|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
Again gh you fail at the idea that we don't already agree and refuse to go the next step on anything.
If you want to successfully revolt you need to build a coalition and community to organize as part of your revolt. Its not a flipping of the switch to "awh things are bad" to "Let's burn down the republic". If genocide was really your red line you wouldn't organize with or form a community with people you consider genocide supporters.
If you want other people to work with you, you need to want to work with them. Do you consider us genocide supporters and still want to work with us or do you not consider us genocide supporters and want to work with us? Easiest softball in the world.
|
Northern Ireland24342 Posts
On May 06 2025 18:32 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2025 12:04 WombaT wrote:On May 06 2025 00:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 05 2025 23:00 Jankisa wrote:
I fail to see how killing 50 k + people with more then half being women and children is not really ugly.
Not to mention all the record numbers of killed journalists, aid workers, emergency responders, volunteers etc. Not ugly enough to lose Europe's support. There isn't really even a coherent way to rationalize not sanctioning Israel. On May 05 2025 20:03 Broetchenholer wrote:What can we do? Padding ourselves on the back that we won the argument on an internet forum? As long as our governments are spineless cowards + Show Spoiler + that treat the conflict as something like what's happening where even we do not care, like africa, there is nothing to do. The issue for Palestinians is that there are killed by a regime that we identify as somewhat part of our responsibility and accountability but in the end not enough to force our governments to affect change. I believe trying to motivate/organize people in the US (and people who take interest in US/or their own politics) toward electoral or radical political efforts to change those governments is helpful and necessary. More people joining those efforts would funnily enough address Jankisa's complaint. One of the big problems is that so many democracy enjoyers (basically all of them here) don't want to do the work a democracy takes. That and/or they have been deluded into believing that "the work a democracy takes" means simply periodically voting. What’s Europe going to do? Aside from the fact that Europe isn’t a monolithic continent and attitudes and actions re Israel vary considerably. Despite that direct economic entanglements aren’t exactly huge so there’s not a huge amount of leverage there. Also as continents go, already the most vociferous and active on the issue. Ever notice that, ineffectual as it was most interjections from the world at large occurred during the Biden administration? Not because it would necessarily listen, but at least the possibility of pressure might swing things? It Europe has a sway in such things, it’s only with a potentially receptive US you can do shit. If you elect a ‘Israel can do whatever it wants’ US government you limit those options considerably. You were told this repeatedly. Instead you went with ‘Genocide Joe’ rhetoric for fucking months, and claim no misjudgement whatsoever. While preaching and pontificating the whole time. One can only presume you’ve personally done a fuckload to help the Palestinian cause, otherwise such a piousness would be ridiculous right? What are you talking about ? Ue is either the first or close second business partner with israel. Sanctions would be a huge leverage. Either you don't know the subject or you're lying but you should refrain posting then. The rest is average centrist hypocrisy, the democrats including your darling cory are largely funded by aipac, they funded, supported diplomaticaly and even armed Israel. The democrat administration spearheaded alongside the maga the repression against the anti genocide movement. The democrat have fully aligned themselves with a supremacist far right who is currently committing a genocide and fully supported them at each step and the lesson you seem to learn of this defeat is "fucking arabs".Well, eat this defeat, eat it well because there are more to come, the rightists won't for you no matter how aligned you are with their views while leftists just do'n't vote for genocide supporter. All in all only blatant idiots or liers can pretend the democrat administration acted differently than the maga one, the only advantage with Trump is he isn't at hypocrite as you are .
The fuck dude/dudette? I’m the third generation of my da’s family to be involved in BDS and the pro-Palestinian movement in some capacity over the past few decades, where are you getting ‘fucking Arabs’ from? This characterisation reads like you’ve never read any of my posts on the topic.
I’m also interested in what might conceivably work, even if it’s a long shot.
Outside of a real hardcore, most people’s political activism and engagement is galvanised or otherwise by the prospect of success, or not.
I agree that Europe and elsewhere can, and should do more, indeed I’ve argued for cultural and sporting boycotts as well in this thread.
It’s a part of the puzzle, but the US is still the kingmaker in this scenario. International pressure, absolutely critical but it’s as much about making the US bend as it is Israel.
To that end, having an administration that not only won’t bend, but will actively double down is functionally different from one that is very inflexible, but might. And this has appreciable, functional impacts on attempts to generate that pressure. Movements are built from us humans, and their energy and motivation isn’t limitless.
You see this re climate for example. Some would like to do their part when that’s the general direction of travel, and there’s some positive movement. When say, the US leave the Paris Accords yet again and say fuck the climate, many become disheartened.
Two things can both be unacceptable, but still be different. I was critical of the Biden administration on this topic, but the Trump one is a different beast altogether.
Let’s turn Gaza into an international resort! Let’s drop restrictions on certain types of arms, let’s expel South Africa’s diplomat because of that ICC arrest warrant. Let’s attempt to criminalise supporting boycotts like BDS.
There’s also the general chaos of the Trump admin in foreign policy in general. Gaza got a lot of the world’s gaze for quite a period, which helped to build some momentum and opposition. Now you’ve got tariff wars, you’ve got Ukraine etc to contend with.
It was always my position that international pressure should be more, at a state or an individual level, but that the US has to at least be potentially moveable by that pressure, even slightly. Which it realistically no longer is for the rest of Trump’s term.
My frustration comes from a seeming desire to make an already difficult process, have to played on ‘hard mode’, and being lectured about thinking ‘maybe we should set the difficulty to easy, we might have a better shot’ all the time.
|
On May 07 2025 00:26 Sermokala wrote:
Again gh you fail at the idea that we don't already agree and refuse to go the next step on anything.
If you want to successfully revolt you need to build a coalition and community to organize as part of your revolt. Its not a flipping of the switch to "awh things are bad" to "Let's burn down the republic". If genocide was really your red line you wouldn't organize with or form a community with people you consider genocide supporters.
If you want other people to work with you, you need to want to work with them. Do you consider us genocide supporters and still want to work with us or do you not consider us genocide supporters and want to work with us? Easiest softball in the world.
As I already told you, don't work with me if you insist.
That's not an excuse for you all not to "build a coalition and community to organize as part of your revolt" that you all purportedly "already agree" on being necessary.
But that "already agree" is basically the "lip service" that is being referenced in the previously mentioned quote from the review on One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This:
“This is an account of a fracture,” he writes, “a breaking away from the notion that the polite, western liberal ever stood for anything at all.” It is a deft, broken-hearted, rhetorical savaging of comfortable people who say nothing (or pay lip service) but care only about preserving normality, convincing themselves that these things only happen “to certain places, to certain people”.
|
On May 06 2025 22:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2025 21:44 Nebuchad wrote:On May 06 2025 21:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 06 2025 20:03 Nebuchad wrote:On May 06 2025 12:04 WombaT wrote:
Ever notice that, ineffectual as it was most interjections from the world at large occurred during the Biden administration? Not because it would necessarily listen, but at least the possibility of pressure might swing things? It Europe has a sway in such things, it’s only with a potentially receptive US you can do shit. If you elect a ‘Israel can do whatever it wants’ US government you limit those options considerably.
Nothing at all was happening under Biden, we now have a bunch of people coming out telling everywhere that the pressure that he put on Netanyahu was nonexistent, there was a full report on it on Channel 13 in Israel but that's on TV so I'll use this link instead. All of these people should see charges along with Netanyahu. On May 06 2025 15:56 GreenHorizons wrote:
As if neither the voters or the people they vote for have agency.
... which, for the voters, is the case. They don't have agency.I feel like this is just a desperate quest to be important, really. It was important to vote for Harris so that things would be different, except that, no, it wasn't. It was important to NOT for Harris so that things would be different, except that, no, it wasn't. Always found this blame game boring and that won't change now. We don't need to find out who is to blame, we know who is to blame, they showed them doing it on the news, it's not a big mystery that needs solving. Well it would seem in an ostensible democracy that would be catastrophic, and sort of determinative of what needs to happen next? So which is it, are they in part to blame for the genocide because of their agency as voters, or should they revolt immediately because they don't have agency as voters? I suppose that somewhat depends on what they believe. If they believe voters have agency and revolt is unnecessary they are responsible (for their opposition to what is necessary). If they believe they/voters don't have agency (that's not democracy) and revolt is necessary (and they are making a good faith effort toward it), then they aren't responsible, because it's not a democracy and they don't have agency as voters. I obviously fall in the "revolt is necessary" group. This "I have no agency as a voter, voting is the only path out" contradiction is nonsensical. EDIT: I should mention I don't think most people on TL extend the same grace to Russian citizens that they'd like extended to them in what are ostensibly much more legitimately democratic countries.
This seems reasonable but in complete contrast to almost every post you have made in the USpol thread. Almost everyone there believes in the agency of their vote to various degree's and has said in response to you that they believe the best strategy is to try to primary the Democrats that they disagree with then if that fails still vote Democrat over the Republican in the main election. To which your repeated response (in the triple digits) has been to accuse them to be complicit in genocide.
Can you elaborate?
|
Northern Ireland24342 Posts
On May 06 2025 16:43 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2025 15:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 06 2025 14:54 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 06 2025 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 06 2025 12:04 WombaT wrote:On May 06 2025 00:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 05 2025 23:00 Jankisa wrote:
I fail to see how killing 50 k + people with more then half being women and children is not really ugly.
Not to mention all the record numbers of killed journalists, aid workers, emergency responders, volunteers etc. Not ugly enough to lose Europe's support. There isn't really even a coherent way to rationalize not sanctioning Israel. On May 05 2025 20:03 Broetchenholer wrote:What can we do? Padding ourselves on the back that we won the argument on an internet forum? As long as our governments are spineless cowards + Show Spoiler + that treat the conflict as something like what's happening where even we do not care, like africa, there is nothing to do. The issue for Palestinians is that there are killed by a regime that we identify as somewhat part of our responsibility and accountability but in the end not enough to force our governments to affect change. I believe trying to motivate/organize people in the US (and people who take interest in US/or their own politics) toward electoral or radical political efforts to change those governments is helpful and necessary. More people joining those efforts would funnily enough address Jankisa's complaint. One of the big problems is that so many democracy enjoyers (basically all of them here) don't want to do the work a democracy takes. That and/or they have been deluded into believing that "the work a democracy takes" means simply periodically voting. What’s Europe going to do? Aside from the fact that Europe isn’t a monolithic continent and attitudes and actions re Israel vary considerably. Despite that direct economic entanglements aren’t exactly huge so there’s not a huge amount of leverage there. + Show Spoiler +Also as continents go, already the most vociferous and active on the issue. Ever notice that, ineffectual as it was most interjections from the world at large occurred during the Biden administration? Not because it would necessarily listen, but at least the possibility of pressure might swing things? It Europe has a sway in such things, it’s only with a potentially receptive US you can do shit. If you elect a ‘Israel can do whatever it wants’ US government you limit those options considerably.
You were told this repeatedly.
Instead you went with ‘Genocide Joe’ rhetoric for fucking months, and claim no misjudgement whatsoever. While preaching and pontificating the whole time.
One can only presume you’ve personally done a fuckload to help the Palestinian cause, otherwise such a piousness would be ridiculous right? Well...On April 27 2025 20:53 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 27 2025 17:29 Yurie wrote:On April 27 2025 16:58 Jockmcplop wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/26/antisemitism-us-jews-free-speechThe Trump administration claims that its moves to defund universities, arrest and deport students and force schools to demote or monitor professors are meant to combat antisemitism, protect Jewish students and remove “Hamas-supporting” foreign nationals from the country. American pro-Israel groups including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Hillel International, Aipac and the Heritage Foundation have united behind Republican measures to crack down on higher education and its putative antisemitism. Religiously identified groups such as the Orthodox Union and Christians United for Israel have joined the chorus, celebrating the punishment of supposedly antisemitic students and professors. Whatever their varied pasts, today’s pro-Israel groups are not about protecting American Jews. Instead, they are allies in Maga’s war on free speech, academic freedom and the US’s democratic society itself. This shows how badly the definition of antisemitism has been twisted by the Israeli government and its advocacy groups worlwide. The US government is now targeting American jews who disagree with the way Israel is conducting its genocide, at the behest of pro-Israel groups. Now what is really antisemitic? Disagreeing with Israel's actions, or the US government targeting jews for arrest for speaking out? I think this separation is quite clear in Europe. Jews are more unpopular than they were but far from large organized hate crimes against them. While Israel as a state is unpopular and people would not object to them being banned at sporting events, Eurovision, stop military sales etc. What are you guys waiting for? Could do sanctions on Netanyahu and others that specifically have used genocidal rhetoric and/or the country at large. I mean there's plenty the EU and European countries generally could be doing but aren't. Plenty their populations could join people like stilt and myself in demanding from their politicians,but aren't. Plenty people could be contributing to right here, but aren't. What exact "misjudgement" do you want me to admit to? Pointing out the material fact that the Biden administration was aiding and abetting a genocide (or ethnic cleansing campaign if one insists), and their insistence on doing that was not only morally indefensible, it was basically electoral malpractice? If you find yourself telling people they shouldn't point out their nation's political leadership is, as a matter of fact, aiding and abetting genocide (or EC) because you believe it would hurt their chance of getting reelected, you've already lost the plot. I know for a fact my government is immune to pressure on this subject. They have a huge majority and already essentially have consent to do whatever the fuck they want, and they obviously don't want to fuck with Israel, because the current people in charge of Labour got there working very closely with the Israel lobby to discredit and character assassinate Corbyn. There is no route in the UK to a government that doesn't sell weapons to Israel. Ireland has a good record on Israel. Is it the government or the voters that are immune to pressure to act? Seems to me to be both and a bit of a responsibility diffuser. Somehow it ends up basically no one's fault that these ostensibly democratic countries around the Western world have been aiding and abetting a genocide for over a year. As if neither the voters or the people they vote for have agency. The people of Ireland are quite supportive of Palestinians afaict. In N. Ireland the dynamic is pretty specific. One of the British governors of Jerusalem even said that Israel could be a, quote, "loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of hostile Arabism."
...
Today, Irish support for the Palestinians feels most pronounced in Northern Ireland, which is governed by the British and where Irish nationalists compare their situation to Palestinians under Israeli occupation. www.npr.orgAlso, religion more specifically: Religious narratives play a “massive role” in explaining support for Israel among both Irish, British and American Christians, Bumin said.
In particular, belief in the Abrahamic covenant – God’s biblical promise to the Jewish people – emerged as one of the top predictors of pro-Israel sentiment.
“For people who say they support Israel in all three countries we surveyed, the idea that Israel is important for the fulfillment of biblical prophecies is of major significance,” Bumin said.
Theological differences between Christian denominations play an important role, with Catholics in Ireland almost 80% less likely to support Israel than Protestants, the survey found. www.timesofisrael.comThe bold is quite the euphemism. I'd never considered looking at this along religious lines within Christianity and I'm not sure it holds up. Northern Ireland is a pretty specific case, where it could also just be that the Catholics vibe more with whatever Ireland is doing rather than having an a priori religious reason. That said, Francis was fairly critical of Israel, so Catholics might listen to that. However I'm not sure it holds. Italy, the European bastion of Catholicism is totally fine with Netanyahu. Spain, another bastion of Catholicism, is not. Poland, yet another Catholic nation, seems totally indifferent (almost allowed Netanyahu to show up to the Auschwitz memorial, but is overall at least somewhat critical). Nor do I see any particular religious underpinnings in how South America talks about Israel. Argentina doesn't give a fuck and has voted against some UN mandates condemning Israeli behaviour. Brazil is more critical. Both are deeply Catholic nations. However all these Catholic nations are ruled by different political alliances. Spain and Brazil: social democrats. Ireland and Poland: centric parties/coalitions. Argentina and Italy: right wing. I find it hard to draw a comparison in protestant nations, but I'll grant you that even their more leftish governments aren't as outspoken against Israel as the more leftish Catholic ones: Denmark voted against recognising the Palestinian state in 2024 (although the rest of Scandinavia do recognise it). Germany under Scholz was indifferent at best. Finland lets its actions (doing arms deals) speak louder than its words (critical). But I find that the hypothesis that this is due to different flavours of Christianity rather than other factors unsubstantiated.
Religion in Northern Ireland (there are relatively very few Protestants in the Republic) is borderline interchangeable with national identity, so it becomes kinda tricky to compare to populations elsewhere. As you said. Its basically a colonialism analogue, and indeed I’m not sure many Prods (of which I am one) even really support Israel so much as rather childishly immediately gravitate to whatever the opposite position taken by most Catholics/Irish identifying.
What’s baffling to me recently with the ‘Kneecap’ controversy at Cochella is quite how baffled many Americans seemed to be that a politically motivated partly Irish language rap group would be pro-Palestine.
For a country so frequently obnoxious in their ‘Irishness’ (see green rivers on St Paddy’s), they seem incredibly detached from Ireland in general.
Interesting data points, it’s a pretty complicated one for sure.
I’d crudely say we’re in our second phase of European Islamophobia now, and I imagine that influences things too. If the first phase was an unreasonable backlash over 9/11 and terror, I see this second phase as a backlash to a lot of Muslim migration. One facet of which, I’m unsure how widespread but I’ve definitely encountered it is a pretty crude ‘I’d rather the Jews than the Muslims on this one’ formulation
|
Israel’s far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said that the Gaza Strip should be “entirely destroyed” and its inhabitants “leave in great numbers to third countries” after the war, in what would effectively amount to ethnic cleansing.
This is strange because I remember being told repeatedly that if Israel wanted to destroy Gaza they would just nuke it.
|
United States42236 Posts
On May 07 2025 01:06 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +Israel’s far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said that the Gaza Strip should be “entirely destroyed” and its inhabitants “leave in great numbers to third countries” after the war, in what would effectively amount to ethnic cleansing. This is strange because I remember being told repeatedly that if Israel wanted to destroy Gaza they would just nuke it.
I don't think you're making the point you think you're making. The argument you're referencing goes along the lines of:
Person A: "Israel would kill all the Gazans if they had the power to"
Person B: "But Israel does have the power to do so and they haven't"
Person A: "That doesn't prove anything"
The flaws with Person A's argument are pretty evident. Israel has, for four or so decades, made a daily choice to not destroy Gaza despite having the power to do so. They destroy buildings but the population of Gazans has grown exponentially. If Israel chooses not to level the entire of the Gaza strip for ten thousand days in a row then it seems reasonable to extrapolate that there's probably a pattern.
What we're seeing now is a change in that pattern. They're behaving differently. The people in charge have changed and the checks have changed.
The correct conclusion here is that Israel's policy has changed from the one they've had for decades. Not that Person A was somehow right all along. Israel's policy changing in the present does not allow you go rewrite the past to project those changes backwards. There are an awful lot of previous decisions such as Israel providing the sole economic lifeline to the Gazan economy by allowing Gazans to cross the border for employment that cannot be explained if this was always the plan.
|
And since this is the first time we see a quote like this from an israeli politician, this makes total sense
|
On May 07 2025 04:26 Nebuchad wrote:
And since this is the first time we see a quote like this from an israeli politician, this makes total sense
You can see terrible quotes from politicians from basically everywhere. What is the point you are trying to make?
|
On May 07 2025 04:29 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2025 04:26 Nebuchad wrote:
And since this is the first time we see a quote like this from an israeli politician, this makes total sense You can see terrible quotes from politicians from basically everywhere. What is the point you are trying to make?
That Kwark, pretending that this shows a change in israeli policy, is a very silly boy
|
United States42236 Posts
Israeli policy and actions have previously been very firmly and consistently against direct administration of Gaza. They’ve repeatedly left after occupying it and have been trying to get anyone else to police the place. They let Hamas run it for two decades when nobody else would.
This is a policy shift, not the culmination of some long plan.
|
United States42236 Posts
On May 07 2025 04:39 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2025 04:29 Billyboy wrote:On May 07 2025 04:26 Nebuchad wrote:
And since this is the first time we see a quote like this from an israeli politician, this makes total sense You can see terrible quotes from politicians from basically everywhere. What is the point you are trying to make? That Kwark, pretending that this shows a change in israeli policy, is a very silly boy
Presumably they refused to occupy it for decades because they wanted to occupy it. They offered it to Egypt and Jordan and America because they wanted to occupy it. It all makes sense if you hate Israel enough.
|
On May 07 2025 04:44 KwarK wrote:
Israeli policy and actions have previously been very firmly and consistently against direct administration of Gaza. They’ve repeatedly left after occupying it and have been trying to get anyone else to police the place. They let Hamas run it for two decades when nobody else would.
This is a policy shift, not the culmination of some long plan.
"Direct administration" of Gaza is, like, you rule Gaza and Gazans in it. They're not trying to occupy the place, they're trying to take it for themselves, clearing the people who are there in the process. What they've been doing is consistent with that plan. Allowing Hamas to stay in power, for example, creates unstability, which makes it so that Palestine has a much lower chance of becoming a state.
It is also consistent with what they've been doing in the West Bank, obviously, as direct support for settlers doesn't help further any plan except this one.
All of this is very very easy to follow.
|
It is if you start from the conclusion that Israel as a nation is evil.
|
On May 07 2025 04:59 Billyboy wrote:
It is if you start from the conclusion that Israel as a nation is evil.
It is also easy to follow without starting from that conclusion.
|
Northern Ireland24342 Posts
On May 07 2025 04:59 Billyboy wrote:
It is if you start from the conclusion that Israel as a nation is evil.
If the glove fits and all that. Although I’m not a big fan of the evil term.
|
United States42236 Posts
On May 07 2025 05:06 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2025 04:59 Billyboy wrote:
It is if you start from the conclusion that Israel as a nation is evil. If the glove fits and all that. Although I’m not a big fan of the evil term.
It’s not just evil, there’s some Jewish specific stuff going on in the argument being made. If Israel acts like it currently is then it’s evil. If it spends decades acting to the contrary then that’s evidence of the secret long term evil plan. They can’t just be a nation of normal people who disagree about things with normal political divisions and changing priorities over time which is influenced by events like Oct 7. There’s a conspiracy, a master plan, and they’re deceiving us all.
Jews are allowed to be as dumb as the rest of us. They can have disagreeing factions that wax and wane. They can shift their goals and objectives. I should be able to agree that the displacement of Gazans is ethnic cleansing without having to also agree that the Jews were always scheming to do this.
If someone used Brexit as an argument that Britain was only ever in the EU as part of a plot to destroy it by leaving that’d be absurd. The real explanation involves broader shifts within the Conservative Party over a 30 year period, the identity crisis opposing new Labour that saw IDS using Europe as a wedge issue in 2001, the rise of UKIP and the populist right, Cameron‘a hubris off the back of the PR referendum, Corbyn being anti EU, Boris fucking Johnson appearing on HIGNFY, and a million other things. Nobody would dream of arguing that Brits were incapable of being dumb and that Brexit really showed the falseness of everything that preceded it. But Jews are apparently not allowed that luxury. The contradictions within their policy aren’t allowed to just be contradictions.
|
There has been massive protests for a long time now in Israel, their governments policy is not popular but way to many people in this thread and in the left universe act as though all the Jews are cheering at each babies death.
Next if white rednecks in the US south held the beliefs of Hamas towards the Mexicans and women, based on comments on the others threads, you would be cheering for their death and the deaths of their collaborators for hiding the Nazi's.
There is some serious disconnects in peoples logic when it comes to Israel.
|
Could either of you two clowns please post something specific in what I've posted here that makes it look like I'm talking about Jews, so that we can see the disconnect in action?
|
On May 07 2025 05:24 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2025 05:06 WombaT wrote:On May 07 2025 04:59 Billyboy wrote:
It is if you start from the conclusion that Israel as a nation is evil. If the glove fits and all that. Although I’m not a big fan of the evil term. It’s not just evil, there’s some Jewish specific stuff going on in the argument being made. If Israel acts like it currently is then it’s evil. If it spends decades acting to the contrary then that’s evidence of the secret long term evil plan. They can’t just be a nation of normal people who disagree about things with normal political divisions and changing priorities over time which is influenced by events like Oct 7. There’s a conspiracy, a master plan, and they’re deceiving us all. Jews are allowed to be as dumb as the rest of us. They can have disagreeing factions that wax and wane. They can shift their goals and objectives. If someone used Brexit as an argument that Britain was only ever in the EU as part of a plot to destroy it by leaving that’d be absurd. The real explanation involves broader shifts within the Conservative Party over a 30 year period, the identity crisis opposing new Labour that saw IDS using Europe as a wedge issue in 2001, the rise of UKIP and the populist right, Cameron‘a hubris off the back of the PR referendum, Corbyn being anti EU, Boris fucking Johnson appearing on HIGNFY, and a million other things. Nobody would dream of arguing that Brits were incapable of being dumb and that Brexit really showed the falseness of everything that preceded it. But Jews are apparently not allowed that luxury. The contradictions within their policy aren’t allowed to just be contradictions.
His argument doesn't require anything uniquely Jewish and I've never detected a hint of anti-semitism in his hundreds of posts here. Warring tribes see eachother as vermin. You can replace Jews with Hutu and Palestinians with Tutsi and Oct 7 with the assassination of Habyarimana and you have the exact same debate on whether genocide/ethnic cleansing was planned/debated internally beforehand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
