129
Lmao there is a huge difference between "existing" and "actively deliberately genociding a people and culture they believe are inferior"
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2026
129 points (97.8% liked)
World News
57012 readers
2165 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Israel has no right to exist. Germany also has no right to exist. No state has an inherent right to exist.
Any right is ultimately a product of consensus. Challenging a right is an expression of dissent, which is itself a human right.
It makes sense for a tolerant society seeking to protect itself to enshrine the rights of humans to exist, so as to avoid the paradox of tolerance. This is the compromise of free speech that must be made to defend it: to treat this consensus as a contract, whereby anyone who rejects it also loses the rights it confers. Likewise, anyone who denies other humans the right to exist must forfeit their own.
What's more, states are not people, but organisations. Their right to exist is the product of a consensus that this organisation has a sovereign monopoly on the use of force within its territory. But that right is strictly subordinate to the human right to exist and express opinions. It must be open to dissent.
And a state that denies people their right to live (Israel) or to express their dissent (Germany) is in breach of that contract.
Fuck our government. Fuck Merz, fuck the representatives and fuck the voters that enabled this travesty against human rights in general and our constitution in particular.
Directed at the German parliament
That's some Zionist bullshit. I guarantee that and criticism of Israel would end up being lumped in.
Already is in Germany. It's even illegal to protest in Germany in a different language, and that rule was specifically made to target the anti-genocide protests using Palestinian freedom slogans that have been around for decades
And what about Palestine's right to exist? Lebanon? Syria?
Can we first know what "right to exist" means for the context of a nation state? Surely, Nazi Germany didn't have a "right to exist". So, surely it's not a universal right like a person's right to exist? This means there are things a state can do that revoke it's "right to exist"? So, what does it actually mean?
-
All states (even Nazi Germany) have a "right to exist" and it cannot be revoked.
-
No states have a "right to exist".
-
All states have a right to exist until some defined violation that revokes that right.
-
It's a meaningless phrase that is only used in the context of defending a genocidal apartheid state.
I'm leaning towards thinking they are using the last definition.
Anarchism made a thought crime in Germany.
The Germans really love genocide.
Our government sure does. Their enablers probably don't actively love it, they just can't be arsed to actually think about the implications of just voting CxU. The reasons range from "I've always voted for them" (that just makes it worse) and "they're Christians" (the fuck they are) over various forms of "I like the status quo" (which they're making worse for everyone not already rich) to "the evil bad green / left parties are gonna take away my house, my car, make me eat tofu and whatever other propaganda bullshit my favourite sensationalist rag has told me that I believe uncritically".
They don't love genocide, they just love not having to care about politics and the cunts they elect abuse that merrily. Of course, there are also genuine genocide fans, but for the most part, it's more a habitual complacency with a chunk of domestic fearmongering.
As a democratic body, we've been slacking off for decades. Now the bill is coming due and the youth get to foot it. We get thrown in with the misguided, the lazy and the assholes. And the worst part is how many of us fall into the "domestic misery -> xenophobia" trap and prove you right.
I can't even argue with your conclusion. The difference between actively supporting and passively permitting is academic when the results are these pieces of shit in our government.
This whole shit about "Right to exist" is extremely absurd.
Never before, anywhere else on the planet, no other country was ever questioned to have the right to exist.
Fuck these genocidal colonialists, trying to smooth ambiguous sentences with acceptance for their genocide.
exactly. does Genovia have a right to exist? that's the fictional European kingdom from The Princess Diaries. it's doesn't exist. but does it have a right to?
Some countries hove more rights that some people.
I do not recognize terrorist states. Free Palestine. And fuck you Germany. You never changed.
What about Palestine's right to exist? They going to pass a similar law about that?....no?... Didn't think so.
People OK, government bad.
Israel should exist as a pluralistic society.
Apartheid Israel needs to undergo some very painful changes, starting with ending their genocide against Palestinians.
Israel is a settler colonial project, it fundamentally cannot exist as a pluralistic society.
Palestine used to be a pluralistic society.
Settler colonial projects absolutely can become pluralistic societies.
Israel should exist as a pluralistic society.
Pissrael is colonial apartheid white supremacist project. It needs to be completely dismantled and destroyed.
Many many people should be tortured and executed, all the rest can be imprisoned and forced to reconstruct every building destroyed. The sentence ends when Palestine is fully rebuilt.
Palestine should be the only state and we should mind our own business on how they should govern their land.
I don't know what "Israel's right to exist" means. Like, I believe that Israel should exist as a secular, democratic country with fully equal rights for all people regardless of their ethnicity or religion, with the right of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return, with reparations for the victims of genocide and apartheid, with full accountability for the perpetrators of crimes against humanity, and with a national project overseen by the international community that will effect the deep institutional and educational deradicalization of the population, including a complete political and institutional repudiation of all kind of jewish-supremacist forms of zionism, as well as a German-style Erinnerungskultur, and by having as its Staatsräson a commitment to the defence and security of Palestine. Is it jail for me in the Bundesrepublik or not?
Yes, jail for you. German law is about Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state (and everything that comes with that which they don't speak about and ignore).
And may the Israeli themselves receive the same right to exist as they give the Palestinians.
That has been illegal already afaik, so what changed?
It was illegal to deny holocaust. Fuck Israhell
No, antisemitism (or really any kind of discriminatory sentiment) is / has been punishable by law already. Among other things, there is precedence that denying Israels right to exist can count as such. While German law is not based on precedence, it shows that it was de facto illegal to do so.
What is legal is to criticise Israel and call out their crimes against humanity, but the political bubble has somehow been convinced it's not that bad and they are the good ones.
I don't see Germany making laws about other state's rights to exist. And also, states don't have rights to exist.
Don't be a dumb dumb protecting stupid laws.
Don't be a dumb dumb and read stating a plain fact about law as defense of a new law that seems to be mostly symbolic. Or an expression of my take on states for that matter, because neither has happened here.
Then I apologize on both counts. I understood your matter of fact tone as normalizing the overzealous and biased enforcement of anti-hate laws.
I don’t read this as defending it, just explaining the German government’s view of antisemitism.
I’ll go further and note that this broad definition adopted by the government led to multiple instances of Jews being arrested for antisemitism for peacefully protesting the apartheid. I’m not defending the law at all, just lamenting that it’s sadly not new, as far as I can tell.
So I guess I also want to know if anything changed or if they just wanted to pat themselves on the back for formally codifying it.
That was my bad if they weren't defending the law (see my comment to their response).
And yes, I'm aware of the irony that German Jewish people were arrested for their stance against the Palestinian genocide.
Fuck ze germans and fuck Israel