3 ms·

The intensity of the war in Gaza has declined. There is no real urgency. There is also no real solution the protesters are presenting about how we can get a cea

• tootie 2y ago
  The war has gone quiet, but Gaza is starving, their hospitals are destroyed and Netanyahu has indicated nothing will stop him from invading Rafah. I live in NYC and do not give the slightest shit about people occupying Columbia University. They are not demanding Columbia arbitrate a cease fire, they are demanding they divest from Israel until they end Apartheid. It's a perfectly valid argument and has absolutely no basis or dependency on antisemitism.
  • wonderwonder 2y ago
    Assume these same protestors are against Iran for murdering its citizens. Or Saudi Arabia for killing a million people via famine in Yemen? Or the muslims killing hundreds of christians in Africa? Or is it for some reason only the Jews that are getting protested against for killing far less people while trying to stop a terrorist organization embedded in Gaza responsible for the rape, torture and murder of hundreds of Jews. No antisemitism here at all.
  • nsguy 2y ago
    We're going to agree to disagree. I see the usage of the term Apartheid is potentially antisemitic. This is because I consider it to be not true and therefore I consider it equivalent to other blood libels spread against Jews. To me this is masked antisemitism. I think there is more correct/factual terminology that can properly convey the problems on the ground (and there are many) without hyperbole and distortion and so when people choose to not do that I'm going to make assumptions about their motives. Gaza is not starving is also I think the objective truth right now. There is a lot of food going into Gaza. The markets are full of food and the prices have gone down significantly. That can't ensure that everyone can get it, especially if it's stolen by armed gangs or resold for profit. But yes otherwise, life in Gaza right now is terrible. I don't see the protests showing us a path forward here. Rafah is definitely a problem. It's a problem with two sides though. We have Hamas and Israel. What are the protests asking Hamas to do here?
    • tootie 2y ago
      The actual "blood libel" and similar accusations were based on completely fabricated stories. Applying the term "Apartheid" is a subjective use of language to describe observable reality. The current ruling coalition of Israel is a mix of hawks and religious extremists who hold expressly anti-Palestinian views. They have a vested interest in maintaining a Jewish majority. They are actively expanding into Palestinian territory and committing acts of violence to do so. It's not literally the same thing as South Africa, but it's similar enough to me. And it does not require any imaginary rituals nor condemnation of anyone for their faith. This is purely criticism of the Israeli government, although I'd go further to include the people who keep voting them in to power. I'll put an even finer point on it and point a finger at the ultra-orthodox community. We like to think of nice Jewish neighbors who have a menorah instead of a Christmas tree as decent, normal folks, but the ultra-orthodox are extremists in every sense of the word and thoroughly isolated from mainstream society. And they are driving the excesses of Israeli policy. And, maybe not coincidentally, if you look at the rise in anti-jewish bias attacks even in the US, ultra-orthodox make up a majority of targets.
      • nsguy 2y ago
        There are plenty of fabricated stories around this time. Blood libels, like conspiracy theories, need to have some element that can resonate. If they are obvious complete fabrications then they're not going to work. Around the times where people were telling stories of Jews using the blood of children for Seder there was a culture and atmosphere where people believed that. The dictionary says of Apartheid "(in South Africa) a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race. segregation on grounds other than race." Israel does not segregate based on race or anything else. There is no such observable reality. Palestinians or Arabs (if that's even a race or an ethnic group) serve in the IDF, they work in tech, they are judges in courts, they are members of Parliament. Many of them are advocates for Israel. Your "observable" reality doesn't exist. Israel does not treat Palestinians living in the occupied territories the same as Israeli citizens. That is the observable reality. That is also not Apartheid at all. The use of this word is absolutely a fabricated story. The story of the occupied territories can't be summed out in one sentence but is not a racial (or ethnic or any other) segregation story at all. A Palestinian from the west bank who is legally in Israel isn't "segregated" from any activity or location (e.g.). Blacks in the USA are arguably treated worse than Arabs in Israel. Palestinians aren't even segregated in the west bank or Gaza. There is no accepted definition of the word Apartheid that fits the fabrication. The restrictions on local population that is under occupation has never been called Apartheid in history. I don't think you really know the ultra-orthodox Jewish communities. Some of them are anti-Zionists and are marching and camping with Palestinians. Some of them live in their own world of Torah studies and couldn't care less about current events. And yes, some of them participate in Israel politics (and society btw, not necessarily as isolated as you suggest) and are part of the government to help their constituents not serve in the IDF and get funded by the state. The attacks against ultra-orthodox relate to them being visibly Jewish, that's about it. That's just pure antisemitism and trying to paint them as "extremists" is to be honest also antisemitism. It's like saying the Amish are extremists (I think those guys do get some hate as well). EDIT: To expand on the Apartheid thing. The word conjures some very specific images to those that hear it and are familiar with things like South Africa or the segregation against blacks in the US. None of those images apply to Israel. There's no "blacks sit in the back of the bus", "blacks can't be members of this club", "black can't stay in this hotel", "blacks live in their own neighbourhoods". None of that. The situation in Israel is quite unique. OTOH there are many countries with actual racial/ethnic discrimination (like China/Tibetians or Russia/Chechens or Qatar) where nobody cares. Israel basically has two or three options with respect to the occupied territories. It can annex them and give everyone equal rights. A move that the international community will likely not accept (e.g. see the Golan heights). The Palestinians will also not accept that since they demand the right of return for refugees living outside the region and they have no wish to become Israeli citizens. E.g. many Palestinians in East Jerusalem who have the option to become Israeli citizens refuse to do so. The Israelis are also afraid they will lose the Jewish majority in the resulting "democracy" (though some Israelis consider this a workable solution). It can withdraw from them unilaterally. Another move the international community or the Palestinians will not accept (e.g. see Gaza). Or it can try to reach some sort of settlement (e.g. see the failed Oslo Accords). Most Palestinians demand that Israel cease to exist and Israelis "Go back to Europe" (which is a cute story but also disconnected from any reality). So basically no options but to perpetuate the current situation. The current reality of wars, violence, right wing government, religion etc. is simply overlaid on top of this problem with no solution. Even if you didn't have a right wing government in Israel and you didn't have a war in Gaza there's still no solution (and we've been there before) and there's still violence.