Anonymous foxnewsinsider 9w

Pipe down liberal

7

Anonymous #2 9w

Exactly

10

Anonymous justinian 9w

Believe me, I am quite far from liberal

-2

Anonymous foxnewsinsider 9w

Not really. I bet you are a capitalist and a nationalist, believe in “free enterprise and competition” and you don’t want King George back. Your ideology is a lie, born from French and British liberalism that has been laundered as conservatism by big business interests in the 1980s and further bastardized with Epstein backed psyops to make you fear blue hair dye.

6

Saying genocide is wrong is not downplaying the holocaust, it’s respecting it

6

Anonymous #6 9w

???

1

Anonymous justinian 9w

Do you even try to know what you’re talking about?

1

Attacking zionism is literally upholding the values we deemed Nazi Germany incapable of possessing.

0

Comment Deleted

0

“Obey the law” hmmm uncritically demanding that people obey the law just because it’s the law without regards to the morality of that law definitely had no concerning historical context

11

Here’s one for you Israel is breaking international law by crimes against humanity, war crimes, etc. Is that okay to you?

7

Comment Deleted

0

And you think the Nazis weren’t enforcing the law? Super extreme example but like law doesn’t mean good.

9

Comment Deleted

0

The entire point of this post is not that hate speech isn’t bad, it’s that hate speech laws are incorrectly being applied. Actual antisemitism is bad, but if opposition to Israel’s actions is defined as antisemitism, then shit which isn’t actually hate speech can be treated as such.

6

Comment Deleted

0

If the state attempts to define opposition to Israel as antisemitism, then it can be used against people who aren’t actually antisemitic. Simply claim that anti-Zionism (namely the phrase “from the river to the sea”) is incitement of hatred. Though frankly I think the UK is a better example of police crackdowns on Gaza protesters than Germany.

5

Comment Deleted

0

I think people can use “from the river to the sea” in an expulsionary context which is bad or in a context referring to “dismantle the Jewish supremacist government so everyone can live there peacefully.” *I* don’t use the term because the meaning can be unclear, but it’s not up for the government to make that decision. And in the reverse, why is it okay to support the destruction of Palestine by supporting the Israeli government?

2

Anonymous #2 9w

If someone said “Zimbabwe will be free” during the era of Rhodesia, was that incitement of hatred against white Rhodesians?

1

Comment Deleted

0

I think the takeaway from German history should be that we should oppose all genocides and all ethnic supremacist governments.

4

Comment Deleted

0

You seem to not care about prejudice when it is against Palestinians. And “from the river to the sea” is not an inherently antisemitic phrase any more than “Amandla awethu” or “black power” or “Mayibuye iAfrika” are anti-white. They can be used in a bigoted way but that doesn’t define them.

4

Comment Deleted

0

Defining antisemitism as “criticizes Israel” devalues antisemitism and can make it worse because people will blame innocent Jewish people for Israel’s actions

4

Comment Deleted

0

You’re like a robot this is just sad

5

Anonymous #2 9w

You haven’t even tried to explain *why* “from the river to the sea” is antisemitic. You are just spamming “this is a law against antisemitism”

6

Comment Deleted

0

“From the river to the sea” was developed by the PLO in the 1960s to call for a single democratic secular state for both Jews and Palestinians. Hamas using it in its 2017 charter doesn’t retroactively redefine it. Was calling for an end of Rhodesia hatred against white Rhodesians?

1

If someone says “free Kurdistan” is that hate speech against Turks just because the Kurdistan Workers Party also says that and is considered a terrorist group by Germany?

1

Comment Deleted

0

“Simply dont criticize Israel in the way the government doesn’t like and you wont be arrested” chud

1