I will be marching in the Capital Pride Parade myself, on behalf of Fair Vote Canada. I do not object to most of the actions to which Capital Pride committed. However, I strongly object to Capital Pride's use of the g-word to describe Israeli misconduct in this war.
I am self-conscious of the fact that I am a non-Jew communicating towards a Jew, and that there are Jewish groups such as Independent Jewish Voices who have labelled Israel with the g-word accusation. That arguably does not diminish the historical repetition of the blood libel that is evident in the selective use of the g-word against Israel; whereas several major powers have committed equal or worse crimes without equally being accused with the g-word. (Although, our representatives have officially accused Putin's Russia, China, and Canada itself of "genocide", and I am skeptical of use of the word in all those instances too.)
Since when is accusing the Israeli government and military, for instance, of carrying out genocidal actions an example of **selective** blood libel? Israel is most certainly not a paragon of moral virtue for whom criticism must be reserved. Furthermore I fail to think of other states whose real or perceived acts of ethnocide haven’t been called out by state/“independent” media in some manner or another.
If anything, the Israelis have been given an extreme amount of leeway (to still put it very lightly) in the West only up until recently.
Even then, this recent discontent is limited to powerless demographics with zero influence on foreign policy. That is to say, champagne socialist students and other such rabble who aren’t plugged into the US intelligence apparatus and/or State Department, etc. Biden said a few brief words to pander the mob, and the result was an inevitable weapons delivery, alongside massive financial aide packages. Why? Because restless young students building small encampments on university grounds isn’t a threat to the establishment, and never will be. Zionism has bipartisan support in the United States, the only difference is the flavour.
In other words, the overwhelming majority of actors who actually matter and who have access to the levers of power are themselves ardent Zionists, one way or another, for better or for worse.
I’m not really moralizing here, minus the second sentence, merely explaining how I see the political situation as it be. Interested to hear what else you have to say on the matter.
Any notion of the Israeli military as the "world's more moral army" is a joke. But there is not the least credibility to any "genocide" accusations against Israel. Genocide is the deliberate extermination of a civilian population for the sake of exterminating it. While Israel has put Gazan lives at reckless risk in order to exterminate Hamas, and while Bibi personally is invested in perpetual war in order to sustain his unpopular government and keep himself out of prison, none of that exculpates Hamas from its cynical use of human shields. And we do not know that Hamas would be as restrained with the use of nuclear weapons as we know that Israel is.
There's plenty of evils that are condemned in American foreign policy alone without being labelled with the g-word. Millions of people opposed the invasion of Iraq, yet few of them deluded themselves with slapping the U.S. with the g-word. Many people condemn the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan during WWII for good reason, but don't use the g-word even though it absolutely was the targeting of a civilian population. The war in Vietnam was brutal, yet not labelled with use of the g-word. And while Russia and China have been accused of genocide, there is little overlap between those accusing them and those accusing Israel of the same (even though I have one exception in mind). This is where the selectivity comes in. (Though, I would say that in the past decade the g-word has in general become much more abused and politicized than it used to be, by all sides.)
I understand where you're coming from now, and it's certainly true that the term is being abused by ignorant cosmopolitans who live in luxury, despite the blood-soaked history behind it.
Perhaps the most that could be said at this point is that there've been plenty of war crimes committed, which themselves are not necessarily genocidal in motivation, but 'merely' cruel and unusual instances of abuse on their own, as opposed to being predominantly part of a top-down framework of genocidal intent.
How is this a good use of your time?
Get a hobby, maybe something that lets you talk to someone outside your bubble.
Disagreement is welcome in my comment section. Homophobic slurs are not.
I will be marching in the Capital Pride Parade myself, on behalf of Fair Vote Canada. I do not object to most of the actions to which Capital Pride committed. However, I strongly object to Capital Pride's use of the g-word to describe Israeli misconduct in this war.
I am self-conscious of the fact that I am a non-Jew communicating towards a Jew, and that there are Jewish groups such as Independent Jewish Voices who have labelled Israel with the g-word accusation. That arguably does not diminish the historical repetition of the blood libel that is evident in the selective use of the g-word against Israel; whereas several major powers have committed equal or worse crimes without equally being accused with the g-word. (Although, our representatives have officially accused Putin's Russia, China, and Canada itself of "genocide", and I am skeptical of use of the word in all those instances too.)
Since when is accusing the Israeli government and military, for instance, of carrying out genocidal actions an example of **selective** blood libel? Israel is most certainly not a paragon of moral virtue for whom criticism must be reserved. Furthermore I fail to think of other states whose real or perceived acts of ethnocide haven’t been called out by state/“independent” media in some manner or another.
If anything, the Israelis have been given an extreme amount of leeway (to still put it very lightly) in the West only up until recently.
Even then, this recent discontent is limited to powerless demographics with zero influence on foreign policy. That is to say, champagne socialist students and other such rabble who aren’t plugged into the US intelligence apparatus and/or State Department, etc. Biden said a few brief words to pander the mob, and the result was an inevitable weapons delivery, alongside massive financial aide packages. Why? Because restless young students building small encampments on university grounds isn’t a threat to the establishment, and never will be. Zionism has bipartisan support in the United States, the only difference is the flavour.
In other words, the overwhelming majority of actors who actually matter and who have access to the levers of power are themselves ardent Zionists, one way or another, for better or for worse.
I’m not really moralizing here, minus the second sentence, merely explaining how I see the political situation as it be. Interested to hear what else you have to say on the matter.
Any notion of the Israeli military as the "world's more moral army" is a joke. But there is not the least credibility to any "genocide" accusations against Israel. Genocide is the deliberate extermination of a civilian population for the sake of exterminating it. While Israel has put Gazan lives at reckless risk in order to exterminate Hamas, and while Bibi personally is invested in perpetual war in order to sustain his unpopular government and keep himself out of prison, none of that exculpates Hamas from its cynical use of human shields. And we do not know that Hamas would be as restrained with the use of nuclear weapons as we know that Israel is.
There's plenty of evils that are condemned in American foreign policy alone without being labelled with the g-word. Millions of people opposed the invasion of Iraq, yet few of them deluded themselves with slapping the U.S. with the g-word. Many people condemn the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan during WWII for good reason, but don't use the g-word even though it absolutely was the targeting of a civilian population. The war in Vietnam was brutal, yet not labelled with use of the g-word. And while Russia and China have been accused of genocide, there is little overlap between those accusing them and those accusing Israel of the same (even though I have one exception in mind). This is where the selectivity comes in. (Though, I would say that in the past decade the g-word has in general become much more abused and politicized than it used to be, by all sides.)
I understand where you're coming from now, and it's certainly true that the term is being abused by ignorant cosmopolitans who live in luxury, despite the blood-soaked history behind it.
Perhaps the most that could be said at this point is that there've been plenty of war crimes committed, which themselves are not necessarily genocidal in motivation, but 'merely' cruel and unusual instances of abuse on their own, as opposed to being predominantly part of a top-down framework of genocidal intent.
I made a meme you might like: https://x.com/DevinDignam/status/1826380942791049233