Thank you for reading the article about Blood Libel, and I hope learning about the long history of murdering Jews around the world gives you pause, as it should. If you actually do not take these historical accounts seriously, I can only encourage you to take a serious look at where you get your information. Although not the topic of this article, the distinction made between antisemitism and anti-Zionism is misguided, as the two have the same exact meaning. Ironically, your choice to attack Dean Chemerinsky only underscores the exact point I am making in my article, with the Dean being the victim of a text-book case of antisemitism. Feel free to read my article "Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism" if you seek more clarity on this very serious issue. I would take a beat and deeply contemplate the meaning of words, before irresponsibly throwing around terms like "colonialism."
What happened at the Dean's home was carefully orchestrated and cowardly. Interesting that when Jews are being maligned, it's "free speech." Say the same thing about other minority groups, of which Muslims are not a part, and it's "hate speech."
The writing on the wall was clearly anti-zionist not anti-semitic. The fact that this article skips over that meaningful distinction is telling. What's more telling is that a web search for "Is Chemerinsky a Zionist?" shows every major media outlet conflates the two obviously district ideas.
It's rational to blame Israel for Zionism because it's the largest pool of Zionists, by definition. And it's easy to see that Zionism is not merely the peaceful desire for a homeland.
--
Clearly the aspect of Zionism that is most prevalent is seller colonialism, not peaceful religion, and just as clearly no one who ignores meaningful distinctions, like calling everything against a Jewish person blood libel, cannot be taken intellectually or ethically seriously.
Thank you for reading the article about Blood Libel, and I hope learning about the long history of murdering Jews around the world gives you pause, as it should. If you actually do not take these historical accounts seriously, I can only encourage you to take a serious look at where you get your information. Although not the topic of this article, the distinction made between antisemitism and anti-Zionism is misguided, as the two have the same exact meaning. Ironically, your choice to attack Dean Chemerinsky only underscores the exact point I am making in my article, with the Dean being the victim of a text-book case of antisemitism. Feel free to read my article "Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism" if you seek more clarity on this very serious issue. I would take a beat and deeply contemplate the meaning of words, before irresponsibly throwing around terms like "colonialism."
What happened at the Dean's home was carefully orchestrated and cowardly. Interesting that when Jews are being maligned, it's "free speech." Say the same thing about other minority groups, of which Muslims are not a part, and it's "hate speech."
The hypocrisy is hard to ignore. Sadly, you are right in your observation. Thank you for reading and sharing your thoughts. 💙
The Dean himself has been too lenient in this regard and it backfired monumentally. Free speech and human decency should not be mutually exclusive.
The writing on the wall was clearly anti-zionist not anti-semitic. The fact that this article skips over that meaningful distinction is telling. What's more telling is that a web search for "Is Chemerinsky a Zionist?" shows every major media outlet conflates the two obviously district ideas.
It's rational to blame Israel for Zionism because it's the largest pool of Zionists, by definition. And it's easy to see that Zionism is not merely the peaceful desire for a homeland.
--
Clearly the aspect of Zionism that is most prevalent is seller colonialism, not peaceful religion, and just as clearly no one who ignores meaningful distinctions, like calling everything against a Jewish person blood libel, cannot be taken intellectually or ethically seriously.