3 ms·
I think he must have established by the end the Jews he is referring to are those who support Israeli aggression. Not all Jews.
by nashashmi 5y ago
I think he must have established by the end the Jews he is referring to are those who support Israeli aggression. Not all Jews.
- cloverich 5y agoThis is how I read it as well, although some are less charitable with how they interpret actions in the moment -- people mis speak all the time and are heavily criticized for it. As another commentor suggested, this was probably not a carefully thought through thesis but more of a thought piece put together in a short time frame and meant more as an expression than some hill to die on. My charitable reading is that the last section (and title) perhaps carry the piece too far away from nationalist Jew and into ethnic Jew which aren't quite the same. Perhaps if the Author had thought through their goal and audience more thoroughly they might have re-worded it. Hard to tell. I think it is otherwise a thought provoking piece.
- yakshaving_jgt 5y agoReplace the word "Jews" with "men" and gauge the reaction of those in the modern diversity movement. Either it's ok to say "not all <group>", or it isn't.
- el-salvador 5y agoThey wouldn't bat an eye.
- yakshaving_jgt 5y agoThat doesn’t fit what I have observed[0] at all. [0]: https://time.com/79357/not-all-men-a-brief-history-of-every-dudes-favorite-argument/ https://time.com/79357/not-all-men-a-brief-history-of-every-...