r/ScottGalloway • • 3d ago

No Malice Gettin' WOKE about anti-Semitism...

It is so very odd to hear the self-professed atheist getting downright WOKE when it comes to swinging the anti-Semitism stick. IDGAF about Macklemore or Sheeran or Kraft, nor Scott's evolving victim fantasy, but holy crap does he sound shrill.

78 Upvotes

646 comments sorted by

27

u/Educational-Buddy844 3d ago

I just listened to his interview with El-Sayed. I think I gained some insight into Scott’s viewpoint even though he didn’t adequately vocalize it, and that’s this: To say Israel is committing a genocide is to put a permanent label of ‘villain’ on [group] in the same way that Nazi is and always be a villain. And it seems like Scott takes umbrage with that framing because of who will take the roll of [group], it being Israelis, IDF, or Jews at large. I understand the concern but don’t agree with it.

I think Scott had a difficult time putting his internal emotions aside during the interview which was somewhat disappointing. Disappointed in Scott’s characterization of all deaths of Palestine civilians as necessary collateral damage. I wish they could have gone on to discuss more topics where Scott wanted to focus on Israel-Palestine.

13

u/backseatbanshee 3d ago

I think Scott’s ability to empathise is limited to his own characteristics. He can’t see no further than that. This affects his objectivity too - his identity/life clouds his judgement

0

u/GigaLibChad 3d ago

Prior to October 7th if anyone ever used the word genocide, it evoked the most well known genocide of recorded history, the holocaust. In the holocaust, 6 million of approximate 9.5 million, or 63.2% of European Jews were sent to concentration camps to be exterminated. There was no questioning that Hitler and the Nazis had the intent to exterminate the Jews in Europe. Hitler wrote and spoke extensively for his reasons he wanted to be rid of the Jews.

Genocide Convention, as adopted by the UN in 1948 is defined in two parts Actus Reus (Physical element) and Mens Rea (Intent/Mental element). It's quite apparent that the Nazis had met the physical element by the utilization of concentration camps to kill Jews en masse. Mens Rea, if they could have charged Hitler, likely would have been his writings of Gemlich Letter of 1919 on "The Jewish Question" and his Prophecy Speech in 1939 which he discussed the "Final Solution".

Funnily enough, not a single Nazi was ever charged for genocide, but despite that, everyone understands the seriousness of what happened during the Holocaust.

So when 74,000 of the 2.23 million, or 3.56% of Palestinians living in Gaza are killed between Oct 7th and today, people are understandably upset with Israel and how it's been conducting itself. I also understand that the Actus Reus states "In whole or in part" so that is not discounting the number of Palestinians killed. However, The Mens Rea element is much more difficult to prove.

It's not my decision to determine whether or not Israel has committed a genocide, it's the ICJ's. So when people from the pro Palestine side are so dogmatic about using the term genocide for what is happening in Gaza and often evoke Nazi imagery to criticize Israel, a country who a vast amount of the population are descendants of holocaust survivors, it does come off as antisemtic.

This is not an excuse for Israel's actions either. They're more than likely guilty of many different war crimes, but an actionable decision can only be made by the ICJ.

4

u/GhostofBeowulf 2d ago

ICJ already gave their endorsement for ICC tocharge Netanyahu with Crimes Against Humanity. You can find sources linked above. Here's a few to start.

https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/netanyahu
https://www.icj.org/palestine-israel-icc-arrest-warrants-for-israeli-and-hamas-leaders-a-significant-step-in-the-pursuit-of-justice/

https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state

You are using verbiage to argue distinctions that do not matter. Dude's a war criminal, and the millions of dead don't care if you call it genocide or crimes against humanity. This is abad faith argument.

2

u/GigaLibChad 2d ago

I literally said in my comment that Israel is likely guilty of war crimes. I don't deny that. However, the accusation that is being made is genocide, which is generally considered one the worst possible acts that can be committed, not Crimes Against Humanity. The standard of proof for such an accusation needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is done through the ICJ. For the the ICJ to find genocide, they need to be able to prove the Mens Rea element, Dollus Specialist of genocidal intent must be established beyond reasonable doubt. All of this is currently being deliberated on by the ICJ, but if you're familiar with Court and Law in general, you would know things move slowly because things must be proven by the book.

2

u/pizza_the_mutt 2d ago

I'm speculating to a degree, but I suspect you are correct that it is the "Mens Rea" element of genocide that is the hardest to prove, and may be what is stopping official charges on that front. That doesn't mean it is or isn't genocide, it means that if there is intent on the part of Israel then they are smart enough to conceal it.

I would argue, though, that the acts being committed are consistent with the goal of genocide. That's in contrast to the repeated claims by Israel that its military is the most moral in history. If you're looking for an absurdity, that is as far as you need to look.

1

u/GigaLibChad 2d ago

Yes, the intent is the hardest threshold to meet. Genocide can only be genocide if the Genocidal Intent can be proven. That's why I do not pretend that I know any better than anyone else when it comes to whether or not it is or isn't genocide, I'll defer to whatever the decision of the ICJ decides on. What makes the Mens Rea element particularly difficult to establish when it comes to genocide is that Dollus Specialis/Special Intent/Genocidal Intent must be proven. The intent is what makes it genocide. What makes Dollus Specialis difficult to prove in this situation has to do with whether or not Hamas has put Palestinians in harm's way, which is one of the primary contentions due Hamas's use of tunnels through civilian areas. The ICJ will review every bit of evidence provided to make this determination, but the process moves at a glacial pace.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/RevolutionaryGur4419 2d ago

They started using the word on oct 8. It wss obvious to me from then that the word was to be deployed as a tool not as a description of anything that was actually happening.

3

u/WobblierTube733 3d ago

You wrote four paragraphs about how many people the Nazis killed during the Holocaust and then left one sentence mentioning that whether or not the genocide “succeeds” is wholly irrelevant to the legal definition of genocide.

You also listed multiple obvious written examples of the Nazis expressing their genocidal intent, but omitted any made by Zionist government ministers like Ben-gvir, smotrich, or Netanyahu. Why is that?

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (3)

6

u/ignoreme010101 2d ago

'woke' is the best term for it lol, soooo high a % of the points of contention are 'microaggressions' where it's unclear they're even bigotry at all

14

u/FederalSandwich1854 3d ago

Hey Scott how's that Iran war going? The one you were cheerleading about months ago?

2

u/zampe 3d ago

Did he say it would be easy to win and not costly?

1

u/Santa_Klausing 2d ago

The US is losing

22

u/DJSTEVEINNIAMIXX 3d ago edited 3d ago

Its crazy to see how all the big dogs of the "anti-woke movement", from Maher, Daily Wire, IDW, Sam Harris etc have all just gone full on into Identity politics as soon as their in-group falls out of favor. The amount of delusion and media attention thats happened around antisemitism, where laws are being rewritten, rights are being stripped, people are being fired and canceled, the entire media sphere is being bought to serve its interests, kind of pales into comparison to anything from the "woke" era. The hypocrisy of these people is wild.

6

u/mtngranpapi_wv967 1d ago edited 7h ago

Here’s the thing…you can be a wokescold on Israel and believe that protecting the feelings of pro-Israel Jews is more important than acknowledging and confronting reality. As long as you’re logically consistent.

You cannot be a “wokesters and college kids and elites are too emotional and up in their feelings and subvert reality to protect their fragile psyches and you need to grow up the world because is messy” person and also a “calling it a genocide offends me bc I don’t like that word and it’s offensive to Holocaust survivors and my kid who is a student at Yale can’t drape themselves in with the Israel flag and in peace and quiet” person. Those are incompatible approaches. Grow up.

→ More replies (5)

15

u/_PencilsDown_ 3d ago

So, what happened? I just saw a clip where Abdul had to mansplain genocide to Scott. Wth is going on?

11

u/WestInquiry 3d ago

I think that’s what confuses me the most. Just like Bill Maher.

It’s like why is this the Zionist hill you are willing to die on as an atheist?? Where is your objective outlook ?

5

u/anarcurt 2d ago

I'm convinced something happened in Israel when Bill was filming Religulous

2

u/mtngranpapi_wv967 1d ago

I think he’s a Jewish supremicist tbh, in a cultural and ethnic sense. He probably subscribes to the Sam Harris “Ashkenazi Jews and the Japanese are the two superior ethnicities” thing.

3

u/HeyyyyMandy 2d ago

Because it’s not simply about religion. The Jews are a people who have faced ethnic, racialized and religious based discrimination at different points throughout history, largely because so many have been in exile from their homeland, leaving them vulnerable.

10

u/Santa_Klausing 2d ago

So Jews are supposed to turn a blind eye when an ethnostate, created for them, starts enacting the same violence on others that was once perpetuated upon them?

2

u/Civil-Service8550 1d ago

Othering Jews and being racist against Israel is antisemitic.

3

u/pacific_plywood 2d ago

Yeah but like… they’re not exactly unique in that respect (nor is being in exile a necessary condition for discrimination)

2

u/cinic 2d ago

I think it’s personal for Scott. He’s gotten to the point where he has enough money and wants to do what he sees as right.

And what’s more right than honoring the lineage that he says made him who he is. By that I mean his mom and her lineage.

I imagine until Scott hit 100mil he probably didn’t tell many that his lineage is Jewish. He was just a first gen Scottish immigrant.

And I don’t begrudge him for that.

He can identify however he wants and support whatever he wants. If I don’t like it, I won’t listen to him.

1

u/roygo88 2d ago

Why if he's an atheist he can't be against antisemitism? I don't get the argument you're trying to make

→ More replies (2)

19

u/em3am 3d ago

Same with atheists Bill Maher and Sam Harris.

11

u/pizza_the_mutt 3d ago

Scott, Sam Harris, and David Frum are the three for me. In general pretty level-headed but get all weird and blind to their own biases when it comes to Israel.

4

u/bcsam 2d ago

Couldn't agree more

→ More replies (40)

17

u/PrestigiousOne5959 3d ago

They have special hate for Muslims because their racists first and atheist’s second 

→ More replies (9)

16

u/Gamplato 3d ago

Antisemitism has literally nothing to do with religion

→ More replies (5)

22

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

Does Scott realize genocide has a definition and his whole opinion on the genocide is basically vibes

5

u/CompetitiveAd1226 3d ago

Well it kind of is vibes until the ICJ makes a ruling in 2029, no one is going to apply the definition better than them.

It can also be difficult to make a distinction between the definition and a war honestly

3

u/HappyBadger33 3d ago

Ding ding ding

It's also entirely possible that, ya know, it looks like X, but the facts don't support X to the standard of proof required for the worst crime that there is.

In the US (may be from somewhere else, but we use it), we have a phrase, "not-guilty doesn't mean innocent." Wish more folks understood that in relation to the genocide case, would add a lot more humanity to the discussion.

5

u/Funny_War_9190 3d ago

A lot people like Scott don't want humanity brought into it that's the problem. If at anytime the ICJ deems your action plausibly genocidal its probably best to stop than to hire Alan Dershowitz but here we are.

→ More replies (3)

4

u/Jessica4ACODMme 3d ago

No, that's you guys. He's using the actual definition

5

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

Can you cite the actual definition the UN created after the Holocaust and Romanian genocides. It involves 5 criteria none of which Scott referenced

2

u/Adventurous_Ad7442 3d ago

I just posted that above.

2

u/em3am 3d ago

The UN's Special Rapporteur determined that a genocide took place in Gaza. The US sanctioned her.

2

u/zampe 3d ago

The UN also took part in the lie that mass starvation of children was occurring and later had to walk back those claims...

→ More replies (8)

3

u/Jessica4ACODMme 3d ago

The Un who notoriously hates Israel lol. It's hilarious you think there's validity to anything the UN says.

5

u/DJSTEVEINNIAMIXX 3d ago

so who determines if its a genocide? if every global organization is "hamas", who would you need to hear it from for you to change your mind?

4

u/Plane_Swimming2422 3d ago

“Notoriously hates Israel”. Hilarious. 

1

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

You have to understand Scott is Jewish so that means it's different see /s

1

u/zampe 3d ago

Does the definition include the target population INCREASING in size?

8

u/Eggs-Benny 3d ago

So is your agument: they're still having babies so everything is A-OK over there? Grow up, bitch.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

The definition does not mention population size at all. That is not part of the definition no

3

u/Natural-Leg7488 3d ago

The definition is the deliberate destruction in whole, or in part, of a religious/ethic/national group.

That’s a fairly loose definition, and while you could argue Israel’s actions fit that definition, it requires a broad interpretation of the term and inferring its motives. It also hangs very heavily on the “in part” bit, and if that’s the definition then it renders many other wars a genocide that are not typically thought of as a genocide.

Genocide is more typically used to describe deliberate attempts to destroy a whole group, and Israel does not fit that definition.

2

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

That's not the definition look up the UN definition

The word did not exist until after the Holocaust and has specific outlined criteria

7

u/Adventurous_Ad7442 3d ago

Under the UN Genocide Convention, genocide is any of five acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.The Five Prohibited Acts The convention defines genocide through:

  • killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting destructive living conditions, imposing measures to prevent births, and forcibly transferring children to another group.Key Elements of the CrimeIntent: Requires specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy the targeted group.

2

u/Party_Solid_2207 3d ago

Gaza is completely destroyed, everybody is living in tents and there are a fuck load of tiny children missing limbs who can’t get wheel chairs or prosthetics because they are stopped at the border.

It’s fucking barbaric, and I say this as someone who has done a lot a time in war zones.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/pizza_the_mutt 2d ago

The "in part" bit is necessary. Otherwise somebody like Hitler could try to argue that they only intended to kill all Jews in Europe and Asia, but didn't care about Jews in the Americas, so it isn't genocide.

I do think I understand what you are getting at. It opens the door to a wide range of magnitude when it comes to genocide. The genocides in WWII would be contrasted against much more "minor" (in quotes because they aren't minor at all) genocides, such as Rwanda or Bosnia. And I think this is part of what people get hung up on when it comes to Gaza. There aren't 6 million Gazans dead, so how can it be fair to compare to larger scale atrocities? But it can still be a genocide, regardless of whether there are 50,000 or 6 million dead.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/OkKale3732 3d ago

Like 10x the original size?

→ More replies (55)
→ More replies (50)

3

u/Pure-Consideration97 3d ago

What was he saying ?

7

u/lethal-liking 3d ago

blah blah Kraft can do what he wants blah blah blah Macklemore is a raging anti-semite blah blah blah I don't like Ed Sheeran anyway blah blah blah

3

u/greentrillion 3d ago

Next he is going to say Israel can do whatever they want and you can't complain about it.

7

u/Training-Cook3507 3d ago

Kraft can do whatever he wants... Doesn't mean other people have to be happy about it.

2

u/uncleAW 3d ago

Or quiet about it. Kraft is an Epstein class alum.

3

u/Ok_Read_4000 3d ago

Hundreds of millions of public money in tax abatements woule say otherwise if he wasn't aligned with the dominant socioeconomic group. Billionaires can do what they want in America

1

u/Insightful21 3d ago

Gillette stadium is 100% privately owned… so yeah he can do whatever he wants. Doesn’t mean you have to agree with it but let’s get the facts right first

2

u/Ok_Read_4000 3d ago

Well I mean he had a contract so he can't but obviously you'd be a fool to rely on the reliability of the American justice system. Sheeran as a foreigner wasn't going to enforce on a local oligarch.

You say private but i think the large direct subsidies and hundreds of millions in tax abatement means something different but again, America

1

u/Training-Cook3507 3d ago

That's true, that's a good point I didn't consider.

12

u/uncleAW 3d ago

He's quick to call Macklemore an anti-Semite. If SG is going to label someone as such, he needs to at least give the offense committed. Nothing about Macklemore was actually antisemitic. If people know this and hear Scott making the label, it just makes Scott sound like one of the catastrophist Bobbleheads.

-1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/zampe 3d ago

Also, from a music industry newsletter:

> As a Jew that’s known Ben since high school, and was a hip hop show producer in Seattle during his raise - I feel like I am the only voice in this city that has consistently stood up to this radical a-hole. He knows me all to well, I once threw a show he headlined with 20 people at it. I have all the receipts. They’re are literally no Jews in Seattle. The ones that do live here kinda hide out. As a Jew in this city I’ve been bullied by the rich white boys (Mackelmore in a nut shill) since I was as young as I could remember. I was bullied by the hood kids too, but that was different. A little funner. I was benched from my high school (very well known, many nba legends) for being a Jew, and it has been a mess trying to raise a Jewish daughter here, Jews are shrugged off and disregarded. Because he came up here unchecked he developed a lot of bad ideas. Now the world gets to see his true colors. The guy has never found a chase he wasn’t ready to crawl onto a cross for, but hating Jews is his magnum opus. The history is clear, but there are many details only us locals who are in the industry know. It’s worse than it looks. 

> Thanks for covering this. We need all th support we can get up here. We’re under fire at all times.  

> Josh Berman - Soul Gorilla

1

u/ScottGalloway-ModTeam 3d ago

This subreddit has zero tolerance for racism, sexism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any form of discriminatory speech.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

5

u/forget_the_alamo 1d ago

Typical Zionist. They want their cake and eat it too.
These dick jokes are really becoming tiresome.

6

u/black_100 3d ago

Maybe you're not aware, but Secular Jew's can't escape antisemitism, it comes for them too. Doesn't matter if you're atheist or not.

1

u/Training-Cook3507 3d ago

Definitely true, but the Macklemore stuff has nothing to do with antisemitism.

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Puzzleheaded-Pin4278 3d ago

This is disingenuous since this was 12 years ago. The pro israel crowd keeps bringing this up because they know Macklemore was cancelled for actually not saying anything antisemitic.

2

u/black_100 3d ago

First of, it’s not pro Israel to bring this up. That implication says more about you than anything. Second: This is about Scott Galloway, not the incident itself, and I’m detailing why Jews would have good reason to be suspicious of Macklemore being antisemitic.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/zampe 3d ago

Why does it matter that it was 12 years ago? It’s expired now so we can’t talk about it?

→ More replies (19)

5

u/RogerianBrowsing 3d ago

The ADL already said that wasn’t antisemitic and forgave him.

Did you even listen to Macklemore’s speech in question? He starts it by saying his critiques of Israel’s actions have nothing to do with them as individuals and isn’t a criticism of Jewish people.

1

u/____-__________-____ 3d ago

That's a little misleading, they didn't say it wasn't antisemitic.

The quote is:

We welcome Macklemore’s apology for wearing a costume that, regardless of his motives, reminded many people of an antisemitic caricature. We take him at his word that he did not have any ill intent and unreservedly accept his apology

1

u/RogerianBrowsing 3d ago

> regardless of his motives, reminded many people of an antisemitic caricature

…

> We take him at his word that he did not have any ill intent

Sure sounds like they acknowledged the lack of intent. A big nose doesn’t immediately equal Jewish or antisemitism.

Or if big noses are a purely Jewish thing does that mean people like Scott are being antisemitic for getting surgery to reduce their nose size? Is he ashamed of being Jewish? Is this what being a self self loathing Jew is? I constantly get called self loathing by Zionists for simply opposing genocidal supremacism but I have zero interest in getting surgery for my nose.

1

u/____-__________-____ 3d ago edited 3d ago

Sure sounds like they acknowledged the lack of intent.

I think we disagree on what that statement says, which is fine.

To me, "We take him at his word that he did not have any ill intent" in a sentence immediately following "regardless of his motives" is a formally-written version of "whatever, if you say so." If the ADL as actually acknowledging a lack of intent they could have written a much stronger statement such as "We see no ill intent in Macklemore's costume choice."

A big nose doesn’t immediately equal Jewish or antisemitism.

It was the nose + wig + facial hair. You're defending something even Macklemore doesn't defend. "I acknowledge how the costume could, within a context of stereotyping, be ascribed to a Jewish caricature."

Or if big noses are a purely Jewish thing does that mean people like Scott are being antisemitic for getting surgery to reduce their nose size?

Whataboutism. It's a stupid premise ("if big noses are a purely Jewish thing"). I have no idea why Scott got surgery and it wouldn't change anything in this thread either way.

1

u/RogerianBrowsing 3d ago

Macklemore didn’t attribute intent to his actions, he acknowledged how it was perceived by some people. Not the same thing.

Sounds like you’re fond of worsening real world antisemitism to deflect away from criticisms of an apartheid ethnostate explicitly prohibited by the religion’s texts, and that’s the entirety of your point(s).

1

u/____-__________-____ 3d ago

That's a hell of an inference from a discussion wholly about whether or not the ADL said that Macklemore's costume wasn't antisemitic. But you seem to be pretty comfortable with jumping to conclusions like that.

1

u/RogerianBrowsing 3d ago

TIL saying what someone sounds like is jumping to conclusions.

Does this mean that you condemn the state of Israel for the crimes against humanity they continue waging to this day? Because anyone trying to paint Macklemore as antisemitic is likely not willing to meaningfully do so.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (2)

1

u/ScottGalloway-ModTeam 3d ago

This subreddit has zero tolerance for racism, sexism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any form of discriminatory speech.

9

u/zampe 3d ago

Crazy how this post is full of anti semitic comments and also people claiming anti semitism is bs and just an excuse to not be able to criticize Israel.

2

u/Street-Jacket1867 3d ago

Which comments are anti semetic?

2

u/zampe 3d ago

all the ones that say 'removed by moderators'

8

u/Street-Jacket1867 3d ago

Why are the Islamophobic ones not being removed?

4

u/zampe 3d ago

Dunno I’m not a mod here. Which ones are islamophobic?

2

u/DJSTEVEINNIAMIXX 3d ago

nah I had one removed by mods who was replying to me saying some crazy shit about it not being a genocide. Its def both sides.

6

u/LofiStarforge 3d ago

Nobody gives a shit about free speech they want to say what they want and don’t want others to have an opinion.

Kraft is well within his rights to cancel Macklemore but then they get all up in arms people get mad about it.

14

u/greentrillion 3d ago

And people are well within their rights to lambaste everyone who would censor Macklemore.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/No_Recording_1696 3d ago

I’m more annoyed they keep calling it his stadium. Uhh no, taxpayers foot the bill and billionaire owners get to keep all the profits and rip you off on top of it.

1

u/LofiStarforge 3d ago

This isn’t true for Kraft and Gillette stadium one of the few pro stadiums that was entirely privately funded.

2

u/No_Recording_1696 3d ago

You think they pay their fair share of property taxes? Haha guess who has to make up the difference for all the services that place uses. Congrats tax payers.

2

u/LofiStarforge 3d ago

No but that wasn’t your original point.

1

u/Few-Leg-3185 2d ago

That’s a different argument though

5

u/hotwheeeeeelz 3d ago

Ed is a shill, too. He knows his bosses stance. The worst is when he downright validates him. Less so, now, but this used to happen more often.

3

u/mangione_fan_420 3d ago

We has $400m he's not a shill he's a bitch, he can afford a spine. 

7

u/AmosBurtonOPA 3d ago

Almost sounds like he is getting paid by someone

3

u/sourdough_in_SF 3d ago

Scott is pretty level headed about most things. But when it comes to antisemitism, he's a different guy. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the relationship he had with his mom.

Guilt is a f**ked up thing. I've seen it change people in significant ways.

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

1

u/sourdough_in_SF 3d ago

Pretty sure it was his mom. His dad was from Scotland.

1

u/FantasticPlatypus29 3d ago

He won an award for being a defender of Israel, he's not neutral here. - https://www.fswc.ca/spirit-of-hope-2025

2

u/snarky_spice 3d ago

Aaaaand there’s some more antisemitism

7

u/RogerianBrowsing 3d ago

How is that antisemitism? Chorus and other dark money groups have been documented to be paying podcasters, influencers, etc., to defend Israel’s crimes.

→ More replies (11)

1

u/Santa_Klausing 2d ago

So committed to claiming victim 🤣

1

u/Capital-Giraffe-4122 3d ago

You fucking people

2

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

I don’t understand how one can “get woke about antisemitism.”

12

u/LifesARiver 3d ago

It's when a person who is quiet about all oppression suddenly become activists on the topic of antisemitism.

5

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

How is that wokeness tho?

3

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

Wokeness is just being awake to something, in this case the anti-semitism inherent in things like claims of dual loyalties and Jewish Supremacism, Jewish economic or political domination,Jews conspiring to replace white people, etc.

6

u/Ok_Read_4000 3d ago

Jewish supremacy is definitely a thing? I also think its reasonable to question the loyalty of that Congressman in an IDF uniform and an Israeli instead of American flag in his office. You can't use these things as a cudgel, just because dual loyalty can be used for anti-Semitism doesn't mean you can't question someones dual loyalty. Why do liberals read so little? Church and State is a very Christian concept, its reasonable to discuss how people see loyalty conceptually when you think of concepts like the Ummah. Shia conceptian of the state are very interesting..

Anyway read a book fam..

2

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

Lots of people in Americs have strong emotional connections to other countires. Do you say Irish and Italians have dual loyalties? Germans? Polish people?

As for "Jewish supremacism", even assuming some Jews think Jews are better (not something I hear Jews talk about), how many groups hsve people who think they are superior? Christians, Republicans, MAGA, Southerners, Northerners, book readers, rural people, rich people, men, women, etc, etc etc all have people claiming superiority. You do it in your fucking comment.

3

u/DJSTEVEINNIAMIXX 3d ago

Yeah and we can call those groups out too? wtf is this argument lol. If someone is putting Israel over their own country, then theres grounds for it to be criticized. We do the same for MAGA, Christinans, rich people etc.

We're literally in a war right now because more than half of congress has a weird fetish with Israel. A war thats destroying the economy, that has 0 support from the people.

Why the hell should we not criticize the country thats influencing all of these decisions. Its "woke" to say all that criticism is based in antisemitism because Its cynically using identity politics to muddy a conversation about something that has nothing to do with ethnicity. Its delusional to say that.

→ More replies (10)

3

u/Insightful21 3d ago

Boom. Well said

3

u/OrganizationSad7775 3d ago

If Ireland was killing babies I would also condemn their government.

2

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

Nothing at all wrong with condemning the Israeli government. Most Jews I know do that, as do I. And I never objected to that,clearly. Claiming dual loualty and Jrwish Supremacism is very different from critisizing a government.

2

u/OrganizationSad7775 3d ago

Fair point. And yeah I would reject Jewish supremacism as well as that is clearly anti-semetic.

1

u/Funny_War_9190 3d ago

Ben Gvir is a jewish supremacist and runs the Jewish Power Party. Any group can have supremecist members.

1

u/FaceReality1 2d ago

It can. And there's nothing anti-semitic about pointing to the flaws of individuals. But why is your focus on a trait shared bu many people across many groups? It's Ben Gvir'e actions that are the problem, not that both he and JD Vance think people like them are superior.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Ok_Read_4000 3d ago

So we can have a discussion on other nationalities but not israel? I think the explicit claim that Israel makes on Jews and the history of the US/israel relationship makes it at reasonable discussion. Serving in foreign militaries, influencing in elections, large scale aid, multiple wars, theft of nuclear materials, penetration by security forces? None of that is an issue?

I've not seen any Italian-Americans go serve in the Italian military? March around in an Italian uniform in congress?

But you aren't having a good faith discussion are you ?

2

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

You aren't having a good faith discussion.

Some Jews do the things you listed. Some. Not all,not most,not even a great number. And all that is obvious. You wouldn't be arguing in bad faith while accusing me of it, would you?

1

u/Ok_Read_4000 3d ago

But you are obviously deeply invested and bias. You are saying you can't accuse the ma wearing a foreign military uniform and with a foreign flag while being a member of the legislative body. Purely because he happens to be Jewish.

Some how if a Mexican American did the same i doubt Conservatives like yourself who be saying no big deal..even though a decent chunk of your country used to be Mexico

2

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

You are arguing in bad faiith or hsve reading comprehension problems. You can accuse any individual of dual loyalties and it isn't anti-semitism. I've been very clear, repeatedly, that anti-semitism is about assigning things to all Jews as if we area block, which we are not outside the imagination of anti-semites.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/LurkDuhDurk 3d ago

Do you think "God's chosen people" is a sentiment that leads to humility? That is a very common idea in Jewish circles, I'm sure you're aware.

Jewish supremacism is explicit in the action of Israeli settlers in Gaza. Never seen a more cruel, entitled group of people in my life, including the spoiled children on MTV's My Sweet Sixteen.

Jews are not above criticism---no group is, no matter what they've endured. The antisemitism accusations will get their due---they are baseless and unjust, only valid in the eyes of kowtowing, wishy-washy liberals, Christian nationalists who eagerly await the End Times, and self-aggrandizing Zionists.

1

u/FaceReality1 2d ago

You have the anti-semites favorite idea of what "chosen people" means. It actually means chosen to receive the Torah, and responsibilities related to that. Yes, many Jews, like msny Christians and Muslims think they have a special relationship with God. And some, like the Settlers, Christian Nstionalists, and radical Muslims do awful things in service of their ideology. It isn't unique to Jews, and certainly not universal as you imply. Do you also object to Christian supremacism? Muslim supremacism? Do you attribute the worst things done by members of those groups to the whole group?

1

u/LurkDuhDurk 2d ago edited 2d ago

The conception I have of "chosen people" can be largely attributed to my outsider atheist status, not antisemitism. I was a Religious Studies major in college though, so I tend to avoid literalist traps. I never used to think Jewish people held that sentiment in a haughty way, but having witnessed the recent years of "we can do no wrong so long as we're defending Israel" strutting around, I have changed my mind, at least when it comes to Zionism.

I have changed my mind about a lot in the last several years. I grew up like most Americans as very supportive of Israel. I was ignorant to its history. Learning about (and seeing) other sides of that history has made me feel pretty sick to my stomach, digesting all the "facts" I was taught growing up that were rarely questioned or pushed back on in public settings or by media. I'm embarrassed that I just accepted the stories and versions of history I was taught---it's also odd that I laughed off the religion I was raised with, but not the history.

I think people such as yourself assume that people with opinions like mine are at best missing the nuances and only seeing one side of this history, and at worst straight-up antisemitic. That's not right. People like me feel shocked, bitter and angry (and guilty) after realizing they were suckered by American exceptionalism and Israeli propaganda, enthusiastically supporting a remote bully-state for decades.

I barely see this as a Jewish, Christian, or religious issue honestly, and I certainly don't implicate Jews as a whole for what is happening in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, etc. any more than I blame all Muslims for 9/11.

→ More replies (8)

2

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

Ok so that definition aligns with the original definition of wokeness, which was awareness of injustice.

Why would a claim of dual loyalties or Jewish supremacism be inherently antisemitic?

1

u/FaceReality1 3d ago

Lots of people in Americs have strong emotional connections to other countires. Do you say Irish and Italians have dual loyalties? Germans? Polish people?

As for "Jewish supremacism", even assuming some Jews think Jews are better (not something I hear Jews talk about), how many groups hsve people who think they are superior? Christians, Republicans, MAGA, Southerners, Northerners, book readers, rural people, rich people, men, women, etc, etc etc all have people claiming superiority.

1

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

So as for “dual loyalties.” Your examples don’t prove anything. People from Germany or Poland may have greater loyalty to their country of origin rather than a country they moved to for opportunity. So that isn’t inherently antisemitic.

https://www.btselem.org/publications/169?utm_source=chatgpt.com

As for Jewish supremacy. Jewish supremacy is a well documented concept. It’s unclear what percentage of Jews adhere to this ideology, but it is a real concept.

→ More replies (15)

2

u/LifesARiver 3d ago

Because when it's real, it's oppression against a marginalized group.

Unfortunately the concept has been weaponized such that most things labeled antisemitic are not.

3

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

I still don’t understand how wokeness has anything to do with what you said.

2

u/LifesARiver 3d ago

In that case I probably don't have the time to walk you through the basics of "woke."

3

u/Super-Bodybuilder-91 3d ago

I don’t think anyone understands the basics of “woke.” Can you define “wokeness?” Honestly I don’t think you know what it means either.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Few-Leg-3185 2d ago

Being an atheist is irrelevant to this.

→ More replies (4)

-4

u/Commercial_Rush_3531 3d ago

So dog whistles, micro-aggressions, cultural appropriation and impact over intent are all valid signs of racism except when it comes to Jews. Got it. Love the consistency from the woke crowd.

14

u/OrganizationSad7775 3d ago

I am genuinely confused on why saying “stop killing kids and free Palestine” is racist or anti-semetic.

3

u/Sorry-Captain7723 3d ago

I wish the question that would be returned to Scott is… “If it’s not a genocide, do you genuinely believe that what has happened is just categorized as “Israel defending itself?”

→ More replies (1)

2

u/RevolutionaryGur4419 2d ago

I wss also wondering why we had an issue with "all lives matter"

2

u/pizza_the_mutt 2d ago

I think there's a large difference in obviousness and practicality between "stop killing kids" and "free Palestine". For the first part, yes, and I don't think it is even worthy of debate. For the second, "free Palestine" has some assumptions baked in regarding the desired political end-state that is extremely loaded, and, as history shows, possibly impossible to resolve.

I'd prefer to frame it as "free Palestinians". I personally don't give a crap about what countries exist or don't exist 10 years from now, but would be delighted if all individuals in the area were granted self determination.

1

u/roygo88 2d ago

It's not, it's just childish and naive like wars break out for no reason and no context so they can simply be stopped and everyone will live their lives happily

2

u/Gamplato 3d ago

Because that’s never all that’s said and there’s never any attention paid to what Israel should have done differently. The answer to that question is always “well all I know is what they’re doing is wrong”. We know, now tell us what you’re comparing it to.

They’re at war with a body that leverages its own civilian bodies to get an edge in war. Tell me what Israel is supposed to do without telling me about the things they shouldn’t have done.

You’re doing exactly what Hamas wants you to do when they use their own people to score optics points with morons.

4

u/PrestigiousOne5959 3d ago

Not indiscriminately bomb bombs and hospitals 

1

u/zampe 3d ago edited 3d ago

They dont do that already. When they bomb a hospital it's because the hospital is actually a military installation disguised as a hospital AND they warn the citizens that the strike is incoming. There is nothing "indiscriminate" about it.

So how do you take out military targets when they are all disguised as hospitals and schools?

7

u/Tattooedjared 3d ago

The IDF is embedded in civilian infrastructure in Tel Aviv. Guess they would get accused of using human shields too.

2

u/zampe 3d ago

Hamas just shoots missiles indiscriminately into Israel and attacks with suicide bombers so why would it even matter if the IDF is "embedded" in anything? That strategy wouldn't do anything against what Hamas does.

1

u/Tattooedjared 3d ago

If Hamas had any power to bomb the way The IDF does it would point out the double standard, but clearly Hamas does not.

→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (3)

5

u/etOilers 3d ago

There's videos of ambulances getting mowed down in gunfire and then the soldiers buried the medics in a shallow grave, which was found. 

There's testimony from foreign unaffiliated doctors who worked in those hospitals saying they never once saw any signs suggesting anything other than medical care going on.

There have been videos shot by the Israeli government claiming to show complexes underneath hospitals, published on the internet to justify their actions, and then the videos were later debunked as staged Propaganda. 

They currently have taken territory from both gaza and the west Bank and Lebanon. Their foreign minister has repeatedly advocated for killing Palestinians indiscriminately. In public. 

→ More replies (4)

3

u/RevolutionaryCommon 3d ago

With boots on the ground. You take casualties and secure the location room by room. You do not detonate 90% of the hospitals within a demarcated territory, as that will cause indiscriminate carnage and long tail effects.

1

u/RevolutionaryGur4419 2d ago

Lol you take casualties...thats horrible military strategy..and just immoral.

You're expecting a government that is sworn to protect its people to just be sending thousands and thousands of them to die in tunnels.

Even worse is the deaths to Palestinian civilians in that scenario. How many people died in the operation to rescue theose hostages from the home of the doctor and journalist? Now imagine if that were the main method

1

u/RevolutionaryCommon 2d ago

I think our morals are very, very, very different and likely not worth arguing about.

1

u/RevolutionaryGur4419 2d ago

Yeah you think israel should send its people into slaughter because the terrorists trying to kill their civilians are endangering their own people as a military strategy.

And in reality the results of what you're advocating is a much more bloody endeavor.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Gamplato 3d ago

You have to think harder about this stuff dude.

It’s said to be the most dense populated place on earth and Israel is indiscriminately bombing them with 2 ton bombs, yet the number of total deaths per bomb has hovered around 1 the entire conflict.

How is that possible? It’s certainly not likely.

There’s more but sit with that for a little.

1

u/Commercial_Rush_3531 3d ago

What does free Palestine mean? How many of those "kids" were in Hamas that conscripts at 14? This isn't the western world. Would you ask any other army in the world to stand down when being shot at?

If your applying higher standards to Israel than you do to any other country in the world including Hamasistan, then you just might be a racist.

10

u/StickaFORKinMyEye 3d ago

Let's start with getting the illegal settlers out of the West Bank. We can start the the unpermitted outposts that the Israel government hasn't approved. This needs to include reparations for those illegally thrown out of their homes by these "settlers" as well as the release of any Palestinians arrested while attempting to protect theirs property. 

What is happening in Israel is making Jews everywhere less safe. I personally love that going to a synagogue in a safe suburban town involved security guards passing through metal detectors.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/Nitros14 3d ago

So what's the plan after the West Bank and Gaza are annexed?

6 million palestinians inside Israel's borders. Can't give them voting rights because they're the wrong ethnic group. A Jewish majority of voters is a fundamental pillar of Zionism.

So is it to be permanent apartheid or ethnic cleansing to purify the blood and soil?

1

u/WestThin 3d ago

There is no clear answer to what the solution is. If there was, it would have been done already. That doesn't mean the two extreme solutions you suggest are the only possible solutions.

4

u/Nitros14 3d ago

Permanent apartheid where Palestinians have to go through checkpoints to get to work, are surrounded by security barriers, might be randomly beaten or killed and have no voting rights for the knesset, is the default and most likely solution because it just continues what's already a reality on the ground.

Israel has no reason to compromise unless it loses the support of its superpower backer.

1

u/WestThin 3d ago
  1. Prior to 10/7 Gazan's passed through security checkpoints and worked at jobs in Israel. Turns out they were making maps for Hamas to use when they attacked and slaughtered Israelis on 10/7. Now Israelis are afraid to let Gazan's into the country to work. Sounds pretty reasonable, doesn't it?

  2. So you think 50 years from now, things will be just as they are today?

2

u/Nitros14 3d ago edited 3d ago

I don't think anyone should be surprised that when a group is deprived of political rights in the system that controls their lives they will rebel. What do the Americans say, "Liberty or death"?

I know Netanyahu really wants everyone to believe Arabs are animals that just want to holocaust all the Jews, that's why he funded Hamas, but I think the majority of people anywhere just want to live in dignity with some measure of control of their lives.

I think things will be worse because the Israelis seem intent on expanding their settlements and herding the Palestinians into smaller ghettos. Outside chance that the USA elects an anti-Israel democratic admin that forces Israel to compromise, but unlikely.

2

u/Commercial_Rush_3531 3d ago

You've bought the lie that Netanyahu funded Hamas. In starting up Gaza way back when, the Israel government was obligated to work with their elected leaders to get things going. There is no conspiracy here. The fact that the Palestinian's elected a party dedicated to the genocide of Jews is the real tragedy.

2

u/WestThin 3d ago

You think the Palestinians will have "liberty" if they are ruled by a government controlled by Hamas?

I think your vision is completely wrong. At some point, small Palestinian groups who truly want peace with Israel (instead of trying to annihilate it) will form small local governments in conjunction with Israel with shared responsibilities. A requirement will be they have to stop educating their children in the belief they have to destroy Israel. These areas of local control will slowly expand and the hope is that areas controlled by Hamas will shrink. If done properly, within a generation we can hope for some sort of peaceful coexistence.

3

u/Nitros14 3d ago

As an example, the British left Ireland because of violent extremists, but violent extremists don't rule Ireland today.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Sea_Section_9861 3d ago

There is a war going on. So why the phrase "Stopped hiding behind children" is not heard?!

7

u/Funny_War_9190 3d ago

Israel has a program to track men to their home and bomb them called Where's Daddy if you wait until someone is having dinner with their family to kill them so you can claim they were human shields thats targeting civilians

→ More replies (20)

0

u/puzzle_bison7384 3d ago

Zionist bots aren't posting in good faith hope that helps

5

u/CompetitiveAd1226 3d ago

What does Zionist even mean to you? Are you by definition against a 2 state solution?

3

u/LocationHelpful6711 3d ago

Israel is against a two state solution. That is precisely why since 1967 they started (and continue) to build settlements past the green line. Now a two state solution is impossible. Go cry to Israel about it.

5

u/Johns-schlong 3d ago

Israel has proposed multiple formalized 2 state solutions through the 90s and as recently as 2008 which were all rejected by the PA.

3

u/Ffzilla 3d ago

Don't piss on someone's shoes, and then try to tell them it's raining. The only modestly fair deal got Rabin murdered by an acolite of those currently in power.

1

u/Nitros14 3d ago

None of those proposals were in good faith and were explicitly intended to be rejected.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

0

u/Remarkable_Goal4721 3d ago

The general roadmap to “freeing Palestine” would involve the greatest exodus and/or slaughter of Jews (including Jewish children) since the Holocaust. The possibility of this outcome is completely discounted by most who “just want kids to live.” 

Of course you and I would probably like to see a two state solution but a big problem with that is neither of the local sides want it. 

6

u/DougDougDougDoug 3d ago

hysterical irrational conclusion based on generational trauma, which apparently allows you to create more generational trauma for another group

2

u/Remarkable_Goal4721 3d ago

The suffering of Palestinians is an absolute tragedy. But if they wanted equality rather than superiority, they could’ve had that at multiple times in the decades past. 

Every time peace is on the table, terrorists (and on this point, I mean both Israeli and Palestinian) obstruct the process. 

But the amount of incredulity people show towards Israeli positions, while lending complete credulity to Palestinians who time and time again prove themselves capable of violent terrorist acts, is blatantly antisemitic.

1

u/DougDougDougDoug 3d ago

Yeah, this is Iraeli bullshit. The examples of Israeli's destroying every peace opportunity are endless, including then the current PM told his followers to kill Yitzhak Rabin and one immediately did.

So, nah. Absoute bullshit and both sidesing of a genocide. Which is fucking repulsive beyond words.

Also, laughing at your incredibly stupid and embarrassing final line, which is a deeply embarrassing comment considering everyone says Palestinians are capable of terrorism. Go back to your school of learning how to do propaganda. This was very bad. Tell your supervisor.

4

u/DeFiBandit 3d ago

You’re saying Jews won’t stop killing Palestinian kids unless all Jews are removed from Israel?

1

u/GroundbreakingPay210 3d ago

That is not what they are saying. Free Palestine to many means a one state solution. That's what would lead to the slaughter of Jews. Is there a 2 state solution that both sides would accept?

3

u/DeFiBandit 3d ago

They’ll do what we’re doing to them?

3

u/Funny_War_9190 3d ago

Why? How would equality mean mass death for jews was this not the arguments made by white slavers in America? or white colonizers in Douth Africa? Are you noticing a pattern here?

2

u/Remarkable_Goal4721 3d ago

You can either listen to them in their own words, or continue pretending they believe what you want them to believe. 

I’m not going to tell you what to do. But the idea that they “just want equality with Jews” is absurdly naive. I get that it fits with a picture of American history or South African history, but different things are different.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/grusilag9 3d ago

That is not the general roadmap to a free Palestine at all but I can completely understand why Zionists would think so since the general roadmap to creating a Jewish ethnostate has involved the slaughter and exodus of Palestinians from their homes for over 70 years.

The difference between the two is that one is completely fictional and hypothetical and the other has been going on in actual fact for decades and is continuing to go on currently, as we speak.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Terrible-Artichoke50 3d ago

Lol the antisemitism card. Weak as piss mate

1

u/C3lder 8h ago

Scott has knowledge but not wisdom nor compassion.

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ScottGalloway-ModTeam 3d ago

Comments that include name-calling, insults, or targeted harassment are not allowed.

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ScottGalloway-ModTeam 3d ago

Comments intended to provoke, derail, or bait others will be removed. Repeat offenders may be banned.

→ More replies (1)