Anonymous #2 11w

I’m Jewish too, I think the far-right’s rise is normalizing lots of anti-Jewish stuff that’s going from dog whistles to outright statements. Additionally, a lot of them are taking advantage of Gaza to push their own narratives about Jews as a whole, outside of those in Netanyahu’s cabinet.

58

Anonymous #2 11w

that really sucks, upset but unfortunately unsurprised to hear that. some of the absolute coolest people ik personally, online, and historically are/were Jewish

17

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

Yeah, the first part of your third paragraph is pretty important. I support bringing an end to the violence against the Palestinian people, as any sane person would. When people use antisemitic rhetoric to accomplish that goal (although I think a lot of those people don’t actually care, they’re just taking advantage of Palestinians), not only is it obviously bad for Jewish people, but it also works against real progress for Palestinians.

7

Anonymous #5 11w

They make these things called cellphones and what’s really cool about them is that they can take and send video basically anywhere in the world

13

Anonymous #3 11w

100%. Bad actors muddy the waters, even well-meaning ppl can fail to distinguish. Imo, an even harder battle is rhetoric that’s not anti-semitic but perceived as such like Globalize the Intifada is an important slogan literally meaning Resist Around the World (or Rise Up Everywhere) against oppression, in solidarity with Palestine But when every official source says it calls to “K*** the Jews”, I don’t blame the avg Jewish American who gets scared/anxious. Education is the challenge here

5

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

I like Mamdani. I would have voted for him if I lived in NY. That was an exceedingly poor choice of phrase, I have to say. It has pretty explicitly come to have a meaning of violence at this point.

5

Anonymous #3 11w

Hmm - I can guess where you’re coming from, but respectfully, i disagree My thinking: intifada translates to “uprising” or “resistance”. Like in English, resistance is a neutral word from civil disobedience to armed violence. Like how “civil war” is general and “The Civil War” is specific, it invokes two proper nouns in Palestine’s context There’s the mostly protests/worker strikes vs mostly armed violence of the First vs Second Intifadas + Israel’s response, but want to hear your thoughts

3

Anonymous #3 11w

Btw, I genuinely appreciate you for sharing your thoughts on a difficult, upsetting, contentious topic here. This is the type of convo I think is so important. (and quickly on Zohran, he said he doesn't use that phrase bc it's widely interpreted and often requires context for Americans, but he also refused to denounce it. plz correct me if that's wrong)

1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

I’m just considering the etymological meanings of words vs how they’re taken. When words are taken a certain way, even if it’s not how you mean it, careful wording is imperative. For example, “bicycle” in German directly means “chain donkey”, but nobody pictures a donkey when you say it. It’s the same way for intifada, even if the direct Arabic translation is different. For English speakers, “intifada” directly conjures the idea of the first and second intifadas.

1

Anonymous #3 11w

It’s kinda like how “ground zero” has come to mean the site of 9/11, even though it predates that, and technically has a wider meaning.

1

Anonymous #3 11w

To be clear, I recognize you didn’t assert this, but if you believe zohran mamdani is calling for intafada, you are racist. Just like full stop.

-2

Anonymous #3 11w

In summary, a lot of public speaking and speechwriting is not only about putting the words on a page, but being able to craft something to be received a certain way.

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 11w

In fact, my original comment said he wasn’t. I said it was a poor choice of words.

3

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 11w

I also said I would’ve voted for him if I lived in NYC

3

Anonymous #2 11w

I feel this is due to the degredation of communication, dishonest predatory rhetoric, and the ability to understand that being Jewish has nothing to do with the imperialistic pro war actions of Israel. The criticism is against Israeli imperialism not being Jewish and the fact that people are using both as synonymous is disgusting

11

Anonymous #2 11w

Im also Jewish, and religious. I feel like i have to over-explain my stance. Other jews think i have internalized anti-semitism or whatever, non-jews dont really “get it” and draw a lot of assumptions if they only know im religious. And dealing with the people who think i will be on their side when they say horrible things. Im a history and religion major and its like… why would i be a religious jew and be FOR a STATE of Israel?? i dont get the zionist position either like why ??

5

Anonymous #9 11w

Like i understand in a historic sense how the zionist ideology developed after ww2, but i dont fully understand how people themselves are so brainwashed that when they spend time studying TNK or Talmud they come away still somehow agreeing with the zionist position?

7

Anonymous boariskarloff 11w

You can also fake video’s, make up stories, whip millions of people into emotional frenzies with nonsense, so again, I ask you, how many of the things on your list are you personally bearing witness to?

1

Anonymous #5 11w

so we can’t trust anything we don’t see with our own eyes?? so, you must just have no opnion on anything outside of your day to day life then? idiot lmfao

3

Anonymous #10 11w

I’ve seen enough of the world/country in my short years to form a functional map of things that doesn’t spout nonsense for fake internet points.

3

Anonymous #5 11w

so only ppl with the privilege to travel internationally can have opinions. got it

1

Anonymous #10 11w

You likely have very valid observations of what you’ve seen here. Give yourself more credit.

1

Anonymous #5 11w

But did you SEE Alexander Graham Bell invent the telephone OP or are you just spouting nonsense on the internet☝️😼 btw i am very rich and have travelled the world to personally witness the non-happening of these non-crises you wokes keep talking about 🙂‍↕️ i have the pleasure to inform you everything is AI and the Middle East isnt real it was made up by the democrats

6

Anonymous #5 11w

Ita almost as if individual observation and the mass reporting of starvation and death in certain areas leads to collaborative interpretation that maybe something bad is happening there and then people want to help fund or create solutions to the problem that has been observed by individuals, reported on, interpreted, and discussed for the past two years

7

Anonymous #9 11w

Gazans are individuals observing their own circumstances too, just like us. When thousands of them cry out, we can hear it because of the instant information aggregate of the internet

6

Anonymous #5 11w

So if I send you a video of me plowing your dad crazy style it’s fine because you’re not really witnessing it? I just want to ensure that I haven’t misconstrued your argument.

4

Anonymous #3 11w

sorry it took a moment to respond here. i see what you’re saying, public reception is a factor. certainly, there are times when there are strategic disadvantages to certain language but there are also limits to that. like in 2015, 41% of white people saw “Black Lives Matter” as advocating for violence - clearly that didn’t make it true, or wrong to say

1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

Arabic words in particular are strongly stereotyped in the US to be associated with terrorism. Like even if a christofascist yelled “Praise God” mid-terror attack, most Americans would have no reaction to it in everyday scenarios. But bc they only hear “Allahu Akbar” when seeing media depictions of terrorists, effectively the same phrase terrifies many ppl

1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

The black lives matter analogy is because people were being fed lies, where I feel like the background to this scenario is a specific event, much more akin to the “ground zero” analogy, or even how “holocaust” is a general phrase, but THE holocaust is something specific now.

1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 11w

also encourage looking into the First Intifada. Wikipedia is a good start This was an overwhelmingly nonviolent uprising against Israeli oppression in the 80s/90s, modeled after US civil rights protests/strikes/boycotts. Yet it still faced ultraviolent IDF reactions: “In the first year in the Gaza Strip alone, 142 Palestinians were killed, while no Israelis died” On an absolute level, this was far more traumatizing for Palestinians. I hope ppl consider why Israeli trauma is the default concern

1

Anonymous #3 11w

that’s fair. BLM is a slogan/movement associated with a series of events, and ppl were def fed lies about it lol i think intifada is at once a word/slogan/movement/event(s). similar to your examples, understandable for Americans to associate it with the the First/Second Intifada…but I also think ppl were (and still are) fed lies about their cause/motivation, and the nonviolent focus of the First one

1

Anonymous #2 11w

Jews are cool bro. It's just genocidal maniacs that are the problem. But I have genuinely no quarrel with Jewish people because that's just ridiculous. Alot of bigotry is just plain stupidity

3