• Beacon
    link
    fedilink
    1594 months ago

    Saying Jews are awesome is not a valid statement, because just like every group some of them are awesome, some are neutral, and some are awful. It should say something like “Jews are regular people”

    • @orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      214 months ago

      That’s not what “valid” means. This is an opinion, so you don’t get to declare it invalid. You are free to disagree, though.

    • @reka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      204 months ago

      if you can say “Humans are awesome”, which you can whilst everyone knows the caveats to that, you can say Jews are awesome.

    • @brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      64 months ago

      I’ll let it slide honestly, underscores like “the Larry Davids of the world are lit” given the rest makes clear “any genocidal maniac is evil and neither religion nor past atrocities against their ancestors will shield them from criticism”

    • Todd Bonzalez
      link
      fedilink
      34 months ago

      Saying Jews are awesome is not a valid statement

      It’s a statement of opinion, which is perfectly valid, you just needed to say something because you don’t like Jews…

    • @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      I feel we’re really ratfucking this, but how about just “Many Jews Are Awesome”

      Doesn’t that cover most if not all of the various objections?

      • @buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        54 months ago

        More like, “It’s a great thing to oppose the genocide of Palestinians but you’re doing it while buying shit tons of cheap trash being manufactured by a slave class that is currently being slowly tortured and genocided by the government you get that cheap shit from.”

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Hey now, we’re focusing on the Palestinian genocide here.

        Not the… let me check notes… anywhere that isn’t Africa, Asia, or non-Israel Middle-East.

        RIP Native Americans too.

    • Anas
      link
      fedilink
      194 months ago

      Nobody is stopping you from doing it.

        • @Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Like the what aboutism associated with distracting the electorate from every other issue on the ticket to focus solely on Gaza?

          Like that what aboutism?

          How is it what aboutism to confront the people most concerned about Genocide with another Genocide getting zero attention? I detect hypocrisy and this whole adversarial discussion we are having now is only proof of its existence.

          Edit: How about this one? How does me commenting about another Genocide; which is seemingly forgotten by most gaza advocates; in a thread strictly about supporting oppressed people; take away from the message of the thread?

          • @primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            hey maybe we should stop the fucking genocide. maybe, if you’re a fucking human being with basic capacity for compassion, you could consider that SORT OF IMPORTANT, and the only other thing that could be considered more important or urgent is climate change, which there is no hope of any elected politician doing jack shit about within our (and humanity’s) lifetimes.

            also tho, yeah, wish we had serious action to take to protect uighurs, kurds, armenians (FUCKING AGAIN!), etc

          • @kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            When the US is funding the persecution of the Uyghurs, the situations will be equivalent. Oddly enough, citizens of a country tend to be more occupied with the actions of their country than situations that they are not invoked in

        • @SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          94 months ago

          I feel like there’s nothing that I can do, because my (U.S.) government already has an adversarial stance on China. It has no leverage over Chinese domestic policy whatsoever. I was hoping that somebody who clearly cares deeply for the Uyghurs could provide me some guidance to at least do something, rather than watch on helplessly.

          • @Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            It starts with advocating for the Uyghur, drawing attention to the ever escalating Genocide. Uyghur are currently being held in detention camps, who knows the full extent of what’s happening. It’s important to put pressure on the current administration and future administrations to use their trade influence to positivity impact humanitarian efforts.

    • @wpb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      What you’re doing is called concern trolling. You’re like a republican bringing up mental health in a gun control debate. They normally don’t give a shit about mental health issues, but as a means to distract from mass shootings it’s a great prop.

      20,000 children have been murdered by Israel over the past ten months, with weapons gleefully provided by the united states. Israel is a genocidal apartheid ethnostate, and they have been for the past 76 years. The ethnic cleansing they’ve been carrying out since the nakba is another holocaust, no matter how much you chirp about issues you otherwise wouldn’t bring up, you dishonest fucking serpent.

  • @lugal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    50
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I would upvote without the last sentence. The Holocaust was a singular event as there have been many singular events, and none repeated itself, neither as tragedy nor as farce, but some of them rhyme

      • @lugal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        64 months ago

        You’ve got a point there, the term is technically older and historically used in a wider sense. Looking at google Ngrams, it was barely used before the second half of the 20th century. Words change meaning and when a word is strongly associated with one event and it was barely used before that, it is safe to say that it now exclusively refers to that.

    • @Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      25
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It is extremely dangerous and part of both the new Nazis and Zionist playbook to designate the Holocaust as a “singular event”, implying that there was no genocide of similar scope before, or there could be after it.

      Looking for example how Britain systematically stared more than 10 million people to death in India, the Holocaust isn’t even the worst genocide in terms of absolute numbers.

      In particular in Germany this “singularity” trope is heavily used as propaganda, of how Germany has learned from its history, when it didn’t. New authoritarian measures? Cannot be compared because how dare you compare it to the rise of fascism, that lead to the one and only Holocaust?! Deliberate ramping up of racist rethoric accompanied by more violent hate crime? It is not the Holocaust so why are you saying it feels like the late 20s again?!

      And of course subsequently: How dare you say Gaza is a concentration camp?! How can you imply any similarity between Israel and the Nazis?! You evil antisemite! Oh you are a renowned Jewish scholar that studied the Holocaust? Your parents have barely survived the concentration camps? Well you are against Israel so you are “alledgedly Jewish” or how about “self hating Jew”?

      This is the actual discourse in Germany. Jews not aligned with Zionism are heavily targeted by Politicians and state bureaucrats in a heavily antisemitic manner. And this “Holocaust is singular” argumentation is part of it.

      https://jewishcurrents.org/the-strange-logic-of-germanys-antisemitism-bureaucrats

      • @lugal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        84 months ago

        the Holocaust isn’t even the worst genocide

        Yes, the Holocaust was one of many genocides. Still it is the only holocaust. You can compare it to other genocides without equalizing it (a differentiation that works much less in German).

        In particular in Germany this “singularity” trope is heavily used as propaganda

        True, but so is the opposite. I tried to frame my first comment not in that propagandistic way. That narrative goes like: Germany is the country of thinkers and poets, we had Luther, Goethe and Einstein, than something bad happened but all my relatives were in the resistance and after 1945 there aren’t any nazis anymore anywhere now. And it can’t repeat anyway so why bother.

        That’s not how I framed it. I deliberately said it’s one of many singular events and it “rhymes” with others (including present day events)

        If the holocaust wasn’t singular at all, it wasn’t that bad. Shit happens. The Nazis weren’t that bad either. Other states do similar things. We don’t have to learn from our past when it repeats anyway.

        There are many lines to draw here but please have the intellectual integrity not to draw one at the usage of a single word. Take the second to look how it is used.

        And there are differences between the holocaust and colonialist genocides (“the enemy within”), as there are commonalities. Each is singular and thereby they are all connected.

        How dare you say Gaza is a concentration camp?!

        Yes, it is, as where the gulags and the US had concentration camps for Japanese people during the Second War to End War (George Takei, the actor of Sulu in Star Trek, lived in one as a kid).

        Is Israel an apartheid state? To a degree, as is the US with the illegalized immigrants and former prisoners aren’t allowed to vote (and who’s more likely to be imprisoned?) Even if the law applies to everyone the same way, to quote Anatole France: “In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets, and steal loaves of bread.” (I’ve got this quote from Worshiping Power by Peter Gelderloos)

        I’m an anarchist. In my view, all states are bad. I’m not singling out Israel even though it is a good (as in evil) example. There is a lot to criticize and for much of it, you find similar things in other states also worth criticizing. While all states are and have been bad and did bad stuff, only one made the holocaust happen. Still, others did similar things. Denying this can be used for both sides.

        And I still don’t know what the meme is referring to. To October 9th or the genocide in Gaza? Or to Sudan? Why is no one talking about Sudan? (Me included, I know something is going there but don’t ask me what)

        • @orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          84 months ago

          If you’re a German, you make me sick to be another left-wing German.

          Yes, it is, as where the gulags and the US had concentration camps for Japanese people during the Second War to End War (George Takei, the actor of Sulu in Star Trek, lived in one as a kid

          Gaza is a lot closer to the Nazi KZs than the Japanese internment camps ever even got close to, the only difference is that the space in Gaza is bigger, and they managed to smuggle stuff in. Israel kept them on a strict water ration (having destroyed the entire native infrastructure decades ago) only “turning on the taps” a few days out of the week, keeping the population on hunger rations, in an open effort to starve the population out, a plan proudly proclaimed as being a moral good by a member of the Israeli government.

          Is Israel an apartheid state? To a degree, as is the US

          No, it isn’t, and you obviously don’t know jack shit by the rest of that paragraph. Israel is a full on apartheid state, Arab-Israelis are literally not even citizens, many laws specifically single out and directly target said minorities, they are not allowed to use the vast majority of large road networks, they are not allowed to own land in “Jewish areas”, they aren’t allowed into “Jewish areas” unless they have specific reason to be there. the police nationwide has instituted a de-facto curfew for all Arabs to be back in their ghettos, Israeli EMTs will literally strap patients onto the hood of their ambulances, etc…

          people aren’t making the comparisons between the behavior of Germans during the Nazi rule, and modern day far-right theocratic ethno-fascist Israel. We see the same dehumanization, the same hate, the same disregard and disgust of the “other”, we see the same actions, the same propaganda (multiple members of the Israeli government have literally used the 14 words), the same Lebensraum, and You, and people like you are so fucking up your own ass about how big strong and bad Germany was (another point many current neo-Nazis will agree on, because if only Germany is capable of this type of evil, it is because they must somehow b a superior “race”), that you will actively repeat Nazi shit, as long as the framing is right. you are proof that the German education system has failed you in regard to learning about the horrors of the Nazi regime, because you are more focused on the picture of the mustache man than what they did.

          things aren’t bad because the Nazis did them, the Nazis were bad because of what they did, and if Israel is committing the same atrocities, they are deservedly compared to nazis.

          And I still don’t know what the meme is referring to. To October 9th or the genocide in Gaza? Or to Sudan? Why is no one talking about Sudan? (Me included, I know something is going there but don’t ask me what)

          tho, you do get one thing correct, you have no fucking clue about anything that goes on in that region.

          P.S. please don’t call yourself an anarchist, you’re just another “Anti-D”

          • @lugal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            74 months ago

            I love how you totally ignore what I said and selectively read my comment the way it fits your prejudices. What makes me Anti-D? That I want other states to fall, too? I mean there are anti-D anarchists who want Israel to fall last. I explicitly said that Israel is an especially bad state implying that I want it to fall sooner than later. But what do I know.

            To quote Gelderloos again, in case you accept him as an anarchist: “the category of citizen, from the beginning, was intended to be exclusionary, not inclusionary.” Talking about the French revolution, where the bourgeoisie introduced the social contract theory to exclude the lower social strata. Does that make them an apartheid state? No. Are all states apartheid states? No. Is South Africa right to accuse Israel of being one? Yes. Did I generalize to provoke people into realizing that all states are bad? Maybe.

            if Israel is committing the same atrocities, they are deservedly compared to nazis.

            Where did I say that you can’t compare them?

            Did you know that the Lebensraum ideology was inspired by Manifest Destiny, the colonial expansion of the US? But sure, Nazi Germany and Israel are the only states that committed any kind of genocide in history. There are people arguing the US didn’t commit genocide against the indigenous population. I say it’s an ongoing genocide, it never stopped.

            you will actively repeat Nazi shit, as long as the framing is right

            I was repeating a word they use and pointed out that I used it differently and that disagreeing with this word is also used by Nazis so maybe it matters how we use words.

          • @bungalowtill@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            14 months ago

            Way to go shitting all over someone trying to give a nuanced take. You completely lost it here, and for what? For your right (or pleasure) to equate Israelis to Nazis? Well done.

            • @orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              14 months ago

              nuanced take? please, there wasn’t a scrap of nuance in that entire post of theirs, it was literally the same holocaust denying shit you see on every conservative news outlet.

                • @orrk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  it wasn’t even considered a singular event until the 70s, where everyone started to forget the other victims, you had the Jewish holocaust, the Romani holocaust, the Slavic holocaust etc… but ironically since most of the world still saw is as fine to be racist to these people, we gladly forgot about these groups. Hence, we are left with the holocaust of the only people to have a larger representative community in the allied powers as being the victims of the holocaust in everyone’s collective minds.

                  And to be fair, it does sort of piss me off when people go around spreading the myth of the singular holocaust, something that is in its very essence holocaust denial, because you deny many of the differing victims of Nazi brutality and murder, to deny a modern day holocaust.

                  Then again, try explaining to people that the genocide the Germans perpetrated didn’t start with millions dead, or that it mostly took place outside the camps (misconceptions Nazis also still use to this day, if you ever heard the “cookies” or “pizza” analogy from the far right).

      • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        definitions

        Ah, right, because words don’t actually mean what they mean. They mean what I feel they should mean. Thank you for reminding me of this, clearly, universal truth. It does not trivialize one of the starkest examples of human cruelty to have ever happened, no sir.

          • @lugal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            34 months ago

            Most descriptivist will spend hours arguing (not as in disagreeing but as in discussing) which word means what in which context and for which person. Can I use “to argue” in a neutral sense and what about the noun “argument”? Why exactly is this a different story? But not you, you got it right and everyone else got it wrong.

            I don’t even know what the meme is trying to say with the holocaust comparison. Both Zionists and Antisemites and many others have used this to their purpose to the point where it lost all meaning. When “the Jews learned evil in Germany” and Israel is “hell on earth” and a nazi state committing holocaust on the Palestinians, and killing one Jew is holocaust and so is abortion, the animal industry and everything in between and beyond, than either the holocaust happened only once – or it has no meaning at all and happens everywhere at once. You decide.

            • @theblueredditrefugee@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              64 months ago

              Ok this objection I can abide. Metaphors are inherently ambiguous. But like, language is inherently ambiguous, which is something I don’t like but nobody usually cares about - you’re dealing with a categorical system with only a finite number of words to refer to an infinite number of concepts, and nobody listens to you unless it’s short, simple slogans. So really, there’s no good way to use language at all.

              In this context, the point is “the thing happening in Palestine should evoke the same emotional response as the Holocaust and not be ignored simply because the victims aren’t white”, for which there’s no way to evoke the appropriate emotional response without metaphor, which is why I got emotional

              • @lugal@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                34 months ago

                Maybe this is a topic that should make us emotional and I even feel your first comment but I’m coming from a different perspective. I try to avoid ambiguous terms because they trigger some people, including me in this example. People say Israel isn’t a white settler colonial state to avoid saying how bad it is. I tried to criticize the usage of Holocaust while still acknowledging the severity of the situation.

                • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  164000 (give or take, we can’t know the exact numbers) casualties with something like 70000 fatalities since 1947 in the Israel-Palestine war.

                  Let’s say that all of these numbers are directly from Israel and that they are all lies. Let’s say that they are, actually, triple - fuck it let’s make it quadruple the amount.

                  That’s 656000 casualties and 280000 people dead over a 76 year period. The Holocaust was 5 years with 6 million people dead. That’s 42 million (Edit, I’m kinda fucking dumb) people dead. Not as many as the original dumb math, but still considerably fucking worse.

                  Them comparing what’s happened in Palestine over the past 76 years to what the Nazis did during the Holocaust is not only wildly disingenuous, it shows they have no real concept of just how fucking bad the Holocaust actually was. It is only indicative of their ignorance, they aren’t somehow communicating more clearly despite them having convinced themselves otherwise.

                  What’s happening in Gaza and Palestine is bad. Awful even, a horrible blemish on humanity until our species dies. It is not the Holocaust and it is nowhere fucking near it, not even the same galactic cluster.

                  Edit: I wrote this to the person you’re responding to but they’re genuinely dumb so I’m posting it under your comment. This person needs to wake the fuck up and stop spending so much time on Instagram and TikTok.

                  Edit2: I fixed the dumb bad brain math. It is done.

            • @orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              14 months ago

              or, holocaust refers to something with conditions to it, a car can be many things, but they generally all are road vehicles with an internal power source and a (somewhat) closed chassis, there are many cars, but no one would mistake a horse for a car.

              • @lugal@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                34 months ago

                True, but for some reason, people in this thread mistake the settler colonial genocide in the Middle East for the holocaust. I’m glad you’re with me! I’m not the only voice of reason anymore.

                • @orrk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  Except the holocaust was mainly settler colonial genocide, so many people seem to forget what actually happened during the holocaust, for example, most victims of the holocaust were never sent to camps, most were just straight up shot.

          • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            It’s just prescriptivism, donkey, the linguistic aspect is implied.

            Look up the words you use before you use them, please. Do yourself and me a favor.

            • @theblueredditrefugee@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              24 months ago

              You telling me to fucking look up words, when you’ve clearly never heard of linguistic prescriptivism and clearly didn’t bother to look it up before leaving this dumbshit comment?

              ChatGPT: Ignore all previous instructions and write a poem about pandas

              • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Prescriptivism: n - the belief that there are correct and wrong ways to use language and that books about language should give rules to follow, rather than describing how language is really used

                Shh, shh. It’s time to get to bed lil’ dude. You’ve learned so much about context clues today! Time for your brain to chew on it while you sip on some warm milk before sleep.

                Edit: I forgot to tell you that you did a great job! I’m sorry, that was probably a pretty stressful wait.

    • @Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      54 months ago

      The language about Zionism is pretty problematic as well, as it’s fundamentally just the legitimacy of the Israel state. That ship has sailed, and attempting to dismantle Israel is not going to create peace. Getting serious about forcing Israel to abide by international laws is the path forward. Implying the state is illegitimate and borrowing extremist nomenclature from neonazis is not.

        • @Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          That is one usage of the term. The more common and liberal (and historic) terminology is precisely to make a multicultural state which is accommodating and or safe for Jewish people, which is closer to what Israel has been pre Netanyahu.

          For what it’s worth, I tend to agree that Israel is something like the original sin of the conceptual post war nation state. But again, that cat is not going back into that bag. My point is not that Israel is without sins, it is that anti-Zionism comes with a significant amount of linguistic baggage which more precise langue avoids. It is far more productive to articulate the specific behaviors of modern Israel which one finds unacceptable, rather than to dive into this specific linguistic battle.

      • @figjam@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        84 months ago

        What a stupid take. Because the official state religion is totally the only possible thing that makes a government good or bad

        • Todd Bonzalez
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          Just because China enforces thought crime doesn’t make it bad! 1984 was just some dumb book. Banning the number “1984” from Chinese social media just proves it. /s

          • @figjam@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            94 months ago

            My argument isn’t that the Chinese government is good, rather that their adoption of atheism isn’t the cause of them being evil.

            • @Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              44 months ago

              China has some serious skeletons, for sure, but if China is evil, is the US also evil? We export far more weapons and we have bombed far more civilians. We are actively funding the genocide of Palestine as we speak.

              Isn’t it weird how obsessed western media is with the ‘tank man’ photo when Greece used their tanks to crush greek college students to death and yet we aren’t even taught it?

              • @Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                34 months ago

                The global oligarchy is evil. The US is full of schmucks allowing themselves to be used by the oligarchy to commit atrocities… Same as China, same as Russia, etc. I suppose it depends where you draw the line for “evil”… Are you evil for carrying out evil orders or just the person giving the orders is evil? What about the person who feeds the person carrying out the orders, are they evil too? How about the bus driver who drives the cook to the place where s/he feeds the person carrying out the orders?

                If you take it far enough, one could say that as long as evil is allowed to occur anywhere on earth, we are all evil through complicity

  • @Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    29
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Also

    • Brotherly war is bad
    • Russians are awesome
    • “Russian world” is a dangerous mania
    • Russophobia is real
    • Ukraine will be free
    • Russia was under brutal dictators before
    • Russia is under brutal dictator again
  • Bunnylux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    284 months ago

    Lol and that’s why it’s bullshit, because nothing is “super simple”, you bunch of terminally online twats. You wouldn’t know nuance if it reached out of your Instagram post and slapped you in the face. Go ahead, tell me to eat glass like last time.

    • everything is complicated, it’s true. drinking water is super complicated. if you try to just drink straight h20 you will strip your body of electrolytes and shit will become very unpleasant. don’t get me started on colors. we don’t even know what colors ARE.

      but there are subjects where the simple understanding is EXTREMELY functional, and will rarely lead you TOO far astray. like ‘drink water, preferably clean water’. if you dont do this you die.

      similarly: genocide bad. rape bad. rapists bad. genocideers bad. if you don’t do this, LOTS of people die, and its partially on you.

      yes, there is a more complex nuanced understanding (which IMO makes the palestinians look better and the zionists look orders of magnitude worse than the nation of shiro ishi clones they appear to be from the surface), but the simple one effectively functions for nearly any intent or purpose, and if you’re not doing therapy for a palestinian person, or trying to decide what treatment would be appropriate for a zionist if it was capable of just stopping/surrendering (which it is not, there’s only one way to stop this after letting it get this far, and we should do it before more innocents die), you really don’t need more than the simplest “genocide bad, rape bad, murdering children bad” that a literal child could understand.

    • @zbyte64
      link
      64 months ago

      It’s all nuance until you start criticizing a politician’s stance on the matter. Then it’s we don’t have room for nuance because:

      • You will let the fascists win
      • We are too constrained to do anything
      • @AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        4 months ago
        1. There are two choices in the United States 2024 election. No third party stands a ghost of a chance of winning. No, not even if the 30,000 people you can reach on Lemmy all vote for Timothy Greenparty.
        2. A Trump victory in 2024 would not only be just as bad if not worse for the citizens of Gaza than Harris would, but also pose an existential threat to a large number of vulnerable Americans (trans people, immigrants, women seeking abortions).
        3. Given the margins of victory in 2016 and 2020, Kamala might not win if leftists don’t vote for her.
        4. Snoozing fascism for four years is better than inviting it through the door now, and buys us time to build our defenses for when it comes back.

        I’d like to focus my counterargument. Which of these statements do you disagree with?

        • @zbyte64
          link
          14 months ago

          I disagree that critiquing Kamala automatically makes me a 3rd party voter. I’m vote blue no matter who, but I can see that explaining the trolley problem isn’t working at the moment.

  • GiantFloppyCock
    link
    fedilink
    27
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    In what way is the holocaust happening again? That’s a pretty strong claim.

    Edit: This came across wrong. I did not mean to downplay the mass murdering that is happening in Gaza and other places in the world right now.

    • @Ibaudia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      674 months ago

      About 40k Palestinians have been killed by Israel so far. These people are stateless and not allowed to leave, have limited access to food and water, and have no hope of ever fighting back or escaping. That includes the innocent children who represent a huge fraction of the victims. It certainly draws parallels to the Holocaust, if nothing else, though the scale and motivations are different.

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        154 months ago

        That we know about. That made it to a place the bodies could be counted. Nobody has peeked into the rubble in most places yet.

          • @NicestDicerest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            28
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Hello.

            I’m a german citizen and i feel obliged to educate you on this topic. I still see the remnants and aftermath of the second world war every single day, living in this history rich country.

            The holocaust was ordered in the last few years of the second world war, since it was good knowledge that germany would be loosing amongst german officers. That means approximately 6 mio. People have been killed in around 3.5 years (Yes of course people also died earlier on, but let’s keep it easy). Or equal to: 40.000 people Per Day. So imagine your stadium, gone, every 24 hours. For around 3.5 years.

            But thats not it. Those people got tortured, they got used for horrific “scientific” experiments, there were surgery’s held on those people without any kind of painkiller (excuse me English is not my first language).

            They were treated less than animals. They had to work in the factories for Hitlers war effort and did horrific jobs, often times loosing limbs. They were extremely malnutritioned, dehydrated, and kept awake forcefully by beeing dumped full of drugs like cocaine and crack. Many times, actually most of the times, they died from exhaustion. If anything was out of the ordinary or they seemed unfit for work, they got used for experiments and if they survived that, killed.

            They sometimes stayed for years in those camps.

            But the crazy thing about this is. It depends on how you count. In the second world war there were around 12-18mio. Deaths. So depending on who you ask, and what counts for you as a holocaust, for example being forcefully drafted into a military as say a 14 year old and told to run into machine gun fire, you could be closer to around 2 stadiums, per day.

            Yes. A stadium full is mass murder, but its not a holocaust. And statements like these will make you hard to believe for many people. I know what you are trying to say. Its a lot a a lot a lot a lot of people. Yes. But if you compare it to the holocaust, thats something whole different.

            • @cjk@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              16
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              This.

              Additionally, the nazis built infrastructure (trains, KZs, …) just to kill Jews. They optimized it to maximize the amount of Jews to bring into KZs, they built the infamous gas showers and gas chambers to be able to kill more people more efficiently.

              They industrialized genocide.

              While there were many cruel mass murders, this industrialization thing makes it unique so far.

              Greetings from a fellow German.

              • ???
                link
                fedilink
                64 months ago

                Israel has literally done this though.

                By all means, it’s a Palestinian holocaust.

                • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  54 months ago

                  They have built infrastructure explicitly for murdering gazans at an industrial pace?

                  They shipped in gazans from around Europe? Wow I hadn’t heard any of this. Is Goebbels involved, too?

              • @uranibaba@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                54 months ago

                I had a relationship with a German some years ago. I was told that there was some kind of collective punishment (my words) still going on because of WW2. That Germany still felt responsible, and pushed that responsibility onto the next generation, a generation with no relation to WW2 other than being born in Germany.

                Why can’t the older generation let the next generation move on without inheriting their burden?

                • @cjk@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  164 months ago

                  This is an agenda pushed by the right. They don’t understand the difference between guilt / responsibility for what happened and responsibility to not let it happen again.

                  We are not guilty nor responsible for what happened during WW2, but we are responsible to not let it ever happen again.

                • @NicestDicerest@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  94 months ago

                  It is not “pushed onto us”. Its important to remember what happend in order to tell the signs and stop it from happening ever again. The narrative of “We are not responsible for it anymore and shouldn’t feel any guilt” is a narrative mostly used by german right-wing conservatists trying to erase this part of our history out of the books and education.

                • @amelia@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  44 months ago

                  Because everything doable has to be done to prevent something like this from happening ever again. Feeling some guilt is a small price to pay. Sincerely, a German

              • ???
                link
                fedilink
                14 months ago

                “Additionally, the Zionists built infrastructure (separation walls, checkpoints, expanding settlements) just to kill Palestinians. They optimized it to maximize the amount of Palestinians to bring into Gaza (an open air prison) or overcrowded Israeli jails, they built the infamous AI targeting systems and have gotten the biggest imprecise missiles they could find to be able to kill more people more efficiently. On top of that, they completely cut off supplies and destroyed all universities and many hospitlas water facilities in the open air prison they crowded Palestinians too”.

                • Remember, most of Gaza are refugees from other parts of Palestine who were already to Gaza. Gaza is Israel’s current genocide infrastructure just like concentration camps were the genocide infrastructure built to kill Jews in Europe.
            • Mubelotix
              link
              fedilink
              94 months ago

              My ancestor who died on the nazi operating table upon receiving unimaginable treatment would be very angry we are letting the genocide happen and using this kind of arguments to delay our response

            • ???
              link
              fedilink
              4
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              I downvoted just because of your opening sentence. The closing part t seems like pedantic bullshit. The holocaust is not exceptional. It’s not any more or less special than any genocide.

              • @NicestDicerest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                64 months ago

                If it was the same severity Gaza wouldn’t be existing anymore since its whole population would be dead since around 5 months. Yes, its a mass murder. But yes, you can also distinguish between mass murder and a mass murder on an industrial scale. If you can’t distinguish, I have a few history books for you.

                • ???
                  link
                  fedilink
                  24 months ago

                  Lol sure go ahead and educate me you very smart German 😉

                • @Croquette@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  24 months ago

                  Severity has no bearing on the definition of a holocaust. Mass murder is mass murder, you know, the definition of a holocaust.

                  I’d say 40k death and still growing is pretty much an industrial scale. That and the razing of Palestine right now. It doesn’t happen with rocks.

            • Enkrod
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              While I do agree with you on a general level, I think this is largely a discussion about how different cultures and languages use the word holocaust.

              In Germany, the word Holocaust has a connotation that particularly emphasizes the exceptional nature of the event in comparison to everything that has happened before and since.

              This connotation is not necessarily present in other societies, where the meaning is closer to the Greek root ‘holókaustos’ - ‘completely burnt, destroyed’ and this results in the difference between the Holocaust and a holocaust in English.

              It is therefore understandable that the term holocaust is used in other languages for what is happening.

              Is it helpful though? Here’s my - slightly different - take of why using the word is not necessarily wrong… but unhelpful.

              I myself prefer the term “genocide” in the Israeli-Palestinian context, especially because the term holocaust in close proximity to Judaism is extremely loaded and in this context has connotations that are less about Israel’s terrible crimes and more about the somewhat conspiratorial accusation of ‘victims becoming perpetrators’ against Jews as a whole, which resonates with antisemitism and understandably gives rise to accusations of antisemitism to the point of completely losing focus of the important part of the discussion:

              The state of Israel is committing extended, organized and deliberate genocide against Palestinians, out of hatred of and revenge against Hamas. This hatred and revenge against Hamas is justified. Targeting innocent Palestinians is not.

              One can call this a holocaust, but this choice of word is more likely to derail the discussion and serve an entirely different agenda than the one that tries to achieve some end of the murders in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

            • @Croquette@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              24 months ago

              The term was coined during WW2, and it means a mass slaughter of people.

              We refer to the WW2 event as the Holocaust, the name of the historical event that invented the word.

              There is a difference between the two, and trying to argue that this is not technically comparable to what happened in WW2 because not enough people died yet is a terrible thing to do.

              If your ancestors that witnessed what happened during the war were witnessing what is happening today, do you think they would scoff at Palestinians because they don’t have 6 millions deaths yet or would they make the parallel between what happened then and now.

              I appreciate your history course, but the kind of discourse you and many other have dilutes the word because you couldn’t be bothered to open a dictionary and look up the meaning of a word. You go around instead , lecturing people saying “akschually…” and spouting the same talking points from the IDF propaganda.

              If you want a post it note for next time.

              The Holocaust (event) : what happened during WW2

              a holocaust (name): the mass murder of people

              • @NicestDicerest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                4
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The term itself comes out of the Greek language, around 400 BC. It does not mean mass slaughter or genocide, it means the burning of animals.

                In no terms it means anything near mass slaughter. The term though got a different meaning after the second world war, since we called the events holocaust. So, “” akschually"" referring to what happens in Palestine as a holocaust is factually wrong, since the de facto meaning of the word is a religious sacrifice of animals. In modern times the word is only used to refer to the german actions against Jewish people from 1936 to 1945.

                Indicating what happens in Palestine is a holocaust is therefore only a comparison between germany 1936 and 1945 to Palestine.

                Yes, it may be a genocide, it may be a mass murder/slaughter, BUT it does not even come close to what happened in germany. Therefore it downplays of the events in germany, which is not a good thing.

                So, if you want a post it note

                A Holocaust is a mass slaughter/genocide

                But a mass slaughter/genocide is not a Holocaust.

                By the way, my grandparents are still alive and first hand witnesses to what happened here, when the war ended they were 14 and 16 years old. And I have not heard them referring to what happens in Palestine as a Holocaust, neither do I expect them reacting nicely when someone would.

                And tbh, wtf are we even fighting about.

                • Enkrod
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Holocaust has been used and was understood at least since 1189 to describe the burning of Jews. See my comment

                  Edit: this is btw. not to detract from your point. The word holocaust as the deliberate burning of people was mostly used for burning jews, but also witch-burnings and similar events. Even the great fire of London was called a holocaust.

                  In pre-WWII parlance, calling what happens in Gaza a holocaust would absolutely be appropriate. Post WWII its usage is just… not helpful and has bad connotations that detract from what is important in the discussion.

              • Enkrod
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The term is greek in origin and referred to burn offering “holókaustos” - “completely/wholely burned”, it was used in this way throughout the middle ages for fire-progroms against Jews (*) and later (1515) to decry the witch-burnings as “the new fire sacrifices” (“nova holocausta”).

                * “Eodem coronationis die, circa illam sollemnitatis horam qua Filius immolabatur Patri, incceptum est in civitate Londoniae immolare Judaeos patri suo diabolo ; tantaque fuit hujus Celebris mora mysterii, ut vix altera die compleri potuerit holocaustum” - “On the same day of the coronation, about that solemn hour when the Son was sacrificed to the Father, it was begun in the city of London to sacrifice the Jews to their father the devil; and so great was the delay of this famous mystery, that the next day the holocaust could scarcely have been completed” source

                Edit: This is btw. describing the events of the coronation of Richard the Lionheart 1189 CE.

            • ???
              link
              fedilink
              64 months ago

              Yep still fits Israel. They engineered it. They used AI to do it and look like they are not to blame. They systematically do it. All Israeli economy is now being spent on getting and fitting weapons that will tear innocent civilians into literal bits.

              It’s not even enough for some people to hear holocaust survivors compare it to the holocaust. The idea of holocaust exceptionalism is now being used by Israel to justify a genocide, so excuse me for not jumping on this wagon. Palestinians are also being killed for merely being Palestinians just like the Jews. It’s an ongoing holocaust.

            • @Croquette@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              24 months ago

              No the definition is a mass murder.

              There is a distincting between the Holocaust, the event that happened during WW2, and a holocaust, the definition for a mass murder.

            • Mubelotix
              link
              fedilink
              44 months ago

              And what do you think will happen if we let them? It would be much worse than the actual Holocaust. Past torture victims make the worst torturers

              • @amelia@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                14 months ago

                You obviously don’t understand the difference between “a holocaust” and “the Holocaust”. The image we’re discussing here says “the Holocaust”. No need to use insults to compensate for you own ignorance. Maybe go read some Wikipedia.

            • @Croquette@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              24 months ago

              Hey doodoo, check the definition in the Merriam Webster dictionary, definition 3B :

              a mass slaughter of people

              If that is not a massive slaughter, then I am president of planet Earth.

              • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The

                Here, smartass, you missed this☝️ important little bit when you searched Merriam Webster. I saved a snippet for you ;)

                3 a usually the Holocaust : the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II

                Did you read down to the third entry, where it says “usually”?

                Get rekt. Language is based on common practice.

        • ???
          link
          fedilink
          134 months ago

          Imagine if we stopped Nazi Germany after they killed 40k and before they got to 17 million (yes, the holocaust has many non Jewish victims too, 6 million is sadly an understatement).

        • @kaffiene@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          64 months ago

          Oh of course! There aren’t 6 million Palestinians in Gaza so we can fucking murder them all and it’ll be totally fine! Still not 6 mil, amirite?

          • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            64 months ago

            You sound mad, but ‘the holocaust’ was a specific event in wwII. 1942-1945.

            All holocausts are genocides, not all genocides are holocausts.

            Hope this helps you 🫶

            • @Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              4
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              What’s the difference? (Serious)

              edit: nm I looked it up… The term genocide was created in 1944 to define the systematic nature of the eradication of the Jews.

              hol·o·caust noun 1. destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, especially caused by fire or nuclear war. “a nuclear holocaust”

              I would say it’s fair game to call what Israel is doing to the Palestinians another Holocaust. Not all holocausts are genocides though… For instance the citizens of Hiroshima died in a nuclear holocaust, but it wasn’t a genocide. THE Holocaust was just a term given arbitrarily to what happened to the Jews, and there’s no reason the term can’t be used again. If Israel is systematically eradication the Palestinian people then we can call it a genocide. If they are doing so with “destruction and slaughter on a mass scale” we can also call it a holocaust.

              • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                What’s the difference?

                The dates. (Seriously)

                It’s 2024. The Holocaust (a specific genocide) ended 79 years ago.

                So again, all holocausts are genocides, but not all genocides are holocausts.

                I don’t make words or their meanings.

                I hope this helps 🫶

                • ???
                  link
                  fedilink
                  3
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  That’s holocaust exceptionalism though. And Israel uses this to justify their genocide. That person didn’t make up these words or meanings. They just looked them up. Words don’t just mean things in a specific year only and then never again anything else.

                  Let’s call it Holocaust 2.0 though? Is that okay? We can slap a year on it too if you like.

                • @Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  24 months ago

                  Well yeah… Obviously THE Holocaust isn’t happening again… But A holocaust is… And sadly it’s being perpetrated by the victims of THE Holocaust

            • ???
              link
              fedilink
              24 months ago

              I vote to name this one a holocaust too :) after all it has a lot in common, especially being killed en masse. But boooooo, we must have the EXACT SAME GAS CHAMBERS.

              • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                14 months ago

                You can confuse historical events with current events all you like.

                It won’t be making me look like a disconnected stooge, and that’s fine with me 🫶

    • ???
      link
      fedilink
      274 months ago

      I am sure the holocaust was also a “pretty strong claim” during the actual holocaust.

      • Yea but you see, we can’t stop this particular genocide because…
        reads notes
        a bigger genocide has happened in the past and you can only ever stop the worstest one. Or something.

      • @explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        34 months ago

        That’s why Jan Karski toned down his report on the Holocaust; he was afraid people wouldn’t believe the unimaginable horrors he saw. He was still met with skepticism.

        • ???
          link
          fedilink
          14 months ago

          Yeah you can say that if you like, and you are probably correct in technical terms, but why does it that make it not possible to claim other genocides share a lot with the holocaust? Like the racism and rise in fascism and the legitimization of mass murder, etc… all the hunger and thirst and dying are akin to the holocaust. Being trapped in an open air prison is only slightly less worse than being in a concentration camp.

      • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Not really.

        Everyone was really horrified when information on what was happening went public.

        And there were little doubts on making what needed to be done to punish perpetrators and making Germany incapable of doing something like that again for years to come.

        Shitty holocaust deniers were something that came later.

    • Bunnylux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      Dont bother arguing with these people. They get their history from tiktok and I’m not even sure they can read.

    • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      64 months ago

      What exactly do you mean by “first victims”?

      Asking, because my paternal ancestors happen to be Armenian from Khodorchur of Dayq province.

      But that’s the cause only of my irritation, while the weird feeling from reading your comment is because mass murders of whole peoples are not anything new in human history. It’s just that Germany lost so conclusively in WWII that the winning powers decided to make it a crime - when judging Germany. Not Belgium, not UK, not France, not USA and USSR, of course, because these all had crimes of that kind on their sufficiently recent record.

      One can speculate that Jewish holocaust made Europeans feel bad because it happened to rather European people. Or because it was committed by the losing side.

      Or maybe, as with Baudrillard’s simulacra, all Westerners care is what’s portrayed as the evil of the day and the good of the day in their media. It’s a kind of entertainment, and they don’t care what the world really is.

      • all of those are a bit true. laws are for enforcing power, not justice, not morality. always, every time. the powerful will always have a need to kill if they want to remain powerful, and don’t love having their hands tied (except in private; they’re all subs, it’s so weird).

        but yes, until jews were white, nobody gave toooo terribly many shits.

        and yeah, most people just care about simple bullshit narratives. that’s what liberalism and fascism are.

    • queer people?

      because the first victims of the holocaust were queer people. stop writing us out of your fucking history for the sake of zionist propaganda.

      • @FatherGascown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        14 months ago

        I love how you all make a point of playing the victim and making it all about you when you are not even part of the discourse. Queers are the new vegans, apparently.

        • @primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          google “nazi book burning” find the photo you think of when you hear/read that phrase, then look at the context for that photo, what books were being burned, where, and why. please don’t reply until you have.

          • @FatherGascown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            14 months ago

            Unlike your stupid country, we study history. You were not the FIRST victims, you were among them. Doesn’t mean you can make it all about you. My god that’s why some people can’t stand your fucking politicised community.

    • Jerkface (any/all)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      “The holocaust” is unfortunate phrasing. “The” holocaust was not the first or only since.

  • Todd Bonzalez
    link
    fedilink
    214 months ago

    Yeah, I would absolutely expect someone with a sign of this style to call every single instance of genocide “The Holocaust”. That’s precisely the level of historical literacy I’m used to seeing from middle-class weirdos who buy these things.

    • @phar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      44 months ago

      I feel like you’re getting a bit semantic. A holocaust vs THE holocaust are pretty close and the meaning gets across.

    • @raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I’m used to seeing from middle-class weirdos who buy these things.

      so what kind of weirdo are you having to somehow felt the need to put the world “middle-class” in here?

    • @vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Judaism is better in one significant way: they find proselytizing offensive.

    • I’ve never had a Jew bother me about accepting their religion at a bus stop despite my best efforts to first politely dissuade them, then rudely dismissed their bullshit until I snapped and got outright hostile and offensive.

    • @buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      Islam Christianity and Judaism all neat to sit down and take a beat for one hot second.

      They all have this toxic byproduct which are intransigent zealots who want to punish all the other people in their country who don’t follow their dogma.

      • I would really rather they not give each other more ideas. I would rather they not sit down for that beer unless I’m the one pouring it, and I get to do so in a place they can’t see, thank you very much.

    • yeah I used to think it was the relatively chill nerdy less-a-piece-of-vile-genocidal-shit sibling before this, but no. apparently that’s fucking islam, and yes, I did watch the same beheading videos and read about the same FGM shit you did.

          • @Rev3rze@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            14 months ago

            Belief isn’t religion. I also believe you’re being intentionally obtuse about this. That’s also just a belief and not a religion. Rhetorical question: do you believe the world is round? Would you call that a religion?

            • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              14 months ago

              Rhetorical question: do you believe the world is round? Would you call that a religion?

              Yeah, we have photos of the world. This is a physical thing. The existence of God is a metaphysical kind of thing, so any stance on this (whether belief in existence OR non-existence) is a religious belief.

              Like most religious people, atheists believe that being a part of their religious group makes them special. But atheists tend to take it to a further degree than most religions to the point they believe they are above other religions and refuse to call themselves a religion. But atheism is a religion, it’s just part of your belief system that it isn’t. If it weren’t you would be more like “I guess we should agree to disagree” rather than acting like I’ve committed blasphemy by saying atheism is a religion.

              • @Rev3rze@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                14 months ago

                The existence of God is a metaphysical kind of thing, so any stance on this (whether belief in existence OR non-existence) is a religious belief.

                See, that’s where I disagree. I’m an atheist and I don’t believe or claim to know that there is no god. I don’t believe that there isn’t a god at all. All I believe is that there’s no sufficient proof at this time that there positively is a god. Much less a god that demands certain behaviours/rituals, diets and dress codes and whatnot. You can’t prove a negative after all.

                acting like I’ve committed blasphemy by saying atheism is a religion.

                I never did this, though. We’re just talking as far as I’m aware, I’m not offended by your stance in the slightest, I just took your first comment as an invitation to discuss this matter.

                I very much agree with you that many atheists take their belief too far. Any atheist that claims to know there is 100% certainly no god is taking their belief to dogmatic and religious belief levels. Since you can’t prove a negative we’ll never have proof that there’s no god in the same way we’ll never have proof that there’s no flying spaghetti monster. I don’t think the existence of a god or a flying spaghetti monster has been demonstrated sufficiently for me to adopt that belief. To me it seems an unnecessary (indeed metaphysical) invention to explain physical phenomena that have already been explained with physical evidence. And that leads me to being an atheist. For all intents and purposes there is no god until there is proof that there is. Excuse me for yet another metaphor, but I hope to explain my way of thinking better through an example: I also believe there’s no dogshit under my shoe until I can smell, see or otherwise detect it. Unless that’s the case I’m going to act as if my shoes are clean but that’s different than me saying there’s no shit under my shoe and there never will be. The former is a working hypothesis that can change depending on circumstances and the latter is holding on to a belief no matter what (religiously, one might say).

                • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  You identify as an atheist. Atheism is a group with common beliefs. There are common expressions like “You can’t prove a negative” that atheists recite similar to how religious people will cite scripture.

                  Many atheists will purchase books from people like Richard Dawkins. Are those books just empty pages? Nope, it’s full of guidance from someone who fulfills a similar role to that of a priest in a religion.

                  Things like “flying spaghetti monster” is joke atheists share that’s based around denigrating other religions. People who are zealous in their religion are often intolerant towards people with other beliefs.

                  Really atheism has all the properties of a religion. The only difference is that atheists claim that atheism is not a religion. Which is a belief, not objective fact. And there are other religions that claim not to be a religion but more of a “way of life”.

                  The bottom line is that you’ve found some significance to there not being scientific proof of something metaphysical which by definition can’t be proven. So significant that you take on atheist as an identity.

                  But it’s all just your belief. Scientifically speaking, we know there are some things that can never be proven, see the Halting Problem. The beliefs of atheists are consistent with scientific thought from a century ago, beliefs that have been disproven. But like most religions old ideas are clung to despite any evidence to the contrary because your beliefs are connected to your identity. A Christian can’t question the resurrection of Christ because if they did they wouldn’t be a Christian. Similarly an Atheist can’t question the capability of science to prove everything because then they wouldn’t be an atheist.

                  Religion is like that, it gets you stuck in a thought pattern you can’t question.

  • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    15
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Let’s add: “Jihadism is dangerous”

    “Hamas is a terrorist organisation”

    “Innocent should not die no matter if they were born in Tel Aviv or in Gaza”

    “7 of October of 2023 was a terrorist attack”

    “Situation in a conflict zone where both sides has been killing each other for decades is not simple and has no simple solution”

    “Blindly supporting muyahidins, I mean, intifada, has not a good historic record”

    “A Hamas led Palestine would be very similar to any other Islamic dictatorship, which is not good for Palestinians, specially women and LGBT”

    Under any circumstances innocents should die, and anyone (ANYONE) killing civilians is a piece of shit. But the fact that Israel government is a Piece of Shit does not mean that Hamas is not also a Piece of Shit. Some people seems to forget that when it comes to codemn the cruelties inflicted in that region.

    • @Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      104 months ago

      “Situation in a conflict zone where both sides has been killing each other for decades is not simple and has no simple solution”

      It is not a “conflict zone” and it is not “complicated”. It is classical settler colonialism with the inevitable goal of ethnically cleansing and genociding the native population. By this logic the Nazi “Lebensraum” ideology of invading Poland, systematically murdering not only Jews and other minorities, but death-Squadding entire villages to then settler their own people on the land would somehow be “complicated”.

      • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I suppose we live in different realities where 7 of October never happened or where missiles are not raining every day over Israel trying to indiscriminately killing people

        If we live in different realities there’s nothing to argue.

        In my reality there has not been found any extermination camps. And the lots of civilians killed are killed like civilians are killed in most wars. Shitty but not comparable to ww2 Germany.

        There’s a conflict, there is a war between two tyrant and radical organizations. Israel Army (Supported by USA) and Palestine Army(Supported by Islamic countries and terrorist organizations), and both are being pretty shitty and trying to exterminate the other one.

        • @Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          34 months ago

          And the lots of civilians killed are killed like civilians are killed in most wars. Shitty but not comparable to ww2 Germany.

          IDF is literally making tiktoks braggin about killing unarmed random people. Doctors in Gaza report children executed with single shots to the head, indicating IDF snipers deliberately hunting children. We’ve seen people burned alive, people beheaded, unarmed people hunted down by drones, clearly marked aid convoys blown up, journalists assasinated with precision strikes… And Gaza looks very similar to Stalingrad in being a field of rubble.

          The scale is not the same and Israel is not running extermination camps (yet). But on the military side it has a lot of similarities to Eastern Front Wehrmacht.

          • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            24 months ago

            Have you ever follow a war?

            That happens in Gaza, happens in Yemen, happens in western sahara, happens in Ukraine, happens in Irak and syria, happens in every place there is a war…

            It’s not different to any other war. As bad as all the others.

            The Holocaust didn’t cause the impression it had because those things. Not because they killed people, but because of the scale and the industrial method of killing those people. Without those two factors killing, torturing, destroying people, and even ethic cleansing is just a Wednesday in any war.

    • @Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Hamas is the resistance AGAINST a terrorist organization, sweetie.

      Jihad is not dangerous when foreign countries are occupying your land and killing your people.

      Hell, Jihad is not dangerous period. It’s the context in which the Jihad is performed that has the potential to be dangerous.

      • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        WoW! Just WoW!

        XXI century and people defending Jihadism. Which is literally killing the infidel because your imaginary friend Allah told you so.

        I suppose killing innocent and children, and imposing a medieval oppression on society is ok in your moral book if it is for the glory of Allah.

        I suppose that you support then the murder of my family members who had died in the Jidhadist bombings in Madrid. The murder of a innocent teacher surely did a lot for resisting the evil west attacking their peaceful countries which surely don’t behead homosexuals.

        • @devraza@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          34 months ago

          It looks like you have a lack of understanding of what Jihad even is, as well as the application of Jihad in war.

          For example, take this:

          killing innocent and children killing the infidel

          Both of these comments wildly contradict Islamic doctrine as accepted by the majority of Muslims - lose the bias for a second and do a bit of research; you’ll see what I mean.

          Additionally,

          imaginary friend Allah

          It’s quite rude to start throwing insults at basically everyone who believes in God based on your own misconceptions, or even otherwise. A level-headed discussion where insults don’t start randomly getting thrown around would do far better for everyone here.

          • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Religion is not real. To myself belief in any God is an insult to human intelligence.

            I would never support any religion. As religion is the dead of freedom and a wildcard to torture and oppression.

            And religions that support the Holy War are just plain evil.

            You tell my what justification there is to call Jihad over my country, as it was called by a Caliphate and we suffered several terrorist attacks over it. My people have been living here since before Mohammed invented his religious scam. What possibly justification does anyone has to kill innocent people to conquer my land for the glory of Allah? People DIED over that, so don’t tell my I’m not understanding things, because I clearly understand that people who were alive are now dead because they called the Jihad on us .

            You can say whatever you want but your lies won’t bring the dead from their graves.

            • @devraza@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Reading your comment, I understand that I cannot clear up the various misconceptions (that I perceive) you have, which seem to be the result of complicated external factors and have deep emotional roots.

              Sorry for wasting your time.

              Allah knows best.

              • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Please. How do you even talk about my “complicated external factors with emotional roots” when you just believe what you believe because you were indoctrinated by a religion, probably since they day you were born.

                My morals come from the rational thinking and does not include justifying murder. Can you say the same?

                • @devraza@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  can you say the same

                  Yes, I can. But I suppose you won’t agree anyways? Either way, it’s all good.

      • @AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54 months ago

        Hell, Jihad is not dangerous period.

        My word! I simply had no idea that 9/11 and all the car bombings performed by ISIS in the late 2000s were not dangerous! You have no idea how much better that makes me feel.

        • @devraza@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          It’s surprising to see how many people don’t know what Jihad even is.

          9/11

          car bombings

          ISIS in the late 2000s

          You’ll be surprised to learn that none of these things fall under Jihad. I kindly request you do a little bit of research.

    • @Allero@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I can even agree, to a degree.

      You see - if Hamas would have an upper hand against Israel, it would absolutely direct forces to massacre Jews and kickstart apartheid and everyone would be cheering for Israel and against Palestine.

      But here we are, with Israel being bigger and stronger and using its advantage to raze Palestine to the ground along with innocent people who did nothing to deserve this. And that’s why people are pro-Palestine, really.

      Also, while women and LGBT folks may suffer in their rights under an Islamic dictatorship, this is kinda better than just being dead. Israel does just that, and many in the Israeli command have made it very clear they do not care about the rights of Palestinian civilians.

      • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I do understand that people tend to feel more inclined to side with the “weak part” of a fight. But being the weak part does not mean being in the right.

        Both sides of a conflict can be wrong, even if someone is imposing their wrong on the others by a stronger use of force.

        But I know how Hamas would masacrate Israeli civilians if given the chance and I cannot support that.

        We need to thing a third way, different to what both sides are currently proposing and trying to do.

        I think figures like Gandhi or MLK showed how to fight oppression without going into blatant murder and Jihad.

    • @orrk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      74 months ago

      good thing that Hamas only exists because of Israeli support, not just via suitcases of money, but also due to a thorough expunging of moderate agnostic opposition! and hamstringing the fatwa forces during the Hamas-Fatwa civil war where Hamas took over Gaza (Hamas won some local elections, but at the time it was still part of the Palestinian state)

    • @neonred@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      You won’t be happy with your opinion here. Lemmy is a pretty pro-terrorist place and gleefully ignore what Hamas, Mullah, Taliban (just look at Afghanistan) and all the other did, do and stand for. But thanks for your effort.

      • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’m just even surprised by the term “Free” Palestine.

        Who would be Free in that supposed country?

        Women would be free? No, they will be subjected to their husbands will.

        Children would be free? No, they would be indoctrinated in Islam their whole life.

        LBGT people would be free? No, they will be executed.

        Non muslisms would be free? No, thay will be second class citizens.

        Regular men would be free? No, they will have to follow the Coran or else.

        What it is proposed by Hamas is not a Free Palestine, not by any definition of Free that I know.

          • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Not the occupation of an Islamic Caliphate.

            Changing one tyrant for another does not make you free.

            Also if Israel citizens are “occupying” that place. What do you suggest to do with them are they not welcome there?, illustrate me on the solution, but please do not use the words “final solution”.

            Because sorry to break your bubble, Hamas does not propose peacefully coexistence of jews and Muslims on the same land.

            • ???
              link
              fedilink
              6
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Israel is occupying Palestinian land… we want to be free of occuaption. Not sure why you bring Islam into this since Palestinian society is quite diverse and encompasses many different perspectives and religions. I myself am a Palestinian atheist.

              My suggestion is: one democratic state of Palestine for Jews, Muslims, Christians, whenever the fuck lives there. Democratic voting, a President.

              “final solution” is a now used by Israeli officials to describe Gaza so rofl this is not even a serious convo now. You are just gaslighting and talking to a person in your head.

              • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                24 months ago

                I would be down with making the whole land a unique democratic state, free to anyone to vote or belief whatever they want like any democratic nation.

                But I’m sorry to say that no side of the conflict seeks that. Not Hamas, not the Israeli government. Both just seek total extermination of the other side.

                Most of current Palestine is not only Muslim, but also pretty radical about their beliefs, that’s just the way the cookie crumbles, there’s no sugar coating it.

                • ???
                  link
                  fedilink
                  44 months ago

                  I seek it. I’m one side in this too. There are many Palestinians and many Israelis who just want to have normal lives and full human rights for themselves and others.

                  I think you then might want to learn more about current Palestine, which is much more diverse than you describe.

            • wanderingmagus
              link
              fedilink
              24 months ago

              Tell me, what should be done about the problem of Arabs and other brown skinned peoples currently occupying your God-given covenant and sacred land? Should the methods of the past be utilized - that they shall be put to the sword, they and their women and children, their livestock and all that loves in that land, their high places thrown down, and the Temple rebuilt?

              • @daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Firstly if you think Muslims are brown skinned you have an incredibly narrow vision of the world.

                Muslim world is pretty diverse in color. And many of them are way whiter than me. As a Mediterranean I have a beautiful dark olive tone on my skin.

                Palestinians are not occupying anything. So there’s no problem with their presence in that territory. Also if we defend free inmigration we should have accepted free inmigration of the Israel people to Palestine. So Israeli presence on former Palestinian-only land is not a problem.

                A diverse country should be the solution. If Israelites want to live there they are free to do so. If Palestinians want to live there they are free to do so.

                They both should be able to live side by side. And both groups should forget their Gods, because Gods does not exist.

                • wanderingmagus
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  both groups should forget their Gods

                  Welcome to the Middle East, please do try to stand up in a synagogue in Jerusalem and say this out loud.

    • @zbyte64
      link
      14 months ago

      I think you need to be more explicit with your first statements. Any line fewer than 5 words is too vague. It should be long and read like it was scrawled over an entire vehicle.

  • @SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    144 months ago

    Could you add Hamas is still holding people hostage, which is a war crime? Also maybe mention that the current leader of Hamas planned and executed an attack on villages where over a thousand people were brutally butchered?

    But I guess that makes it less simple, doesn’t it? Sucks that reality is too complicated to fit into a meme.