223
NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
223 points (97.9% liked)
News
29426 readers
3228 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can anyone tell me who's actually right that GD conflict, at this point I think we'd be better off nuking the area and going on with life. Its been decades, time for actual resolution.
The area will probably be uninhabitable in 20 years (give or take) due to climate change. Israel's "victory" over Palestine will be short-lived.
It could be uninhabitable tomorrow.
It's really one of the most uncomplicated conflicts in human history, I think. Israel took the Palestinian's land by force, and has killed thousands upon thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians over the past 77 years. It's really as simple as the Holocaust to figure out who's in the wrong here. Sure, the Palestinian's fight back with little effect, but so did the Jews in WWII, and no one thinks the Holocaust was complex.
My local model gave me this, I'm gonna go with this.
"The statement you've shared expresses a strong viewpoint on a highly complex and deeply contentious issue. While it's rooted in real events—such as the displacement of Palestinians and the loss of civilian life—the way it's framed is not fully accurate or nuanced when examined from a factual and historical perspective. Here's a breakdown:
What’s true:
In 1948, the creation of the state of Israel was followed by war and the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians—this is known as the Nakba ("catastrophe" in Arabic).
Since then, Palestinians have lost significant territory, and many still live as refugees or under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza.
Thousands of Palestinian civilians have indeed been killed over decades, especially in Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.
Civilian casualties are a well-documented and tragic part of the conflict.
What’s oversimplified or inaccurate:
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is widely regarded by historians, diplomats, and political scientists as one of the most complex geopolitical conflicts in modern history, involving:
Colonial history (British Mandate)
Competing nationalisms
Religion
Refugee crises
International law
Military occupation and terrorism
Internal divisions within both Israeli and Palestinian societies
Comparing the conflict to the Holocaust, where 6 million Jews were systematically murdered in a state-run genocide, is historically and morally problematic.
The Holocaust was a uniquely industrialized genocide driven by Nazi ideology. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, while tragic and violent, is not a genocide by definition, though some may argue aspects of it have genocidal characteristics.
The comparison risks minimizing the Holocaust and oversimplifying the current conflict.
Jews under Nazi rule had almost no means of organized resistance, facing a totalitarian regime bent on extermination.
Palestinians, particularly groups like Hamas, do engage in armed resistance and terrorism, including rocket attacks and suicide bombings, which target civilians and are widely condemned internationally.
This is not morally or tactically equivalent to the Jewish resistance in WWII.
Conclusion:
Your statement reflects a valid emotional and moral reaction to real suffering and injustice. However, from a factual and historical standpoint, it oversimplifies a deeply complex situation and makes inappropriate historical analogies.
If you're interested, I can offer a more balanced summary of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the key historical events."
Cover your shame man, jeez! There's children here!
Models are definately fallible, but definately less fallible than most people.
How do you publicly let AI do your thinking for you without even a hint of shame or embarrassment?
I check its claims against verified sources. 🤷♂️
The problem is letting the AI digest the information for you. It is impossible to engage in critical thinking when you're not actually doing the thinking yourself.
I think it's possible for people to do that, probably a lot. But it's not what I'm doing.
Well, I don't think I've ever heard of a morally good colony. Kinda gotta be a dick to be a colony.
Doesnt even kind of answer my question.
Israel is a colony. Do I need to explain why showing up to a place, claiming it as your own and violently repressing natives to make it so is bad? Sorry I don't mean to be snarky, I just wanted to be simple
Which group of people on the planet hasn't done that?
My ancestors did, as did theirs and yours. Should we all suicide over it, to make it right? Or try and pack ourselves back into where we came from? Get everyone to head back to Sumer?
What's done is done and not accepting that seems to be the problem to me. For all parties involved.
The problem is that it isn't done. Its happening right now. This isn't like the native Americans where they have already been completely displaced and whatnot. Its happening right now before your eyes.
The main solution has been a two state solution. That would be what your saying as "what's done is done and accept it"
But Israel has rejected a two state solution for its entire existence, and continued colonizing and genociding folk to get the land they claim
That's right now at this moment. I cannot stress this enough, it's like going to a native American before the trail of tears and saying "I don't know, seems like what's done is done" when we have only just started starving and slaughtering their entire population. There's so much slaughter left to go.
This isn't done. Israel is committing a colonizing genocide right now. Today. Right now. Today. Right. Now. Today.
I'd say it's done, look at the damned place. If that's not done it's close enough.
Brother in Christ, do you want to just be pro genocide at that rate? No reason to stop the Holocaust now, it's basically over, might as well let them finish? Is that the actual position you want to take
I dont agree with that comparison to the holocaust, it's an insult to its victims. And I dont believe it's anywhere near over, that'd be the millionth time thats been said in 60 years.
So I dont think you know my position, we obviously have diferent views of objective reality.
It's not an insult to compare a genocide to a genocide. It's a genocide. An extermination. The point is to put that weight of history on you. If you cannot bring yourself to see the wholesale slaughter of a people as the same due to who those people are and who's committing it, that's a issue.
See, we agree we don't agree, the end.
Saying we don't agree doesn't justify holding a morally abhorrent position. Just means you're done trying to have a good reason. You opened this whole convo with "someone tell me who's right in this" and I did and all you did was justify a genocide you said you knew nothing about.
You can't "not agree" you have no opinion with any basis. You defaulted to the genociders side for some ungodforsaken reason and took a stand there while also self proclaiming your ignorance.
You asked for an explanation. You got one. And yet somehow with literally everyone who replied to you telling you what the fuck is up you somehow still went from no opinion to "fuck it, I'm actually pro genocide at this point. No half measures"
Go fuck yourself
We'll if you agreed, you wouldnt find my position morally abhorrent, see how that works, so duh.
I asked, you answered, i responded, don't get mad because people think differently, get mad because I'm not ever going to read your next response.
That's a lot of opinion for someone who doesn't know what's going on.
so you support genocide, huh?
I support the lesser of teo evils.