WTF are you talking about. It is of course possible to be antisemitic towards Zionists.

And the «semitic» argument is bullshit, it is basically rehashing 19th century white supremacist pseudoscientific racism. The term is currently basically only used to describe language families similar to the term «indo-european».

The word antisemitism has a precise meaning: the «discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish).»

There is nothing unique about Zionism in how it weaponizes religion. Same as “Christian nationalism” in the US, like Hindutva in India, like all kinds of Islamism, like Francoism or like any other clerical fascism. We should be better than to accept the weaponized forms of religions. Unless you consider something as silly as “Mohammed was a pedophile” as a useful counter to Daesh, which is terminally unserious.

This is antisemitism. Don’t do it, don’t upvote it, don’t spread it. Israeli ethnonationalism is not reducible to the Jewish religion. There is nothing in Judaism that deterministically leads to apartheid and genocide. Many Jews see the “chosen people” story as an intergenerational responsibility to unfuck the world (Tikkun Olam). Many Jews are antizionists precisely because of their Judaism.

The fact that this was up for debate, the fact that there are countries that choose to boycott as a result, the fact that this is news: these are wins people. The cracks have formed and it’s starting to buckle. It is now normal and mainstream to talk about boycotting the genocidal Israeli apartheid regime. Even the German apartheid-apologist institutions are forced to say they respect the decisions of non-apologist ones. Don’t take this as reason for cynicism and disappointment, it’s quite the opposite! Apartheid South Africa didn’t get boycotted, isolated and forced to recon with its crimes all at once, it was a process. KEEP PUSHING!

Nothing serious, just walking down the national focus tree, while world tension increases in HOI4.

Everyone wants the war to end, yet no one has a ready-made solution — perhaps there are none. We owe each other the honesty this moment demands. Anything short of Russia’s full withdrawal from Ukraine is profoundly unjust and outright dangerous, but an uncompromising pursuit of justice can also bring us to the point of no return.

Survival itself — enduring as an independent nation despite Putin’s history lectures — is already a victory for Ukraine. But the story won’t end there. Greedy states attack not because they are provoked, but because they can do so. Stopping them will take more than moral force.

Hey look, whataboutism!

So the American Otto Strasser is a woman.

Jeff, my boy, you finished the game, you hundred-percented it, just buy a chateau or something and retire to paint Warhammer and do pottery and tantric meditation or whatever man, stop hoarding money.

The United States of America after the Cold War.

The only thing that would make this even more ridiculous is if the Trump organization sues them for copyright infringement.

you follow the guy on linkedin or something?

Israel is an Apartheid state (convicted) that is on trial for Genocide and whose political leadership is wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.

You can’t pinkwash that.

That’s the wrong way to look at it. Israel is a project of the West. Merz explained it: Israel is doing our dirty job.

I think the owning occurred at bombing time not at building time.

One thing that is entirely facepalm-worthy is this “explanation” the Nova agency gave:

Francesco Civita, a spokesperson for Nova, confirmed that the news agency had ended its relationship with Nunziati over his Gaza question. Civita said that Nunziati had been let go for asking a question that was “technically incorrect” because Russia had invaded a sovereign country unprovoked, whereas Israel was responding to an attack.

So, Pinho could have just made that case, right? There was nothing pushy or loaded about the question. If anything, if one truly believes that the two cases are so different, then they should actually want to be asked this question, as a chance to educate the public about the difference.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone on fedi that not of an age that would have at some point made a Facebook account.

Look, like I repeated multiple times in this discussion, nobody is saying Germany is a totalitarian state. There are worrying signs. I get that in your immediate experience those might not be there. But lived experience is not a substitute for structural analysis. The article is not saying that they are pervasive, but that they are becoming more common and that’s alarming.

We are on the same side here: the side that wants Germany to be a free and democratic country. Sounding an alarm should not be cause for defensiveness but for vigilance.

I’m a dual EU-Canadian citizen. Canada is not an authoritarian country. However in the past few years, more and more, provincial governments are using a constitutional trick called the Notwithstanding Clause to push various political agendas without having to care about judicial oversight. If someone rings the alarm that this is an authoritarian tendency, a slippery slope that could fundamentally erode our rights as Canadians, should I start calling them anti-Canadian propagandists? Or should I take stock and weigh the danger and maybe use my position as a citizen of a democracy to make noise about it?

«The price of liberty is eternal vigilance» because democracies don’t fail overnight. They erode at the margins, starting with the people it is easiest to vilify. The time to speak up is not when repression becomes universal, but when it becomes noticeable at all.

What makes things worse is that such posts critical of Germany’s and Europe’s stance on rights violations often come from accounts praising China, Russia, and other autocracies for their politics. This is the case also here.

This is a blatant ad hominem attack here. I’m a bit flabbergasted at this kind of unfounded vitriol and smear, presented in such a passive aggressive manner. What are your receipts?

a cheap propaganda piece published via Substack

Zeteo is a real new media organization, with “Mostly Factual” rating on MBFC, only because of the reviewer’s perception that it does “one-sided reporting that can sometimes lack opposing counterpoints”, without any failed fact checks in its history. Their choice of publishing platform is irrelevant: as far as I can see in the sidebar, !europe@feddit.org does not have a rule about Substack, this is not !world@lemmy.world.

written by a person who runs a YT channel called “Mad in Germany.” This person has no idea what is going on in Germany.

Wrong: “James Jackson is a freelance reporter and broadcaster based in Berlin and covering news, business and culture in Germany and Central Eastern Europe for publications like the BBC, Sunday Times, Time Magazine and others. A former trainee at Deutsche Welle, he produced an award-winning documentary about the trans history of Berlin and is a Poland fellow of the International Journalist Programme.” That bio definitely does not scream “has no idea what is going on in Germany”. Source: https://www.madingermany.org/about

I don’t understand why such a post is not deleted.

So, first you call me a bootlicker of autocracies, then you ask for the post to be deleted. You are creating an extremely toxic discussion and at this point, I’m pretty sure you’ve broken Rule 3 of the community.

Beyond that, for what it’s worth: Your Ai Weiwei point also misses the point. A private magazine can decline to publish, but spiking a commissioned piece for its political content is still evidence of a chilling climate. The article’s core claims are about escalating repression, police violence at protests, and the narrowing of acceptable speech. These are contestable on facts, not on the author’s YouTube channel. If you think the claims are false, show counter-evidence on policing, on protest bans, on international warnings, and on the treatment of Palestine-solidarity voices.

Further, you are choosing to double down on your smear precisely in response to a comment where I very very clearly say “I agree, absolutely agree, that Germany has not crossed the line yet, but the line is getting closer, and pretending the raising of the alarm is the problem is exactly how democracies sleepwalk into disaster.”

Do you have anything to contribute beyond toxicity, smears and paranoia?

I hear you, and nobody is claiming Germany is already living under a totalitarian police state. Yet pretending the article says dissenters are immediately jailed is a misread, precisely the misrepresentation you’re accusing me of.

The article is documenting escalating repression, police violence against elected officials, chilling of speech, and a political culture that treats Palestine solidarity as criminal suspicion by default. You can choose to read it as hysteria, or you take the rise of authoritarianism world-wide actually seriously and read it as a useful warning.

Look at how UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese was smeared, disinvited from institutions, and treated as an existential threat simply for applying international law. That pattern should disturb anyone who cares about democratic norms.

And when people like @hendrik@palaver.p3x.de and @JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org and @Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org jump in all over this thread and call critical journalism “propaganda” and accuse me of “scrapping the web for negative news to spread [my] propaganda”, it kind of confirms the point, doesn’t it? Criticism of state violence is instantly pathologized and viewed with suspicion. If this is what’s happening on fucking …lemmy, I honestly am a bit uncomfortable about what it means for mainstream discourse in the country! And yes, I agree, absolutely agree, that Germany has not crossed the line yet, but the line is getting closer, and pretending the raising of the alarm is the problem is exactly how democracies sleepwalk into disaster.