TheDankHold

Don’t infantilize Netanyahu and the IDF. They’re doing the genocide. Bernie is opposing a person that wants total immunity from the law and is advocating for what he believes even still.

There are more things to consider than Israel Hamas. Don’t be the left wing equivalent to pro lifers. Hyped up on a wedge issue to the extent you let yourself get taken advantage of by the rhetoric of the worst actors.

Interesting that the chart starts in 1948. It seems to miss that immediately prior 80% of Palestinians were forcibly removed from their lands and/or massacres by Zionist settler militias.

Next you’ll tell me that the population swap between Greece and Turkey was a genocide too, considering how you count the migrations of Jews that occurred after Zionists murdered and purged as many Arabs as they could from Palestine.

The conflict has existed longer than the Israeli state and ignoring that time period only obfuscates the reality of the situation.

Reductive purity testing won’t end the genocide you know. Do you know the position of the Republican candidate on Gaza? (hint: it’s an example of actually advocating for genocide)

Refusing to take steps to reduce harm enables the worst outcome and there are also other issues besides Gaza that exist beyond this wedge issue.

You should actually watch the video because you might be surprised that he directly talks about Gaza and states his position (no more money for Israel if they can’t control their violent impulses). You know, instead of spouting off like a blind partisan.

There’s plenty of sense in calling out a genocidal corrupt religious extremist. We don’t need to bring up Hitler liking dogs when talking about them.

Like you said, language evolves. People are deciding that the definition you follow is very limited and constrains dialogue by being needlessly exclusionary. So they’re seeking to expand the definition to its logical conclusion.

You can throw a fit about other Semitic people being recognized or you can accept that language changes to fit our current understanding of the world.

Antisemitism still refers to prejudice against Jewish people. It’s also being extended to all Semitic people as to disallow them the ability to categorize prejudice against them is to obfuscate and to an extent even deny their own reality.

That’s not an answer to the question.

Interesting that you use the idea that English is a living language to push back against people using a term in a way you’ve decided is incorrect. Seems like you don’t think English is that alive after all if you refuse to incorporate all Semitic people into the concept of antisemitism.

You can’t cite descriptivist arguments to defend your prescriptivist attitude towards the term antisemitism. It betrays your own bias and deflates your argument.

Language evolves, just like you said. Which is why people are realizing the double speak nature of this idea that antisemitism is only when you’re prejudiced against a specific Semitic people group and the others don’t get a term to describe prejudice against them. Your position is an Orwellian attempt to deny a group of people the ability to specifically identify their oppression and it’s sad.

The end result of reactionary rhetoric. The GOP admitted it when they hung the banner “we are all domestic terrorists”

Mental healthcare gets held back by people like you who think their ignorance is more valid than the knowledge of people that actually study these phenomenon from the goal of understanding it.

I hope you have enough self awareness to realize you’re allowing conservatives to sabotage your principles through wedge issue scapegoats that are misrepresented.