Saying Jews are awesome is not a valid statement, because just like every group some of them are awesome, some are neutral, and some are awful. It should say something like "Jews are regular people"
I’ll let it slide honestly, underscores like “the Larry Davids of the world are lit” given the rest makes clear “any genocidal maniac is evil and neither religion nor past atrocities against their ancestors will shield them from criticism”
More like, "It's a great thing to oppose the genocide of Palestinians but you're doing it while buying shit tons of cheap trash being manufactured by a slave class that is currently being slowly tortured and genocided by the government you get that cheap shit from."
How about the same questions to you regarding the Palestinian genocide?
Before you answer, the US withdrawing aid would not stop the genocide. Israel has enough on hand to completely level Palestine. So what do you suggest should be done? Also keep in mind that withdrawing aid means that Israel completely stops even pretending to listen to the one country in the world that can talk to them. Also, also keep in mind that Israel has nukes.
What you're doing is called concern trolling. You're like a republican bringing up mental health in a gun control debate. They normally don't give a shit about mental health issues, but as a means to distract from mass shootings it's a great prop.
20,000 children have been murdered by Israel over the past ten months, with weapons gleefully provided by the united states. Israel is a genocidal apartheid ethnostate, and they have been for the past 76 years. The ethnic cleansing they've been carrying out since the nakba is another holocaust, no matter how much you chirp about issues you otherwise wouldn't bring up, you dishonest fucking serpent.
As fun as that is to say, capitalism has no reward for its fervent adherents after death. Nothing that would make its followers feel like they were doing people a favor by killing them. No capitalist utopia waiting on the other side.
Actually yes, though normally under the same people that were brutal dictators in other times.
Late Lenin-early Stalin, early Khrushchev, late Gorbachev, and even early Putin himself.
I know so many cool Russians and Ukrainians personally, it's abhorrent what's happening because of Russia's dictatorship, within and without its borders.
I would upvote without the last sentence. The Holocaust was a singular event as there have been many singular events, and none repeated itself, neither as tragedy nor as farce, but some of them rhyme
Holocaust is a general term, and there have been others, here are some pictures of huge piles of skulls from the Cuban Holocaust done by the Spanish in the late 1800s:
You've got a point there, the term is technically older and historically used in a wider sense. Looking at google Ngrams, it was barely used before the second half of the 20th century. Words change meaning and when a word is strongly associated with one event and it was barely used before that, it is safe to say that it now exclusively refers to that.
It is extremely dangerous and part of both the new Nazis and Zionist playbook to designate the Holocaust as a "singular event", implying that there was no genocide of similar scope before, or there could be after it.
Looking for example how Britain systematically stared more than 10 million people to death in India, the Holocaust isn't even the worst genocide in terms of absolute numbers.
In particular in Germany this "singularity" trope is heavily used as propaganda, of how Germany has learned from its history, when it didn't. New authoritarian measures? Cannot be compared because how dare you compare it to the rise of fascism, that lead to the one and only Holocaust?! Deliberate ramping up of racist rethoric accompanied by more violent hate crime? It is not the Holocaust so why are you saying it feels like the late 20s again?!
And of course subsequently: How dare you say Gaza is a concentration camp?! How can you imply any similarity between Israel and the Nazis?! You evil antisemite! Oh you are a renowned Jewish scholar that studied the Holocaust? Your parents have barely survived the concentration camps? Well you are against Israel so you are "alledgedly Jewish" or how about "self hating Jew"?
This is the actual discourse in Germany. Jews not aligned with Zionism are heavily targeted by Politicians and state bureaucrats in a heavily antisemitic manner. And this "Holocaust is singular" argumentation is part of it.
Yes, the Holocaust was one of many genocides. Still it is the only holocaust. You can compare it to other genocides without equalizing it (a differentiation that works much less in German).
In particular in Germany this "singularity" trope is heavily used as propaganda
True, but so is the opposite. I tried to frame my first comment not in that propagandistic way. That narrative goes like: Germany is the country of thinkers and poets, we had Luther, Goethe and Einstein, than something bad happened but all my relatives were in the resistance and after 1945 there aren't any nazis anymore anywhere now. And it can't repeat anyway so why bother.
That's not how I framed it. I deliberately said it's one of many singular events and it "rhymes" with others (including present day events)
If the holocaust wasn't singular at all, it wasn't that bad. Shit happens. The Nazis weren't that bad either. Other states do similar things. We don't have to learn from our past when it repeats anyway.
There are many lines to draw here but please have the intellectual integrity not to draw one at the usage of a single word. Take the second to look how it is used.
And there are differences between the holocaust and colonialist genocides ("the enemy within"), as there are commonalities. Each is singular and thereby they are all connected.
How dare you say Gaza is a concentration camp?!
Yes, it is, as where the gulags and the US had concentration camps for Japanese people during the Second War to End War (George Takei, the actor of Sulu in Star Trek, lived in one as a kid).
Is Israel an apartheid state? To a degree, as is the US with the illegalized immigrants and former prisoners aren't allowed to vote (and who's more likely to be imprisoned?) Even if the law applies to everyone the same way, to quote Anatole France: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets, and steal loaves of bread." (I've got this quote from Worshiping Power by Peter Gelderloos)
I'm an anarchist. In my view, all states are bad. I'm not singling out Israel even though it is a good (as in evil) example. There is a lot to criticize and for much of it, you find similar things in other states also worth criticizing. While all states are and have been bad and did bad stuff, only one made the holocaust happen. Still, others did similar things. Denying this can be used for both sides.
And I still don't know what the meme is referring to. To October 9th or the genocide in Gaza? Or to Sudan? Why is no one talking about Sudan? (Me included, I know something is going there but don't ask me what)
The language about Zionism is pretty problematic as well, as it's fundamentally just the legitimacy of the Israel state. That ship has sailed, and attempting to dismantle Israel is not going to create peace. Getting serious about forcing Israel to abide by international laws is the path forward. Implying the state is illegitimate and borrowing extremist nomenclature from neonazis is not.
Ah, right, because words don't actually mean what they mean. They mean what I feel they should mean. Thank you for reminding me of this, clearly, universal truth. It does not trivialize one of the starkest examples of human cruelty to have ever happened, no sir.
I've never had a Jew bother me about accepting their religion at a bus stop despite my best efforts to first politely dissuade them, then rudely dismissed their bullshit until I snapped and got outright hostile and offensive.
yeah I used to think it was the relatively chill nerdy less-a-piece-of-vile-genocidal-shit sibling before this, but no. apparently that's fucking islam, and yes, I did watch the same beheading videos and read about the same FGM shit you did.
Islam Christianity and Judaism all neat to sit down and take a beat for one hot second.
They all have this toxic byproduct which are intransigent zealots who want to punish all the other people in their country who don't follow their dogma.
I would really rather they not give each other more ideas. I would rather they not sit down for that beer unless I'm the one pouring it, and I get to do so in a place they can't see, thank you very much.
Asking, because my paternal ancestors happen to be Armenian from Khodorchur of Dayq province.
But that's the cause only of my irritation, while the weird feeling from reading your comment is because mass murders of whole peoples are not anything new in human history. It's just that Germany lost so conclusively in WWII that the winning powers decided to make it a crime - when judging Germany. Not Belgium, not UK, not France, not USA and USSR, of course, because these all had crimes of that kind on their sufficiently recent record.
One can speculate that Jewish holocaust made Europeans feel bad because it happened to rather European people. Or because it was committed by the losing side.
Or maybe, as with Baudrillard's simulacra, all Westerners care is what's portrayed as the evil of the day and the good of the day in their media. It's a kind of entertainment, and they don't care what the world really is.
all of those are a bit true. laws are for enforcing power, not justice, not morality. always, every time. the powerful will always have a need to kill if they want to remain powerful, and don't love having their hands tied (except in private; they're all subs, it's so weird).
but yes, until jews were white, nobody gave toooo terribly many shits.
and yeah, most people just care about simple bullshit narratives. that's what liberalism and fascism are.
I love how you all make a point of playing the victim and making it all about you when you are not even part of the discourse. Queers are the new vegans, apparently.
Lol and that's why it's bullshit, because nothing is "super simple", you bunch of terminally online twats. You wouldn't know nuance if it reached out of your Instagram post and slapped you in the face. Go ahead, tell me to eat glass like last time.
everything is complicated, it's true. drinking water is super complicated. if you try to just drink straight h20 you will strip your body of electrolytes and shit will become very unpleasant. don't get me started on colors. we don't even know what colors ARE.
but there are subjects where the simple understanding is EXTREMELY functional, and will rarely lead you TOO far astray. like 'drink water, preferably clean water'. if you dont do this you die.
similarly: genocide bad. rape bad. rapists bad. genocideers bad. if you don't do this, LOTS of people die, and its partially on you.
yes, there is a more complex nuanced understanding (which IMO makes the palestinians look better and the zionists look orders of magnitude worse than the nation of shiro ishi clones they appear to be from the surface), but the simple one effectively functions for nearly any intent or purpose, and if you're not doing therapy for a palestinian person, or trying to decide what treatment would be appropriate for a zionist if it was capable of just stopping/surrendering (which it is not, there's only one way to stop this after letting it get this far, and we should do it before more innocents die), you really don't need more than the simplest "genocide bad, rape bad, murdering children bad" that a literal child could understand.
There are two choices in the United States 2024 election. No third party stands a ghost of a chance of winning. No, not even if the 30,000 people you can reach on Lemmy all vote for Timothy Greenparty.
A Trump victory in 2024 would not only be just as bad if not worse for the citizens of Gaza than Harris would, but also pose an existential threat to a large number of vulnerable Americans (trans people, immigrants, women seeking abortions).
Given the margins of victory in 2016 and 2020, Kamala might not win if leftists don't vote for her.
Snoozing fascism for four years is better than inviting it through the door now, and buys us time to build our defenses for when it comes back.
I'd like to focus my counterargument. Which of these statements do you disagree with?
Yeah, I would absolutely expect someone with a sign of this style to call every single instance of genocide "The Holocaust". That's precisely the level of historical literacy I'm used to seeing from middle-class weirdos who buy these things.
Could you add Hamas is still holding people hostage, which is a war crime? Also maybe mention that the current leader of Hamas planned and executed an attack on villages where over a thousand people were brutally butchered?
But I guess that makes it less simple, doesn't it? Sucks that reality is too complicated to fit into a meme.
Doesn't holocaust literally mean "death by all means necessary" I don't think i would consider this "death by all means necessary"
although i think etymologically holocaust just has to do with "burning by fire" but i recall the germans using a more extreme definition of the holocaust more broadly.
also how is zionism is a death cult? Cringe sure, but death cult? Yeah idk about that one chief.
noun
ho·lo·caust ˈhō-lə-ˌkȯst
ˈhä-,
also -ˌkäst,
or ˈhȯ-lə-kȯst
Synonyms of holocaust
1
: a sacrifice (see sacrifice entry 1 sense 2) consumed by fire
2
: a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire
a nuclear holocaust
3
a
usually the Holocaust : the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II
Several members of her family died in the Holocaust.
a Holocaust survivor
b
: a mass slaughter of peopleespecially : genocide"a holocaust in Rwanda"
"Innocent should not die no matter if they were born in Tel Aviv or in Gaza"
"7 of October of 2023 was a terrorist attack"
"Situation in a conflict zone where both sides has been killing each other for decades is not simple and has no simple solution"
"Blindly supporting muyahidins, I mean, intifada, has not a good historic record"
"A Hamas led Palestine would be very similar to any other Islamic dictatorship, which is not good for Palestinians, specially women and LGBT"
Under any circumstances innocents should die, and anyone (ANYONE) killing civilians is a piece of shit. But the fact that Israel government is a Piece of Shit does not mean that Hamas is not also a Piece of Shit. Some people seems to forget that when it comes to codemn the cruelties inflicted in that region.
If we didn't signal our virtues, nothing would ever happen.
People MUST speak their feelings about things or the very worst things go unchallenged.
What you meant to say is "Let's not make me cringe by making me think about things that have deeply divisive social consequences in either one direction or another, yet I keep getting bombarded with messages that I need to take a side on this issue, why can't I just play video games in peace."
You see - if Hamas would have an upper hand against Israel, it would absolutely direct forces to massacre Jews and kickstart apartheid and everyone would be cheering for Israel and against Palestine.
But here we are, with Israel being bigger and stronger and using its advantage to raze Palestine to the ground along with innocent people who did nothing to deserve this. And that's why people are pro-Palestine, really.
Also, while women and LGBT folks may suffer in their rights under an Islamic dictatorship, this is kinda better than just being dead. Israel does just that, and many in the Israeli command have made it very clear they do not care about the rights of Palestinian civilians.
I do understand that people tend to feel more inclined to side with the "weak part" of a fight. But being the weak part does not mean being in the right.
Both sides of a conflict can be wrong, even if someone is imposing their wrong on the others by a stronger use of force.
But I know how Hamas would masacrate Israeli civilians if given the chance and I cannot support that.
We need to thing a third way, different to what both sides are currently proposing and trying to do.
I think figures like Gandhi or MLK showed how to fight oppression without going into blatant murder and Jihad.
good thing that Hamas only exists because of Israeli support, not just via suitcases of money, but also due to a thorough expunging of moderate agnostic opposition! and hamstringing the fatwa forces during the Hamas-Fatwa civil war where Hamas took over Gaza (Hamas won some local elections, but at the time it was still part of the Palestinian state)
“Situation in a conflict zone where both sides has been killing each other for decades is not simple and has no simple solution”
It is not a "conflict zone" and it is not "complicated". It is classical settler colonialism with the inevitable goal of ethnically cleansing and genociding the native population. By this logic the Nazi "Lebensraum" ideology of invading Poland, systematically murdering not only Jews and other minorities, but death-Squadding entire villages to then settler their own people on the land would somehow be "complicated".
I suppose we live in different realities where 7 of October never happened or where missiles are not raining every day over Israel trying to indiscriminately killing people
If we live in different realities there's nothing to argue.
In my reality there has not been found any extermination camps. And the lots of civilians killed are killed like civilians are killed in most wars. Shitty but not comparable to ww2 Germany.
There's a conflict, there is a war between two tyrant and radical organizations. Israel Army (Supported by USA) and Palestine Army(Supported by Islamic countries and terrorist organizations), and both are being pretty shitty and trying to exterminate the other one.
I think you need to be more explicit with your first statements. Any line fewer than 5 words is too vague. It should be long and read like it was scrawled over an entire vehicle.
XXI century and people defending Jihadism. Which is literally killing the infidel because your imaginary friend Allah told you so.
I suppose killing innocent and children, and imposing a medieval oppression on society is ok in your moral book if it is for the glory of Allah.
I suppose that you support then the murder of my family members who had died in the Jidhadist bombings in Madrid. The murder of a innocent teacher surely did a lot for resisting the evil west attacking their peaceful countries which surely don't behead homosexuals.
My word! I simply had no idea that 9/11 and all the car bombings performed by ISIS in the late 2000s were not dangerous! You have no idea how much better that makes me feel.
You won't be happy with your opinion here. Lemmy is a pretty pro-terrorist place and gleefully ignore what Hamas, Mullah, Taliban (just look at Afghanistan) and all the other did, do and stand for. But thanks for your effort.
So many people seem legitimately confused by what zionism is. At its core it is simply the legitimacy of the Israeli state. Only the most radical versions contain the violent expansionist ideals. But there's a reason the only people ranting about it in such an unqualified way this time last year were white supremacists. Because without qualification, the implication is dismantlement of the Israeli state, which would do absolutely nothing to stop the cycle of violence. It is difficult to imagine that this is a good faith argument from anyone who is seriously engaged with fundamental geopolitics.
Unfortunately I fear that this is a perfect example of linguistic subterfuge, where serious bad actors have injected this language into otherwise well meaning causes, and I would implore those who seriously seek justice for Palestine to avoid this particular vocabulary.
At its core it is simply the legitimacy of the Israeli state.
You make it far too complicated. The legitimacy of the state of Israel is exactly what's being debated. Many would argue the Zionists had no right to move to Palestine and even less right to steal Palestinian land to create their state. To this day Israeli settlers are still stealing more and more Palestinian land, and the Israeli government seems to be rather supportive of their activities.
Only the most radical versions contain the violent expansionist ideals.
Zionism led to the creation of the state of Israel and it was violent right from the start.
Unfortunately I fear that this is a perfect example of linguistic subterfuge
It really is not. You don't have to agree with any of it, but the legitimacy of the state of Israel is not widely accepted in the region, they are seen as a sort of colonial power that have no right to be there and should be dismantled.
Everyone seems to like to argue that people who dislike Israel object simply to Israel's right to exist. What we object to is the fact that they are filming themselves killing women and children.
If a state needs to be allowed to commit genocide in order to exist, it should not be allowed to exist. If it does not need to commit genocide to continue to exist, then why does it do so?
I'm not sure which part of my comment you believe suggests Israel is acting appropriately in Gaza. I am directly addressing this recent trend of merging the real and valid criticism of Israel, with some unfortunately loaded language which supporters of Israeli violence exploit to minimize said criticism.
It's absolutely insane that merely saying "hey, your criticism is valid enough that you don't need to merge your language with neo nazis" is even the slightest bit controversial.
About 40k Palestinians have been killed by Israel so far. These people are stateless and not allowed to leave, have limited access to food and water, and have no hope of ever fighting back or escaping. That includes the innocent children who represent a huge fraction of the victims. It certainly draws parallels to the Holocaust, if nothing else, though the scale and motivations are different.
Yea but you see, we can't stop this particular genocide because... reads notes
a bigger genocide has happened in the past and you can only ever stop the worstest one. Or something.
That's why Jan Karski toned down his report on the Holocaust; he was afraid people wouldn't believe the unimaginable horrors he saw. He was still met with skepticism.
Everyone was really horrified when information on what was happening went public.
And there were little doubts on making what needed to be done to punish perpetrators and making Germany incapable of doing something like that again for years to come.
Shitty holocaust deniers were something that came later.
Does China have the US government by the nuts? Does China get F-35s and 2000lb bombs funded by my tax dollars for their genocide? Is China a shining example of western democracy and values in their part of the world? Is it possible to be upset about more than one genocide at a time?
Holy shit now I know why I have politics blocked on my main account. You guys need a walk. No, no a hike. No actually pilgrimage to Jerusalem on foot on the trail of crusaders
The shittest shitfiesta I have ever seen on Lemmy and I wouldn’t be surprised if hundreds of rdrama degenerates were typing energetically with their fat greasy fingers under the link to this post as we speak