You're viewing part of a thread.
https://holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definition-antisemitism
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Do you realise that such a broad definition only is saying that Israel can't be considered Nazi no matter what they do?
You can criticize Israel’s policies without using Nazi comparisons just fine. The only thing Nazi comparisons do is incite and make understanding impossible. See Godwin’s law.
In the case of Israel it’s also extremely bad taste and shows you’re not interested in serious discussion, only hatemongering.
If you're committing a genocide it's only fair that people compare you with other people who commited genocide. Like the nazis.
And of course it hurts. Because Israel hates to be reminded that they are becoming the kind of people that 80 years ago tried to exterminate them.
Stop doing nazi things if you don't want to be called a nazi. It's as simple as that.
OP had to pull their definition from a page that didn't exist until after the October 7th attack in order to find a source that calls comparing State policies to another State's policies racism.
The IHRA working definition of antisemitism is from 2005.
The definition has been heavily criticised by academics, including legal scholars, who say that it stifles free speech relating to criticism of Israeli actions and policies. High-profile controversies took place in the United Kingdom in 2011 within the University and College Union,[note 1] and within the Labour Party in 2018. The definition has been contested for weaknesses that critics say lend themselves to abuse,[10][11][note 2] for obstructing campaigning for the rights of Palestinians, and for being too vague. Kenneth S. Stern, who contributed to the original draft, has opposed the weaponization of the definition on college campuses in ways that might suppress and limit free speech.[13][14] The controversy over the definition led to the creation of the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and the Nexus Document, both of which expressly draw distinctions between antisemitism and criticism of Israel.[8]
Will you look at that, it's criticized for not making a distinction between antisemitism and criticism of Israel, you know, because criticizing a country doesn't mean hating its citizen or people ethnically related to them.
Of course it’s criticized, that’s the nature of discourse.
However, it’s also widely accepted by major organizations.
People who hide their antisemitism under an antizionist fig leaf are of course upset to be called out.
If hating the State of Israel makes you racist it means that you think Israel represents all Jews, if Israel represents all Jews then all Jews are racists because Israel hates most of its neighbor States and, as you said, hating a State is racist. You love Israel and you love Jews therefore you love racists therefore you can go fuck yourself.
If you think the Jewish people doesn’t a right of self determination in their ancestral homeland, it makes you racist, yes. Every people has that right according to the UN charter. How the Jewish people choose to exercise that right is their choice, and they chose the state of Israel. Denying the Jewish people the right to self determination is racist of course.
Nah man, I'm applying the same logic you are, you support a racist State that represents millions of racist people, go fuck yourself.