Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

Hello I have been here the whole time. I know what happened. This discussion happened due to anti-Semitism:

1) There were obvious anti-Semitic attitudes both in the media and on the forum after the Palestine terror attack

2) Complaints that the inordinate focus on Israel's misdeeds, while ignoring everyone else's misdeeds, is inherently anti-Semitic, whether intended or not.

Please will you clarify the meaning you intend by "anti-Semitism"?

It could mean anti-Jewish, anti-Israeli, or even anti-Palestinian. Which of these meanings do you intend, in your words above?

Thanks. 🙏

You already know what it means. Don't play games.

No, I don't know, and it matters a lot to this discussion. Anti-Jewish rhetoric is discrimination. Anti-Israeli rhetoric is political criticism of a nation state. The difference is crucial.

E.g. my personal position is that I would never knowingly discriminate on the basis of religion, sex, age, etc. But I consider myself free to criticise Israel, as I would criticise any nation's actions, including my own UK. The difference between
"Anti-Semitic" = anti-Jewish,
and
"Anti-Semitic" = anti-Israel
is very, very important.

So which meaning do you intend, in your words, above?

So you are anti-Semitic towards a major collective of Jews, but not the individual Jews.

The fact is that the universities and parts of the media are strongly anti-Semitic and extremely influential, hence millions marching for Palestine and zero marching for Sudan.

[Moreno]

So you are anti-Semitic towards a major collective of Jews, but not the individual Jews.

I don't think this holds. One could, for example, view the Israeli's government's policies as detrimental, also to Jews. It also conflates the Israeli government with Jewish citizens. Or even considers it Jewish.

The fact is that the universities and parts of the media are strongly anti-Semitic and extremely influential, hence millions marching for Palestine and zero marching for Sudan.

Can we then look, for example, at anything written by those here against antisemitism as Islamophic if they have not argued equally against anti- arab issues. Or if they haven't attacked all racist texts also?

Must one, before weighing in on any issue, make sure that one is not missing a similar issue somewhere else in the world and make sure one weighs in equally on those OR one is racist or sexist or ablist in some way?

Are the people here who are consider critique of Israel anti-semitic, but who have not spent time criticizing China's treatment of the Uyghurs, racist against Uyghurs?

And note there is a difference from say 'I hope you would apply the logic of your criticism of Israel to other similar situations involving other ethnic groups' and saying if you aren't doing X also, then you are antisemitic.

and why is your arguement

The fact is that the universities and parts of the media are strongly anti-Semitic and extremely influential, hence millions marching for Palestine and zero marching for Sudan.

Directly applicable to Pattern Chaser.

And: other than in relation to anti-Israel topics, how much have you complained about the situation in Sudan? IOW have you shown that that situation matters to you in and of itself or is it only useful and of value you to you in the context of people's criticism of Israel? If the latter, than are you antiSudanese, since they only have instrumental value in your arguments, but you have not started threads about the situation there?
If one focuses on racism but not sexism, does that mean that one can/should be labeled sexist? Must everyone make sure there is no pressing issue competing for attention or in need of attention out there and make sure to weigh in on that also?

If one is a US citizen, for example, and given the US relationship with Israel (or any other nation involved is this kind of issue) might one not feel a greater responsibility to focus on one conflict over another where one's country is not involved or not involved in the same ways?

How does the logic in your post play out in relation to Jewish people, in Israel and abroad, say in the US. If they protest against current Israeli polity are they anti-semitic or self-hating Jews, necessarily?

What happens if we have people who protest the US history of involvement in Latin America, but they don't criticize the history Soviet/Russian involvement in Eastern Europe?

Are they antidemocratic?
Anti- Western European rooted countries?
Anticapitalist?
Anti-non slavic white, since non-slavic whites have tended to hold positions of power in the US?

If in the 60s I protested for the civil right of african americans, without protesting against the treatment of Latinos in the US, or the treatment of Native Americans in Nicaragua or the treatment of Jews in Russia was I anti-latino, anti-indigenous people anti-semitic?

Can an LGBTQ person, noticing that you spend time criticizing anti semitism but not anti trans rhetoric assume you are antitrans?

Have you called out anyone for being anti-African American recently? Are you on the way to being correctly labelled racist against AFs?
Replace AFs with any group you have been neglecting if you have been giving equal time to them. IOW choose a group you have been remiss is defending and thus clearly racist, ablist, sexist, sexualityist, political affiliationist, large group-ist, etc.

[Pattern-chaser]

So you are anti-Semitic towards a major collective of Jews, but not the individual Jews.

I can see no courteous or constructive way to reply to this, so I won't

[Sy Borg]

So you are anti-Semitic towards a major collective of Jews, but not the individual Jews.

I don't think this holds. One could, for example, view the Israeli's government's policies as detrimental, also to Jews. It also conflates the Israeli government with Jewish citizens. Or even considers it Jewish.

It's the inordinate focus.

The fact is that the universities and parts of the media are strongly anti-Semitic and extremely influential, hence millions marching for Palestine and zero marching for Sudan.

Can we then look, for example, at anything written by those here against antisemitism as Islamophic if they have not argued equally against anti- arab issues. Or if they haven't attacked all racist texts also?

Must one, before weighing in on any issue, make sure that one is not missing a similar issue somewhere else in the world and make sure one weighs in equally on those OR one is racist or sexist or ablist in some way?

Ivy League Universities became dangerous for Jewish students. We then find university presidents saying that calls for genocide against Jews me be acceptable at the university, depending on the context.

As for the media, there are endless pity articles about the plights of Palestinians and almost none about the Sudanese. Sudanese people have noticed this and commented on it, naturally enough.

And note there is a difference from say 'I hope you would apply the logic of your criticism of Israel to other similar situations involving other ethnic groups' and saying if you aren't doing X also, then you are antisemitic.

and why is your arguement

The fact is that the universities and parts of the media are strongly anti-Semitic and extremely influential, hence millions marching for Palestine and zero marching for Sudan.

Directly applicable to Pattern Chaser.

Again, and you will see this throughout the debates, here and elsewhere, that this has always been my objection. Why are the crimes of Israel worse than the crimes in Syria, Yemen, Sudan and a few other African nations not treated as bad?

And: other than in relation to anti-Israel topics, how much have you complained about the situation in Sudan?

I have not complained about it, myself. I don't complain about any of it, unless I think praise or criticism is not even-handed. Why? Because we are human, and this is what we have always done. We try to do better, but that is clearly easier said than done. I thin there has been progress, but it is very slow. My feeling is that people are impatient, expecting behaviour from humans en masse that has so far almost always been seen in individuals or small groups, akin to expecting the Titanic to do a quick U-turn as soon as it sees the iceberg.

Latency is deeply underestimated and that underestimation leads to frustration and blame. Israel has become a scapegoat for endemic global issues related to the questioning of the world order established after WWII, while territorial incursions are increasingly common in the world - and will become much more common before this decade is out. Various nations are considering invasions on several continents.

In short: it's the disproportionate focus and blame laden on Israel while far worse crimes against humanity are happening.

[Good_Egg]

Is that an adequate answer to your words?

Sorry, no it isn't.

You've suggested that antisemitism is a type of wrongful discrimination. (I.e. discrimination in the modern feminist sense). And I'm agreeing that it makes sense to look at it that way.

You seemed to agree with me that such wrongful discrimination requires some sort of double standard or irrelevant standard.

Does it not follow that criticism of Israel is legitimate - innocent of the wrong of discrimination - if it applies the same relevant standards as are applied to all of the other nations of the world ? But constitutes discrimination against those who count Israel as their homeland if it fails that test ?

(I appreciate that insisting on "relevant" standards may sound vague. But that seems to me an essential part of understanding what wrongful discrimination is.

For example, it used to be the case that one of the criteria for becoming a policeman in England was being at least 6 feet tall. If that's considered genuinely relevant to the job - if taller people are better at intimidating criminals - then such a requirement is legitimate, involving no prejudice or bias, no wrongful discrimination. That's just what the job involves, and if some people are naturally endowed with the relevant ability and some aren't, so be it.

But once you recognise that shorter people may have different, equally effective, ways of intimidating criminals, so that height is irrelevant to performance, then maintaining such a requirement becomes wrongful discrimination. Against women, who are on average shorter than men, and against those races with lower average height than us descendants of Vikings.

So I'm suggesting that "double standard" is insufficient to identify behaviour that you would say constitutes discrimination. It has to be "double or irrelevant standard".)

[Pattern-chaser]

Does it not follow that criticism of Israel is legitimate - innocent of the wrong of discrimination - if it applies the same relevant standards as are applied to all of the other nations of the world ? But constitutes discrimination against those who count Israel as their homeland if it fails that test ?

I am using "discrimination" as a catch-all term for all the -isms — racism, sexism, anti-religious stuff, and so forth — and I think you are doing the same.

So my answer to your final question is "no". It's "no" because wrongful or biased political criticism is just that. It remains political, not discrimination. But in political discussion, it is still appropriate to hold all nations to the same standards. In that we are in agreement. Even my quibble (just described) is only about the use of the word "discrimination". I see no significant disagreement between us; do you?

[Sy Borg]

However, the focus on this issue over far worse ones is anti-Semitic, being passed on via the broad tentacles of Palestine's global PR machine, driven by a deeply biased UN, with its obvious anti-Semitic elements.

[Good_Egg]

It's "no" because wrongful or biased political criticism is just that. It remains political, not discrimination.

I think what you're doing here is distinguishing different categories of speech, and asserting that the notion of discrimination is applicable to some categories and not others.

So that it is a category error to try to apply the notion of discrimination to categories such as "political criticism".

If that is what you wish to argue (and it's always possible that I've misunderstood you), perhaps you could have a go at defining those categories. Possibly by multiple examples - what other types of speech are incapable of being racist or sexist or ... ?

[Sculptor1]

Antisemitic statements:

"Free Palestine"
"I support a ceasefire"
"I dislike Netanyahu"

[Sculptor1]

However, the focus on this issue over far worse ones is anti-Semitic, being passed on via the broad tentacles of Palestine's global PR machine, driven by a deeply biased UN, with its obvious anti-Semitic elements.

Says the guy how was taken in by the lies of the Israeli state.
That UNRWA were involved in defence of Gaza, causing the divestment of million of aid to strving people.
That babies were beheaded by Palestinians.
Both these were fake propaganda spewed by Isreal.

You last sentence is pure propoganda. Millions of people know what is happening in Gaza, you seem to want to ignore.
100s o AID vehiclws at seven entry points waiting to bring aid to starving people, yet the IOF refuse to let them pass.
That is genocide.

[Sy Borg]

However, the focus on this issue over far worse ones is anti-Semitic, being passed on via the broad tentacles of Palestine's global PR machine, driven by a deeply biased UN, with its obvious anti-Semitic elements.

Says the guy how was taken in by the lies of the Israeli state.
That UNRWA were involved in defence of Gaza, causing the divestment of million of aid to strving people.
That babies were beheaded by Palestinians.
Both these were fake propaganda spewed by Isreal.

You last sentence is pure propoganda. Millions of people know what is happening in Gaza, you seem to want to ignore.
100s o AID vehiclws at seven entry points waiting to bring aid to starving people, yet the IOF refuse to let them pass.
That is genocide.

Not only have you drunk all the Kool Aid, you don't even know the gender of people you speak to for years. You are the propagandist, projecting onto me.

You conveniently ignored that the UNRWA had a dozen members confirmed to be involved in the attack, and that dozens of others openly celebrated the Palestinian terror attack on Israel. You conveniently ignored who sent the missiles and the geopolitical intent of it, despite knowing it would rain hell on their own people.

Yes, I know millions like you are concerned about Gaza. They are as just concerned about Palestinians as much they don't give a damn about Sudanese. You are all hypocritical in your selective crocodile tears.

[Pattern-chaser]

I think what you're doing here is distinguishing different categories of speech, and asserting that the notion of discrimination is applicable to some categories and not others.

Yes. Discrimination is, near enough, hate speech. Political criticism, although it can get lively (), should not contain such elements. If it did, then of course it would be discriminatory. You seem to seek constraints, boundaries, or barriers in my thoughts that I don't think are there...?

[Pattern-chaser]

You conveniently ignored that the UNRWA had a dozen members confirmed to be involved in the attack...

Not "confirmed", alleged by Israel. And now that the UN has had time to investigate Israel's (so far unfounded) claims, it has made counter-claims. I am not in a position to know if one or both is lying. Oops, not "lying", of course; it's called propaganda.

[Pattern-chaser]

You conveniently ignored that the UNRWA had a dozen members confirmed to be involved in the attack, and that dozens of others openly celebrated the Palestinian terror attack on Israel.

Ah, but is that propaganda, or is this propaganda:

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) has reported that Israel tortured its staff. It also reported, as of 9 March, that Israel has murdered 162 of its employees since the violence escalated on 7 October.
...
In January this year, former Israeli official Noga Arbell said in Israeli parliament that the UNRWA was “allowing terrorists to be born” by providing aid.

Excerpted from here.

There are many claims being made. Not all of them are true. Which ones are, I wonder? [Yes, I mean that literally; I don't know who to believe.]

[Sculptor1]

However, the focus on this issue over far worse ones is anti-Semitic, being passed on via the broad tentacles of Palestine's global PR machine, driven by a deeply biased UN, with its obvious anti-Semitic elements.

Says the guy how was taken in by the lies of the Israeli state.
That UNRWA were involved in defence of Gaza, causing the divestment of million of aid to strving people.
That babies were beheaded by Palestinians.
Both these were fake propaganda spewed by Isreal.

You last sentence is pure propoganda. Millions of people know what is happening in Gaza, you seem to want to ignore.
100s o AID vehiclws at seven entry points waiting to bring aid to starving people, yet the IOF refuse to let them pass.
That is genocide.

Not only have you drunk all the Kool Aid, you don't even know the gender of people you speak to for years. You are the propagandist, projecting onto me.

You conveniently ignored that the UNRWA had a dozen members confirmed to be involved in the attack, and that dozens of others openly celebrated the Palestinian terror attack on Israel. You conveniently ignored who sent the missiles and the geopolitical intent of it, despite knowing it would rain hell on their own people.

Yes, I know millions like you are concerned about Gaza. They are as just concerned about Palestinians as much they don't give a damn about Sudanese. You are all hypocritical in your selective crocodile tears.

LOL
And now you double donw on your own gullibility.
"UNRWA: Sweden and Canada resume funding for UN agency for Palestinian refugees"
WHy? because Israel was caught out in a lie, and screwed themselves by murdering 1007 hungry people and ran tanks over their dying bodies, also injuring a 1000+ people becasue IOF was "feeling threatened" by people cattying bags of flour to take back to their tempory shleters where their straving childen are dying.

This is genocide.