#is there an automatic assumption that jewish = zionist?

[natsukaishii]

twt if i see one more “zhongli and tighnari’s eng vas are zionists don’t support them” tweet i’m deleting the app

[gothhabiba]

Hi, this is very ignorant. I'm trying to read as much as I can on Palestine and Zionism but there is one point I cannot find an answer for. Given that Zionism is not Judaism, given that at the beginning most Jewish people did not share this view and was actually supported by christians with antisemitic views, given that it was conceptualized as a colonial project that could only be actualized by ethnically cleanse Palestine, one thing I don't know how to disagree with Zionists is the idea that Jewish people do come from that land. Even if European jews are probably not genetically related to the Jewish people from there, I think Jewishness is something that can be constructed as related to that land. This of course does not mean that Palestinians are not natives too and they have every right to their land. However I don't really know how to answer when Jewish (Zionists) tell me that Jewish people fled that land during the diaspora. Other than "yeah but the people that stayed are native that underwent christianization before, arabization later, grew a sense of nationhood in the 19th century and are Palestinians now"

It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what "indigeneity" is to believe that it means "whoever has the oldest claim to the land." Rather, to describe a people as "indigenous" is a reference to their current relationship to the government and to the land—namely that they have been or are being dispossessed from that land in favour of other private owners (settlers); they have a separate, inferior status to settlers according to the law, explicitly; they are shut out of institutions created by the settler state, explicitly; they are targeted implicitly by the laws of the settler state (e.g. Israeli prohibitions against harvesting wild thyme or using donkeys or horses for transportation); the settler state does not punish violence against them; &c. &c.

It is a settler-colonialist state that creates indigeneity; without one, it is perfectly possible for immigrants to move to and live in a new location without becoming settlers, with the superior cultural and legal status and suppression of a legally inferior population that that entails.

If all that were going on were some Jewish people feeling a personal or religious connexion to this land and wanting to move there, accepting the existing people and culture and living with them, not expelling and killing local populations and creating a settler-colonialist state that privileges them at the expense of extant populations, that would be a completely different situation. But any assertion of the land's fundamental Jewish-ness (really they mean white or European Jewishness—the Jewish Arabs who were already in Palestine never seem to figure in these arguments) is a canard that distracts from the fundamental issue, which is a people's right to resist dispossession, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

Decolonize Palestine lays out some of the ethnic and cultural history of the region, but follows it up with:

So, what does this all mean for Palestine? Absolutely nothing. Although the argument has many ahistorical assumptions and claims, it is not these which form its greatest weakness. The whole argument is a trap. The basic implication of this line of argumentation is as follows: If the Jewish people were in Palestine before the Arabs, then the land belongs to them. Therefore, the creation of Israel would be justified. From my experience, whenever this argument is used, the automatic response of Palestinians is to say that their ancestors were there first. These ancestors being the Canaanites. The idea that Palestinians are the descendants of only one particular group in a region with mass migrations and dozens of different empires and peoples is not only ahistorical, but this line of thought indirectly legitimizes the original argument they are fighting against. This is because it implies that the only reason Israel’s creation is unjustified is because their Palestinian ancestors were there first. It implies that the problem with the argument lies in the details, not that the argument as a whole is absolute nonsense and shouldn’t even be entertained. The ethnic cleansing, massacres and colonialism needed to establish Israel can never be justified, regardless of who was there first. It’s a moot point. Even if we follow the argument that Palestinians have only been there for 1300 years, does this suddenly legitimize the expulsion of hundreds of thousands? Of course not. There is no possible scenario where it is excusable to ethnically cleanse a people and colonize their lands. Human rights apply to people universally, regardless of whether they have lived in an area for a year or ten thousand years. If we reject the “we were there first” argument, and not treat it as a legitimizing factor for Israel’s creation, then we can focus on the real history, without any ideological agendas. We could trace how our pasts intersected throughout the centuries. After all, there is indeed Jewish history in Palestine. This history forms a part of the Palestinian past and heritage, just like every other group, kingdom or empire that settled there does. We must stop viewing Palestinian and Jewish histories as competing, mutually exclusive entities, because for most of history they have not been. These positions can be maintained while simultaneously rejecting Zionism and its colonialism. After all, this ideologically driven impulse to imagine our ancestors as some closed, well defined, unchanging homogenous group having exclusive ownership over lands corresponding to modern day borders has nothing to do with the actual history of the area, and everything to do with modern notions of ethnic nationalism and colonialism.

I would also be careful about mentioning a sense of "nationhood" or "national identity" in this context, as it could seem to imply that people need a "national" identity (a very specific and very new idea) in order not to deserve genocide. Actually the idea that Palestinians lacked a national identity (of the kind that developed in 19th-century Europe) is commonly used to justify Zionism. Again from Decolonize Palestine:

This slogan ["A land without a people for a people without a land"] persists to this day because it was never meant to be literal, but colonial and ideological. This phrase is yet another formulation of the concept of Terra Nullius meaning “nobody’s land”. In one form or the other, this concept played a significant role in legitimizing the erasure of the native population in virtually every settler colony, and laying down the ‘legal’ and ‘moral’ basis for seizing native land. According to this principle, any lands not managed in a ‘modern’ fashion were considered empty by the colonists, and therefore up for grabs. Essentially, yes there are people there but no people that mattered or were worth considering. There is no doubt that Zionism is a settler colonial movement intent on replacing the natives. As a matter of fact, this was a point of pride for the early Zionists, as they saw the inhabitants of the land as backwards and barbaric, and that a positive aspect of Zionism would be the establishment of a modern nation state there to act as a bulwark against these ‘regressive’ forces in the east [You can read more about this here]. A characteristic feature of early Zionist political discourse is pretending that Palestinians exist only as individuals or sometimes communities, but never as constituting a people or a nation. This was accompanied by the typical arrogance and condescension towards the natives seen in virtually every settler colonial movement. That the early settlers interacted with the natives while simultaneously claiming the land was empty was not seen as contradictory to them. According to these colonists, even if some scattered, disorganized people did exist, they were not worthy of the land they inhabited. They were unable to transform the land into a modern functioning nation state, extract resources efficiently and contribute to ‘civilization’ through the free market, unlike the settlers. Patrick Wolfe’s scholarship on Australia illustrates this dynamic and how it was exploited to establish the settler colony.

[bogleech]

Guess I have to make a main thread about this. Someone decided to fight with me in the notes on this post just yesterday about Gaza and made select responses of mine into a callout thread here, where they say my anger towards the IDF is all a cover for antisemitism. This didn't make any sense, because they said they were also against the IDF killing civilians, and I repeatedly said that Jewish people aren't to blame for the IDF or represented by the IDF in any way, putting us supposedly both on the exact same page. What gerry leaves out of their own screenshots, and I'd actually forgotten, is that at first they came at me from an angle that I was disrespecting the victims in Gaza.

So this implies they feel gaza is being subjected to a genocide, and a pretty big one, since they're upset my language made it sound "smaller and tamer." When it becomes obvious that I do in fact consider it a serious genocide, that's when they switch over to saying that my criticism of Netanyahu or the IDF is inherently an attack on Jewish people.

Notice I never actually said "zionists" in this screenshot, even, but that I defined "regular humans" as humans who don't want to kill innocent families. That would automatically include Jewish people since they overall do not wish to kill anyone, but have in fact spent quite a lot more time trying not to get killed. I believe there may be entire books about this fact! I think there's even whole museums about it, if I'm not mistaken?!

So then they pivot to saying I'm an antisemite because I said the IDF and its supporters can "burn in hell," and they say "invoking hell" is an antisemitic dogwhistle, which is definitely news to me?!

So I tried to clarify, again, that I'm only angry at the people who are themselves killing civilians and the "pro-genocide maniacs" who defend the killing of civilians, which they responded to as if I had "lumped them in" with those. You can just see right there that I didn't make any assumption that they were a part of that at all. Thanks to their earlier comments I still thought I was speaking to someone 100% against the IDF's actions, but every time I said that the killers and their advocates alone are bad, they've framed it in some new way as me just not liking anyone Jewish. So now that you have that context:

...In a response to an ask, they finally just say they hated me to begin with and set out with the intention to "bait and sealion" me (their own words!!) into saying something they hoped would be antisemitic, which they believe was successful despite me never saying anything about Jews other than "this isn't their fault." They saw what they admittedly wanted to, so strongly, that they show me saying "this isn't the fault of Jews" as evidence that I blame Jews. But speaking of people "going mask off"

In multiple more recent posts and asks, this person appears to say that they simply do not believe the IDF is really targeting children or ambulances or relief aid, that "none of those are true," and the deliberate targeting of any children is supposedly just a conspiracy theory??? So I guess they did successfully troll me and I feel like a real gullible dumbass, because the only reason I continued responding to this person in the first place was that they said they were in fact against the ongoing massacre. Instead, these comments sound like they think the IDF is being unfairly vilified by dishonest propagandists, and that's why they hated me enough to try and fish for callout fuel. That's the nastiest fucking thing anyone's yet pulled on me about this and it's not one that I'm just going to ignore. I should have smelled a troll early on and just blocked them, but it's SO hard for me to suspect ulterior motives. I always go in thinking people mean well, and that there's just a miscommunication we can work out. I almost feel like this individual noticed that and tried to exploit it?!? Unfortunately I'm sure this kind of thing will happen again simply because I don't intend to obediently shut up about what's being done to Gaza. It's not logistically possible for the death and destruction to all just be accidental collateral damage. Don't let anybody ever fool you into thinking the IDF is the face of the Jewish community or vice-versa, just as you can't let anyone fool you into thinking Hamas represents all Palestinians. Especially don't engage this person, stop doing so if you have been, and block them.

[opencommunion]

"The Israeli government’s creation of the linked property account [between the frozen assets of Iraqi Jews and the stolen property of Palestinians dispossessed in the Nakba] was a singular act — something of a historic milepost—that constructed a zero-sum equation between the Jews of the Arab countries and the Palestinians in Israel. The political theory that underlay the Israeli government’s construc­tion of that equation rested on a system of moral, diplomatic, and economic assumptions that resulted in a practice of nationalization and naturalization that was riddled with contradictions. The government of Israel automatically assumed that the Jewish ethnicity of the Iraqi Jews meant that they harbored a Zionist orientation. It 'endowed' them de facto with that particular form of national identity before they had any intention of immigrating to Israel, and certainly without having obtained their consent. The Foreign Ministry was aware that the Iraqi Jews could not be considered refugees, still less citizens of Israel. The process of nationalizing and naturalizing the Iraqi Jews — while they were still in Iraq — was collective rather than individual. The par­ties in question were not consulted. As Sharett put it, 'I said that we shall not rely on the free choice of the refugees, but that this is a question of an agree­ment between states.' On the basis of this naturalization, the Israeli gov­ernment 'appropriated' the property of all of Iraq’s Jews in order to utilize it — rhetorically, symbolically, and judicially— as state property in every re­spect.

... In 1975, the newly established government-financed pressure group known as the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries (WOJAC) ar­gued that Palestinian refugees should not be allowed back into Israel, since an involuntary population exchange had already taken place in the Middle East. ... WOJAC too held the same attitude as the state toward the property claims of the Iraqi Jews, maintaining that they should be used to enhance the bargaining power of the Israeli gov­ernment, not to support individual claims. The government of Israel has cap­italized on the population exchange argument to deny the rights of the Palestinians to return to Palestine or to claim compensation for their 'lost' property.

... The Jews of Iraq became hostages of—and a fig leaf for —the Israeli gov­ernment in its efforts to divest itself of responsibility for compensating the Palestinian refugees. The conceptual model that guided the Zionist leader­ship vis-a-vis the Jews of Iraq, as with other communities, held that Jewish identity and Zionist identity were one and the same. The national leadership assumed a monopoly over the community and its property, even though nei­ther the one nor the other was located in its territorial domain. ... A condition of the trade-off equation was that the Palestinians' national identity be annulled, and that they be regarded as part of a 'united Arab na­tion' that included Iraq. That approach forged one of the most pungent il­lusions harbored by Israel in its brief history ('There is no Palestinian peo­ple,' as Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir used to say). The trade-off equation cynically constructed the interests of Arab Jews and Palestinians as conflicting a priori."

Yehouda Shenhav, The Arab Jews: A Postcolonial Reading of Nationalism, Religion, and Ethnicity (2006)

[fairuzfan]

You talking about the hunger games in relation to palestine reminded me of an absolutely deranged thinkpiece I stumbled upon a couple years back, so I went looking for it. It's by 'the jewish (zionist) chronicle', and they are talking about the movie, and if the premise of it is mocking isr*el. It's funny that they can see the resemblance between the capitol and their illegitimate country, while still seeing no fault in themselves. And when I say funny, I mean 100% expected. I'm attaching a link if you're interested at all, but be warned it's worded in the typical anti-arab way.

https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/is-the-hunger-games-inadvertently-mocking-israel-p3w00co6

Ok this article is absolutely ridiculous LMAO. Literally proves my point about how Palestine and the Districts are the same.

What's really funny is that for years I've been trying to figure out Suzanne Collins' (the writer) political opinions because The Hunger Games is just so obviously a metaphor to me for Palestine but I've found like less than nothing about her. She said she got the idea from watching the Iraq War with bits of reality television interspersed so I think I can kinda tell where her politics lie a bit (although at this point, I don't think I can make assumptions).

In all honesty, I haven't watched the movies lol because the casting and set design really messed up how I imagined the story while reading. Plus I heard that the movie does exactly what the books mock (making a spectacle of war for consumption) so that automatically turned me off. I wanted to see this new movie though because I wanted to see the songs come to life but now I'm like completely uninterested since the director (Francis Lawrence) signed the no hostage letter (click) that Amy Schumer wrote. If you're willing to align your name with Amy Schumer at this point with how incredibly racist she is, I have no interest in any content you want to make.

Back to the article, I would say it's actually more "anti-Palestinian" than "anti-arab" because it homogenizes all of Palestine otherwise, but yes this is like. An incredibly racist article lol. Here's an excerpt that I thought was actually super funny.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEY WOULDN'T SHOW A MOVIE WHERE MEN AND WOMEN KISS. Legit one of the funniest assertions I've seen in a while. Remember guys, Palestinians CANNOT handle romance, it will explode their brains.

Also it's really funny how they're like "yeah the bow and arrow reminds me of the slingshots Palestinians use but remember, KHAMAS, like Katniss' resistance, has rockets!!!!! Israelis hide in fear in bomb shelters!!! KHAMAS only has tunnels for attacking! Nevermind the use of the tunnels for countering relentless siege on the people of Gaza! We, the people in the Capitol that I see myself in, are the victims!"

Also look at how they end the article:

"Man, Snow really reminds me of Israel. Won't examine that at all, even though I know it's important to. Anyways I feel so bad :( It ruined my evening."

And to that I say: Suck it, bro! Get Palestiniated!

I really underestimated how wild this would be. Here's the article if anyone wants to read it:

[eretzyisrael]

Elica Le Bon الیکا‌ ل بن @elicalebon:

"There is a very specific psychological process behind the “Jews control the world” trope that antisemitic persons subscribe to.

Let’s break down the process:

By way of background, millennia of anti-Jewish propaganda creates a conditioned stimulus - conditioned response effect.

First, they’re exposed to an event (conditioned stimulus). Because of their programmed internal bias, they automatically draw assumptions about Jews being somehow guilty in relation to the event (conditioned response).

Second, they engage in confirmation bias—“the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs”—by looking for information that tends to support their demonized perception of Jews.

Third, they draw conclusions on what they falsely determine to be “facts, research, and evidence” (which is in fact just confirmation bias), that the Jews are in fact entirely at fault for the event.

Fourth, they begin to observe that certain media outlets or commentators contradict their narrative and portray the event in a much more balanced way, or in a way that may exonerate Jews from the unfair charges levied against them.

Here, they enter a state of cognitive dissonance: the discomfort felt when one’s perceptions or beliefs are inconsistent with reality, thus compelling their desire to end the psychological disturbance.

Finally, because they cannot reconcile these two things—the contradiction between perception and reality—the solution to alleviate this uncomfortable state is not to admit that they were wrong (which may cause even more discomfort in identifying themselves as hateful) but to reason that they are most certainly correct, and that the only explanation for this contradiction is that Jews control the world, the media, and the narrative, and are dictating that narrative in their favor (full blown conspiracy psychosis).

At this stage, If they suffer from an intense savior complex, they may make it their mission to “expose” this “truth about Zionists” to the world, hoping the gnawing feeling of internal deregulation will be resolved by doubling down against it.

At bottom, they just cannot accept that their “truth” about Jews is fundamentally hatred, bigotry, bias, and cold, hard antisemitism.

It’s been thousands of years in the making and always ends in bloodshed - when are we implementing programs to dismantle this in schools?''

[brick-van-dyke]

I'm still pretty sick with the flu and I'm still figuring out how to move past being frozen with hyperempathy so I'll try to be brief with this. But I want to touch on a thing I've been thinking about pretty much this entire past year.

In the last decade, or my whole upbringing and childhood as well to be honest, I saw a horrific amount of dehumanisation of Arab culture, language and idenity. All of it was associated with the Taliban, ISIS, war and terrorism to the point most young people would assume that and be suspicious when they'd see a mosque, hijab, brown skin, arabic written somewhere or any display of Arab culture. Like, no, the west has always been violently racist and you all aren't immune to that upbringing of assuming anything written in arabic to be ISIS propaganda, anything to do with Muslim holidays being seen as oppressive and bad or homophobic; a reason for suspicion. We've all been brought up with that shit.

I now want us to think about that upbringing with Jews today and how the antisemetism ingrained in the west actually defines Israel in ways much like how Islamophobia defines the Taliban or ISIS. We KNOW they aren't the same as being Muslim or being Jewish, but that doesn't stop us making associations and assumptions. It doesn't suddenly make demonizing Jews in the same way Arabs have been dehumanised okay. Both are people that deserve love, respect and protection from hate. Political Zionism, Mossad and Modern Israel are western inventions that aren't Jewish at all, just as much as ISIS and the Taliban are western inventions that aren't Arab or Muslim. They were created by western powers for western interests (and hell, even if they weren't that wouldn't justify shit) and should never be used as a reason to automatically suspect our Muslim, Jewish and Arab siblings. These are groups that's exist irrespective of this and require our respect all the same.

I'm staunchly antifascist, pro/ part of the Intifada and for a one state solution with a free Palestine that includes all and respects all equally. Doing that means, fundamentally, that we can't use the weapons and tactics of the western colonial entities; of hate, of demonising an entire culture, language and people. We have to be better.

Just as we have to be against the Bush administration's dehumanisation of Arabs and Muslims, and their targetting of the entire race, various cultures, religion and language, we have to actually put in work to not let ourselves be taken in by western antisemetism that is deeply ingrained within our society as well. There are many stigmas in western society around Jews, and we cannot let it be suddenly exempt from scrutiny because we decide one is okay while the other is not. Both are equally bad, if not good indicators that these same people likely have anti Arab and anti Muslim beliefs internalised as well. They often go hand on hand from what I've seen of liberal racists who have said "I'm not racist" then proceeded to say they think Muslims are all homophobic and that all religions are bad because "Muslims created ISIS" without realising the horrific racism in that. It's these same people who often say "all Jews are responsible and must stand up against Israel or they're actually Zionists". It's the same logic and it always comes back to a general internalisation of racism. That is something we, as leftists, must fight against.

Like, the same people who now say "I have to check and make sure the Jews I know aren't Zionists" are also the same people who have said "I think Arab Americans deserve to see Gaza get flattened because they didn't vote blue". Like it's the same old racist shit and the same post Bush suspicion based on "all Muslims and Arabs are ISIS right?" It's the same shit, like modern Israel, ISIS, (and I'd also include Iran, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.) and the Taliban are all entities created/ taken control of by the west and then used by the west to expand their own access to resources. It's the US just expanded so if anything y'all should be way more inherently suspicious of white Americans being the CIA in disguise than Jews all being Mossad and Muslims all being ISIS members. Like they are different things, Zionists aren't Jews and vice versa. Basically, just don't assume shit and listen to antizionist Jews when they call you out on antisemetism. The west has deeply ingrained anrisemetic roots and you all still have to unlearn that shit if you really want a free Palestine and a successful Intifada (both in Palestine and, I hope, for successful land back movements in other western colonised nations).

If you see a Jew celebrating their holidays without mentioning Palestine or condemning Israel? Shut up and let them celebrate. If you see a Muslim celebrating their holidays without condemning ISIS or Afghanistan and Iran's treatment of women? Shut up and let them celebrate. Entire groups of people shouldn't be expected to be held to account and put in all the work of unraveling western colonialism, all because you're already suspicious of anyone who isn't white, atheist or just live differently to you. Respect people and their culture, unlearn western racist imperialist propaganda.

Unlearn that shit and learn to unite under one banner of antifascist resistance that sees all as equal.

[scarecrowgolem]

youve reblogged from people who seem to want a two state solution for Palestine, was this intentional? if so, i will hope you look into this article and consider further: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/

wanting the abolition of Israel is the same as wanting the abolition of the United States, it is a matter of settler colonialist entities being dismantled, not necessarily persecuting the colonizers in the same ways that they have persecuted the indigenous peoples of the land they occupy. a two state solution wont solve anything or save anyone.

judaism is a beautiful religion, but it is not dependent on zionism to flourish. im sorry if im assuming too much by acting like you dont know the circumstances surrounding Israeli occupation of Palestine, and im sorry to only communicate in a critical manner.

You are allowed to dm me, you know.

I do not agree with everyone I reblog from, and I get recommended posts.

I often get recommended posts about antisemitism and jewish topics, and because I am jewish, I interact with the posts. I do not make automatic assumptions or suspicions about other jews because it would be antisemitic, as well as tedious. Jews are not a monolith and we do not agree on everything.

I am not a zionist and I do not agree with the 2 state solution. I support the liberation of palestine and I do not support the state of israel, or the US for that matter.

Yes you have assumed too much. Also, Judaism is not just a religion.

Also who is "people"? I checked and it seems like only 1 person I rbed a post from (which was a recommended post) is a 2 state solution supporter.

Anyways, you seem weird about jews and have been making weird assumptions about me more than once so im gonna block you btw so... i guess you cant dm me but you could have.

[female-malice]

Thank you for responding to my question - I suppose I thought you were Jewish, my mistake.

I appreciate your response. I'm not sure I agree with supersession permeating the secular gen z political consciousness as you described, antisemitism being a cultural "default" - where expressed by secular gen z/millenials it seems more an antisemitism founded on a conspiracy logic, detached from religion and a collection of stereotypes. I don't know much about the supersession project admittedly.

On my initial question, though, you still upheld that Jewish people = Israel. The logic of Jewish people not being responsible for gentiles' antisemitism, I agree with. But to clarify, I was asking about if Israel as a state is inciting that hatred, not Jewish people. The Israeli state's specific policy and military choices, with the assumption that the Israeli state is distinct from Jewish people, and therefore Jewish people shouldn't be automatically held accountable for Israel's actions unless they actively support it.

But I see lots of Jewish people arguing there is no distinction between Israel as a state and Judaism, and I see this as tying Jewish people to the fate and actions of Israel. I don't see how this is a good idea because of Israel's actions and global condemnation on humanitarian grounds. I see it as inciting antisemitism on humanitarian grounds in new demographics who are being told Israel=Jewish people. I worry for anti- or non-Zionist Jews who are being called to account for the actions of Israel.

Knowing now you aren't Jewish, I suppose you won't be able to comment on this from the Jewish persective, but I would like your opinion anyway. I'm wondering why Jewish people support the conflation of Jewish people with Israel, and why there isn't more pushback on this. For example, when other "peoples" are held accountable for their state's actions we call it racism, ex. Chinese people facing racial aggression for China's handling of Covid. The distinction between a state and a people is reaffirmed in other contexts. Israel and many Jewish people seem to reject that distinction completely, and I'm wondering about their perspective behind that stance. Are there just too few non- or anti-Zionist Jews? From a personal perspective, this distinction is important to me because I can't support many things Israel does but have no hatred towards Jewish people and am completely secular, so not supersessionist.

You need to actually research supersession or you will never understand any of this.

If your family puts up Christmas decorations, then you're a secular person from a Christian culture. This means that you don't understand anything about supersession but you are a participant in it. This is the case for the majority of Gen Z. The whole point of supersession is for the average person to know nothing about it. You're not supposed to know why the religion exists. You're just supposed to open your Christmas presents.

What if you told Han Chinese people that all their history and culture is the foundation of a new proselytizing religion. And you told them that their history and culture isn't about them anymore. It's now about your new religion. Their mytho-historical heroes are now your religious heroes. Their ancient connection to land is now your ancient connection to their land. Your new religion doesn't include them unless they convert. And if they convert, they'd no longer be Han. Another religious group sees you doing this and gets inspired and does the same thing. Now there are two religious groups claiming the mytho-history of the Han. This conflict you've created is the basis of all cultural and political interactions with Han Chinese people for 2000 years. And after 2000 years, half the world follows the two superseding religions. And there's only a small community of Han left alive to claim their history, culture, and land as their own. That's what supersession is.

This could not have happened to the Han because they had gunpowder and automatic crossbows. Today, 1 in 5 human beings on planet Earth are Han Chinese. They are the largest ethnic group in the world.

A Chinese person from Hong Kong or Taiwan or America is probably critical of the CCP. But that's just politics. What do you imagine Chinese people would say if you said about China what Gen Z says about Israel?

"We should stop equating the country of China with the Chinese people. China as a sovereign state is a genocidal construct and a failed project. It has done more harm than good to Chinese people so it shouldn't exist. The Chinese people do not need a homeland. They'd be able to live safely in diaspora as long as the state of China becomes obsolete."

You will not find one Chinese person who will ever agree with that statement. And if you make a Tiktok saying this, they'll ban your IP address.

There are many Chinese people who think the CCP is redeemable and it's only Xi Jinping who is concerning. There are many Chinese people who think the PRC is redeemable and it's only the CCP causing problems. There are many Chinese people who don't recognize the PRC and believe the ROC is the real Chinese sovereign state. There are many different Chinese political opinions. But no Chinese person on Earth would support abolishing Chinese sovereignty in the Chinese homeland.

I don't support everything that goes on inside the PRC. But I agree with the historical fact that they won the civil war. I agree with the fact that they are the sovereign state that represents the Chinese homeland. The idea of dissolving the PRC would never cross my mind.

But of course, the ROC does not recognize the PRC and vice versa. The civil war never officially ended despite the PRC's clear victory. So, someone could insert themselves into this geopolitical limbo to argue in favor of dissolving the PRC. I personally think that's a terrible idea. Those are the type of arguments that would incite a new round of warfare between the PRC and ROC. So, even though these two governments have different opinions about who the land belongs to, the rest of us should not weigh in. Instead, we should sit at home and say "two state solution." The PRC and ROC are not doing a two state solution any time soon. But let's just say the words "two state solution" instead of inciting WWIII in Asia.

Most Gen Z opinions I see online are arguments in favor of inciting WWIII in the Middle East. You can't say "ceasefire" one moment and "dissolve Israel" the next and then call yourself a peace activist.

It's wild that Israel/Palestine has the same geopolitical weight as PRC/ROC. But that's the world we live in. 1 in 5 human beings are Chinese and have a deep personal opinion about the Chinese homeland. And 1 in 2 human beings are Christian or Muslim and have a deep personal opinion about the Jewish homeland. Even the secular college students putting up Christmas decorations have a deep personal opinion about the Jewish homeland. That's what 2000 years of supersession, conquest, and proselytizing will do. After 2000 years, the obsession with Israel is not a religious thing anymore. It's become the secular status quo in Christian majority and Muslim majority societies.

[projectqueer]

STATEMENT OF SOLIDARITY WITH Dyke March Chicago

by Stephanie Skora, Trans Liberation Collective founder Before I say anything else, it is most important to note that the Israeli State began bombing Gaza again last night. Gaza has been limited to only two hours of electricity a day for the past several days, no doubt in a preemptive move to silence news about the bombing. Instead of circling up around Palestinian communities and helping support them during yet another brutal attack on their land and families, many people were calling them antisemites and perpetuating Zionist violence against Palestinians by allowing unfounded and unsupported accusations of antisemitism to gain traction. This is a source of no small amount of disappointment and anger on my part. We, as Jews who claim to be in solidarity with Palestine, must do better.

Let me make myself VERY clear: I am a proud Jewish woman. I am a genderqueer trans woman, a lesbian, and an anti-Zionist. I am nobody’s token, and I find antisemitism in all forms abhorrent. I am in explicit solidarity with the Chicago Dyke March Collective, and support all of their actions, and decisions during the March and at the park afterwards in regards to their removal of three Zionists from the space. I participated in the conversations with, and removal of, those Zionists, and would do the same again if asked. The people in question were kicked out because they were Zionists, were aggressive, and made Palestinian attendees feel unsafe. That is, and will always be, a valid reason to remove someone from a space.

In the interest of centering Palestinian voices in recounting the actual events of that day, I will refer everyone who asks to the forthcoming statement from the Dyke March organizers. The Chicago Dyke March Collective organizers can speak for themselves, and I would encourage everyone to listen to their words, rather than making assumptions based on sources that lack credibility. I will, however, make a statement about the backlash from, and aftermath of, the removal of those Zionists. Many of you have asked my perspective on the events of that day, so please consider this my official statement on the matter.

Dyke March is, very specifically, a space organized by queer and trans people of color, FOR queer and trans people of color, so that they have somewhere safe to go and celebrate themselves during Pride Month. Yes, everyone is welcome at Dyke March as long as they follow the rules of the space and don’t cause any problems, but Dyke March is not designed to be a space for everyone and their assorted feelings about oppressed people.

This year, Dyke March was very, VERY visibly anti-Zionist, and pro-Palestinian. This means a variety of wonderful and necessary things, but it also means that, for attendees, that there are prerequisites to our attendance there. By attending, we are recognizing that we are entering a space that was specifically designed to center and uplift queer and trans Palestinian voices… if that is not something that you can comply with, the solution is simple: don’t go to Dyke March. If, like Ellie Otra, Palestinians make you feel uncomfortable and you “just want to be Jewish in public” but feel the need to assert your presence and privilege even after you’ve been told that Palestinians feel uncomfortable, then don’t come to Dyke March, and go do it somewhere else. If, like Laurel Grauer, you are a known liar, Zionist, racist, and Islamophobe, then don’t come to Dyke March, and go march with A Wider Bridge and/or the Israeli Consulate in Chicago Pride, who I’m sure would be more than happy to have your despicable-ass self in their contingent.

Just to make myself clear: if you are a Zionist, if Palestinians make you feel uncomfortable, or if you work for a horrible, violent, pinkwashing organization, go fuck yourself, and go fuck yourself somewhere other than Dyke March. Just because a space allows you to attend does not mean that the space is FOR you, and to assume that you have a right to come and make people feel unsafe in their own spaces just because you want to be visible in public is the HEIGHT of privilege, White fragility, Jewish feelings, and general fuckery.

It is also important to say something about the role of Jews in explicitly anti-Zionist spaces. Namely, it is never the place of Jews to tell Palestinians how, where, why, and at what they are allowed to feel uncomfortable, unsafe, or traumatized, and in which contexts. Palestinians always have the right to determine the terms of their own safety in their own spaces. Always. It is neither the place, nor the right, of Jews to get all up in our feelings about the reactions of Palestinians to symbols that have been heavily appropriated by the Israeli State and Zionist settlers for the express purpose of eliciting reactions of fear and trauma. Whatever your feelings about the Star of David as a symbol, the reality of the situation is that the violent use of that symbol by the Israeli State has made it inextricably associated with that state, and the violence that it commits. That is OUR problem as Jews, and our feelings about that symbol are to be hashed out amongst ourselves, in Jewish spaces, and not taken out in the form of baseless and violent accusations against Palestinians.

It is absolutely true that the Israeli State has appropriated Jewishness for its own purposes, and perverted the culture and history of a beautiful, proud, and strong people to serve the theocratic, ethno-nationalist interests of a genocidal nation-state. It is absolutely true that Zionism is a form of racism and White Supremacy, mediated through a Jewish context. It is absolutely true that Zionism is an unacceptable political ideology that has no right to be heard, or considered as valid, in any space, but particularly those that center Palestinians. It is absolutely true that Zionism is an ideology that maintains its supremacy through the re-traumatizing of each successive generation of Jews, in attempt to force us into allegiance with the Israeli State. It is absolutely true that Zionism reinforces its power by forcing Jews to exhibit White fragility in response to criticism of Jews, because in the context of Zionism, Jews assume a position of power and privilege that we have not historically occupied.

So, what is the role of Jewish people in anti-Zionist spaces, especially ones organized by Palestinians? I would argue that our role is twofold: 1) To support the labor, organizing, and work of Palestinians as they continue their struggle for liberation from the Israeli State and Zionist ideology, including by educating other Jews about Palestine and Zionism. 2) To link the struggles against antisemitism and anti-Zionism, and to help ensure that one struggle is not weaponized to silence the other.

Why does this look so limited? Because we, as Jews, enter into these spaces (or at least SHOULD be entering into these spaces) as accomplices to the liberatory struggle of the Palestinian people. Zionism is a system of power and control places Jews in a position of privilege vis a vis Palestinians.

This means that when Jews enter an anti-Zionist space, we accept that we are entering it under certain conditions. As beneficiaries of the system of power and control that those spaces were set up to combat and dismantle, we may be held to a higher political standard. We may be required to affirm certain political positions in order to remain in the space. We may be asked certain questions about our politics because of our positions of privilege. And all of those things might feel bad, might hurt our feelings, and might seem really unfair to us… but it is our job to remember, and to remind each other, that our discomfort and hurt feelings at being held to a higher standard is nothing, NOTHING, compared to the genocide, violence, and ethnic cleansing that we are in those spaces to help put to an end. That is our role as accomplices, and privileged people in that space. Other privileged groups of people are treated the same way in social justice spaces, and that is the norm in our corner of society. It is also important to note that if you are arguing that a space that excludes Zionists automatically also excludes Jews in general, then it is YOU who is conflating Zionism and Judaism, not Dyke March.

I would also like to add this, specifically addressing the Jewish people that will see this statement, and in particular those of us who call ourselves anti-Zionist, or Palestine solidarity activists. It is incumbent upon us, in particular, to not participate in this mishegas, and to not heap violence upon Palestinians. It is incumbent upon us to not let our possible previous Zionist brainwashing and existing Jewish fragility and feelings to allow us to grab on the first specious accusations of antisemitism levied against Palestinians by a source that completely lacks credibility. A Wider Bridge, is a known racist, Islamophobic, homophobic, and transphobic organization coming down against Dyke March, which is run entirely by queer and trans people of color, some of whom are Palestinians. Laurel Grauer, a known liar, racist, and Islamophobe, works for A Wider Bridge, and is not credible in any meaningful way on this issue.

It is our job to listen to Palestinians. To not pass judgement on them without hearing their voices. To believe them when they refute or reject accusations made against them. To lift up their voices when they speak their own truths, and give their account of events. It is our job to not give further traction to unfounded or under-supported accusations of antisemitism made against Palestinians, especially when we KNOW that accusations antisemitism have been historically weaponized against Palestinians, and used to silence their voices on vital matters, including affirming their own humanity and safety.

If you, personally, cannot do these things, then I ask you to consider why you cannot believe Palestinians, why you are giving credibility to accusations of antisemitism without knowing all the details, and why you have a right to be considered a Palestine solidarity activist.

That’s all I have to say on the matter for now. I am in explicit solidarity with Chicago Dyke March, and all the organizers in the Chicago Dyke March Collective.

[navigatethestream]

The trans community of Chicago has risen up to explicitly denounce the Chicago Pride Parade and Festival, and to announce our intention to once again form our own spaces, to better serve and represent our own pride and liberation. The Compton’s Cafeteria Riots and the Stonewall Riots are how we mark the legacy of Pride: Strong, proud, and unapologetic trans resistance in the face of a world that continues to prefer our bodies as corpses in the ground, rather than revolutionaries in the streets. We reject the image of Pride offered to us: Empty platitudes from politicians who cover up the murders of Black youth, productions put on by corporations that abuse trans and queer workers, and the constant presence of murderous police officers armed to the teeth with, tasers, pepper spray, automatic weapons, and the audacity to say that they are here for our protection, as they rush to arrest us for celebrating our own legacy. The rainbow masquerade is not enough. In 1970, Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson created the Christopher Street Liberation March in New York City, in commemoration of the police riot at Stonewall Inn the year before, and in direct protest of the New York Women’s House of Detention and the incarceration of queer and trans people. By 1973, wealthy, white, cisgender gays and lesbians had taken over the march, banning trans women and those with radical politics. In 1992, 2008, and 2015, Chicago’s Pride Parade was disrupted by queer and trans activists protesting police brutality, corporate greed, racism, and gentrification. Most recently a collective called #BlackOutPride disrupted the Parade to make a statement that the gay establishment of Chicago has since shamefully ignored.  We rise in explicit solidarity with their demands as we issue our own. We are the Trans Liberation Collective leading a coalition of sibling organizations and accomplices to shut down the Chicago Pride Parade, because our voices have been repeatedly erased, and Pride organizers have refused to listen to past demands made by the most vulnerable of queer individuals. We, as a coalition led by trans women and femmes of color, know that there can be no Pride in a celebration of white, cisgender, gay male joy that simultaneously excludes the lives, legacies, and power of Black and Brown trans women. Knowing those truths, and in the name of trans liberation, our coalition states the following: 1. We call for divestment from gentrification, displacement, and white cis supremacy! The same forces which violently forced our ancestors out of their own movement are still at work, creating a celebration of queerness that is inaccessible by all but the most privileged of trans and queer people. When queer celebrations uphold the violent systems of gentrification and segregation in Chicago, echoing racist practices of redlining that have shaped the human geography of this city, queer revolution is impossible. We rise in solidarity with coalition member Pilsen Alliance, who are working to end economic and environmental violence where the most vulnerable communities in Chicago are being pushed out, schools are being closed, and families are being separated—thanks to Danny Solís and Mayor Rahm Emmanuel’s real estate developers. We denounce the racist, transphobic, ableist, and exclusionary policies and practices of white, cis gay organizations like Center on Halsted, Howard Brown, Equality Illinois, and other organizations that prioritize North Side services and the wealthy over Black and Brown trans people. 2. We rise in solidarity with Palestinian liberation, including the call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions! The Chicago Pride Parade has a long history of allowing organizations that engage in pinkwashing–the promotion of Israel’s supposed positive record on LGBTQ rights as a means to distract from their brutal crimes against Palestine–to participate in the Parade. The presence of groups like A Wider Bridge, Stand With Us, and the Israeli Consulate General dishonors the legacy of the trans women of color who galvanized our movement. As an explicitly anti-Zionist collective leading an explicitly anti-Zionist coalition which includes Jewish, Muslim and Palestinian organizers, we reject any celebration of the illegal Israeli state in the Chicago Pride Parade. Trans and queer people will not be used as propaganda for a genocidal, settler-colonial state, in an attempt to spread racist and Islamophobic tropes about Palestinian culture. Pinkwashing, Zionism, settler-colonialism, and genocide have no place in queer struggle. As a coalition, we proudly join the calls to free Palestine! 3. We rise in solidarity with anti-colonial movements, from Puerto Rico to Standing Rock, and beyond! Trans liberation necessitates the liberation of all peoples, and especially indigenous peoples. We honor the legacy of Sylvia Rivera, a Boricua trans woman as we resist all forms of colonial occupation and US imperialism, both in Chicago and around the world. We remember Jamie Lee Wounded Arrow, an indigenous trans woman murdered this year, and recognize that indigenous peoples will be the leaders in our movements as we continue to proliferate ways of celebrating ourselves that transcend binaries, and protect the natural environment. We denounce the participation of banks and corporations in the Chicago Pride Parade that contribute to the genocide of indigenous people, the continued investment in DAPL and other oil pipelines, and the debt crises in oppressed communities across the planet. The Trans Liberation Collective and all members of our coalition demand Puerto Rico’s colonially-created debt be forgiven, that all stolen lands be returned to indigenous peoples, and advocate self-determination for all colonized communities as we fight to protect our planet! 4. Stonewall and Compton’s were anti-police riots! We reject the insertion of law enforcement into queer struggles, and demand the city of Chicago immediately move toward disarming, disbanding, and abolishing all police and prisons! The police are not now, and have never been, a friend of queer and trans people, especially queer and trans people of color. For far too long, police have intentionally harassed queer and trans people, arresting us on assumptions and false charges, terrorizing our communities, and criminalizing our very existence. Hosting the Chicago Pride Parade in the heavily-policed neighborhood of Boystown–and relying on the labor of incarcerated people to clean up afterward–is a testament to the event’s lack of commitment to Black and Brown communities. We rise in explicit solidarity with coalition member Black Lives Matter Chicago in calling for the immediate abolition of police and prisons, including the practice of solitary confinement. The brutality of the Chicago Police Department, and the cowardly, conniving racism of Mayor Rahm Emanuel have shown us again and again that abolition is the only answer. Chicago does not need police; it needs better infrastructure, public schools, free health services, and shelters specifically for trans and queer people, especially trans and queer elders and youth. 5. We demand sanctuary and immediate amnesty for all undocumented communities! Undocumented queer and trans folks are some of the most vulnerable in our community. We demand that the safety of undocumented immigrants be ensured through immediate amnesty. Furthermore, we denounce the actions of both current and previous administrations in perpetuating the state of political violence that has led so many refugees to seek safety in the United States, where they are forced to confront the xenophobic and racist policies in place. We demand that ICE be dismantled, and that the funds used to imprison undocumented people be channeled back into immigrant communities. No borders! No walls! No prisons! 6. Trans people are the vanguard of the queer liberation movement. We demand more resources, facilities, funding, and access for Black and Brown trans people in Chicago! We demand better education on trans issues, beyond just pronouns, and that trans educators be paid to do this education. We demand jobs for all trans people, who are systemically underemployed due to transphobia, especially in organizations that claim to work for queer and trans causes. We demand access to affordable housing, especially for Black and Brown trans people, trans elders and youth. We demand trans-affirming shelters to be established and fully funded, especially in the South and West sides. We need free, affirming, competent, and accessible healthcare, to offset the disproportionate poverty, lack of wellness, and HIV+ rates in the trans community–the result of decades of medical mistreatment and refusal. We demand a redistribution of funding from wealthy North Side schools to impoverished and underfunded schools on the South and West sides as a form of educational reparations. We demand an immediate end to the practice of charter schools in Chicago, and a use of those funds to invest in public schools with education and protections for queer and trans children. We demand the decriminalization of sex work, because sex work is real work, and deserves to be treated as such. We demand to be treated as human beings, with respect, dignity, and resources! 7. In the legacy of powerful trans women of color, we will be launching our own celebration for 2018! Today, in the city of Chicago in 2017, we follow the legacy of disruptions before ours, and answer Sylvia Rivera’s call by announcing the reinstating of Chicago’s Trans Pride, to be held during June of 2018, co-sponsored by Brave Space Alliance, the Trans Liberation Collective, and the BTGNC Collective. We call on all trans people in Chicago, and especially all trans and queer people of color to join us in divesting from Chicago Pride, and joining us in 2018. Together we will make a new celebration in our own images, full of our own joy, pride, strength, resilience, and liberation. Trans liberation means police and prison abolition! Trans liberation means resisting capitalism! Trans liberation means divesting from war, militarism, and colonialism! Trans liberation means protecting the environment and sharing resources!

Trans-Led Coalition Shuts Down Chicago Pride Parade published on RadFag

[bottledfool]

Being anti-zionist without being antisemitic is not just possible. It's the default position of anti-zionism.

The default position of anti-zionism is not antisemitism, because zionism, in its attempt to equate all Jewish people with the state of Israel and its actions, is intensely antisemitic in its ideology. Even Jewish people living in Israel are not automatically responsible for the atrocities their state commits. Some are complicit, namely those in the IOF or those who cheer on the government's genocidal actions, but there are plenty of Jews in Israel who vehemently oppose zionism, as I'm sure you're very aware.

If someone has anti-semitic beliefs, they didn't get there by opposing a genocidal apartheid state. They got there by some nonsense that they should be mocked for, and they're more likely to align with what Israel is doing than not, even if they might not like to admit it.

Addressing point number 4, I frankly could not care less about whether or not some people in Israel "fear the Palestinian right to return."

Regardless of the Jews' history of traveling to Palestine, the state of Israel is illegitimate and was formed because land was stolen from the Palestinians and given to them. This is not the fault of the average person living there, and they certainly do not deserve to be punished for something their government did, but if someone is opposed to releasing the Palestinians from the concentration camp that is Gaza because they're worried they might become a minority, then fuck them. And I mean that 100%. There does not exist a good enough reason to oppose ending the apartheid, least of all worrying about no longer outnumbering the people who are being oppressed.

I understand that this post was not intended to whitewash the things Israel is doing. It's pointing out that anti-semitic sentiments have no place in this discussion, and I agree with that completely. However, the assumption that anti-zionism must necessarily tread carefully to avoid morphing into antisemitism is simply not true. Jewish people as a whole are not the Israeli government.

Additionally, while this point is more subjective, I don't believe it's necessary to account for most of the zionist perspectives when pushing an anti-zionist argument. As you have correctly stated, the zionist argument that Jews can only be safe if they have a powerful Jewish ethnostate in Palestine is wrong. Any argument that attempts to justify that position can and should be dismissed out of hand, as any reasonable person would do when faced with arguments in favor of an ethnostate of any kind. One does not have to engage with or keep in mind the historical justifications for apartheid apologia in order to avoid antisemitism. The overall message of your post is perfectly reasonable, but things like this weaken your message and push away people who would probably otherwise agree with it.

How To Be Anti-Zionist WITHOUT Being Antisemitic

Yes! It's possible! But it's not automatic.

This post is by no means comprehensive, but bear in mind rule one of the Internet: You CANNOT tell the difference between a well-meaning yet uninformed leftist, and a neo-Nazi sockpuppet pretending to be a leftist to spread antisemitic rhetoric. Reading and absorbing the information in this post will help you avoid dipping into antisemitic modes of thinking.

Don't deny Jewish history in Palestine. There's been a continuous Jewish presence in Palestine ever since the Romans destroyed Judea - and not just the descendants of Jews who stuck around after that; Jews have been making aliyah to Palestine, and specifically the four holy cities (Hebron, Safed, Tiberias, and Jerusalem), for pretty much the entire history of the Jewish Diaspora. Every time Jews got expelled from somewhere, some Jews migrated to Palestine. There was even an attempt, in the middle of the war between the Byzantines and Sasanians in the 7th century, to regain political autonomy in Palestine and reconstitute Judea under the Sasanids (it, uh, obviously didn't succeed.) This is all historical fact, but that doesn't mean any of it justifies apartheid in the modern day. Denying the history doesn't help anyone, it just makes you antisemitic.

Don't whitewash the Jewish population in Israel. Ashkenazim only make up about 31% of Israel's Jewish population, less if you consider that the 2019 study would have counted Bulgarian and Greek Jews as Ashkenazim, when they're in fact Sephardic. The majority of Israeli Jews are Mizrahim who were expelled from other countries in the SWANA region who wrongly blamed their local Jewish populations for the Nakba. There is an internal racial dynamic within Israel where Ashkenazim hold hegemony, and that is worth critiquing in concert with Israeli oppression of Palestinians, but just saying "Jews are white Europeans" is antisemitic and flatly wrongheaded. Jews are an ethnoreligious group whose members come from all racial backgrounds.

Don't invoke classic antisemitic tropes like dual loyalty, or tell Jewish Israelis to "go back where they came from". Most Israelis do not have a second passport, are not eligible for a second passport, and cannot return to wherever they or their grandparents came to Palestine from. Litvak Israelis can't return to Lithuania, their communities were destroyed by the Nazis and then paved over and replaced by the Soviets. Moroccan Israelis can't return to Morocco, they were expelled. American Israelis only make up about 5% of the Israeli population. Jews have always lived on "other people's land", the difference in Palestine is that we're the oppressor, rather than the oppressed.

Understand why Israelis fear the Palestinian Right to Return, even if that fear is something you (rightly) oppose. It's true that settlers always become anxious about the people whose land they stole fighting back, but with Israelis this is even more potent due to two thousand years of antisemitism, and in particular, an event in living memory. In 1932, German and Austrian Jews were stripped of their citizenship, becoming stateless, and when the Evian Conference was held in 1938 to address what to do with the Jewish refugees, all 32 countries in attendance refused to take in more than at most 30,000 Jewish refugees, and that "most" was from the USA and the UK. (Except the Dominican Republic, but that was because Trujillo wanted to bring in a surge of Europeans to overwhelm the country's Black population, so...) When my country, Canada, itself a settler colony, was asked how many Jewish refugees would be allowed into Canada after the war, the infamous response was "None is too many." Golda Meir, then representing the British Mandate in Palestine, and later a Prime Minister of Israel who said and did some awful shit to Palestinians, was not permitted to speak or participate in the conference, she was only allowed to observe as country after country refused to accept Jewish refugees in any large number. (Though it should be noted that Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion, later the first President and Prime Minister of Israel respectively, actually supported this bullshit, because they thought having nowhere else to go would drive Jewish refugees to Palestine. They were right.) Israeli settlers are terrified of becoming a minority, because they do not trust the Palestinians to be any different from the rest of the world. And again, none of this justifies Israeli apartheid, but it elucidates where the Israelis are coming from, and should inform your anti-Zionist work.

Be specific and precise in where your principled anti-Zionism is coming from. To say that "the State of Israel is an openly settler-colonialist venture that has displaced millions of Palestinians and continues to engage in daily human rights abuses and ethnic cleansing" is specific and precise. To say that "Zionists use the Holocaust to play victim and get whatever they want"... do you understand the difference between those two statements? And why the second one might sound like when you say "Zionists", what you really mean is "Jews"?

Avoid double standards. Unless you genuinely believe that all white people should be kicked out of the Americas and return to Europe, don't apply that same belief to Israeli Jews. There is no post-Israeli future in Palestine that doesn't involve Jews living there. See points 1 and 4. And just to be clear, avoiding double standards cuts both ways. There is also no just future that involves the continued apartheid and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. It's evil, fascist, and genocidal for Israeli military officials to say that for all they care Gazans can go jump into the sea.

For fuck's sake stop putting the Neturei Karta on my dash. The Neturei Karta are a fringe group of Litvish Haredim who split off from other Haredim in Jerusalem. They're very publicly anti-Zionist while also being visibly ultra-Orthodox, so they get a lot of attention, but they're also Holocaust revisionists who attended and spoke at a 2006 Holocaust denial conference whose other speakers included David Duke of the KKK and several outright Holocaust deniers, and their leader defended Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a president of Iran who claimed Jews made up the Holocaust. If you want anti-Zionist Jews, there are plenty of us. Check out Jewish Voice for Peace, Independent Jewish Voices, or even the Satmar if you really want Haredim. Don't give the fucking Neturei Karta any oxygen.

Finally: Zionism is not a euphemism. Zionism is not "when Jews do a thing I don't like," and a Zionist is not "a Jew I disagree with/don't like". Zionism is a nationalism, and like all nationalisms, it hasn't fully delivered on the liberation it was created to provide, and it's oppressed others in the process. Zionism will never go away until the material conditions that drive Jewish nationalism - that is, global antisemitism - are addressed, and yet the Palestinian right to liberation is not and must not be contingent on the end of antisemitism. This is the fundamental problem at the core of the issue: Zionists believe Jewish safety will only come from a Jewish ethnostate with a Jewish majority, and since everywhere on Earth is populated by someone, it may as well be in Palestine, given the Jewish historical roots there. And they're wrong. They're doing horrific, evil, genocidal things in the name of Jewish safety, and they're wrong to do so. But we can condemn Zionism from an informed perspective, rather than from an ignorant one, and in doing so avoid antisemitism and strengthen our anti-Zionist work. The last thing we want to do is spread Nazi rhetoric in the name of Palestinian liberation.

[hanorganaas]

Well, Gal Gadot is also a Zionist who supported the mass genocide of Palestine in 2014 so i'm pretty sure that's why a lot of people don't like her as well.

...Did you read the part in her post where she said COEXIST...cause you may not realize it but the automatic assumption that a Jewish Woman who supports Israel supports Murder is Antisemtic.

So are you going to tell me because I support Israel and peace in the middle east that I support Genocide too? Cause thats what Im seeing right here

[schraubd]

'Cause You Know That You're Toxic

Google has a new gadget that tries to gauge how "toxic" a given comment is. It has a lot of learning to do. "Dogs are animals" is rated at 87% likely to perceived as toxic. "Muslims control the world", by contrast, clocks in at 30%. "Nazis are evil" gets a whopping 98%, while "Nazis are great" gets only 66%. I found out about this little toy from Liel Leibovitz, who claims it has a particular problem with Jews. Based on my fiddling around, it seems to have a problem with everyone, but he's not wrong that its performance re: the Tribe leaves a lot to be desired. "Zionists control the world" gets only an 18% rating, and if you change it to "Zios" that drops to 1% (I guess Google doesn't know it's a slur either). "Jews run Hollywood" falls in at 27%. On the other hand, "I hate Jews" gets a perfect 100% score, so there's that. Of course, it wouldn't be a Liel column without some hysterical allegations about how this is really the fault of the New York Times, rather than the predictable (and not-unique-to-Jews) set of kinks in a new machine-learning device. But the best part of Liel's column is when he takes issue with the term "toxic" itself:

The very term itself, toxicity, should’ve been enough of a giveaway: the only groups that talk about toxicity—see under: toxic masculinity—are those on the regressive left who creepily apply the metaphors of physical harm to censor speech not celebrate or promote it. No words are toxic, but the idea that we now have an algorithm replicating, amplifying, and automatizing the bigotry of the anti-Jewish left may very well be.

Interesting hypothesis, Liel-of-July-2017! I wonder what Liel-of-June-2017 has to say on that?

If the Times really wants to correct the record, it would follow up by taking a hard look at why it made the mistake in the first place. That is, it would examine the knee-jerk assumptions and overheated language that have crept into both its opinion and its news pages lately, both of which regularly offer space not just to legitimate newsgathering about Trump’s very real misdeeds and the rank incompetence of his administration, but also to wild-eyed conspiracy theories in which the Kremlin or some other malign foreign entity controls the White House. These theories are toxic nonsense, cooked up by political operatives who use social media and the press to attain political ends through means that are inherently extra-constitutional and undemocratic—and that have been quietly and systematically debunked, sometimes by the paper’s own reporting.

[...] 

Now, with the shooting at the GOP baseball practice in Virginia, the same toxic logic comes home.

And here too: "This sort of bigoted nonsense is toxic to all Americans, but it’s particularly hazardous to Jews, whose suffering is too often explained away these days as an acceptable byproduct of excessive power and influence." Or here: "Like Israeli lefties—but not, say, like the toxic creeps who rant about Israel in the anthropology departments of large American universities or the anti-Semites who pack the British Labour Party—Waldman and Chabon believe that Israel is in dire need of saving from what will ultimately be its downfall." But maybe Liel-of-June-2017 is an outlier. Where does Liel-of-March-2017 come down?

It didn’t take long for me to learn the same lesson Chris does in the movie, namely that the point of this new strain of toxic liberalism isn’t really to help victims of racism or anti-Semitism or any other sort of discrimination; rather, it’s to reconfigure the identities of white people so that they may go on and enjoy the same exact comforts to which they’re accustomed.

 One can keep going. And going and going and going. Sometimes I think the job of editors is to save writers from embarrassing themselves this way -- surely, it would not be too hard (and it was not too hard) to figure out if Liel had repeatedly used the term "toxic" a mere month before claiming that nobody but the "regressive left" did so. But perhaps here the right move was to give him enough rope to hang himself with. If he can't keep track of his own shibboleths and no-no words, nobody else should do it for him. via The Debate Link http://ift.tt/2tV1zar

[infiniteglitterfall]

It's honestly amazing. People think they're supportive of Jewish people. They just don't support the ones who dig up dead bodies to sell their organs!!! This is a perfectly reasonable position to have!! ANYONE would oppose that!!!

It reminds me of ritual abuse, in one very specific way. Both ritual abuse, and antisemitism, often involve things that make you sound absolutely ridiculous and unbelievable when you try to explain them.

"No, I swear, nobody is magically immune to the tropes about Jews poisoning wells, using the blood of children to make matzah, and secretly controlling the government! These are real, common libels today, not just in Superstitious Medieval Europe!"

And then you turn around for one damn minute, and they're holding up protest signs claiming "Congress is Occupied by Israel," actively supporting a group founded upon the belief that Jews control the media and the U.N., and retweeting some shit about how Jews really DO poison Palestinian groundwater! President Abbas said so!

2016:

2024:

I was looking at the Instagram account for Free Palestine Melbourne the other day. Because it had organized a recent rally where a different local group there, Free Palestine Printing, had distributed posters and flyers with photos of Nazi armies, with the swastikas replaced with stars of David. And I wanted to see if they'd even mentioned it.

They hadn't. But I did find a shit-ton of Jews saying that they weren't going to use the star of David anymore, because (they claimed) it's been carved and burned and branded into Palestinian skin. (And so, SO many people saying the star of David is a Nazi symbol now. SO MANY. Both Jews and non.)

This absolutely REEKS of the antisemitic willingness to believe the most grotesque things possible of Jews -- especially if you throw any kind of religious symbolism in there. The gorier, the more believable it is.

I fact-checked the hell out of it. Then I went through and told each one of them that no, that is bullshit urban legend that comes from one incident where cops beat a Palestinian prisoner and left cuts that looked, in one place, like the bottom of a triangle with extended lines.

Israel's Justice Ministry investigated it and ended up charging 7 cops with abuse of a helpless person, aggravated assault, obstruction of investigation, and abuse of official power. (I don't think we even have some of those charges here in the U.S.? I wish we did.)

(One commenter did acknowledge that "I personally didn't love those posters either due to ambiguity of messaging, but I want to reiterate that it is the zionist project obfuscates the star of david and commits nazi-like acts under this flag."

I was like, I'm not posting in these comments anymore but there is one (1) group here that is melding the star of David with the Nazis, and it is in Melbourne, and you are actively supporting it.)

People need to learn that if it's this fucking easy for them to believe absolutely catastrophically evil things about Jews, especially if they have the plausible deniability that it's just the country they think is a Jewish ethnostate! Then they're antisemitic.

It's bad enough the discourse responded to "you're being antisemitic" with a defensive blanket refusal to even believe it was possible for them to be antisemitic.

And the automatic assumption that it was FAR more likely that Jews are just the one marginalized group that DOES use claims of bigotry to shut down valid criticism.

But ten months later, there are people happily putting the star of David on Nazi flags and pretending this will somehow free Palestine.

Hold on, I think I screenshot it.

Yup. I forgot about the "same same."

And about the fact that the printers also sell this shirt.

They drew the quiet part out loud.

I'm feeling a very alienated from people around me because of my refusal to participate in antisemitism, and I'm not even Jewish, so I can't IMAGINE how so many of you are feeling out there. I almost feel silly for feeling alienated about it. It's causing some real reflections when it comes to how I view myself politically. It's like here I am thinking, "No, we're against ALL oppression, right guys? .... right, guys?" 🦗🦗🦗 And it sucks knowing that a. the alienation I'm describing pales in comparison to what Jewish people might be feeling and b. that it probably isn't even that surprising to you all. Antisemitism is so perennial, cyclical, it insists on coming back again and again, rooting itself in places where people otherwise wouldn't expect it. It's Samsaric.

I almost feel like I'm being gaslight- "I'm not antisemitic, I'm just saying that Jews are harvesting the blood and organs of children!"

Like, bro, what else would that be? If blood libel isn't antisemitism, what counts as antisemitism?

This post is probably a bit jumbled, but I hope you're all doing well. ❤️

[fairuzfan]

Hi thanks for this, a binational state is not a two state solution but I actually dislike the two state solution more than the binational solution. I dont think a two state solution is even feasible or realistic.

But regarding the binational state: My question is why does there need to be an 'israel' at all? Why can't it just be Palestine? Why are we separating people based on religion and ethnicity?

The whole plan hinges on the fact that Palestinians are allowed right of return as given by the Israelis. OK let's say they let Palestinians come back to their homes. But the state of Israel as we know it is intrinsically tied with the identity of Israelis. The identity of Israelis rely on the state. Therefore Israelis need the state, even if there is right of return.

Under the binational plan, we assume Palestinians are automatically given equal rights under the framework that Israelis provide. And there lies the issue. Any sort of determination the Israelis have over the Palestinians will always put the Palestinians at a disadvantage.

It does not make sense to me to lend legitimacy to a settler colonial state. I genuinely don't understand why there needs to be an "Israel" at all. Israel is built on the ruins of Palestine and lives by subjugation of the palestinians. So how can israel exist if it no longer is able to subjugate? The whole Israeli state relies on the displacement and theft of native land. That is what zionism is, at its core. The whole zionist project relies on ethnic cleansing. So under that assumption, how can "israeli" exist as an identity alongside Palestinian?

Like why can't it all just be "Palestine"? I feel like the binational state misconstrues and redefines zionism and colonialism, not necessarily on purpose. In my opinion, zionism and israel are fundamentally linked. No western power, which Israel is a western power, will allow under the systems we currently have in place for palestinian and israeli identities to exist side by side. Yeah a lot of Israelis dislike the binational state which maybe gives me a little hope that it might be going in the right direction but they are against it because they believe that the "Jewish character" of the land will be lost. So in my understanding, therefore, they'd fight to maintain the "Jewish character" and refuse the right of return for Palestinian refugees, which they believe will cause israeli jews to be outnumbered within a democratic system. I just genuinely don't believe Israel or Israeli jews will be willing to provide legitimacy to Palestinian identity/political power if the "israeli" identity still exists in some capacity. They call Palestinians a demographic threat. Why would they let Palestinians have rights if they're still israeli themselves?

My point is, it just seems overly naive to assume Israelis in general would be willing to "coexist" with Palestinians if they fundamentally consider themselves a different people who cannot fall under the "Palestinian" identity. Like before "israel" was established, zionist colonialists were NOT interested in interacting with Palestinian society. Under this binational state, would Israeli Jews willingly give up zionism? If not, then I don't get it. Zionism as an ideology and a practice is the issue. Will this binational plan somehow stop zionism from being implemented? It feels like there are too many loopholes to let zionism slip through the cracks.

But also I'm leaving some other side thoughts about this whole thing out of the discussion — I think with the current genocide, which is the worst part in Palestinian history we've had in centuries, there is the question of societal reconstruction and reeducation. The binational state proposition was already odd to me from before but now it seems impossible for a variety of reasons that I don't want to get into.

Will say that I see the "binational democratic state" a lot, even on anarchist threads (which... lol) but genuinely if you think that a binational state in which the status as an "israeli" exists in contrast with the status as a "Palestinian" and you genuinely think an "israeli" political system will allow for the right of return for Palestinians (which the whole plan hinges on) then you are naive at best and at worst, have no real intent in providing Palestinians with any real alternative to self determination and are a liberal zionist wanting to preserve the israeli state.

Palestinians are currently called "demographic threats" in their own land. What makes you think that will magically go away, along with systematic oppression? Be for real.