this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
226 points (100.0% liked)

World News

1036 readers
21 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The United States House of Representatives has overwhelmingly passed a bill that would expand the federal definition of anti-Semitism, despite opposition from civil liberties groups.

The bill passed the House on Wednesday by a margin of 320 to 91, and it is largely seen as a reaction to the ongoing antiwar protests unfolding on US university campuses. It now goes to the Senate for consideration.

If the bill were to become law, it would codify a definition of anti-Semitism created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”.

According to the IHRA, that definition also encompasses the “targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity”.

The group also includes certain examples in its definition to illustrate anti-Semitism. Saying, for instance, that “the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” would be deemed anti-Semitic under its terms. The definition also bars any comparison between “contemporary Israeli policy” and “that of the Nazis”.

Rights groups, however, have raised concerns the definition nevertheless conflates criticism of the state of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism.

In a letter sent to lawmakers on Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) urged House members to vote against the legislation, saying federal law already prohibits anti-Semitic discrimination and harassment.

“Instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism.”

Archive link

top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sweetpotato@lemmy.ml 71 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So it's ok to call students that are protesting against a genocide Nazis but not the people actually committing the genocide. Got it.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago

That's what modern Nazis do - try very hard to defame their opponents as Nazis. Sometimes even their victims. Then any argument from that side is disadvantaged.

Why the fuck I'm even writing this here, it's obvious, only unless I find a way to kill some bad people doing this, I won't help things.

[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 67 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean, what do you call a person that performs ethnic genocide?

[–] Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 46 points 6 months ago (1 children)

American?

😂😂😂😂😂

[–] Facebones@reddthat.com 1 points 6 months ago

He's out of line,

But he's right

[–] Railison@aussie.zone 52 points 6 months ago (3 children)

So about that freedom of speech…

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 34 points 6 months ago

That's double-plus ungood wrongthink, citizen. Report for re-education.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 14 points 6 months ago

What about it? You are still free to say exactly what the government wants you to say

[–] rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 months ago

I get the feeling a lot of our more vocal free speech absolutists are going to be conspicuously quiet on this one.

[–] john89@lemmy.ca 47 points 6 months ago

What the fuck?

Fuck zionists and their disproportionate amount of control over the world.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 43 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] Arcturus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Always the same map

A bit surprising that "israel" didn't vote against it, but that would be a bit too on the nose I guess.

[–] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Wild to me that China is not a part of "core world trade"

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 months ago

China didn't colonize the world like western Europe and Japan did, then make neocolonial institutions like the IMF and World Bank to preserve those colonial relations.

They've mostly escaped colonialism and become the manufacturing hub of the world now, but wealth isn't being extracted from the Global South / "former" colonies to China like they are being transferred to the imperial Core.

[–] cobra89 2 points 6 months ago

It seems like the US voted against it because Russia was using it as a political ploy and excuse to try and invade Ukraine. (Ukraine is "full of Nazis" sound familiar?)

That's why Ukraine voted against it too.

The United States says it was one of three countries to vote against a U.N. resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism over freedom of speech issues and concerns that Russia was using it to carry out political attacks against its neighbors.

Ukraine and Palau were the other no votes.

"We condemn without reservation all forms of religious and ethnic intolerance or hatred at home and around the world," said Deputy U.S. Representative to the Economic and Social Council Stefanie Amadeo, explaining the U.S. vote.

"This resolution's recommendations to limit freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the right to peaceful assembly contravene the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and must be opposed," Amadeo said.

The UN resolution wanted to quash "antisemitic" protests very much like the ones we're seeing in the US right now. So really if you're against the Bill this post is about, you should be okay with the US voting no on that UN resolution.

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 40 points 6 months ago

Saying, for instance, that “the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” would be deemed anti-Semitic under its terms. The definition also bars any comparison between “contemporary Israeli policy” and “that of the Nazis”.

Lmao this is a guilty conscience talking.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 39 points 6 months ago

Ah, free speech in the land of the free

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 36 points 6 months ago

Bruh literal facism

[–] maniel@lemmy.ml 31 points 6 months ago

But Nazism is completely legal in the US?

[–] Binthinkin@kbin.social 29 points 6 months ago

Zionists are also thieves because they are buying stolen Gaza land.

I have sat at passover with Zionists and they are the dumbest shittiest people just like the crazy evangelicals. Just shit people.

Good luck on getting them to admit any type of fault.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

at least you have freedom dont ya, us?

[–] Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 months ago

Freedom of speech. Except the speech we don't like.

[–] AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and IDF is being actively outlawed in the western world as governments support the brutal mass killing in Gaza.

Condemnation of Russia's invasion of Ukraine or China's actions in Xinjiang rings completely hollow. Western governments really are the people in glass houses throwing stones.

[–] SitD@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

bro you need to chill out. I'm all for criticizing Israel but if you use a name that has a bad ring to it (for example nazi) but is defined on an entirely different era, set of crimes, and political landscape, you cannot put forward a well-reasoned argument. if people continue to get up in their feelings and stray from reality, they'll never change anything that is based in reality

[–] BNE@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hun, your slavish devotion to optics are shackles. Worse, you're policing your peers, prioritizing the abstract appeal of your optics to a hypothetical other over their reality anchored and literal praxis.

Kill the cop in your head, babe. We'll be over here when you're ready.

[–] SitD@feddit.de 1 points 6 months ago

where's this from?

[–] impure9435@kbin.run 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's what happens when corrupt politicians are paid by AIPAC

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Got your cart before the horse: the US controls Israel, the control Israeli lobbyists have over it is secondary to that.

[–] impure9435@kbin.run 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If the US truly controlled Israel, they could force them to comply with UN resolutions, force them to ban settlements or force them into a ceasefire. The US built Israel, but these criminals are now strong enough not to have to listen to the US or anyone, not even the UN or the ICC.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If the US truly controlled Israel, they could force them to comply with UN resolutions, force them to ban settlements or force them into a ceasefire.

Could, but why would they want to? They have a little buddy doing their dirty work for them.

[–] impure9435@kbin.run 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How does the US benefit from Israel committing a genocide?

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

The oil, the real estate?

[–] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I'm a little confused why this is in the news. First off, it's just a House Resolution. It's has no legally binding repercussions. It's basically the House of Representatives as a group making a statement: "We don't like anti-Semitism". The definition of anti-Semitism they decided to point to is the thing that's really in contention. But again, this affects nobody but the US House of Representatives.

Secondly, the vote on this took place in December. So it seems kind of late to be raging over it.

Full text of the resolution: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres894/BILLS-118hres894ih.pdf
Summary of action: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/894/all-info

If you're in the US and it really bugs you, I'd suggest looking up how your district representative voted and let them know how you feel about it.

[–] faede@mander.xyz 19 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I have contacted all my reps several times about Palestine and cease fire and the only response has been that they fully support Israel against the terrorists. They don't care about our opinion.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 months ago

Get it in writing and share it

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

Democracy amirite

[–] Shyfer@ttrpg.network 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

No, this definitely seems different and new from all the recent articles about it I've seen. This vote passed Wednesday, not in December. It's a response to the protests at universities. And it's a bill, so it can be passed into law. I think you're confusing two different things.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-bill-to-expand-definition-of-antisemitism-amid-growing-campus-protests-over-gaza-war/ar-AA1nZV5S

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/70-house-democrats-and-21-republicans-voted-against-a-bill-to-crack-down-on-antisemitism-on-college-campuses/ar-AA1o02Rn

This expands the definition of antisemitism to bring critical of Israel at all or comparing Zionism to Nazism, and would codify it into law if it, passes the Senate and is signed by the President. So there is still time to stop this, and it's a big deal, so people should be angry about it.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Wonder what other things they'll make illegal to compare to Nazis. Cause once you're banning disparaging speech, why stop there?

[–] Facebones@reddthat.com 2 points 6 months ago

As heavily as they're censoring outlets to the point a tiktok ban suddenly isn't laughable, I'm surprised they didn't pass a law making calling it genocide a hate crime.

[–] FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

At some point US troops will invade to bring democracy to such an autoritarian country

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 18 points 6 months ago

This gives the USA too much credit. It doesn't invade other countries to save them from tyranny. It invades them because it wants to control them for strategic or economic purposes.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 months ago

That's called a Nazi apologist law. That's making a subset of Nazis accepted and censoring those against them at the same time.

I thought I won't see such decay in my lifetime, but then life is never boring.

[–] Faydaikin 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

And what's so bad about being called an antisemite?

I mean, personally I'm highly against all types of organized religion. The abrahamic ones included.

So the shoe fits, I guess.

[–] sweetpotato@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What does it mean to be against a religion? As in you don't follow it? Or that you oppress people following it?

[–] Faydaikin 1 points 6 months ago

It means I think Religious Organizations should be abolished and made illegal.

Whatever your relationship to deities is, it should remain personal and private.

[–] aniki@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yeah I don't give a shit if worthless mouth holes call me an anti-semite anymore. Yeezy said we're not allowed to question our jewish masters and look where we are. If that makes me an anti-semite then you'll find me closer to burning your yarmulke than accepting this fucking bullshit.

I've always been anti-religious and my position has never changed.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 1 points 6 months ago

Tens of thousands of civilian casualties is the price we are willing to pay for a strategic military asset the the middle east.

After all, tens of thousands of civilian casualties is the price we are willing to pay for the 2nd amendment.

We'd be hypocrites otherwise.

-- US Congress, probably.