+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Culture (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-49.html)
+--- Forum: Style & Fashion (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-132.html)
+--- Thread: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) (/thread-13148.html)
Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - C C - Nov 5, 2022
https://english.alaraby.co.uk/news/academics-warn-un-against-ihra-definition-anti-semitism
EXCERPTS: Over 100 scholars specializing in Jewish history, the Holocaust and anti-Semitism have urged the United Nations not to adopt a controversial definition of anti-Semitism propagated by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).
The statement, signed by 128 scholars, denounced the IHRA definition as "politicized" and said it could be used to "discredit and silence legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies".
[...] The current IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, adopted by the organisation in 2016, defines anti-Semitism not only as "a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews" but goes on to say that accusing "the State of Israel of being a racist endeavour" and "requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation" are examples of anti-Semitism.
The definition has been adopted by 38 states worldwide, including the US, the UK and Germany, but has been criticised for being too broad and vague and conflating opposition to Israel and its policies with hatred of Jews.
[...] The current push at the United Nations coincides with the election of the most extreme right-wing government ever to come power in Israel, and fears that Israel's current deadly assault on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank could intensify... (MORE - missing details)
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Syne - Nov 5, 2022
"requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation" is a literal definition of bigotry. Accusing "the State of Israel of being a racist endeavour", is so broad that it cannot help but be anti-Semitic (especially considering it's accommodation of Arabs within it's government, when Jews are not even tolerated to live within neighboring Arab countries). And it's fairly obvious that those who complain, about such definitions being too broad, are projecting their own desire to use such overly broad bigotry.
Any intellectually, morally honest and unbigoted person should be able to acknowledge that you can criticize specific actions of any government or person without attributing everything they do to some nefarious motive.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Kornee - Nov 5, 2022
Clickbait? Whatever. How seemingly odd that by contrast, brazen openly expressed, rabid, genocidal anti-goyism receives no establishment censure at all!
Truth from a clued up non-white, who is free (enough - for now) to say what systematically brainwashed cowered whites dare not do openly:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/0289LSwDdUxL/
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Syne - Nov 5, 2022
^^Cue the local anti-Semite and bigotry apologist.
Non-white people being anti-Semitic isn't new or rare:
Kyrie Irving suspended over anti-Semitic posts
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Kornee - Nov 5, 2022
(Nov 5, 2022 06:21 AM)Syne Wrote: ^^Cue the local anti-Semite and bigotry apologist.As the article states real quickly, said 'antisemite' apologized profusely - i.e. he caved in to relentless pressure from politically supreme foes.
Non-white people being anti-Semitic isn't new or rare:
Kyrie Irving suspended over anti-Semitic posts
That's the usual story. Deja vue for e.g. Marlon Brando. A very few have/had stiffer spines and stood by their principles regardless. Case in point:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EVndvMuE5igL/
Another one, by a former African-American congresswoman who refused to take an absurd obligatory oath of allegiance to the Jewish state:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImFMcbF2MYY
And from a white goy female:
https://www.mintpressnews.com/abby-martin-lawsuit-state-georgia-over-bds-law/264798/
Tragically such folks are way too rare to matter. Too many goy attack dogs willing to snarl menacingly at anyone pointing out the raging hypocrisy.
Witness right here.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Syne - Nov 5, 2022
Yes, modern, civilized society does not condone rabid bigotry. And yes, bigoted hatred is really just a mask for cowardice. It's just a matter of which wins, the resolve of the defensive need for the mask or the true, underlying fear. And such people very often feel the need to seek out the examples of others to reinforce their own defensiveness. It's like the UFO true believers, who feel the need to repeatedly give examples of the experiences of others, as they know their own is insufficient...even by their own estimation.
There is no overcoming such a person's own defense mechanism. It serves far too valuable a purpose for the narrative necessary to maintain their own dubious self-image. The self-lie that their fear is in no way unreasonable or unjustified.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Kornee - Nov 5, 2022
(Nov 5, 2022 07:59 AM)Syne Wrote: Yes, modern, civilized society does not condone rabid bigotry. And yes, bigoted hatred is really just a mask for cowardice. It's just a matter of which wins, the resolve of the defensive need for the mask or the true, underlying fear. And such people very often feel the need to seek out the examples of others to reinforce their own defensiveness. It's like the UFO true believers, who feel the need to repeatedly give examples of the experiences of others, as they know their own is insufficient...even by their own estimation.I know it's futile to ask. But ask I will, just for the record. Instead of that diffuse drivel, how about tackling the actual substance of each linked to article/vid conveniently supplied - beginning with that given in #3?
There is no overcoming such a person's own defense mechanism. It serves far too valuable a purpose for the narrative necessary to maintain their own dubious self-image. The self-lie that their fear is in no way unreasonable or unjustified.
That of course would mean actually seriously studying, and attempting what might pass as an objective response to what is presented. Rather than just reacting reflexively with a lazy polemic.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Syne - Nov 5, 2022
Very hypocritical to demand an objective response to an insubstantial polemic. It's the whining of every crackpot. The demand that you take their claims, about UFOs, uneducated scientific theories, conspiracy theories, etc., seriously. That you "prove them wrong," when the onus of their claims fall squarely on themselves.
Very typical of a bigot to try hiding behind links or other people making their arguments for them. The aforementioned cowardice seeks to insulate them from having to aver or defend any particularly vile or objectively weak position themselves. They always give themselves an out, by not making arguments directly. Just vague claims and citing others for any imagined justification.
Most honest and good people require actual, demonstrable evidence to deem another to have wholly dubious motives. Evidence like repeatedly spreading barefaced bigotry.
But go ahead. If you can muster it. In your own words, make the case for even one claim in that video in post #3. If it can truly be addressed in an objective fashion, you'd be able to do so without any links at all. But therein lies the rub. You feel you have to post the links, because your conspiracy theory includes the defensive notion that everything that disagrees is, itself, a conspiracy. And any citations given as refute will be dismissed as such.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Kornee - Nov 5, 2022
OK - you refuse to quote me as per forum decorum. Then I will here reciprocate.
The substance of the 'antisemitic' claims is established in the article(s) linked to! But as expected, your type just deflect, confirming my opening remark in #7.
The invitation remains - show *in detail* that e.g. Dr Tony Martin 'was an antisemite and had no legitimate case to make'. And so on for the other case studies provided.
But you won't because you can't.
RE: Over 100 academics warn not to adopt IHRA anti-Semitism definition (loophole style) - Syne - Nov 5, 2022
As long as you're playing this "prove me wrong" crackpot game, no one has any reason to take you seriously.
You're just the average bigot, too lazy and cowardly to make the case yourself. I will refute anything you actually have the nerve to claim and justify wholly on your own. I won't play this little, endless game of "refute every point in this long video, now refute this whole article, now refute this webpage. etc., etc., ad nauseam.
You're just like every UFO nutter, claiming this video and that personal testimony are proof that others must refute, except you're also a hateful bigot.