This line was specifically in the article about protests being suppressed:
About two weeks ago, Israel Police suppressed a demonstration in the city of Haifa against the war on Gaza, and forcefully prevented the Arab and Jewish participants from gathering in the city.
Iâve posted quite a few links deep above into this thread about how Israeli citizens have effectively lost the right to protest, with the heavy crackdown onto protests.
Also on the Jewish lobby thing, itâs quite daft to call it the âJewish lobbyâ and plays into anti-Semitic tropes, when the various Jewish lobbies canât even agree with each other. Some are explicitly anti-Zionist (although I think this is a minority?), some back Netanyahu, some want him out. Not to mention the varying attitudes towards Palestine. Just look at the reaction towards Corbynâs supposed anti-Semitism for example. Not all Jewish organisations condemned his actions.
David Schneider, the comedian, wrote an article a while back about discussing Israel without being misinterpreted. I thought it was in the Guardian but it turns out it was the Independent. Anyway, I thought itâs worth reposting.
Be precise in your language.
Avoid saying âZionistâ or âZionismâ when discussing contemporary Israel/Palestine. The terms are too loaded now, too coarse and broad in their application, and too often used by hardcore antisemites to mean simply Jews.
Benjamin Netanyahu is a Zionist, but so are Israeli lawyers and peace activists fighting to achieve justice for Palestinians. You cannot lump them all together. Fair enough when talking historically, as long as youâre informed and precise, but for the present day, I recommend using specific terms instead, such as âthe Israeli governmentâ or âNetanyahuâ.Do not slide from anger at the actions of the Israeli state into asserting that Israel is controlling everything or paying money to MPs, celebrities or the media to act as they do. To do so simply echoes far-right antisemitism and centuries-old conspiracy theories about Jews, now rebadged to apply to Israel.
And yes, I know about the documentary The Lobby, where a Labour MP was filmed discussing money with an Israeli embassy official. But unless you have other examples of this, I suggest you avoid it. Of course, I may have received money from Israel to tell you this.Donât conflate Israel and Jews. It may anger you that the likes of Netanyahu try to do this, so donât make the same mistake yourself. If you see someone talking about Jews, antisemitism or the Holocaust and find yourself leaping straight to Israel-Palestine, think again.
Avoid the terms âIsrael lobbyâ and especially âJewish lobbyâ unless you also say âSaudi lobbyâ, âRussian lobbyâ, âHindu lobbyâ and so on. âSupporters of Israelâ is safer language.
As for âJewish lobbyâ, they say âtwo Jews, three opinionsâ. The idea of us agreeing enough to form a single lobby is as likely as Theresa May fighting the next election as Tory leader.Donât accuse Jews of dual loyalty to Israel and the UK (or whichever country), and certainly not of just being loyal to Israel. Itâs another age-old antisemitic standard, as featured in Stalinist show trials and the Dreyfus affair.
Donât compare Israeli actions to the Nazis unless itâs incredibly specific and historically justified (such as a settler calling for Arabs to be gassed). And even then, use extreme caution.
Donât ask every Jew to condemn Israel in every tweet or comment they make. Would you ask every Muslim to condemn Saudi Arabia? I hope, and presume, not.
Itâs obviously not my place to tell Palestinians how they should define their oppression, but for the rest of us, people need to be able to criticise Israel and Jews need to be reassured at a time of rising antisemitism.
With careful language, we can do both.
Most of his points seem fair but I donât understand this one. There is no justice for Palestinians within Zionism
Wouldnât the two-state solution inherently have a Zionist element?
I think his point is that Zionism is a rather archaic term. I donât think Jewish fundamentalism even works because Haredi Jews donât consider themselves Zionist. Probably âIsraeli Ultranationalistâ is what people referring to Zionist mean unless, as he points out, itâs just hardcore antisemites using it as a synonym for Jews.
I swear this is all Iâve ever seen it in the context of.
I think in todayâs context, in which Israel has existed for 80 years, the broader meaning of Zionism as an ongoing philosophy no longer makes sense, as a home for the Jews in their historical homeland, as it has been achieved and realized by now 3 generations. I think today most people use it as a description of the alternative to a 2 state solution, in line with their use of the phrase from the river to the sea.
The most prominently covered pro-Israel lobbying group in the US is almost certainly AIPAC. They are so tightly aligned with the Israeli government that there have been credible discussions on whether its members should be required to register as foreign agents. Their main model for influence has been to be very front and center in all debates and so are incredibly visible. The actually biggest group though are Christians United for Israel and its membership has absolutely exploded in the last ten years or so. It is very rare you will hear any debate about Israel in the US reference this group though.
If you want to talk about a âJewish Lobbyâ, donât do it here. Youâre welcome to knock yourself out on Twitter. Elon is dead into that kind of âFree speech absolutism, who gives a fuck if itâs anti-semiticâ stuff.
When we talk about a âJewish Lobbyâ it is very much a modern variant of old âInternational Jewryâ or âCultural Marxismâ tropes. It ties into the idea that there is a shadowy cabal of Jews controlling everything. Itâs fucking nonsense, and itâs very anti-Semitic - so donât go there please. Many people here, some of whom would be very much in agreement with you on your other points, are also pointing out that itâs problematic. If you donât want to listen to me, listen to everyone else posting in the thread.
That idea is definitely muddied by the existence of a well known Israel focused lobbying group called J Street, that is a Jewish founded and run group that leans on the name to make clear who they are and what issues they are focused on.
Officially there is a different reason for their name, but it is very in the weeds to understand it. DC is known for its lettered street names. The oldest, most influential lobbying groups have physical addresses on K street, and so that has become an in the know catch all name for lobbyists in general (âyou need K street money to win an electionâ). Oddly there is not a J street and so the J street lobbying group picked that name to represent the absence of their argument from the debate - recognition of Palestine as an official independent state as part of a 2 state solution. But you have to be in politics to understand that implication. To everyone else they are J street because they are Jewish and advocating for policy American Jews do not see the other Israel lobbying groups supporting.
AIPAC:
This is a neighbourhood in Gaza which has been flattened by Israel. As we speak, itâs no more than a heap of rubble.
Just want to add my unqualified tuppence.
I like your posting and you add great value to this small community. On this subject there has been a bit of an edge, and I fear another departure, but hopefully it wonât get near to that.
The criticism is valid from a few here. Netanyahu, Israeli Government, Israel, Jews, Jewish lobbying groups, Jewish lobby⌠big sliding scale there. The last part, Jewish lobby, can easily be taken as anti-Semitic, and to my mind, if it is even a thing, it isnât a well defined thing and could be a catch all phrase that anti-Semites could use.
Peace.
PS - it is concerning to see that even in a country like America, where I live, the coverage is so massively biased, and amendment protections on free speech donât appear to apply very well to those who want to legitimately criticize what the Israel government is doing under Netanyahu.
I would characterize the maintenance of a Jewish ethnic state as one of the two states as an inherently Zionist project. Not the only possible Zionist project, but distinct from the âall of Judea and Samariaâ crowd.
âEven in America?â From any snippets Iâve seen America is one of the most biased and brain washed countries on earth
Maybe at one point in time. But for the last few decades the Zionist project, as itâs primary focus, has been dismantling any possibility of a 2 state solution/a state for Palestinians
I donât think there necessarily is just a single Zionist project. But my fundamental point was that the two state solution, i.e a nation-state for Israeli Jews and a nation-state for Palestinians, has an inherently Zionist element to it. Citizenship in that Jewish state would presumably look something like Israeli citizenship today, with the vast majority of Arab residents of the territory being deemed citizens of the Palestinian entity. âRight of returnâ isnât going anywhere, and it seems very unlikely that the current requirement of one Israeli parent for birthright citizenship would disappear either.
If the future was just a liberal democratic pluralist secular state, you would only need one of those. But neither party wants the pluralist, and probably not the secular either.
Indeed. And it has a written Constitution to enshrine free speech, hence the disappointment, at least for this expat living here, that the bias is so extreme.
For me, using the phrase Jewish lobby isnât anti Semitic, it just refers to all Jewish groups that lobby. Letâs face it, we use lots of phrases that generalize groups, people etc. The Arab world, the right, the left. Itâs exhausting and impossible to have to specify to the last detail so as not to âoffendâ someone.
Basically, itâs a way of shutting off any criticism or argument about any subject. Just cry racism, homophobia, nazi, facist and you shut the person up for fear of being branded a bigot.
By the way, to me personally, it doesnât conjure up a
conspiracy theory of Jews being puppet masters and pulling the strings.
Another example of the world gone mad.
Waiting to be told Iâm a bigot.
I donât know about other people, but for me itâs simply about respecting people. If you canât even make the effort to be specific to respect other peopleâs feelings, then maybe youâre the problem, not someone getting âoffendedâ.
Itâs quite ironic because the rest of your post is then about shutting off any criticism or argument about what you said.
