Due to miscommunication within the admin team, the report was resolved without taking action. It has now been removed.

I don't want to be nasty, but I have to say, that to a large extent, it's correct to say the vast majority of Jews in the world, who reside in the US, Israel, or Europe, may as well occupy the same position as white people. That being, they stand on top of a racial caste system. We can argue about polling but besides an increasing trend among younger Jews, most support Israel to one extent or another. This comes from the fact that Israel's settler colonial nature directly materially benifets Jews at the expense of Palestinians.

Israel being a state actor (unfortunately) gives it basically unlimited resources when it comes to inserting zionism into every single Jewish organization and community from its western backers. This makes anti-zionist organizations extremely difficult to maintain. So, Zionism is hegemonic within the larger Jewish community.

Now, you can say that zionism and Judaism aren't the sake, and I'd agree, mainly due to the fact that Judaism is a much older concept. However, at this point in time, the distinction between Judaism and Zionism among the majority of Jews is non-existent. The reality is, due to the corrosive rot that infects every settler population during the process of settler colonialism, Jews are by and large inclined to support imperialism at this historical moment.

I think this is changing, slowly, among a not-insignificant portion of younger Jews who are opposing genocide, but not to a degree that can substantially burden the zionist project (and I think the entity will collapse before it can become substantial).

It's frankly a microcosm of the larger imperial core. A small number of anti-imperialists, struggling to break out of of imperial consciousness, and feeling like they're going mad due to the overwhelming imperialist rational portrayed by all their peers.

Also, we should recognize why the Holocaust targeted Jews, and why Hitlerism placed such an emphasis on antisemitism, is because Hitler conflated Bolshevism and Judaism as the same phenomenon in his mind. Their were historical conditions for that, such as Jews being an internally colonized population to a degree within Europe. This led to higher participation in revolutionary movements at the time, as it does everywhere. However those conditions no longer exist, at least not for Jews.

Similar conditions do exist for Muslims across the west, and in a similiar fashion, they are suppressed in increasingly brutal ways. The reason for that is slightly different though, this time being due to Muslim populations wanting their homelands to be decolonized, which would kill imperialist unipolarity.

The resurgence of Judeophobia comes from the historical Hitlerite tendency among the right. Yet, it still hasn't translated to a policy of systematic discrimination in the West. Instead, similiar to cries for white safety in the past, measures used to "protect jews" are actually mechanisms being put in place to surveil, kidnap, and financially isolate, other marginalized groups in the US, primarily Muslims.

Jews accutely benifet off of the growth in Islamophobia, in the immiseration of West Asia, and of the maintaining of the US empire. So does the rest of the imperial core's populace, but due to the empire using Jews as the primary "human stock" to maintain its presence in West Asia, they receive the most bountiful loot of most other communities here.

This is however not an eternal phenomenon, it can only be sustained for as long as Israel is still holding on. They looks less likely with every passing day in my opinion. And, to an extent, I must say, I do fear the "comeuppance" that the mechanisms of empire will have for the subjects that failed it.

This is where the hitlerite trend becomes dangerous. That tendency will, in my opinion, be unleashed by the empire domestically as a sort of reaction to Israel's failure to secure the empire's hold. Just as swiftly as the white identity was bestowed upon Jews, it will be ripped away. The mechanisms made to "prevent antisemitism" will be used to enforce an actual judeophobic policy, as well as onto all the other marginalized peoples in the West, as it already has.

The main distinction between Jewish identity and White identity is that White identity was explicitly constructed for the sake of dividing working class power, and enacting genocide. Jewish identity has an actual history predating zionism which can be pulled from to reorient it, whereas, white identity can only be dismantled.

This isn't me trying to be a Jewish exceptionalist, I'm just noting the difference of the two.

With regards to opening space for Jewish critics of Zionism. I must ask, are they coming here because they are genuine critics of zionism, or because we are not hostile enough to zionism? I'm not going to normalize crass expressions like "Fuck the Jews" or things of that variety. However, wat exactly does being open mean?

I can understand allowing people to unlearn at their own pace, as of course people in the imperial core are going to have a lot of unlearning to do. But I'm not going to sugar coat and deny that Jews by and large support genocide at the moment.

I've never minced my words speaking on the vulgarity of Sunni Arabs for example, when discussing their sectarianism with regards to Iran and Syria. Many here can attest, that I've spoken about Syrian Arab Sunnis in an even more disparaging manner than the original poster spoke if Jews, yet no one has made any comment about that commentary. Why should Jews from the imperial core be treated with more leeway then I've treated people of my own faith, regardless if they are different sect.

Sunni Arabs have been integral to the continued imperialism of West Asia, using sectarian to justify their opposition to Iran and support for anti-shi'ite political projects, nearly all of which have been backed by the US and Israel. Yet Jews, whose support has been even more consequential to the colonization of West Asia, are meant to treated with less scrutiny?

I understand that in the West, we're conditioned to treat historic Jewish suffering as exceptional and eternal, but it does not manifest that way in our current reality.

I can agree we need to make the distinction that the US is the primary driver of the zionist entity, not the other way around. However I make that distinction for a very simple reason.

When Israel collapses, the US and Europe will still be imperialists. They will continue engaging in barbaric actions across the world until they are stopped, Zionism withstanding or not.

Hopefully, my comment does not come off as rude or disrespectful, but I felt the need to be a bit blunt.

This is a new user. I saw their history, wish I had the iron confidence to be so aggro right out the gate. But yeah, saying "fuck the Jews" makes you sound like a neonazi, of which there are many and growing. Then again, "fuck the libs" makes you sound like an American conservative but we have good reason to say it.

I dunno. I guess were I Palestinian I would know. Were I Palestinian, I probably wouldn't object to "fuck the Jews". But I'm not a relativist.

Big difference, I guess, was that unlike white people, Jews were heavily oppressed decades ago and we still see people, a growing amount, who emulate those oppressors. Their sentiment is not in power but we don't ever want them to be. I'm reminded of Kruschev's stance, "oh the bourgeois aren't in power here and thus we should leave them alone". We look at where things come from and where they're going, not just their current position. Now, perhaps there's no danger whatsoever of those groups coming to power.

Again, unlike this new user I suppose I'm a bit wishy washy on this because it's a complex issue to me.

One thing I do absolutely object to is the user's notion stated elsewhere that Jews are small in number and thus you shouldn't talk about them. Isn't that... what a minority is?

EDIT: I did read this article: https://tariqacknickulous.substack.com/p/no-jews-today-are-not-oppressed I'm a bit more convinced that systemic antisemitism is unlikely in thr future.

I've locked this thread per OP's suggestion.

I'd also like to remind everyone to report anything you find problematic, especially if it breaks one of the instance rules or relevant community rules. If a reported post or comment isn't removed after a day or so, if it's particularly egregious, you can contact one of the admins to request clarification.

I feel you. I try to push back on this kind of thing to an extent, but I don't think there is really an instance-wide rule against it, unless the language is needlessly combative. And I can sort of see where it comes from, the boiling rage that is induced in a person to see headline after headline of violent entities committing mass murder and facing no consequences.

But still, we have to try to push back and make the distinctions, even if it's not always popular in the moment, or results in some misunderstandings that need clarification. One way of putting it, is it's not good material analysis to feed into "this region sucks" or "this people sucks" narratives and I don't think most of the time it is meant to be material analysis to begin with. I think it is more often just rage mode, unfiltered "I'm sick of this shit and I want to put them down in the only way I know how" and the way people tend to know how if they come from the imperial core, is to do the imperial core thing of saying "it's us vs. them, they are absolute trash, we are good and enlightened," etc.

I try to point out to people that flattening of narratives to oversimplified "us vs. them" is not what successful liberation forces tend to be doing. LovelyB points it out here in emphasizing the IRGC's letter to the American people: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12950123/8791112 (EDIT: this part was written before their subsequent crashout and comment removals - the link that matters is the IRGC's letter, found here: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12917289)

It's like I've said multiple times on this forum, people don't change sides and then immediately unlearn their previous ways and adopt a bunch of new ones. The transition is a lot bumpier and uneven than that. And for those of us in the imperial core, it can be pretty easy to slip into "communism with imperial dehumanization characteristics." I mean, think about it, does the IRGC talk the way they do because they are a "better people" or something? No, I'd say it's part deliberate strategy and part them being a more principled, human-needs-focused culture in general; meaning, the current culture, not something inherent to being Iranian throughout history. Different material conditions, different leadership, differently developed culture could give a very different result.

Our primary objective is not to describe the world, but to enact change in it, including in ourselves (we are not above it). Unlike the wrong-headed philosophies of those who believe ideas take precedence over all, we can't liberate simply by having better ideas and debating them. We can't exist outside the culture, the society, the ecosystem, and then judge it as if from outside. We are always in the thick of it, pushing in one direction, being pulled in another. I emphasize this for a couple of reasons. One is that when we recognize this, it's easier to see how we are impacted by the dominant culture, even when we despise it in our hearts and minds. The other is that change, rather than being perfectly right about ideas in the abstract, is what is most needed. Of course we don't always agree on how to go about that change and end up back in ideas, but we still have to shift back to change too. But change has to mean improving material conditions, so that improved culture can more easily follow. We can, and I believe should, strive to hold fellow communists to a more principled standard than we would in more casual contexts, but we also have to be understanding of the inertia involved from the dominant culture, as well as the limitations of human beings. For some people, the seemingly dehumanizing rage mode may be an attempt to get past liberal pacifism, to contend with the militancy required of revolution, to recognize that overcoming brutality cannot be gentle. For others, it may be nothing more than an expression of pre-existing imperialist thought in their minds, but with the allegiance changed.

I do believe it's something we have to watch for and discern about, if only because the opportunistic rightists do not fear the imperialist thought, do not want to reject it, and are perfectly happy to pretend like they are on the same side as liberation, while recruiting for something that is more about reasserting capital. That is the strongest reason I have in defense of being careful with it. I understand revolutionaries are not pacifists. I understand liberation is not a dinner party. But I also understand that historically, the most successful liberation forces have tended to be principled, sometimes in ways that surprised others, have tended to offer help readily where they could, and have tended to have a "world village" view that transcends borders. This does not mean they deny or hide from embedded issues and pave over it with liberal platitudes, but neither that their priority is to condemn and grant themselves a view of superiority, of being better for the world because of where they come from rather than because of what they do. Their priority is "what is to be done?" In tandem with doing it. And if they can do that in a way that empowers their people to thrive together as a communal whole, they have done their jobs well.

This is an insane expectation. Pointing out that Jews are not oppressed today is not making Jewish critics of Zionism less welcome. You wouldn't hold anyone to this level of standard for any other people. There is nothing in there that should be offensive to you as a Jewish person, unless you kill babies or are a Jewish Exceptionalist. There is zero anti-jewish sentiment in there. In fact, OP's post reeks of Jewish Exceptionalism.

Most of those things that was said could also very easily apply to white people, but if I had said that about white people, it absolutely wouldn't make White critics of racism any less welcome.

In fact, let's do it. Let's replace "Jew" with "white" in that comment.

White people, tell me if I am making you less welcome :

White people today are at the top of a racial hierarchy that exists in western society. Nobody should be worrying about "anti-white sentiment" any more than they should have worried about anti German sentiment or anti Italian sentiment during world war two.

If somebody says "fuck white people", it is not as offensive as if somebody said "f-black people". Black people are actually oppressed in society whereas white people are not.

White supremacists expect us to treat them better, put them on a pedestal while they are already at the top of the chain. There is a genocide going on. Calling a German a "kraut" wasn't offensive during the second world war.

The vast majority of white people live in the imperial core where racist systems exist to maintain their privileged position. They enjoy much better wealth and social prestige than others.

Apart from fringe black-nationalists, anti-white racism is not a thing. Nobody really hates white people for being white. In fact, many non-white people people internalize and support racist systems inadvertently to the benefit of white people. White people are afforded privileges for being white in every part of the world, and especially in the imperial core.

The US is a white-supremacist hotspot internationally. All white institutions in the imperial core should be dismantled. Explicitly non-racist institutions should be the only ones that should remain.

Fuck all the white people who kill babies and support killing babies.

Oh look at me making all the white people feel less welcome.

Yeah.... no. this rhymes with "blue lives matter"

i've asked this elsewhere on the tankie troika, but i haven't gotten a good answer: what makes right-wing antisemitism not materially real? the response in that case was to point out the united states' own actions, which naturally only serve zionism. now bourgeois attempts to "combat antisemitism" will always serve bourgeois interests, and i don't really believe in "antisemitism on the left" as a material concept, but how can we outright reject the existence of antisemitism when the fascists are organizing along that particular line? i don't think these particular fascists in power, who are "anti-antisemites", are married to jewish supremacy the way they're married to whiteness, especially given the influence of the antichrist end times faction within that lobby. what stops it from becoming politically expedient and possible as the imperial boomerang swings back to start doing "traditional" antisemitism again? obviously these questions only apply to the west.