On Tuesday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) over comments she made advocating for Palestinians to be free.
You do realize a state can dissolve without literally everyone dying right? When East Germany and West Germany reunified the entire population of both countries didn’t die. When apartheid collapsed in South Africa all the settlers didn’t die.
“death to america” does refer to an end to the US empire- not the American people. I’ve talked with a fair number of Iranians who dislike their own government and Americas reign of terror around the world.
From “the river to the sea” means an end to the apartheid government in occupied Palestine. It’s projection from the murderous settlers that a unified non-apartheid state would mean their own extermination- because that’s what they do to the undesirables in their unified state.
The state of Israel is a genocidal ethnostate, that is the context for the tensions. Israel kills way more Palestinian civilians every day, and has been long before October 7. Before the European colony arrived, Jews, Christians and Muslims co-existed in Palestine.
For the same reason that it was Islamaphobic for the US to invade Iraq, it is antisemitic for you to say “death to Israel”
This is a bit of a nonsequiter. The US is islamaphobic, and the Iraq invasion was criminal, informed by chauvanism, orientalism, and islamophobia, but it’s hardly the equivalent of an occupied people resisting that occupation.
May they all be free from the river to the sea someday.
You’re now admitting that Israel is a Jewish state despite trying to claim otherwise for this entire thread.
I’ve only responded to you a couple times, and all I said is that Israel is not all jews, does not speak for all jews, and is a genocidal ethnostate.
Saying death to an ethnostate does not mean death to the people in it, same as death to america doesn’t literally mean all americans should die.
This isn’t that hard.
Israel kills way more Palestinian civilians every day
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Israel is doing horrible things, but it doesn’t deflect from the fact that “death to Israel” is antisemitic.
One of those parties is a colonial occupier, the other an occupied people resisting state violence. I can support one and not the other.
You’ve taken this argument far away from “death to Israel” not being antisemitic because you’re trying to argue that Palestine should exist. I’m not saying it shouldn’t, but it doesn’t make you not antisemitic.
Death to Israel is not antisemetic, because despite the europeans wrapping it in the trappings of jewishness, it isn’t all jews, doesn’t speak for all jews.
Israel systematically disenfranchises non-jews and sterilizes non-white jews.
Comparing the hamas attack to the holocaust is like comparing an indigenous people’s raid of settler encampments to the holocaust. It is wildly inappropriate and ignores the difference in power between Jewish people under the nazis and Jewish people in a White Jewish ethnostate
the Holocaust of 6 million Jews and the recent terror attack that killed and took hostages of hundreds of Israeli civilians.
Makes it sound like you think they’re of similar themes. Theyre not. One was a wholesale slaughter of an oppressed minority, the other was anticolonial violence directed at settlers.
Both involve the killing of innocent civilians based on their racioethnic group
This is reductionist. You need to wipe away of the context of a white Jewish supremacist apartheid state vs the context of being scapegoats for the nazis for your position to make sense.
Also settlers aren’t civilians, settlement is part of an extended military campaign of genocide.
Yes. Still, they give both context to saying “death to Israel” because they prove that the statement is being used in a violent way.
Violence is justified against settlers, violence isn’t justified against an oppressed ethnic minority. They are distinct things.
Oh of fucking course it is going to be violent, unless the settler state caves. That is how anticolonial movements always go. But it is a lesser violence vs the continued violence its existence is predicated on.
Please pick up wretched of the earth by Fanon at your local library, it is a very necessary read for westerners.
It is antisemitic to equate calling for violence against Jewish settlers partaking in genocide to calling for violence against all Jews on the basis of being Jewish.
You’re being antisemitic. And if you aren’t Jewish, you need to shut the fuck up now. If you are, I’d be happy to explain why your position harms us as a whole.
Yeah, it really sucks that colonial violence makes anticolonial violence inevitable. Israel needs to stop doing colonial violence so that the anticolonial violence stops. It will never stop until the colonial violence stops or Israel exterminates all Palestinians.
This isn’t a threat this is just an understanding of historical materialism.
If you actually cared about Jewish people and weren’t interested in Jewish death to advance a settler colonial political project you’d be calling for an end to Israeli apartheid.
You do realize a state can dissolve without literally everyone dying right? When East Germany and West Germany reunified the entire population of both countries didn’t die. When apartheid collapsed in South Africa all the settlers didn’t die.
deleted by creator
“death to america” does refer to an end to the US empire- not the American people. I’ve talked with a fair number of Iranians who dislike their own government and Americas reign of terror around the world.
From “the river to the sea” means an end to the apartheid government in occupied Palestine. It’s projection from the murderous settlers that a unified non-apartheid state would mean their own extermination- because that’s what they do to the undesirables in their unified state.
The government isn’t the people.
Marg bar Amrika
deleted by creator
Israel isn’t all Jews, doesn’t represent all Jews, and it’s legit antisemitic to say that it is.
You are the one sounding antisemitic.
deleted by creator
The state of Israel is a genocidal ethnostate, that is the context for the tensions. Israel kills way more Palestinian civilians every day, and has been long before October 7. Before the European colony arrived, Jews, Christians and Muslims co-existed in Palestine.
This is a bit of a nonsequiter. The US is islamaphobic, and the Iraq invasion was criminal, informed by chauvanism, orientalism, and islamophobia, but it’s hardly the equivalent of an occupied people resisting that occupation.
May they all be free from the river to the sea someday.
deleted by creator
I’ve only responded to you a couple times, and all I said is that Israel is not all jews, does not speak for all jews, and is a genocidal ethnostate.
Saying death to an ethnostate does not mean death to the people in it, same as death to america doesn’t literally mean all americans should die.
This isn’t that hard.
One of those parties is a colonial occupier, the other an occupied people resisting state violence. I can support one and not the other.
Death to Israel is not antisemetic, because despite the europeans wrapping it in the trappings of jewishness, it isn’t all jews, doesn’t speak for all jews.
Israel systematically disenfranchises non-jews and sterilizes non-white jews.
Is saying “death to america” fatphobic?
Comparing the hamas attack to the holocaust is like comparing an indigenous people’s raid of settler encampments to the holocaust. It is wildly inappropriate and ignores the difference in power between Jewish people under the nazis and Jewish people in a White Jewish ethnostate
deleted by creator
This part of the post
Makes it sound like you think they’re of similar themes. Theyre not. One was a wholesale slaughter of an oppressed minority, the other was anticolonial violence directed at settlers.
deleted by creator
This is reductionist. You need to wipe away of the context of a white Jewish supremacist apartheid state vs the context of being scapegoats for the nazis for your position to make sense.
Also settlers aren’t civilians, settlement is part of an extended military campaign of genocide.
Violence is justified against settlers, violence isn’t justified against an oppressed ethnic minority. They are distinct things.
Oh of fucking course it is going to be violent, unless the settler state caves. That is how anticolonial movements always go. But it is a lesser violence vs the continued violence its existence is predicated on.
Please pick up wretched of the earth by Fanon at your local library, it is a very necessary read for westerners.
deleted by creator
It is antisemitic to equate calling for violence against Jewish settlers partaking in genocide to calling for violence against all Jews on the basis of being Jewish.
You’re being antisemitic. And if you aren’t Jewish, you need to shut the fuck up now. If you are, I’d be happy to explain why your position harms us as a whole.
deleted by creator
Yeah, it really sucks that colonial violence makes anticolonial violence inevitable. Israel needs to stop doing colonial violence so that the anticolonial violence stops. It will never stop until the colonial violence stops or Israel exterminates all Palestinians.
This isn’t a threat this is just an understanding of historical materialism.
If you actually cared about Jewish people and weren’t interested in Jewish death to advance a settler colonial political project you’d be calling for an end to Israeli apartheid.
deleted by creator
It effectively communicates the message in my opinion.
Bu-but the non-jewish allies have very strong feelings about protecting the european settler state!!
I heard some germans even donated supplies to it