cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/46148690
Over the past few days, @MrKaplan@lemmy.world/@MrKaplan@piefed.world has banned multiple users, blocked entire comms, and now defederated from Anarchist.Nexus over their anti-Zionist stance.
This extreme overreaction and general power trippin’ bastard behavior stems from Lemmy.world’s history of pro-Zionist views. And now MrKaplan is seeking out the flimsiest pretext to to enact his own personal vendetta.
Free Palestine, Death to Israel, Death to Zionism.
Lemmy.world is a ZioNazi instance. Avoid it like the plague.
Those who conduct or support the genocide of a ‘lesser’ people are nazis. Whether they do so out of hatred or greed, the result is the same.
“Nazi” is not a generic synonym for “bad person” or “mass murderer” or “genocider”. I know it’s common place, but this is the laziness I’m talking about. If we start using every word by its generic connotations or goodness/badness, then these words will no longer serve as a distinctive epistemological tool.
And there is actually a historical irony here, in the context of doing this with Zionism. The soviet union and its bolsheviks actually supported the Zionist entity in its first decade of existence, and actively so. Massacres against villagers and other events from that era didn’t cause any deterrence to that support. They even went as far as making Arab communists work as what would effectively be described today as Mossad agents. This alignment only started to shift circa ~1958.
Should we call the soviets from that era “Nazis”?
If we want to principally oppose Zionism, and we should be, then we need to be educated, informed, and diligent against falling for traps like those from the mainstream right-left political theater.
I think that’s a good enough approximation. And the current nazis are very much conducting the genocide of the native people. I said nothing about “bad person” or “mass murderer”.
I think we should definitely criticise the Soviet support for all sorts of nationalisms in general, and this nationalism in particular. Yes the Russian Empire was cruel towards (most) minorities, but that doesn’t mean you need to create political entities that do not have the population or economy to support themselves. Cultural freedom might have been a better aim.
However, the wish for a ‘Jewish’ state is still understandable, if it recognises an equal Palestinian state. The Israel of the 1950s was still problematic, but a far better country than the Israel of today.
And the mask is off.
Massacres in 2024 are abhorrent and a very big deal. Massacres in 1948 were unfortunate, preferably not mentioned at all.
Population displacement is abhorrent and criminal in 2024. But it was “understandable” in 1948.
Colonialism in 1948 was okay whenever it had good enough red paint!
Many of you are not against Zionism. You are specifically against the Jabotinskyists leading the Zionist entity’s scene today. And the opposition itself is not that genuine. It’s just a part of the moral posturing arsenal for scoring points in the right-left political theater.
Sorry, how did you go from ‘the wish for a Jewish state is understandable’ to ‘massacres and population displacement are unfortunate / okay’? Colonialism is never okay. But there are levels of evil. The Israel project was misguided from the beginning, but it could have been justified in the immediate aftermath of the holocaust. Now? Not only are Israel’s actions openly genocidal, there’s no reasonable justification for attacking every country in the region.
I don’t know about this. Has there been a change in Israeli leadership? I thought the change in policy was due to US influence.
European Jews* grabbing land and displacing people in another continent to create a new faux-nation, all facilitated by the British empire (with help from the French, and the already mentioned soviets) is “justified” because they suffered a holocaust! at the hands of Nazis who actually had an agreement with Zionists before the war (yes, Nazi Germany itself was on the list of facilitators, together with soviets)!
I’m not necessarily attacking you personally btw. I’m just showing that your positioning, common among some mainstream leftists today, is neither historically informed, nor logically, intellectually, or morally consistent. This positioning, precise in its “filtering”, is designed specifically to score points in the mainstream right-left political theater. A theater that has staunch Zionists in every faction, to the point where Zionism was often the easiest uniting factor one can point to.
That is not to say that all apparent opposition to Zionism in mainstream politics is fake. But whatever genuine opposition that exists out there, is an opposition to factions within Zionism, not Zionism itself. And it’s often an extension of local/national factional fights within that theater.
* Many were atheist and non-religious cultural Jews btw.
Justifying settler colonialism with the holocust is so disgusting. Shame on you .
Every single form of zionism is about settler colonialism which was never moralnand neither legal
I think I understand what you are saying. Yes, I do not hold all zionists to be equally bad people. I feel that those who acted out of fear, or who tried to compromise (even if that ‘compromise’ was stealing ‘only’ half the native peoples’ land) are less bad people than those who support murder and genocide, and find joy in violence. But isn’t this natural? In any group, there will be better people and worse people. So while zionism itself is ‘bad’, would you not expect ‘less bad’ and ‘more bad’ factions within it?
You seem to gloss over what’s important (the first stipulation), by arguing for the latter stipulation, which is on the surface true, no matter how formulated. Although, the “not as bad as” formulation makes it clearer that this is a simple case of relative privation.
Mainstream politics in the west, left and right, supports Zionism. And that’s what’s most relevant. Everything else can be assumed a diversion, unless otherwise proven.