Really, chloe?
Seems conspiratorial… never attribute malice to that which can be attributed to stupidity.
When reading the article she is actually on the right side:
“I believe that it is deeply antisemitic to conflate the actions of the Israeli government with Jewish people, not the least when Jewish peace activists worldwide are protesting these actions.”
Probably assumed this was just a peace slogan.
If she wasn’t defending her actions, I’d agree with you. I can understand repeating the slogan not knowing the full context, but she seems to know full well what she’s doing.
That’s not the impression I get at all.
She said she’s taking a lead from Palestinian and Jewish peace activists. And the article has quotes from both Palestinian and Jewish representatives who see it simply as a call for freedom for an oppressed people, so that’s a credible claim.
But the meaning behind what people say and how others interpret their words can be very different. It’s pretty evident some people do take offense to the chant. And maybe the potential harm was more potent than any underlying good intent.
In the interview she gave with RNZ, she wasn’t willing to say whether or not she would continue using the chant. Maybe she’s reconsidering whether it’s appropriate, and she’s feel a bit whakama about the whole thing. But that’s just as much conjecture as what you’ve said.
Anyway, my point is I don’t think it’s fair for you to act like this is some kind of deliberate attack.
Quiet everyone, David “someone should blow up the Ministry for Pacific Peoples” Seymour has something to say about dangerous rhetoric
The slogan isn’t calling for a genocide, it’s calling for freedom for Palestinians. That isn’t anti-Semitic. It’s just bad faith to conflate Palestinian human rights with a genocide against Israelis. Human rights aren’t a zero-sum game, everyone can have them.
Sorry, but you’re wrong there. The translation tames things a bit, but the original slogan, along with the Hamas charter it’s drawn from, call for the outright extermination of Israel.
And Hamas are miserable anti-Semitic goons that are an armed minority and do not represent the interests of most Palestinians.
Interestingly the phrase was originally used by Likud in 1977 in an election charter: “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. If this phrase is a call to genocide the knife cuts both ways.
Doesn’t make it right for anyone to say though.
Personally, I don’t use it, because I’ve heard from some Jewish people I know that they find it offensive or alienating. But for me I’m not bothered with pro-Palestinian activists using it either.
Saying that the country of Israel should not exist is not antisemitic.
Looks like a contrived political battleground. Pick your side folks there will be no nuance allowed.
I cannot begin to express how little I care about this story.
Thanks for contributing then?
