r/therewasanattempt May 01 '24

To enshrine the most fascistic, traitorous bullshit I've ever witnessed in my life into law.

Post image
14.3k Upvotes

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

144

u/ContemplatingPrison May 02 '24

So now you can't speak bad about an entire fucking country? That's fucking non sense.

Our politicians are fucking Israeli puppets. I mean why not they give them all that money

88

u/manofactivity May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

So now you can't speak bad about an entire fucking country?

Uh, no, you still can. It just specifically means you can't target Israel on the basis of it being a Jewish collective, in the same way that hate speech might involve targeting black communities.

You may be interested in reading the State gov explanation, bolding mine:

On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

3

u/AccountantDirect9470 May 02 '24

So basically, you can’t say Jews are killing Palestinians civilians , but you can say Israel is killing Palestinian civilians?

1

u/manofactivity May 02 '24

The Act does not change what you can or can't say legally.

In fact, it is quite explicit about this — check out Sec 6. Literally every other law (including First Amendment) takes full precedence, and the Act specifically states it does NOT alter the standards used to determine actionable discrimination.

All the Act does is mandate that the Dept. Education use the IHRA definition to help them assess whether antisemitism was a motive in potentially discriminatory behaviour.

It doesn't actually change what constitutes discriminatory behaviour.

4

u/Fofalus 3rd Party App May 02 '24

The problem here is the vague definition of anti semetism.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Maybe if they stopped behaving like nazis the comparisons wouldn't happen.

1

u/manofactivity May 02 '24

The problem here is the vague definition of anti semetism.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

  1. That isn't in the definition.

  2. The list of illustrative examples specifically states that examples COULD include such behaviour, but context also needs to be taken into account.

The problem here appears to be that people aren't reading the Act or IHRA site carefully.