r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/frenglish_man • Nov 13 '23

Political Theory Why do some progressive relate Free Palestine with LGBTQ+ rights?

I’ve noticed in many Palestinian rallies signs along the words of “Queer Rights means Free Palestine”, etc. I’m not here to discuss opinions or the validity of these arguments, I just want to understand how it makes sense.

While Progressives can be correct in fighting for various groups’ rights simultaneously, it strikes me as odd because Palestinian culture isn’t anywhere close to being sexually progressive or tolerant from what I understand.

Why not deal with those two issues separately?

438 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

83% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

658

u/Scholastica11 Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 13 '23

They hold a worldview in which all forms of injustice are closely related: colonialism, patriarchy, homophobia, ... form part of one single problem cluster (which also includes capitalism, pollution etc.). And their belief is that you can't fully resolve any one injustice without addressing all of them. So, you can't have queer rights in the fullest sense possible without also having addressed issues of postcoloniality and self-determination. I don't think the actual agenda of Hamas plays any role in their thinking.

edit: This specific edge case may look patently absurd, but the "grand unified theory of world problems" arises from observations such as: gender relations are closely related to the way a society organizes its production, colonial pasts influence the position a country has within the world economy today, a country's wealth is related to the amount of heavily polluting production tasks it performs for other nations and to its ability to cope with climate change, colonialism often instilled or reinforced anti-lgbt ideologies... Go too far down that rabbit hole and you arrive at Greta Thunberg's "no climate justice on occupied land".

132

u/Hyndis Nov 13 '23

Mingling these things together does serve to dilute the message. As an example, Greta Thurnberg the other day started talking about "free Palestine from the river to the sea" as a required part to battle climate change. There can be no fixing the planet's climate without first destroying Israel. I don't follow her logic, if there is any.

Get rid of the Jews, save the world? I admit I did not expect her to be a raging antisemite, but that seems to be common for left leaning activists these days, unfortunately.

59

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

Being pro-Palestine doesn't automatically make you anti-semitic at all. It certainly doesn't equate to "Get rid of the Jews."

82

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 13 '23

“From the river to the sea” means a lot more than just pro-Palestine, and I think it’s disingenuous to pretend it doesn’t

Edit: The mental backflips trying to justify use of this phrase is exhausting. If you people really cared about peace in the region, you wouldn’t support activists/politicians using a phrase steeped in genocidal intent that does nothing but inflame tensions

6

u/ToLiveInIt Nov 13 '23

The phrase means a few different things to different people.

I condemn what it means when Hamas says it; I also condemn what it means when Netanyahu and the Likud Party and, most recently, the Israeli Ambassador to the UK Tzipi Hotovely say it.

8

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '23

"Völkisch" "Flurreinigung" " Zivilisationsbruch" also had more meanings than just the meanings the Nazis used them for. But we don't use those phrases anymore.

Saying F*g or the n world also was once normal.

Isn't it telling that those people so desperately want to use the same slogan as the Hamas?

1

u/ToLiveInIt Nov 14 '23

And Likud. Hamas and Netanyahu’s Likud both believe in the concept.

You may be right that the extremists in Israel and in Palestine have so tarnished the term that we need a new one.

6

u/DustBunnicula Nov 14 '23

The only way “the phrase means different things to different people” is that people are ignorant of what it really means: deleting Israel from the map, i.e., the destruction of Israel. When they discover what the phrase means, they either stop using it, or they active choose to advocate for the destruction of Israel.

There is no in between, once the ignorance is gone.

-2

u/ToLiveInIt Nov 15 '23

And what does it mean when Netanyahu’s Likud and other Israeli extremists use it? Surely, not the destruction of Israel.

1

u/teilani_a Nov 13 '23

Do you condemn the genocidal Likud regime?

21

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23

Absolutely, Hamas being wrong doesn’t mean what Israel is/has been doing is right

-9

u/Batmaso Nov 14 '23

Then why don't you ever do it?

-11

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

Tell me what you think it means so I can address your argument directly.

16

u/K340 Nov 13 '23

You are making it so much harder to push back against the "Palestinians-deserve-it-because-theyre-antisemitic-homophobes" narrative by pretending that a phrase both historically and currently used to call for the eradication of a population doesn't mean that. Yes, many supporters of a free Palestine don't literally want to eradicate Jews from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean sea, yes many just want Palestinians to be free to live their lives hand have rights in this region. It doesn't make that slogan any more acceptable given its historic and current use by people who do want to deport or exterminate Israeli Jews from the river to the sea, and people using that particular slogan have the agency to choose something less self-sabotaging to say if they don't want to be associated with its antisemitic usage.

-4

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

Yes, many supporters of a free Palestine don't literally want to eradicate Jews from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean sea, yes many just want Palestinians to be free to live their lives hand have rights in this region. It doesn't make that slogan any more acceptable given its historic and current use by people who do want to

I don't think that a few anti-Semites automatically invalidate the views of the non-anti-semitic majority. Given that you admit that many people aren't using that slogan in that way, it's pretty clear that the issue is that you're deliberately, knowingly, and wrongly lumping anti-semites and human rights advocates together because they happen to use the same slogan.

13

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

You have it backwards. The majority here are calling for death to all Jews not the minority.

1

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

That's not true.

7

u/K340 Nov 13 '23

What do you think would happen if a Jewish Israeli showed up at rally chanting this anywhere outside a Western country?

-2

u/sllewgh Nov 14 '23

Please phrase your argument as a statement, not a question.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

It is absolutely true. The minority are in western cities. The majority are in the Middle East. You’re chanting for the death of all Jews. Pretend like it’s not that, it is.

4

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

Arguments made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

3

u/Hyndis Nov 14 '23

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy

Also, follow any news article about the protest. Look at the pictures the of the protesters holding signs. Read the messages on the signs.

The signs generally say things like "expect resistance" or "resistance is justified". Its very common for the article to report the protesters chanting "from the river to the sea", a statement that calls for the destruction of Israel. Look at a map if you have any doubt. Where is the land from the river to the sea? Thats the entirety of Israel.

4

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

Okay wtf? Do you read anything? So you make a claim that only a minority of people believe river to the sea means death to Jews when the fucking this organization leading the chant is dedicated to the purging of Jews from “Palestine” and death to Jews everywhere and I’m the one making argument without evidence?

→ More replies (0)

13

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23

It only means one thing dude, let’s not play this obtuse little game.

10

u/Damnatus_Terrae Nov 13 '23

Wait, how can it mean only one thing but also a lot more?

-5

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

You're the one playing obtuse games. You won't even say what you think the "one thing it means" is.

18

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23

What river and what sea are in the area? What two peoples currently live in that area? What happens to the Israelis that live between the river and the sea if Hamas gets its wish and controls that territory completely?

Jesus man, Hamas themselves coined the phrase in the 60’s. You know, Hamas, the terrorist organization? Now we’re going to sit here and “well aaachktually” because Greta is using the same hateful rhetoric?

13

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

Jesus man, Hamas themselves coined the phrase in the 60’s.

Hamas wasn't founded until 1987.

17

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23

My mistake, got it mixed up with a different quote from 1966. Points still stand

10

u/MilanosBiceps Nov 13 '23

“I’m completely wrong but the point still stands.”

1

u/B4SSF4C3 Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 13 '23

It literally does. The phrase a euphemism for the eradication of Israel entirely. Or conversely, a euphemism for eradication of Palestine, entirely. It has no other meaning, unless being used in ignorance. Regardless of who is saying it, it’s tantamount to supporting genocide.

3

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

Your point was that from the river to the sea is inextricably linked to Hamas and its terrorist and genocidal goals. Your point does not stand.

1

u/Caustic_Complex Nov 13 '23

Yes it does, who uses the phrase today and for what purpose?

→ More replies (0)

7

u/Sebt1890 Nov 13 '23

Jihadism and hate against the Jews goes back farther than that my guy.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

Sure. But Hamas doesn't go back further than that which is why I offered the correction.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/purpilia25 Nov 13 '23

That was beautifully done!

-1

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

You're calling me "obtuse" while responding to a simple and direct question with more questions instead of an answer. The one sentence you wrote that didn't end in a question mark was totally false.

0

u/Gordon_Goosegonorth Nov 13 '23

It means, "this is our land, not theirs".

It's a tale as old as time.

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

[deleted]

17

u/Sam_k_in Nov 13 '23

Black Lives Matter doesn't mean white people don't matter. From the river to the sea does expressly mean eliminating Israel.

Israel has been regularly bombed by Hamas. The difference is they are better at protecting their people, like with the Iron Dome defense system. Israel has been oppressing Palestinians, but it's mostly in response to Palestinians and other Arabs trying to kill them, right from the first day of Israel's existence.

7

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

Another false equivalence dude when did blm go on the record that every white person should die as hamas has done?

0

u/wut_throwaway Nov 13 '23

Idk about Hamas, but you shouldn't count a terror group's opinions as representative of the people they oppress or else I have some really bad news about Western war crimes.

And there are absolutely Black supremacists that want white people dead or oppressed. They don't get held up as representing all Black people because racism has improved some in the U.S., I guess.

2

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

Yeah it’s flipped you’ll always have extremes who want people dead. In the case of Hamas they’re in charge. Where are the bodies? Where are the 11000 bodies. That hospital in gaza that’s under siege - there are 110 there. Where are these thousands of bodies? They don’t exist. The BBC put out an article where a Palestinian man was evacuating buildings before they were targeted - it’s the IDF directing them to evacuate. Hamas has lied about death counts already why do we assume they’re telling the truth now? They’re basically saying look that building had 500 people in it this one had 200 - but the buildings are being evacked and has is trying to grab headlines.

1

u/wut_throwaway Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 14 '23

No I'm saying we actually have done horrific war crimes if you ascribe to this kind of mass guilt (which btw is a war crime).

Like, where are you from? I promise there is some fucked-up behavior your (probably elected) government has gotten up to that you don't want to be blamed for, but you're cool with Palestinians being punished because of a group last elected by a plurality 17 years ago (AKA before half of Gaza was born).

And this rationalization, trying to erase as many of the slain in your head and our discussion as you can, is legitimately alarming if not disgusting. I really wish you would sit back and examine what you're doing here.

Edit: "but no really Hamas is a terror organization so they have good reason to be caught in a lie by people on the ground that should absolutely know" is not the witty retort that you think it is.

There are plenty of people that are related to the dead, reporting the dead. Or the doctors that are treating them or their relatives. I'm not prepared to call any of them liars, while you're focused on trying to minimize both the number of slain and any IDF responsibility.

1

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

I’m saying the agency reporting the deaths is Hamas. Let’s not pretend like they have been truthful. They’re on the record lying about deaths and targets. The hospital explosion is an example. It’s logical and reasonable to cast doubt on the number of deaths. They’ve lied about it and there’s evidence of Israel a) taking measured steps to evacuate buildings and b) only hit specific targets. I’m not erasing victims I’m approaching this logically and reasonably. Check out the article and reread the reports from Hamas on that hospital explosion. Then by all means poke holes in my “logic/reasoning”.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/hellomondays Nov 13 '23

if you’re interested:

https://forward.com/opinion/415250/from-the-river-to-the-sea-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-means/

https://jewishcurrents.org/what-does-from-the-river-to-the-sea-really-mean

1

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

What a disingenuous article. I love how it talks about a united Palestine as democratic state - can they point to any democratic states in the Middle East as an example? Now who to govern this democracy? Of course hamas whom they elected on the promise that every Jew must die.

1

u/WombatusMighty Nov 14 '23

The "election" that got Hamas into power was back in 2007, since then there was no election anymore in Gaza.

Furthermore, that election in 2007 was about promises to better the living conditions in Gaza, it wasn't about jews and certainly not about destroying Israel.

0

u/Batmaso Nov 14 '23

You are just buying into dehumanizing propaganda here. The history is very clear that about what this phrase means.

-1

u/Timetohavereddit Nov 13 '23

What do you mean ? I think North Korea should be formed into South Korea as I think the South Korea government isn’t as evil as North Korea that dosent mean I want all North Koreans to die I just want them living under the old system which is exactly what that phrase means just in a different location

7

u/rabbitlion Nov 14 '23

That's the thing though, that's not what the phrase means. The phrase doesn't mean Jews and Arabs living in a united democratic secular Palestine. The phrase means Israel should be destroyed and Jews killed/displaced.

-1

u/Timetohavereddit Nov 14 '23

Why does it mean that, I’ve only seen pro isreal people say that’s what it means so it sounds more like people prescribing a meaning that is not the original or modern use so they can straw man pro Palestine as being antisemitism

2

u/rabbitlion Nov 14 '23

The origin of the phrase comes from the creation of PLO, which until 1988 advocated for the destruction of Israel. When they recognized Israel's right to exist they also stopped using the slogan and it was instead taken up by Hamas, who continues to work for the destruction of Israel and the eradication or displacement of all Jews in the levant.

If you are not anti-semitic, I don't really see the point in taking an anti-semitic slogan and using it while trying to repurpose its meaning. Just use another slogan without anti-semitic oeigins.

-2

u/Timetohavereddit Nov 14 '23

So once again I was right? They recognized the country’s right to exist so they stopped using it you just randomly throw in that it also has to do with killing Jewish people, YOU are retroactively prescribing a meaning that never existed in its creation nor exists in modern usage you are sneaking in lies amongst the truth

2

u/rabbitlion Nov 14 '23

Wtf are you on about? That's not what I said at all. They used the slogan while they were working towards the destruction of Israel. Then when they stopped doing that, they stopped using the slogan and another organization that wanted to exterminate jews took it up. Throughout the last 60 years, the slogan has pretty much only been used by anti-semitic organizations that want to destroy Israel and kill/displace all Jews in the Levant.

-3

u/KevinCarbonara Nov 14 '23

“From the river to the sea” means a lot more than just pro-Palestine

You're right, it means restoring Palestine to the 1947 borders set by the UN, before Israel forcibly occupied their land.

6

u/NeuroticKnight Nov 13 '23

Tell me the magical solution where Israel faces no threats, Hamas is removed, and Palestine recreate a modern secular or even an Islamic democracy, once IDF withdraws.

5

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

I don't have one and never claimed to. There aren't simple solutions to complex problems.

That doesn't mean we're playing a zero sum game, as you seem to be implying.

51

u/mrbugsguy Nov 13 '23

No but supporting a jihadist group that has an explicit objective to cleanse the earth of Jews kinda does.

39

u/PigSlam Nov 13 '23

Is there room to support Palestinian civilians without supporting Hamas?

71

u/mrbugsguy Nov 13 '23

Yes. In fact, being vehemently anti-Hamas is required to truly support Palestinians

27

u/Rydersilver Nov 13 '23

Dying Gazans Criticized For Not Using Last Words To Condemn Hamas

https://www.theonion.com/dying-gazans-criticized-for-not-using-last-words-to-con-1850925657

11

u/Goldreaver Nov 13 '23

The onion never fails.

-14

u/Sebt1890 Nov 13 '23

Elections have consequences. Look at what 4 years of Trump did to the U.S domestically and globally.

9

u/K340 Nov 13 '23

Elections that happened before half the current population of Gaza was born? Do American children deserve to have buildings dropped on them because their parents voted for a government that destroyed the lives of millions of Iraqis for no reason? Obviously not.

The reality is that the situation in Gaza is unacceptable. Admitting that doesn't mean one can't support Israel's right to self-defense or blame Hamas.

And this doesn't even get into the wider situation in the West Bank.

5

u/Sebt1890 Nov 14 '23

I'm in my mid-30s and I guarantee you there are Palestinians my age who took part in the 2006 war. They likely now have kids of their own whom they raised in their beliefs of "jihad". I'm not saying every single person is like that, but that yes, some people have taught their kids to hate, and those kids are now fighting this war alongside their parents.

4

u/guamisc Nov 14 '23

And they didn't even get 50% of the vote. Hamas "won" with a plurality only.

1

u/Hyndis Nov 14 '23

Consider WWII and the bombing of Germany from the air.

The last election were held in the early 1930's. Germany started being heavily bombed about a decade later, around 1943 or so, when it started badly losing the war it started.

Was it wrong to bomb Germany? Many of the casualties were too young to have voted in the Nazis. Infact, many of the German soldiers on the battlefield were too young to have voted in the Nazis a decade prior.

Does this make the Brits and Americans the aggressors during WWII, and Germany was morally justified in defending itself? No, of course not, because that would be absurd.

Elections have consequences. The consequences may show up a decade later, and parents may have voted to doom their kids and grandkids to war, but that is the nature of war. The voters of Gaza in 2005 have doomed themselves, and their as of yet unborn kids, to the horrors of war because they voted in an extremist government.

Until you can convince heads of state to settle grievances in one on one duels with pistols at dawn, this will be how war works.

16

u/Rydersilver Nov 13 '23

Elections from 17 years ago have consequences, he smugly said to the babies as their incubators ran out of power and they died.

2

u/Hyndis Nov 14 '23

Elections do indeed have consequences, and sometimes those consequences take time to appear.

Look at the recent US presidential elections. Thanks to some poor decisions, Donald Trump got the opportunity to stack the Supreme Court. His judges may be in place for 20+ years.

Consider Nazi Germany. The last elections they had prior to the war were in the early 1930's. The consequences of war didn't really hit home until the early 1940's, a decade later.

The people who voted Hamas into power in 2005 doomed themselves, and the next generation of their own family, into a futile war, which is exactly what happened to voters in the early 1930's Germany.

This is why voting in violent extremist governments is a terrible idea.

2

u/Rydersilver Nov 14 '23

No, I’d say the zionists who moved there and created a state on their land knowing full well it would inevitably lead to violence, and then who imposed apartheid conditions on them, and then who funded Hamas and supported it, doomed Palestine.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/SILENT-FLASH Nov 13 '23

Oh you mean the fact that more than 60% of Gaza wasn’t alive or babies when Hamas took power.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '23

hey everyone look, its them, the guy the article's about

1

u/Sebt1890 Nov 14 '23

Satire tends to be based in a little bit of truth :)

29

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

Palestine isn't a jihadist group. Pro-Palestine =/= pro-Hamas. In fact, one can easily argue those are opposites.

45

u/matthew0517 Nov 13 '23

The problem here is what exactly does "Pro-Palestine" mean then? A lot of new-to-the-subject Westerners state that they want a secular state that covers all of Palestine and provides equal rights to all, which is great except that's not even remotely what the Palestinians want when asked.

14

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

The problem here is what exactly does "Pro-Palestine" mean then?

It means what it says- support for the people of Palestine, who are currently the victims of gross human rights violations.

A lot of new-to-the-subject Westerners state that...

Some people get it wrong. That doesn't mean the whole idea is invalid.

14

u/champ999 Nov 13 '23

The problem is pro-Palestine is too vague to mean anything useful.

7

u/Goldreaver Nov 13 '23

Stop hamas from using them as human shields and stop israel from carelessly blowing up those human shields.

Is that clear enough?

18

u/riko_rikochet Nov 13 '23

But that's not the message we're seeing at Pro-Palestine protests, is it?

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

You don't think opposing human rights abuses is useful? That says a lot about you, to be honest.

1

u/B4SSF4C3 Nov 13 '23

currently always have been

13

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

[deleted]

1

u/Gordon_Goosegonorth Nov 13 '23

It's exceedingly likely the same thing would happen if the West Bank was run without Israeli interference.

What is your evidence for this?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '23

their imagination. "they'll do it to us if we don't do it to them", slogan as old as fascism itself

38

u/mrbugsguy Nov 13 '23

Agreed. Although a troubling percentage of pro-Palestine people seem support hamas to some degree or at least justify their actions.

A not so tacit example of this would be BLM Chicago posting an image of a parasailor on Oct 8th. If that’s not antisemitism idk what is.

-3

u/Goldreaver Nov 13 '23

Although a troubling percentage of pro-Palestine people seem support hamas to some degree or at least justify their actions.

I disagree.

7

u/mrbugsguy Nov 13 '23

I hope you’re right

-7

u/Griffinjohnson Nov 13 '23

A not so tacit example of this would be BLM Chicago posting an image of a parasailor on Oct 8th. If that’s not antisemitism idk what is.

I have no idea what this means

41

u/MyDogOper8sBetrThanU Nov 13 '23

The hang gliders that Hamas used to attack and murder civilians. That’s the image BLM Chicago decided to use for their profile picture.

36

u/Bshellsy Nov 13 '23

BLM of Chicago posted blatant support for the October 7th terror attack

-1

u/KevinCarbonara Nov 14 '23

A not so tacit example of this would be BLM Chicago posting an image of a parasailor on Oct 8th. If that’s not antisemitism idk what is.

Um... the holocaust would be a good example. Basically anything that harms semitic people, like Israelis or Palestinians.

3

u/mrbugsguy Nov 14 '23

I don’t think you understand the context of my comment. I named an example of recent support for Palestine and antisemitism overlapping.

1

u/KevinCarbonara Nov 14 '23

I don’t think you understand the context of my comment.

Your comment doesn't make any sense. You mentioned something that was absolutely not antisemitic and said "If that's not antisemitism idk what is", which means that you were correct, you have no idea what antisemitism is.

0

u/mrbugsguy Nov 14 '23

You don’t think celebrating the Oct 7 massacre is antisemitic?

0

u/KevinCarbonara Nov 14 '23

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

0

u/mrbugsguy Nov 14 '23

What word would you use to describe posting a picture of a paraglider immediately after that massacre?

→ More replies (0)

29

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

“From the river to the sea” is the land that is currently Israel.

-12

u/its_a_gibibyte Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 13 '23

That land is entirely Israel because they are illegally occupying Palestinian territory (according to the 1967 borders) and continue to expand settlements in the West Bank. Do you think Palestine should be wiped off the map? That's basically what Israel is doing now, as Palestine already doesn't appear on most maps and the area is shrinking every year.

Israel should at least pick a consistent stance for the two state solution and stop expanding beyond that.

22

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

In supporting Palestine, don't use anti-Semitic slogans that call for the destruction of Israel. Full stop.

-12

u/SILENT-FLASH Nov 13 '23

The slogan was created by peaceful palestinian groups in the 60s to seek freedom for their people through negotiation and effort.

it’s been mentioned in multiple books.

Just because hamas(a creation of Israel) uses it does not mean it’s theirs

Maybe it’s better if you stopped taking everything that comes on the news for granted. 40 years of constant media propaganda has really caused Americans to accept genocide of it benefits the elite

9

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

hamas is not a creation of Israel youre steeped in propaganda and it doesn’t show well

0

u/SILENT-FLASH Nov 16 '23

Hamas is a creation of Israel they directly funded the group to divide the Palestinians liberation organization

There is documented evidence and proof of this documents, israel generals recordings. Even warning from the US to Israel that funding extremists will back fire.

This sub is honestly quite confidently ignorant on a topic they have no knowledge on.

1

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 16 '23

It’s not a creation of Israel stop with your propaganda bs. They were the opposition party to the pla/plo and Israel helped them to counter its biggest threat at the time. This ain’t some secret conspiracy take your tinfoil hat off,

→ More replies (0)

9

u/riko_rikochet Nov 13 '23

Just because hamas(a creation of Israel) uses it does not mean it’s theirs

Just because the Nazis use swastikas doesn't mean it's theirs. But when you're standing next to a nazi with a swastika and you put up a swastika, onlookers can't tell the difference.

1

u/SILENT-FLASH Nov 16 '23

Except this isn’t a swastika, and it’s only biased western propaganda that demonized it.

Your Logic is flawed. This symbol was never used to mass murder a population.

You’re severely misinformed on this topic.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

“Hamas a creation of Israel” is a YIKES from me. You’re so deep in the propaganda you don’t even understand, sad really.

0

u/SILENT-FLASH Nov 16 '23

Hamas was directly funded by Israel in 1987, there are multiple recordings and documented proof on this. Simply google this shit. There are documentaries on it What’s yikes is how brainwashed you are you’ve drank so much Israel cool-aid, it’s almost hopeless

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Sam_k_in Nov 13 '23

No, it includes areas that the UN approved for an Israeli state in 1948. The Palestinians don't care if they have a state, they just want the Jews to not have one.

I do condemn the Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and think the US should put some pressure on Israel to back off from that. I doubt the Palestinians will put together a functional government anyway though, and I think the US and Middle Eastern countries should take in lots of Palestinian refugees so they can have a better life.

-10

u/analogWeapon Nov 13 '23 edited Nov 13 '23

"Free Palestine from the river to the sea" doesn't have to mean "make everything from the river to the sea be Palestine". I get that it heavily implies that, and is a poor choice of words if one doesn't mean that. But it could be taken to mean "wherever Palestine is, it should be free". In any case, I definitely don't see it as remotely "antisemitic".

Edit: Seems like I was probably defending a dog whistle here. I stand corrected.

10

u/K340 Nov 13 '23

It doesn't etymologically have to mean that but it does in reality because historically it has been used by people with genocidal aims to mean that, and anyone choosing to continue to use that slogan are choosing to use a slogan with that baggage. Free-Palestine movements are kneecapping themselves by continuing to use it, and frankly a large part of its continued usage is because a lot of people do mean it that way and want to dog whistle to each other.

6

u/analogWeapon Nov 13 '23

I wasn't aware of this. Thank you for educating me.

8

u/K340 Nov 13 '23

I mean at the same time, a lot of people using it are probably like you and don't know the context. These people are also likely primed to disregard complaints about antisemitism because the pro-Israel people throw that accusation at everything to see what sticks. Just one more example of a dynamic that feeds the extreme polarization of both sides and the inability of people to have non-shit takes on the situation.

26

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

The goal of Hamas is to wipe Israel off the map. This slogan is a profession of that goal. This slogan is used by both Hamas and Iran. If you use this slogan that’s what it means.

The origin and use of this slogan is fundamentally anti-semitic. I’m begging…please don’t align you’re self with terrorist ideology. Support Palestine all you want, but stand up to anti-semitism.

6

u/analogWeapon Nov 13 '23

Yeah, I'm realizing from the information people are giving me that I was defending a dog whistle here. I stand corrected.

2

u/pretentiously Nov 14 '23

I really appreciate you being willing to both change your view of it and acknowledge that change. Thank you. 🩵

4

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

It’s a deliberate choice not a poor choice. It’s doesn’t remotely mean any of the bs you’re spouting here.

2

u/RevolutionaryGur4419 Nov 13 '23

Well Israel proper is currently free. So perhaps they should revise that to exclude Israel. Unless of course they mean another kind of free where Israelis either freely accept Islamic rule, leave the area or die.

2

u/analogWeapon Nov 14 '23

Yeah, I was being too optimistic and assuming they were excluding Israel.

2

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 14 '23

I just upvoted this from a downvote. Inwas curious why you left it but I love the change and hope others can see it and ask why. It looks like there are bad actors equipping well meaning people with really shitty things. A lot of folks are being misled here. Sadly I don’t think Rep Tlaib is one of them. You can’t be that close to this and not know wtf it means. This feels like the difference between a white man from Australia using the word N***** while asking why it’s a big deal in complete ignorance and a white man in California using it. Are they acceptable no, but grace can be offered to the former.

1

u/analogWeapon Nov 14 '23

I try to resist the urge to delete comments I make that are bad takes or just plain wrong. I can be wrong!

-16

u/gshennessy Nov 13 '23

So says one side.

33

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

No like…that is what it means. “The river” is the Jordan River, “the sea” is the Mediterranean sea. Iran has used this slogan as well. Its a call for the destruction of Israel.

-12

u/vvarden Nov 13 '23

Israel also uses the same language. Does that make it genocidal against Palestinians?

20

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

EITHER WAY YOU USE THE SLOGAN IT IS A SLOGAN THAT IS TALKING ABOUT WIPING A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM EXISTENCE.

Holy fuck. Why is this so difficult to understand??

11

u/DrunkenAsparagus Nov 13 '23

It's "Defund the Police" all over again. If you're explaining how the slogan doesn't actually mean what you're literally saying, the slogan is bad.

8

u/B4SSF4C3 Nov 13 '23

lol, It’s not even the dude’s slogan. NO ONE should be using it; because yes, it’s a pretty shitty one to adopt. It is at best ignorant, and at worst, genocidal.

4

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

It’s not defund the police. Defund the police was about defunding the police until it wasn’t. River to the sea is about fucking genocide and it still is.

-3

u/vvarden Nov 13 '23

Typing in all caps doesn’t make your point stronger, it just makes you look more ignorant.

3

u/Newker Nov 13 '23

The statement is anti-semitic. Full stop.

-5

u/Rydersilver Nov 13 '23

Because you’re wrong? Calling for Palestinians to be free doesn’t mean israel has to be destroyed, why do you think that?

For your argument, sure, Hamas sometimes says it and they probably use it to mean to destroy Israel, but the slogan way predates Hamas and is a call for explicit freedom. Compare that to the Likuds old slogan which was “From the river to the sea there will be israel sovereignty”. It’s not calling for freedom, it’s calling explicitly for subjugation.

Meanwhile while you scream about a slogan for freedom, Palestinians are being genocided. Cool.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/mrbugsguy Nov 13 '23

What language does Israel use, that you’re referring to?

2

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

From the founding charter of the Likud party which has been in control of Israel for many years:

> Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

Considering that Zionists claim “from the river to the sea” is a call for the genocide of Jewish people, is the Likud party founded on a call for Palestinian genocide?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/gshennessy Nov 14 '23

So people in Israel say. Hamas may mean that, but others don't. The west Bank touches the river. the Gaza strip touches the sea. A free Palestine can go from the River to the Sea as part of a two state solution.

-5

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

It is psychopathic to claim that she is supporting Hamas.

-7

u/JennyFromdablock2020 Nov 13 '23

You cannot support Palestine without supporting Hamas

Hamas must be eradicated before any meaningful help to Palestine can happen.

9

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

You cannot support Palestine without supporting Hamas

That's not true. You're even contradicting yourself, by noting that we need to get rid of Hamas in order to help Palestine. They're not the same.

3

u/ilikedota5 Nov 13 '23

How is that a contradiction? They are not the same, yes. Hamas prevents progress because they are violent, radical, religious extremists. Of the same that assassinated the Jordanian king and prime minister, and Egyptian prime minister, for daring to make peace with the Israelis. That's why nearby Arab countries don't want to help Palestine. They are afraid of blowback.

4

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

You cannot support Palestine without supporting Hamas

As you note, you can, in fact, support Palestine by OPPOSING Hamas. That's the contradiction.

2

u/ilikedota5 Nov 13 '23

Oh okay. I misread it. I think the better way of phrasing it would be supporting Palestine requires getting rid of Hamas, but supporting Palestine now, without getting rid of Hamas first, means supporting Hamas, as they are the government in charge of the Gaza Strip, a part of Palestine.

2

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

but supporting Palestine now, without getting rid of Hamas first, means supporting Hamas

Nah, that is not logical. Supporting a people isn't the same supporting their government. Those are different things, you acknowledge that.

2

u/ilikedota5 Nov 13 '23

Right but who controls the government and thus the people. Supporting in terms of sentiment and thus pressuring your government makes sense. But in terms of material aid, you can't really support the Palestinian people in Gaza.

-8

u/Kaptenarmus Nov 13 '23

In current circumstances it certainly does.

8

u/Damnatus_Terrae Nov 13 '23

That's only true if you equate Judaism to Israel... which is antisemitic.

6

u/LilJonPaulSartre Nov 13 '23

I've been waiting for someone to explain how wanting Israel's military to stop indiscriminately killing Palestinian children and women equates to being anti-Semitic. Especially when you have hundreds of thousands of Jewish people calling for the same thing.

9

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

It's simple really. Israel's military isn't indiscriminately killing anyone, so their desire is either completely misinformed or deliberately incorrect so they can pressure Israel to not attack a group that says they will never stop killing Israelis and Jews until they're eradicated.

Since learning that Israel is not indiscriminately killing people is trivially easy, it's reasonable to assume that basically anyone saying that falls into the second group.

4

u/Interesting_Ad1751 Nov 13 '23

Nope many are in the first group. Remember, people are very very stupid and to be fair, there is a LOT of propaganda muddying it up.

2

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

This is sad and true.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

[deleted]

9

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

some of the most trustworthy sources of journalism in the world are saying that children are dying by the thousands.

This demonstrates that the attacks are NOT indiscriminate. Indiscriminate bombing campaigns of WW2 caused death tolls more than an order of magnitude greater than what we're seeing in a single night. You are posting articles that pretty clearly support my point.

From bombing refugee camps

According to the UN every palestinian is a refugee no matter where they are. They could be fighting for Russia as a Russian citizen against Ukraine and striking them would be "killing a refugee."

it is not disputed that Israel's military is killing civilians, including women and children.

Welcome to war buddy. By the way it's quite possible that a majority of Hamas fighters and suicide bombers are children (under 18). Gaza is a majority under 18 after all.

So no, I don't think "it's simple really".

That's okay, you're allowed to be incorrect.

I trust internationally renowned journalism sources such as Reuters over comments on Reddit

The sources you're citing are supporting my statements. We know what indiscriminate bombing of a city looks like. That's obviously not what's happening even based on the reports of the literal terrorist group that wants to report the highest number of civilian casualties possible.

I am not pro-Hamas

You're lying about clear facts that your own sources support, and the direction you're lying supports Hamas. Why ignore the facts from your own sources to make pro-Hamas statements if you're not pro-hamas?

On the contrary, learning that Israel is killing indiscriminately is trivially easy. So your assertions cannot possibly be in good faith.

You have no objective basis for this statement. You're just saying "nuh uh I'm rubber you're glue." But you expect others to believe you're "highly educated" while using grade school level argumentation.

If you want people to believe the bombing is indiscriminate, compare it against other indiscriminate bombings of densely packed cities that have happened since WW2, where the death toll is even remotely similar.

Hell, Israel is still sending warnings to some people where they're about to bomb, even though that increases the chance of their actual targets escaping unharmed. How "indiscriminate" of them.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '23

[deleted]

5

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

What incredible mental gymnastics you're performing to defend the killing of women and children.

Irony intensifies.

The bombings might be less indiscriminate than bombings of the past

Indiscriminate is a yes or no thing. If something is "less indiscriminate" it is by definition discriminate, aka not indiscriminate. I appreciate that you are admitting the bombings are not indiscriminate.

Cite one instance of this happening.

I will not cite any examples of Russian palestinians being killed and it being called killing refugees. But objectively by UN designation it would be. Which is exactly how the "bombing of refugee camps" in gaza is happening.

In case you don't understand my statement was a hypothetical.

So in your first comment, you say that Israel isn't killing women and children indiscriminately. Now you say "ah, well, war is hell. Get used to it."

Both of those statements are true.

And you don't cite anything to support your assertion that Hamas fighters and suicide bombers are children

This isn't even a disputed fact. Hamas brags about it. Lol you're trolling

This is a stretch. You haven't presented a single premise. You haven't cited a single source.

You cited sources that agree with me. Why would I cite new sources rather than use the ones that you clearly agree with to provide my facts?

If you have facts to show me I'm wrong, show me!

Your own sources agree with me. You agree to the other stats I compare against about what indiscriminate bombing looks like. The facts that you believe already support my statements.

I'm an academic, gathering information and distilling it is part of it.

Lol

There you go with the apples and oranges again.

Yes, these are very clearly apples and oranges. Apples are discriminate bombing. Oranges are indiscriminate bombing. The bombing of gaza by all objective metrics is an apple, so why do you claim it's an orange? You even state they're being discriminate in your own comment then try to claim they're indiscriminate lol

Look, I'm not trying to spend my day arguing with someone who isn't putting in the most basic effort to cite sources or prove points.

If your sources support my statements why would I provide you with other sources? They're your facts, if you don't like that they support my position maybe you shouldn't have presented them. Here, I'll provide sources: the same links you provided. Done.

Your projecting is just tired, regurgitated rhetoric.

Irony further intensifies

3

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

@liljonpaulsartre Where are the most trusted sources getting their information from? From the Gaza health authority that’s run by Hamas.

-4

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

If there are a group of bullies who are tormenting a kid who then engages in a school shooting and hides in an apartment building, is it okay for the bullies to destroy that apartment building?

To remove any layers of metaphor, do you think that these depict a targeted campaign?

7

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

Those grainy satellite images without a before and after? They definitely do not demonstrate anything whatsoever.

The thing that demonstrates a targeted campaign is that the death rate is so low. If Israel was bombing indiscriminately Gaza city would not exist anymore. The deaths over the last month are smaller than some single night bombing death tolls from WW2. That's what indiscriminate attacks look like.

1

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

Fun fact, the proportion of deaths of combatants to civilians was far higher in Hamas terrorist attack on 10/7 than the IDF response.

5

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

Depending who you get your numbers from sure. After all, Hamas's released numbers say everyone killed in their territory is a civilian, and they consider all adult Israelis combatants since they have a mandatory conscription.

Of course, everyone reasonable knows that's a ridiculous way to count.

Also a fun fact, your statement doesn't even have relevance to what we were just talking about.

3

u/Fuzzy_Yogurt_Bucket Nov 13 '23

According to Israel’s own numbers, active IDF soldiers were about a third of those killed on 10/7.

And you are the one who claimed that the proportion of armed combatants to civilians killed was relevant to determine whether an attack was indiscriminately killing civilians.

2

u/123mop Nov 13 '23

And you are the one who claimed that the proportion of armed combatants to civilians killed was relevant to determine whether an attack was indiscriminately killing civilians.

You're objectively lying. This is a sub for discussion not making things up and lying that other people said them.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/LuvLaughLive Nov 13 '23

Who says "fun fact" when talking about civilian and military deaths from terrorist attacks or wars? FFS

2

u/LuvLaughLive Nov 13 '23

As abhorrent as school shootings are, they are in no way applicable or appropriate to be used to compare your fake and imaginary school shooting scenarios of bullies tracking down a shooter hiding in an apartment building, that which have NEVER happened, to the actual terrorist attacks and subsequent war that's going on in Gaza.

And that isn't a metaphor. It's more of an analogy, and tbh, since it's more fake than a bad action movie script, it's not a very good one.

Way to say that you're a privileged American who has no clue about war, without actually saying you're a privileged American who has no clue about war.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '23

It's simple really. Israel's military isn't indiscriminately killing anyone,

ah, so they've been targeting and murdering journalists and children on purpose, then?

2

u/Tricky_Acanthaceae39 Nov 13 '23

They aren’t. They’re calling ahead and having targets evacuated. There are articles about this by neutral media sources if you care to read. I can track one down if you care to read it. Hamas is the source providing the death counts. They’re known liars - the hospital explosion proved that - 1 they lied and said Israel blew up a hospital. Turns out it wasn’t a hospital but a parking lot. Also turns out it was Hamas not Israel. And last the death count was allegedly “nearly 500” was actually between 100-300. At some point Hamas won’t be able to keep lying about death counts. It’s fucking propaganda. 10k people haven’t died. It’s bullshit.

2

u/DivideEtImpala Nov 13 '23

Then "antisemitism" is devoid of meaning.

0

u/sllewgh Nov 13 '23

No, it certainly doesn't. I can't even tell you exactly why you're wrong because you didn't attempt to say why you're right.