We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.
-
Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.
-
Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.
-
Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.
-
Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.
-
Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.
-
Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.
-
American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.
-
Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.
-
AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.
Aren't there many prominent jews saying critical things? Just off the top of my head, Naomi Klein, Norm Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Mandy Patinkin and his wife. Also, these 150 actors, directors, etc? https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/04/09/lhqn-a09.html
Many of those who do are prominent outside of Jewish communities (as in, prominent in general) because of their left-wing politics (some because of their anti-Israel activism, like Professor Finkelstein). It seems like Jewish institutions are dominated by Zionists - not surprising, they have all the funding and CIA backing. A similar thing happened with Ukrainian community institutions in the diaspora.
I don’t think there’s a single antizionist Jewish organization of meaningful size. The best you get is mealy mouthed twostatism or “peace for all” energy, never addressing the colonial nature of the state
Jewish Voice for Peace has 750,000 supporters. Is that not a meaningful size?
Edit: changed "members" to "supporters" based on their annual report
While many members are actual anti-zionists who understand the colonial nature of Israel, JVP as an organization does not take a stance on Palestinian statehood.
JVP is explicitly anti-Zionist
I didn't say they were zionists (though I see I may have inadvertently implied it - not intentionally, sorry), I said they take no stance on Palestinian statehood. IIRC neither does BDS. It's just not part of the purpose/tactics of JVP, who are an organization for American Jews to oppose American support for "Israel".
Edit: coming back to this comment, you didn't say that I called them zionists so it's slightly beside the point as a direct reply to you. My bad.
I feel like this thread has evolved into a different conversation - I commented above because someone said there is no prominent Jew saying a single critical thing of Israel and Zionism (patently false). Then someone said there is not a single anti-zionist Jewish organization of meaningful size (also patently false). Now the question is whether they take a stance on Palestinian statehood, which I don't know how you can be anti-Zionist and explicitly in support of the movement led by Palestinians and interpret that as "no stance on a Palestinian state" but that is a much more nuanced question that I think it worthy of nuanced discussion (which I appreciate your comments trying to be more particular like that) but that conversation is miles away from "not a single Jew opposes Zionism" and "there are no anti-Zionist Jewish organizations."
Yes, I think you're right that this conversation is drifting somewhat.
To be honest, I think part of it is different definitions of "anti-zionist". Some people (including myself, mostly - see the rest of this paragraph) take that to mean "opposing the existence of Israel at all", by which definition JVP is not an anti-zionist organization. However, since they take no stance on the existence of "Israel" or the Palestinian state for tactical reasons, I think it can be argued that they are anti-zionists regardless - as is the case with many organizations and people. It all depends on context. JVP I would call anti-zionists despite taking no position of "Israel's" existence (and of course many Palestinian organizations also take no stance or support 2 states, but are clearly anti-zionists as well), some individual being interviewed on Pier Morgan I would not (for example).
I kind of started rambling, I think, so hopefully I conveyed my point well enough. To summarize: I think organizations and people who prominently work against zionism can be anti-zionists while tactically accepting or taking no position on the existence of "Israel", however a random individual (who is not actively doing work to oppose "Israel") who actually does not think "Israel" should be abolished is not an anti-zionist by definition. Certainly, anyone who defends "Israel" in any way from those who say it should be abolished is a zionist. I think JVP fits into the first of these three cases (anti-zionist organization that takes no position for tactical reasons).
It's sadly true still that anti-zionism is a very small minority viewpoint among Jewish communities, especially among those in powerful/leadership positions. It's more common, I think, to find people who don't care/are neutral, but still not in positions of power which are completely dominated by zionists (unsurprising, they get all the funding and support whereas their enemies are smeared and harassed).
Yeah, all fair points
I was very specific in my language, does JVP support the decolonization of Israel and an end to the Jewish state?
They have 4 "FAQs" on their website and one of them is explicit that it is opposed to Zionism. jewishvoiceforpeace.org/about/#faq
JVP takes no official stance on Palestinian statehood, it's not really part of their purpose/tactics. Neither does BDS, IIRC, so it doesn't make them zionists. JVP's purpose is to oppose American support for "Israel", since they're an American Jewish organization.
Yeah, in the US, the "Jewish institutions" of the 20th century all were or became Zionist institutions over time, so if anyone prominent within them turns on Israel, they get systematically excluded from institutional life. Which happens all the time.