"We hope the world hears us and knows that the people of Israel are not the government of Israel," said one protester.

“We hope the world hears us and knows that the people of Israel are not the government of Israel,” said one protester.

Israelis protested on Saturday night, calling for a ceasefire and the resignation of hardline Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Tens of thousands took to the streets in Tel Aviv to demand that the government reach a deal with Hamas to secure the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.

They also called for new elections, accusing Netanyahu of prolonging the conflict to keep himself in power.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    1956·
    7 months ago

    I wish them luck. They have an uphill climb against someone cementing dictatorial powers but I hope they can achieve those goals.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      275·
      7 months ago

      All the research I’m doing right now points to them just wanting their hostages back. Can anyone post evidence of citizens protesting the war on the grounds of genocide?

      I just don’t see the humanity here… I want to see it, but I can’t find any evidence at all that they are against the actual atrocities being committed. If there is a huge vocal outcry for this, then their media (and/or ours) is doing overtime to hide it.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
        261·
        7 months ago

        It’s interesting that Lemmy has pretty okay representation globally, not great but OK.

        Are there any lemmings in Israel that can tell us what’s going on?

        I think it’s important not to project into these protesters what we would like them to be protesting about. We need to hear their words, from them.

        • Shyfer@ttrpg.networkEnglish
          15·
          7 months ago

          I’ve seen a couple and they were mostly Zionists defending the genocide. So far, they haven’t reflected well on their state, but if there’s anyone who actually doesn’t like the atrocities committed by Israel in Israel, I’d be curious to see if they exist here. The only one I’ve seen in articles is that one who sent to jail instead of participate in the IDF.

            • Shyfer@ttrpg.networkEnglish
              8·
              7 months ago

              No, but I could see the misunderstanding. When I said “here”, I meant on Lemmy. I was just commenting on the people from Israel I’ve met so far on Lemmy. And how I also would love to see some more varied opinions from Israelis here on Lemmy, because the few I’ve run into were pretty pro-genocide.

        • CerealKiller01@lemmy.worldEnglish
          103·
          7 months ago

          Hi, Israeli here.

          I’ll start off by saying this turned out to be a VERY long post. I did my best to condense the absolutely necessary parts, and I still feel I’ve left a lot of important stuff out. Anyway, hopefully anyone who’s interested in the situation and reads this will be able to gain some insight.

          The thing is, you guys are looking at the situation in Israel from your perspective without understanding the factors at play. To actually understand the situation among Jewish Israelis (who I’ll refer to as “Israelis” for simplicity’s sake) requires a thorough explanation about Israeli culture, politics and some history.

          Saying “I don’t see any signs against genocide, that must mean all Israelis are pro-genocide” forces your perspective on the situation, like saying (in very broad terms) “I didn’t see any signs that talk about ‘all life matters’ in the BLM protests, that must mean they only value black lives”, so imaging that, but instead of an American saying it, it’s some dude in Thailand who has very little understanding of the racial situation on the US.

          So, let’s go:

          Right now, the country is pretty divided among supporters of the current government and those opposed to it. While the government has a 53% majority in the parliament, it really never had more than 50% supporters among the population (Firstly, some left wing parties didn’t get enough votes to get into parliament. Also, right after the elections the Likud government adopted a plan proposed by the religious far-right party that would, in essence, transform Israel into a Hungry-like hybrid regime which made many liberal Likud supporters oppose the government). The opposition grew stronger after Oct. 7th, though the government still has the support of (mainly) the far right, the ultra-orthodox religious parties and the Israeli version of Trump supporters who mainly want to “own the libs”. There are weekly polls that check how many people support the current government and Netanyahu is using every trick in the book to increase support among the public because his coalition is extremely fragile.

          However, regarding the war in Gaza, there is a consensus that’s shared among a very large majority of the population from both sides:

          1. The Israeli hostages must be returned. I cannot overstate how important this is. Firstly, Israel is a tiny country, quite communal and most Israelis have large families. The hostages aren’t “citizens”, “people” or even “fellow Jews”. They’re “The niece of my dentist”, “My ex’s uncle”, “The daughter of friends of my colleague” etc. Nearly Every Israeli knows someone who knows someone who’s been kidnapped. Secondly, one of the founding ethos of Israel is to have a safe place for Jews that’s free of persecution no matter what. The Oct. 7th massacre is seen not only as a tragedy, but as the state not performing one of its core functions to some extent. Lastly, redemption of prisoners is a major commandment in the Jewish faith. This is the main point on all virtually ALL Israelis can agree upon (Let me stress that again - the agreement isn’t that the hostages “should” be returned, but that they MUST be returned. That’s important for later).

          2. Hamas must be destroyed. If they’re allowed to exist, this will happen again (There is, however, disagreement on how best can Israel vanquish Hamas).

          These two objectives are seen among many (not sure if most) as contradictory - Hamas is using the hostages to force an Israeli retreat from Gaza, and the only way they will release all of the hostages is if that secures their rule in Gaza. This is also important to remember for later.

          1. What Israel is doing in Gaza is somewhere between unfortunate and tragic, but it’s absolutely not genocide, rather a result of Hamas integrating itself into civilian infrastructure and hiding behind civilians (again, this is the mainstream opinion, not something agreed by ALL Israelis).

          I, personally, subscribe to the first two points, do not believe they are contradictory and while I believe the IDF isn’t nearly as cautious about harming civilians in Gaza as it should be and that not allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza is immoral, both things do not constitute genocide.

          Those numbed three points are in the Israeli consensus, but we have one more crucial piece of context before I get to the demonstrations - There are two groups of Israelis who do not believe the 1st and 2nd points are contradictory. Each belongs to opposing ends of the political spectrum - in the right there are those who think military pressure is the only way to, somehow, secure the release of the hostages. The other group is left  leaning, and it believes that withdrawing from Gaza for the release of the hostages and building a civilian opposition against Hamas Will solve the issue in the long run. They also believe the current government doesn’t really want to get rid of Hamas, rather they want to make sure Hamas will remain the only Palestinian ruler in the strip, so the government has an excuse to continue the current treatment of Palestinians (both as individuals and as a people). The first group thrives on extremism and sowing division (and if this reminds you of a certain US political party and a US politician in particular, you are absolutely on the money), and the second group is trying to build on a consensus, and make room for liberal right leaning people in order to gain influence (the opposition is actually composed of two liberal right wing parties).

          Oh, wait, just one other thing - There’s a joke that goes: A Jewish man is stranded on an island for 20 years. He is finally rescued, and the rescuers see the life he built for himself. Among all the things they see, there are two synagogues. They ask the man “you were on this Island alone. Why do you need two synagogues for?” The man looks lovingly at the first synagogue and says “Well, this is the synagogue where I prayed every day for someone to come and rescue me, and this” he says while looking disdainfully at the second synagogue “is the synagogue where I wouldn’t be caught dead in”. Point is, Jews and Israeli Jews in particular, love to argue and have disagreements. Think The Life of Brian’s The People’s Front of Judea and Judean People’s Front. So when I say “there are two groups”, it’s more like “there are about 1,000 groups that can be broadly divided in two camps”.

          You’d think this leads to a society that’s fractured on many levels so that it can’t really operate, but Israelis are also very good at putting differences aside and coming together to achieve a common goal.

          So, finally, about the protests - as you may have guessed, the people who are protesting belong to the second camp. And yes, many of them think what’s happening in Gaza is wrong. But remember the whole “putting our differences aside and coming together to achieve a common goal” and the “The hostages must be returned”? That’s the strategy in a nutshell. The protesters are trying to use the single most agreed upon goal, and build a consensus for a deal from there. That’s the reason you won’t see anything about Gazans in the protests. Going outside the consensus gives the far right more ammunition to paint the protesters as traitors and to rally the moderate right against them. The push for a deal NOW (the main rally cry) will cease virtually all IDF operations in Gaza anyway, so in some of the protesters’ minds (mine included), protesting against the IDF while correct in a vacuum actually goes against that very cause. Now, I don’t really know US history that well, but think what would happen if the Vietnam anti-war movement made room for more conservatives on the grounds that the war is harming the US. Maybe Nixon’s “law and order” campaign would have failed and he’d have lost the elections. I might be talking out of my ass here, but even if I’m wrong I hope this at least gives a better understanding about the strategy used by the protesters in Israel - they’re saying “You don’t have to join us because you’re a hippie peacenik. You have to join us because that’s what’s best for our country”.

          I’d like to stress that the protesters are NOT hiding their opinions. They just want to make as much room for other supporters. Some people are willing to protest for a cease-fire if that means getting the hostages back, but would not be willing to protest alongside a sign that says “The IDF is killing innocent people”.

          So that was about the situation in Israel. If you came this far, I hope you found the read worth your time. Now I’d like to ask for a bit more of your time in return.

          I have a question for the people who are protesting against Israel to stop the “genocide” unconditionally (or those who are in support of said protests), but are not protesting against Hamas to release the hostages unconditionally (or those who see no need for these protests) - I assume you don’t agree with Hamas’s actions on Oct. 7th, but obviously you don’t believe these actions justify what Israel is doing in harming innocent people (BTW, most Israelis would agree. If you don’t understand how this can be, refer to the 3rd point stated previously).

          I’d like to ask why does this logic not work the other way around? If what Israel is doing is reprehensible regardless of anything Hamas has done previously and should be opposed, then surely what Hamas has done is also reprehensible regardless of what Israel has done previously and should be opposed. Is it just a matter of numbers, so there’s a “minimum casualty” that justifies protests, and below that the victims are SOL?

          Not saying that’s the case, but that’s what I was able to come up with. Maybe I’m missing some context.

          And before you say that’s just whataboutism - I don’t think it is. Both things are a part of the same situation, so I think this is more a case of a cop seeing two cars driving on the road at night and stopping only one of them (where the driver happens to be black).

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
            41·
            7 months ago

            Thank you so much for this thoughtful response. I’ve read it several times, and I may have to respond to it in pieces (I’ve actually had to paste it into a word doc to follow along). I may be updating my response in edits. I’m going to be trying to be as respectful as possible in my responses out of appreciation for the depth you’ve offered on this perspective, and I’d like to respond to what I think I see is your questions; firstly I’ll need to respond to some of your answers as a part of that, because I think that’s where some of the cross talk is occurring from, or perhaps confusion from the part of Israelis about how the world, and specifically the US is seeing this. I’m going to have to use metaphors in some locations because I think much of this is about perspective, and one of the metaphors you used I think has utility in this regard.

            You brought up 3 points as the primary consensus shared among the Israeli population. I’m going to repeat them here to ensure my understanding of them is characterizing them correctly.

            These attacks were personal, not abstract. Israellis are identifying individually, at a personal level with having been attacked. It’s also an extension of local culture that hostages ‘must’ be returned. Layered in this sentiment is the idea that this was a failure of government to defend it’s citizens. Israellis see Hamas as an existential threat to Israel (perhaps them individually, see above) and must be vanquished. Israel’s actions in Gaza are viewed as unfortunate but necessary.

            I want to highlight a few additional points of context you offered:

            There are two groups of Israelis who do not believe the 1st and 2nd points are contradictory. Each belongs to opposing ends of the political spectrum

            the right there are those who think military pressure is the only way to, somehow, secure the release of the hostages

            left leaning, and it believes that withdrawing from Gaza for the release of the hostages and building a civilian opposition against Hamas

            I think this frames how you see the situation plays out in Israeli society and is useful for informing the discussion.

            So to set up the discussion a bit further, it might be helpful for you to understand the context that October 7th sits in from an outside perspective. In the years and months leading up to October 7th (really the 18 months prior), the nature of the Israeli/ Palestinian relationship had been becoming increasingly, and overwhelmingly clearly an apartheid state/ concentration camp type relationship, where Israel seemed to be continuously eroding any pretense of a lasting solution, while regularly worsening conditions for Palestinians on the ground (again, prior to Oct 7). There seemed to be a regular drumbeat where it looked like public sentiment was finally about to roll over on the kind of continuous and unquestioning support for Israel that they had enjoyed from the US since it’s inception. It seemed like there would be calls for Israel to effectively stop maintaining it’s apartheid state relationship with Palestaine, because time and the scale of violence was just not on Israel’s side. The summary for this point is that there was a palpable shift in the conversation that was happening prior to October 7th, where it was becoming increasingly clear that the Israelis were pretty clearly and plainly the oppressors in this relationship.

            I think there it’s also worth the context of work the BLM movement did to educate the American left’s perspectives on power and positionality. Through BLM, Americans who were receptive to it, were able to advance their perspective of how the dynamics of power and racism come to play in oppression. There is way too much to unpack here for this discussion, but understand that Americans, especially young Americans and left wing Americans have been basically been studying the dynamics of power that come into play around race and racism for the better half of a decade at this point. Most leftwing Americans probably attended at least some kind of BLM protest during the last 10 years, and many leftwing Americans have at this point directly experienced the kind of state sponsored violence that black people have continuously been saying they experience but most white people just never believed to exist because it hadn’t happened to them personally. That perspective has now shifted.

            I think initially the reaction in the US to October 7th was basically shock and disappointment. It really felt like Israel was finally being dragged to the table, and that their meal-ticket of international exceptionalism was finally up, but that October 7th completely reset the clock on that. Likewise, it completely eroded any credibility that Hamas could possibly have had. But the we saw the response happen and it was like “What?” and I’m not talking days and weeks later. Like the moment Israel began it’s bombing campaign, from the outside itt was very clear that they did not give a fuck about Palestinian society what so ever, or even really going after Hamas; that these bombings were of Palestestine and the palsetian people, Hamas or no Hamas be damned.

            And that basically seems to have been the way that Israel has continued to this point. The more reporting that comes out, it doesn’t seem like Israel is even bothering trying to recover hostages (I mean how can you engage in a bombing campaign if your goal is to recover hostages?).It’s so clearly about genocide and the elimination of the Palestinian people from the land, that looking from the outside there is no other word for it other than genocide. If this isn’t a genocide, then the word has lost all it’s meaning.

            So I want to address the ‘left-right’ spectrum you described and offer context to where I see that fitting in how the broader community might see that. You suggested that broadly the three primary points are held up, but that the left-right axis is about whether to engage in negotiations or to bomb. From the outside, these three points are clearly all centered in an extreme-right framing of the conflict, and you are rotating around another axis orthogonal to the typical framing that the outside world is viewing the conflict through. It’s not clear at all that there is any Palestinian perspective even being peppered into that axis. It would be a ‘purely extreme right’ axis, where the framing is just about tactics.

            And so I think it becomes a matter of addressing the three primary points. I think people can understand the first point without much more effort, especially millennial Americans. We lived through 9-11, many of us went to war (myself included), many of us lost family. We survive school shootings and racial violence basically constantly. Very few Americans live lives completely unscathed from a deeply personal impact of extreme violence. So there is sympathy on this first point.

            The second point is much more difficult, because it’s not clear what-so-ever that the Israeli government is interested in defeating or making irrelevant Hamas through political means. Israel effectively kaibashed every political approach to peace (before Oct 7th). It just doesn’t seem like they are operating in good faith. Since then it’s been more and more and more egregious settler-colonialism from Israel, only putting into stark contrast (even moreso because of the legacy of genocide and pograms * within * the history of Judaism) the clearly apartheid nature of Israel’s foreign policy positions with Palestine. So it’s like, Israel has shown no good faith as an actor being willing to engage in a peace process? I think the headlines of the day only further emphasize this.

            I think the third point highlights the departure most significantly. When seen from the outside, people just don’t care about the history at a certain point and become focused on just this conflict. The whole thing becomes a scoreboard where one side has killed 30,000 women and children, while the other side killed 1000 or so non-combatants. The numbers are so incomparable that it’s barely worth discussing. Obviously Oct. 7th was horrendous, but it in no way justifies what we see coming from Israel. October 7th happened because of a shocking waste of resources and lapse in security from Israel (along with I guess secretly funding Hamas? Again, headlines of the day). Like what’s the point of funding Iron Dome if Bibi is going to let things like this through for political purposes?

            And that’s what the crux of this becomes from a taxpaying, leftist (or rightwing, they’re views aren’t that different) perspective. What exactly are we funding Israel for? So they can continue to genocide the Palestinians and make international conflict inevitable in the ME? It seems like that’s all we’re really getting for our money; it’s not like Israel has been a particularly good ally.

            So in summary, the idea that what Israel is doing in Gaza is in any way proportional or necessary, or even effective is basically unacceptable to most of the US population in one way or another, be it anti-war/ pro-peace/ or from a purely monetary perspective. What exactly are we getting as US citizens funding this genocide? And it doesn’t seem like much. Mostly just a shittier and shittier “ally” in Israel (although they rarely act like it), and a more volatile situation in the region.

            I would also point out that from an outsider perspective, your leftwing to rightwing framing doesn’t appear along a L to R axis. It looks more like a R-R axis argument about soft versus hard power. I’ve been following Israeli media this entire time, and it’s clear to me that most Israeli media outlets are not considering the damage that this has done to the Israeli people’s good graces in the world. The world had real sympathy for the Israeli position on October 8th, but that good will is long gone, and Israel is rapidly becoming a pariah state.

            I’m not sure where you personally fall in the perspectives you outlined but I appreciate you enumerati

            • CerealKiller01@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              7 months ago

              Thanks for the reply and sorry it took me a few days to answer. Also sorry if my reply seems disjointed. We broadened the scope from just the Israeli protests for a hostage deal to, really, the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and it was hard to give the correct background while keeping it relatively short and trying to account for my own bias, so the reply was written in parts. Hopefully I was able to draw a coherent, if simplified, picture.

              First of all, you got the gist of what I’m saying. There are a few things I’d say were a bit off, but most of it isn’t worth going point-by-point. I also agree with many things you said, and you’ve actually described the stance of the Israeli left as well as I could at one point (and now you have to keep reading if you want to know where…).

              You’re absolutely correct saying the two camps I’ve described are not left-right. Notice I didn’t say “left”, rather “left-leaning”.

              The left-right axis in Israel is best described as the answer to “Do you think Israel should aspire towards a 2 state solution with the Palestinians?” Or, how it’s usually framed, “Are the Palestinians a partner for peace?”. If this seems like a trivial question, please keep in mind this is really a mirror of the Palestinian “Is Israel a partner for peace?”, which is a highly contested question among Palestinians.

              It’s also correct to say that in the last year there’s been an increase in Israeli aggression toward Palestinians (This is a view shared by a lot of Israelis, in light of the extremist government). However, in the long run, both sides are basically equally to blame(there’s A LOT of historical context I’m not going to go into. Just as a starting point, you can look up the Oslo accords in the 90s, the 2005 Israeli disengagement from Gaza, the 2007 Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip and the blockade that followed). If the protests are against specific actions taken by the Israeli government in the last year, I’m all for it. That said, I got the distinct feeling that the protesters aren’t protesting against the treatment of Palestinians during the last year, but for a Palestinian state, in which case the protests should be directed against Hamas and Israel both. I understand why people would want to protest against Israel, but I don’t understand how one can protest against Israel and not against Hamas using the same metrics.

              Hamas has been planning the Oct. 7th attack for at least a year, and invested in infrastructures to support terrorist acts for many years prior (underground tunnels, some of them leading to Israeli settlements, and some used to hide militants, weapons and hostages. After Israel’s invasion to Gaza, Hamas leadership said they have no obligation to protect Gazan civilians), so saying the Oct. 7th attack is related to Israeli aggression in the last year might have merit (talking purely about causal relationship, not justification), but there is enough reason to believe that the attack would have happened either way. Furthermore, if Hamas gets a “free pass” since their actions were a result of Israeli transgression, why does Israel not get a “free pass” as their actions are a result of Hamas aggression? This approach, where every side’s violence is justified using previous violence committed by the other side, is called a cycle of violence, and is one of the main lenses through which the Israeli left is looking at the broad confrontation between Israel and the Palestinians (we call it “the cycle of bloodshed”). I can talk about Hamas firing rockets at Israeli civilian targets as of 2004, and before that there were suicide bombings going all the way back to Hamas’s foundation, and other terror attacks going back before the Israeli control over the west bank and Gaza (that is, before what you refer to as “aparthide”). I’m saying this not to try and convince you that “the Palestinians started it!”, but to explain why “They started it!” is not a call for peace, but a call for more violence.

              The former paragraph also relates to the third point (Why Oct. 7th happened), but if to address that point directly - saying “October 7th happened because of a shocking waste of resources and lapse in security from Israel” is like saying "The Gazan casualties are due to Hamas investing their resources into attacking Israel instead of caring for their civilians’'. That’s blaming the victim on top of contributing to the cycle of violence (Also, and this is really a side note, as of now there are about 35,000 Gazan casualties in total. estimates are that about 2/3 of them were uninvolved in fighting).

              “The second point is much more difficult, because it’s not clear what-so-ever that the Israeli government is interested in defeating or making irrelevant Hamas through political means. Israel effectively kaibashed every political approach to peace (before Oct 7th). It just doesn’t seem like they are operating in good faith.” Welcome to the Israeli left. Feel free to grab a cup of coffee and chat with the many guests we have here from the moderate centre. You came just in time for our lecture on “How Netanyahu and the far-left propped Hamas to shoot down any option for a diplomatic solution”. The highlights include Smotrich, the current Israeli minister of finance, stating that “Hamas is an asset and Fatah is a burden”, and Netanyahu saying “Those who want to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state should support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfer of money [from Qatar] to Hamas”.

              Regarding Israel being a “bad ally” to the US - I agree, and so do the Israeli left and large portions (most?) of the centrists. The way we phrase it is that the current government is creating a rift between Israel and the US and abandoning the values that are shared among both countries. For us, this is a moral issue (we kinda like those shared values), but also a practical one should the US withhold the support it gives us. Don’t know what Israeli news sources you’re following, but it was much talked about in the last weeks at least. BTW, the Israeli far-right, that de-facto controls the coalition, is very unconcerned about this due to, IMO, self delusion. But this also seems too narrow a reason to protest. If the US were to withdraw all political and financial support from Israel, and Israel would continue acting the same, would most protesters be content? And how does this explain protests in countries that don’t provide Israel with support?

              To finish, I’d like to address the use of “apartheid” when talking about Israel. A Palestinian call fall into one of 3 categories - Those who have Israeli citizenship, those who live in the west bank and those who live in Gaza. They each live under a different legal infrastructure.

              Israel has about two million Arab citizens (I’m saying “Arab” to include Palestinians, and other Arab groups like Durze as well as “ethnically” Palestinians who don’t identify as such nationally) who have the same rights as any Jewish person (small asterix - Arabs in west Jerusalem aren’t citizens, though are offered citizenship and have most of the same rights including, for example, voting in the local elections). There is institutional racism that’s more akin to the way black people are (“are”, not “were”) treated in some parts of the US. The Arabs in the (annexed) Golan heights also have full citizenship. As of 2006, Hamas is the sole sovereign in Gaza and there are no Jewish people living there, so “apartheid” doesn’t apply. We’re left with the Arabs in the west bank, who mostly do live under a discriminatory rule system (Yet still have their own government and law system). However, the distinction isn’t race, rather citizenship. For example, some Israeli Arabs moved into Palestinian settlements in the west bank (due to lower cost of living), and they still retain the same rights they had when living in Israel-proper. The Israeli left refers to the Palestinians without an Israeli citizenship as “living under occupation” and to the Israeli control of the disputed territories (excluding the Golan heights) is referred to as “the occupation” (we naturally view this as morally wrong). This, to me, seems much more correct than “apartheid”, especially considering that “apartheid” is used to specifically refer to the system in South Africa, and even the west bank is far from it. If anything, apartheid  a-la South Africa is what the far-right in Israel has in mind (for both Israeli Arabs and Arabs living under occupation), and that’s one of the reasons the distinction between “occupation” and “apartheid” is important in practice - if the far-left will have their way (which seems implausible, yet not absolutely out of the question), those who say Palestinians live under apartheid now will have a hard time explaining, or even understanding, exactly how the situation changed for the worse.

          • werty@lemmy.mlEnglish
            12·
            7 months ago

            No matter how developed you Hasbara troll is, Isntreal solidified it’s pariah status for the increasingly limited remainder of its illegitimate existence : the palestinian resistances have won.

            • CerealKiller01@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              7 months ago

              Dude, thinking that Israeli Hasbara would sit quietly waiting for someone to say “hey, I wonder if there are any Israelis in the crowd, let’s hear what they have to say”, and then writing a 1,700 word reply on a small platform such as Lemmy is puzzling at best.

              Calling it, even as a backhanded compliment, “developed” is mind boggling.

            • WldFyre@lemm.eeEnglish
              11·
              7 months ago

              Isntreal

              These childish Trump-like insults for names look so stupid lol

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.worldEnglish
        93·
        7 months ago

        You won’t be able to find reliable information because Israel has a lot of ability to influence discourse especially online. They will kill and threaten journalists. They are the global leader in providing computer exploits and spy tools to nation-states. Don’t forget that nothing happened at Tienamen square, and there is no war in ba sing se.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        Is there any suggestion that they’re protesting against “genocide”?

        Is it possible you’re looking at this situation through a particular lens?

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
      123·
      7 months ago

      Israellis are basically the only people on the planet that can stop this genocide. I said that back in November, it’s still true now.

    • index@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      31·
      7 months ago

      Not going to be easy when so many other corrupted governments are aiding this one

  • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
    17811·
    7 months ago

    Netanyahu has been prime minister for 16 years, just won reelection in 2022, and has been a murderous, zionist bastard the entire time.

    • FiniteBanjoEnglish
      15·
      7 months ago

      Not to mention, he lost power before 2022 because of court battles from 2015 to 2021 after which the courts ruled he could not be held accountable for crimes of corruption, and his reinstatement also meant that the compromise-government that formed on the condition of 2 years of conservative rulership followed by 2 years of progressive/moderate rulership was cut short and it was just back to back Netanyahu-lite to Netanyahu-lager.

      Murphy’s law is enforced in Israel.

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.netEnglish
        61·
        7 months ago

        the condition of 2 years of conservative rulership followed by 2 years of progressive/moderate rulership was cut short

        Well the important thing is that the moderates compromised. How were they to know that the fascists couldn’t be trusted?

        This is Charlie-Brown-with-the-football levels of gullible.

        • FiniteBanjoEnglish
          3·
          7 months ago

          Yeah, probably one of the few cases where it actually would have been better for the government to remain in shutdown.

    • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      4·
      7 months ago

      If you think it’s that simple you have no clue how controversial he is, and has been for roughly the entire time (increasing over the years). Israel isn’t (yet?) stuck in a two-party system, so there’s lots of different parties. Needless to say, Likkud (his party) does not get 50% of the votes. It is the largest party most of the time but not a majority.

      The previous government formed with parties from opposite sides of the spectrum just to keep the Likkud out. It didn’t last long, but neither did any of Bibi’s governments in the preceding 2 years - we’ve had a political crisis because no one wanted to work with him because he’s so controversial. The only reason he won the last election is that some parties on the left didn’t pass the threshold to be represented (basically throwing away their votes) and he partnered with extremist parties on the far-right, which he previously wouldn’t have lowered himself to but he was desperate to return to power. No one would partner with him but them.

      As for the number of votes Likkud does get - yeah, it’s a lot, but so are Trump voters (or pick your least favourite party/politician in your country) and it wouldn’t be fair to generalise and say all Americans support Trump, would it? Not to mention, you only get to pick from the candidates that are available.

      FWIW I voted against him, to the party that didn’t pass the threshold :( it was the first time in their history this happened IIRC

      • blazera@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        Likud doesnt get a majority, but it does get a plurality for a reason. Its also far from the only murderous zionist party, the coalition formed is absolutely a majority. Even if people didnt vote for netanyahu, most of them voted for a murderous zionist party. Netanyahu isnt doing this alone.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.caEnglish
    1264·
    7 months ago

    And this shows that those opposed to Israel’s actions in Gaza are not antisemitic (ignoring the eventual neonazi assholes), they are opposed to a government that is committing genocide. Especially a government that governs a people THAT SHOULD KNOE BETTER.

    I have no problems at all with Jews and I’m sure that, given people who really want peace, a good treaty can be made where both the Palestinians and the Israelites can peacefully coexist, that would be awesome.

    However, right now saying even something like that is somehow antisemitic. If anything, I find that sort of behavior antisemitic, because it is so transparent that it pushes more people to the far right and into the hands of neo Nazis.

    Stop the genocide, stop the war, withdraw ALL Israeli forces immediately and unconditionally. Then put in a peace keeping force comprised of multiple countries in that same area, and make sure they all work towards peace.

    • joneskind@lemmy.worldEnglish
      211·
      7 months ago

      I was about to say that I hoped we could make protests against Israel’s government without being called antisemitic here in France too…

    • nifty@lemmy.worldEnglish
      105·
      7 months ago

      People like me get no love from anyone because I want the Jewish people to have Israel as their country, and I want to help protect the rights of Israelis. I also want the same for Palestinians.

      People who perpetuate genocide against anyone shouldn’t be tolerated by civilized societies. The fact that mass killings exist in any form in human history is not a role model for the future.

      • Andy@slrpnk.netEnglish
        611·
        7 months ago

        I find it helps to name check the position you’re describing, which is “a one-state solution”.

        • nifty@lemmy.worldEnglish
          133·
          7 months ago

          How is what I am describing one-state? The reasonable path forward, which limits bloodshed and violence, is supporting both Israel’s and Palestine’s right to exist.

          • Andy@slrpnk.netEnglish
            11·
            7 months ago

            Sorry, I think I had a different comment open in a different tab and got confused before I had to run off to do something.

            I’ll leave it up, because I don’t like to delete comments that have been replied to.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zipEnglish
      74·
      7 months ago

      First of all if Israel, having such a strong military and industrial base, were not a piece of rotten evil, it could make a huge difference in the Middle-East.

      But instead of actually working toward that end Israelis decided to put a kinda similar image and exploit it. Simultaneously having a narrative of “we tried, but they just don’t want to live happily” in their propaganda and even believing that themselves.

    • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      630·
      7 months ago

      Palestine will reject any treaty. Like they always have. All they want is for Jews to be the minority or to leave entirely.

        • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          14·
          7 months ago

          A headline from an article I need to pay to read that was sourced by hamas themselves? I’m sold! 🤣

          No wonder the whole world doesn’t take you far lefties seriously 😂

          • Sagrotan@lemmy.worldEnglish
            121·
            7 months ago

            Yeah. Before that there were a Greek guy named Alexander, before that there assyrians. Let’s give it back to them. Oh wait, there were since guys from deeper Africa before them… The concept of countries or nations is utterly stupid.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        They agreed to treaties before that Israel rejected. But sure, blame the Palestinians

    • Pilferjinx@lemmy.worldEnglish
      429·
      7 months ago

      Israel jews are a different breed than the holocaust survivors. Germany paid reparations to Israel and barely, if any, actually made it to the actual survivors. They’re generally not a good people. But I have seen protests and legit compassion from them to know that it’s always the loudest voices that are most often heard.

    • InformalTrifle@lemmy.worldEnglish
      437·
      7 months ago

      There’s just one small flaw in your plan. Hamas has widespread support in Palestine and is not interested in peace, only in the destruction of Israel.

      If you end the war you just go back to the previous situation where Hamas will continue to persistently launch rockets at Israel and execute more terror attacks, not peace.

      • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.eeEnglish
        91·
        7 months ago

        Maybe it has such support because of Israel actions. I bet after the Netanjahu war crimes it will have 99%. Hell survivors probably will KoS anyone who even remotely resembles someone from Israel and will pass this tradition on generations to come.

        • InformalTrifle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          214·
          7 months ago

          I can understand why you’d think that coming from a position of logic, but no, it’s Islam.

          You’re right, it’ll probably go from >50% to 99%. And probably few of them will ever acknowledge that their religion and support of Hamas is what led to this tragedy.

          • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.eeEnglish
            82·
            7 months ago

            So what you want to just murder them all? Clean up the place? There are certain historical figures from ww2 Germany and Russia that figured out all the methods, bells and whistles.

            • InformalTrifle@lemmy.worldEnglish
              29·
              7 months ago

              Where did I say I wanted to murder anyone?

              Where do you live? Was it always the country it is now? How would your government react to constant bombardment from a fanatical religious neighbour that wanted to wipe your country off the map to get into paradise?

              • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.eeEnglish
                33·
                7 months ago

                Probably not digging mass graves everywhere. It would be lots of foundational work. Cultural assimilation. Economic warfare. Coca Cola. Replacing the leaders.

                Violence is easiest and quickest but is also stupid and has opposite effect, unless of course we go all the way to a complete wipe out. Stalin way.

                At this point there is no half measures. You have to go all the way, total wipeout. Those people will not forgive Israel in hundred years. It makes no sense to start genocide but not finish it. That would be pure madness and random convulsions of some blind, shortsighted idiot.

                Hell, I would grab a grenade launcher myself at this point if I was in their shoes. This stuff is the worst possible way to handle it.

                They could throw a nuke there and it wouldn’t be far off from the mess it is now.

                Result is everyone hates them, people are all radicalised against them. Bombings inside Israel will probably continue nevertheless. Nothing is solved but there is a gargantuan pile of problems added.

                I suspect the goal was populism all along. And this guy is a psychopath.

      • danekrae@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        7 months ago

        “Now we’ve justified, that 70% of the murdered people are women and children, right? RIGHT?! REICH?!”

        • InformalTrifle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          310·
          7 months ago

          No, I’m not commenting on Israels methods which clearly could be better, to put it mildly. That doesn’t mean it’s logical to dream there can ever be peace with jihadists

      • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
        71·
        7 months ago

        If they aren’t interested in peace then why was it Netanyahu who just torpedoed the current cease fire proposal and not Hamas?

        • InformalTrifle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          26·
          7 months ago

          Clearly because he wants to eliminate the jihadist terrorist organisation. I’m not claiming that’s the right decision but I understand it. But it seems a lot of Israelis don’t support him.

          But just because Netanyahu is no longer interested in peace doesn’t automatically make Hamas a peaceful group. The group that performs suicide bombings, uses human shields, beheads civilians, would stone you to death for drawing a picture of the prophet. They are not looking for peace no matter how much you downvote

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, and who’s to blame for that, literally by funding Hamas? The Israeli government.

        If they could fund hamas then they can also fund schools, hospitals, help rebuild Gaza.

        None of what you say should stand in the way of a peace treaty

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.worldEnglish
    892·
    7 months ago

    Good shit guys, and good luck, what’s the point of democracy if they don’t fucking listen. We should all be doing this, all of the time

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      4·
      7 months ago

      Guess why France has a some pro-consumer laws that wouldn’t fly in other countries. It’s because if the government pisses the people off, they instantly respond with rioting. It works.

  • Anas@lemmy.worldEnglish
    629·
    7 months ago

    While it’s fair that they’re protesting for their hostages to be returned, this headline puts them in a completely different light. I don’t believe anyone is actually protesting for a ceasefire.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      245·
      7 months ago

      This is correct. I can’t find anything at all claiming this protest has anything to do with stopping the Palestinian genocide for the sake of humanity.

      They just want their hostages back, according to what I’ve been able to find. Can anyone show significant support for the contrary?

    • untorquer@lemmy.worldEnglish
      103·
      7 months ago

      Article specifically quotes about the people being hostages of respective political leadership. Albeit a somewhat moderate take in context, still rather antiauthoritarian which tends to be anti war/genocide.

  • FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4916·
    7 months ago

    ‘“We hope the world hears us and knows that the people of Israel are not the government of Israel,” said one protester.‘

    I really wanted to believe that, but they have the same PRV type of voting system as Ireland so that’s hard to believe. It’s not like UK/US where the votes are counted in a more primitive way.

    • blargerer@kbin.social
      702·
      7 months ago

      I’ll admit to not being the most knowledgeable person on internal Israeli politics, but my understanding is hes been holding onto power for a while through a combination of coalitions and judge nonsense. Even then, if he represented the views of 51% of Israeli’s that would still be a lot of people who’s views don’t align with his.

      • Tryptaminev@lemm.eeEnglish
        312·
        7 months ago

        The problem is that there is a lot of Israelis who are now against Netanyahu, but who are still in support of the genocide in Gaza, or who are always in support of the Settler terrorism and slow genocide in the Westbank.

        No Israeli government has reduced or at least stopped settlements since Rabin was murdered. The Center and Center Left of Israeli politics are equally in favor of an Apartheid occupation and running Israel as a supremacist ethnostate.

        There is some people that genuinely reject all of this fascist nonsense and demand actual peace and actual justice in Israel. But unfortunately they are very much a minority. And when they speak up they often get threatened, harassed and attacked.

        • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
          161·
          7 months ago

          No Israeli government has reduced or at least stopped settlements since Rabin was murdered.

          Quoth the Haaretz: “Jigal Amir won”.

          The possible silver lining is that Netanyahu also demonstrated that the right-wing’s idea of how to ensure security – namely, by antagonising Palestinians into submission – doesn’t work. But that kind of insight will take a while to actually sink in.

          And another thing that needs to happen is Israelis not shying away from looking at what’s being done to Palestinians. The Israeli press is self-censoring, knowing that noone wants to watch or read about the crimes the IDF is committing. It’s wilful ignorance: People want to support the IDF because they at least at some level still believe in the antagonising Palestinians into submission approach, yet they can’t bear to acknowledge what that entails. Which is kinda actually a real silver lining: Imagine if the Israeli press glorified, instead of ignored, all those mass graves and whatnot, what that would say about their audience. In the end it’s still only the Kahanites who actually get a hard-on when seeing Arab corpses.

          …the same, side note, btw also happened in the Third Reich: First Nazis were very overt, the pogroms were open, public, they were dragging people through streets and whatnot. They very quickly changed approach, made sure that people were able to ignore what was being done, were able to come up with lies such as “they’re only expelling the Jews” and actually believe in them. Precisely because not every German back then got a hard-on when seeing a Jewish corpse either.

          So, please, Israeli people, get rid of those chucklefucks in government before they put you in camps for protesting.

        • go_go_gadget@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1224·
          7 months ago

          Biden’s primary stated reason for defending Israel is a promise to his dying father.

          Not his conscience, not the people alive and around him today, not the people who voted for him, not the people who he’s depending on to get re-elected.

          Sorry America, an 80 year old white man is making an undemocratic choice due to a promise he made to another old white man. Awesome.

            • go_go_gadget@lemmy.worldEnglish
              98·
              7 months ago

              Fair enough, but it’s just about the only explanation that would make sense. Dude is going to lose the election over this.

              • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                31·
                7 months ago

                So first; your comment sounds passive aggressive. You can argue/ discuss without it. If not, I’ll just block you.

                I appreciate the sources, never knew it was thanks to his father - that Biden is a pro-Israel/ Zionist. However this does not particularly show that defending Israel is a “promise to his father”

                Like the other comment state:

                Biden’s primary stated reason for defending Israel is a promise to his dying father

                In none of your articles does this come up. Only that his father is the reason of him being pro-Israel.

                I know very well Biden is a pro-Zionist/ pro-Israel. You can check my comment history.

                EDIT: so your sources and your comment doesn’t “answer” my question at all. It just shows he became a pro Israel because of his father. Not about him promising his father, he will defend Israel.

                We all know already that he’s a pro-Israel because there’s a video of Biden saying “if there was no Israel, we will invent one”. Joe Biden says if Israel didn’t exist, the US would have to invent one to protect US interests

      • floofloof@lemmy.caEnglish
        253·
        7 months ago

        Some of those dissatisfied with him will want an even more extreme right-winger. So you conclude too much from that figure alone, except that he’s very unpopular.

        • untorquer@lemmy.worldEnglish
          61·
          7 months ago

          For the poll to drop after a genocide starts, one would need to imagine that most of the drop is anti genocide. “Critical support”, when taken in a serious context, usually means one would still vote in an electoral system for that leader who did the thing versus an alternative.

          It’s hard to imagine what a hardliner would want more at a point where the track is basically kettle and bomb, malnourish to death, is short of enslave and malnourish to death. Like nukes don’t work because then you can’t use the land for a couple decades.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      11·
      7 months ago

      It’s also a parliamentary system, and there hasn’t been a stable coalition in forever. Netanyahu, despite his lack of public popularity, has the backroom connections to stay on top of ‘the game’ in a divided parliament, especially with two of the left-wing parties only narrowly missing the threshold in the last election.

  • VoilaChihuahua@lemmy.worldEnglish
    343·
    7 months ago

    I am curious to witness the mental gymnatics necessary to call these Israelis antisemitic…what absolute nonsense will need to be implemented this round?

    • blazeknave@lemmy.worldEnglish
      55·
      7 months ago

      I logged on after reading about the ceasefire, just to look for articles here, where the comments will inevitably say it’s not enough and they’re electing Trump bc they’re so far left.

      • Tinidril@midwest.socialEnglish
        41·
        7 months ago

        What does “left” have to do with it? Is it only leftists who object to genocide?

        The number of voters dumb enough to switch from Biden to Trump is insignificant. What’s going to happen is a whole lot of voters are just going to give up and stay home, and it won’t have anything to do with how far left they are.

        Just like every damn election, the left is telling the establishment how to attract voters, the establishment is ignoring the left, then the establishment will blame the left. The vast majority of those engaged enough to call themselves leftists are going to vote for Biden. It’s the barely engaged working Americans who are going to check out.

        • blazeknave@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          7 months ago

          Ummm… staying home not voting against Trump, is welcoming his election. You flip flopped on this comment from acknowledging the difference but in the end throw your hands up offering, “but that won’t happen anyway, they’ll vote Biden” … I don’t think they will, and staying home to do so is a .5 vote for red team. It’s just the math of elections. Staying home with your vote is still not casting it for the not evil orange dictator

          • Tinidril@midwest.socialEnglish
            1·
            7 months ago

            Gawd, it’s exhausting how many people just lock into the bullshit frame of mainstream news.

            Try to understand this please. Most Americans don’t give a shit about left vs right politics. They give a shit about their kids, or the mortgage, or figuring out that issue that has there boss turning weird shades of purple.

            The tiny sliver of Americans that are politically astuit enough to even realize that they are leftists are not what swings elections. This is exactly as dumb as the Republican delusion that it’s poor brown people fucking them over.

            It’s the same tired bullshit every single damn election. Leftists tell the establishment how to rouse working Americans. The establishment ignores the left and loses. The establishment blames the left. Rince and repeat.

        • Tinidril@midwest.socialEnglish
          1·
          7 months ago

          It’s really not. US long term strategy is to disengage from the Middle East to focus on bringing freedom™ to Africa. The plan is to leave Israel and Saudi Arabia to babysit, which is what the ill-fated Abraham Accords were for from a US perspective. The US doesn’t give a rats ass about the Palestinians, but being implicated in a genocide is inconvenient.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    5·
    7 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    Tens of thousands took to the streets in Tel Aviv to demand that the government reach a deal with Hamas to secure the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.

    Egyptian state media reported “noticeable progress" on talks, although an Israeli official downplayed the prospects for a full end to the war in Gaza.

    Hamas has repeatedly insisted that any deal freeing the hostages must include a withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and an end to the fighting.

    “The most important thing is to bring the hostages back and to get humanitarian aid into Gaza,” said Roi Tzohar, demonstrating in Tel Aviv.

    But chances for a ceasefire deal remain entangled with the key question of whether Israel will accept an end to the war without reaching its stated goal of destroying Hamas.

    The official said Israel was committed to the Rafah invasion, where an estimated 1.4 million people have fled the fighting in central and northern Gaza.

    The original article contains 522 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!