It’s Unethical To Have Sympathy For Israelis, And Other Notes
(caitlinjohnstone.com.au)
DivineChaos100 [none/use name]
politicsNot just unethical, but stupid. Western countries are effectively controlled by Israel, it would be like having sympathy for your abusive prison guard. Noble, sure, but useful? Sensible?
The time for sympathy for Israel is when Israel is under control and vulnerable, not before.
I'm aware that may well mean "never"
Nah that's the classic ZOG mistake. The US led empire has Israel as an essential part of its imperial core. The zionist entitiy has very little room to work that isn't entirely predetermined to be acceptable by this large imperial force. There are back and forth changes and impacts between aspects of the empire, but the zionist entity isn't doing anything that the Empire didn't explicitly allow.
Yeah, I don't think we can use ZOG and zionist entity interchangeably. ZOG implies that the US is some kind of victim of Zionist occupiers or that it was taken over by Zionism, rather than the truth, that European settler-colonialism in the Americas helped inspire Zionist settler-colonialism. The US's government isn't occupied by Zionists, it is fundamentally Zionist.
I think Israel is better understood as a crusader state, actually. The majority of Zionists are Christians, after all.
I think it's more useful to just talk about the US and the zionist entity as one larger imperial entity with hands directly involved in similar processes through 2 separate legal states. The US is a much more controlling hand from the entire empire, where most of the brains are, but the zionist entity can sometimes move independently and sometimes the one hand has to push/pull the other a bit.
No I definitely agree, that's why the crusader state framework makes sense. Crusader states weren't real countries, they're extensions of a larger empire. It's another US state, the 51st state.
That actually works better than the US's unsinkable aircraft carrier, because aircraft carriers can't move independently. States, though, have always had some independence in the US.
Ahhh yeah I misunderstood your intention! Then yes, this framework is also very useful!
I will never, ever express sympathy for Israelis. Ever. Under any circumstances. To do so would be irresponsible, because Israel always weaponizes sympathy and then uses that weapon to commit mass atrocities.
Sympathy is a "dual use" resource that the zionists cannot be trusted with.
If the world gives Israel sympathy for civilians injured by an Iranian airstrike over the weekend in a war Israel started, by Friday they’ll be using that sympathy to justify nuking Tehran.
I don’t enjoy holding this position. It goes against every natural human impulse inside me. But Israel, by its nature, has made it the only responsible position to hold.
History has clearly established that the world was wrong to give Israel sympathy for October 7. The correct and moral thing to have done would have been for everyone to say “That’s what you get for being a murderous apartheid state,”
I believe the kids would call this 'bars'
I've developed a bit of a superstition lately in regards to this.
It goes a little bit like this: If you hate someone and wish harm on them, and harm does end up coming for them, do not show sympathy, and do not show regret. Otherwise, it will backfire on you.
In other words, commit to your hatred, don't back out of it the moment you get what you were asking for.
It especially fits for Israelis. Every fucking time I make the mistake of feeling a little bit of sympathy for them or otherwise offering maybe a little bit of slack, they immediately go and commit another atrocity and laugh about it. No more. They will be buried.
It's a national-narcissism
once you see the pattern you can't unsee it
Can we include americans in this too
Iran is just giving Israeli citizens an oppertunity to topple their fascist terrorist dictatorial rouge government.
She's always on point.
great article, i'm gonna use that headline
I might have gotten a wire or two crossed disregard.
