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