World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Given that the Zionist movement was founded decades before the Nazi movement, I would say Nazis are the descendants.
More accurately, they’re both separate descendants of ethnonationalism which was a popular ideology at that time. And still today, evidently, though it seemed to be in decline for a bit during the post-war period.
Nazis had nothing to do with the Jewish people establishing a homeland in Palestine. Joining those two groups is ridiculous and rude to Jewish people.
The Jewish people began by buying the land legally in the late 1800s as a way to escape persecution. That pissed off the local Arabs (understandably) and both of them started arguing—which was not usually violent until 1920-30ish.
That said, after it became a British Mandate (1917), Israel got a ton of international support. And obviously after WWII, they got whatever they wanted…. Which, was choosing violence.
A lot of the reason the Arabs got little support was because they were fragmented, with no leadership. Each of their revolts were seen as a threat and not a legitimate push back against colonization. And, after the Ottoman Empire fell, England and France “stole” that land, so revolts were more or less terrorism (in their eyes, of course).
This is completely ignoring the boycott and parallel society angle. What Zionists did in pre-mandate Palestine was also forced expulsion of Palestinians; the forcing part was simply delegated to the state. Had they simply wanted to settle in Palestine nobody would've minded, but that was fundamentally not what the Zionist project was.
-Wikipedia
Nazism had a lot to do with the German people expanding their homeland to Eastern Europe and Russia and murdering the inhabitants. Starting to see the similarities now? Nazism and Zionism are sister ideologies, both fruits from the same rotten tree that is European settler colonialism.
Anyone could argue that “my people deserve this” is a similar ideology. That’s just false equivalence. You are cherry picking, and ignoring a whole lot of history and intention.
Has Israel moved towards a similar ideology? Yes. But to claim in started out with that intent is just angry jaw flapping.
"My people deserve this land at the expense of its current inhabitants" is fascism, or at least the underpinning thereof, so you're not wrong there. Nazism, Zionism, Manifest Destiny, it is literally the same thing manifesting in different ways. Look up "blood and soil" and "Lebensraum". Ben Gurion is literally on record saying "we must remove the Arabs and take their place". The Nakba started before the founding of Israel. If you have an argument for how the Nakba was anything but fascism, let's hear it, but so far you're not saying anything of substance.
Okay let's try this. Try this online quiz and see if you can get more than 15/21.
It’s really easy to cherry pick similar statements from people and compare them and make a whole website. Anyone could do the exact opposite.
If you’re going to quote people, you need to use dates because as I have said before dates matter.
who bombed the king david hotel again and became leaders of israel? was it the palestinians? No?
Gee and its a wonder why they aren't called terrorists. Could it be, could be it be racism and colonialism?
Ben Gurion's is 1937.
My dude non-fascists don't say "when we settle [region], [group] will have no choice but to scurry like drugged cockroaches" (dated 1983 btw). Also the site has dates and sources for the quotes; most Zionist quotes are recent but a few are from the 20th century with two from before WWI. They even have one by Herzl himself. Zionism was and continues to use and be predicated on downright Nazi antisemitic propaganda about how Jews can never live with non-Jews and how diaspora Jews are sickly and weak and all that shit. That's why they shit on Holocaust victims, for instance.
1937 is how many years after 1897? Have I not been saying this entire time that the original idea was lost? Yes.. pretty sure I did… yup checked I did.
My dude? Okay have a good day if you’re going to talk like that.
Well obviously if you define your "original idea" early enough there'll be nothing to criticize because they'll have done nothing yet. But fine. Is plain antisemitic propaganda in 1904 early enough for you? What about "a land without a people for a people without a land" in 1898?
-Ze'ev Jabotinsky (né Vladimir Yevgenyevich Zhabotinsky), Revisionist Zionist leader who co-founded the Jewish Legion of the British Army in World War I, on June 06, 1904
-Literally Theodor Herzl, 1896.
My dude, it’s over. Goodbye.
Classic troll pulls their ripcord as soon as their interlocutor brings receipts.
Thanks for doing that btw. SO many more people will read the actual sources in this thread and come to their conclusion instead of yours.
L debate skills
Goodbye, my dude
PS: I have literally never seen anyone complain about this before. Is this not normal internet English?
You don’t know that “my dude” means “fuck you you piece of shit”? I mean, are you 12 years old? I was saying “my dude” as an insult in 1998. Grow up.
Are people confused because someone forgot to label their sarcasm?
I think you thought you offended some folks with an endearing phrase. My whole life I have heard it used and I've used it myself as a synonym of "friend" or otherwise respectable reference to someone. Quick online check agrees.
Huh? Okay I'm not a native speaker so I'm not exactly an authority here but I'm 99.999% sure this is either a dialect, extremely local slang or something equally weird. Can someone confirm or deny this? A quick google didn't turn out anything either.
My dude, chill.
It's over, but not before you were soundly and mostly politely trounced. Grasping on their using "my dude" as justification to duck out is the lamest cope I've seen in years.
It’s just a back and forth that won’t end. And we both agree that Israel is genocidal assholes, so what’s the point of arguing the chicken and the egg anymore than we have, my dude.
They actually had a huge amount to do with the creation of Isreal, actively encouraging and facilitating the movement of German Jews there.
Herlz also asked support from antisemites
The result of the persecution against the Jews resulted in an influx of them going down there. However, the persecution was long before World War II and the Nazis did not directly assist that migration and therefore comparing the two groups as a team or descendants is offensive.
Facts:
Now, if you’re saying Israel today is Nazi-like… then yeah I agree completely.
Dude you have literally no clue what you're talking about.
Zionists are similar tool of oppressiom to nazis
Arab was pissed of when the zionists plan became clear. Owning lands do not give you right to declare a state
There was a group of Yemeni jews who settled in palestine and people was fine with them. Arabs and those jews was going to each other festivities.
The state declaration was in 1948. Zionism was established in 1897.
That leaves 51 years for things to go wrong—and they did.
If things got pretty bad around 1920, that’s just a few years after Britain put its dirty cock in the mix. And I think we can both agree British colonialism has been the cause of a ton of problems.
Zionism was a solution to Jewish statelessness and persecution. In its early conception, Zionism was not a tool of oppression, but rather a form of self-determination.
Did Zionism become a genocidal maniac? Yes.
Zionists had no right to impose a state in any country. Even if the state was in Argentine or Japan or the USA, the population would have not accepted either. Facing a persecution is not a valid argument against imposing a state on the land of people who had nothing to do with the oppression .
No matter how peaceful the ideology started , fact is fact Zionism became violent and is the source of the whole conflicts with the help of the British empire.
I agree with you. Zionism did not start out similar to Nazism, and overtime, with the help of the British government, it became something significantly terrible and has lost all focus of the original intention: to escape persecution.
And… over years there have been more and more Pointless deaths – mostly caused by Israel. And in 2025, I don’t think anyone could argue against it being full on genocide against non-Jewish people in Palestine.
They could have escaped percussion and live as normal citizens of Palestine but no the plan of Herzl was always to impose a state and displace the local population
Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Nazi was quickly in position of power so they was able to execute their plan very fast at first Nazism exclusion, discrimination, and the removal of Jews from German society then the final solution and the holocaust . Zionism needed more time to do it. Now in 2025 we are in the final stage of Zionism , the complete eradication of Palestinians in Gaza and slowly continuing eating the west bank
The Nazis were doing mass shooting, the IDF did mass shooting and mass bombing. Both the Nazis and the idf are starving people. The Nazis used gas chambers, the idf is shooting at people seeking aids with the new terrorist organization claiming to be an aid organization.
I am not saying both are equally the same and that the genocide in Gaza is worse than the holocaust but i think it is still fair to compare both rhetoric and methods
Zionists collaborated with Nazis to help them deport Jews to Palestine.
Well, 19th century zionism was a different thing. Edit: or rather, a more diverse collection if things. Optionally but not necessarily evil. Sometimes it was as benign as 'lets all go somewhere and join a community together ajd bring the ways that we're cool to that community and even if they dont totally like us, they can't hate us more than these assholes'.
So it is fair to say that the idea of zionism that 'won', the genocidal theocratic ethnostate, is at least to some extent based on both the nazis, and some of the same esoteric bs the nazis were into.
It was always about stealing local people land and displace them
Herzl’s Diary, 12 June 1895
Hertzel's version, yes. He also tried to get literally cecil rhodes to help. There were others, and people who hated that guy. It didnt quite mean just one thing til a few years later, though.
In the modern definition of the word, yes, its herzel's that won. I woukd never defend what it is in earnest, only point out that before it started to congeal, it could have been/meant other things.
He didn't win. Antisemite is still a big problem and isrsel is making it even worse. Jews are still not safe anywhere
Which version was not sbout forcing a state on other people and could realistically work without mass displacement and ethenic cleansing?
Feels like he got to sieze the definition, do all his atrocities.
To you, maybe. To zionists, that's a feature!
Nobody is, dear. Safety does not grow in walled gardens, and we firebomb the commons pretty regularly.
I forget their main advocates or if they were calked specific things, most of what i know about this was chatting with an old historian and an article i read a billion years ago, but there really were different ideas of it as recently as the thirties, like joining already extant communities somewhere. They were, like any 19th century european idea, never completely unproblematic, but some of them tried and at least read as genuinely well intentioned, and there was a lot of schismy bitterness as the meaning of thr word crystalized around hertzel's thing. Now of course it's one of tge most vile words in English, but he did not invent it. Mightve been the one who imported it to english.