Presently I am intentionally minimizing my exposure to the news, and I was reluctant to touch this topic because, quite honestly, I’d rather not deal with any drama that could result, but I feel like I need to address a few points to satiate my conscience:

Let me start off by admitting that yes, these polls are probably accurate. It is disappointing for us who are interested in Jewish people for historical or cultural reasons, and given that there is a superabundance of evidence for both the IOF’s atrocities and the unsustainability of the Herzlian project, it is becoming very difficult to excuse the persistent approval of the so-called ‘Jewish state’. At this point, it is tempting to write off Jewish Herzlians as lost causes; most of them should have gotten the message by now.

The problem is comparable to how many Catholics — including Irish ones — tolerated the Fascist invasion of Ethiopia. In fact, it was overwhelmingly common for diaspora Italians to approve of Benito Mussolini:

The Italian-American press, it should be remembered, was almost 90 percent pro-Mussolini. Not until 1941 did the press completely desert Il Duce, and then the repudiation of Fascism was a result of diplomatic developments rather than political repentance.

(Source.)

Although the leadership of Italian-American labor stood unalterably opposed to Fascism, the rank-and-file Italian worker entertained ambivalent and even affectionate feelings for the “new Italy” and the charismatic Mussolini. These deep emotions surfaced particularly during the Ethiopian War when Italian labor unions, like Local 89 of the ILGWU, assailed Il Duce’s aggression only to be denounced by their own workers.

[…]

Significantly, the small number of anti-Fascists, who numbered “optimistically” a little less than 10 percent of a total Italian-American population of 4,600,000 in 1930, could never successfully attack Mussolini without incurring the stigma of being “un-Italian.”

(Source.)

I could share more, but the point is that we’ve seen almost all of this before: indoctrination, overwhelming consensus, intolerance towards the dissidents, &c. Nonetheless, sooner or later the Jewish mainstream is going to outgrow Herzlianism just like most people in the Italian diaspora outgrew Fascism. As I said, the Herzlian project is unsustainable.

While ideally trying to educate ordinary Jews about Herzlianism’s consequences is the optimistic message to take from this, I won’t hold it against you if you see that as a waste of time; they should have jumped ship a long time ago when the evidence for Herzlianism’s atrocities was more abundant than ever. In all honesty, I suspect that only a minority of Catholics and Italians loss interest in Fascism because of antifascist education; most of the disinterest was because of Fascism losing, and a similar effect is likely to happen with Herzlianism. In any event, none of that should stop us from continuing to educate others on Herzlianism’s consequences, including its consequences for Jewish people (‘counterintuitive’ though that may seem).

So yes, as disappointed as I am to say it, ordinary Jews approving of the occupation is probably accurate. The approval is likely, in most cases, an uninformed or a casual one (as was likely for many diaspora Italians regarding Fascism), for whatever that may be worth. Whatever the case may be, I reconcile this with my respect for Jewish cultures by cherishing the Jewish critics of Zionism (many of whom rightfully prioritize Palestinian voices) and by understanding that Herzlianism’s decline is inevitable, which is soon to render its popularity among ordinary Jews obsolete.

See, it’s like this: if you question the claim that the Poles massacred 58,000 Germans, you are a monster. That’s all that there is to it, really.

All atrocity stories that are coincidentally propagated by Western governments need to be immediately accepted at face value. No questions asked. Ever.

Yes, Western governments may make a few little mistakes from time to time, but this time around they’re telling us the truth. Don’t worry, they promise. If you don’t believe me, check out a few of these upper-class ultranationalist dissidents from China and Ukraine. Why would they lie to us?

‘There is no rule that says that on this instance. Hell, denial of the Palestinian genocide is forbidden on this comm. It’s funny that Hexbear users make up shit and the run on it. It’s like a little gossip round. Are you still in secondary school?’

Environmentalism survived—and even thrived—in Stalin’s Soviet Union, establishing levels of protection unparalleled anywhere in the world, although for only one component of the Soviet environment: the immense forests of the Russian heartland.¹

Throughout the early Soviet period, the agencies in charge of timber extraction repeatedly pressed for greater latitude, advancing visions of highly engineered, regularized woodlands while employing aggressive, revolutionary rhetoric. Yet with one quickly reversed exception, the Politburo consistently rejected the drive toward hyperindustrialism in the forest.

After briefly capitulating to the industrialists’ unrelenting attacks on conservationism in 1929, Stalin’s government reversed course, and in the 1930s and 1940s set aside ever larger tracts of Russia’s most valuable forests as preserves, off-limits to industrial exploitation. Forest protection ultimately rose to such prominence during the last six years of Stalin’s rule that the Politburo took control of the Soviet forest away from the Ministry of Heavy Industry, and elevated the nation’s forest conservation bureau to the dominant position in implementing policy.

The results of this struggle for supremacy in the forest, which pitted the party leadership against those very bureaucratic interests assigned to carry out the party’s industrial ambitions, show that environmental protection could find a place in a rapidly industrializing [government] as aggressive as Stalin’s—provided that the reasons given for protection were sufficiently pragmatic, and the supporting faction sufficiently powerful.

(Source.)

‘Sure bud. You are just reinforcing what the meme portrays.’

‘Nah. You just need to keep to yourselves and not deliberately come over here then it is like I am not there because I only sometimes lurk on hexbear and grad to make sure you arent plotting something in the legion of doom.’

I like how they overlooked my comment mentioning how we regularly report on Palestinians’ oppression. It’s like this schlemiel is so invested in dunk culture that they would rather shitpost all day than engage with any intellectually stimulating content (for once).

When you give the Jews equal rights but people equate you to the guy who tried killing them.

Oh, you mean like what anticommies do with the Bolsheviki?

Chinese gusano.

https://imgur.artemislena.eu/piYusCm

If there are already Jews in the Western world who loathe the occupation of Palestine, then the Islamic Rep. of Iran does not have to work a miracle to successfully convince Iranian Jews that the occupation is an oppressive garbage dump. If anything, it takes more work to convince people that the occupation is a Jewish Disneyland.

These schlemiels are in for a rude awakening.

Zionism is unsalvageable. Whitewashing it with idealistic redefinitions only distracts everybody from what Zionism means to Palestinians: occupation by foreign ethnonationalists.

If improving the lot of the privileged is important to you (for some reason), you have to convince them to give up their oppressive mindsets and that occupying Palestine is more trouble than it is worth. If you choose to keep overlooking their toxic relationship with Palestinians, you aren’t going to fix anything.

The petty bourgeoisie has long had a tendency to switch politics almost arbitrarily, given that they have to deal with both the proletariat and the haute-bourgeoisie. I can believe it.

Deimperialized would be the proper term in this case, but you are correct.

Reading these replies makes me nostalgic for the generic anticommunist comments like ‘you own an iPhone! pwned!’ and ‘are you aware that Karl Marx killed 140 million straight white men normal people???’

To be honest, I’d rather have conversations with these types than the neoliberals whose mindset is just ‘RUSSIA BAD, UKRAINE GOOD’. ‘Both sides are bad’ is usually not a good take either, but it does not have to be a barrier to conversation.

I find it sad how the author needs to repeat that they aren’t pro-Russian. It clearly hasn’t deterred downvoters.

Vinberg’s colleagues Scheubner‐Richter and Rosenberg in particular stressed that the “Jewish Bolshevik” dictatorship had killed millions of Russians through war, disease, starvation, and execution. In an October 1922 edition of Aufbau Correspondence, Scheubner‐Richter estimated the costs of the “Bolshevik experiment” to the Russian people at approximately two million refugees and 35 million dead.⁶¹

In an August 1921 Völkisch Observer article, “The Pogrom Against the German and the Russian Peoples,” Rosenberg claimed of Russia: “A characteristic Jewish rule of terror was set up as world history had not yet seen […] Over 30 million people have sunk away through murder, starvation, and cholera.”⁶² He revised his figures upwards in his 1923 Protocols work. He asserted, “Over 40 million Russians perished through the Jewish terror.”⁶³ Hitler used the figure of 40 million Russian victims of starvation that the Jews had caused as early as an August 1921 speech.⁶⁴

Why do I get the strangest feeling that the CIA has something to do with this… why…

When I was at Tishʻa Bʼav service a few hours ago, the Rabbi made no mention of the pogroms of 1917–1923 (but did mention the 1929 Hebron massacre as well as the Oct. 7th incident). When I asked him after the service why he omitted these events, he justified it on the grounds that mentioning every anti-Jewish atrocity would have taken too long. I then said that that era was very significant, and he brushed it aside saying that Tishʻa Bʼav is mostly about the destruction of the Temple anyway. (Although the service spent only a little time on the Temple.)

I know that asking for some recognition of the Palestinians—beyond mentioning the ‘Arabs’ behind the Hebron massacre—would have been an ‘outrageous’ demand, but I would have at least expected the clergy to mention the largest anti-Jewish massacre before the 1940s. I sent the Rabbi an email about the subject, but as I was rushing I carelessly left in the part where I wrote, ‘While most Herzlians insist that the Shoah was so unique that it was incomparable to anything else in history, it would be utterly baffling if they explicitly included this catastrophe as something else incomparable to the Shoah, which is possibly another reason that they almost never discuss it.’ If he ever reads that email then I get the feeling that he is not going to take that comment lightly; it would be so typical for me if I received an extreme reaction.

I can’t say that I was satisfied with the service, but oh well; it wasn’t for me. If it makes somebody sleep easier at night, good for them.

ETA: The Rabbi replied to my email with this:

Thank you for sharing. I am not sure I would call it a photo-shoah, but it was certainly part of the larger history of anti-Jewish violence in Europe. And you are right, it deserves more attention.

I’m surprised that he overlooked my potshot. Maybe he was unsure how to interpret the word ‘Herzlian’.