> Even a slight view into the history of israel should allow you to see that there is a valid and consistent basis for its opposition wholly separate from antis

> Even a slight view into the history of israel should allow you to see that there is a valid and consistent basis for its opposition wholly separate from antisemitism, even if you don't endorse that opposition. I've commented it somewhere else before: it looks to me that the "behavior-based opposition" is essentially "being a state while jewish", similar to "driving while black". There's plenty of valid reasons to pull people over and check their vehicles, police does it all the time. Yet when a cop exclusively pulls over black drivers, while the percentage of black drivers isn't close to 100%, it's probably not about the driving. If someone allies themselves with Erdogan and Hamas, their critique isn't because of behavior, but because of who's the one doing it. Another fun example of that is the UN human rights council where such fine and outstanding human rights' advocates as Afghanistan, Qatar and Russia investigate israel. I'm sure you'll see my point: whatever they care about, it's certainly not human rights. > In my experience though pro-palestine activists in the US are fairly sensitive to this dynamic and vigilant about not aligning with antisemitic groups who would be willing allies. I've always been under the impression that it's mostly them being far left that keeps them from embracing the far right. To me they've never seemed shy about their ideas for israel's future, they're just not saying the quiet part out loud. They're academics after all, they understand that being too obvious will make the general population recoil in disgust.