You are naming things here that need to be said. And I want to add to it.
I grew up around what I can only describe as "casual antisemitism". A kid wasn't allowed to play with me because I was a Jew. People would make matter of fact comments about Jews being manipulative or money grubbing, matter of factly. But I never feared for my safety. And by the time I was an adult, it had mostly disappeared from "things that are acceptable to say out loud."
After October 7th, I have felt fear for the safety of Jews in the diaspora. I find myself wondering whether there's any safe place left outside of Israel.
Netanyahu, Ben Gvir, and Smotrich didn't just damage Israel's image. They handed the world's antisemites a gift, wrapped in an Israeli flag.
No one should be holding all Israelis, let alone diaspora Jews accountable for the actions of Israel's government, but yet, I see all of the ways in which Netanyahu has made all of us less safe.
Even though we didn't make those choices, we pay for them anyway because of the content he built.
Tate, you're responding to something I didn't say. But since you brought it up, let's unpack it.
Criticism of Israel's government? Not antisemitism. I just did that myself. Israelis do it all the time.
And I'd add that holding all Israelis accountable for the current government, let alone holding all Jews accountable, IS antisemitic.
If by antizionism, you mean that Jews have no right to self-determination in our ancestral homeland, that is antisemitic. Especially when no other state is ever questioned in that way.
You can advocate for Palestinians without seeking Jewish erasure.
Dear Kayla. I believe your sincere but I do not agree. Most sane people understand there is some dissent in Israel society, but polls consistently show a majority of Israeli public support for agressive not to say genocidal militairy responses to it’s perceived security threats - while Israel is a major security threat to the entire region itself. Not sure if Israel is safer for Jews than anywhere else. I believe the paranoid feverish security doctrine hasn’t made Israel safer and all of these tactical brutal agressions towards it’s neighbours harms Israel’s strategic long term interests. You also have a representative democracy, and when a majority of the Knesset votes for a racist death penalty law, what is the rest of the world supposed to believe? I think alot of Israeli’s bury their heads in the sand (maybe because the reality is so horrifying) and feel more comfortable believing all criticism of Israel (government and society) is anti-semitism in disguise. Anti-semitism exists as does xenophobia and hatred of muslims, that doesn’t mean anyone who is critical of a community or country does it from a place of hatred. Wanting a country of your own after millenia of persecution might be understandable, but it assumes no jews lived in the area before Israel and were not free to settle there. That is wrong too. Problems we have today is because Zionists took land that was already populated (95% arab Christian and Muslim in the 1930’s) and created a Jewish ethnostate. The arabs that the state did not manage to run out are 2nd class citiziens and do not enjoy equal rights. Arab refugees cannot return to their ancestral land and do not have birthright priviliges and cannot make alia. Israel is stuck in a paradox it seems: it wants to be a democratic ethno state as it is afraid to be persecuted if it loses demographic majority, this constant fear drives it’s paranoid aggressive security doctrine which Israeli’s accept - again out of the same fear - instead of in good faith finding diplomatic and fair solutions for a durable peace. It also wants to be in west asia but not be part of west asia (rather be part of the West). So you end up trapped in an endless loop of violence, which always leads to indignation and criticism from the public at large. These problems were there always, way before oct 7th. Instead of controlling the narrative, Israel should form a durable long term vision for itself as an integral part of the region. This involves concessions which Israel from the moment it established it’s militairy superiority in the region was never really willing to do. Rabin was the only one “sincere” though reluctant to do so and that ended badly unfortunately.
I appreciate that you're engaging in good faith and there's a lot here worth engaging with.
Let's start with where I'd push back.
The 95% figure for the 1930s isn't accurate. By that point Jews were already around 30% of the population, many of them Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews with continuous presence in the region for centuries. The "Europeans arriving to Arab land" frame erases them entirely.
More than half of Israeli Jews today descend from refugees from Arab and Muslim countries.
That's not a colonial story. It's a refugee story. And I find it so curious how deeply this is erased in the narrative that you and others bring to this.
I would add that ancestral ties to the land have survived 3,000 years of diaspora. Jews pray towards Israel. (I'm sure it's not news, but Muslims pray towards Mecca.) I just buried a loved one and Jews are buried with literal dirt from Israel no matter where they are in the diaspora.
Return from Europe, Africa, India, China, none of this is a colonial story unless you deeply change the meaning of the word.
The paradox framing you describe is real and worth taking seriously. But "paranoid security doctrine" implies the fear is irrational. I'd argue the fear has a well-documented basis, including from neighbors who were explicit about their intentions for a long time.
You're right that these problems predate October 7. You're right that Rabin was something different and that his assassination changed the trajectory. I actually agree with more of this than you might expect.
Holding Israeli policy accountable is legitimate and necessary. But where I can't agree is your concession framing.
You are calling on one party to create a durable long term vision while treating the other as if it's simply responding to Israeli behavior.
But there are two parties here, both with leadership, both with choices, both with histories of rejectionism and missed opportunities.
Rabin had a counterpart in Arafat.
What concessions were on offer from him on the other side at Camp David?
What vision does Hamas have for Jews in the region?
You are naming things here that need to be said. And I want to add to it.
I grew up around what I can only describe as "casual antisemitism". A kid wasn't allowed to play with me because I was a Jew. People would make matter of fact comments about Jews being manipulative or money grubbing, matter of factly. But I never feared for my safety. And by the time I was an adult, it had mostly disappeared from "things that are acceptable to say out loud."
After October 7th, I have felt fear for the safety of Jews in the diaspora. I find myself wondering whether there's any safe place left outside of Israel.
Netanyahu, Ben Gvir, and Smotrich didn't just damage Israel's image. They handed the world's antisemites a gift, wrapped in an Israeli flag.
No one should be holding all Israelis, let alone diaspora Jews accountable for the actions of Israel's government, but yet, I see all of the ways in which Netanyahu has made all of us less safe.
Even though we didn't make those choices, we pay for them anyway because of the content he built.
Tate, you're responding to something I didn't say. But since you brought it up, let's unpack it.
Criticism of Israel's government? Not antisemitism. I just did that myself. Israelis do it all the time.
And I'd add that holding all Israelis accountable for the current government, let alone holding all Jews accountable, IS antisemitic.
If by antizionism, you mean that Jews have no right to self-determination in our ancestral homeland, that is antisemitic. Especially when no other state is ever questioned in that way.
You can advocate for Palestinians without seeking Jewish erasure.
Dear Kayla. I believe your sincere but I do not agree. Most sane people understand there is some dissent in Israel society, but polls consistently show a majority of Israeli public support for agressive not to say genocidal militairy responses to it’s perceived security threats - while Israel is a major security threat to the entire region itself. Not sure if Israel is safer for Jews than anywhere else. I believe the paranoid feverish security doctrine hasn’t made Israel safer and all of these tactical brutal agressions towards it’s neighbours harms Israel’s strategic long term interests. You also have a representative democracy, and when a majority of the Knesset votes for a racist death penalty law, what is the rest of the world supposed to believe? I think alot of Israeli’s bury their heads in the sand (maybe because the reality is so horrifying) and feel more comfortable believing all criticism of Israel (government and society) is anti-semitism in disguise. Anti-semitism exists as does xenophobia and hatred of muslims, that doesn’t mean anyone who is critical of a community or country does it from a place of hatred. Wanting a country of your own after millenia of persecution might be understandable, but it assumes no jews lived in the area before Israel and were not free to settle there. That is wrong too. Problems we have today is because Zionists took land that was already populated (95% arab Christian and Muslim in the 1930’s) and created a Jewish ethnostate. The arabs that the state did not manage to run out are 2nd class citiziens and do not enjoy equal rights. Arab refugees cannot return to their ancestral land and do not have birthright priviliges and cannot make alia. Israel is stuck in a paradox it seems: it wants to be a democratic ethno state as it is afraid to be persecuted if it loses demographic majority, this constant fear drives it’s paranoid aggressive security doctrine which Israeli’s accept - again out of the same fear - instead of in good faith finding diplomatic and fair solutions for a durable peace. It also wants to be in west asia but not be part of west asia (rather be part of the West). So you end up trapped in an endless loop of violence, which always leads to indignation and criticism from the public at large. These problems were there always, way before oct 7th. Instead of controlling the narrative, Israel should form a durable long term vision for itself as an integral part of the region. This involves concessions which Israel from the moment it established it’s militairy superiority in the region was never really willing to do. Rabin was the only one “sincere” though reluctant to do so and that ended badly unfortunately.
I appreciate that you're engaging in good faith and there's a lot here worth engaging with.
Let's start with where I'd push back.
The 95% figure for the 1930s isn't accurate. By that point Jews were already around 30% of the population, many of them Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews with continuous presence in the region for centuries. The "Europeans arriving to Arab land" frame erases them entirely.
More than half of Israeli Jews today descend from refugees from Arab and Muslim countries.
That's not a colonial story. It's a refugee story. And I find it so curious how deeply this is erased in the narrative that you and others bring to this.
I would add that ancestral ties to the land have survived 3,000 years of diaspora. Jews pray towards Israel. (I'm sure it's not news, but Muslims pray towards Mecca.) I just buried a loved one and Jews are buried with literal dirt from Israel no matter where they are in the diaspora.
Return from Europe, Africa, India, China, none of this is a colonial story unless you deeply change the meaning of the word.
The paradox framing you describe is real and worth taking seriously. But "paranoid security doctrine" implies the fear is irrational. I'd argue the fear has a well-documented basis, including from neighbors who were explicit about their intentions for a long time.
You're right that these problems predate October 7. You're right that Rabin was something different and that his assassination changed the trajectory. I actually agree with more of this than you might expect.
Holding Israeli policy accountable is legitimate and necessary. But where I can't agree is your concession framing.
You are calling on one party to create a durable long term vision while treating the other as if it's simply responding to Israeli behavior.
But there are two parties here, both with leadership, both with choices, both with histories of rejectionism and missed opportunities.
Rabin had a counterpart in Arafat.
What concessions were on offer from him on the other side at Camp David?
What vision does Hamas have for Jews in the region?