"So, I don't pay any attention to it anymore. I get accused regularly of being an "anti-Semite" but when I challenge the accuser to explain what is anti-Semitic about my comments they don't answer."
I ignore it as well, to the degree I can. However, it has a chilling effect on speech. This is a product of a larger war of words where meanings are stripped and replaced with new ones, much like what you outlined. With that being said, we can only ignore it so much. With changes to law, they are moving closer to criminalizing certain speech acts because they are expanding and redefining "antisemitism ". In the not too distant future, criticism of zionism may be a legal cause to lose a job or even be charged with hate speech. After all, it is already happening globally. Hard to ignore the war on words when it inverts our meanings and criminalizes all dissent to the power apparatus.
Yes I did see that in the house, thankfully it is just a resolution for now. Although I am sure it will be applied to the pending Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act.. or something like it.
As far as commenting on forums and addressing accusers..
Some things are subjective, like if a person supports zionism or not. Other things are objective, like saying anti-zionism is not antisemitic. Unfortunately, most people just parrot whatever the TV tells them, so naturally they do not have a defense to your objection.. because they have not been provided one by their TV.
If they do manage to speak up and defend their accusation, it usually arrives in the form of a word salad that attempts to weaponize empathy and talks about things wholly unrelated to the context in which they accused you. This rhetoric is easy to defeat by someone who isn't under the spell of the narrative.. which is one reason we will not see it openly debated outside of a few platforms such as this.
Oh I agree with what you are saying. I was just referring to the choice or not, that much is subjective. If a person chooses to support or not. It IS objectively a racist political ideology , I do agree with that for sure, hard to dispute considering Herzel's own writings and much of what has followed.
"So, I don't pay any attention to it anymore. I get accused regularly of being an "anti-Semite" but when I challenge the accuser to explain what is anti-Semitic about my comments they don't answer."
I ignore it as well, to the degree I can. However, it has a chilling effect on speech. This is a product of a larger war of words where meanings are stripped and replaced with new ones, much like what you outlined. With that being said, we can only ignore it so much. With changes to law, they are moving closer to criminalizing certain speech acts because they are expanding and redefining "antisemitism ". In the not too distant future, criticism of zionism may be a legal cause to lose a job or even be charged with hate speech. After all, it is already happening globally. Hard to ignore the war on words when it inverts our meanings and criminalizes all dissent to the power apparatus.
Yes I did see that in the house, thankfully it is just a resolution for now. Although I am sure it will be applied to the pending Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act.. or something like it.
As far as commenting on forums and addressing accusers..
Some things are subjective, like if a person supports zionism or not. Other things are objective, like saying anti-zionism is not antisemitic. Unfortunately, most people just parrot whatever the TV tells them, so naturally they do not have a defense to your objection.. because they have not been provided one by their TV.
If they do manage to speak up and defend their accusation, it usually arrives in the form of a word salad that attempts to weaponize empathy and talks about things wholly unrelated to the context in which they accused you. This rhetoric is easy to defeat by someone who isn't under the spell of the narrative.. which is one reason we will not see it openly debated outside of a few platforms such as this.
Oh I agree with what you are saying. I was just referring to the choice or not, that much is subjective. If a person chooses to support or not. It IS objectively a racist political ideology , I do agree with that for sure, hard to dispute considering Herzel's own writings and much of what has followed.