The headline has been altered by independent.
Here’s a link to an archived version
If there is one thing this whole affair is bringing up in the West is just how extremelly racist even the people who loudly proclaim themselves as “progressives” really are.
You see it when they pull out the anti-semite card to try and bat away criticism of Israel: even if Israel indeed represented all Jews (itself a racist assumption because it presumes “all Jews are the same and think the same”), the etnicity of the people mass murdering civilians because of their etnicity, having any weight on ones judgment of their actions is incredibly racist (of the “different weights for different races” kind).
Personally what I see is people who never stopped being prejudiced racists who judge people on their etnicity rather than their actual actions, only some etnic groups became less fashionable to overly be racist against whilst others did not - the architecture of racism is still well in place and in use, it’s just that for certain etnicities the prejudices changed.
How on earth did you come up with the idea that this is a progressive thing? It’s overwhelmingly conservatives and neoliberals using the “anti-Semitism” charge in defense of genocide.
The overwhelming absence of critique in liberal newspapers can be seen as evidence of self censorship due to “anti-semitism”. But corporatism / imperialism can also explain that. The charge of antisemitism is always hurdled at pro-palestinian (anti-genocide) protesters. Liberal media was also arguing “(a free Palestine) from the river to the sea” is a call to genocide.
Anybody that goes on and on about how people in some groups defined by the genetics they were born with are victims or are aggressors, is using the very same framework of prejudiced treatment as the far right.
Fair treatment is to classify people as victims or aggressors by those people having actually been victims or having victimized others and then help the former and stop and punish the latter. Not only is it wholly irrelevant the etnicity of the people involved (unless the people who victimized others did so due to the etnicity of said others, in which case they should be punished extra hard, IMHO) but it’s also massivelly unfair to paint a wide brush over everybody else who happens to have been born with the same genetics as either because of the actions of just those.
There is no such thing as Positive Prejudice: if you’re judging people differently because of their etnicity, you’re being unfair, even if you are judging them more positivelly than you would otherwise.
Successive ultra-nationalist and ever more far-right governments of Israel weaponized the “positive” prejudice of many towards Jews, and this is why we find ourselves were we are now: because complete total murderous racist sociopaths hid being this whole etnic group and committed ever more hideous acts of violent racism whilst avoiding punishment for it by taking advantage of people who still run around thinking in the very same mental framework of discrimination as the Nazis had - with a different list of “good” etnicities and “bad” etnicities in their minds than said Nazis, but still judging and behaving towards others differently depending on their etnicity.
What does any of this have to do with misuse of “antisemitism”? Progressives are best defined by their opposition to wealth inequality, so how is any of this on them? If you think progressives in the US are too soft, that’s fine, but they are certainly better on wealth inequality than the conservatives and neoliberals.
