This is a very short post, but I have decided to make it a post rather than a note because I’m disturbed by certain directions ‘anti-imperialism’ has taken certain small but vocal sections of the left. I feel it’s important to be very clear about this, even at the risk of being cringe, shrill, or tedious.
> In a word, the responses to this tweet are antisemitism.
I agree with everything else, but this seems incorrect to me. The responses are claiming that the South African jews are being hypocritical not because they're jews, but because they're white. I would expect to see similar responses to any non-jewish white group of people in South Africa talking about freeing Palastine. So I think you could reasonably call it racism, but not antisemitism.
Just imagine if every religion had to have a nation of it's own to live in.
I grew up in England, with a Scottish mother. When we visited elderly Scottish relatives, we were amused and concerned about the local religious wars which were based on differences between bible statements from one section of the bible and another. Everyone would have to spend most of their time trying to run their own nation. (I bet they would love that, too.)
Usual caveat that South Africa, like any country, has its problems, but given the history I actually think a lot of credit goes to the leaders of the opposition to Aparteid that there was not ethnic cleansing of Africaners. I am not personally a beleiver in collective punishment, but people have been ethnically cleansed for much less than what they did! (E.g. Indians from Uganda)
If you think Israel is an Apartaid state (debateable but defintely parellels in how they treat non-Israeli citizens) then South Africa is a reasonable example to point to when arguing that the end of Israel doesn't mean the end of its Jewish population, so these arguments aren't even helping their own case. Well, unless they are just in favor of ethnonationalism, but that has very troubling implications for ethnic minorities around the world.
> In a word, the responses to this tweet are antisemitism.
I agree with everything else, but this seems incorrect to me. The responses are claiming that the South African jews are being hypocritical not because they're jews, but because they're white. I would expect to see similar responses to any non-jewish white group of people in South Africa talking about freeing Palastine. So I think you could reasonably call it racism, but not antisemitism.
Just imagine if every religion had to have a nation of it's own to live in.
I grew up in England, with a Scottish mother. When we visited elderly Scottish relatives, we were amused and concerned about the local religious wars which were based on differences between bible statements from one section of the bible and another. Everyone would have to spend most of their time trying to run their own nation. (I bet they would love that, too.)
I am now totally confused. Which means my explanation will be very confusing.
In fact it is so confusing that I cannot explain it at all.
If one of my logins still exists, then OK. If not, sorry!
Usual caveat that South Africa, like any country, has its problems, but given the history I actually think a lot of credit goes to the leaders of the opposition to Aparteid that there was not ethnic cleansing of Africaners. I am not personally a beleiver in collective punishment, but people have been ethnically cleansed for much less than what they did! (E.g. Indians from Uganda)
If you think Israel is an Apartaid state (debateable but defintely parellels in how they treat non-Israeli citizens) then South Africa is a reasonable example to point to when arguing that the end of Israel doesn't mean the end of its Jewish population, so these arguments aren't even helping their own case. Well, unless they are just in favor of ethnonationalism, but that has very troubling implications for ethnic minorities around the world.