Fidel Castro's statements on Israel called anti-Semitic

[kaya'08]

Come on, kaya. Do I really have to spell it out?

Fascism is usually based around some violent and oppressive authoritarian rule demonizing one group and making another saint-like. Unfortunately, Nazim did exactly that, but better than any other Fascist rule, which is why some may choose to compare Israel with the Nazi's as there really is no other regime that did it better. For many, this could fit the definition of Israeli's policies. I personally completely disagree but the likes of Fidel would think otherwise.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Fascism is usually based around some violent and oppressive authoritarian rule demonizing one group and making another saint-like. Unfortunately, Nazim did exactly that, but better than any other Fascist rule, which is why some may choose to compare Israel with the Nazi's as there really is no other regime that did it better. For many, this could fit the definition of Israeli's policies. I personally completely disagree but the likes of Fidel would think otherwise.

Israel is a Jewish state. Comparing it to fascism is one thing, but comparing it to Nazism is completely different than comparing another nation to Nazism because of the religious make-up of Israel and the historical context regarding Judiasm and Nazism. It is inflammatory and anti-semitic.

 

[kaya'08]

Israel is a Jewish state. Comparing it to fascism is one thing, but comparing it to Nazism is completely different than comparing another nation to Nazism because of the religious make-up of Israel and the historical context regarding Judiasm and Nazism. It is inflammatory and anti-semitic.

So its OK if i compared Israel to the Nazi ally, Mussolini?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

So its OK if i compared Israel to the Nazi ally, Mussolini?

Since Mussolini is the father of modern fascism, it would probably be more accurate if you just compared it to fascism or "Mussolini-esq" fascism. That would not be anti-semetic.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Israel is a Jewish state. Comparing it to fascism is one thing, but comparing it to Nazism is completely different than comparing another nation to Nazism because of the religious make-up of Israel and the historical context regarding Judiasm and Nazism. It is inflammatory and anti-semitic.

Inflammatory yes anti semitic no

China is a Chinese state, with a far higher percentage of the people in China being Han Chinese then Israel has jews. If I compare China to Nazi Germany, it is certainly inflammatory but very few peope will accuse the person of being anti Han. To automatically assume that doing the same criticism of Israel means the person is anti semitic is a double standard and illogical.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Inflammatory yes anti semitic no

China is a Chinese state, with a far higher percentage of the people in China being Han Chinese then Israel has jews. If I compare China to Nazi Germany, it is certainly inflammatory but very few peope will accuse the person of being anti Han. To automatically assume that doing the same criticism of Israel means the person is anti semitic is a double standard and illogical.

There is no significant historical context between the Han Chinese and Nazis. That is the difference in your scenario that you omit.

 

[kaya'08]

Since Mussolini is the father of modern fascism, it would probably be more accurate if you just compared it to fascism or "Mussolini-esq" fascism. That would not be anti-semetic.

Yet mussolini clearly supported Hitler and what he did.
That's the problem. It just doesn't stick. I can see where your coming from. Unless the speaker made a direct hit at Israel by refereeing to the Nazi led holocaust instead of the nazi-like policies of Israel (ethnic superiority or whatever fidel was getting at) then it really falls down to the context and manner aswell as the intentions of the speaker. But since only the speaker can claim the nature of the comment i dont see how connecting Israel/Nazi's can be determined as anti-Semitic in every case it is used.
It needs to be rubbed off that list of yours.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

There is no significant historical context between the Han Chinese and Nazis. That is the difference in your scenario that you omit.

So instead of Han Chinese use Japan and the Japanese

The Japanese do have a historical context with Nazi's

In the same context does that make me anti japanese?

 

[mbig]

Yet mussolini clearly supported Hitler and what he did.
That's the problem. It just doesn't stick. I can see where your coming from. Unless the speaker made a direct hit at Israel by refereeing to the Nazi led holocaust instead of the nazi-like policies of Israel (ethnic superiority or whatever fidel was getting at) then it really falls down to the context and manner aswell as the intentions of the speaker. But since only the speaker can claim the nature of the comment i dont see how connecting Israel/Nazi's can be determined as anti-Semitic in every case it is used.
It needs to be rubbed off that list of yours.

The EU/EUMC considers comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be anti-semitic.

The reason being it's not only grotesquely untrue, but is Obviously (and oft intentionally) offensive to so many Jews (nearly half of world Jewry killed in WWII) who are survivors of Naziism and 1st generation relatives/brothers/sons/daughters of those perished.

BTW, in re your Cockeyed statement about me "Your far-right religious propaganda" is laughable as anyone who reads the religion or science sections knows. Or .....who is member of MY 'team science' group.
I'm an atheist, probably a militant one.
I will and have Knocked Literalists of EVERY major religion here and often. That includes any OT entitlement as a basis for a claim for Israel.
Please get even remotely in the ballpark with your insults.

 

[kaya'08]

The EU/EUMC considers comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be anti-semitic.

The reason being it's not only grotesquely untrue, but is Obviously (and oft intentionally) offensive to so many Jews (nearly half of world Jewry killed in WWII) who are survivors of Naziism and 1st generation relatives/brothers/sons/daughters of those perished.

The fact that it is untrue is irrelevant.

it really falls down to the context and manner aswell as the intentions of the speaker. But since only the speaker can claim the nature of the comment i dont see how connecting Israel/Nazi's can be determined as anti-Semitic in every case it is used.

BTW, in re your Cockeyed statement" about me "Your far-right religious propaganda" is laughable as anyone who reads the religion or science sections knows. Or .....who is member ot MY 'team science' group.
I'm an atheist, arguably/probably a militant one.
I will and have Knocked Literalists of EVERY major religion here. That includes any OT entitlement as a basis for a claim for Israel.

Please get even remotely in the ballpark with your insults.

In that case dont waste your time posting stupid video's about Muslims taking over Europe. K thanks.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Yet mussolini clearly supported Hitler and what he did.
That's the problem. It just doesn't stick. I can see where your coming from. Unless the speaker made a direct hit at Israel by refereeing to the Nazi led holocaust instead of the nazi-like policies of Israel (ethnic superiority or whatever fidel was getting at) then it really falls down to the context and manner aswell as the intentions of the speaker. But since only the speaker can claim the nature of the comment i dont see how connecting Israel/Nazi's can be determined as anti-Semitic in every case it is used.
It needs to be rubbed off that list of yours.

Mussolin may have supported Hitler's policies, but it was not Mussolini who sponsored "The Final Solution". That was Hitler and Nazism. There is a difference, here. Comparing Israeli policies to those of Mussolini would NOT be anti-semetic; doing so with the policies of Nazism, would. It has to do with historical context and the treatment of Jews during the Nazi regime.

As far as the speaker's intent, here's how it is differentiated. The speaker, if his intent was not to be anti-semetic was not, however, if the comments were, then the comments were anyway. Therefore, we cannot conclude that Castro is anti-semetic because we do not know his intent, however we CAN conclude that his comments were anti-semetic based on what we know about the comments.

And the statement needs to remain.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

So instead of Han Chinese use Japan and the Japanese

The Japanese do have a historical context with Nazi's

In the same context does that make me anti japanese?

I have no idea what you are referring to. Please clarify.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

The EU/EUMC considers comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be anti-semitic.

The reason being it's not only grotesquely untrue, but is Obviously (and oft intentionally) offensive to so many Jews (nearly half of world Jewry killed in WWII) who are survivors of Naziism and 1st generation relatives/brothers/sons/daughters of those perished.

BTW, in re your Cockeyed statement about me "Your far-right religious propaganda" is laughable as anyone who reads the religion or science sections knows. Or .....who is member of MY 'team science' group.
I'm an atheist, probably a militant one.
I will and have Knocked Literalists of EVERY major religion here and often. That includes any OT entitlement as a basis for a claim for Israel.
Please get even remotely in the ballpark with your insults.

Moderator's Warning:

I warned you about this elsewhere. Do this again in ANY thread and a thread ban will ensue.

 

[kaya'08]

Mussolin may have supported Hitler's policies, but it was not Mussolini who sponsored "The Final Solution". That was Hitler and Nazism. There is a difference, here. Comparing Israeli policies to those of Mussolini would NOT be anti-semetic; doing so with the policies of Nazism, would. It has to do with historical context and the treatment of Jews during the Nazi regime.

As far as the speaker's intent, here's how it is differentiated. The speaker, if his intent was not to be anti-semetic was not, however, if the comments were, then the comments were anyway. Therefore, we cannot conclude that Castro is anti-semetic because we do not know his intent, however we CAN conclude that his comments were anti-semetic based on what we know about the comments.

And the statement needs to remain.

The comments are not anti-Semitic if the intention behind them was not.
Again, it doesn't stick.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

The comments are not anti-Semitic if the intention behind them was not.
Again, it doesn't stick.

The comment certainly can be regardless of the speaker's intent. That does not mean the speaker is anti-semetic. It certainly does stick.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I have no idea what you are referring to. Please clarify.

You stated that to compare Han Chinese with Nazi's miss's the historical context that Jews and Israel have with Nazi's

So instead of Han Chinese use Japanese and Japan as the comparator. As Japan does have a historical context with Nazi's would comparing Japan to Nazi's make me anti Japanese

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You stated that to compare Han Chinese with Nazi's miss's the historical context that Jews and Israel have with Nazi's

So instead of Han Chinese use Japanese and Japan as the comparator. As Japan does have a historical context with Nazi's would comparing Japan to Nazi's make me anti Japanese

I'm STILL not getting what you are saying. Try this. In your analogy...

Jews=
Israel=
Nazis=

 

[kaya'08]

The comment certainly can be regardless of the speaker's intent. That does not mean the speaker is anti-semetic. It certainly does stick.

:doh

So your saying somebody can make anti-Semitic comments and yet NOT be anti-Semitic? And this is supposed to stick under the law?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I'm STILL not getting what you are saying. Try this. In your analogy...

Jews=
Israel=
Nazis=

If
Jews = Israel= Nazi = Anti Semitic

does

Japanese = Japan = Nazi = anti Japanese

Historical context is their as both jews and Japan have historical ties to nazi Germany (different reasons of course)

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

If
Jews = Israel= Nazi = Anti Semitic

does

Japanese = Japan = Nazi = anti Japanese

Historical context is their as both jews and Japan have historical ties to nazi Germany (different reasons of course)

Because of the context of the reasons, no, comparing actions of Japan would not be considered anti-Japanese.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Because of the context of the reasons, no, comparing actions of Japan would not be considered anti-Japanese.

Then it should not be considered automatically anti semitic as well

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

:doh

So your saying somebody can make anti-Semitic comments and yet NOT be anti-Semitic?

Yup.

And this is supposed to stick under the law?

No, I'm not saying anything in regards to legalities. I'm on the fence around legislating hate speech.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Then it should not be considered automatically anti semitic as well

The historical context is completely different, so the parameters and definitions are different.

 

[kaya'08]

No, I'm not saying anything in regards to legalities. I'm on the fence around legislating hate speech.

Hey, they can call anything they want anti-semetic. If i dont get put into prison for it, i dont care.
Unfortunately, DP itself has failed to define what exactly constitutes anti-Semitism and why it should result in a ban. If it goes by anything this organization says, then that really is the cherry on the cake. If we can go back to old school anti-semitism and just say "you know what, its when you cuss out jews, not israel. finished" then im OK with banning people for that. Unfortunately, Israel is not just a jewish state, another reason that description is BS, especially if the meaning secularism has any value down there.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hey, they can call anything they want anti-semetic. If i dont get put into prison for it, i dont care.
Unfortunately, DP itself has failed to define what exactly constitutes anti-Semitism and why it should result in a ban. If it goes by anything this organization says, then that really is the cherry on the cake. If we can go back to old school anti-semitism and just say "you know what, its when you cuss out jews, not israel. finished" then im OK with banning people for that. Unfortunately, Israel is not just a jewish state, another reason that description is BS, especially if the meaning secularism has any value down there.

I don't think I would support legislation to jail someone for anti-semetic speech unless it's intent was to incite violence. However, I support the EUMC's position on defining anti-semetism and on it's position on bias towards Israel. It makes no sense to hold Israel to a higher standard than anyone else, and I see that a lot at DP.

As far as how we moderate hate speech, not something that is appropriate, here.