Their Rule 4:
No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don’t question the statehood of Israel.
[email protected] removed my comment for de-tangling the conflation of antisemitism and anti-zionism. A dangerous conflation that is genuinely antisemitic and fuels antisemitic hate as it conflates the actions of Israel and Zionism to all Jewish people and Judaism.
This prioritization of the German definition, the adopted IHRA definition, is promoting antisemtitism and is diametrically opposed to the 'No antisemitism' aspect of the rule. The definition has been condemned by the writer of the definition, a multitude of human rights organizations including Human Rights Watch (HRW), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), B’Tselem, Peace Now, and Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), and over 120 leading scholars of anti-semitism.
Germany Is Trying to Combat Antisemitism. Experts Warn a New Resolution May Do the Opposite
Fifteen Israeli nongovernmental organizations, including the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, B'Tselem and Peace Now, issued an open letter in September stating their concern that the resolution, especially the IHRA definition, could be weaponized to "silence public dissent."
This could also affect Jewish voices speaking out for Palestinian rights and opposing the occupation, they added. "Paradoxically, the resolution may therefore undermine, not protect, the diversity of Jewish life in Germany," the letter argued.
Rights groups urge UN not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition
"The IHRA definition has often been used to wrongly label criticism of Israel as antisemitic, and thus chill and sometimes suppress, non-violent protest, activism and speech critical of Israel and/or Zionism, including in the US and Europe,” the letter said.
US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Israeli rights group B’Tselem, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) were among the signatories
The letter is the latest attempt by human rights advocates to urge the UN not to adopt the IHRA definition. In November, more than 120 scholars called on the world body to reject the definition, due to its “divisive and polarising” effect.
128 scholars ask UN not to adopt IHRA definition of anti-Semitism
In a statement published on Thursday, the 128 scholars, who include leading Jewish academics at Israeli, European, United Kingdom and United States universities, said the definition has been “hijacked” to protect the Israeli government from international criticism
Why the man who drafted the IHRA definition condemns its use
The drafter of what later became popularly known as the EUMC or IHRA definition of antisemitism,including its associated examples, was the U.S. attorney Kenneth S. Stern. However, in written evidence submitted to the US Congress last year, Stern charged that his original definition had been used for an entirely different purpose to that for which it had been designed. According to Stern it had originally been designed as a ”working definition” for the purpose of trying to standardise data collection about the incidence of antisemitic hate crime in different countries. It had never been intended that it be used as legal or regulatory device to curb academic or political free speech. Yet that is how it has now come to be used. In the same document Stern specifically condemns as inappropriate the use of the definition for such purposes, mentioning in particular the curbing of free speech in UK universities, and referencing Manchester and Bristol universities as examples. Here is what he writes:
The EUMC “working definition” was recently adopted in the United Kingdom, and applied to campus. An “Israel Apartheid Week” event was cancelled as violating the definition. A Holocaust survivor was required to change the title of a campus talk, and the university [Manchester] mandated it be recorded, after an Israeli diplomat [ambassador Regev] complained that the title violated the definition.[See here]. Perhaps most egregious, an off-campus group citing the definition called on a university to conduct an inquiry of a professor (who received her PhD from Columbia) for antisemitism, based on an article she had written years before. The university [Bristol] then conducted the inquiry. And while it ultimately found no basis to discipline the professor, the exercise itself was chilling and McCarthy-like. [square brackets added – GW]
Say what now? Jewish people are perfectly safe. Apologists and supporters of Israel racism and genocide should expect their abhorrent views to be challenged.
Remember the attempted murders of suspected Palestinians in the US by Zionists?
3 months ago someone stabbed a Spanish Tourist near the Holocaust memorial in Berlin because they thought they ware a Jew.
Attacks on Jewish People, not Zionists are on the rise. And Israel is doing them no favors, not disputing that. But there is actual antisemitism out there, not just the "Challenging Zionists and Genociders" kind, but also the "Death to Jews" kind.
@[email protected] This does seem like some of that "both-sides" Zionist apologia crap
From a glance doesn't seem to be. Anti-semitism, and anti-arab racism are unfortunately very common phenomenas; especially after october 7th.
If they used this to defend israel? Ban-worthy yeah. Seemingly though, they're addressing anti-semitism directly.
It seemed like that's what they were doing due to the context of the comment they were responding to, like they're trying to both-sides the argument about the Israel genocide.
At no point did I argue about this genocide, merely about the notion that Jews are "perfectly safe".
Not a chance in hell I'm trying to defend Israel here.
I believe you. After last night i think i got too mad with some users, i should probably double check the modlog and see if i went too hard on some people anyway.
Also, lots of accusatory bullshit coming from feddit anyway. Probably good to address it somehow later.
Thanks. I really don't agree with Feddit at all on this.
Do you mean my comment?
What the fuck are you even talking about? How is idiotic, moronic definition defending genocide actually related to that?
But they are, sweetie. It is Palestinians who are being butchered daily. Around 100 people every day, murdered by Israeli criminals.
Sounds like a "you" problem.
You weren't. You were intentionally playing dim.
Nothing gets helpful for IDF supporters when presented with facts.
Going nuh uh and conflating Israelis and Jews doesn't help your case, buddy.
How am I conflating, sweetie? Do facts offend you? As the facts are that Jewish people are perfectly safe and Palestinian people are not.
People outside of Israel get attacked for being suspected Jews. Do facts offend you?
Perfectly safe my ass :)
you can actually care about Palestinians being genocided and Jewish People being attacked in the diaspora at the same time.
Not sweetie, they aren't. Not more than any other minority in any other country, yet I cannot see anyone shouting like anti-x some country is.
You actually appear to have some odd allergy to facts.
Okay, so now it's not about being safe, it's about not being singled out, I see.
If you miss the entirety of discussions of racism in western countries and how minorities are targeted, you live under a rock.
The current US Senate contains members blaming Wildfires on Jewish Space Lasers. Jewish people have been singled out for centuries and they are constantly used as a scapegoat, see COVID 19 conspiracies theories or theories of blood libel.
Not only facts not matter to you, you move goalposts like an Olympic champ. Have a good day.
Unbelievable tosh.
Racism against all minorities happens daily. The most oppressed minorities at present are definitely not Jewish.
Which I never claimed, I just said that they aren't perfectly safe. And I sure hope you don't think that other minorities that are currently not the most oppressed one are perfectly safe in any way.
Another perfect goalpost move :)
They are perfectly safe, as much as any other minority. There is more chance of being a victim of a traffic accident than a victim of racist attack.
Palestinians on the other hand are murdered daily.
No minority is perfectly safe in racist societies. Especially not a minority that is targeted in as many conspiracy theories as Jewish people are. And thanks to a lot of conflation of Jews and Zionists on both sides, attacks on Jewish people have intensified.
I have never denied that Palestinians are being genocided.
It is quite the opposite. The Israeli hysteria about even the slightest criticism caused increased racism and more attacks on Arab people.
Two things can be true at the same time.
Oh shut the fuck up man
What the fuck?
Women and children are terrorists?
Go and fuck yourself.