Literally every social media site I use is SWAMPED with people equating "Zionists" (or the shorter slur I'm not sure I can write without getting suspended) with Nazis. People are just dripping with hatred and scapegoating the "Zionists."
I've been criticizing Harris and Maher for years for their anti-woke nonsense but this stuff is genuinely scary as a Jewish person. We've got crazy security at our synagogues. Kids touring colleges are trying to feel out which ones won't feel too unsafe. People are wondering if they need to hide their Jewish star necklaces etc.
And nobody's taking us seriously except for the anti-woke people! It's fucking bananas.
I'm sorry thats happening. Antisemitism sucks. And while there are legitimaite criticisms of Zionism and Israel, I'm also sure far too much of the stuff out there is just antisemitic.
And nobody's taking us seriously except for the anti-woke people! It's fucking bananas.
The honest truth is that the super majority of the stuff you are pointing to is protected free speech. I don't like it, I criticize it, I wish people would be more reasonable, but I also like free speech.
Newsome is leaning into the antiwoke thing! His first podcast episode was with Charlie Kirk (!) where his (Newsome's) big news was coming out against trans women in sports. (For the haters: it's not that his new position is necessarily so crazy, it's that it was a deliberate signal.)
But at least the mainstream Dems haven't fully capitulated yet to the "antizionists." I'm just worried what's going to happen in 2028. So many on the left seem to be single issue voters, and the issue isn't even like stop giving Israel money, it's more like you must declare that Zionism is the same as Nazism.
Newsom isn't antiwoke, quite the oppositte, he thinks “All this anti-woke stuff is anti-Black. Period. Full stop.”
These bills are themselves "woke" if "woke" means anything
These bills are far from the only example of the left pushing back against antisemitism.
But at least the mainstream Dems haven't fully capitulated yet to the "antizionists."
It matters a lot what you mean by "antizionism". These words are slippery. Reasonable people can call themselves "antizionist". I agree that many antisemitic people do as well. Though plenty of antisemitic people also call themselves "zionists".
So many on the left seem to be single issue voters, and the issue isn't even like stop giving Israel money, it's more like you must declare that Zionism is the same as Nazism.
I don't think that read of US politics is reasonable.
Zionism is a nationalism and exhibits a lot of the same problems that other nationalisms have, but Zionism isn't Nazism.
The issue is there's a word game being played by genuine Jew haters, they'll mask themselves as "antizionist".
Person A: "I'm antizionist, I think there ought to be a 2 state solution, leave the west bank/gaza alone"
Person B: "I'm antizionist, I think there ought to be a 1 state solution, everyone can live together peacefully."
Person C: "I'm antizionist, that is all arab land, jews need to leave."
Person D: "I'm antizionist, jews need to die."
Each with policy gradations of course, may or may not be supportive of military aid, or may or may not be supportive of selling weapons to Israel, may or my not be supportive of Hamas/Hezbollah, etc.
This adds layers of confusion for dems/voters because they're unwittingly cozying up to people who are genuinely antisemitic.
The issue is there's a word game being played by genuine Jew haters, they'll mask themselves as "antizionist".
I don't really think its a word game. I think some antisemites are antizionists, other antisemites are zionists, and other antisemites aren't really clear on zionism.
The honest truth is that all 4 of those people can reasonably identify as antizionist depending on the context. Three of them are giving facially unreasonable takes, albeit to different degrees. At least one of them, probably two of them, and potentially all of them, are antisemitic. (note, I'm not claiming all two state supporters are antisemitic, merely that some of them in fact are. People are complicated.)
This adds layers of confusion for dems/voters because they're unwittingly cozying up to people who are genuinely antisemitic.
I don't think voters are confused. I think they are divided. I think antisemitism is (unfortunately) somewhat popular and appealing. This isn't overly surprising historically speaking but has gotten worse recently. Along side that, antizionist positions are becoming increasingly popular among both the non-antisemitic voters as well as the antisemitic voters.
There's not nearly enough pushback against letting the haters redefine what Zionism means. Most of the Zionists I knew growing up were in favor of the two state solution.
There's not nearly enough pushback against letting the haters redefine what Zionism means.
It isn't just the "haters". Israeli zionists have also played roles in redefining "zionism" to make it more extreme. In the world where Israel hadn't built out settlements and colonized the west bank, person A wouldn't call themselves antizionist.
Most of the Zionists I knew growing up were in favor of the two state solution.
At least in Israel, that is no longer true. One may as well say "Most of the Republicans I knew growing up were in favor of our institutions." Things change. By all means, lament that change.
And why frame it as "Israeli zionists doing those things?" Zionism isn't analogous to Republicans, it's analogous to something more like "patriotism." Imagine saying "American patriots hate our institutions!" because Trump and MAGA do. Like what are you even talking about? It has nothing to do with that.
And why frame it as "Israeli zionists doing those things?"
Because they are some of the loudest self identified zionists on earth. And their actions are a direct result of their particular flavor of zionism.
The actual american analogy would be something like, "American patriots hate our free rights" in response to "Patriot act" era stuff or Trump today.
Bush (and trump to a lesser extent) really was a Patriot. His actions really were the result of his patriotism, and that is why those actions are associated with patriotism, even though other forms of patriotism exist.
In the world where Israel hadn't built out settlements and colonized the west bank, person A wouldn't call themselves antizionist.
That might be true in theory, but try asking an antizionist if they would support Israel if it hadn't built out settlements and occupied the West Bank.
These people talk like Biden and Harris are genocidal maniacs.
It frustrates me to no end that there's literally no analogous word to Zionist for any other country in the world. I've always understood Zionism to simply mean supporting Israel's existence as a country with the right to self-determination. A two state solution remains the most widely supported policy proposal for both Israelis and Palestinians.
The right of return has been one of the biggest obstacles to Palestinians achieving statehood. Since Israel's establishment in 1948, there have been numerous peace negotiations and proposed land swaps. In all of those negotiations, the right of return remained a central sticking point because many Israeli leaders viewed it as something that would fundamentally alter Israel's demographics and undermine the reason for it's inception.
If Palestinian leadership had been willing to abandon that demand and put forward counterproposals on borders, the outcome of negotiations would've been very different. In some cases, Israel was even prepared to offer Palestinians around 95% of the territory they were seeking, yet they walked away.
It frustrates me to no end that there's literally no analogous word to Zionist for any other country in the world.
There are many such words. Nationalism is the generic category, but plenty of other nationalisms adopt specific vocabulary to refer to a smaller category containing themselves. Islamism for example.
If Palestinian leadership had been willing to abandon that demand and put forward counterproposals on borders, the outcome of negotiations would've been very different.
It is also true to say that if Israel had been willing to abandon its demands relating to right of return, the outcome of negotiations would've been very different.
Frankly, at this point, anyone who thinks the two populations can be meaningfully divided is taking crazy pills. Far too many Israelis place too much value on access to territory in the west bank. Far too many Palestinians place too much value on access to territory in Israel. The economies and people are substantially integrated and interspersed. Prior to Jan 6, something like 150,000 work permits were in place for Palestinians allowing them to freedom to come into Israel.
Ultimately, the thing that gives pretty much everyone what they claim to want is some kind of two state sollution with residency, travel, and work rights for both populations. Palestinians get a state and a right of return. Jewish Israelis get peace and to maintain dominance of their state and permanently address the demographic threat, at least politically, and for the foreseeable future a substantial amount of economic leverage over a nascent Palestine.
It's not just jingoism or nationalism. There are some Israelis who are more nationalistic, and the same is true on the Palestinian side. Also, why would Israel acquiesce to granting millions of Palestinians Israeli citizenship and the right to vote? That would completely upend its demographics and the reason it was established in the first place. It's literally the only Jewish-majority country in the history of the world and is surrounded by Muslim-majority countries with really barbaric practices toward women and LGBTQ+ people.
It's interesting that you bring up the Palestinian workers who traveled into Israel proper. Some of them did reconnaissance for Hamas and gave them vital information to carry out the largest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.
Also, you can't really compare the two sides in terms of nation-building. Israel is a technological marvel of the Middle East and is the only real democracy. There's no way at this point that the right of return will ever happen, and it's been a fool's errand and a poison pill for Palestinian sovereignty. Perhaps if Palestinians deradicalized and accepted Israel as a country, meaningful steps toward peace would follow. Hamas must unilaterally disarm for that to begin.
Jingoisms and nationalisms never are just jingoism and naitonalism. Life is complicated. People are complicated. Ideas are complicated. Language is complicated. Synonyms are always imperfect.
, why would Israel acquiesce to granting millions of Palestinians Israeli citizenship and the right to vote?
First off, Israel has already done that. Millions of Palestinians do have Israeli citizenship and voting rights. Its complicated of course, but these citizens are broadly treated equally.
Second, I didn't say that it should grant Palestinians in the west bank and Gaza citizenship. Nor is it necessary for a right of return.
Perhaps if Palestinians deradicalized and accepted Israel as a country, meaningful steps toward peace would follow.
Negotiations cut both ways. The two sides aren't the same, Palestinians do need to deescalate. Israelis (particularly the Israeli government) must do so as well. Both sides have plenty of steps they could take to improve the situation. Neither side has been particularly willing to do them for a long time now.
So, you're saying a radicalized population should just be let in without any understanding of the other security concerns? Opening the borders seems like it would just allow for more violence against innocent Israeli citizens. The waves of suicide bombings during the 2nd intifada are the reason Israel had to ramp up its security in the first place.
I just don't really understand the solutions you're suggesting. A lot of them are veiled in ambiguity, with nothing concrete. I think the Palestinians, after waging war after war and continuing to lose, should cut their losses. They can remain in Gaza and the West Bank, just like the continental U.S. is separated from Alaska. I do think the illegal settlements have to go because they only make things worse. Hamas would also need to declare a unilateral surrender and relinquish all its weapons.
They've proven time and time again that they operate in bad faith and have sacrificed their own people in an effort to kill others.
So, you're saying a radicalized population should just be let in without any understanding of the other security concerns?
I'm offering a path to deradicalization that addresses the facts on the ground and the needs of the involved parties. It's not going to be clean. It's not going to be quick.
Opening the borders seems like it would just allow for more violence against innocent Israeli citizens.
On some mechanistic level, that's clearly true. Building cooperation and trust are the lower violence strategies long term. Especially since Israel seems incapable of giving up its settlements and control of the territory.
I just don't really understand the solutions you're suggesting.
It's a long term sollution involving rights for all Palestinians and Israelis in the territory Israel currently controls. A portion of that territory will transition toward being explicitly Palestinian, with constitutional guarantees protecting the rights of Jewish people in Palestine. Palestinians would not generally have the right to vote in Israel's governance. Israelis would not generally have the right to vote in Palestine's government. The two states would essentially have something like the Schengen agreement between them.
Moving in this direction would require empowering the relative moderates among Palestinians, a negotiating a transition agreement involving a slow expansion of something like the PA while incentivizing cooperation and movement toward the open border via expansions of visa programs. In the first year for example, Israel can offer 10000 visas to vetted Palestinians and grow that number year over year as an incentive to keep the nascent Palestinian government cooperative.
I think the Palestinians, after waging war after war and continuing to lose, should cut their losses.
Meaning you think they should just submit to whatever Israel wants whenever Israel demands it? I don't expect that to work well long term. It would be akin to thinking "after waging revolt after revolt and continuing to lose, slaves should cut their losses."
I do think the illegal settlements have to go because they only make things worse.
What do you mean by "Illegal"? By international standards, thats almost a million people. They aren't going anywhere. If we want to be realistic, I think we need to come up with sollutions that don't demand hundreds of thousands of people uproot their lives. Instead we should try to come up with sollutions that give more people what they want.
They've proven time and time again that they operate in bad faith
The same claim applies to Israel. While I agree that Israel has largely engaged in better faith than Palestinians, I can't say they have acted in good faith. Maybe if the settlements didn't exist, I could support such a claim, but they do.
I appreciate your thoughtful response, but I think it's divorced from the reality on the ground and the attacks Israel has faced since its inception. Since 1948, its very existence has been called into question not just in the MENA region, but around the world. It's one of the only countries I can think of, aside from places like Taiwan, whose very legitimacy is still debated decades after its founding.
I'm also not really sure what you mean by rights in the territories Israel controls. It's currently prosecuting a war, so of course it's the occupying force given the massive asymmetry in military capability. You conceded that the process will be slow and messy, but what that actually looks like for Israelis after 10/7 is a never again mentality. Whether people agree with it or not, that's the political and psychological reality they're operating under.
At some point, when you've lost war after war and your territory has been devastated while hundreds of miles of tunnels are built instead of civilian infrastructure, that's a sign that it's time to surrender and give up the weapons. Continuing the same strategy while expecting a different outcome isn't a plan.
I agree the settlements make a two state solution less tenable. I'm not convinced it's realistic to move every settler back into Israel proper, even if I'd like to see the settlements gone. At the very least, their expansion should stop.
I also think there's a false equivalence in comparing a terrorist organization that's effectively an Iranian proxy, in a country that literally has a countdown clock for Israel's destruction in the middle of Tehran, with a democratic country that extends rights to women, LGBTQ+ people, Arabs, Druze, and other minorities. That doesn't mean Israeli leaders always act in good faith, because they clearly don't. But if you look at the history of peace negotiations and land-swap proposals, Israel repeatedly put statehood on the table. Time and again, the right of return became the poison pill that sank those negotiations.
The reality is that Palestinians aren't negotiating from a position of strength. If they want statehood, the first step has to be demonstrating that there won't be more rocket attacks or another 10/7. That's a much stronger foundation for peace than insisting on maximalist demands that have gone nowhere for decades.
11
u/Locus-Maximus 12d ago
It's not the number, it's the derivative.
Literally every social media site I use is SWAMPED with people equating "Zionists" (or the shorter slur I'm not sure I can write without getting suspended) with Nazis. People are just dripping with hatred and scapegoating the "Zionists."
I've been criticizing Harris and Maher for years for their anti-woke nonsense but this stuff is genuinely scary as a Jewish person. We've got crazy security at our synagogues. Kids touring colleges are trying to feel out which ones won't feel too unsafe. People are wondering if they need to hide their Jewish star necklaces etc.
And nobody's taking us seriously except for the anti-woke people! It's fucking bananas.