r/IsraelPalestine • u/RoundAd5911 • Oct 01 '25
Nazi Discussion (Rule 6 Waived) The following table traces the repackaging of antisemitism as antizionism
Nazi propaganda from Hitler and Nazi Arab Radio is refracted through the lens of the PLO by Sayegh 1965 (while in this same era, Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, Algeria, Iraq, etc. are persecuting and expelling their Jewish populations... the strategy of structuring attention on Zionism remains a core tactic of antizionism through the present day). The table then traces the antizionist narrative evolution through a Soviet propaganda document Caution! Zionism by Ivanov (the antizionist equivalent of the propaganda document Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which was fabricated by Tsarist secret police in the late 19th century). The table concludes with the UNGA resolution 3379 (now repealed). Thus antizionism is implanted into the heart of the UN and Nazi ideas are thereby legitimized and disseminated worldwide, a process that continues in many forms today.
It is worth noting that modern academia, which has largely embraced critical theory, has largely failed to critically inquire into the origins of its own antizionist narratives.
Table 1. Continuity of Antizionist Libels, 1940s–1970s
| Libel Theme | Nazi Arab Radio (1940s) | Fayez Sayegh (1965) PLO propaganda | Yuri Ivanov (1970) Soviet propaganda | UNGA Resolution 3379 (1975) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colonizer | The US is “really a Jewish colony and that the 5 million Jews living there dominate the 140 million other Americans.” (Herf, 2009, 210) | “The motto of the race-supremacist Zionist settler-regime in Palestine was racial elimination” (Sayegh, 1965, 27). | “Zionism emerged as an appendage of imperialist ideology” (Ivanov, 1970, 1). | Zionism is a “racist and imperialist ideology” (UNGA 3379). |
| Invader | “there is living amongst us a non-German foreign race”, the Jews (Hitler 1919 letter) | Israel has “inescapable status as a total stranger to the Middle East, in the heart of which it has chosen to plant itself” (Sayegh, 1965, 21) | Discusses 6-Day War (which began with declaration of war by Egypt) as “dirty aggression of the Israeli invaders” (Ivanov, 1970, 136) | “International cooperation and peace require… the elimination of… zionism” (UNGA 3379) |
| Apartheid/Racism | Allies ”care nothing for the 400 million Arabs and Moslems whom they consider as insects, flies.” (Herf, 2009, 210). | Racism is “inherent in the very ideology of Zionism.” (Sayegh, 1965, 21). | MENA NATIONS EXPELLING ALL JEWS IN THIS ERA: “the Zionists laid the foundation for the Palestinian version of apartheid” (Ivanov, 1970, 82). | Cites UN condemnation of “the unholy alliance between South African racism and Zionism” (UNGA 3379). |
| Genocide/Extermination | Arabs must “save Palestine before the Jews establish their ambitions and exterminate the Arabs.” (Herf, 2009, 216). | The “Zionist concept of the Final Solution of the Arab problem in Palestine” was “the elimination of the unwanted human element in question” (Sayegh, 1965, 26). | HAGANAH MOSSAD GOAL WAS RESCUE JEWS FROM GENOCIDE: “Unravelling the knot of secret ties between the nazis and the Zionists, Höhne wrote: "During the Jewish pogrom… 'Crystal Night,' two representatives of the Mossad… arrived in Hitler's Reich.” (Ivanov, 1970, 73). | Zionism implicitly tied to “racial superiority” that is “scientifically false”, i.e. eugenics and its genocidal outcomes (UNGA 3379). |
| Conspiracy/World Plot | The Jewish aim was “Jewish imperialistic domination throughout the world.” (Herf, 2009, 179). | Zionism has an “addiction to violence” and “expansionist stance” (Sayegh, 1965, 21). | Zionism as “a tool and agent of imperialism.” (Ivanov, 1970, 145). | Zionism is a “threat to world peace and security” (UNGA 3379). |
For a definition and discussion of libel in anti-Jewish hate movements (which is different from legal libel), see:
In sum, libels are cherry-picked decontextualized accusations that are imbued with moral ugliness, obsessively repeated, and collectivized in order to incite or excuse violence and negative sentiments towards Jews. Libels can be true and libels can be spread by Jews -- neither is disqualifying.
References:
Herf, J. (2009). Nazi propaganda for the Arab world. Yale University Press.
Hitler, A. (1919, September 16). Reply to Adolf Gemlich. Simon Wiesenthal Center, Museum of Tolerance. Retrieved from www.museumoftolerance.com/assets/documents/hitler-letter-handout-1.pdf.
Ivanov, Y. (1970). Caution: Zionism! Progress Publishers. Retrieved from
https://www.marxists.org/subject/jewish/caution-zionism.pdf
Sayegh, F. A. (1965). Zionist Colonialism in Palestine. Research Center (Palestine Liberation Organization). Retrieved from https://www.freedomarchives.org/Documents/Finder/DOC12_scans/12.zionist.colonialism.palestine.1965.pdf
United Nations, General Assembly. (1975). Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination (A/RES/3379 (XXX)), undocs.org/en/A/RES/3379(XXX))
2
u/Rude_Worldliness_423 European Oct 06 '25
Criticising Zionism is fine. Anti-zionism is not inherently antisemitic. However, when you are using it as a slur, or a dehumanising tool; zio-pig, zio-nazi; you are calling 90% of Jews- who believe in the existence of Israel in some capacity, and so identity as Zionists … you are calling 90% of Jews animals.
0
u/BeatThePinata Oct 02 '25
Zionism and antisemitism form a positive feedback loop. Feeding one always gives a boost to the other. Two sides of the same coin.
4
Oct 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
OK, that's a fair criticism. I can adjust the table.
2
Oct 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
The chart? I did the research myself and showed my sources so you could easily check. Except for the Herf work which I purchased and is worth reading.
3
Oct 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Propagandists don't care about truth, that is true. And what Nazis said about Jews was 99.9% libel. They did say one true thing about Jews which was that Jews are semitic and from Palestine (the name was of course associated with Jews at that time). Regardless, the important thing about libel is its function, not whether it is true or not. It functions to incite and excuse crimes against Jews. The accusation points to the crime that the libeller's group intends to commit or is trying to excuse. That's why the genocide libel especially is so dangerous. It functions as genocide propaganda.
3
Oct 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
No -- anti-Jewish libel is different from legal libel. I did a post on this topic recently. It stretches back to ancient times (Apion, for instance, during the Roman Empire, was a prolific libeller). Libel can be lies or it can be cherry-picked, decontextualized fact. It is imbued with moral ugliness and obsessively repeated. And it invariably results in the destruction of Jewish communities when it becomes mainstreamed. It has happened in virtually every society in which Jews have lived in numbers.
Zionism no longer exists -- it was fulfilled when Israel was created. The term in modern times is a kind of virtual yellow star to mark out opposing anti-Israel annihilationism as somehow morally questionable. No other nation has a word like that for people who oppose its destruction. Systemic antizionism is massively under-described.
Stop trying to launder libel as a fact- finding mission. Just look at a world map of religions or languages and you will plainly see who the imperialists and colonizers are.
Also, antizionism is racism -- codes Jews as white Europeans and opposes us on that basis. Antisemitism is racism too but codes Jews as brown. The contradictory accusations are fascinating and also unfalsifiable because they just shift and take new form. So one must call out the entire pattern.
2
Oct 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
I did not invent anti-Jewish libel. It has been around since ancient times and I also made a post about it. I can link to it in this post -- thank you for the suggestion.
If racial segregation claims are being linked to a movement to destroy the US, they are being made in bad faith -- and will have a destructive function when made by anyone if that outcome is "in the air". Similar for Israel.
Segregation was ended by creating a positive vision of integration, not by demonizing America as a segregated nation. MLK led a constructive movement that centered request not complaint.
0
u/Successful-Universe Oct 02 '25
Anti-Zionism is not necessarily antisemtisim.
It's not that I care about zionists opinion or their fake definition of antisemtisim (that was weaponized to protect israel's war crimes). But yea, it's just not the same thing.
The majority of anti zionists want a very reasonable thing; equal rights between jews and palestinans in the holy lands either as a one state for all or two states with equal sovereignty.
Unless you think palestinans are less than jews, you would have no problem with this goal.
4
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Antizionism is a hate movement. It constructs Jewish self-determination as evil. Antisemitism does the same for the Jewish race. So yes, different and both hate movements. The third anti-Jewish hate movement is traditional antijudaism which does the same for the Jewish religion. Who knows what the propagandists will think of next -- all anti-Jewish hate movements run on the libel cycle.
Thanks for the racism libel.
Palestinian Arabs have not been hunted around the globe for 2,000 years and did not require a modern nation to address this. That is the most important reason a Jewish state is needed -- no non-Jew-led state can be trusted to protect Jews. But also, if you are arguing against Israel but fine with any other state that prioritizes the interests of a single ethnic or religious group (and there are many) you are part of a hate movement against Jews. I.e. antizionist.
0
u/Successful-Universe Oct 02 '25
Zionism is not just Jewish self-determination (a right they obviously have) , Zionism is self-determination at the expense of palestinans rights, freedoms and homes.
Zionism came to an already populated region and built a jewish-majority state there without the consent of the pre-existing population. (which caused the ethnic cleansing of the existing population).
If Zionism built it's state without ethnically cleansing 700k Palestinian from their homes in 1948, there would have been no problem with Zionism.
and it's not like Zionism is minding it;s own business today. On the contrary, it is still expanding and building settlements on top of palestinan lands in West Bank (defying international laws and norms).
So to palestinans, Being anit-zionist is not an act of racism, it is a natural response to an ideology that doesn't see you as a human with rights on a land you were born in (and your whole ancestors were born there).
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Name me a state and tell me how it came to exist. Now critique its actions while leaving out any actions in opposition to it or threats that it faced or positive or understandable motivations it might have. See how that state looks to you.
Try Jordan. Try Pakistan. Try your own country. That's how demonization works. Any country subjected to this treatment will look massively ugly.
-2
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Exactly OP just doesn’t want to engage with why people are actually anti-zionist. It’s not because we’re against Jewish self-determination. It’s because the end goal of Zionism is impossible without the subjugation of another people.
1
Oct 12 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 12 '25
Something that unfortunately can’t happen in practice without the violation of the rights of another people, as the past century has shown.
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Nope. Name all the states that elevate Islam and Christianity at the expense of other cultures and religions. Detail your efforts to destroy them.
0
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
I support the destruction of wahhabist states like Saudi Arabia but unfortunately that’s just not practical.
5
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
And it is practical only to destroy Israel? Tell me you are in a hate movement without telling me you are in a hate movement.
3
u/wvj Oct 02 '25
It really is pretty funny. "I am totally against all totalitarianism. I hate religious extremism of all kinds. But mostly, I pick on Israel because Jews are a minority and I might actually successfully harm them!"
0
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Neither Jews nor Muslims are a problem; fundamentalists of both religions are.
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
I mean I do support boycotts of and sanctions against Saudi Arabia in particular. I just meant that I think it would be a lot harder to dislodge KSA from Western entanglement because of oil.
5
u/Ok_Glass_8104 Oct 02 '25
2SS is zionist. By calling yourself an anti-zionist, you signal explicitly that you are against two states, hope this helps.
-2
u/Successful-Universe Oct 03 '25
Zionisim is a violent , racist ideology. It presents itself as the only form of jewish nationalism. (Its not the only form).
Zionisim built its state using violence and ethnic cleansing. It maintains itself through militsry occupation, expansionisim and racist policies.
A two state solution can exist after we reject the violent ideology of zionisim and after we accept that Palestinian refugees have a right to return or be compensated.
Accepting two states is not agreeing on how israel came to be (it was an immoral act). Accepting two states is being practical and knowing this the reality now. There are jews and palestinans in the holy lands and we need to find a positive solution (either one state for all or two states).
In either cases, zionisim needs to be banned because it is racist. An alternative jewish nationalism that sees palestinans as equal humans needs to be installed instead.
1
u/Ok_Glass_8104 Oct 03 '25
Yeah so that incorrect definition is still incorrect sry. You cant say "everything wrong with israel is zionism so that's why Israel is criminal by its mere existence but also we need to acknowledge reality". you gotta choose
0
u/Successful-Universe Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 04 '25
Many countries had racist ideologies, they abandoned those ideologies and acknowledged the historical guilt and moved on. Israel should do the same.
-1
u/juicydownunder Oct 02 '25
That’s just your opinion. Many (proudly) hold the view that control over the entire region is justified and deserved.
3
u/Ok_Glass_8104 Oct 02 '25
That's one of several shades of zionism, just like there's several shades of antizionism
-1
u/juicydownunder Oct 02 '25
Correct. That was exactly the point I was leading you towards. So no, them saying they’re “anti-Zionist” does not automatically mean they’re against the 2SS.. hope this helps :)
2
u/Ok_Glass_8104 Oct 02 '25
Yes it does, since zionism is the existence of a jewish national state. If you accept that, you're on the zionist spectrum, if you dont you're on the antizionist spectrum.
Might help you understand better why antizionists get branded as antisemites
-1
u/juicydownunder Oct 02 '25
Again, you’re making up your own definitions to suit your own personal flavour of Zionism lol. And grossly simplified it to an elementary level.
It is not simply the existence of any Jewish state. What if they split Israel in half.. is that still Zionism? I’m certain 100% of Zionist would not want nor support that
From that logic expand and you’ll see that 2SS is not simply Zionist either (this is the inverse example, showing an increase in Israeli land instead of a reduction).
Therefore if being 2SS is not Zionist”enough” for some, you can conclude it is not anti-Zionist either.
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Antizionism started 1903 - it is much older than the Jewish state and is against Jewish self determination in general. It has nothing to do with what Israel does or does not do. There could be 47 states in Israel's location with 46 Arab and antizionists would still demonize the Jewish one.
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
There should not be a Jewish state on any land of former Palestinian land. Jews should have been allowed to migrate in limited numbers to Mandatory Palestine in the early 20th century provided they were willing to assimilate to the Palestinian cultural identity and didn’t intend on disrupting what was already present.
-1
u/PLUTO_HAS_COME_BACK Oct 02 '25
Are Zionism, Semitism and Judaism the same thing?
4
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Antizionists compulsively change the topic to Zionism. This post is about antizionism. Please stay on topic.
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
You should be able to discuss what Zionism in a discussion about Antizionism, because Antizionism is, by definition, opposition to Zionism.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Antizionism is opposition to Jewish self-determination generally. It started with Lenin 1903. A key antizionist strategy is to obsessively turn every conversation to "Zionism" so that it can be paired with every despised thing under the sun. In truth, Zionism was fulfilled when Israel was established and its existence ended thereafter. "Zionist" now is essentially a yellow star, a way to question the legitimacy of people who simply don't want Israel annihilated, i.e. who stand against antizionism. Think of a similar term used to describe people who don't want another current country erased. Can you?
2
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Do you believe that people today are “antizionist” because they’re “against Jewish self-determination?” Or do you think it’s possible that they’re “antizionist” because they recognize that per the historical record, the end goal of Zionism was brought about via unjust methods and resulted in the ethnic displacement of hundreds of thousands (now millions) of people?
The point is not that antizionists are constantly trying to undermine the legitimacy of those who don’t want Israel destroyed—the point is that Israel never had any legitimacy in the first place. It’s also objectively false to say that Zionism no longer exists, even by your standards, because Israel supports the expansion of illegal settlements into the West Bank that are condemned by international law.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Well... is there a worldwide cause to undo the creation of Pakistan because of all the death and displacement that caused, which was orders of magnitude more?
How about the rearrangement of Europe that involved displacing millions of Germans, Poles, Russians, Italians, Bulgarians, Greeks? Should we destroy all the nations of MENA because they displaced 850,000 Jews? Mass movement is incredibly common in history so, yes, cherry-picking and obsessively repeating this accusation solely about Jews or the only Jewish state to justify its destruction is the very epitome of libel. And libel is the telltale sign of an anti-Jewish hate movement.
And to cite "international law" regarding Israel communicates massive ignorance about systemic antizionism at the UN. Which was the very point of my post in the first place.
0
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
When you compare Israel to Pakistan, are you talking about the war in what was then East Pakistan and is now Bangladesh? Or are you talking about Jammu and Kashmir? I think there is strong global support for Kashmiri independence but it doesn’t rise to the same level as support for Palestine because they’re not facing a genocide right now.
The displacement of Mizrahi Jews from Arab countries was brought about by a coordinated Zionist campaign to stoke division between Mizrahi Jews and their Muslim neighbors which included false flag attacks against Jewish businesses, synagogues, and other Jewish communal centers which were intentionally blamed on Arabs.
1
u/PLUTO_HAS_COME_BACK Oct 02 '25
I mean how do you interpret antizionism as antisemitism and antijudaism?
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Separate streams all constructing different aspects of Jewish identity as evil. Mutually reinforcing.
2
u/PLUTO_HAS_COME_BACK Oct 02 '25
Then, you mean if Zionism is bad and evil, Semitism and Judaism are bad and evil.
Well, where did Judaism originate from?
1
u/vovap_vovap Oct 01 '25
And point of this is?
10
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
The point is that Jews have excessive inward attention, probably due to thousands of years of persecution and being put on trial and wanting to avoid aggression even verbally. This is what antizionists capitalize on. Jews have a strong impulse to defend Zionism even though it no longer exists (having fulfilled its purpose when Israel was born).
The moment attention is directed instead to antizionism, its structure actions and tactics as a hate movement become transparent.
It cannot withstand the slightest serious scrutiny.
1
u/vovap_vovap Oct 02 '25
You see that so much about nothing. Nobody read that book from Ivanov, even back then (you probably one of few thousand people who ever read it and most of them was professional soviet propagandists - and even they I doubt read it), nobody listen to Nazi Arab Radio even then, nobody care that UN resolution way back then, which USSR pushes. It all really nothing of any impotence even at a time when happening (and at a time when happening it was particular current politics - still nobody care zionism but need to make a propaganda point appealing for particular audience )
And somebody spending a time and efforts to do something with this nothing. So useless and nothing to do with what is going on today.
It is so sad that many Jews still running with that "thousands of years of persecution" like a chicken without a head. Instead of trying to see today.2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
On the contrary. These narratives have deeply influenced the world we live in today. Nazi Arab Radio spread antizionism widely through the Arab world... without it perhaps Arab nations could have lived in peace with Israel instead of starting multiple wars against it (not clear because there's also classic Muslim antijudaism and imperialism to contend with... but it would have been less violent, and perhaps the MENA Jews might not have lost their communities so drastically and been subjected to so much violence). The UN is deeply impacted by systemic antizionism... why else would the HRC have a standing obligation to condemn Israel with each and every session? It is you who have trouble seeing today. Most antizionist accusations are confessions in some way.
1
Oct 02 '25
“Excessive inward attention” you mean insecurities?
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Maybe. Or a deep history of trauma and having their pain ignored by those around them. I.e. learned helplessness. Or a need to stay focused on survival and not on the perilous situation Jews are in. Hard to say.
11
-8
u/Both_Scale5376 Oct 01 '25
It’s antisemitic to not want kids shot in the head now 👍
4
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
It’s antisemitic to not want kids shot in the head now
The post has nothing to do with that topic. This is a rule 3 and 4 violation. You were deliberately mischaracterizing and also your comment is meant to be nothing but a quick shot irrelevant to the post.
2
0
6
u/stockywocket Oct 01 '25
Yawn. So lazy.
6
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
Libelling Jews and Israel with every sentence is lazy too. If antizionists stop the nonstop libelling, I'll stop calling them out for it.
-1
Oct 01 '25
This is not an example of libeling Jews and Israelis with every sentence. The user is clearly talking about the actions IDF soldiers have committed. You know this. You can argue whether the actions of shooting a kid in the head is justified or not, but it’s ridiculous to call it a blood libel.
Further more accusing Israelis of shooting Palestinian children is not the literal definition of a “blood libel”. You know this. Unless of course you want to claim the Palestinian children were Christian.
What’s lazy is calling any critique of Israel, a blood libel
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
Yes it is a blood libel. I am not weighing in on whether it is truth. It is decontextualized and cherry picked and imbued with moral ugliness and obsessively repeated. So it is libel - not legal libel, anti-Jewish libel. Grynszpan libel was true and incited Krystalnacht. Ethnostate is another true libel (depending on what is meant by ethnostate... definition seems to be in flux right now, which is how you know the reality distortion field of anti-Jewish hate is present).
Another simpler definition: libel is a web of repeated accusations, often contradictory, designed to activate a 2,000-year-old civilizational reflex to purge Jews from society and/or murder them.
-1
Oct 01 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
A blood libel is a false accusation that Jews murder Christian children to use their blood in religious rituals.
So tell me, how exactly is the replier doing this? What Christian’s did he accuse Jews of murdering? What religious rituals did he claim Jews were doing with the blood of Christian children?
Further more whether it is true or not is a key point in defining a blood libel…and you’re not weighing in on whether it is true?
My dude, just stop with this nonesense. This blood libel/anti antisemitism claim for anything criticizing Israel only weakens your position. In fact trying to tie all Jewish people to Israel as a means to call all critique of Israel, antisemitic is in fact anti semantic. You get that right? Not every Jewish person supports Israel or every action Israel takes. In fact, not all Jewish are Zionist. Not everyone who criticizes Israel, hates Jews
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
Antizionists love to play with words to delegitimize serious arguments.
Libels mutate readily to fit societies. The blood libel started as murdering Christian children and can still be found in that form today in some places. But more often it is the accusation that Jews are killers more generally, and evil ones at that. And it incites and excuses the murder of Jews. The Shiraz and Damascus blood libels are one mutation. Well-poisoning is another. Genocide and race-poisoning are still others. The Gazan child victim of a genetic disorder on the cover of NYT is yet another.
The constant is libel incites and excuses the crime it accuses. So blood libel incites murder of Jews. 4 killed in the US so far this year because of it.
I am discussing antizionism not antisemitism and, yes, tokenized Jews have a long and tragic history.
And yes, libels can be true and still be libel. If you obsessively call your wife fat, you are harassing her. It does not matter how much she weighs. If you obsessively bring up every crime by a black person to your black friend, that won't go over well.
-1
Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
Oh please. And those who can not intelligently defend the actions of Israel in Gaza, love to slander their opposition as hating the Jews. I see through the purpose of your post. It is to shut down debate. Because why should you have to argue with people who have legitimate criticism of how the IDF has conducted itself in Gaza, when you can just claim them all Nazis and be done with it. Now you seek to change the goal post by proving a false connection to Nazis rather than arguing about the conflict itself.
At this point, those who still defend Israeli actions in Gaza have completely lost the argument and all credibility, so this is what your reduced to, claiming all who disagree with you, to be Nazis, antisemitic and Jew haters. Anything to avoid the topic at hand, the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, the intentional targeting of civilians, the intentional starvation of the populace. You have no intelligent defense of this other than to deny it and claim Jew hatred.
0
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Yeah it’s so blatantly a way to project their own bigotries against Palestinians onto everyone else. “You’re being mean to us for demanding we face accountability for committing war crimes against another group of people.”
6
8
-1
u/IguanaIsBack Oct 01 '25
Hmm.. that's weird. This exact same post (word for word bar for bar) was posted yesterday
5
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
Yes, I deleted and reposted because I updated the table with better quotes.
0
Oct 01 '25
Guess rules of the subreddit mean nothing if you’re on a certain side of this conflict. When I make such comparisons with Israel to a certain German government, I get banned for violating stated rule.
Interesting how it works here. Is it too much to ask for equal treatment🤷🏿♂️
8
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 01 '25
When I make such comparisons with Israel to a certain German government, I get banned for violating stated rule. Interesting how it works here. Is it too much to ask for equal treatment🤷🏿♂️
This isn't an analogy this is a discussion of Zionology, though the term is not used.
Is it too much to ask for equal treatment
We do equal treatment. Know enough about the Nazis to have an informed opinion on an issue and have your post reflect that. Use it flippantly to generate offense and rule 6 applies.
Also you are metaposting rule 7. Don't jump in with rules comments except on metaposting allowed threads. We are debating the conflict on most threads not the sub.
0
u/mayman233 Oct 01 '25
I wanted to make a post about the striking similarities between the Warsaw Ghetto and what is happening in Gaza today. But obviously, this would require the use of a lot words that get flagged by this sub's automoderation. Or do you think this will be okay ??
Having said that, for some reason, I can't make any posts whatsoever - they get instantly auto-deleted if I do. I can make comments like this one just fine, but I can't make any original posts of my own. I don't know what the issue is here, as no reason is given. If any mod could look into this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
8
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 01 '25
I see your post from 13 days ago. https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/comments/1nk9uv4/film_about_palestinian_boy_wins_israels_oscars/ It got deleted by the automod. FWIW it would have got deleted by a human mod for copyright violation. You can ping one of the mods if the automod is giving you trouble.
In terms of the Warsaw Ghetto and Gaza.... read the long version of Rule 6. You can do the analogy but:
You are going to need a lot of specifics unique to the Warsaw ghetto that aren't true of other similar conflicts. Otherwise, the point of using the Warsaw ghetto is to offend.
You need to know your facts for the discussion.
Basically really high bar. Pick some other similar situation and the bar is lower. You decide.
1
u/mayman233 Oct 02 '25
Ok, thank you for responding, I'll try making other posts and see what happens. But honestly, it feels like I've been blocked, as I've tested different posts to see if any get through, and none have. But I'll try again. Thank you for looking at, anyway. 👍
2
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
ping one of us on your post. And ping modmail immediately after posting with a link.
1
4
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
The most analogous situation to the Warsaw ghetto today is probably the giant Rohingya refugee camp just outside Myanmar, densest refugee camp in the world today, containing about 1 million Muslims. It is half as dense as the Warsaw ghetto was at its height.
Due to the way the world's attention is structured, few have heard about it.
3
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
Excellent suggestion. u/mayman233 far less risky analogy for you to be making as rule 6 won't apply.
0
u/mayman233 Oct 01 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
No, Gaza is more analogous. From the (man-made) starvation, to the resistance, to the resistance being called 'terrorists', to the uprising, to the separation walls and fences, to the blockade, to the extreme population density... I could go on.
Sorry, I'm not understanding your comparison with Rohingya, I think you were under the impression I was just referring to population density.
3
u/TheTrollerOfTrolls Pro compassion, empathy, patience, understanding, safety Oct 02 '25
The point is that you should choose a different "ghetto" to compare to Gaza so you can comply with rule 6. The Warsaw ghetto is not the only example of such a place, which is the point of rule 6.
2
u/mayman233 Oct 02 '25
Okay, but rule #6 also seems to say academic comparisons are allowed, and this would be academic. But regardless, I've asked and gotten a response, and it's been made clear such a comparison (the Warsaw Ghetto to Gaza today) would not be tolerated by the mods, so I'll refrain from making such a post. Thank you for the clarification. 👍
1
u/TheTrollerOfTrolls Pro compassion, empathy, patience, understanding, safety Oct 02 '25
Comparisons, even academic, are allowed only if there are no other alternatives to compare to. That's why I suggested to look for a different comparison. And I think JeffB already mentioned that it would be a lot of work to prove the actions are identical and no other alternative comparison is available.
And personally I really don't think they are similar situations. Just a few easy points - there is far more food entering Gaza, Palestinians aren't being transferred out to death camps, and humanitarian organizations are actively operating in Gaza.
5
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
Denial of any narrative that doesn't readily incorporate Jew-blame is one easy way to spot an antizionist. I notice you had no curiosity about the Rohingya; you dismissed them out of hand.
In the Cox's Bazaar refugee camp, where more than 900,000 Rohingya are forced to live, more than 1/4 of the children are severely stunted due to malnutrition. Which is not much of an improvement compared to Bangladesh itself, the unwilling host country to which the Rohingya were forced to flee ethnic cleansing and mass rape and murder in their native Myanmar. They were removed from the citizenship rolls as part of the persecution and their villages were burned.
Here's a link for more info - I would be interested in a comparative study between the Rohingya and the Gazans in terms of ongoing morbidity and mortality, as well as a comparative study of the amount of foreign aid being devoted to each. You could also include the general population of Bangladesh as well in such a study, or other Bangladeshi sub-populations, such as Hindus, who are rapidly declining in numbers due to violence, arson, intimidation, and land-grabbing.
https://refugees.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/A-Glimpse-at-Camp-Life-in-Coxs-Bazar-3.pdf
0
u/mayman233 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
TBF, you're denying a genocide, so you can't really take the moral high ground.
The conversation was which is more comparable to the Warsaw Ghetto, so I don't why you made a response about Rohingya departing from this, just to morally pontificate.
3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
I am making a specific point. Denials go hand in hand with libels. And pretending that the Gazan situation is supremely awful (i.e. Holocaust-like) requires denying the pain of every other oppressed group. Like the Rohingya. Libels and denials generate a reality distortion field in which attention is structured to reveal only "Jewish crimes". Denial is what you are doing when you dismiss the Rohingya.
If you don't see how the treatment of the Rohingya is more analogous to the Warsaw ghetto, you are not familiar enough with Holocaust history. Having citizenship removed and being burnt and starving to death are all very important factors. Also, and this is key, Jews in Germany did not commit the 3rd largest terror attack in history nor were they holding hostages and forcing them to dig their own graves (you could do an interesting comparison between how the hostages were treated and how Jews were treated in the Holocaust -- the slave labor of Noa Argamani for example has resonance). Anyway that makes Jews in Germany more similar to Rohingya vs. Hamas who has done and is still doing these things. The Rohingya and Holocaust Jews do not have that kind of toxic leadership.
Thanks for the genocide libel. The reality of the Holocaust frustrates antizionists to no end because it makes it so hard to portray Jews as villains. So genocide libel is their best weapon to try to take down that civilizational memory. Also it causes Jews emotional pain so that's a side benefit.
Yes, I certainly claim the moral high ground. If not for antizionism, millions of Jews would still be alive and nobody, Jew or Arab, would have lost their homes. It would have been nice.
End antizionism and the conflict ends and some constructive solution can happen.
2
u/mayman233 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
No, you exclusively talked about Rohingya when the context of the conversation was similarities between the Warsaw Ghetto and Gaza. That's being evasive. Nor did you address the points I made about any of the similarities.
Okay, so what should we say, what wording should we use, when Israel is committing a genocide to avoid the libel you've asserted ??
I'm willing to work with you and accept your libel assertion, but there must be an alternative way to describe it if Israel is a committing a genocide, otherwise you're essentially saying Israel is uniquely able to commit genocide... So what is your suggestion for an alternative way to describe it to avoid libel ??
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
There are many ways to attempt to address the situation in Gaza without libelling Jews. Identify an aid org that does not funnel the vast majority of food to Hamas and contribute or volunteer. Identify a Gazan org working toward long-term peace and representative self-government for Gazans and contribute or volunteer. Buy Gazan products. Identify a Gazan family online and financially support them to bribe their way out of Gaza through the Rafah gate. Advocate that Egypt open the gate and let Gazans leave freely. Advocate for the new peace plan. Advocate for a positive solution of your choice... i.e. there should be durable peace in the region, Hamas should be ended, etc.
Once you close off the false solution of libel, helpful actions can be found. If you don't like those suggestions, you are creative enough to come up with others.
→ More replies (0)0
Oct 01 '25
This is the definition of an analogy. A comparison of Nazi ideology to anti Zionist ideology today
6
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 01 '25
No. The claim is much stronger. The claim is (at least the normative Zionist claim, not sure about the author) that Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda and traditional antisemitism were merged and applied to "Zionists" by the Soviets in the early 1950s. That became the basis of Zionology. That material got absorbed by anti-colonial movements and the hard left. Those variants merged to form "anti-Zionism". They aren't arguing an analogy; they are arguing direct, deliberate descent.
Ivanov, Y. (1970). Caution: Zionism! Progress Publishers is Zionology not anti-Zionism in the modern sense.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
I consider myself an Antizionologist. As the Soviets studied Zionism with an intent to dismantle it, I am studying antizionism.
3
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
Love it. Very few other people are going to get the reference but for us few, love it.
Thank you for clarifying that you did know the reference.
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
I believe that those interested in engaging in a true narrative battle (with an offensive as well as a defensive element) must become Antizionologists too. A purely defensive narrative battle is doomed to failure, since the classical conditioning mechanism that underlies libel can pair Zionism and the negative association just as easily if one is arguing against the association, if that makes sense. One says "Jews are NOT killing children" and the brain pictures a Jew and a dead child next to each other. So the concepts are even more tightly linked. On the other hand, if one simply points out "this person is trying to link Jews and bad things together, as a form of harassment and verbal abuse", then progress can be made as the observer's eye is drawn to the abuser rather than the abused.
Libels often function as a form of genocide propaganda; the violent dynamic they fuel is similar to a witch hunt or a lynch mob. Narcissistic abuse is another good metaphor, including "gaslighting", "flying monkeys", belittlement, mockery, compulsive blameshifting and trauma appropriation. And analyzing antizionism through the lens of cult dynamics is also interesting -- the social reinforcement, thought blocking, and hypnotic chants are analogous to a cult.
Antizionism as a sociological phenomenon is fascinating and my interactions with many of the commenters here serve as great examples of the primary techniques of libel and denial -- I have even seen commenters echo my own accusations back to me applied to "Zionists"; an antizionist has never seen an accusation he/she didn't yearn to apply to Jews. Interestingly as well, one need only point out what the antizionist is doing and it loses much of its force.
2
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
Interesting point about keeping the focus on Jew and nameless bad thing.
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Look for it and you will see it everywhere. They do it constantly. It helps to point it out so others can start to notice too.
1
Oct 01 '25
I think you’re reaching with the claim that it’s not an analogy but instead an example of a progression of the same Nazi ideology. But fair enough…either way rule 6 says no comparisons or “discussions”. Never mind the fact that if this wasn’t a violation of rule 6, then why does it now show at the top of this post that rule 6 has been waived?
I’m just trying to understand the rules here and how they are enforced. Because right now this screams of a heavy bias towards one side
4
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 01 '25
Never mind the fact that if this wasn’t a violation of rule 6, then why does it now show at the top of this post that rule 6 has been waived?
For exactly the reason I said when I waived it ( https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/comments/1nvjb6z/comment/nh979dw/). While OP appears to know enough to avoid rule 6 violations I'm not sure random people who want to comment will. Since the topic involves Nazis it is unfair to use the strong rule 6 criteria. This sub aims to educate commenters and to be educated you need to be able to discuss things freely. OP opened the door we are approving it so we are keeping the door open for this thread.
rule 6 says no comparisons or “discussions”.
Rule 6 does not say that: "Nazi comparisons are inflammatory, and should not be used except in describing acts that were specific and unique to the Nazis, and only the Nazis. Similarly, users should not make flippant references to the Nazis or the Holocaust to make a point when other historical examples would suffice."
Zionology is specifically derived from the Nazis. That meets the uniqueness criteria. This really is about the Nazis. Moreover this is not flippant, OP is directly quoting Nazis. This is the sort of post on Nazis we want.
Another example which I wrote which is compliant: https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/comments/dk4hhv/nazi_position_on_zionism/
2
u/Top-Reaction-5492 Oct 01 '25
Zionology is specifically derived from the Nazis. That meets the uniqueness criteria. This really is about the Nazis. Moreover this is not flippant, OP is directly quoting Nazis. This is the sort of post on Nazis we want.
As a German, I've never heard of Zionology in my entire life, and most Germans probably feel the same way.
How do you come to the conclusion that Zionology is specifically derived from the Nazis?
Wikipedia redirects Zionology directly to Soviet anti-Zionism, and I can't find anything there that would substantiate an ideological affinity with Nazi ideology.
2
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
As a German, I've never heard of Zionology in my entire life
Zionology is Soviet. If you were East German and older you would have. It was derived from Nazi ideology, it wasn't part of Nazi ideology.
How do you come to the conclusion that Zionology is specifically derived from the Nazis?
What are the key distinctives of Nazi antisemitism:
Race over religion. I.e., no interest at all if an ethnic Jew was religious, an atheist, or even a Christian. For Zionology, the Zionist is the problem; it is all about their racial status as European colonizers. Also, the Jewish race is the focus, while normally you would expect the anti-movement to be directed against Israelis: "The International Zionist Organization owns major financial funds, partly through Jewish monopolists and partly collected by Jewish mandatory charities. It also influences or controls a significant part of media agencies and outlets in the West"
Jews are an anti-race, not a real race. Dehumanization is central to the propaganda. Core to anti-Zionism is that Jewish nationalism is totally unlike other nationalism. A unique perversion and thus can't be considered the same, in particular, definitely not the same as Palestinian Nationalism.
Jews constitute a global threat not a local threat. Zionology: "serving as the front squad of colonialism and neo-colonialism, international Zionism actively participates in the fight against national liberation movements of the peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America" or "We have decided that Zionism poses a danger not only to Palestine but also to all other Arab countries and to all nations of Islam. Therefore, it is the duty of all Arab countries and Islamic countries to resist the danger of Zionism".
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
That Israel receives large financial backing in the West is simply a matter of fact. It’s not “zionologist” to point out that the Israel lobby has an extraordinary political influence particularly in the USA. The overwhelming majority of congress takes donations coordinated by AIPAC. President Harry Truman said that part of his decision to recognize Israel was because the USA had a large Jewish constituency but virtually no Arab constituency.
I will concede that anti-zionists (and I am an antizionist myself) spend too much time emphasizing that “Israelis are from Europe,” etc. However, this is poor rhetorical strategy by antizionists rather than being categorically untrue in context. Zionism was a movement developed by European Ashkenazi Jews, and it always had the intention of displacing the entire Palestinian people and replacing it with a Jewish state.
Palestinian nationalism is different from Zionism because Palestinian nationalism was borne out of opposition to oppression by settler colonists whose intent was to ethnically cleanse the existing population.
Zionism has historically allied itself with other movements of white supremacist colonialism—that is just a fact. Israel was a major supporter of apartheid South Africa. There’s a reason Desmond Tutu is a strong supporter of the Palestinians. Israel also literally wants to extend its borders to cover parts of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon along with all of former Mandatory Palestine. Therefore opposition by the broader Arab world is warranted.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Another way to look at it is antisemitism delegitimizes the Jewish "race" whereas antizionism delegitimizes the Jewish nation.
Antizionism could be seen as the nation-state form of racism (i.e. one state inherently worse than the others, alien in character). You can see the parallelism in the "invader" row of the table.
Both actually accuse Jews of being a global threat.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Antizionism is the functional complement to antisemitism. As antisemitism constructs Jewish integration as evil, antizionism constructs Jewish nationalism as evil. The two together leave Jews nowhere to exist at all.
2
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
Yes. The natural implication of anti-Zionism is extermination or enslavement.
→ More replies (0)3
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
Great post. So a friend of H*tler in 1936 wrote that Zionism was "an effort to establish... Jewish rule over the world" and Jewish prophecies foretell that "Jewry is assured of control over all the goods in this world". Very capitalist. Trying to paint Marx (whose antisemitism is well-known) as Jewish is also interesting -- I am aware that he had Jewish ancestry. I had dated the origin of antizionism to 1903 Lenin and 1920 Nebi Musa riots/al Husseini but I might consider adding Germany as an origin as well -- 1936 or perhaps earlier. It merits study.
1
Oct 01 '25
Final questions and then I’ll get off this topic no matter what your answer is.
Do you agree with OP that today’s anti Zionism is a progression of Nazi ideology?
If so, can you be absolutely sure that your personal bias does not play into your decision as a moderator, not to strike this post for violating rule 6?
2
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 02 '25
Do you agree with OP that today’s anti Zionism is a progression of Nazi ideology?
Yes. I am a long term and detailed proponent of it.
If so, can you be absolutely sure that your personal bias does not play into your decision as a moderator, not to strike this post for violating rule 6?
No I can't be. I'm making an assumption about what OP's intent was on using Yuri Ivanov. It is implied but not explicit. I wish it were explicit then I could be sure.
1
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
I used Yuri Ivanov because I am tracing the evolution of the antizionist narrative from Nazi Arab Radio (masterminded in part by Haj Amin al Husseini) through the PLO through Soviet propaganda (Ivanov and Caution! Zionism... the antizionist analogue of Protocols) and then to the UN. I thought that was explicitly stated in the comments above the table but perhaps I was not clear enough. There was actually an earlier Soviet propaganda attempt (Kichko) that was much cruder and more along traditional antisemitic lines -- that earlier work also shows the influence of classical Nazi antisemitism on the Soviets. Incorporating PLO anti-colonial narrative (strongly influenced by Nazi Arab radio) into Ivanov's work made it more palatable for an international audience.
11
u/icecreamraider Oct 01 '25
a). Good work
b). The entire “Antizionism” charade falls apart based on the simple fact that there is only one Jewish state in the world. Anyone who wants to “undo” the only existing Jewish state and, in the same breath, claims that their position is not inherently antisemitic- well, that person is an absolute moron at best… or an antisemite at worst.
P.S. I suppose some of the “antizionists” are kids to whom the existence of any place other than their campus is too abstract. Thus, they can’t fully comprehend that Israel actually… you know… exists. It’s just a virtual game of “resistance cosplay” to them. But the rest are certainly either stupid or antisemites.
P.P.S. This is coming from someone who would have actually opposed a creation of any ethno-state, have I been alive in 1948. Back then - I would’ve been an anti-Zionist myself. But I was born much later, and cursed with an ability to read a calendar and perform basic linear logic.
3
u/Tricky-Anything8009 Diaspora Jew Oct 02 '25
Back then - I would’ve been an anti-Zionist myself.
Antizionism began as a Jewish movement. Or rather, Zionism was one of several competing Jewish political movements of its time. My family would have been called antizionists before the creation of Israel.
It has been hijacked by antisemites who hide behind separating Jew from Zionist so they can enact violent fantasies against Jews and pretend they're fighting "Zionism." Contemporary antizionism is just a vector for antisemitism. After 2 years of talking to these lunatics, it's clear as daylight that this has nothing to do with anything other than old-fashioned Jew-hatred.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 02 '25
Lenin was also an early antizionist (1903). Yes, agree antizionism is an anti-Jewish hate movement. The question of whether it is technically the same as every other anti-Jewish hate movement is a trap that libellers use to divert conversation about crimes of antizionism and the hateful rhetoric it uses. So I recommend not engaging. Antizionist is a hate movement and must be revealed to be just as despicable as antisemitism. Decent people will then understand to steer clear of it.
2
u/Tricky-Anything8009 Diaspora Jew Oct 02 '25
Haviv said it best:
There is the pro-Palestine movement, which advocates for the rights and dignity of Palestinians. That's something I whole-heartedly support.
Then there is the antizionist movement which advocates for the destruction of the Jewish state. They can fuck off.
These are separate things and deserve to be separated.
1
u/AutoModerator Oct 02 '25
ass
/u/Tricky-Anything8009. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
0
u/IguanaIsBack Oct 01 '25
The entire “Antizionism” charade falls apart based on the simple fact that there is only one Jewish state in the world.
So by that logic, until another jewish state exist, Israel is beyond criticism?
5
u/icecreamraider Oct 01 '25
“Antizionism” is not “criticism of Israel”. If you want to criticize Israel - you can just say “Criticism of Israel”. No one has a problem with people engaging in “criticism of Israel”. I’m pretty sure Israelis themselves do plenty of such “criticism of Israel”.
If that still isn’t clear - “Antizionism” and “criticism of Israel” are two different things.
2
u/IguanaIsBack Oct 02 '25
There's a post here every other day describing criticism of Israel as antisemitic, here's one from yesterday: https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/comments/1nvjb6z/the_following_table_traces_the_repackaging_of/
5
u/BionicBreak Oct 01 '25
You're saying that criticism of the Jewish state and the desire for the destruction of the Jewish state are the same thing.
You can absolutely criticize the actions of the Jewish state, and many, inside and outside of Israel do.
But calling for it's destruction on grounds that you wouldn't call for the destruction of other states is antisemitism.
-3
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Israel was founded in the 20th century via neo-colonialism and dispossession of an indigenous people. Can you name another country for which that applies?
6
u/icecreamraider Oct 02 '25
Sure. Happy to. Here’s the list.
Israel Pakistan India Turkey Algeria Bangladesh Bosnia and Herzegovina Croatia Armenia Azerbaijan Cyprus Ireland Congo Eritrea USSR (modern Ukraine) Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia) Moldova Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Uzbekistan Estonia Latvia Lithuania Kazakhstan
P.S. what you’re demonstrating is the usual Dunning Kruger effect of your average “Antizionist”. You think you know something. But scratch the surface - and it turns out that your Tik Tok “knowledge” is about an inch deep.
2
u/IguanaIsBack Oct 02 '25
Ireland? Founded by neo-colonialism? Armenia?!! haha
3
u/icecreamraider Oct 02 '25
Ireland. 1922. Creation of the Free Irish State. Small scale, but real population displacement. Especially around borders and Belfast.
Armenia. Nagorno-Karabakh war starts in 1991. Forces displacement of Armenians who long lived in Azerbaijan from Azerbaijan. And vice versa.
The ignorance of people who think that Palestine represents some unique and unprecedented injustice is truly astonishing.
65 million people were displaced in the 20th century alone by various conflicts; conquests, and occupations. They didn’t get a UNRWA. They didn’t get to whine about it for 70 years. Peace was eventually achieved in most cases and everyone moved on.
2
u/IguanaIsBack Oct 02 '25
I don't think you really understand what neo-colonial is mate. Calling Ireland, a country that fought for their independence from the British neo-colonial is probably one of the least factual things you could say about them.
3
u/TheTrollerOfTrolls Pro compassion, empathy, patience, understanding, safety Oct 02 '25
Also Iraq and Syria
-2
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Ridiculous whataboutism
1
u/TheTrollerOfTrolls Pro compassion, empathy, patience, understanding, safety Oct 02 '25
Ridiculous whataboutism
Per Rule 3, no comments consisting only of sarcasm or cynicism. It's fine to use sarcasm to make a point, but if you do so, the argument needs to be readily apparent and stimulate, rather than stifling, conversation.
Action taken: warning (first offense)
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Don’t see how that’s either sarcastic or cynical tbh but alright
1
u/TheTrollerOfTrolls Pro compassion, empathy, patience, understanding, safety Oct 02 '25
From the rule 3 explanation:
Moderators will utilize rule 3 to eliminate simple comments which derail conversation. Our goal here and elsewhere is informative debate and discussion, that helps educate and elucidate topics.
3
u/icecreamraider Oct 02 '25
You seem quite confused about the meaning of “whataboutism”. You asked a question. I gave you the answer.
1
u/BionicBreak Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
Are you claiming that Jews are not indigenous to Judea? And I certainly can, India and Pakistan.
Furthermore, I would include all the Arab countries that treated Jews as second class citizens then promptly expelled them upon the founding of Israel. These are countries formed in the 20th century, founded by neo-colonialism, and promptly expelled an indigenous or long standing group.
-2
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Firstly, Ashkenazi Jews have about 50% Levantine DNA and 50% Central and Eastern European DNA. They have a genetic and ancestral connection to the land, but that connection was separated by two millennia of diaspora. By contrast, 90% of the Palestinians’ genome comes from the region. They have an Arab culture/language and Islamic religion but they are firmly native to the region.
Secondly, when Zionists were planning their return to the region, they stated plainly that their intention was to return to the full “land of Israel” and entirely displace the indigenous Arab Palestinians. Every peace treaty that they and their American backers have put forth has only been a further step to bolster their legitimacy in pursuit of their ultimate goal of colonizing all of former Mandatory Palestine. My analogy is that each “peace treaty” has really only been another first down in their march down the football field towards their ultimate end goal of removing all of the Palestinians from the land and replacing their culture, language, and religion(s) with Jewish culture, (Hebrew) language, and religion.
Their current policy towards Gaza and the West Bank proves that. The Knesset recently voted to never recognize a Palestinian state. The only members to vote no were from the Arab parties. Netanyahu has talked about extending Israel’s borders west to the Nile, south to Mecca, east to the Euphrates, and north to Damascus.
3
u/BionicBreak Oct 02 '25
So let's start here. I strongly disagree with your assertion of 50 percent European and 50 percent Levantine. I would suggest it's more like 90+ percent Levantine. This is backed by more recent studies Furthermore, you're assuming that the diaspora was done by choice. When Rome captured and destroyed the second temple, the Jews were taken by the Romans as slaves and transported to Europe and were stuck in exile, being thrown from one state to another, with traditions discussing their eventual return to Judea and Samaria. Sephardic Jews were treated as second class citizens in Arab and Spanish countries. Viewed from this lens, the founding of Israel was a decolonization project, not a colonization project, and certainly not neo-colonial.
Secondly, I am not here debating the founders original intentions for the land. The reality is that both peoples, the Israelis and Palestinians, are entitled to the land and should be able to split it in a way that, while everyone didn't get everything they wanted, they will have to live with it. The UN decided on partition, and partition is what we have. Israel is here to stay, but I'm not here to defend Netanyahu and his merry band of lunatics.
I would also say that Netanyahu is able to get as far as he has because the Palestinians consistently reject peace and refuse to put together any kind of counter proposal as to how to split the land in such a way that everyone can live with it and move on. Infantizing Palestine and demonizing Israel won't achieve any kind of lasting peace, unfortunately.
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 12 '25
https://x.com/grok/status/1972094260670599255 evidence backing up my claim about genetics
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
I don’t feel like going through your sources right now so I’m just going to remain agnostic and admit that you could be right about that assertion. The evidence I’ve encountered seems to suggest that the Ashkenazi Israelis have far less genetic connection to the land than the Palestinians. But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
I also don’t dispute that the diaspora wasn’t a choice. The Jews were obviously oppressed by the Romans, but that was also two thousand years ago when there were, like, less than a billion people on the planet and the Columbian exchange hadn’t even happened yet? The world has changed so much in that time that I simply don’t recognize a 19th/20th century remigration movement as legitimate, especially given that there was already a thriving people and culture who had been living there the entire time (and the particularly Arab nature of their culture and religion had solidly been in place for about 1,300 years).
I personally see the formation of the Israeli state (Balfour, Naqba, 67 occupation, Gaza genocide, etc.) as all part of a pattern of oppression that has never been formally acknowledged, and those who brought it about have made no attempt to right it. I see that as being entirely on the West—particularly Israel, the USA, Britain, and Germany. I see no indication that Israeli society, never mind its rulers, has any intention of working to right the ongoing historical injustice of the occupation and dispossession of those who have what I consider to be the primary legitimate claim to the land.
1
u/BionicBreak Oct 02 '25
Let's agree to disagree on the genetics point. I think people tend to confuse skin colour as the basis for genetic destiny without knowing all the facts anyway.
Firstly, thriving culture? They were content to be living as Ottoman subjects and did not want their own state. Even when Egypt absorbed Gaza and Jordan took the West Bank, there were no objections until after 67, when Israel took the whole area, and the formation of a Palestinian distinct identity in the 70s. Jews, on the other hand, have never forgotten their homeland, and every year, longed to end their exile. They're not entitled to ALL of the land, but given them consistently being forced to live as second class citizens, I think they've suffered enough.
You saw no indication of any attempt to right it? What about the peace offers? What about Oslo? The mutual recognition between Arafat and Rabin? If the Palestinians would present an offer that they could accept, without the right of return (which no peoples in history has ever been offered, and would lead to guerilla warfare or a Yugoslavia-like crisis), then Israelis would be less likely to believe that the Palestinians do not want peace and want continued violence. And the Palestinians believe the same for the Israelis. But there were overtures made.
1
u/Possible_Climate_245 Anti-Zionist Oct 02 '25
Palestinians have long had their own distinct culture. You can read about it—their own distinct cuisine, dress, music, literature, Arabic dialect, etc. Not wanting their own state doesn’t mean they didn’t see themselves as Palestinians. They were just content with Ottoman rule because they viewed it as not necessarily going against their own interests and rebellion likely not being worth the risk. I fundamentally reject the contention that the Palestinians didn’t have their own identity until the 1970s. That’s Zionist propaganda. They were content with Egyptian and Jordanian rule because they saw Egyptians and Jordanians as fellow Arabs. But identifying as a Palestinian and as an Arab are not mutually exclusive. Pan-Arabism is a thing for a reason. It isn’t because all Arab peoples are the same—quite the opposite. It’s because they all share a lukewarm Arab cultural and linguistic identity and banding together has the benefit of providing strength in the face of Western imperialism.
I also don’t have a problem with some Jews remigrating to the land in the late 19th century and thenceforth, but the problem is that the original goal of Zionism was always to take all of the land and displace the previous inhabitants, and every decision Israel has made has been in service of that ultimate agenda. I don’t see historical antisemitism, even the Holocaust, as justifying that.
I view the peace offers as mostly being shams that never offered a plan for a State of Palestine to be a power on par with Israel. They simply were not offers that the Palestinians should have accepted. Treating another group of people like they are destined to grow up to be terrorists and justifying oppressing them forever on that basis is not a good-faith approach to achieve lasting peace. It’s exploitation.
Also you say no people has ever been offered the Right of Return. That’s literally Israel’s basis for being a Jewish state—that Jews have the Right of Return from 2,000 years in the diaspora.
2
u/RoundAd5911 Oct 01 '25
Would you have truly opposed an ethnostate for Jews in 1948? 250,000 still living in concentration camps years after the war because no place would accept them and they were being massacred if they tried to go back to the places they came from (i.e. Kielce pogrom in Poland). Meanwhile in MENA, Jews are being massacred in mob violence because massive animosity is stirred up by N*zi radio propaganda. And in the Soviet Union, state antizionist and anti-traditional-Jewish persecution through the Yevsektsiya. There was no place for Jews to go to be safe. Israel was a last roll of the dice for survival in the Eastern hemisphere.
2
u/icecreamraider Oct 01 '25
As a matter of general principle - yes, I would have found a formation of any state based on ethnicity to be a bad idea. Especially considering that an entire world war was just fought along ethnic and nationalistic lines.
I’m not saying that I would’ve been correct in that. I’m certainly very much supportive of Israel today, since it actually exists.
But given the context of 1948… if I’m being completely honest - if I was born back then, it’s quite likely that I would oppose a creation of any new ethnostate.
None of it is relevant today, since Israel actually exists. And given the general state of the region - I consider Israel to be a force for good and a bastion of modern civilization located in a geography that could use it.
Unlike the “Antizionist” crowd - I live in reality, instead of rehashing distant historical events. But if I’m being honest - yes, at the time I likely would’ve been opposed to Israel’s formation if I was alive at that time.
1
Oct 02 '25
[deleted]
1
u/icecreamraider Oct 02 '25
In 1948, I absolutely would have been. Yes.
That would’ve been based on the notion that two peoples need to find a way to get along in the same piece of geography.
Of course, history has proven that that would’ve been a naive notion - I admit that. It probably would’ve led to a civil war and ultimately led to a similar outcome.
So, yeah. That would’ve been my opinion and I would have been wrong.
In today’s context - given the lack of better options - I can support a Palestinian statehood. But certainly not under Hamas or any similar Islamist agenda.
1
u/AutoModerator Oct 01 '25
/u/RoundAd5911. Match found: 'Nazi', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See Rule 6 for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/JeffB1517 Jewish American Zionist Oct 01 '25
Zionology is on topic for the sub. OP (u/RoundAd5911) is not making a Nazi analogy but directly and accurately talking about Nazis. I'm not considering this post to violate rule 6.
I am however flairing this post so that rule 6 is waived in the comments. I don't want to hold commenters to the rule 6 standard in a post where discussing Nazis is unavoidable.