You're clearly very naive and cannot see the world as more than black and white. Now the Israeli state are the bad guys and the Palestinians are the good guys. So now it is OK to boycott jews again, shout about the eradication of the Jewish state and its people ("from the river to the sea") and talk about a one-directional genocide since "75 years and 182 days". This is either really really stupid or blatantly antisemitic. There is no excuse for what the Israeli government is doing atm. And I agree that there shouldn't be any nations or borders in the world at all. But making this into the mostly Jewish population as a group of occupiers is just wrong. It's actually not too different from what the Israeli government is saying when they identify basically all Palestinian civilians as hamas. Like I said, only black and white thinking :/
Edit: Reading this again, I can see why I upset OP and others. This was unnecessarily harsh. Sorry. I guess it's my own frustration that the internet is full of one-sided debate upon this conflict. I'm still not comfortable with the rhetoric of this post but want to apologize for being so rude!
You sure about that? "From the river to the sea" is open to interpretation, but many (including Hamas) use it with a genocidal meaning. Everyone that uses this phrase should know about this meaning and know what it signals to others. So yes, people are talking about a genocide of Israeli people, i.e. Jews.
Where did I paint Israel as the victim? They are obviously responsible for mass destruction and reckless killing of thousands of people. What I say is that you don't get the complexity of the conflict, that you just focus on one side of it and that calling for the destruction for the Israeli state is very problematic. There seem to be so many people that try to ignore either side of the conflict. "Oh, the Palestinians are all Hamas and we are just defending us" vs "Oh, the Israelis are all genocidal colonialists and we have to destroy them". Neither of both is true and we would benefit from trying to move away from a Palestine vs Israel narrative and try to rather organize against the Israeli government as well as Hamas.
Well, it is really obvious what you don't get. I'm an anarchist, why wouldn't I be in this community. Are you trying to push a normative standard on me and say that only people with the same opinion as you can be in this space? Just because I criticize some specific actions that imo are counterproductive doesn't mean I'm not an anarchist. That's just political discourse.
your discourse is patronizing and disrespectful to me and my ability to understand what's going on. you are hijacking a discussion about how to stop a colonialist genocide to wring your hands about oppressed people possibly winning and treating their occupiers like they've been treated.
I don't believe you're an anarchist because you are derailing a solidarity action and accusing anarchists of being antisemitic.
If you want to talk politics, you're gonna have to accept the fact that people will have different opions. This isn't hexbear where everyone with a different view is instabanned. I get that emotions are running high over the situation in Gaza, but try to respond in good faith instead of leaping to the most uncharitable interpretation possible.
if these same opinions were being voiced in c/politics or c/news, my pushback would be decidedly different. this is an anarchist community, and frankly i don't believe the other user's operating in good faith. just saying "i'm an anarchist" is a pretty thin shield for accusing principled organizers of antisemitism and derailing discussion about a global coordinated resistance movement.
i think it's super cool that an admin is weighing in (since i think that means my reports are being read), but maybe we could get an anarchist to actually do some of the moderation here.
We read every report, but only take mod actions where it is warranted. Reading through what @flora_explorer has posted here, I don't see anything that would violate any instance rules. You are welcome to block them if you don't want to engage with their arguments.
my concern isn't instance-wide rules. as i said, in another community, my tact would have been totally different. my concern is whether this is actually an anarchist community or no.
What does being an anarchist community mean to you? To my mind, if someone self identifies as an anarchist then they should be welcome here. If they are just here for trolling then that's another issue, but I don't think it applies in this case.
It seems to me that you are the only person badjacketing in this post. If you think it's a good policy to ban fellow anarchists for having a nuanced view on the Gaza situation, then you might want to check out hexbear - intolerant authoritarianism is their whole vibe.
You’re clearly very naive and cannot see the world as more than black and white. Now the Israeli state are the bad guys and the Palestinians are the good guys. So now it is OK to boycott jews again, shout about the eradication of the Jewish state and its people (“from the river to the sea”) and talk about a one-directional genocide since “75 years and 182 days”. This is either really really stupid or blatantly antisemitic.
They said that advocating for the eradication of the Jewish state and it's people is either stupid or antisemitic. If you aren't advocating that (and I don't have any particular reason to think you are) then that statement doesn't even apply to you. It's a straw man argument. But looking at the link you posted, there's a "river to the sea" comment right there from someone else. So I can see where they might have gotten that impression. Seems to me we can chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding. They made bad faith assumptions about you, you made bad faith assumptions against them. Lets move on.
You are incorrect about hexbear. I am an anarchist and post there almost exclusively, I have seen more vigorous debate there than any other left space. Hexbear actually allows proper arguments and doesn't even have downvotes.
That's unfortunate to hear, I don't know the context of your experience so I can't make any assumption, but it is just funny to me how much I see comments like that about hexbear, when I have found it to be very welcoming to diverse views (aside from pro-liberalism or fascism), and plenty of other anarchists on there agree. I wouldn't have been drawn towards it if it weren't for so many people saying they were 'MAGA tankies' etc.
Hm, OK I get that you are upset. And I really don't want to derail anything here. My point is rather that we should try to be critical of ourselves as well. It is obviously easier to organize if there is one clear enemy, like Putin or Erdogan. The Ukrainian or Kurdish struggles have gained a lot of solidarity because these conflicts are easier to divide into good vs bad. In the Israel/Palestine conflict however I think we need to be careful. I see how deeply problematic the Israeli government is behaving and we need to organize and stand firm against it. But it is also true that antisemitism has a very long and complex history where the Israeli state plays an important role. This does obviously not excuse any violence or abuse by the Israeli state. And I don't get why the US or the European nations fail to put sanctions on Israel. But at the same time, the Jewish people do need a safe place to exist and antisemitism is not a hoax made up by the Israeli government. While Jewish people from abroad may even speak against the existence of the Israeli state, antisemitic attacks in e.g. the US and Europe have increased. Only this week someone through a Molotov cocktail on a synagogue where I live (in Germany). Many synagogues here need police protection. The generation of my greatgrand- and grandparents have systematically killed Jews. Many states around Israel would have destroyed Israel long ago if they'd had the means to it. Again, I know this does not excuse any violence by the Jewish state. They should be held responsible for the horrible atrocities they are currently performing. But imo it just is not as easy to say that the whole state of Israel with all the people living in it is the enemy here. Netanyahu and his extremist Likud party for sure. But not Israel itself. I hope you can understand where I'm coming from and what my intentions are.
ETA: and yes, I really identify as an anarchist. To me this means that we should strive to live without hierarchies and without rulers. In my utopia there would be no nations, no borders, no capitalism, no money, no jobs etc. We would need to find ways to organize in better ways that benefit everyone and lets everyone participate to their own needs. But unfortunately it will be a really long struggle to get to this.
"Antisemitic genocide enablers"? What genocide are we talking about now? I think you might be so locked in in this us vs them mentality that you don't hear what I say but try to forcibly put it in the "them" category.
Well, you cannot deny that there are many antisemites that would want to kill all the Jews. Especially within Hamas. And if people use the same rhetoric ("from the river to the sea"), why wouldn't I warn against this antisemitic rhetoric? I don't see how I am "parroting" Israeli propaganda though.
Lol, see what I mean by black and white thinking? Either I'm against it or for it. Nothing else imaginable. "Genocidal colonialism" is a very loaded term and I'm not sure it even applies here. And because I dare to think about why it might be something else I'm directly in favor of colonialism and genocide? Wild.
the project of setting up Israel as a nation state is a genocidal colonialist project. dissembling about this, suggesting it was acceptable, that the occupied people should only resist within the boundaries you set, shows you aren't opposed to the genocidal colonialist project.
I agree that the circumstances of the creation of the Israeli state was highly problematic. But the link to the present is not that clear cut. What do you plan to do with all the "colonialists" then? Where should they go? What kind of reasonable and feasible solution would you think of if all of the Israeli state is already defined as a genocidal colonialist project? Kill all the Jews? Or exile them? Wouldn't that be genocide, too? Or you want to dissolve the Israeli state and let everyone live peacefully together? But is this really an option with all the conflicts and how many Palestinians have been displaced?
This is not really any answer to what I've asked. I'm all for bringing down that wall. But without any plan this will lead to a bloodbath on all sides. So please, what is your plan with Israel and its population if this "genocidal colonialist project" is going to be stopped.
Many Jewish people are against Israel and boycott Israeli companies. Yes, we can shout about the destruction of the Israeli state because that is different than eradicating people. In some situations it is black and white, the Israeli state's goal is the death of Palestine, both the people and the nation. Numerous officials and policies have made this clear.
Yeah, you see the problem there? Hamas is also trying to kill all the Jews. And other Arab States also want to see them dead. They've made this very clear as well. Instead of favor one side we should try to moderate the conflict and help the voices of people who are in favor of a peaceful solution and not one where either side gets killed. We shouldn't let the most hateful parts of each side get so much power. Palestinians as well as Jews (and everyone else living there) should have a right to exist peacefully. You won't solve this by either giving the land to the Palestinians or the Israelis. Destroying the Israeli state would obviously lead to a genocide of Jews. You need to be very naive to think it wouldn't come to that once the Israeli military and polixe were to be dissolved. The Israeli government however should definitely be targeted. We need to find a way to take away the power the Likud and the Hamas currently hold.
You'd be surprised to learn there is more than Hamas in Palestine, and the majority of people there just want their families to be able to return and have their land back that was stolen by western imperial powers, and then further taken by Israel over time. Getting rid of the Israeli state wouldn't have to mean kicking out everyone or a genocide of the Jews there. I don't disagree there is a lot of antisemitism in the Arab world and everywhere, it's possible to protect the lives of Jews and Arabs in the region though.
I'm well aware that many if not most Palestinians are not on board with Hamas. Same goes for the Israeli people who also mostly disagree with their own government and the mass killings as far as I'm aware. But you can see how little of an argument this is right now in Gaza. The Israeli state is killing people without sense although their own citizen don't want this. I could see the same happen if the Israeli state would get dissolved. How would you stop Hamas and other militant antisemites from killing Jews then? You've seen what they did on October 7th, imagine what they'd do if no one would stop them. I would also wish for a peaceful solution where everyone could just get along. But there has been so much hate and trauma for generations on both sides that it will probably be a really slow process. And there needs to be some sort of instance that keeps both sides from killing each other. I don't see how dissolving the Israeli state could actually work here.
The conditions that led to them attacking on the 7th are very different than what they would be if Palestine had proper self-determination. But true, it will take a while to heal divisions.
People don't want endless violence, there have been many periods where Jewish and Arab people lived together peacefully. I agree though, a process like this would probably need third-party peacekeepers, an independent coalition could form to help protect people in the region and prevent terrorism, like the groups of states in the region that have come together to fight ISIS.
The issue people are having with your comment here is that you are misrepresenting the OPs post. The only thing they are calling for here is an economic boycott of Israel to pressure the Israeli government to end their attacks on Gaza. Meanwhile you are rolling that up in strawman argument that says that's basically the same thing as wanting the obliteration of all Israelis. Don't be so quick to make bad faith assumptions. While left wing antisemitism is a real issue, as is antisemitism in the middle east, OP hasn't given you any cause to make that accusation here. I'd suggest editing your post to clarify that you were (I assume?) talking more generally about the topic rather than about the OP in particular.
Hm, I see what you mean. But the post is calling for an "end to Zionism" (in the video) and sees the whole Israeli state as non other than a genocide project (for the entirety of its existence, in the description). One of the top comments is the antisemitic slogan "From the river to the sea PALESTINE will be free". All in all, I don't feel comfortable with this at all. I mean, please organize against what the Israeli state is doing. But don't just adopt antisemitic rhetoric and paint this whole conflict as this one-dimensional.
Maybe it's my own bias, because as a German I'm much more sensible to the topic of antisemitism and especially in German leftwing politics, organizations like e.g. BDS have been identified as antisemitic for a very long time. Leftists from other countries often have a very different understanding of the same conflict. Not sure what to make of it though.
I am also sensitive to antisemitism, and share your concerns about some of the content on the posted link. But OP can't control what other people write on that site. Just because some antisemitic people/groups also support an economic boycot of Israel, doesn't imply that anyone who supports a boycott is antisemitic. It's a non-violent means to put pressure on the Israeli government. It doesn't look like they will stop the killing without additional external pressure, so if this helps to add some pressure then I can't do anything but support the boycott.
My concern is that we will let us drag into this conflict by one side and regard the other side as the enemy. This happens very frequently at the moment that people will either sway hard towards pro-Palestine or pro-Israel. I think we should try to be able to differentiate a bit more. The linked video is very partial in this regard. Hence my concern.
Yes, just because some antisemites want the same things doesn't make these things antisemitic. And I agree that some action is necessary to make Israel stop the killing.
How is BDS antisemitic? Maybe there is antisemitism associated with it's movement in Germany but that hasn't been my experience in the US. Though any pro-Palestine group here is constantly called antisemitic by Americans that support Israel.
Well, there is this official text on BDS by the German federal ministry for political education (unfortunately in German). I did not mean that the German branch of BDS is considered antisemitic, but the whole of BDS.
TL;DR of this text is basically that BDS is outwardly and on first glance pretty progressive. When I look at their website I can agree with most stuff I see. The article in German above now claims that BDS fails the 3-Dimension test of antisemitism. That is, they demonize Israel, use double standards and want to delegitimize its existence. The article then describes the history of BDS where it claims that BDS campaign calls the state of Israel a colonialist and that they therefore try to further delegitimize it. The problem the article sees with that is that BDS leaves open which land they want to return to Palestinians exactly and what they plan to do with the Jewish population inhabitating it right now. Same goes for plans for all Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland. Again, this would probably mean large displacement of the Jewish population and the destruction of the Israeli state. The article then describes how a frequent rhetoric of the BDS campaign and associated people is to compare the Nazi Regime with Israel. In context of how many survivors and their descendants of the Shoah founded the state of Israel and still live there, the article sees this as the "ultimate demonization". This demonization is contrasted in the article with all of the Palestinian refugees living in neighboring Arab countries who are also discriminated against and who have to endure violence and oppression as well. Also, many examples of clearly antisemitic public figures associated with the BDS are named.
The difference between the German discourse vs the international one on BDS is probably how you view the right of Israel to exist. There is the argument that the Jewish religion is highly persecuted and that especially after the Shoah Jews need their own state to be able to live free from antisemitism and persecution. Internationally (apparently including many Jewish voices) this is viewed differently and a framing of Israel as a colonial state that should be dissolved may therefore be more easily thought of. From the former perspective, this already is a antisemitic argument because it delegitimizes the existence of a safe space for Jews.
In my own opinion, I see the BDS campaign as pretty problematic because it tries to simplify this whole conflict into "Israel bad / Palestine good" and how it tries to onesidedly moralize it. Sure, there are pro-Israel campaigns that try to do the same. But neither will lead us anywhere. BDS is in my opinion not a campaign that is interested in solving this conflict constructively or with everyone in mind. But we desperately need campaigns who are interested in Palestinian and Jewish people alike. I may be perceived here as derailing the protests against the Israeli government. My concern though is that we let ourselves be derailed by groups like BDS.
I agree we need to be careful that we don't enable the sort of mass murder of Jews that has happened throughout history, being from Germany I'm sure you are especially careful to ensure something like the Holocaust doesn't happen again.
I don't agree that calling Israel a colony is antisemitic, it was formed as and still operates as a settler-colony. This conflict isn't black and white, but in war there is nearly always an aggressor against the other, the culpability is rarely even. Israel, the aggressor, with support from untouchably powerful militaries, and the victim, Palestine, whose homeland was forcibly taken by said militaries.
I don't see the de-legitimization of the state of Israel as antisemitic because the state is not legitimate by any recognized standard, and continues seizing territory in opposition to international treaties, annexing Palestinian land even in the last few weeks. I'm sure antisemitic people could use the BDS movement to mask their true views but I haven't seen that connection in the US. There are plenty of Jewish people in the US who call for boycotting Israel and giving Palestine full self-determination.
From the former perspective, this already is a antisemitic argument because it delegitimizes the existence of a safe space for Jews.
I thought more about this idea, and I agree that Jewish people are historically extremely persecuted such that they probably should have an independent nation as a safe space. But why does it have to be at the cost of so many lives and peoples homes? Massacre and displacement of Arab people is not a good way to create a safe haven for Jewish people, and having it continue for decades certainly increases antisemitism, in turn making Jewish people less safe.
I 100% agree and isn't this the underlying struggle really? The British decided to put the Jewish state there and then left everyone kill each other. Now there are millions of people living in a small place all with their own reasons to live there. I can see why a Jewish state has its legitimacy, but not how this would legitimize Palestinian from being displaced. On the other hand, Palestinians have the same right to live there, but that doesn't legitimize them from displacing Jews. Now everyone has their reasons to stay on the same land and fights over it without recognising the other side. This whole conflict is build on a really bad decision and history. But we are where we are right now and while it's a fucked up situation, we cannot really do much but try to find a reasonable compromise for everyone.
And regarding what you said in your other comment: yes, this is a very asymmetric conflict and Israel obviously has much more military power, which it abuses all the time. And meanwhile the settlers continue violently displacing Palestinians all the time as well. This needs to be stopped! My point is just that, while we try to stop these atrocities from happening, we should never forget that in its core the Israeli state does have legitimacy and that there are Jews that do have a right to live there (obviously not the settlers where they settle).
And maybe a small anecdote: a really close friend to me was Palestinian, born in Yarmouk Camp in Damascus. He told me how he has lived his whole live there and how much at home he felt in this refugee camp. Just imagine, a refugee camp that went on existing over 60 years with its inhabitants not having a chance to be proper Syrians and being discriminated against constantly. Over a 100K people lived there. But then came the war in Syria and what the Syrian government instantly did was to destroy this camp. My point being, even other Arab countries (except Jordan really) around Israel give a shit about Palestinians. They treat them like outsiders to this day, don't give them a chance of having basic rights and let them rot in camps just as well. Just look at Lebanon, same story there! And Egypt doesn't care about them either. If we want to tell the whole story about Palestinians, we shouldn't concentrate on Israel as the one evil. Again, this does not excuse anything the Israeli state is doing right now. But it stops us from demonizing Israel in the first place.
Look at what is happening in argentina right now, the amount of social movements that are forming and are active, on both protest and direct action is something that Americans have never seen in their republic history.
I really appreciate you mentioning this. I‘ll read up about it. Thanks!
The amount of damage the US has done to their citizens, community, society and pretty much everything is staggering imo. I‘m sad for the people who live there.
Abolition Media is a two year ago rebrand of AMW English. It definitely feels like they're trying to market themselves to anarchists despite their typical content.
Occupy is probably pretty close to a popular movement that many anarchists dream about. I never participated but from what I heard / read it seems your judgement seems to spot on.
I think its important to point out, that even if a movement tries to put some anarchist ideals into practices, the goals often are not in line with anarchist ideals. Also more often than not, its really hard to have no hierarchies in a broader movement. Privilege and unspoken hierarchies around knowledge, skill and connections still exist and sometimes get really highlighted in supposedly "non hierarchical" environments.
Your post from weeks ago was deleted locked because it was widely off-topic for the /c/anarchism community on lemmy.ml.
That said... the occupy movement was mostly run by Anarchists and even a cursory glance at the sources should have told you as much. It's nice that you are interested in Anarchism, but it would be great if you spend like more than 5 seconds to learn about it before posting.
I really dont like your tone mate. I didnt like it when you deleted my post and didnt react to my messages and I dont like it now. Your fellow moderator told me in writing that they think you made a mistake and their empathetic reaction led me to not pursue the matter of you abusing your mod power in an anarchist community. So please dont push me.
Since you’re saying yourself that Hauis question/topic does have something to do with anarchism, it is illogical and unfair to delete it.
Also, insulting another person and stating they didn’t read more than 5 seconds about anarchism makes you appear like a gatekeeper about knowledge on anarchism.
Haui is asking a legitimate question here, so he deserves argument instead of abusive rhetoric.
This was about a totally different question weeks ago that had literally nothing to do with Anarchism and would have better fit into the /c/showerthoughts community. And besides, it wasn't even deleted but just locked, see: https://lemmy.ml/post/12525634
In the post you locked a few weeks ago, haui explicitly asked to be told if it is the wrong place to post his question and not shut him down. You went and shut him down immediately, telling him „c/showerthoughts“ would be the more appropriate place even though a high number of upvotes clearly indicated he was indeed correct in posting the question here.
Also, haui didn’t get the chance to reply to this comment of yours because you disabled that as well and now you’re coming back at him for no reason with this kind of attitude which by the way breaks the first rule of this place („dont be shitty“) as well as your comment on his old post broke the rule nr 1 (be respectful) of your community.
Sorry, but you are missing the context of /c/anarchism@lemmy.ml being intentionally strongly moderated because of previous brigading of all sorts of trolls. And these kind of conspiracy thinking posts get a lot of up-votes on lemmy.ml all the time, that is part of the problem with that instance.
And last but not least, I wasn't being shitty. I answered their question and advised them to read up on it a bit more as it is hard to miss that the Occupy movement was mainly driven by Anarchists. The most prominent face of it that is mentioned everywhere, the late David Graeber, is probably one of the most well known contemporary Anarchists. If that is what you consider "gatekeeping" then sorry but you are being silly.
P.S.: Your post history makes it pretty clear that this is a sockpuppet account of haui, so please be honest here and argue with your main account and don't vote brigade and concern-troll with sockpuppet accounts.
It's funny what is "pretty clear" to you and what isn't. Like it is clear to you that my account is Haui's alt but it's is not clear to you that you are being disrespectful. Had you checked Haui's post history it would have been obvious to you that they don't hesitate posting their views with their account. My account is my personal account and I am not Haui. They can talk for themselves.
Checking **your **post history on the other hand, it seems obvious to me that you mostly comment by giving people helpful advice but on some very few occasions you act disrespectfully. Those times only seem to concern the topic of corporate power and somebody critizing it. This in turn leads me to believe that maybe deep down you are torn between depending on huge corporations (maybe because you work for one or used to or because somebody close to you does or did or you profit from huge corporations in some other way) and having anarchist tendencies (which is my you are active here). If that is the case, you of course become offended by someone like Haui aksing questions because you are confronted with your inner dichotomy.
Whatever it may be, maybe you could ask yourself what it is that annoys you and get over personal grief and start treating people with respect. I hope you get there.
Please refrain from psychologizing in the future... you are so far off the mark it is almost funny :)
Oh and an almost dormant account on a random instance jumping in an obscure thread in a small community to support a specific argument is a sure sign of a sockpuppet account. Please stop gaslighting people here and treat them with the respect you claim they deserve.
@BackOnMyBS might be able to clear this up since both barti and I are known to him. Your suspicion is close but still false. I'm not writing as barti and I'm not telling them what to write. What else can you think of that would have a similar outcome?
Fine, so even if that is true, you just admitted to vote brigading by asking your friends over to this thread and "dunk" on someone you previously had a mild disagreement with but then went on to harass other moderators and instance admins about. I think you should take a step back here and have a long deep thought about what respect means and how it applies to other people and not just to yourself.
Now you're twisting my words. I said you should think about other scenarios, not that I asked anyone to do anything. Mate, I dont know what axe you have to grind with me but your gaslighting and manipulation tactics dont work here. You're the one who shut down a legit question and were unresponsive to my messages (which in itself is disgusting behavior for a mod), your own fellow moderator told me you were wrong. What kind of issue do you have with being wrong and having to project your own issues on others?
In any case, I dont see us having a constructive discussion at any point in the future since you have no moral compass whatsoever. You're power tripping. I'm pulling the plug on this. Good bye.
Just for the record, I didn't respond because we jointly agreed as mods to de-escalate after you started harassing people in DMs and everything else you wrote above is a complete fabrication.
They're just throwing trash, telling you what your intentions are causing you to defend yourself, which is baiting you into an antagonistic argument. I would downvote and ignore. Also, remember that you can easily block anyone. I'm gonna do that rn 🙂👍
“And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.”
“It’s a lot more complicated than that—”
“No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”
“Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes—”
“But they starts with thinking about people as things…”
― Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum
All too often, people who identify as an authority do so because they think of people as owned things. An ugly situation somewhat ameliorated by Celine's Second Law "Effective communication is only possible among equals."
"If you don't respect the privileges I think I ought to have in my position in the social hierarchy, I won't respect the rights I might be willing to grant to someone in your position in the social hierarchy."
Well, you just told me that I had a plethora, and I would just like to know if you know what it means to have a plethora. I would not like to think that someone would tell someone else he has a plethora, and then find out that that person has no idea what it means to have a plethora.
Anarchism
Hot