no, just people conflating Nazism to Zionism. You know, normal antisemitic type stuff.
I haven’t seen that on my dash or on facebook
I have however seen people’s hamfisted attempts to mount “defenses” of Israeli actions by talking about the Holocaust
and people on both sides holding up Holocaust survivors who agree with their view as if surviving the Holocause gives you magical infallibility
I’ve seen it. You been under a rock or just pretending it doesn’t happen? Just today I saw “It’s a shame they didn’t learn enough from the Holocaust to not perpetrate the same thing against others.”
Look at all the words you’re putting in my mouth. Please no more. I’m getting full.
I didn’t say “it doesn’t happen”. I just said that I have not seen it on my dash or my facebook feed.
The post wasn’t about that. I just don’t choose to follow anybody on tumblr who I’ve seen conflate Zionism with Nazism. I don’t live under any rock and I don’t pretend that wild, over-the-top, hyperbolic, and yes, anti-semitic claims are made in regards to the Israelis.
But you’re kind of an example of what I was talking about. My post was in regards to the number of people I’ve seen on my dash and on facebook who are sympathetic to or wholeheartedly partisans of Israel who raise irrelevant issues as substitutes for arguments.
Like now, my remark was about a specific subgroup of Israel supporters. Not all of them. Not most of them. Just a number of them that I had happened to have seen in a row, which I was commenting on. And you’ve responded to this by bringing up this unrelated topic of whether any anti-Israel people conflate Zionism with Nazism.
I get that you’re all emotional and everything but please settle.
“In most cultures throughout history, [justice systems have] been dominated by compensation… Medieval systems, and all tribal systems, that don’t have centralized governments are compensatory in nature. Sometimes it’s individual compensation, sometimes it’s group compensation (you compensate the clan of which the person’s a member). But it’s very compensatory… What happens is, if the communities ended up having to pony up for your crime (because they would have to pay the other clan) then they would have an interest in policing you. And if you turned out to be a repeat offender, they kicked you out, and they made you an ‘outlaw’. The term outlaw meant outside the protection of the law. They didn’t actually kill you, and they didn’t actually punish you, but once you were made an outlaw and they withdrew their protection from you, anyone else who wanted to kill you and punish you could do so with impunity, and that was a really tough spot to be in. So, by withdrawing protection, you end up ‘punishing’ people without directly punishing them.
It was only when the monarch started intervening in this local tribal system—which the people were very reticent about giving up, they were very reluctant to give up their rights to compensation—but eventually the king superseded them, and then breaching the king’s peace turned out to be the major offense. And it’s sort of the way it is today. A crime against ‘society’ is not a crime against you. So, it turns out, if you are raped, if you are assaulted, you are not the official victim of the crime in our legal system. I represented as a prosecutor ‘The People of the State of Illinois’, and I didn’t represent you. So what happened to you is simply a crime against the polity and not against you at all. Well, I think that’s perverse. And if that perversity is expressed, then people would rebel against it.”—Randy Barnett
Thomas Mathieu, 70, says he recalls feeling a low blood sugar incident coming on, so he pulled his car over into the turn lane and parked. That’s the last thing Mathieu, who is diabetic, remembers until he awoke to being beaten by San Antonio, Texas, cops. The beating left him with three broken ribs and cuts and bruises over his body. Cops say he refused multiple orders to step out of his car.
If you meet the president and tell him that he’s a piece of shit will you get thrown in Guantanamo on the spot or will they get you later on
Neither the president will sternly say, “nobody talks to me like that…” and then a look of respect will come over his face as he says “…I like it. Make this man an I.D. and give him a key to the good bathroom. He’s my newest advisor. Welcome aboard kid.”
Then he’ll briskly walk out of the room saying something about how there’s “too many yes-men around here.”
About to go to sleep when I see red lights flooding through bathroom window
Some car has backed into the dead end road in the cemetery that ends right by my backyard where the fence USED TO be until it got removed (but only a five foot section at the end of the dead end road leading right into my yard)
Then I see the car turns off all it’s lights and now I can’t see anything
90% chance occupant if that car is a serial killer about to slowly walk into my backyard break through the sliding door and murder me right?
Honestly, that is more accurate. Because remember that you can be personally pro-life, and still be pro-choice. Choosing to keep a child is a choice. But you cant be anything other than anti-choice if you are against a persons right to their own body.
addendum to that petition to stop calling people “pro-choice” and instead use the term “pro-abortion rights” because most “pro-choice” people have a laundry list of choices they don’t believe in people’s right to make
you could respond to literally any comment about the Israeli/Arab conflict (or anything) with a glib remark about how that person has failed to solve the conflict forever in their single comment
but that really doesn’t serve any purpose other than to send out the message that unless someone can solve some problem in the world in their act of expressing an opinion about it, that they should just shut up
which is helpful I guess, if you’re just trying to be unnecessarily combative