I recently made a post that, according to the moderator which banned me, “conflated Judaism with Zionism”. The post did not in any way conflate Judaism with Zionism, it was me being tired of people trying to center anti-Semitism and over inflate the presence it has in society.
It had an inflammatory title, “I don’t give a shit about anti-Semitism”, which I can get why people would find problematic. But the text if the post was not in any way conflating Zionism with Judaism. I explained the reasons for the rise in anti-Semitism, the genocide the Israeli state is carrying out, and why I am tired of people acting like it is of most importance.
Jewish people are not systemically oppressed, they’ve been integrated into Western society, into whiteness. What has happened to Jewish people and their assimilation is similar to the experience of Italians and the Irish (in America). There will be no Holocaust 2.0, Jewish people in NYC are not at threat of being lynched. The victim mentality and the centering of the Jewish experience only plays into Jewish supremacism, Zionism. Jews are not special, it shouldn’t be controversial to say that.
I’ll repeat the analogy I made in the original post: Imagine if your main concern was the safety of German minorities after they did the Holocaust. It’s completely ridiculous and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
I suspect the main reason for the “conflating Zionism with Judaism” part is me saying most Jewish people support Israel, which Is a fact. I pointed this out as a reason for the (over-exaggerated) rise in anti-Semitism. I did not even once state anything in opposition to Judaism and Jewishness in in of itself, only gave reasons to the generalisations. I can forgive someone taking this as somehow conflating the two in the context of, I repeat, the inflammatory title, but what I said wasn’t in any way remotely that.
To quote Prof. Finkelstein, on when he asked his mother if she had ever met a decent German:
I remembered one German soldier, he had a kind of a guilty look on his face.
That was all she could remember—one. So it doesn’t surprise me that she loathed all Germans.
This is what I was getting at. A common response to seeing a genocide committed by Jews is, albeit irrationally, to loathe all Jews. Just like, for a time, people hated all Germans. To center the hate towards Germans in the post war years would be seen as ridiculous, rightfully so. Even more ridiculous is to imply this will somehow transfer into violent lynchings.
People like us should know that Zionism and Nazism are not contradictory ideologies, they can coexist and work together (and have historically). So why (I am referencing the replies to my post, not the moderator who banned me) is it that people think Elon throwing a sieg heil is a sign of an imminent Holocaust in the USA? The main donor of Trump is a Jewish Zionist. I repeat, Jews are not at threat. It is ridiculous and, as I already said, plays into Jewish supremacy.
In the brief period where the post was up, I did not receive any real counter arguments, only people flinging insults who clearly either did not understand the text I wrote or didn’t even read through it. I was then of course banned. I expected the forum named @askchapo to be open to discussion. I am sure if I had an actual conversation on the topic with the moderator who banned me, I’d either be able to convince them of the content of the post, or have my own mind changed.
Bans shouldn’t just be thrown around like that, especially considering the content of my post. The text giving reason to the ban was a single sentence, it did not touch on the content of the post. Just “conflating Judaism with Zionism”, that’s it. No specific line of text was noted.
At last I’d like to add that the post was primarily in response to liberal Zionists like Owen Jones and other such figures, not to fellow leftists. Figures who disingenuously over inflate the importance of anti-Semitism, its presence and general effect.
I fully agree that anti-Semitism usually leads right back into far-right ideologies that are in staunch opposition to us, but that is not what I was trying to argue against in the post.
Click here to view my original post
The primary issue here is in the broad-brushing and lack of care in the post (e.g. the title), which makes it easy to leave impressions of antisemitism. In your spoiler quote, you say things along the lines of, “if a state that exists in your name commits genocide, of course you will be hated”. While you are not explicitly saying so, the sentiment here has a rhetorical next step: “so antisemitism is valid and correct”. I’m not saying you believe this, but it would feel natural to have seen that written next by the flow of the rhetoric. The post is playing with being on the edge of antisemitic language and possibly crosses that border depending on how you interpret it. I don’t think that’s a very effective way of communicating in addition to the possibilities for causing harm.
Contrast to something like this: “Zionism is perhaps the greatest purveyor of antisemitism on the planet by engaging in ethnonationalist genocide and conflating everything they do with Judaism. In addition to the inherent antisemitism of associating race hate mass violence with Judaism, it inspires antisemitism among those who sympathize with the victims, as there has always been a real risk that those sympathizers take “Israel” at their word in conflating their project with Judaism. Even just adopting and then negating Zionist language can lead to problematic statements.”
Basically the same sentiments, but communicated in a way that is careful about how it is presented.
I would also disagree that Jewish people, including Ashkenazi Jewish people, are fully integrated into whiteness. They are partially integrated. Most can pass as white basically any time they want to by just not saying certain things. A lot of (most?) white people are going to treat them as white, as will others. But there is still a reactionary group that others Jewish people, follows and maintains antisemitic mythologies, and participates to one degree or another in ensuring there is always a bit of a threat in the background. In the most reactionary circles this does lead to overy antisemitic actions and violence, but the soft reactionaries and edgelords help to pipeline them. There is a dual character of whiteness and Jewishness for Ashkenazi Jews in white supremacist societies and which is dominant various regionally and on an individual basis. So on one hand most Jewish people in the US face very little discrimination due to being mostly assimilated into whiteness. On the other hand, there is still antisemitic violence and rumbles of more if reactionaries become more powerful and numerous and.
I would agree that antisemitism is not as common or extreme of an issue as islamophobia or anti-blackness and that Zionist organizations lie about what constitutes antisemitism, thus diluting it. But your thoughts that overstate Jewish assimilation into white supremacy may be a case of reacting to and negating Zionist framings too simply and on their terms. Zionist organizations call every single expression of sympathy for Palestinians antisemitic. Those organizations are lying in support of an active genocidal ethnonationalist project. But they also list real cases of antisemitism that should not be dismissed.
Re: moderation, well it’s a friendly socialist instance so I don’t want to exactly start a fight about it, but I would say they are quick to ban and bad at conflict resolution and explanations. They tend to describe this in terms of protecting their members, but I think it is mostly a consequence of having basically zero irl organizing experience and therefore making the mistakes of young organizers. Having no interest in listening to or guiding disagreement and being quick to drop a hammer is one of those mistakes. Communists grow out of this if they are self-critical after joining and leaving (or watching implode) a few organizations. At the same time, you should consider that your post was fairly flippant, inconsiderate, and flirted with antisemitism, so I wouldn’t say they made a greater error.