They are driven by the common sense.
You mean basic morals and ethics?
Yeah, this also.
Officials must reach out to moderate elements within European social democracies, engage in open dialogue, and avoid labeling all criticism and hostile diplomatic initiatives as antisemitism.
Just as an idea: They could also stop the illegal annexation (at least) beyond their 1967 border.
And genocide as policy
and not sheltering war criminals…
Distracting people from their looting by inciting bigotry-based distractions isn’t official fascist policy and yet…
True. Like I said I was being pedantic; genocide is Israeli policy in all but name.
They’re driven by the fact that a bunch of assholes killing innocents is a bad thing. I know that this is a difficult concept to grasp, but it really is important.
🤯
Weird article. If cites a piece of research by an Israeli university. But by now it should be clear that public opinion in Europe has become anti-Israel not because of anti-semitism, but because of the terrible war Israel has waged on civilians in Gaza. This research was biased and poorly executed.
Israel Times and Jpost are both propaganda rags.
I pity the Israelis. They’ve had quite good governments, but with Netanyahu, they have a de facto dictator and propaganda is up and fairness is out of the window.
Don’t, Netanyahu’s policies are popular in Israel, so are Ben Givir’s. They are simply the figureheads of a broadly endorsed program of Palestinian Genocide across Israeli society, that is what makes Israel so scary.
I pity the Israelis.
I don’t. Israel is an excellent case study in how you can’t do half a fascism; you either make some effort to respect others’ human rights or you sink down the ultranationalism hellhole and get a Netanyahu. A democracy based on securing lebensraum for the ubermensch is just not how the world works.
Jpost definitely, Israel Times deserves some nuance. It’s definitely Zionist as hell, but it follows a strain of liberal (still fascist) Zionism that’s sometimes capable of tolerating dissent.
Sure, I think that is a better more accurate description.
But by now it should be clear that public opinion in Europe has become anti-Israel not because of anti-semitism, but because of the terrible war Israel has waged on civilians in Gaza.
I mean that’s (through a Zionist filter) exactly what it’s saying. It’s just that the authors of the report agree with the terrible war Israel has waged on civilians in Gaza, and all the other terrible wars Israel has waged on civilians in Gaza and elsewhere, so their solution isn’t “let’s not wage terrible wars on civilians,” but “here’s how we can get the narrative back under control so we can keep waging our terrible wars on civilians.” The research was neither biased nor poorly executed; it was fascist.
And we actually need a report for the obvious?
There is more stuff in it. Like as in Germany and Austria not doing it, because of guilt of the Holocaust. So being too critical is seen as a political issue. Poland not doing it, because they really want US support against Russia. The UK, France and Germany being big enough players that they have some actual interest in the Middle East beyond the symbolic, which make going against Israel more problematic.
Just as an example. I see a lot of post comparing the current genocide committed by Israel to the Holocaust. That however is a horrible idea, if you want to convince Germany or Austria to do something against Israel. As in both of them have a historical debt to Jews and that easily translate to Israel as a Jewish state. It therefore means that they “have to” support Israel. It would be much smarter to not deliberately make the connection and if it is brought up, then to talk about that debt being void, as Israel is committing genocide.
Germany seems to somehow manage to always be on the wrong side of the genocide.
Unfortunately Zionist propaganda sometimes works, so yes. Here though it’s a case of the dealer getting high on their own fascist supply; the report is a foreign policy recommendation for how Israel could do Zionist propaganda better to reduce the number of its European critics.
“The obvious” according to the headline is that criticism of Israel by European governments isn’t driven by Muslims or Antisemites. The fly in the ointment is that according to the article, many countries in Europe lack a “sense of historical debt or guilt” regardless of the question whether there should be any in the particular countries.
The headline is obvious… just by accident. The four lines or so I could stomach make it clear that it’s a fluke. At a passing glance, it looks like they are close to getting the actual point. The ingress(?) makes it clear that that is not the case, they’re blaming this on “virtue signalling”, of all things. Because, y’know, that’s not a red flag or anything.
Obviously, your traditional European-style antisemite would be a racial essentialist who argues that sinister Middle Eastern aliens are polluting Europe’s ancient and noble culture and bloodlines, and would probably have a Roman statue as their Xitter avatar. They wouldn’t be the sorts of people to be concerned about the human rights of brown-skinned people in the Middle East, and even if they try to fake such concern, it’d be visible from a mile off.
deleted by creator
pikachufacecoveredinthebloodofchildren.jpg
The article is kind of shit probably because it is an Israeli source. They only criticise themselves for not being able to convince others that Israel is good but never their own actions that lead to others having a negative opinion on Israel. Plus the framing under each picture of Pro-Palestinian protestors that they also are “anti Israel”.
Perpetrators of a genocide would have to not be engaging in carrying out a genocide, for that to be possible. But, that stament is a tautology. Also, how far should we care about the meaning of words? Palestinians are far more semitic in ancestry than Israelis.
I don’t think that the logic holds here. There absolutely are people who take the pro-Palestinian side not because they actually oppose what Israel is doing, but because they hate Jews and see it as an opportunity to “justify” that hatred
A good example is the former British National Party leader Nick Griffin. Thankfully, he is no longer active in politics and wasn’t very good at it when he was, but he makes for a good example. He was simultaneously anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Muslim because he was just a massive fucking racist stain on society
It’s good that people like Griffin aren’t leading the conversation. They are out there, though, and we ought to be wary of them
You’re absolute right.
My point was that it becomes impossible to discern underlying motive, when they (Israel) are actively carrying out a genocide on a 50% child population.
Consider a Venn diagram for being critical of Israel’s ongoing genocide, with the following circles:
- A: They are Jewish
- B: They are carrying out a genocide
Israel’s argument that “you’re against Israel because of antisemitism”, suggests that the area with only A, is significant. How many are critical of Israel’s genocide, not because of the genocide, but because they are Jewish? It’s would be such an absurd thing to argue.
They exist, but I wonder how much that group really matters in the big picture. Anecdotally I’ve never seen this angle in my life, except as a Zionist talking point aiming to delegitimize criticism. Russia, too, is a huge fan of that tactic: got an issue with genocide, wow, can’t believe you’d be that russophobic, big honking crocodile tears, Sad-imir Putin. The Zionists have been equally blatant.
… ? Well, fucking duuuuuuhhhh?
diplomatic failures, national narratives and virtue signaling
Oh yes, that is surely why people are being all mean against the genocidal maniacs.
Edit: why are we platforming this site?
