I’m not defending ethnic cleansing. That’s what I mean with arguing in bad faith, I’m not policing your tone.

I’ll say your point abt ethnic cleansing of Israelis actually being thinly veiled antisemitism makes sense I was wrong about that.

Do you see how “No, it’s not actual antisemitism” comes off as playing apologist for ethnic cleansing advocacy?

It’s not arguing in bad faith to point out the necessary implications of an argument.

All I’m saying is, the modern use of the symbol is not a reference to the symbol used in Nazi concentration camps. Something that is confirmed both by my real life discussions and online research. I’m honestly open to change my mind if you provide a decent source or something. The Wikipedia article I linked only has one source refuting it and maybe my bubble is misinformed.

If you follow the source in the Wikipedia article, this is what it has to say:

The red triangle appears in the Palestinian flag, where it represents the role the Hashemite dynasty played in the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire during the First World War, Desai said.

“The colour red symbolizes the blood of those who sacrificed in battle for the Arab cause and the Palestinian cause. Red is also one of the Pan-Arab colours, along with black, white and green, which together represent Arab unity and independence.”

(note, again, this is in the context of being part of the flag, of being a symbol of Arabs rather than enemy targets, and not an inverted triangle)

But for some, the red triangle is reminiscent of the classification used in the Holocaust to identify political prisoners in Nazi camps, Musu said.

As the Auschwitz-Birkenau memorial and museum explains, the camps identified prisoners using coloured triangles, including red for political prisoners and pink for gay prisoners.

Several posts online have noted the similarity, including an Instagram Reel by Jewish actor Amanda Markowitz, who wrote, “Either they truly don’t know or they do know and are using Holocaust inversion … and both of these options are dangerous.”

… not much of a refutation.

Pug can you chill out and try to understand me here? You don’t have to agree but no need to argue in bad faith.

Being irritable is not ‘arguing in bad faith’, and I’d thank you not to play fucking tone police when discussing defending ethnic fucking cleansing and antisemitism.

I’m not defending Hamas introducing the symbol. I’m defending the many protestors using this symbol as a symbol of resistance, not for their use of the symbol, but against the accusation of antisemitism.

Again, how does that differ from the Strasserist “anti-capitalism” comparison I made? “Yes, I know these people introduced this symbol for most-likely horrific reasons that I (supposedly) don’t agree with, but I’m going to use it and I expect you to regard it as legitimate and wholesome”

Largely what I see is that tankies want to ethnically cleanse Israelis from the area, not Jews. Your experience may differ, let me know. That doesn’t make it okay, but the difference is rather important when discussing antisemitism. Surely you wouldn’t equate Israelis with Jews either.

Jesus fucking Christ, are you being serious here?

Campist fuckwits aren’t calling for Arab citizens of Israel to be ethnically cleansed; and even if they were, that holds about as much fucking water as the Trump administration crying “It’s not a Muslim ban, it’s just a ban on countries that are majority Muslim 😭” Most Israelis are Jews because Israel’s primary form of growth was through the invitation of Jewish immigrants. If I said “I’m not anti-Muslim, I just want all of those filthy Bosniaks out of my good Yugoslavia”, would that pass muster with you? Would you say, “Oh, you’re just advocating ethnic cleansing of an unrelated group for unrelated reason, definitely nothing to do with anti-Muslim sentiment! 😊”?

It’s fucking insane how much you bend over for shit that, rightfully, would not fucking fly in any other context. Israel is a horrific ethnonationalist state; that doesn’t mean you have to play fucking defense for ethnic cleansing because they’re fucking bad camp.

Is it too much to ask for you to see some nuance in this? Wikipedia directly refutes the claims that you and the other person are making, and has a reference. If you provide some evidence to the contrary I’m happy to change my mind.

The only ‘refutation’ that the Wiki article provides is that the red triangle, used horizontally on the flag as a representation of Arab unity dates back to the early 20th century.

For some reason, a group of Holocaust deniers introducing the use of an inverted red triangle as an independent element to mark Jewish identified targets (not Arabs) seems a bit distinct from that.

Not really. The Nazis had symbols for Jews, this symbol was used for various non-Jewish prisoners as well. And it was used for prisoners, not targets.

And?

And then you just repeated your same argument that Hamas is antisemitic and they use the symbol so it’s antisemitic.

“The Holocaust deniers use a symbol from the Holocaust to mark people they characterize as Jews for death”

If it were any other antisemitic group, would you be bending backwards to accommodate their introduction of such a symbol?

And then you add a new argument: that tankies use the symbol and they are pro-ethnic cleansing which is the same as being antisemitic (it isn’t) so the symbol is antisemitic

“It’s not antisemitic to want to ethnically cleanse Jews from a region!”

Holy fucking shit, are you being serious?

But there’s also plenty of people who aren’t antisemitic who use the symbol.

Which has all the validity of anti-capitalists deciding to use the swastika in honor of the Strasserists, whilst insisting that they aren’t onboard with the whole antisemitism thing, just the anti-capitalism.

Sorry it just doesn’t convince me. The symbol may be problematic since it’s often used to designate targets, but this connection to the holocaust is just not accurate.

I note again

“The Holocaust deniers use a symbol from the Holocaust to mark people they characterize as Jews for death”

Christ, it’s like talking to a conservative claiming that MAGA merch being sold for $14.88 means nothing.

You’re kinda proving my point. Whether or not Hamas is antisemitic says absolutely nothing about whether the symbol is.

… if the symbol has an immediate and visceral connection to historical antisemitism, is used by an antisemitic group, and has little history of use before its use against an enemy perceived as Jewish…

… what exactly do you think the symbol is, if not antisemitic?

This is basic dogwhistle shit. Next will you tell me the iron cross has a history outside of Nazism, so neonazis and their supporters using it means nothing, actually?

Let’s create our own reality where symbols mean something else so we can demonize the people we hate better! Yay, now we’ve reached tankie-levels of campism.

No, this is examining context and usage to determine that it is most likely a symbol used by antisemites with antisemitic reasons in an antisemitic context, despite the attempts of other people to adopt the symbol - as used by antisemites, for antisemitic reasons - for non-antisemitic reasons. And, considering that the symbol has been used in real-world attacks on non-Israeli Jews, and that many of the people we’re discussing - campist fuckwits - are openly on the record as being pro-ethnic cleansing of Jewish people, specifically, from a one-state solution in the region, I don’t really think that “This symbol isn’t antisemitic!” holds much water.

The Sultan will be displeased to hear of this

I think Envy’s response was over the top but to be fair here, you’re the one who started with black-and-white discourse by putting anything remotely related to Palestine/Gaza into the antisemitism box.

… that Hamas is antisemitic is not exactly a shocking revelation. The red triangle remains controversial and the connection to the Holocaust is not easily dismissed - not least because the inverted red triangle as a stand-alone symbol had very little currency in modern discourse before Hamas started using it to mark Israeli targets.

“Nothing I love more than giving the far-right Israeli government the excuse it desperately wanted to genocide Gaza! Critical support for the PEOPLE’S Zionist-Funded Catspaw of Hamas!”

Putting aside the extremely dubious military value of the raid (which, as has been pointed out, largely resulted in the massacre and kidnapping of civilians rather than the pursuit of serious military objectives, including UN-verified sexual assault that is denied by multiple admins on the Fediverse ), celebrating what can be seen even under the most charitable terms as an overwhelming strategic failure is… strange.

It’s like Confederates celebrating Pickett’s Charge.

Why does the tech industry affect people in such a bizarre way?

Don’t worry, like so many other totally-genuine-posters on here, he’s never seen a tankie on Lemmy in his life, it’s all a shitlib delusion. And Russia isn’t that bad! Whatabout the West???

Just like Ensign_Crab, who came here to downvote this to show solidarity with a fellow bootlicker. :)

Admins of lemmy.ml - if you check the modlog, it’s Dessalines.

Lord.

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-features/actors-strike-hollywood-sag-aftra-living-wage-healthcare-struggle-1234798347/

According to SAG-AFTRA, only 14% of its members make at least $26,470 annually to qualify for SAG-AFTRA healthcare coverage

Most actors aren’t millionaires, and ‘playing pretend’ for a camera is no less work than playing pretend for corporate ghouls in an office.

How so?

Worth mentioning that this is US-defaultism. Outside the US everyone has experienced socialised healthcare or other such social services

Welfare states originated with Otto von Bismarck in an effort to combat socialism, which is worker ownership of the means of production. For that matter, Americans are eminently familiar with social services.

Tankies are dumbasses who simp for dictators, liberals have more intelligence but apply it incorrectly.

Most liberals are liberal for lack of a better idea. Most liberals have not even been exposed to serious conceptions of socialism. If given the choice between fighting with liberals or fighting with tankies to see the point of a democratic and socialist society, liberals are by far the easier fight.

For that matter, if given the choice between fighting with a liberal regime, whose insufficient opposition to authoritarianism is likely to result in an eventual capitulation to fascism; or a tankie regime, which is and has its goal as fascism painted red; the former is much easier to fight and organize in.

Of those two choices - and the real world is not composed of such a binary - I would argue, albeit admittedly as a demsoc rather than an outright anarchist - that anarchists, whom I disagree with moderately at most, shouldn’t have anything in common with fucking tankies, who are despicable. If ‘opposition to capitalism’ is a valid point of ‘agreement’ then, as I pointed out, literal fascist regimes are no less ‘allies’ in that conception in contrast to the liberal menace.

Weird how they can’t answer this but Pug called you the time vampire. Despite never answering your questions honestly. Shocked you’re not banned yet for asking questions.

When did Blaze ask me any questions in this thread?

Lord.

Tankies are morons who have the right intentions but the wrong idea how to get it. They read Marx and saw Stalin and went “sure that seems good.”

“They read Marx and missed his point entirely, instead embracing fascism, therefore, they’re better than people who haven’t read Marx.”

Liberals haven’t read Marx, saw Stalin and went “anything he stood for was evil.” And they’re mostly right, but they have the wrong intentions with the new ways of avoiding it. All of which lead to Trump’s iron grip.

What exactly is the fucking difference, then, between tankies and liberals in this conception in terms of where it leads to?

“Tankies are better than liberals because they oppose capitalism” in this conception, which acknowledges that tankies are aiming for Stalin-esque bureaucratic control of the means of production, is no more coherent than “Strasserists are better than liberals because they oppose capitalism”, or “Theocratic clientists are better than liberals because they oppose capitalism” - the latter, bizarrely enough, being something I have actually heard tankies on Lemmy espouse. Apparently the whole fascist conception of a “third way” was lost on them - or worse, appears appealing.

You could just as easily say “Liberals are morons who have the right intentions (democracy) but the wrong idea how to get it (capitalism)”

You have the choice not to wear it. You can choose to change your clothes.

You can choose not to run software that was trained on stolen data and hallucinates misinformation. Easy.

Yeah, that doesn’t stop other people from using it, spreading it, and mistaking it. Politicians are openly sharing AI videos and claiming them as true. AI content is often spread untagged precisely because it is intended to pass as ‘genuine’ engagement. Fuck, I myself mistook an AI pic for an aesthetic photo just the other day because I wasn’t looking closely.

Misinformation doesn’t go away just because you, personally, refuse to generate it and try to keep an eye out for it.

Pandora’s box is opened, wrt AI. I don’t know what to do about it and it doesn’t improve our lives - but we also can’t un-fuck what it’s brought. It’s made disinformation much cheaper and faster to spread, for both state actors and non-state actors. And the fact that you can run a LLM on an ordinary (if high-end) consumer computer means it’s not going away completely. We’re stuck with this.