show me one other form of bigotry accusation you hold to the same standard. This perspective is almost certainly a blindspot. Im not certain - but I definitely would not rely on you to stand up or defend folks from actual antisemitism. How do people even think, let alone say these things and not get called out by everyone immediately? Do you actually and critically think this is true or even appropriate to say?
- chevill 5y ago
  >Huh? Are you seriously calling someones words who feels victimized, a weapon? Are you seriously holding fear of actual violence to an unsubstantiated standard? The idea of figuratively describing something as a weapon isn't new or unusual. I'm not even sure what you mean by the second sentence. I was talking about people defaulting to claims of bigotry at any sign of criticism. If every criticism of Israel, even legitimate criticisms not coming from a sense of bigotry, makes a person feel victimized then there is something wrong with that person. If words cannot be used as a weapon exactly how do criticisms of Israel make a person feel victimized? >Please show me one other form of bigotry accusation you hold to the same standard. I hold all forms of bigotry accusations to the same standard. The example given was basically "a lot of people exist that are antisemitic so we can assume that criticism of Israel is probably antisemitic." Which is an argument that's basically uses the same sloppy logic that actual bigots use to justify their beliefs. Calling someone a bigot can have severe consequences for that person whether they are actually bigots or not. The key part of that sentence is that it can have consequences when they are not guilty. Yet people throw accusations around assuming someone's intentions simply because they said something they don't like. That's wrong so its important to try to only make those accusations against people that are actually bigots. I'm not sure how that's controversial. Some people do this because they genuinely think that anyone that criticizes a thing they like is a bigot. However, some people know better and intentionally falsely accuse people of being antisemitic because they know that it makes people afraid to voice their opinions. Thus, I called it a figurative weapon. >but I definitely would not rely on you to stand up or defend folks from actual antisemitism. Well whether you rely on me or not I will do the right thing if a genocidal antisemitic political party attempts to take over US politics. In the meantime, if I see people doing bigoted things I will stand up for people being targeted. Like I always have. This is kind of what I was talking about though, you seem to have labelled me as an enemy of yours simply because I suggested that there are people that criticize Israel for reasons other than antisemitism. There is no government in the world that doesn't sometimes deserve to be criticized. >Do you actually and critically think this is true or even appropriate to say? I don't understand. Are you saying its impossible to be critical of Israel without being antisemitic? To be clear, what I was saying wasn't intended as a defense of the person OP was about. I think that the Google employee's letter was poorly worded and offensive. I don't know if he's antisemitic, but the phrasing saying that "Jews have an insatiable appetite for war" comes across as bigoted to me. It could be the result of poor phrasing causing someone to say something that they didn't mean, but it might not be. I can't blame someone for interpreting his statement as antisemitism because it was an overtly antisemitic statement. He could be a different person today, but no one made him publish that.

alichapman 5y ago

I disagree with this. There are certain things that the Israeli government have done that are worthy of being criticised - the same can be said for every government in the world. Brushing off all criticism as antisemitism is unhelpful.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

devtul 5y ago

> how the one tiny country in the whole world This tactic of saying "oh try to find Israel on the map, it's so tiny, oh poor state of Israel" is often pushed by Zionists, also often trying to link anti-zionism with anti-semitism. I saw a talk with Ruth Wisse, a professor at Harvard University pushing this narrative.

myfavoritedog 5y ago
Because the argument has validity. If Israel weren't Jewish, nobody would care about it. You can go line by line describing Israel and its so-called "atrocities" and I'll show you countries that are far more appropriately accused of those types of atrocities... yet those other countries never make it into the international news cycle. I'm not Jewish. I'm not religious. But the singling out of Israel by political/antisemitic forces has not escaped my notice.
- Macha 5y ago
  China vs the Uighurs and Tibetans? India vs Pakistanis? Pakistan vs Indians? Russia vs Chechnya? Spain vs the Basque people? Canada in the 80s vs native people (we had an article just the other day)? The US vs black people? Plenty of countries get criticised for their treatment of minorities when they do something wrong.
  - myfavoritedog 5y ago
    You're making my point. China is literally wiping out the Uighurs. There's no hair-splitting or propagandizing about it. They're committing actual genocide. But besides a few mentions here and there, the international community is doing nothing about it. If it were at all proportional, the stories and condemnation should be in the news every day. But instead, we see more media coverage in a single day of Israel's counter attacks from rocket fire than we do for a year of Uighur genocide.
    - Macha 5y ago
      The news gets bored. It's why settlements don't make the news but it makes the news when it rises to armed conflict. Israel has already been pushed out of the news cycle by Belarus here. There were plenty of news stories about the Uighurs last year. The international community is not doing much about Israel either.

throwaway894345 5y ago

> But as a matter of probability, a lot of people who criticize Israel are also antisemitic. Agreed. In practice, antizionists (folks who believe that Israel shouldn't exist) virtually are virtually always antisemitic. Whatever you think of him, Bret Stephens makes a pretty insightful analogy that it's like how there could theoretically be segregationists that aren't racist, but they don't exist in practice. That said, there's a distinction to be made between antizionism (i.e., "Israel shouldn't exist") and criticism of Israel (e.g., "Israel's settlement policy violates human rights"). The former is de facto (but not de jure) antisemitism while the latter is not. EDIT: I'm getting a lot of downvotes for this, I'm guessing I've offended a lot of people who identify strongly with antizionism/antisemitism. My intention wasn't offense, but rather observation. That said, I make no apology for any offense taken--enjoy my Internet Points! (:

world_peace42 5y ago

You are terribly correct. It reminds me of the left claiming Islam is a peaceful religion because only a ~third (whatever the numbers they allege) support violence and a much smaller fraction perpetrate it. Unfortunately, your claim is unquantifiable, so, as evidenced by your replies, the people who hate Israel vehemently deny any anti-semitism.

8note 5y ago
If you're taking the position that the actions of some people who follow some version of a religion to be defining for it, every religion is the religion of war, including atheism. At that point, it's not a very interesting statement
- world_peace42 5y ago
  I'm most certainly not "taking the position that the actions of some people who follow some version of a religion to be defining for it", and I'm perplexed as to how you reached that conclusion. That's quite a ridiculous claim and quite a ridiculous inference as well. But we agree that that particular statement is not very interesting!