》Feel like they are helping #Palestinians
To be honest, I used to believe that too. But I have recently become despondent realizing it was the other way around. Because it made me realize fewer are interested in either harmed group.
@pomerance @imstilljeremy @hebrewbyinbal I found David Hirsh’s book very eye opening on how ‘liberal’ (‘left’ in the UK) can be, in fact often are, really antisemitic.
I don’t agree with everything in the book but I recommend it as some thinking material.
https://www.routledge.com/Contemporary-Left-Antisemitism/Hirsh/p/book/9781138235311
#antisemitism
Today’s antisemitism is difficult to recognize because it does not come dressed in a Nazi uniform and it does not openly proclaim its hatred or fear of Jews. This book looks at the kind of antisemitism which is tolerated or which goes unacknowledged in apparently democratic spaces: trade unions, churches, left-wing and liberal politics, social gatherings of the chattering classes and the seminars and journals of radical intellectuals. It analyses how criticism of Israel can mushroom into antis
You are mistaken Rabbi.
https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/From-the-River-to-the-Sea
https://www.adl.org/resources/glossary-term/allegation-river-sea-palestine-will-be-free
It is directly a call for the destruction of Israel, and thus for the protections of the state of Israel on the Jews in the MENA. As the governments in the MENA have expelled their Jews, and Jews presence (like LGBTQ+ presence), there is no reason to believe that this call is anything but a call for Jewish death or expulsion, as has happened in the recent past.
If Alice drops an anvil onto a man's head, it's a reasonable conclusion that he will die/be injured.
Chanting for the erasure of the physical and and legal protections of a marginalized group in a place where the law and history are directly contrary to their mere existence is the same. You cannot separate the two any more than you can separate Alice's actions from the man's death.
This is also the view of most Jewish organizations.
@serge @rabbigabriel @pomerance and I would say it’s trauma on top of trauma.
Palestinians experienced horrible trauma since the Nakba. The creation of Israel may have been good for many Jews, but it’s been terrible for Palestinians.
They are acting from their trauma, yes, and not worrying about the people they experience as oppressors.
AND… Jewish people are a tiny minority and regularly have real reason to fear for safety.
Both are true.
@rabbigabriel @serge @pomerance
I think if you separate the meaning of words from the way the words are used, we aren't really talking about the same thing anymore.
In core, I agree with you that it doesn't necessitate calls for genocide. But by the same reasoning, strictly speaking, that would be similar to those who say things like "Palestinian used to refer to the Jewish residents. So, they now are free from River to Sea." as a means of sidestepping calls for human rights for Palestinians.
@rabbigabriel @serge @pomerance
All words are used in particular contexts and with particular meanings. Some are broad and some are general.
We can agree, for example, that "From River to Sea" is intended as a call for the rights of non-Jewish people in the land, whether they identify as Palestinian, Arab, Israeli, or Christian (sometimes Druze too).
I agree with entirely that it isn't useful to discuss it in the general sense, but rather specifics. But I know you and Serge so no harm here.
@rabbigabriel @serge @pomerance but the meaning of the words is their context. That’s what language is all about.
What I agree with is that some do not intend “death to jews” but it is clearly a call for the destruction of the state of Israel.
@devotaj @rabbigabriel @serge @pomerance
The preeminent view I have heard would probably be best described as "indifference" as to the implications towards Jews.
No ill will necessarily, but that any attempt to address that is necessarily not the same thing. I agree with the Rabbi that, married to an understanding and addressing of the dangers and needs of Jews, it need not be genocidal.
Unmoored from that, it is likely a hindrance (and danger to the diaspora). Which seems more important.
@rabbigabriel @serge @pomerance I don’t think freedom for Palestinians has to mean destruction of Israel.
However this phrase does mean that, as it’s saying all the land from the river to the sea is for Palestinians, which contextually does exclude Jews.
And based on the built up anger, also implies it.
Not caring what happens to the Jews in this scenario is the same thing that happened to Palestinians in the creation of Israel — the Nabka.
@rabbigabriel @devotaj @pomerance
Members of the KKK do not chant anything against black people, they chant "White Power"
At the Unite the Right "Jews will not replace us!", they didn't chant anything about death or harm to Jews, only that they wouldn't be replaced by them
The various dog whistles on the ADL's database are dog whistles for a reason.
You can't remove these terms from their context, period.
@pomerance @devotaj @rabbigabriel @serge @hebrewbyinbal
You guys, there is now a big block of Kahanist boot lickers in the Israeli government, they are bent on harming occupied Palestinians, and they are planning on destroying the high court and corrupting the IDF to achieve their goal. Many of us in Israel are seeing this as an end of our democracy.
Criticism of a horrible regime is not antisemitism.
@pomerance @rabbigabriel @devotaj @hebrewbyinbal @serge
That was not me, It was Inbal who called it antisemitism.
as for the "River to sea" quote, the same was and is used by right wingers in Israel, I think Geula Cohen and Refael Eitan were the first to make it mainstream in the 1980s, though the Hitnakhluyot were happening since the late 1960s and early 70s, exactly with that idea in mind...
@rabbigabriel @pomerance @serge he was denying that they are a “race” not an ethnic group.
The two are not synonymous.
An Act to make provision to require Ministers of the Crown and others when making strategic decisions about the exercise of their functions to have regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic inequalities; to reform and harmonise equality law and restate the greater part of the enactments relating to discrimination and harassment related to certain personal characteristics; to enable certain employers to be required to publish information about the differences in pay between male and female employees; to prohibit victimisation in certain circumstances; to require the exercise of certain functions to be with regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and other prohibited conduct; to enable duties to be imposed in relation to the exercise of public procurement functions; to increase equality of opportunity; to amend the law relating to rights and responsibilities in family relationships; and for connected purposes.