|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 10:09:22 GMT -5
I don't think this was true in the 90s when I was growing up. Feels like there was a lull between the 60s and the 00s. You might be right about that. I didn't see too much of it in the 80's either, but I do remember my older cousins in the 70's in that mindset. Now though, the moment you set foot on a college campus you're bombarded with it. Now I expected that at NYU where my middle child went, but at G-Town? That kind of blew my mind. I was somewhat radical back when I was in college 20 years ago but the students I with whom engaged in political activism with were a small minority where I went to school. Today, I assume that young people are more politically engaged than in the past two decades and that’s a good thing. The long-term problem for Israel though, extends well beyond college campuses. Young people in general in most western countries are far less sympathetic to Israel today than in the past. And it’s largely due to Israel’s own policies and injustices. So while most Western leaders are reliably in Israel’s corner today, support for Israel is likely to erode in the West over the next few decades. |
|
|
|
Post by alienrace on Nov 14, 2023 10:13:15 GMT -5
College activism doesn't bother me. College is when people are supposed to find out who they are. I'm less bothered by the activism than by the pressure exerted to be an activist. Peer pressure really doesn't lead to good, or genuine things. |
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Nov 14, 2023 10:22:39 GMT -5
College activism doesn't bother me. College is when people are supposed to find out who they are. I'm less bothered by the activism than by the pressure exerted to be an activist. Peer pressure really doesn't lead to good, or genuine things. I don't believe people are being forced to do anything they don't want to do as it applies to activism. Are people getting caught up in the moment? Absolutely. And society today has kind of forced you to pick sides on pretty much everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 10:49:37 GMT -5
Glenn Greenwald’s interview with two Harvard students who signed the controversial letter after the October 7th attacks.
Worth listening to their thoughts to be reminded that these are young adults (kids to me). Therefore it’s better to engage with them in debate than to try to cancel or censor them for their controversial opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by alienrace on Nov 14, 2023 11:02:54 GMT -5
I don't believe people are being forced to do anything they don't want to do as it applies to activism. Forced, not really. Pressured? Absolutely. Having 3 kids that went through college, witnessed it firsthand, and they still talk about it. |
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Nov 14, 2023 11:35:15 GMT -5
College activism doesn't bother me. College is when people are supposed to find out who they are. I'm less bothered by the activism than by the pressure exerted to be an activist. Peer pressure really doesn't lead to good, or genuine things. You don't think learning to deal with peer pressure is a skill worth developing? Sure gonna need it in the workplace. |
|
|
|
Post by alienrace on Nov 14, 2023 11:43:39 GMT -5
You don't think learning to deal with peer pressure is a skill worth developing? Sure gonna need it in the workplace. Did I say that? Why is it you seem to take things I say and extrapolate into something I did not? |
|
|
|
Post by msmaggie on Nov 14, 2023 11:47:30 GMT -5
You don't think learning to deal with peer pressure is a skill worth developing? Sure gonna need it in the workplace. Did I say that? Why is it you seem to take things I say and extrapolate into something I did not? You said peer pressure doesn't lead to good things. I don't agree: developing the character to handle peer pressure is a "good thing" IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 13:53:34 GMT -5
Van Jones greeted with “no ceasefire” chants at the pro-Israel rally in DC today
Makes one wonder if they really care about getting the hostages released alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Nov 14, 2023 13:55:48 GMT -5
There is an inordinate amount of pressure on young people to have, or be part of a "cause" since the 1960's. It has gotten for more intense in the last decade or so. it is 'cool'
|
|
|
|
Post by summer23 on Nov 14, 2023 14:00:33 GMT -5
As long as destruction of property, stealing property, and acts of violence do not occur, I encourage people to protest/march.
When I see with my own eyes people destroying property, stealing property, throwing things at police, etc., and I am told there was "very little" of it took place, or it was "mostly peaceful", it's no longer people protesting/marching and I have no use for them or people throwing cover for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on Nov 14, 2023 14:00:38 GMT -5
There is an inordinate amount of pressure on young people to have, or be part of a "cause" since the 1960's. It has gotten for more intense in the last decade or so. Sounds like young people need a job. I read and developed opinions in college but was too busy to be an activist because I had to go to work. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Jazz on Nov 14, 2023 14:14:34 GMT -5
Broadly I agree but why shouldn’t the Palestinians get a vote in this debate? Aren’t you de-humanizing Palestinians by not considering how they feel about the slogan? We’re only allowed to consider how one side feels about it? So we’re back to choosing sides. And it’s complicated by the fact that many pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist activists are Jewish themselves. So who should I listen to? - Palestinians and Jews who aren’t offended by the slogan “Palestine will be free, from the river to the sea” and say it’s about freedom and not Israel’s destruction? or - pro-Israel Jews who are sensitive about civil rights for Palestinians because of their emotional and political connections to Israel and their desire for it to maintain its identity as a Jewish state? They do get a 'vote', I've heard explanations about how this isn't a call for genocide and the violent destruction of Israel. I believe those explantations from people that it's a call for a one state solution with liberty and justice for all. Although, for the most part, I think it's just a slogan that rhymes to which many people employing it give little or no thought. Dehumanizing is a little much so is the choosing sides thing. We're talking about an English slogan here, not what should actually happen on the ground. If 'the river to the sea' concept is a one state solution, I would think step one would not be the continued antagonization of people with whom this future state is to be shared. It's obviously going to take a tremendous act of trust and understanding to implement such a solution and feeding into fears, and letting people in power deliberately play on those fears, over something as relatively unimportant as a slogan that rhymes seems pointless.
You can listen to whoever you like but I find your characterization of who objects and their motives for objecting extremely disingenuous. As I alluded to above, absolutely there are people in Israel using this slogan to say, 'see? they hate us and want to kill us all'. But these are hardly the only reasons given for the objection. The primary reason is that a group who has faced constant oppression, wholesale slaughter and genocide for centuries have heard this kind of language before and it's bringing back the collective trauma of past historical experiences for them. You are being incredibly dismissive of all that and instead saying that the problem with the slogan is civil rights for Palestinians and the wish to maintain a Jewish state on the back of denying these rights. This is exactly what American Jews have been complaining about. That no one takes their centuries old fears seriously and also that this dismissal is not applied to any other historically marginalized and oppressed group.
|
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Nov 14, 2023 14:22:47 GMT -5
Broadly I agree but why shouldn’t the Palestinians get a vote in this debate? Aren’t you de-humanizing Palestinians by not considering how they feel about the slogan? We’re only allowed to consider how one side feels about it? So we’re back to choosing sides. And it’s complicated by the fact that many pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist activists are Jewish themselves. So who should I listen to? - Palestinians and Jews who aren’t offended by the slogan “Palestine will be free, from the river to the sea” and say it’s about freedom and not Israel’s destruction? or - pro-Israel Jews who are sensitive about civil rights for Palestinians because of their emotional and political connections to Israel and their desire for it to maintain its identity as a Jewish state? They do get a 'vote', I've heard explanations about how this isn't a call for genocide and the violent destruction of Israel. I believe those explantations from people that it's a call for a one state solution with liberty and justice for all. Although, for the most part, I think it's just a slogan that rhymes to which many people employing it give little or no thought. Dehumanizing is a little much so is the choosing sides thing. We're talking about an English slogan here, not what should actually happen on the ground. If 'the river to the sea' concept is a one state solution, I would think step one would not be the continued antagonization of people with whom this future state is to be shared. It's obviously going to take a tremendous act of trust and understanding to implement such a solution and feeding into fears, and letting people in power deliberately play on those fears, over something as relatively unimportant as a slogan that rhymes seems pointless.
You can listen to whoever you like but I find your characterization of who objects and their motives for objecting extremely disingenuous. As I alluded to above, absolutely there are people in Israel using this slogan to say, 'see? they hate us and want to kill us all'. But these are hardly the only reasons given for the objection. The primary reason is that a group who has faced constant oppression, wholesale slaughter and genocide for centuries have heard this kind of language before and it's bringing back the collective trauma of past historical experiences for them. You are being incredibly dismissive of all that and instead saying that the problem with the slogan is civil rights for Palestinians and the wish to maintain a Jewish state on the back of denying these rights. This is exactly what American Jews have been complaining about. That no one takes their centuries old fears seriously and also that this dismissal is not applied to any other historically marginalized and oppressed group.
I beg to differ. African-Americans have had their complaints and pleas fall on deaf ears for half a century and only until recently have those pleas been taken seriously. But even then those pleas are being rejected by a significant amount of people. And while I am extremely sympathetic to Jewish people and what they've gone through throughout history, the same could be said to some extent about Palestinians. I refuse to put one group of people above another. People everywhere have suffered long enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 15:04:35 GMT -5
Dehumanizing is a little much so is the choosing sides thing. There are two historically oppressed peoples involved in this debate: Jews and Palestinians. The Palestinians have been oppressed by Israel for the last several decades. The chant is about their liberation from oppression. You're choosing sides by elevating pro-Israel Jews over the interpretations of Palestinians and Jewish critics of Israel. Even if we set aside Palestinians (I don't but for the sake of argument..), which Jews should I listen to? The zionists or the anti-zionists? It's not as cut and dry as an unambiguously hateful slogan like "Jews will not replace us". "From the river to the sea" is ambiguous because t can mean different things depending on who chants it. This is exactly what American Jews have been complaining about. That no one takes their centuries old fears seriously and also that this dismissal is not applied to any other historically marginalized and oppressed group.As a Black person with Native American ancestry, I strongly disagree. I've been told to "get over slavery" many times in my life. And it's worth noting that there are many American Jews who oppose Israel using Jewish trauma to shield the state of Israel from criticism of their oppressive policies towards Palestinians. I've shared references to their voices earlier in the thread. Israel as a nation-state, shouldn't benefit from the victim card anymore than any other nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Jazz on Nov 14, 2023 15:07:11 GMT -5
I beg to differ. African-Americans have had their complaints and pleas fall on deaf ears for half a century and only until recently have those pleas been taken seriously. But even then those pleas are being rejected by a significant amount of people. And while I am extremely sympathetic to Jewish people and what they've gone through throughout history, the same could be said to some extent about Palestinians. I refuse to put one group of people above another. People everywhere have suffered long enough. The context of my remarks is ‘The left has really let us down.’ Why American Jews feel abandoned The left has been sympathetic to and championed the issues faced by Black people even if the country as a whole has not. |
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 15:10:40 GMT -5
I beg to differ. African-Americans have had their complaints and pleas fall on deaf ears for half a century and only until recently have those pleas been taken seriously. But even then those pleas are being rejected by a significant amount of people. And while I am extremely sympathetic to Jewish people and what they've gone through throughout history, the same could be said to some extent about Palestinians. I refuse to put one group of people above another. People everywhere have suffered long enough. The context of my remarks is ‘The left has really let us down.’ Why American Jews feel abandoned The left has been sympathetic to and championed the issues faced by Black people even if the country as a whole has not. Blame Israel. Apartheid and progressivism don’t mix. Like what do you expect when Israel is marginalizing the Palestinians? |
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Nov 14, 2023 15:19:45 GMT -5
I beg to differ. African-Americans have had their complaints and pleas fall on deaf ears for half a century and only until recently have those pleas been taken seriously. But even then those pleas are being rejected by a significant amount of people. And while I am extremely sympathetic to Jewish people and what they've gone through throughout history, the same could be said to some extent about Palestinians. I refuse to put one group of people above another. People everywhere have suffered long enough. The context of my remarks is ‘The left has really let us down.’ Why American Jews feel abandoned The left has been sympathetic to and championed the issues faced by Black people even if the country as a whole has not. As for being let down I think it depends who you ask. Soul has posted video after video showing Jews marching in support of a ceasefire. And many Jews are critical of Israeli leadership. Sure there have been too many people on the left using anti-Jew rhetoric in support of Palestine but I don't think the left has totally abandoned Jews or Israel.
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 15:33:47 GMT -5
The context of my remarks is ‘The left has really let us down.’ Why American Jews feel abandoned The left has been sympathetic to and championed the issues faced by Black people even if the country as a whole has not. As for being let down I think it depends who you ask. Soul has posted video after video showing Jews marching in support of a ceasefire. And many Jews are critical of Israeli leadership. Sure there have been too many people on the left using anti-Jew rhetoric in support of Palestine but I don't think the left has totally abandoned Jews or Israel. One of the biggest things left out of this discussion so far is the fact that most Liberals are secular or not religious. So most of us don’t view “Jews” and “Israel” as interchangeable. They’re two separate things (a religion and a nation). Despite the fact that the Left is a little insensitive towards religious people in general at times, Jewish Leftists/Liberals haven’t claimed to feel threatened when they participate in pro-Palestine events around the country. And they shouldn’t given that many Muslims participate in these events too. In contrast, Christians are more dominant among Conservatives. Which partially explains them having more of an emotional connection to Israel and not viewing Jews and Israel as separate as much as those of us on the Left. So on a certain level, the opposing sides are talking past each other because we don’t view Jews and Israel in the same exact way… |
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 14, 2023 18:22:26 GMT -5
Van Jones is living proof that radical college students become less radical after we cut our hair, get a job and a mortgage 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Nov 14, 2023 18:25:00 GMT -5
Broadly I agree but why shouldn’t the Palestinians get a vote in this debate? Aren’t you de-humanizing Palestinians by not considering how they feel about the slogan? We’re only allowed to consider how one side feels about it? So we’re back to choosing sides. And it’s complicated by the fact that many pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist activists are Jewish themselves. So who should I listen to? - Palestinians and Jews who aren’t offended by the slogan “Palestine will be free, from the river to the sea” and say it’s about freedom and not Israel’s destruction? or - pro-Israel Jews who are sensitive about civil rights for Palestinians because of their emotional and political connections to Israel and their desire for it to maintain its identity as a Jewish state? They do get a 'vote', I've heard explanations about how this isn't a call for genocide and the violent destruction of Israel. I believe those explantations from people that it's a call for a one state solution with liberty and justice for all. Although, for the most part, I think it's just a slogan that rhymes to which many people employing it give little or no thought. Dehumanizing is a little much so is the choosing sides thing. We're talking about an English slogan here, not what should actually happen on the ground. If 'the river to the sea' concept is a one state solution, I would think step one would not be the continued antagonization of people with whom this future state is to be shared. It's obviously going to take a tremendous act of trust and understanding to implement such a solution and feeding into fears, and letting people in power deliberately play on those fears, over something as relatively unimportant as a slogan that rhymes seems pointless.
You can listen to whoever you like but I find your characterization of who objects and their motives for objecting extremely disingenuous. As I alluded to above, absolutely there are people in Israel using this slogan to say, 'see? they hate us and want to kill us all'. But these are hardly the only reasons given for the objection. The primary reason is that a group who has faced constant oppression, wholesale slaughter and genocide for centuries have heard this kind of language before and it's bringing back the collective trauma of past historical experiences for them. You are being incredibly dismissive of all that and instead saying that the problem with the slogan is civil rights for Palestinians and the wish to maintain a Jewish state on the back of denying these rights. This is exactly what American Jews have been complaining about. That no one takes their centuries old fears seriously and also that this dismissal is not applied to any other historically marginalized and oppressed group.
Fantastic post
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Jazz on Nov 15, 2023 15:46:12 GMT -5
There are two historically oppressed peoples involved in this debate: Jews and Palestinians. The Palestinians have been oppressed by Israel for the last several decades. The chant is about their liberation from oppression. You're choosing sides by elevating pro-Israel Jews over the interpretations of Palestinians and Jewish critics of Israel. Even if we set aside Palestinians (I don't but for the sake of argument..), which Jews should I listen to? The zionists or the anti-zionists? It's not as cut and dry as an unambiguously hateful slogan like "Jews will not replace us". "From the river to the sea" is ambiguous because t can mean different things depending on who chants it. I'm not choosing sides. You've made these sides up and placed me in one. You don't have to be a pro Israel Jew to find this slogan offensive or questionable. I'm also saying that when people say something is offensive to them it's worth listening to them and understanding why. Instead of dismissing them by creating this system that places one groups history above anothers. Which, by the way, is going to make the one state solution this slogan calls for pretty tough to implement. How are you supposed to get people on board when you're chanting a slogan they think means you want to kill them all? As a Black person with Native American ancestry, I strongly disagree. I've been told to "get over slavery" many times in my life. And it's worth noting that there are many American Jews who oppose Israel using Jewish trauma to shield the state of Israel from criticism of their oppressive policies towards Palestinians. I've shared references to their voices earlier in the thread. Israel as a nation-state, shouldn't benefit from the victim card anymore than any other nation. Yeah but who told you to get over slavery? The progressive left told you to get over slavery? The people chanting the river/sea slogan? This is about left wing Jewish people in this country feeling like they've been abandoned by people they thought they were all in a club together with. Like if you told them something they were doing was racist/sexist/whateverist they would examine what it was and try to do better but when it's their turn, instead people explain to them why they're wrong. Go reread the article in the OP. This isn't a bunch of Zionists disingenuously weaponizing claims of antisemitism to defend Israel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Jazz on Nov 15, 2023 15:47:58 GMT -5
Blame Israel. Apartheid and progressivism don’t mix. Like what do you expect when Israel is marginalizing the Palestinians? So left wing Jews should just 'get over it'. Cool, got it.
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 15, 2023 16:01:56 GMT -5
Blame Israel. Apartheid and progressivism don’t mix. Like what do you expect when Israel is marginalizing the Palestinians? So left wing Jews should just 'get over it'. Cool, got it. Uncharacteristically silly reply from one of my favorite posters 
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 15, 2023 16:02:27 GMT -5
You are choosing a side if you're arguing that other meanings of the slogan should be ignored. Furthermore, let's clarify a few things. Israeli is a nationality and not all Israelis are Jewish. Jews aren't a political monolith. Some find the slogan offensive while others don't. One Jewish person or even a few, can't speak for all Jews. In the context of Israel, the Palestinians are the marginalized group. So "From the river to the sea" should be viewed in the context of people wanting freedom and equality for the Palestinians, not the erasure of Israel. I don't see it as fair to assume the worst of people who use that slogan at protests. This is about left wing Jewish people in this country feeling like they've been abandoned by people they thought they were all in a club together with. I have no idea who these folks are but I respectfully disagree with conflating criticisms of Israel with hate speech. For the last several weeks I've seen thousands of Leftwing Jews standing in solidarity with the Palestinians and calling for a ceasefire. Marxist and Progressive Jews were at the forefront of the Civil Rights movement and in supporting Palestinian liberation, they’re continuing that tradition. If a person is offended by a slogan that calls for freedom and equality for Palestinians (or any oppressed group of people), they're probably not Leftists or Progressive. Like if you told them something they were doing was racist/sexist/whateverist they would examine what it was and try to do better but when it's their turn, instead people explain to them why they're wrong. Go reread the article in the OP. This isn't a bunch of Zionists disingenuously weaponizing claims of antisemitism to defend Israel. "From the river to the sea" isn't what this thread was about originally. It was about college students and other activists saying insensitive things in the immiediate aftermath of the Oct. 7th attacks. Some groups responded by blaming Israel and not condemning Hamas. I don't agree with those kinds of statements and said so earlier in the thread. But I also don't think it's fair to label those statements 'Hate Speech' and try to censor people or get them fired. Like for example, when Bill Maher called the 9/11 hijackers “brave” shortly after the attacks, that was an insensitive comment for sure. But no one called it hate speech. Likewise, people blaming Israel and not condemning Hamas is insensitive but not hate speech. Israel is a country not a race or religion. It should be fair game on college campuses to say things about politics that aren't popular or simply wrong but we live in a society full of snowflakes today 🙁.
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 15, 2023 16:49:33 GMT -5
The slogan “F__k Joe Biden” offends half of America but no one should lose their job or be censured for saying it.
|
|
|
|
Post by alienrace on Nov 15, 2023 16:51:30 GMT -5
The slogan “F__k Joe Biden” offends half of America but no one should lose their job or be censured for saying it. Probably not half at this point Just sayin'
|
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Nov 15, 2023 17:01:20 GMT -5
There are two historically oppressed peoples involved in this debate: Jews and Palestinians. The Palestinians have been oppressed by Israel for the last several decades. The chant is about their liberation from oppression. You're choosing sides by elevating pro-Israel Jews over the interpretations of Palestinians and Jewish critics of Israel. Even if we set aside Palestinians (I don't but for the sake of argument..), which Jews should I listen to? The zionists or the anti-zionists? It's not as cut and dry as an unambiguously hateful slogan like "Jews will not replace us". "From the river to the sea" is ambiguous because t can mean different things depending on who chants it. I'm not choosing sides. You've made these sides up and placed me in one. You don't have to be a pro Israel Jew to find this slogan offensive or questionable. I'm also saying that when people say something is offensive to them it's worth listening to them and understanding why. Instead of dismissing them by creating this system that places one groups history above anothers. Which, by the way, is going to make the one state solution this slogan calls for pretty tough to implement. How are you supposed to get people on board when you're chanting a slogan they think means you want to kill them all? And, we have a winner
|
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Nov 15, 2023 17:47:18 GMT -5
I'm not choosing sides. You've made these sides up and placed me in one. You don't have to be a pro Israel Jew to find this slogan offensive or questionable. I'm also saying that when people say something is offensive to them it's worth listening to them and understanding why. Instead of dismissing them by creating this system that places one groups history above anothers. Which, by the way, is going to make the one state solution this slogan calls for pretty tough to implement. How are you supposed to get people on board when you're chanting a slogan they think means you want to kill them all? And, we have a winner Look at the polls and look at the massive protests around the world. This is the most successful anti-war movement since the anti-Iraq war protests. So it’s a moot point and factually inaccurate to argue that the slogan is discouraging Jewish people from supporting Palestinian liberation. |
|
|
|
Post by summer23 on Nov 15, 2023 18:23:16 GMT -5
|
|
