Lemmy.world reportedly bans people for being anti-Zionist. At the same time, numerous human rights organizations have documented that Zionist policies and actions amount to crimes against humanity (e.g., forced displacement, collective punishment, apartheid).
If banning opposition to crimes against humanity is itself anti-humanity, doesn’t that make lemmy.world complicit? How do you reconcile defending a platform that silences critics while atrocities continue?
Since the crooks conjured their plan, yeah.
There’s another bag of fun to etymologically explore, seeing the contrast of how each of these words are commonly used, and what lurks shallow beneath the contemporary euphemisms. Perhaps not least the whole “conserve what” thing. Worse things than the milder interpretations some associate with in the broad conflation
Sorry I don’t speak academese. It’s conservative in the sense that Zionism chose to conserve reactionary ideas in favor of perusing a more libratory political path that was available at the time, while using the cloak of progressivism. Herzl himself said he wanted to use Marxist economics in the new Jewish state even though I have no idea how you can use Marxist economics without pursuing liberation for all. As I said I couldn’t get past the first couple of pages of Judenstaat because it pissed me off.