#zionists are second coming of nazis

[tomlinsonandtits]

I'm posting under this tag cos there are way too many Zionist blogs on this tag to count atp but please please please educate yourself on what's actually being done to palestine from better sources than Zionist blogs who have a propaganda to spread based on lies.

If you care so much to speak up about the hypocrisy of taylor swift, don't become hypocrites yourself by supporting and justifying genocide and ethnic cleansing.

[discoursedumpster]

@puppypalice what do you think a Zionist is, though? Because this implies that there's some kind of Zionist organization or political party that people can join.

As far as I can tell, there are two different definitions people are using for "Zionist."

People who don't think Israel should be violently destroyed.

A specifically Jewish movement of people who love genocide in general, or genocide of Palestinians in particular.

But there's not an organization for either of those things.

You seem to be picturing the second definition? But like... what are they joining? The IDF?

I know they're not joining some evangelical megachurch that wants Israel to exist so that the End Times can come or whatever.

Because nobody is protesting those. They rarely even get mentioned.

I know they're not joining Hamas/PIJ/PFLP, despite the fact that Sinwar said he would fight until the last child in Gaza; despite Haniyeh demanding "the blood of Gaza's children, women, and elderly;" despite the fact that Gazans loathe Hamas for starting the war, routinely torturing and executing dissenters, and committing countless atrocities against them over the past 15 months.

Because at best, nobody gives a shit about Hamas. And at worst, they buy the propaganda that Hamas is "the Palestinian resistance." (Instead of the We Want To Live movement and the Gaza's Liberators movement.)

Are future historians going to be saying this about anyone who hates and opposes Hamas? Because that seems to be what usually gets Gazan activists, and Jews, denounced as Zionists.

If so, that now includes not only most of Gaza:

But also, the rest of Palestine:

That's from one of the co-organizers of the We Want To Live movement, who has twice been jailed and tortured by Hamas for organizing marches in Gaza.

He's only 24, and he's repeatedly put his life on the line for Gaza's freedom. And there is not one person in the pro-Palestine movement that will platform him, or anyone like him. Even Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib -- another Gazan activist, one who hates Israel significantly more than Howidy -- gets pre-emptively blocked.

Anyway, the context for the whole "they'll call them Zionists" thing was that the Hind Rajab Foundation filed 12 complaints against IDF soldiers.

Which does make it seem like that must be what everyone's going to be called Nazis for joining?

The Hind Rajab Foundation is chaired by a former Hezbollah member: Dyab Abou Jahah, a Belgian man from Lebanon who also:

founded a Holocaust denial group;

has repeatedly called for the violent destruction of Israel;

says Europe makes "the cult of the Holocaust and Jew-worshiping its alternative religion";

questioned the existence of the Nazi gas chambers;

and calls gay men “AIDS spreading faggots”...

...just to hit the highlights.

The article notes that there were no troops around when Hind Rajab was killed. Which is news to me, because I only learned about it on social media.

So basically, a guy who is at best a Nazi apologist started a group named after someone who wasn't killed by the IDF, but who he wants us to think was. And now that group is running "a campaign... to identify Israeli soldiers who have published videos to social media in which they commit, claim to have committed, or appear to endorse committing potential war crimes, and to file complaints against the soldiers on that basis."

@stoptheantisemitism blocked me after I said you can't just report people you assume must have committed a war crime. Because surely you can, since "they've posted themselves committing atrocities all over social media" or whatever.

But in fact, the article they posted literally says that the campaign includes people "who appear to endorse committing potential war crimes."

And no matter how despicable or disgusting that is, it's also absolutely fucking silly to be like, "Hey!! Sri Lanka!! SRI LANKA!! This guy who tweeted about wanting to burn Gaza City to the ground is in your country right now!!! Arrest him!!!!!!"

The fuck you want Sri Lanka to do about that??? He didn't commit a crime on their soil, and he's not a citizen of their country.

So I'm assuming you're talking about the IDF. But what's the point of saying that future historians will imply people were Nazis for joining the IDF even if they don't hate Palestinians? People are already calling them that today.

More to the point, it's not like there's a massive movement to move to Israel and get permission to join its military.

Is the point just to make sure we damn everyone in the IDF, whether they personally hate Palestinians or not, whether they were conscripted or not, etc?

Is the point just to call them Nazis?

Is the point to minimize the Nazis by deemphasizing what they did?

Because it seems important that Hitler not only industrialized mass murder and killed a peak of 500,000 people a month, but also:

declared a state of emergency,

seized dictatorial powers,

stripped Jews of their citizenship,

made relationships and sex with them illegal,

pressured white people to boycott all Jewish businesses,

and banned them from leaving the country without turning their property and money over to the Nazis,

none of which Israel has ever done to either the Palestinalsians, or its own Arab citizens.

like, I would assume that nobody is making a conscious attempt to minimize what the Nazis did. But it minimizes what they did either way.

[queer-scots-geordie-dyke]

the leftist vehement hatred for anyone who's served in the military is so divorced from reality too. like they love to trot out the fact that poverty/lack of education are used to recruit poor minorities that don't have other options, but the moment someone joins the military they're the literal scum of the earth. like I'm sorry, I thought these ppl were victims a second ago?

& then shouldn't that extend to ppl who live in countries w mandatory military service? shouldn't we recognize that the lack of options makes these ppl victims? but leftists who largely come from middle class American families who have never been anywhere CLOSE to an active warzone will say that "good" Israelis would go to prison or leave the country, even though they KNOW some ppl don't have those options. the gall to pass moral judgments on ppl living in a political situation they will never understand. but these ppl are strangely silent on Iranian mandatory military service.

"I would die before serving in the military" 1) no you wouldn't 2) you got one whiff of nazi rhetoric & immediately started posting "zionist blocklists" you would literally be helping them round up the jews

ABSOLUTELY THIS.

[ind1g3n0us-lev1t3]

@elenajones23 first of all, who are you, a non Jew to lecture me about what my religion does or doesn’t allow? Who are you to tell me, as someone who doesn't practice the same religion, that I can or cannot do things?

The Torah isn’t a simple set of guidelines and commands, it’s far more complex than that. It has different interpritations, so saying the torah doesn't allow it is blatantly false. The name "Zion" (Promised land) is mentioned 154 times.

“It isn’t your land and it never was your land” bullshit.

We absolutely do have a land, if we don't, then why do we have holy sights in Jerusalem? Why are names like "Jaffa" and "Haifa" Hebrew?

The land of Israel is where my ancestors came from, it is where they lived, it is where they had a connection to, and it is where they suffered under the romans and were exiled.

We were never welcomed in Europe, we were never welcomed in the rest of the middle east.

These are ancient scrolls called the "Dead sea scrolls" which are a set of ancient Jewish writings dating from the 3rd century BCE.

This is all of what remains of our ancient temple, this is what it once was:

The first temple is Solomon's temple, the second one is Herod's temple, which was destroyed in 70CE by the romans. centuries later, the Muslim caliphates built the Al Aqsa mosque which was built on top of our temple mount. Today, the west wall is all we have left of this historic holy place.

The name "Palestine" was given to the land of Israel by roman colonisers who exiled most of us from the land of Israel, took many of us slaves, and scattered everyone else through western Europe (Some moved further east).

Now about the Nazis = Zionist argument. The Nazis originally made a deal with German Zionist Jews (The Haavara agreement) to bring about a mass migration from Germany to Israel, it should be mentioned that this was because Hitler and the Nazis wanted a Jew-Free Europe, not because the Nazis supported Zionism.

This deal was criticized by both Nazis and Zionists. Zionist criticised it because it made a deal with the devil, and the Nazis criticised it because it went against their philosophy.

The Nazis were extremely antizionist, the belief that they were Zionists is soviet cold war propaganda to demonise the state of Israel and the broader Jewish community. They believed that Jews were biologically incapable of running their own state and were too inferior. Hitler had a "Palestinian" friend (Amin al-Husseini) who campaigned in Berlin, fought for a Palestinian state, and even CONTRIBUTED TO THE HOLOCAUST. They also lead a boycott of Jewish businesses in "Palestine".

So, you're wrong. So very very wrong. You can try to lecture me about the history of my own people and religion all you want, but you're wrong.

Please, kindly fuck off and read a history book. Please attend a Synagogue service and learn more about our religion before you come spewing false bullshit about it.

[pencopanko]

Antisemitism and Islamophobia are very similar (if not the same), actually

So I was scrolling down the #palestine tag for any updates and important information, and I came across this:

And I think we need to sit down and talk about this.

I am a Muslim. I live in Indonesia, a country that is predominantly Muslim and a lot of Muslims here also support the Palestinian cause. Hell, even our government supports it by not only allowing Palestinian goods enter the country without fee, but also by taking in Palestinian refugees and even acknowledging the status of Palestine as a state while not having any political ties with Israel. The topic of the Palestinian tragedy has been spoon-fed to us at schools, sermons, media, etc., so your average Indonesian Muslim would at the very least be aware of the conflict while non-Muslims would hear about it from their Muslim friends or through media.

However, there is a glaring problem. One that I keep seeing way too often for my liking.

A lot of them are antisemitic as hell. The sermons I would hear sometimes demonize Jewish people. Antisemitic statements are openly said out loud on social media. Some are even Nazi supporters who would literally go to anime cons and COSPLAY as members of the Nazi party. This is not just an Indonesian Muslim problem, no, but this is a glaring issue within the global Islamic community as a whole. Today, this sense of antisemitism is usually rooted in general hatred towards the Israeli government and its actions against the people of Palestine, but antisemitism amongst Muslims are also rooted in certain interpretations of verses from the Qur'an and Hadith mentioning Jewish people and Judaism (particularly the Bani Israil), but in a way that is more ridiculing instead of life-threatening when compared to how antisemitism looks like in the Western world.

As someone who prefers to become a "bridge" between two sides in most cases, I find this situation to be concerning, to say the least. While, yes, it is important for us Muslims to support Palestine and fight against injustice, we must not forget that not every Jewish people support the Israeli government. A lot of them are even anti-Zionists who actively condemn Israel and even disagree with the existence of Israel as a state as it goes against their teachings. A lot of them are also Holocaust survivors or their descendants, so it is harmful to think for one second that Hitler's actions and policies were justified. It's just like saying that Netanyahu is right for his decision to destroy Palestine and commit war crime after war crime towards the Palestinians.

As Muslims, we also need to remember that Jewish people (the Yahudi) are considered ahli kitab, i.e. People Of The Book along with Christians (the Nasrani). The Islam I have come to know and love has no mentions of Allah allowing us to persecute them or anyone collectively for the actions of a few. While, yes, there are disagreements with our respective teachings I do not see that as an excuse to even use antisemitic slurs against Jewish people during a pro-Palestine rally, let alone support a man who was known for his acts of cruelty toward the Jewish community in WW2. They are still our siblings/cousins in faith, after all. Unless they have done active harm like stealing homes from civilians or celebrating the destruction of Palestine or supporting the Israeli government and the IOF or are members of the IOF, no Jewish people (and Christians, for that matter) must be harmed in our fight against Zionism.

Contemporary antisemitism is similar to (if not straight up being the exact same thing as) contemporary Islamophobia, if you think about it; due to the actions of a select few that has caused severe harm towards innocent people, an entire community has been a target of hate. Even when you have tried to call out the ones supporting such cruelties, you are still getting bombarded by hate speech. It's doubly worse if you're also simultaneously part of a marginalized group like BIPOC, LGBTQ+, etc. as you also get attacked on multiple sides. This is where we all need to self-reflect, practice empathy, and unlearn all of the antisemitism and unjustified hatred that we were exposed to.

So, do call out Zionism and Nazism when you see it. Call out the US government for funding this atrocity and others before it that had ALSO triggered the rise of Islamophobia. Call your reps. Go to the streets. Punch a fascist if you feel so inclined. Support your local businesses instead of pro-Israel companies.

But not at the cost of our Jewish siblings. Not at the cost of innocent Jewish people who may also be your allies. If you do that, you are no different from a MAGA cap-wearing, gun-tooting, slur-yelling Islamophobe.

That is all for now, may your watermelons taste fresh and sweet.

🍉

Salam Semangka, Penco

[a-very-tired-jew]

A trend that I have seen lately from the antisemitic anti-Zionist crowd is to latch on to the concept of Christian Zionists. I've seen a good number of the big accounts across social media talk about Christian Zionism as if it's the same thing as Zionism as it relates to Jews.

For example; take one of the GFM "verifiers" and big anti-Zionist blogger el-shab sharing from palistani (who is a raging antisemite).

This is one example and follows the standard I've seen across ProPal social media. They will typically introduce Christian Zionism as a whataboutism to distract from the fact that their movement is full of Nazis, antisemites, and supremacists. They will not explain the differences between Christian Restorationism Zionism and Zionism, nor explain how it came about, and then drop the "Christian" modifier and just call refer to it as Zionism from then on. This is part of how they are and have been spreading the "Zionism is a White Supremacist Colonizer ideology".

Most people don't know the difference between Christian Zionism and Zionism. Most people don't know that Christian Zionism is Christian Restorationism and that they changed the name of their belief/ideology to "ally" with Jews and garner support. But that "allyship" with Jews is conditioned on the fact that they need us to be in our homeland so that they can get their Second Coming Apocalypse ending.

That's it.

That's the whole thing.

We need to be in Israel so the End Times can happen and that's why they're (Christian) Zionists.

It has nothing to do with Zionism as it relate to Jews, Jewish safety, Jewish identity, Jewish indigeneity, and so on.

It's just another appropriation by goyim.

Now, End Times style Christians in the USA tend to be right wing bigots. They're typically the ones ranting about how *insert hated group* are a sign of the End. They push for legislature that is discriminatory and hateful. Many of them are White Supremacists and proud of it. This is a common tactic used by the mouth pieces of the anti-Israel movement; distract and redirect.

Do they have Nazis in their movement? Yes. But don't focus on that. Focus on this other thing that I'm holding in front of your face that is totally the worse thing so that you don't question why we have Nazis, antisemites, and other bigots in our group.

Jews are not Christian Zionists and cannot be. Zionism as it relates to Jews is completely separate with its own subtypes couched underneath it. But to conflate their Christian beliefs with a Jewish ideology is a fallacious argument that really shows how desperate antisemites anti-Zionists are.

After all these months it appears that people are listening to Jews about what Zionism actually is vs what these protesters have been telling them it is. They need to go "well what about this Zionism?! huh? huh?" as if it's another gotcha. But just like they've been defining Zionism as if it was Kahanism, this new talking point will just be another nail in the coffin of "it's anti-Zionism, not antisemitism!"

[matan4il]

Believe it or not it is possible for people to agree with the fact that Jews are native to the land, while simultaneously thinking that does not give them the right in the here and now to establish their own state there (and displace the people who have been living there for several hundred years).

Believe it or not, recognizing that Jews are native to the Land of Israel, while denying them the rights that come from that, is not the great line of defence you think it is.

Native rights are not conditional.

A people does not lose its right to self determination, to self rule in their ancestral land, no matter what they had done at one point in time. The Cambodian Khmer Rouge massacred at least 1.7 million people, Cambodians and other minorities living in Cambodia, but I'm sure you don't go to the blogs of Cambodians on Tumblr, to tell them that they lost the right to their state in their own land. The Japanese committed atrocities during WWII, such as the Nanjing massacre, yet no one says Japan has lost the right to exist. And of course, Nazi Germany started the bloodiest military conflict in human history, and committed the most extreme case of a genocide, which was actually industrialized. I'm looking forward to you coming off anon, to show me the asks you sent to Japanese or Germans on Tumblr, telling them they don't have a right to their own state anymore...

If the only native rights you treat as conditional, are those of the Jews, your stance is antisemitic.

2. That's before we get to the part where you distort Jewish history to vilify Jews, and their national liberation movement. Zionists absolutely did try to coexist with the Arabs in Israel.

Here's one piece on Jewish attempts to reach peace with the Arabs before the State of Israel was even established. Here's another on the Weizmann-Faisal peace agreement between Jews and Arabs in 1919, in which both sides agreed to respect and help with the national aspirations of the other side. On Faisal's part, the agreement was conditioned on Britain's promise to help create a greater unified Arab state. This was never fulfilled, so the agreement became void, too. But I think its importance is in showing the Jewish attempts at peace, and the fact that following it, Faisal wrote a favorable letter about Zionism. If Zionism had been inherently anti-Arab and hellbent on displacing Arabs, this agreement wouldn't have existed, and such a favorable view of Zionism by an Arab leader would not have been possible, not even temporarily.

Most importantly, at the moment when talk turned into practice, as the UN voted in 1947 on a suggestion to divide the Land of Israel roughly equally and create a Jewish state and an Arab one there, the Jews accepted it, the Arabs did not (the latter also rejected the 1937 Peel Commission, which suggested a similar divide, except the Arabs would get roughly 81% of the Land of Israel).

The displacement you mentioned cannot negate the native rights of Jews in Israel, because they weren't the ones who caused it. The displacement of the Land of Israel's Arabs is a result of the war the Arab leadership started, due to their rejection of what was essentially a two state solution.

If your anti-Zionist denial of Jewish rights cannot stand without blaming Jews for the decisions of the Arab leadership, it is both antisemitic, and racist, erasing the agency of Arabs.

3. Now let's go back for a second to your implication that one group displacing another from the land, where the latter has lived for centuries, negates the former's right to self determination. I'm putting aside for a second the centuries of discrimination and persecution which Jews had suffered in Israel, I'm putting aside the religious persecution (for example, how the Arabs succeeded in their campaign of harassment of Jews praying in Jerusalem, and in their demand that the British arrest Jews for blowing the shofar, praying out loud, or bringing Torah scrolls to the Western Wall, the second holiest place to Judaism, after the Temple Mount), I'm putting aside the repeated massacres of Jews, and I'll only talk about displacement, since that's what you mentioned. Because in 1929, Arab violence towards Jews in Israel resulted in the displacement and ethnic cleansing of Jewish communities from places like Hebron, where Jews have lived for THOUSANDS of years, and Gaza (to name just two of the communities harmed), almost 20 years before the State of Israel was established.

Somehow, I have a hunch that you won't come off anon to denounce the right of Palestinians to a state of their own based on this displacement and ethnic cleansing of ancient Jewish communities. Do I really need to explain why such a discriminatory application of this (very flawed) logic, in the name of anti-Zionism, is antisemitic?

But, you know. Congrats on at least not erasing the fact that Jews are native to Israel, two seconds before most of the world celebrates the birth of a Jewish man in Israel, more than 2,000 years ago.

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[genderfluid-jewish-lesbian]

My Jewish Identity

I am an Ashkenazi Jew. When people hear this, they assume I am Polish. I am not.

My family lived in Ukraine for many years, to the point that I could say I am Ukrainian. But I am not, because at the time it was Soviet Russia, so they would have identified as Russian. Except they didn’t. They said they were Jewish, because they weren’t treated as if they were Russians. 

When people hear this they must think, “oh, they must have such a hard time with the current war up north” I don’t. The Ukrainians that are suffering were never my family. My family got kicked out, and left for America. They left their tiny shtetl, and came to a new land. If they were still alive, they would feel bad, but the people suffering are the grandchildren of the people who hated them. I feel sorrow for the people there, because if my family never left I would be among them. But my family never wanted to leave. 

I live in America. I identify as an American as a child of immigrants would. I am 4th generation American, in some parts 5th, but I don’t feel that way. I am a Jewish American: Jewish first, American second. 

I am also Irish, Italian and Cypriot. When people ask for my ethnicity, I say that I am Ukrainian Jewish, Irish, and an Italian-Cypriot blend. People get upset when I list my Jewishness as an ethnicity. These people are never Jewish. “It’s a religion, not an ethnicity!” To you it is. To the people who oppressed my family, it was very much an ethnicity. It was a justification for killing non-practicing Jews. 

My name is Chaya. It comes from the word “Chai” meaning life in Hebrew. If you do not already know this, it’s pronounced with a k sound, not a ch sound. People have said that the word was stolen from other languages. They are denying my name, one of the must fundamental truths of my existence. My name means life, and they are denying it. They are denying Jewish life. 

People ask me if I’m a Zionist. Am I one for wanting the state of Israel to exist? A homeland of my people? Then yes, yes I am. Can I be one and want Palestine to exist? Yes, I can. Can I be a Zionist and want peace for everyone? I certainly believe so, but people on the internet are telling me I am a nazi. I am a Jew. I know what nazis are. I know what genocide is. I know what ethnic cleansing is. You are telling me I am contributing to it. How can someone say anything more hurtful? My family escaped ethnic cleansing. We have been doing that since the 7th century. It is the reason I am alive. You tell me, that to get a land back from the descendants of my oppressors, I am the oppressor? You tell me I am no longer native. Is there a time limit? Do I have to stay in the land to stop the clock? I couldn’t. My family couldn’t. We are a wandering nation of people who have been kicked out of every place we have stayed. Now we are finally home, and we are told it is no longer our home? By who? Not us, I am sure. Oh, it’s by the people who took our land in the first place! Now the media has put us against each other, and people don’t feel safe in the streets. 

People say they feel safe. Those stories are shared everywhere. Someone else says they feel unsafe, but how can they possibly when someone else, in different circumstances, from different decent, in a different land, with a different level of religion, says they are okay? How can both be the same group and have different experiences? We wouldn’t, if we never lost our land. 

[olderthannetfic]

People have said this in the reblogs, but people who are concerned about what Project 2025 might do to AO3 should try to prevent that by voting for Democrats, including Joe Biden (or whomever replaces him if that happens), and supporting campaigns by canvassing, phonebanking, donating, sending postcards. If you're not a U.S. citizen, you can't vote or donate but you can probably find other ways to support, including by reblogging pro-voting posts on here. It's not a done deal. One person in the reblogs brought this up too but I wanted to elaborate: There's a huge problem on Tumblr with anti-voting propaganda, especially spread by tankies and other kinds of horrible people. I think that more people need to consider that if they're going to decide "hey, the occasional funnee meme isn't worth following a terf or Nazi or other anti-LGBTQ+/racist bigot" that should expand to tankies. Supporting dictators like Putin and Xi is supporting anti-LGBTQ+ politics, supporting racism (these people all violently suppress racial and religious minorities) and is supporting censorship. They are kind of famous for that. Supporting Putin, especially if you are also downplaying or making excuses for the invasion of Ukraine, is also supporting genocide because that is what he is doing to Ukraine right now. That should be a firm line for you, I think, if your convictions aren't like completely worthless lol. Some things should be more important to you than fucking memes! And at least have the bare minimum critical thinking skills to wonder if people who spend so much time doing apologetics for right-wing homophobic transphobic dictatorships, might be discouraging voting because they're ok with the U.S. also becoming a right-wing homophobic transphobic dictatorship.

One of my eternal vent pet peeve things is how many people make excuse for the blogger heritagep/osts (username is without the slash, but they and their friends are name-searchers). This is a person who regularly reblogs pro-dictatorship propaganda including for fucking North Korea, discourages and shames voting, and also is a vicious anti-semite who tries to hide that under supposedly being pro-Palestine. The way you can tell this is they're constantly making "Zionist blocklists" but if you look at the names that are actually on those blocklists, they're nearly all people who are outspokenly ANTi Zionist but who happen to be Jewish and post about that.

The excuse people constantly use for following them is that their blog is about documenting old Tumblr posts. Which just seems so flimsy because there are so many blogs that do that these days? Nearly all the rest of which are not antisemitic transphobic-dictator-apologists. H/eritageposts' commentary isn't even that funny. A lot of it is "anti" adjacent shit acting like everyone who ever liked Hetalia or Shingeki no Kyojin is antisemitic and responsible for rising Nazi sentiment online, which is kind of rich given the antisemitism and pro-right-wing-dictator stuff they've been radicalized into. Like lol call fujoshis "cringe" all you want but hardly any of the people I know who were into Hetalia in 2010 are antisemites in 2024, but you, on the other hand... Like maybe fandom is not in fact the danger and you can be a sucker for Internet extremism even without it!

Anyway, people, please just have bare minimum standards and compassion for who you follow and promote. No one's saying that you ahve to research everyone you reblog from, but there are blogs who regularly post this shit, you'd notice if you followed them or even glanced at them, that people make excuses for following because "funnie posts." Like come on. Have more self-respect and more actual courage of your convictions than that. All you're showing is that when the actual dictators are here you'll fall right in line the second they make a joke you laugh at.

--

Even if that weasel wins, plenty of people have fought horrendous governments before.

Queer people didn't have any fucking rights in the US when I was a kid, so we fought. We'll just have to fight again if it comes down to it.

Always vote.

Even if all the candidates suck, they're never all the same.

[blackpearlblast]

hey, if my ask is insensitive or simply too much work/you dont want to give your opinion/energy thats ok, and im sorry for bothering you if it is. ive seen many jewish people say "from the river to the sea" is a dogwhistle/generally antisemitic phrase to use, but you used it in your golem art's text part(incredibly moving text btw.) im asking you bc you mentioned youre jewish and i thought you might have insight or thoughts to give on why you use it/what you think about the first statement about the phrase?

hi, yes, i would be glad to talk about my perspective on this! first of all, i do want to say that i think a lot of palestinian bloggers have already talked about this and their voices will always be what you want to seek out first when educating yourself. however, i do know the crowd of people claiming that "from the river to the sea" is antisemitic/genocidal has been very loud so i understand why you would want to hear a jewish perspective on it too. second, in order to explain why i think "from the river to the sea" is not antisemitic will involve me comparing it to actual antisemitic, nazi slogans and dogwhistles and talking about what they mean. so just a heads up for that before it comes up.

the full phrase is "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free!" i think a lot of times in accusations of antisemitism people leave off the second half of the phrase in order to claim it is calling for something else to happen from river to sea (like the expulsion or execution of all jews.) but that's just like, not, ever, a thing? that is said? you can tell the pieces of the phrase go together because they rhyme and also are said together by palestinians and allies near constantly. it's "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free." and i think all of the fearmongering relies on a good bit of ambiguity beyond that too. "what does a 'free palestine' mean? could it meant they want to throw all the jews into the sea?" - some zionist when i tried to look up the origin of the phrase in case there was anything really important i was missing that i should cover in this. there's like this idea that they can't really be asking for a free palestine, there has to be some kind of catch.

i think it's also important to look at the circumstances that this slogan was born under. the thing about modern day palestine and occupied palestine, on which israel tries to build itself, is that even though spatially the land stretches from river to sea, the people's experience of it does not. because of the apartheid system of checkpoints, ID-based restriction of movement, and blockades (in the case of gaza), there exist great gulfs in the land that are impossible or near impossible for people to cross. there can be a place a couple miles away, that due to lacking the "proper credentials", is more distant for palestinians living under apartheid than perhaps a destination a cross-country trip away would be for you. so i see the call for a free palestine specifically "from river to sea" to remove those gulfs and allow freedom of movement for everyone. i find very little of this has to do with jews, personally. the only connection is that the people who set up and maintain this system of apartheid happened to be jewish. and i hope that we would all agree that resisting one's oppressors- even if those oppressors are also marginalized and oppressed in other ways- is not a bad thing.

but it is true that many white supremacist/antisemitic slogans may focus more on the creation of a (white) nation than actually the jews themselves, since they have already established among themselves that a white nation has to mean no jews. so let's look at some of the more famous nazi rallying cries and how different they are from "from the river to the sea."

the fourteen words are most primarily known to be "we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." wow! i guess we could find some superficial similarities between this and river and the sea, like if we really wanted to stretch it. but personally, there's a ton of alarm bells in my head that this phrase sets off while river to the sea doesn't. the emphasis of "we" and "our" when used in this way really implies an us versus them narrative. and here the ambiguity really is present and malevolent! a "free palestine" is a palestine unrestricted by apartheid and colonialism. a "secure existence" and "future for white children" is uhhh, what does that Mean. like, we Know what that means right. but they aren't saying it. we can very easily find people saying what a free palestine means if we listen to palestinians. please, please listen to palestinians. there are so many people talking about what their idea of a decolonized palestine looks like, but the basics are generally one state, for all people, with equal rights for all, and the ability for those who were expelled from their homes in the nakba and all of the many long years following it, to return.

"blood and soil" is even vaguer. but thankfully(?), nazis were very enthusiastic about explaining what the phrase meant to them. "blood" is the superior aryan bloodlines and eugenic values that they wished to propagate and the "soil" represents the land of germany and the desire to "reject modernity and embrace tradition" by leaving urban life behind and living in the idealized countryside. (see we got a twofer here!) the only possible connection i could make to from the river to the sea here is the emphasis on the land but that on its own doesn't feel significant to me. land and the place where you live is very important to all kinds of humans all over the world. and i think another particular aspect of "blood and soil" is the emphasis of how you are living on the land. it's not just enough to be able to live in your homeland with freedom of movement and the ability not to be killed with impunity by occupying soldiers (lucky you!), you want to live there in a state of racial purity exemplified by eugenic values. in general, in nazi slogans, there is a particular fixation with a society shaped to represent these specific values. the call is not for freedom from repression, from an actual occupying colony, but instead from the considered bad actors and impure values coming from within their society. freedom from having degenerates sullying their perfect aryan nation. there is a plea to be able to get rid of those who do not match their view of a perfect society. the plea for a free palestine is, so much, a plea to be able to keep their family members, their friends, the friendly stranger down the block. that is not a fascist ideology, that is the will to live. and though i am referring to the ideology surrounding "blood and soil" in past tense because i am referencing the coining of the phase, these sentiments and slogans are obviously (and unfortunately) alive and well today. though, there is a particular irony to white american neo-nazis chanting it on stolen land.

"they will not replace us"/"jews will not replace us" refers to the "great replacement" theory, that jews are orchestrating a mass replacement of white people with immigrants (specifically non-white, often muslim immigrants.) i do not think this slogan has even any superficial similarities to from the river to the sea. you could definitely compare this sentiment to israel's attempts to maintain an artificial ethnic majority, since in many ways the potential "solution" to the "great replacement" would also need to involve creating/maintaining an artificial ethnic majority. (this is obviously not saying that israel subscribes to the great replacement theory, but that the tactic of maintaining artificial ethnic majorities is shared between zionism and great replacement theorists, since both ideologies rely on a specific ethnicity being the majority in their country.)

dogwhistles like 88, triple parenthesis, etc. rely on being vague symbols so that only those who know what the symbols stand for know what they mean. (88=HH=heil hitler, the triple parentheses representing the supposed (((echoes))) of jewish influence throughout history.) "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free" is a complete phrase that directly names its cause. people who say "free palestine" want you to know they stand with palestine. i guess if you wanted to be going for the most bad faith reading possible you could say "free palestine from what?", to which every palestinian and everyone who has been remotely paying attention to what palestinians are saying would shout: "from apartheid, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, and currently, very open and deliberate genocide!" like, it is true that if you felt you did not glean every aspect and detail of what the people in the occupied territories are calling for, you would be correct! but they are answering this. they want to talk about it. the reason i do not believe from the river to the sea is genocidal or antisemitic is because i have been reading and listening to what palestinians are saying and none of them have said they want to kill all jews. they do not want genocide, they want to go home! they just want to go home. i don't know most of this was written pretty tongue in cheek because i was talking about nazi slogans and nazis are pathetic and even more pathetic when held up against a movement of people who are legitimately trying to fight against a great wrong that was committed against them, but i just get so sad saying this. they just want to go home. haven't you ever felt that way before?

in the end, words mean things, and even more importantly, the contexts they're said in mean things. and while it's true that antisemites do hide behind dogwhistles and vague statements for plausible deniability, the alternative meaning does have to actually be established somewhere for them to be effective. from the river to the sea lacks an established alternative meaning. fearmongering from people who refuse to listen to what palestinians are actually saying does not make sense to me as legitimate definitions of the phrase.

also!!!! i'm sorry this got so Fucking long, thank you if you actually made it this far! i intentionally used "from the river to the sea" in my artists statement because it frustrates and upsets me so much to see people making such a big fuss about it when actual antisemitism goes unpunished. like a lot of the phrases i talk about here were chanted at the charlottesville neo-nazi march in 2017 and while many people were deeply upset and angry at what happened, the jewish community was not rallied around even Close to as much as it right now. and with joe biden saying "if it weren't for israel, not a single jew in the world would be safe" at a fucking hanukkah celebration i just. i don't know. the push back against "from the river to the sea" has so much to do with backing colonial and imperial interests and so so little to do with our actual safety. the concept of our identities and safety is being weaponized against palestinians, and at the same time makes it harder to identify actual antisemitism. and that hurts.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Yossi Klein Halevi

Subsequently, the Soviet regime went a step further, from the erasure of the Holocaust to its inversion, equating Zionism with racism and even Nazism. The notion of Zionism as a form of racism was born in the Soviet Union. The regime understood that the only way to justify Jew-hatred from the left was through anti-racism. That ingenious ideological twist is the Soviet Union’s posthumous gift to Western anti-Zionists.

Is anti-Zionism, then, the latest iteration of antisemitism? Much of contemporary anti-Zionism uncomfortably fits the historic pattern of both symbolization and denialism. In the era of anti-racism and human rights, the Jewish state is turned into the criminal of nations, a symbol of racism and colonialism, and now even genocide. Reaching this conclusion requires a heavy dose of denialism: the erasure of the Zionist narrative, from the millennial-old Jewish roots in the land of Israel to the relentless war against Israel’s existence, which has forced Israel to act in sometimes brutal ways.

According to the anti-Zionist variation of supersessionism, sinful Israel has ceded its story to the Palestinians, who are, in effect, the new Jews, both as victims and as rightful heirs to the Holy Land. We are not only colonialists in our land but, in our story, imposters who must be expelled from both. In their fallen state, Jews have even forfeited the Holocaust; in this retelling, Gaza becomes the “Gaza Ghetto.” When a swastika is painted on the façade of a synagogue, it is no longer clear whether the perpetrators are far-rightists celebrating Nazism or far-leftists branding Jews as the new Nazis.

Astonishingly, the current rise in attacks on Jews coincides with the greatest mass slaughter of Israelis in a century of conflict between Arabs and Jews. The global assault emerged with the first reports of the Hamas massacre – before Israel’s counter-offensive even began. Antisemitism is a response not only to Jewish power, real or exaggerated but also to Jewish vulnerability; a successful attack on Jews rouses the antisemitic appetite.

The pretext offered for the widespread support among anti-Zionists for the Hamas massacre is based on two “denialist” arguments. The first is that the massacre was the inevitable result of the Israeli occupation. This argument ignores the fact that Hamas’ goal is not the end of the occupation of the territories Israel won in the 1967 Six-Day War but the destruction of the Jewish state. And it ignores the complicated history of how we have come to this point, including Palestinian rejection of every offer Israel has made over the years to end the occupation.

The second argument in support of the Hamas massacre is that it was not a massacre at all. There were no mass rapes; children weren’t burned alive. This latest expression of anti-Jewish denialism has taken the macabre form of tearing down posters of Israeli hostages, even blacking out their faces – a literal defacement. Embracing Hamas requires adopting its denial of the humanity of Israelis.

The British Jewish writer David Hirsh argues that the term “anti-Zionism” should be treated like “anti-Semitism,” removing the hyphen and lowercasing the “z.” Similar to the absence of meaning in “Semitism,” he notes “Zionism” for radical progressives is a fantasy construct, a demonic ideology with no resemblance to its actual nature. Historical Zionism incorporates almost the entirety of Jewish political and religious life – from social democrats to Marxists, from theocrats to Reform Jews to secular liberals. To reduce “Zionism” to a form of colonialism not only does violence to the Jews’ attachment to their ancient land but to the complexity of Zionism itself.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Today, the PA lacks any political legitimacy to mask its role as a second South Lebanon Army for Israel. The continued theft of land and the denial of rights of the refugees of the Gaza Strip, as well as the rest of the Palestinians, bestowed a duty upon Hamas and the resistance factions to launch the attack to break the status-quo. Oslo failed to free the Palestinian prisoners as promised by PLO officials, and the right of return was similarly sidelined; the Great March of Return in 2018 was crushed by the kneecapping of protestors in their hundreds. The international community cheered on, hoping to trap both Gaza and the West Bank with its own standards of passive resistance, statebuilding, and individualist economic prosperity that hides itself behind the veil of a collective effort to produce the New Palestinian to the world. The significance of the October 7th assault thus becomes clearer: it was an attack not only against Israeli settler colonialism, but also against the fundamental discourse that underlies the PA. It broke the taboo on centering Palestinian rights through the lens of decolonial and revolutionary armed struggle. More importantly, it scathed the colonial hubris of a nuclear-armed beast that boasts of its weaponry and supposed military superiority to the world when ‘mowing the lawn’ in Gaza. No wonder, then, why the international community is cheering on the destruction of Gaza and the elimination of resistance. Out of fear that Hamas would break the perpetual stalemate that the PLO signed on to in 1993, the US wants to quench the Zionist bloodthirst that ensued after October 7th through JDAMS, Delta Force squadrons, and a media clergy that parrots every Israeli army claim that demonises not only the Resistance, but the entire population of Gaza. The entire Israeli political spectrum is united around portraying Palestinians as Nazis, ISIS members, ‘children of darkness’, as well as human animals in order to manufacture worldwide consent for the continuous bombardment of the Gaza Strip. It is already clear that October 7th will become a landmark moment in the history of Palestinian resistance against Zionism, its benefactors, and its local agents. The PA, US, and Europe are encouraging the massacre and total siege of the Gaza Strip, not only because of their inherent interest in the continued existence of Israel on Arab land, but also because of their frenzied desire to try and restore the status quo, an imagined reality that existed before October 7th. Attempts to soften Hamas’ position on liberation via the Quartet and Qatar never bore fruit, as evidenced by what has transpired since. The failure of the peace dividends to thwart the Palestinian people, the collapse of the political discourse that masks securitisation behind a national goal, and the continued will of the resistance groups in Gaza to fight despite an international siege and soft power tactics to entice them to stay silent – all of this will pave the way for a more revolutionary discourse with regards to liberation. The era of pseudo-statebuilding is finally behind us, and an age of liberation is coming.

[waluigis-biggest-fan]

I’m disgusted to share a species with Zionist Nazis.

All Zionists are just the second coming of Nazism. It’s just the exact same thing.

Every talking point is just hatred. You can’t argue with Nazis.

I’m so fucking tired of liberal shitstains pretending to be progressive.

[mossadspypigeon]

Previous anon here. I am just really frustrated with the world.

People being mad at immigrants being deported and then wanting Israelis to go back to where they come from and even trying their best to track Israelis and to get them to leave or be deported or whatever.

I am so fucking frustrated because I really hate the decision to deport anyone yes even if they have terrorist links but everyone will huddle around and go “THAT’S SO WRONG AND EVIL” and patting themselves on the back while trying to do that to us. They have done it before and they will do it again. It’s so frustrating. You think that people shouldn’t be harmed for their opinions but go around saying “NO ZIONISTS ALLOWED” painting it everywhere it’s on stores it’s people chanting it on the subway. Please don’t get me wrong I don’t think we should be cruel like that and cheer for anyone’s misfortune. But I know this is going to be weaponized against us.

As if a Cornell class about Israeli history was disrupted and everyone in there wasn’t fucking harassed. No one is doing anything. But you want me to cry for goyim? I can’t. All my tears ran out even for Jews. I’m soulless. You want me to be angry at those pesky evil Jews for laughing? You’re mad at laughter but you were just saying the most cruel shit about the hostages which is a norm. How many hostage posters have been ripped apart and written over and mocked????? How is this fair. How is this fair.

You don’t care when Jews were labeled Zionist and beat up or hurt. But you care when some anti Zionist gentiles get rightfully charged for their violent behavior towards Jews. Are you serious. It’s this same shit all over again. You don’t care when anti Zionists lobby for Israelis to be removed from your country (and I have proof this isn’t something I’m making up) but you’re mad at the idea of anti zionists with terrorist links being deported? It hasn’t even happened yet. Jews are getting killed and hurt right now and you can’t even bring yourself to pretend to care. But you’re mad for gentiles. Boohoo.

what’s funny is the people who claim this is evil actually support panarabism and ba’athism, which contributed to expulsions of jews.

nasser in egypt’s socialist party…kicked jews out in the 50s.

the groups these dorks think are “communist and socialist icons” are actually the opposite. the pflp is a panarab group, same with fatah, the plo, hamas, hezbollah, and the houthis.

ba’athism is another panarab “leftist” movement that got much of its bs from nazi theory like “foundations of the 19th century” etc. they also helped plan one of the first arabic translations of mein kampf.

many (NOT ALL) arab ��socialist and communist”movements that tons of these western tankies claim are paragons were actually just plain nazi movements that hated jews and other marginalized mena peoples like kurds and amazighs.

but i’ll get called a racist in .2 seconds for pointing out…checks watch…racism. lmaoooo

[perrysoup]

Jewish State Ideas BEFORE Palestine

CRITICAL PREAMBLE: It is important to keep in mind that the idea of building a Jewish State is Zionist. It does not reflect the views of Judaism as a whole, and any antisemetic actions will result in blocking and banning. It is critical now more than ever that we recognize that there is a different. Your issues in Palestine are with ZIONISM, not Judaism. Do NOT associate them as the same. Doing so is a common Zionist tactic to make comments or opinions against Israel be rebutted that it is antisemetic purely because it comments on actions by Israel and their Zionist government and military.

Again, Zionism and Judaism are NOT one in the same, and should not be treated that way.

Anywho, timeline time!

1820 - Ararat City - Grand Island Niagara River in Western New York. Considered a precursor to Zionism as known today.

1902 - Leaugue of Eastern European States - "would entail the establishment of a buffer state (Pufferstaat) within the Jewish Pale of Settlement of Russia, composed of the former Polish provinces annexed by Russia."

Date Unsure - Herzl Plan - "The Jews who wish for a State will have it. We shall live at last as free men on our own soil, and die peacefully in our own homes." His proposed location? Cyprus 1903 - British Uganda Program - Rejected after (shocker) there were lions in Africa. Also "it was populated by a large number of Maasai people, who did not seem at all amenable to an influx of people coming from Europe." fuckin wonder why. Note that some Zionists were concerned it would "make it more difficult to establish a Jewish state in Palestine in Ottoman Syria, particularly the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem" 1928 - Jewish Autonomous Oblast in USSR - Proposed by Russia specifcally to prevent a State of Israel AND done because it viewed Judaism as a threat to the state. "In that sense, it was also a response to two supposed threats to the Soviet state: Judaism, which ran counter to official state policy of atheism; and Zionism, the creation of the modern State of Israel, which countered Soviet views of nationalism. Yiddish, rather than Hebrew, would be the national language, and a new socialist literature and arts would replace religion as the primary expression of culture." Also included the idea of a JSR in Crimea or "part of Ukraine, however these were rejected because of fears of antagonizing non-Jews in those regions."

1940 - British Guiana - "the British Government decided that "the problem is at present too problematical to admit of the adoption of a definite policy and must be left for the decision of some future Government in years to come""

The Madagascar Plan and the Italian East Africa plans were both efforts by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy to "solve Jewish problem" (YES THIS IS BAD). "Jews from Europe and Palestine would be resettled to the north-west Ethiopian districts of Gojjam and Begemder, along with the Beta Israel community."

1989 - Plans for the West Bank - Contemplation of a Second Jewish State - "Israeli settlers in the West Bank have mulled declaring independence as the State of Judea should Israel ever withdraw from the West Bank. In January 1989, several hundred activists met and announced their intention to create such a state in the event of Israeli withdrawal."

So yea, don't tell me about "homeland" when there were a shit ton of other ideas accepted within the Zionist ideal prior to SETTLING on Palestine. It's "homeland" cause that's where the British Empire could throw Israel. Not because they though it was the "right thing to do" or whatever thing Zionists claim now a days.

[trekwiz]

It strikes me that there are 2 different (modern) Israels, and in the US and Europe, we're only really taught about one of them.

You might know this one: in 1947, the UN adopted a partition plan to create Israel. This was intended as reparations for the holocaust--but mysteriously, would not be comprised of land from the perpetrators, the Axis powers. Wikipedia has a good primer:

Here's the important thing to know: that Israel doesn't exist. The plan was never implemented. It would have required that Palestinians give up the majority of their land to create a new country, despite having an overwhelming majority of the population in the territory. Mass theft and expulsion was not reasonable. Palestinians boycotted the talks. Ultimately this country never came into existence; a massive terrorist attack left it moot.

There's a second Israel that has its origins in the 1840's. British Evangelical Christians came up with the idea that Jewish people should be shipped off to Palestine to bring about the second coming. Yes, it's as antisemitic as it sounds. You can read a primer on Wikipedia here:

In 1914, the British promised to liberate Palestine and return it to Palestinian rule in return for military support against the Ottomans. They didn't uphold their end of the deal (no surprise), and opted to manufacture a conflict: in 1917, they promised to create a Jewish homeland, and encouraged Zionist immigration specifically, to strengthen their "peacekeeping" claim to the territory. (Differentiation: Zionists are those who specifically support a Jewish ethnostate on Palestinian territory; one does not have to be Jewish to be a Zionist, and not all Jews are Zionist.)

In 1936, the Palestinians fought back against the British, who still hadn't kept their promise to free Palestine. Unlike the American revolution, Palestinians lost. If you're starting to think this sounds a lot like how Britain treated India, you're not far off.

In 1938, Britain decided to take steps to honor its promise to free Palestine. This spurred escalations from multiple Zionist terrorist organizations: comprised of foreigners who believed they had a greater right to the land than the locals, Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi coordinated against the British and Palestinians.

Haganah formed earlier, in the 1920s, and originally worked with the British to prevent Palestinian liberation. They were eventually armed by Poland.

Irgun was an internationally recognized (including by the US) terrorist organization. They're known for a particularly heinous bombing:

They worked with Haganah to plan it, and you may recognize a specific tactic they used: a phone call to "warn" their victims in advance.

They formed because they believed armed force should be used to prevent Palestinian freedom, and allow Zionists to secure a future country. Their whole cause for existence was to suppress Arabs and make them compliant.

They explicitly believed that terrorism was a necessary tactic to steal Palestinian land for their own benefit.

Lehi is an offshoot of Irgun that described itself as a terrorist organization. It's important to understand that this organization also explicitly wanted to ally itself with Axis powers, specifically Nazi Germany and Italy. Their goal was to create a totalitarian Jewish ethnostate that would operate by the same values that Nazis held.

This all came to a head in 1948. Britain basically said, "fuck it, we created this mess, but we're not going to fix it." They pulled out of Palestine, without making good on their promise to free it.

The Zionist terrorist organizations banded together for one large terrorist attack after the British left: they massacred Palestinians in multiple hundreds of villages and forced them out of the territory--including the use of bio-terrorism to ensure they wouldn't return:

In the aftermath, these terrorist organizations decided to cosplay as a country, now going by the name Israel. Under this new name, these organizations worked together to destroy evidence of their 1948 terrorist attacks.

It's worth mentioning as well, that Israel continues to honor its component terrorist organizations; it still has a military service ribbon named for Lehi--the organization that literally wanted to pal around with Hitler.

Despite the merger and name change, these terrorist organizations have never ceased their violent attacks against the Palestinian people. They regularly escalate the ongoing ethnic cleansing any time they can create an excuse. They were slaughtering Palestinians on a regular basis, even before Israel's October 7 escalation.

Palestine remains oppressed by a terrorist entity that US and European governments are funding and arming.

The only reason you haven't heard about this Israel is because the US government has a vested interest in propaganda that portrays them as a legitimate country: they serve as a military presence for us in the mid-east.

You already know why our government lied about WMDs as a pretext for war against Iraq and Afghanistan; it shouldn't be a surprise that our government has the same motivation for maintaining ties with a terrorist organization operating in the same region, seemingly tied to our interests.

Americans and Europeans: you should be questioning this propaganda and advocating for the Palestinian victims of genocide: your tax dollars are funding terrorism. When you decide "it's too complicated, I don't know enough to have an opinion" or "both sides engage in violence so I'll just equivocate", then you're helping to normalize these atrocities. You're making it easier to spread propaganda in favor of arming and funding Israeli terrorism.

You should speak up in favor of a one state solution, led by Palestinians. The history of these Zionist terrorist organizations makes it clear that this is the only way for there to be justice. The leaders of the Zionist entity should be brought to trial, and Israel permanently disbanded.