nichtsowichtig @ nichtsowichtig @feddit.de

Posts

17

Comments

162

Joined

2 yr. ago

With a history as messy and complex as Palestine/Israel, yeah, obviously there is room for doubt. Refusing to have a discussion here doesn't help anyone.

The accusation is 100% unfounded,

you don't even know why exactly the player made these accusations. you're just making assumptions.

Tolerance ends with the intolerant

Please, tell me precisely at which point the israeli team proved themselves intolerant?

I guess that is the big tagedy. which leads a lot of israeli into very militant and isolationist positions. Defending autonomy and self determination at all costs. Which also causes a lot of suffering on other people.

Well, it is common that the term "Israel" is used in a very generalizing way. "Ireland refuses to shake hands with Israel's Basketball team" would be misleading in a similar way, but this generalization is so common that people don't really notice it anymore

holocaust inversion is textbook modern antisemitism.

Giving people water and food is not funding terrorism. Starving people, denying them basic human rights and killing inocent people is funding terrorism. Yes, the humanitarian aids will also benefit hamas, but that does not give us the right to deny people their basic human rights

Now that is a fucking stretch. If you compare Jewish people with Nazis, don't complain when people call you an antisemite.

its like going to qatar to play but wearing a rainbow flag, its virtue signaling

People didn't even end up wearing rainbow flags because they were threatened with consequences. it was basically virtue-signaling-signaling

Well I think the reality is really complex and intertwined. Jewish people live in Israel because, historically speaking, they aren't safe anywhere else. In this context here: It would be safe to say that the jewish player's ancestors sought refuge in Israel because they were not welcome in the country they previously lived in (That could be Germany, Russia, Yemen, Iran etc). Many of them had no other choice and for many, Israel was the only hope for a life in dignity and safety. Completely separating jewish identity and israeli identity is impossible, it is connected.

but I don’t feel this is the way it’s being used

In a way I agree. The concept of anti-semitism is used when it is convenient. People are called anti-semites when they call out the war crimes commited by Israelis far right government, and likewise people categorically refuse to acknowledge that criticizing israel can be antisemitic. It is totally polarized, and people don't care about context anymore.

what do you mean with Israel exists because of antisemitism?

Zionism is a movement founded by european jews who have suffered from persecution for centuries. So they believe that to protect themselves from their oppression, they needed an own nation. Jews started to understand themselves as a people. And not to mention, The Shoa made millions of people seek refuge in Israel/Palestine after world war two. So in short, if anti-semitism wasn't a thing, the nation-state of Israel wouldn't even be an idea.

even considering that, withdrawing support for civilians would be unethical

yeah, I think it is strangely twisted. It has nothing to do with the accusation of anti-semitism, it is just israel they don't like. They never wanted to shake the hands of the israeli team, and just used the player's comments as a reason.

I don't. If you click on "Jews" on the wikipedia it says right in the beginning:

Jews (Hebrew: יְהוּדִים‎, ISO 259-2: Yehudim, Israeli pronunciation: [jehuˈdim]) or Jewish people are an ethnoreligious group[12] and nation[13][14][15][16][17]

The jewish are a people. Many of them aren't even religious. Antisemitism created israel. and not the other way around.

Here another wikipedia article on distinguishing antisemitism and criticism of Israel.

and the Israeli pre-emptively insulted the Irish basketball association

All I can find is that one team member called the irish team 'quite antisemitic'. I just don't see why that would be so upsetting. If it is unfounded, move on, don't make a big deal out of it. For some reason, being accused of antisemitism is a bigger of a deal than actually being antisemitic. And that is the reason why I am confused about it. One Israeli player says the irish team is antisemitic, the irish team gets angry and refuses to shake hands. Alright. But what is the context here? what exactly are the reasons why the israeli player made these accusations? And why does nobody care about the context? Everyone already decided whether the accusations are unfounded or not, without even knowing anything about the context. Imagine someone being accused of racism without being given any sort of context. And everyone already has an opinion whether the accusation is unfounded or not. It's just weird.

The 3 D's are a useful tool to tell apart antisemitism and valid criticism.

that's what's odd about it. The article says the reason the team didn't shake hands was because of 'wholly inaccurate accusations of antisemitism'. So does that mean they would have shaken hands if one of the israeli team members had not made that accusation? Or were they just looking for a reason? This is what seems odd to me. If we imagine Ireland playing against an african nation that is also torn by war and conflict. If one of their team members accused the irish team of racism, and as a consequence, the entire irish team refuses to shake hands with the African team because they are so offended by these accusations. That would be really weird. That's why I asked for more context.

There is a difference between the country and the religion and antisemitism is used for the religion alone.

That is incorrect. Anti-Judaism is the (much older) component of antisemitism that is used for religion alone. While it is wrong to say that any criticism against israel is antisemitic, it is equally wrong to say that criticizing Israel is never antisemitic. in some cases it is. Sadly many people refuse to have this discussion. Israel exists because of antisemitism, not the other way around.

how am I supposed to understand this, what is the context here?

An Israeli player said "It's known that they are quite anti-semitic" and the entire irish team felt so offended by that that they decided not to shake the hands of the israeli team? To show them how unfounded the allegations are?

What are the details here? the article doesn't really say much

good point. I have already shifted my position on this. Patients won't be able to get their needs met unless they comply, so acting like you like it, or even convincing yourself that you enjoy it is pretty much the only way to get through this process.

ouch, that hurts. But point taken.

Im okay with admitting that, but I would think that you’d have to be pretty vulnerable to share that info

you are right. It is inconsiderate of me to expect people to disclose vulnerabilities in order to have their perspectives validated. I wouldn't want to be treated that way either.

you make good points. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me.

thanks for the links. To clarify, I oppose "functioning labels" like "severe" or "mild" autism. However, I think it is important to say that some autistics feel more disabled by their autism than others. Support need vary, and there should be a way to express that. If you have another term that is better, I'm all open to hear that! Finding good terms isn't always easy. Doesn't mean any one is better than the other. I agree with you insofar that any kind of "ranking" - as you say, is very misleading. I am usually called "mildly autistic" when I disclose my autism. Which is not how I experience it. I'd personally be more comfortable with being called a high masking autistic, as it doesn't invalidate my experience as much. Again, I am open for better words here. What I read about people who identify as level 2 or 3 autistics is that it is important to them to make some distinction, as their experience is quite different from people with lower support needs.

You not wanting to listen to them, or not considering them “enough” to satisfy whatever need it is you have (which I genuinely don’t understand), is a you problem.

You misunderstand me here. I precisely want to listen to them. What I am looking for is perspectives from people who dealt with more impairing issues (eg problems getting dressed, basic hygiene, trouble to communicate basic needs etc). I haven't seen the perspectives from these particular people.