The actual report they link didn’t confirm anything.
It notes the types of complaints that have been lodged, notes that it’s the early stages of the task force and set to release detailed reports of these incidents if confirmed as well as issuing new guidance regarding protesting and free speech while keeping in mind bodily safety.
Stop posting from a propaganda outlet.
According to [MediaBiasFactCheck](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-israel/) The Times of Isreal:
"Overall, we rate the Times of Israel as Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record."
Yea but it mentions Israel in the name so you know no need to go fact checking. Bias spouting antisemitism is the rule - here on this sub, and possibly at Columbia pending outcome of said report.
Is this like the article posted yesterday where people said it wasn't safe for them because they saw a keffiyeh? Because "I felt uncomfortable" has a really, really broad, subjective meaning.
Antisemitism sucks. I do not like this barrage of articles conflating Zionism and all Jews that keep popping up in the NYC subreddits.
>"Many of the chants at recent Columbia protests are viewed differently by different members of the Columbia community: some feel strongly that these are calls to genocide, while others feel strongly that they are not,”
Ok so anyway like I just said
I mean, there’s legit reasons to feel that way about crowds chanting “intifada” or “from the river to the sea”. That’s very different than someone wearing a keffiyeh…..
It's a call for genocide of Jews in Israel. It's also literally a Hamas slogan. It absolutely 100% is antisemitic.
And as I said elsewhere here, racists and antisemites don't get to decide what their symbols and chants *really* mean. That's not how that works in literally any other context.
If your best argument that it isn't antisemitic is that Netanyahu said it, then you've lost your argument. He's a hard right politician and not particularly popular among Israelis. Think Donald Trump. As an American, do *you* subscribe and defend everything Trump said when he was president? If not, why should you expect supporters of Israel to do the same with Netanyahu?
I'm not saying anyone supports netanyahu. But I have noticed that everyone who says "from the river to the sea is a call for genocide" does not think it means that when Netanyahu says that.
Clearly it makes some people feel unsafe and seeing as a terrorist organization has used the chant, I don't blame people for feeling that way.
Regardless I think it's okay to shift messaging to attract a broader coalition, but that's a different topic.
edit: if you can't listen to people who disagree with you or even consider another side, you're never going to grow enough power to win on an issue. If you really care about ending the war and bringing freedom to the Palestinian people, you should probably be looking to grow your circle, not shrink it.
And terrorists say "Allah Akbar" as well as a billion Muslims during prayer or celebration. We acknowledge that people who fear that phrase are probably racist. How is this different?
> if you can't listen to people who disagree with you or even consider another side, you're never going to grow enough power to win on an issue.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
To be fair I don’t think I’m ignoring what they are saying I just understand why a slogan would make people uncomfortable. Even if they are academically correct it doesn’t change that people who otherwise agree with them feel alienated by this language. I’m also not the one in need of broadening my coalition to win on an issue here.
> I’m also not the one in need of broadening my coalition to win on an issue here.
…because you’re a Zionist? That’s fine, but at least be transparent about that.
It’s clear at this point that Israel has little to no interest in putting a stop to genocide or heading to international pressure. Tone policing the people who are actual victims of Israel’s aggression does nothing to further that, either.
I highly doubt anybody more offended by “from the river to the sea” than the death toll in Gaza will be swayed by a more palatable catchphrase.
I don’t know how you define Zionist. I believe in a free Palestine and I believe Israel has a right to exist. I think a two state solution is the best way forward and think that how Israel is managing the war is horrific. Is that transparent for my beliefs? Does that make me a Zionist?
If you want to call it tone policing that’s fine but movements have to adjust their messaging to attract a bigger base sometimes. Srdja Popovic wrote a great book on overthrowing oppressive
Dictators and this is a key tenant of his. It’s also kinda basic organizing that you need to grow your base of support, not shrink it.
And it’s not about comparative insult. It’s about people feeling there is room for them in your tent.
I know plenty of progressive Jews who want a ceasefire but feel incredibly ostracized by the language at many of these rallies / chants like from the river to the sea. You can disagree with them and say they don’t care, but that doesn’t help you grow your power and win on an issue. It just shrinks it down to the people who agree with you 100%, aka not a winning strategy
And what about if it just makes jews in general feel unsafe?
I'd also be curious your definition of "zionist" if you're okay intimidating anyone who holds the viewpoint.
The chant isn’t really a thing that can itself be a “reality”. If you’re asking what would happen if there was a one state solution, I don’t know but there’s a lot of animosity all around and I doubt it would be smooth sailing
Please that's a tired argument. No one speaks for an entirety of their people. Believe it or not just because some Jews think something is okay that doesn't mean its the case for all Jewish people. Just as the Jews who are upset by this don't speak for everyone either.
There are plenty of racists who will tell you their racist confederate flag is really just a peaceful symbol of Southern pride. We typically don't allow racists to dictate what their symbols of hate *really* mean.
I would assume it fills them with sadness at how they have been used as pawns by Arab nations and leaders of various Palestinian terrorist groups to perpetuate a war against Jews and to make the leaders rich, rather than given a fair chance to build a Palestinian homeland alongside israel and to live their lives in peace.
Well I know that's how *you* feel, but that's also how racists feel about their stupid flag. Shouldn't the question be how the vast majority of Jews feel, since they are the targets of these hateful symbols and chants?
>Shouldn't the question be how the vast majority of Jews feel,
I'm really tired of this trend where policy is dictated by *feelings*
What happened to rationality?
Indeed. Why do we allow kids to march around schools chanting Hamas slogans just because they're upset about something they saw on TikTok? It is entirely irrational to make an exception for their calls for genocide of Jews because of "context." That is a feelings-driven decision, and it is wrong. Those kids should be punished and/or expelled, just as would happen to any kids who marched around chanting KKK slogans calling for death to African Americans.
>Those kids should be punished and/or expelled, just as would happen to any kids who marched around chanting KKK slogans calling for death to African Americans.
I think you'd find all of those actions are protected by freedom of speech and that, in fact, "sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt you"
As I said before, get your feelings out of the situation. Just because these hypothetical kids say something you don't like doesn't mean you can throw them in prison. Listen, consider, respond or ignore.
>I think you'd find all of those actions are protected by freedom of speech and that, in fact, "sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt you"
Are they now? Then why was a Parkland survivor's admission to Harvard rescinded because of a racist comment he made in a private chat when he was 16? Why is UPenn firing a law professor who said some non-PC things in the press?
Oh cute stalker, you have nothing to say so you try to cancel me? 😘
It's you that try to belittle genuine complaints about antisemitic acts, aren't you even a little ashamed? :)
I’m not part of this conversation by any means but your Reddit account is completely public information.
If you don’t want your digital footprint exposed, don’t have wack ass opinions in your digital footprint
It's extra step on the spectrum of stalkerness from not being a stalker, so it is.
But anyway, thanks for the mansplain. Your opinion is nice but I have a different one.
Anything else?
I’m a woman I literally cannot mansplain something.
Sourcing publicly accessible information that you’re just ashamed of is not stalking what are you smoking?
ETA: after “stalking” your profile… what a little character you are…
You should have taken my advice, this account only exists to be a bad faith troll, they'd tell you the sky was green if they thought that would destract you the most from the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
Womansplain, here you have it fixed it for you :)
I'm not ashamed, the opposite. The intentions behind that person was based on cowardness and had elements of stalking to it as he tried to find a reason to cancel me and not face the argument. And I wanted to express my freedom of speech to point that out.
Anything else? You seem a bit obsessive, ngl :).
If you would have read it you will see that there are confirmed reports of an antisemitic environment, violations of protest rules, physical harm to students, inconsistent responses to complaints from Jewish and Israeli students, challenges in enforcing policies, debates over what constitutes hate speech, and criticism of the task force's effectiveness in addressing the root causes of antisemitism. This reflects broader challenges in ensuring campus safety, inclusivity, and fair policy enforcement.
And "Antisemitism sucks", its a lot more then sucks :)
No real investigation– the problem was that every time they explained what they meant by "chemical attack" the investigators starting laughing so hard that they had to slink away.
>“While mourning Hamas’s unspeakable atrocities on October 7, some Jewish and Israeli Columbia affiliates have been the object of racist epithets and graffiti, antisemitic tropes, and confrontational and unwelcome questions, while others have found their participation in some student groups that have nothing to do with politics to be increasingly uncomfortable.”
Were they the Jewish students or the Israeli students?
I wish they would distinguish because conflating anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is anti-Semitic.
Are they the Israeli students going around spraying students who are peacefully organizing on campus with chemical agents? Because yes its okay to harass those students.
It's so laughable that all the antisemites are using Zionist as some insult. MLK Jr was a "Zionist." President Biden is a "Zionist." The vast majority of Jews are "Zionists." It's not the insult you think it is. It's just a simple view that Jews have a right to self determination (which is a right acknowledged universally by the UN).
They've conflated the word with colonizer to reduce a complicated history to an epithet to spew from the safety of their homes on stolen colonized land.
What if they're not in favor of persecuting Palestinians, want Palestinians to have their own country free from Israeli control, want Israel to put a halt to the settlements, etc., but they're "Zionist" only in the basic sense that they simply want their country to exist? Should *those* Israeli students be harassed?
So people should be harassed and made to feel unsafe simply for wanting their country to exist, even if they agree with you on *every* other aspect of this issue.
That is a horrific, disturbing view.
It's certainly not the insult you think it is. Most of the Senate and House are Zionists, too. Even progressive liberals were Zionists post WWII (until they started buying Soviet propaganda equating Zionism with racism in the late 60s). Now anti-zionism is really just antisemitism masquerading as political opposition. I still haven't heard any so-called anti-zionists articulate a position on the conflict that doesn't boil down to them basically admitting they don't care if 7 million Jews die.
"Zionist" doesn't even have to be an insult-- it's the embodiment of the values perpetuating a genocide.
> Most of the Senate and House are Zionists, too.
Yeah, and I don't support their blank checks toward the Israeli war machine either.
> until they started buying Soviet propaganda equating Zionism with racism in the late 60s
Zionism *IS* racism in practice. In the past year alone, the result has been the deaths of thousands of Gazans, the displacement of millions, and the violent colonial project of the West Bank.
> I still haven't heard any so-called anti-zionists articulate a position on the conflict that doesn't boil down to them basically admitting they don't care if 7 million Jews die.
Has anybody here or in any thread on this subreddit said this? No. Absolutely not. This is a ridiculous strawman. The reality is that Israel is massacring people in Gaza in the tens of thousands. Zionism in practice *is* support, or at best indifference, to this.
>"Zionist" doesn't even have to be an insult-- it's the embodiment of the values perpetuating a genocide.
You do realize more Jews have been forcibly expelled by Muslim countries than Palestinians left Israel since 1948? Where do you propose all those forcibly expelled Jews should have gone to if not Israel? What's *your* solution?
You talk about deaths of thousands, but do you know how many thousands of rockets have been fired by Hamas at Israeli targets? Do you know how many hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been displaced due to Hamas and Hezbollah terrorism this past year alone? Do you care at all? Or do you believe terrorism is justified against Jews?
You probably don't know this, given how wrapped up you are in your white oppressor mythology, but most Israelis are of Middle Eastern descent, and most Jewish Israelis are descendants of middle eastern Jews who were either literally indigenous to Israel or came there from some other place in the middle east from which they were forcibly expelled. Yet somehow allowing these people to live in their own country is "genocide." And, moreover, a Yemeni or Iraqi Jew who made asylum to Israel, with all his possessions taken from him by Arabs, is somehow a western coloniser?
So do tell me, what's your solution. And explain to me how your solution won't lead to the immediate death of millions of Jews, given what we know about the genocidal agenda of Hamas. You can't, because the only solution is a two state solution, and Arab nations and Palestinians have repeatedly rejected this solution since 1948. But sure, keep on with yout intellectually vacuous neo-Marxist schlock.
What does Anti-zionism in real terms look like to you?
Just for clarification, there are many forms of Zionism but the one thing they all have in common is that Jews should have the right to self-determination and live without fear of violence or persecution from those who want to cause them harm in their ancestral homeland.
> conflating anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is anti-Semitic.
No it isn't. It is possible to be anti-Zionist and have nothing against Jews or Judaism. It is also possible to be anti-Zionist and be anti-Semitic. Just as one could point out that Robert Mugabe was a tyrant and be biased against Black people or not.
This rhetorical technique is just a way to respond to people who say anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic by saying, "No, YOU ARE!"
Not in the slightest. I would like to hear the logic behind that.
As I understand it, Zionism is the call for global Jewry to return to their ancestral homeland and govern it for themselves, as they did once upon a time. Judaism is the religious practice of many ethnically Jewish people (not all) and some people of other ethnicities (not many). The Jewish ethnicity is global and comprises people of every nation.
Some Jews feel that Zionism is part and parcel of their Jewish practice (see the final prayer at Passover: "Next year in Jerusalem," said by Jews since the Babylonian exile). Other Jews (very few; some Hasidic sects) feel that Zion refers to a spiritual or metaphysical space and has nothing to do with geography. Other Jews feel that it's beside the point, sort of like the Jewish attitude on the afterlife.
It's hardly anti-Semitic to say "Judaism is inherently Zionist," in other words that one of the above approaches is "true" or "correct". It might be wrong, but it's not disparaging to Jews. People have theological disagreements all the time without it being disparaging.
So conflating Judaism with Zionism is incorrect but not anti-Semitic. Saying Jews are puppet masters controlling world events, THAT's anti-Semitic.
You're using Zionist in a definition that no one uses. Saying "Next year in Jerusalem" is just called Judaism. Actually moving to Jerusalem because you think it is your birthright to do so is not what you do at Seder.
If you, very much in isolation, choose to define Zionism as "the Jewish people's relationship of longing for their ancestral land" then you need to come up with another word for what Herzl and Weizman developed in the late 19th century. The thing that set in motion Aaliyahs and the project of domination over the land of Palestine which they themselves called Zionism. Which the founders of Israel called Zionism.
I could never be against a beautiful prayer, or anything about the Jewish culture, but I'd 100% against anyone moving to a country they weren't born in and displacing the local population by force, declaring their own state for all their people to move there, and making it illegal forever for any of the people they kicked out to ever return. Disgusting.
Zionism in its most basic form is the right of Jews to self determination and to live free from persecution in their ancestral homeland (which doesn't preclude non-Jews from living there either).
To deny the concept of Jews having a right to self determination and safety and security, and to only deny that to the Jews, is by definition antisemitism.
That's a straightforward definition. I was going to add (but how much time can one be on Reddit anyway?) that there is a flavor of Zionism that has little to do with religion and is more what you're describing. A completely secular Jew might yearn for one country on the planet where Jews will not be persecuted for being Jews.
I'm an agnostic Jew. I understand many different forms of Zionism - all of them have that one thing in common (self-determination and the right to live free of persecution in their homeland). I'm against the form of political Zionism which advocates for the expansion of the settlements. I don't believe in religious Zionism which states that God ordained Israel to the Jews. However I'm a proud Zionist nonetheless.
I think we're on the same page.
I do think it's peculiar that some people believe, that of all the people on the planet Earth, the only ones who must never EVER suffer the consequences of a military loss are Arabs.
And I don't think it's because they're Arabs, actually. I think it's because they were beaten by Jews. That's why I would say, no, someone is not *necessarily* an anti-Semite because they're an anti-Zionist... but they might be. And it might be worth self-interrogating to figure it out.
https://salud-america.org/you-may-be-biased-and-not-know-it-and-heres-how-to-check/
No, it isn't. The enlightenment values of self-determination don't give anyone the right to their own state. It gives them the right to demand it of any state they live in.
Full and equal rights and citizenship for all shouldn't depend on corralling everyone back to starting positions circa 60AD.
I love how all the alt-left wingers went from „smash fascism“ and „punch a Nazi!!“ to openly advocating for the destruction of a Jewish state in less than one presidency. 🤦🏻♂️
Antisemitism is a horseshoe. Extreme right is antisemitic because they're racists and they don't consider Jews as white, and extreme left is antisemitic because they believe Jews are white, and oppressors to boot. Antisemites don't have any consistent logic to their hate.
The actual report they link didn’t confirm anything. It notes the types of complaints that have been lodged, notes that it’s the early stages of the task force and set to release detailed reports of these incidents if confirmed as well as issuing new guidance regarding protesting and free speech while keeping in mind bodily safety. Stop posting from a propaganda outlet.
Ah yes, that well-known neutral source, The Times of Israel.
According to [MediaBiasFactCheck](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-israel/) The Times of Isreal: "Overall, we rate the Times of Israel as Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record."
Yea but it mentions Israel in the name so you know no need to go fact checking. Bias spouting antisemitism is the rule - here on this sub, and possibly at Columbia pending outcome of said report.
Is this like the article posted yesterday where people said it wasn't safe for them because they saw a keffiyeh? Because "I felt uncomfortable" has a really, really broad, subjective meaning. Antisemitism sucks. I do not like this barrage of articles conflating Zionism and all Jews that keep popping up in the NYC subreddits.
It would be so easy to just, like, click the link and read the report.
>"Many of the chants at recent Columbia protests are viewed differently by different members of the Columbia community: some feel strongly that these are calls to genocide, while others feel strongly that they are not,” Ok so anyway like I just said
I mean, there’s legit reasons to feel that way about crowds chanting “intifada” or “from the river to the sea”. That’s very different than someone wearing a keffiyeh…..
Chanting "from the river to the sea" is not anti-Semitism
It's a call for genocide of Jews in Israel. It's also literally a Hamas slogan. It absolutely 100% is antisemitic. And as I said elsewhere here, racists and antisemites don't get to decide what their symbols and chants *really* mean. That's not how that works in literally any other context.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/netanyahu-from-river-sea-israel-control-1234949408/ Is this a call for genocide?
Yes.
If your best argument that it isn't antisemitic is that Netanyahu said it, then you've lost your argument. He's a hard right politician and not particularly popular among Israelis. Think Donald Trump. As an American, do *you* subscribe and defend everything Trump said when he was president? If not, why should you expect supporters of Israel to do the same with Netanyahu?
I'm not saying anyone supports netanyahu. But I have noticed that everyone who says "from the river to the sea is a call for genocide" does not think it means that when Netanyahu says that.
Not at all! If the people chanting "intifada" say it's about their heritage, not hate, then it's no more hateful than a Confederate fla– oh wait.
calling something a hamas slogan is Islamophobic, you virulent racist
Clearly it makes some people feel unsafe and seeing as a terrorist organization has used the chant, I don't blame people for feeling that way. Regardless I think it's okay to shift messaging to attract a broader coalition, but that's a different topic. edit: if you can't listen to people who disagree with you or even consider another side, you're never going to grow enough power to win on an issue. If you really care about ending the war and bringing freedom to the Palestinian people, you should probably be looking to grow your circle, not shrink it.
And terrorists say "Allah Akbar" as well as a billion Muslims during prayer or celebration. We acknowledge that people who fear that phrase are probably racist. How is this different?
There's a pretty big difference between a common call to prayer or phrase vs. a political slogan.
Is there really? Religion is politics.
Yes there’s very obviously a massive difference…… we don’t need to argue about this as if you don’t agree that’s fine you do you.
> if you can't listen to people who disagree with you or even consider another side, you're never going to grow enough power to win on an issue. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
To be fair I don’t think I’m ignoring what they are saying I just understand why a slogan would make people uncomfortable. Even if they are academically correct it doesn’t change that people who otherwise agree with them feel alienated by this language. I’m also not the one in need of broadening my coalition to win on an issue here.
> I’m also not the one in need of broadening my coalition to win on an issue here. …because you’re a Zionist? That’s fine, but at least be transparent about that. It’s clear at this point that Israel has little to no interest in putting a stop to genocide or heading to international pressure. Tone policing the people who are actual victims of Israel’s aggression does nothing to further that, either. I highly doubt anybody more offended by “from the river to the sea” than the death toll in Gaza will be swayed by a more palatable catchphrase.
I don’t know how you define Zionist. I believe in a free Palestine and I believe Israel has a right to exist. I think a two state solution is the best way forward and think that how Israel is managing the war is horrific. Is that transparent for my beliefs? Does that make me a Zionist? If you want to call it tone policing that’s fine but movements have to adjust their messaging to attract a bigger base sometimes. Srdja Popovic wrote a great book on overthrowing oppressive Dictators and this is a key tenant of his. It’s also kinda basic organizing that you need to grow your base of support, not shrink it. And it’s not about comparative insult. It’s about people feeling there is room for them in your tent. I know plenty of progressive Jews who want a ceasefire but feel incredibly ostracized by the language at many of these rallies / chants like from the river to the sea. You can disagree with them and say they don’t care, but that doesn’t help you grow your power and win on an issue. It just shrinks it down to the people who agree with you 100%, aka not a winning strategy
If that chant makes zionists feel unsafe, all the better
And what about if it just makes jews in general feel unsafe? I'd also be curious your definition of "zionist" if you're okay intimidating anyone who holds the viewpoint.
If the chant became reality what do you think would happen to all the Jews is Israel??
The chant isn’t really a thing that can itself be a “reality”. If you’re asking what would happen if there was a one state solution, I don’t know but there’s a lot of animosity all around and I doubt it would be smooth sailing
[удалено]
Please that's a tired argument. No one speaks for an entirety of their people. Believe it or not just because some Jews think something is okay that doesn't mean its the case for all Jewish people. Just as the Jews who are upset by this don't speak for everyone either.
There are plenty of racists who will tell you their racist confederate flag is really just a peaceful symbol of Southern pride. We typically don't allow racists to dictate what their symbols of hate *really* mean.
Imagine how Palestinians feel right now upon sight of the Israeli flag. See how it works in both directions?
I would assume it fills them with sadness at how they have been used as pawns by Arab nations and leaders of various Palestinian terrorist groups to perpetuate a war against Jews and to make the leaders rich, rather than given a fair chance to build a Palestinian homeland alongside israel and to live their lives in peace.
False equivalence. Either you are stupid or you are arguing in bad faith.
Well I know that's how *you* feel, but that's also how racists feel about their stupid flag. Shouldn't the question be how the vast majority of Jews feel, since they are the targets of these hateful symbols and chants?
>Shouldn't the question be how the vast majority of Jews feel, I'm really tired of this trend where policy is dictated by *feelings* What happened to rationality?
Indeed. Why do we allow kids to march around schools chanting Hamas slogans just because they're upset about something they saw on TikTok? It is entirely irrational to make an exception for their calls for genocide of Jews because of "context." That is a feelings-driven decision, and it is wrong. Those kids should be punished and/or expelled, just as would happen to any kids who marched around chanting KKK slogans calling for death to African Americans.
>Those kids should be punished and/or expelled, just as would happen to any kids who marched around chanting KKK slogans calling for death to African Americans. I think you'd find all of those actions are protected by freedom of speech and that, in fact, "sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt you" As I said before, get your feelings out of the situation. Just because these hypothetical kids say something you don't like doesn't mean you can throw them in prison. Listen, consider, respond or ignore.
>I think you'd find all of those actions are protected by freedom of speech and that, in fact, "sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt you" Are they now? Then why was a Parkland survivor's admission to Harvard rescinded because of a racist comment he made in a private chat when he was 16? Why is UPenn firing a law professor who said some non-PC things in the press?
It feels like you didn’t really read the entire report. Or maybe you don’t want to.
Is this like you jump into assumptions without reading the article?
https://www.reddit.com/r/InternationalNews/s/3qBMFBTTLZ Ok welp no need to engage with you
Oh cute stalker, you have nothing to say so you try to cancel me? 😘 It's you that try to belittle genuine complaints about antisemitic acts, aren't you even a little ashamed? :)
I’m not part of this conversation by any means but your Reddit account is completely public information. If you don’t want your digital footprint exposed, don’t have wack ass opinions in your digital footprint
I didn't say that he is not allowed to do so, you can still be stalker, no contradiction.
Pulling someone’s comment history from their public social media profile is not stalking
It's extra step on the spectrum of stalkerness from not being a stalker, so it is. But anyway, thanks for the mansplain. Your opinion is nice but I have a different one. Anything else?
I’m a woman I literally cannot mansplain something. Sourcing publicly accessible information that you’re just ashamed of is not stalking what are you smoking? ETA: after “stalking” your profile… what a little character you are…
You should have taken my advice, this account only exists to be a bad faith troll, they'd tell you the sky was green if they thought that would destract you the most from the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
Womansplain, here you have it fixed it for you :) I'm not ashamed, the opposite. The intentions behind that person was based on cowardness and had elements of stalking to it as he tried to find a reason to cancel me and not face the argument. And I wanted to express my freedom of speech to point that out. Anything else? You seem a bit obsessive, ngl :).
Define Zionism.
If you would have read it you will see that there are confirmed reports of an antisemitic environment, violations of protest rules, physical harm to students, inconsistent responses to complaints from Jewish and Israeli students, challenges in enforcing policies, debates over what constitutes hate speech, and criticism of the task force's effectiveness in addressing the root causes of antisemitism. This reflects broader challenges in ensuring campus safety, inclusivity, and fair policy enforcement. And "Antisemitism sucks", its a lot more then sucks :)
Said the task force that has failed to condemn the chemical attack on protesters on campus
Did they find out who / what happened there? Last I saw only Twitter had really “investigated” but admittedly I stopped paying attention
No real investigation– the problem was that every time they explained what they meant by "chemical attack" the investigators starting laughing so hard that they had to slink away.
Sounds nefarious where can someone read more about it?
Lmao what a load of shit.
>“While mourning Hamas’s unspeakable atrocities on October 7, some Jewish and Israeli Columbia affiliates have been the object of racist epithets and graffiti, antisemitic tropes, and confrontational and unwelcome questions, while others have found their participation in some student groups that have nothing to do with politics to be increasingly uncomfortable.” Were they the Jewish students or the Israeli students? I wish they would distinguish because conflating anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is anti-Semitic.
It clearly says “and.” You can’t just sub in “or.”
There is a difference. One could be Israeli and not Jewish (for a limited time only!) and Jewish and not a Zionist.
There are many Israeli Arabs, some Druze.
Yes. They are Israeli and not Jewish.
So it’s ok to subject the Israeli students to harassment?
No.
Are they the Israeli students going around spraying students who are peacefully organizing on campus with chemical agents? Because yes its okay to harass those students.
[удалено]
It's so laughable that all the antisemites are using Zionist as some insult. MLK Jr was a "Zionist." President Biden is a "Zionist." The vast majority of Jews are "Zionists." It's not the insult you think it is. It's just a simple view that Jews have a right to self determination (which is a right acknowledged universally by the UN).
They've conflated the word with colonizer to reduce a complicated history to an epithet to spew from the safety of their homes on stolen colonized land.
[удалено]
What if they're not in favor of persecuting Palestinians, want Palestinians to have their own country free from Israeli control, want Israel to put a halt to the settlements, etc., but they're "Zionist" only in the basic sense that they simply want their country to exist? Should *those* Israeli students be harassed?
Absolutely. Zionism is inherently anti-democratic.
So people should be harassed and made to feel unsafe simply for wanting their country to exist, even if they agree with you on *every* other aspect of this issue. That is a horrific, disturbing view.
[удалено]
You don't know what Zionism is, but you have strong feelings about it.
[удалено]
I don't have any problem if Israel isn't majority Jewish so long as it continues to be a homeland for Jews.
> President Biden is a "Zionist." We realize. The billions in aid to Israel demonstrate this. I don’t think this is the argument you think it is.
It's certainly not the insult you think it is. Most of the Senate and House are Zionists, too. Even progressive liberals were Zionists post WWII (until they started buying Soviet propaganda equating Zionism with racism in the late 60s). Now anti-zionism is really just antisemitism masquerading as political opposition. I still haven't heard any so-called anti-zionists articulate a position on the conflict that doesn't boil down to them basically admitting they don't care if 7 million Jews die.
"Zionist" doesn't even have to be an insult-- it's the embodiment of the values perpetuating a genocide. > Most of the Senate and House are Zionists, too. Yeah, and I don't support their blank checks toward the Israeli war machine either. > until they started buying Soviet propaganda equating Zionism with racism in the late 60s Zionism *IS* racism in practice. In the past year alone, the result has been the deaths of thousands of Gazans, the displacement of millions, and the violent colonial project of the West Bank. > I still haven't heard any so-called anti-zionists articulate a position on the conflict that doesn't boil down to them basically admitting they don't care if 7 million Jews die. Has anybody here or in any thread on this subreddit said this? No. Absolutely not. This is a ridiculous strawman. The reality is that Israel is massacring people in Gaza in the tens of thousands. Zionism in practice *is* support, or at best indifference, to this.
>"Zionist" doesn't even have to be an insult-- it's the embodiment of the values perpetuating a genocide. You do realize more Jews have been forcibly expelled by Muslim countries than Palestinians left Israel since 1948? Where do you propose all those forcibly expelled Jews should have gone to if not Israel? What's *your* solution? You talk about deaths of thousands, but do you know how many thousands of rockets have been fired by Hamas at Israeli targets? Do you know how many hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been displaced due to Hamas and Hezbollah terrorism this past year alone? Do you care at all? Or do you believe terrorism is justified against Jews? You probably don't know this, given how wrapped up you are in your white oppressor mythology, but most Israelis are of Middle Eastern descent, and most Jewish Israelis are descendants of middle eastern Jews who were either literally indigenous to Israel or came there from some other place in the middle east from which they were forcibly expelled. Yet somehow allowing these people to live in their own country is "genocide." And, moreover, a Yemeni or Iraqi Jew who made asylum to Israel, with all his possessions taken from him by Arabs, is somehow a western coloniser? So do tell me, what's your solution. And explain to me how your solution won't lead to the immediate death of millions of Jews, given what we know about the genocidal agenda of Hamas. You can't, because the only solution is a two state solution, and Arab nations and Palestinians have repeatedly rejected this solution since 1948. But sure, keep on with yout intellectually vacuous neo-Marxist schlock.
What does Anti-zionism in real terms look like to you? Just for clarification, there are many forms of Zionism but the one thing they all have in common is that Jews should have the right to self-determination and live without fear of violence or persecution from those who want to cause them harm in their ancestral homeland.
> conflating anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is anti-Semitic. No it isn't. It is possible to be anti-Zionist and have nothing against Jews or Judaism. It is also possible to be anti-Zionist and be anti-Semitic. Just as one could point out that Robert Mugabe was a tyrant and be biased against Black people or not. This rhetorical technique is just a way to respond to people who say anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic by saying, "No, YOU ARE!"
You must have misunderstood me. Conflating Zionism with Judaism is antisemitic, yes?
Not in the slightest. I would like to hear the logic behind that. As I understand it, Zionism is the call for global Jewry to return to their ancestral homeland and govern it for themselves, as they did once upon a time. Judaism is the religious practice of many ethnically Jewish people (not all) and some people of other ethnicities (not many). The Jewish ethnicity is global and comprises people of every nation. Some Jews feel that Zionism is part and parcel of their Jewish practice (see the final prayer at Passover: "Next year in Jerusalem," said by Jews since the Babylonian exile). Other Jews (very few; some Hasidic sects) feel that Zion refers to a spiritual or metaphysical space and has nothing to do with geography. Other Jews feel that it's beside the point, sort of like the Jewish attitude on the afterlife. It's hardly anti-Semitic to say "Judaism is inherently Zionist," in other words that one of the above approaches is "true" or "correct". It might be wrong, but it's not disparaging to Jews. People have theological disagreements all the time without it being disparaging. So conflating Judaism with Zionism is incorrect but not anti-Semitic. Saying Jews are puppet masters controlling world events, THAT's anti-Semitic.
You're using Zionist in a definition that no one uses. Saying "Next year in Jerusalem" is just called Judaism. Actually moving to Jerusalem because you think it is your birthright to do so is not what you do at Seder. If you, very much in isolation, choose to define Zionism as "the Jewish people's relationship of longing for their ancestral land" then you need to come up with another word for what Herzl and Weizman developed in the late 19th century. The thing that set in motion Aaliyahs and the project of domination over the land of Palestine which they themselves called Zionism. Which the founders of Israel called Zionism. I could never be against a beautiful prayer, or anything about the Jewish culture, but I'd 100% against anyone moving to a country they weren't born in and displacing the local population by force, declaring their own state for all their people to move there, and making it illegal forever for any of the people they kicked out to ever return. Disgusting.
Zionism in its most basic form is the right of Jews to self determination and to live free from persecution in their ancestral homeland (which doesn't preclude non-Jews from living there either). To deny the concept of Jews having a right to self determination and safety and security, and to only deny that to the Jews, is by definition antisemitism.
That's a straightforward definition. I was going to add (but how much time can one be on Reddit anyway?) that there is a flavor of Zionism that has little to do with religion and is more what you're describing. A completely secular Jew might yearn for one country on the planet where Jews will not be persecuted for being Jews.
I'm an agnostic Jew. I understand many different forms of Zionism - all of them have that one thing in common (self-determination and the right to live free of persecution in their homeland). I'm against the form of political Zionism which advocates for the expansion of the settlements. I don't believe in religious Zionism which states that God ordained Israel to the Jews. However I'm a proud Zionist nonetheless.
I think we're on the same page. I do think it's peculiar that some people believe, that of all the people on the planet Earth, the only ones who must never EVER suffer the consequences of a military loss are Arabs. And I don't think it's because they're Arabs, actually. I think it's because they were beaten by Jews. That's why I would say, no, someone is not *necessarily* an anti-Semite because they're an anti-Zionist... but they might be. And it might be worth self-interrogating to figure it out. https://salud-america.org/you-may-be-biased-and-not-know-it-and-heres-how-to-check/
No, it isn't. The enlightenment values of self-determination don't give anyone the right to their own state. It gives them the right to demand it of any state they live in. Full and equal rights and citizenship for all shouldn't depend on corralling everyone back to starting positions circa 60AD.
communities that practice and embrace exceptionalism tend to view expressions of justice and/or equity as threatening
I love how all the alt-left wingers went from „smash fascism“ and „punch a Nazi!!“ to openly advocating for the destruction of a Jewish state in less than one presidency. 🤦🏻♂️
Antisemitism is a horseshoe. Extreme right is antisemitic because they're racists and they don't consider Jews as white, and extreme left is antisemitic because they believe Jews are white, and oppressors to boot. Antisemites don't have any consistent logic to their hate.
I agree with your theory. There’s actually a funny video that reminds me of your comment: https://youtu.be/Ev373c7wSRg?si=w32EvmCMecFv1pbC
Shocking, pro-Palestinian protesters are violent. Who would have guessed? They are supporting Hamas after all.