Nice!
-
The thing with such people is that if they didn't go so far, I wouldn't have an issue.
There's nothing wrong with talking about the issues in the West Bank per se (though I'd ask why not discuss other human tragedies and only talk about Israel) but when one talks about Israel as an illegitimate state or makes allusions to antisemitic tropes, it's clear this absolutely doesn't belong on a site like this, and never from an admin.
The Israelian government is largely seen as racist colonialistic and genocidal. It is always, ALWAYS a good moment to be reminded of that. And if we allow public officers to wear turbans or a kippah, we certainly should allow a Mastodon admin to remind us of who is who.
-
The thing with such people is that if they didn't go so far, I wouldn't have an issue.
There's nothing wrong with talking about the issues in the West Bank per se (though I'd ask why not discuss other human tragedies and only talk about Israel) but when one talks about Israel as an illegitimate state or makes allusions to antisemitic tropes, it's clear this absolutely doesn't belong on a site like this, and never from an admin.
@serge @lavaeolus @stefan Oh, and your choice of words like "such people" and "perse" is nailbiting.
-
@serge @lavaeolus @stefan Oh, and your choice of words like "such people" and "perse" is nailbiting.
-
@serge @lavaeolus @stefan Wow, just.... Wow....
-
The Israelian government is largely seen as racist colonialistic and genocidal. It is always, ALWAYS a good moment to be reminded of that. And if we allow public officers to wear turbans or a kippah, we certainly should allow a Mastodon admin to remind us of who is who.
@KoosPol You speak of "Israelian government", but then about allowing "public officers to wear turbans or a kippah" - which is already conflating Israel with Jews elsewhere.
Also, allow "to remind us of who is who" - wtf are you talking about?1) weirdly conflating religion of unrelated people with the action of a state
2) not the act of reminding, but the focus of "80 years", i.e. the whole existence, is what I take issue with -
@serge @lavaeolus @stefan Wow, just.... Wow....
@serge @lavaeolus @stefan He blocked me, hahahaaa....!
Just to not get confused on who said what, I'll wear this as a badge of honor: -
@KoosPol You speak of "Israelian government", but then about allowing "public officers to wear turbans or a kippah" - which is already conflating Israel with Jews elsewhere.
Also, allow "to remind us of who is who" - wtf are you talking about?1) weirdly conflating religion of unrelated people with the action of a state
2) not the act of reminding, but the focus of "80 years", i.e. the whole existence, is what I take issue with@lavaeolus @serge @stefan Hi there. Yes, I agree. My mind is usually much quicker than my fingers. In my mind it was a pretty solid argument. But ofcourse, if you look at it from the outside it's pretty flimsy. Let me fill in some side comments should have added in the first place:
The turbans/kippah mention was about double standards. Generally we allow people to speak out for what their (not necessarily religious) beliefs are. Even by public officials. I see so issue with a Mastodon admin making a stand. This is in no way a conflation of religion and state.
The 80 years "frame" (for lack of a better word, English is not my first language) does not exist in a vacuum. It's sort of a whataboutism. We can't solve all the problems of the world. But if we see one, it's worth addressing. And then we shouldn't drag other problems to it and complain that that one wasn't solved too.
I hope it makes more sense now. -
@KoosPol You speak of "Israelian government", but then about allowing "public officers to wear turbans or a kippah" - which is already conflating Israel with Jews elsewhere.
Also, allow "to remind us of who is who" - wtf are you talking about?1) weirdly conflating religion of unrelated people with the action of a state
2) not the act of reminding, but the focus of "80 years", i.e. the whole existence, is what I take issue with@lavaeolus @serge @stefan One more thing I forgot:
"Also, allow "to remind us of who is who" - wtf are you talking about?"
If someone is calling me a nazi without knowing me even a tiny bit, that person needs to get his head examined. -
Nice!
"Mastodon is currently considered *the* alternative to Twitter. SURF [the IT cooperative of Dutch education and research] and Universities of the Netherlands are therefore jointly exploring how a Mastodon environment for education and research in the Netherlands can take shape."
https://www.surf.nl/en/mastodon-pilot-for-research-and-education
"Twitter"? Sounds like the article from 2023?
-
@Bradley_JF @rejzor @stefan
Very much this. Would help some to not panic over business presence here:
"I am gonna block instance X or Y if they ever alow ads!!!"
- Yes ads are horrible but if coca cola has an account on a big instance it wont give them tools to track you automated and their posts are just posts (technically).
- If they open their own official instance for their brands, products and employees then their fanbase can happy connect and the rest can ignore it. -
@lavaeolus @serge @stefan Hi there. Yes, I agree. My mind is usually much quicker than my fingers. In my mind it was a pretty solid argument. But ofcourse, if you look at it from the outside it's pretty flimsy. Let me fill in some side comments should have added in the first place:
The turbans/kippah mention was about double standards. Generally we allow people to speak out for what their (not necessarily religious) beliefs are. Even by public officials. I see so issue with a Mastodon admin making a stand. This is in no way a conflation of religion and state.
The 80 years "frame" (for lack of a better word, English is not my first language) does not exist in a vacuum. It's sort of a whataboutism. We can't solve all the problems of the world. But if we see one, it's worth addressing. And then we shouldn't drag other problems to it and complain that that one wasn't solved too.
I hope it makes more sense now.@KoosPol Well, you see how your original post can be very easily misunderstood.
For the record, I disagree with @serge calling you a "Nazi".
In the same way the admin is allowed his speech, Serge is allowed to point out the potential issues with the way he phrased things (phrases do not exist in a vacuum, too). And in the same way, I'm allowed to voice my displeasure with those phrases.
Nothing more happened, nothing less.
-
@KoosPol Well, you see how your original post can be very easily misunderstood.
For the record, I disagree with @serge calling you a "Nazi".
In the same way the admin is allowed his speech, Serge is allowed to point out the potential issues with the way he phrased things (phrases do not exist in a vacuum, too). And in the same way, I'm allowed to voice my displeasure with those phrases.
Nothing more happened, nothing less.
@lavaeolus @serge @stefan
This -
Oh this is the same instance where the admin posted yesterday about how Israel "controls the West" and "has done so for 80 years" (ie all of its existence).
Is making allusions to Jewish lies, Jewish control of government and delegitimatizing a state's existence considered acceptable?
@serge so, we're doing quotes now as if we're citing something, but that thing we are supposedly citing is not even written in that post?
If they had actually written what you are purpoting, that would be unacceptable. But they didnt write that.
-
@serge so, we're doing quotes now as if we're citing something, but that thing we are supposedly citing is not even written in that post?
If they had actually written what you are purpoting, that would be unacceptable. But they didnt write that.
Hes says two things in the original version:
"This behavior is what you get, and what you make possible, when you spend 80 years talking about the #Palestinian “conflict.” This is not just about far-right #apartheid nationalists in #Israel.
It is all about 80 years of enabling by the “reasonable center” and the “silent majority” in the West."
There are multiple dog whistles at play here. It's a lot of careful writing. You can read it either as Jews are covering up the situation by "re framing" (ie lying) or you can read this as an allusion to the "Jewish Question" 100 years ago in Europe, aka that the existence of Israel is akin to the Holocaust.
I took the *less problematic* view in this post, which is "just" that Jews someone control the West.
But re-reading it today, it's far more obscene in that it's a clear allusion to Holocaust Denial, rather than Jewish governmental control.
-
@serge so, we're doing quotes now as if we're citing something, but that thing we are supposedly citing is not even written in that post?
If they had actually written what you are purpoting, that would be unacceptable. But they didnt write that.
Should I go back and focus on the Holocaust Denial part then, rather than the lies?
-
Hes says two things in the original version:
"This behavior is what you get, and what you make possible, when you spend 80 years talking about the #Palestinian “conflict.” This is not just about far-right #apartheid nationalists in #Israel.
It is all about 80 years of enabling by the “reasonable center” and the “silent majority” in the West."
There are multiple dog whistles at play here. It's a lot of careful writing. You can read it either as Jews are covering up the situation by "re framing" (ie lying) or you can read this as an allusion to the "Jewish Question" 100 years ago in Europe, aka that the existence of Israel is akin to the Holocaust.
I took the *less problematic* view in this post, which is "just" that Jews someone control the West.
But re-reading it today, it's far more obscene in that it's a clear allusion to Holocaust Denial, rather than Jewish governmental control.
@serge or you could read it as a critique of Western people, whom he believes to be "enabling" human rights violations against palestinians by using the word "conflict".
(Which is another take that one could agree or disagree with)
You can read it in a lot of ways. But see what I did here? The words I put into quotation marks are actually verbatim of what he wrote. One shouldn't use quotation marks for things we are interpeting only.
-
@serge or you could read it as a critique of Western people, whom he believes to be "enabling" human rights violations against palestinians by using the word "conflict".
(Which is another take that one could agree or disagree with)
You can read it in a lot of ways. But see what I did here? The words I put into quotation marks are actually verbatim of what he wrote. One shouldn't use quotation marks for things we are interpeting only.
When someone is actively advocating genocide or ethnic cleansing of 7 million people, or half the world's Jews, as this person does in implicitly calling for the destruction of the state of Israel through de-legitimization, then my read of everything else they say is going to be less generous then it would be otherwise.
If he had simply referred to the issues in the West Bank, ongoing violence, encroaching settlements, unequal treatment by the law, statements by the far-right ministers in Israel- all of which I find morally repugnant, I would have no area of disagreement.
When he starts to de-legitimize the state itself, that shifts the conversation and his specific and deliberate use words and phrases undergo far deeper scrutiny.
Could I be wrong in my interpretation? I might be. But even if you omit the issue of lies, or holocaust denial - the de-legitimization of Israel as a nation is deeply problematic from an official in this position.
-
@serge or you could read it as a critique of Western people, whom he believes to be "enabling" human rights violations against palestinians by using the word "conflict".
(Which is another take that one could agree or disagree with)
You can read it in a lot of ways. But see what I did here? The words I put into quotation marks are actually verbatim of what he wrote. One shouldn't use quotation marks for things we are interpeting only.
As for the use of quotes, they're functioning in my post not as verbatim excerpts but as explainers.
Endantisemitism does it differently. They just put a single word or phrase, eg:
https://mastodon.social/@endantisemitism/116235532159121068
My quoting is trying to capture the same information of addressing the accusation, in a larger context. For me the poster's offensive and hateful comments were problematic, but far more problematic was who was saying them- someone who is representing the Dutch government in an official capacity and is acting as the editorial gatekeeper.
My experience has been an evolution over time.
I used to do long explainers, no one read them.
I then pointed to external resources, people argued with them.
Then I made my own website, people didn't click through.
Now I just put the hate meme in quotes. I'll consider changing that. But let's not let this slide into tone policing, ok?
-
Nice!
"Mastodon is currently considered *the* alternative to Twitter. SURF [the IT cooperative of Dutch education and research] and Universities of the Netherlands are therefore jointly exploring how a Mastodon environment for education and research in the Netherlands can take shape."
https://www.surf.nl/en/mastodon-pilot-for-research-and-education
There is a non-manager in their IT dept who can have an instance running by quitting time.
-
J jeppe@uddannelse.social shared this topic
