205
Meta to broaden hate speech policy to remove more posts targeting 'Zionists'
(www.middleeasteye.net)
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
205 points (92.5% liked)
Technology
59317 readers
4531 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Conflating Jews and Zionists is obligatory for Mark "Donated $125.000 to Zaka" Zuckerberg.
Also denial of the existence of israel is now forbidden in Germany and on Meta platforms. Free speech btw.
Denial of Israel as in saying it doesn't exist, or that it shouldn't?
Pretending the state of Israel isn't a form of regional power doesn't make it go away.
Don't get me wrong, Israel has shown time and again that it does not deserve that power and must be dismantled. But that doesn't sound like what the law is talking about.
Maybe I'm being overly pedantic about the language in use
To be clear I'm talking about the government form of one single state and calling it Palestine, Not booting out everyone living there.
Israel could be recognized as a country. In fact Palestinians have presented a two state solution for mutual recognition. If israel accepts it, it will become a country. Even Hamas has said to be open to this
Palestinians have the right to recognize israel as a country as they have stolen their land. We do not have that right. Lucky for israel if they aren't super Nazis looking to expand their Lebensraum, they can agree to that two state solution right now.
Maybe it's just me, but calling for the eradication of a country is bad (controversial take, I know)
Zionists are not following Judaism. If you ask some orthodox jewish people living in occupied Palestine they'll tell you they are in exile and are not allowed to have their country until the arrival of the Messiah, that they are simply living in that land that belongs to whoever it belonged to.
Zionists on the other hand are imperialist colonizers who took the land from its owners. So asking for the land to be returned to its rightful owners is legitimate, and this translates to the end of the existance of the state created on wrongfully seized land.
This should not be conflated with eradicating the people. The people could live there with the local Muslims, Christians and Jews as they did before. Although I know we don't live in a fairy tale. If the occupying state is dismantled, how can one live peacefully with the people who tortured you, your family and society for decades and made your life hell...
Edit: adding link to interview
That's a tiny minority sect of Jews in Israel, a majority of Jews in Israel support the existence of Israel, that's why they're there.
A majority of Jews in the U.S. and globally also support the existence of Israel.
I'll edit the link to mention these are orthodox jews who were interviewed.
I didn't know how few are the Jews who actually heed their religion.
To be noted regarding Pew's poll is that the number of those who believe that the land was promised to the Jews does not say whether they believe they should be owning it now or it shall only become theirs once the Messiah comes.
South Africa pulled it off. But yes, it basically required dismantling the state completely from what it was. South Africa as it existed before and after apartheid are essentially different states with the same name. They got a new Constitution and everything. They still have a lot of problems with the white population having a majority of the land and money, but there's nowhere near the violence there was beforehand. Everyone mostly lives in peace together now. It can be done. The same thing happened with the IRA in the UK.
We would need to do the same thing. Dismantle Israel completely down to its roots, build something new in the same place from scratch, a place for both Palestinians and Israelis can live together. Some people would be pissed and there'd be some trouble in the beginning, but most people want to live in peace.
So, per your words, jewish people are zionists who use religion as an excuse to occupy a land that is not theirs (and keep expanding with more settlers every chance they get). Also, isn't israel supposed to be their god given country? Why would they leave?
No, what I said is that Zionism opposes Judaism. Zionists seemingly are not religious but twist what the religion says to enact their colonial goals.
So, per your words, jewish people are zionists who use religion as an excuse to occupy a land that is not theirs (and keep expanding with more settlers every chance they get). Also, isn't israel supposed to be their god given country? Why would they leave?
Yes everyone should recognize Palestine.
I agree, but not a Palestine that occupies 100% of Israel.
Israel is not a country.
If israel wants to exist it can accept a two state solution with Palestine right now.
You do not get to decide whether a colony is a country. The natives do.
Saying israel is a country is similar to saying Crimea is actually Russian.
Is the US a country? Is Australia a country? I doubt the natives decided they were. Very weird way to define a country, regardless of your thoughts on Israel / Palestine
Calling for the eradication of a religious ethnostate that engages in genocide and colonialism is surprisingly a good thing.
Or do you think it was bad the world eradicated Nazi Germany?
That's an excellent historical analogy — too bad you've misunderstood it. Germany was not dissolved after WW2, and its population was not thrown to the wolves. We only replaced their government. I agree that Likud needs to go (ideally to the Hague) but the people here wanting to wipe the country from the map are dangerous lunatics.
The countries of East and West Germany would like a word with you. The state of Nazi Germany very clearly ceased to exist.
What? No it did not. What are you even trying to say?
The division was because the winners couldn't coexist, not because Germany inherently needed to be split. The whole thing could have been treated like West Germany.
No, the division was because the winners couldn't agree on who gets to build a new country where the old one was.
No one was going to leave the Nazi state in power.
Sounds to me like we're in agreement here? In any case, the Allies didn't give have Poland annex German territory or whatever. It continued to exist. Lots of people in this thread on the other hand want to delete Israel altogether and give it all to Palestine (which, incidentally, has never been a state at any point in history)
Why would the Allies give German land to a Soviet puppet state of Poland?
You know what they did? They gave it back to the people living there, so let's give Israel back to the people who lived there, that is the majority the Palestinians.
The Israelis can be like White South Africans, stay or fuck off, it's not important.
Holy fuck. I'm going to be charitable and assume you're just unaware of history, and not a full-blown Nazi. You know Palestinians and Mizrahi Jews are the same people, right?
The only full blown Nazi I'm potentially seeing around here is wanting the Nazi-wannabe state of Israel to not be destroyed.
And no, Palestinians are not all Jews.
The majority of Israelis are descended from Europeans or Americans, they are not the people living there before Israels colonisation.
This is absolutely false, but I should perhaps be thanking you. I've been wondering in these Israel vs. Palestine discussions why so many people have such dogshit takes on the matter. It seems many are simply running their mouth despite a complete lack of understanding of the facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#Jews
That aside, your willingness to deport millions of people is appalling. You are a hateful, miserable person and what you are advocating for here is a type of genocide.
That doesn’t say they at all.
What it does show is at best maybe 44% can trace a parent or grandparent back to the region.
Destruction of a state apparatus is not genocide. I understand you’re invested in downplaying what genocide actually is so you’re acting dishonestly with that remark but still.
This is not confusing the two - this is specifically targeting anti-semitism
No this is banning criticism of israel along with it. Using Judaism as a shield for Zionists.
If they wanted to ban antisemitism they would not have included non-antisemitism in there.
You think that dehumanising, calling for harm or denials of Jewish existence aren't anti-semitism?
Why are you bringing up Judaism?
The article separately mentions Zionism. This has nothing to do with Judaism.
You mentioned Judaism. You think Zionism had nothing to do with Judaism? You think dehumanising anyone - including Zionists is ok?
That is exactly it. Antisemites figured out a while back that they could say whatever they want about Jews as long as they swap out the word Zionist. This has been a feature of white supremacy for ages. It used to be "people with big noses" or "people who wear hats" or even "bankers," or "globalists." The latter two are more similar to the use of "Zionist" because they represent actual groups that people criticize. That gives more cover to the actual antisemites.
This is actually a good thing, because it removes that cover from bigots who want to hijack the movement and hide behind it.
Isn't it incredibly dangerous to ban "Zionist" only because it's misused? It can be used to legitimately describe people who have a vested interest in Isreal occupying Palestine. I understand it's used as a slur, but banning otherwise normal words will make the discourse much more difficult.
Who said anything about banning it? You can read the full statement here. As I said, this is about bigots co-opting the word to say bigoted shit, taking into account the nuance of how a word can be used or misused. Literally no one other than propagandists are talking about Meta "banning" the word.
My apologies, I did not read the article on the assumption Meta would choose the irresponsible option. The article was surprisingly nuanced, and I hope the enforcement of Meta's policies are equally nuanced.
Yes, let's hope so!