• Artisian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Please explain why my “criticism” would be stronger if stopantisemitism were ever an anti-israeli body. I don’t understand that at all. This would show they have principles, instead of being a grift.

    Plenty of other orgs have useful idiots and fans. They are ‘pro-Israel’, but I don’t think that’s the most useful descriptor or context.

    • mrdown@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The group repeat the same exact Israeli state and government lies and propaganda so they are 100% pro Israel group. Denying that is like denying that 1 +1 = 2

      • Artisian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yes, they are pro-Israel. They are also an american grift that’s very profitable.

        I feel like you’re saying 2 is an even number, and I’m saying it’s also literally 2. Specificity has value, and I think there should be a good reason to be vague instead of specific.

        I will ask again: why is my argument for changing the title stronger if stopantisemetism were anti-Israel?

        • mrdown@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Explain how it is not a good title to use the designation of Pro Israel group in the title when the group has the exact same propaganda as the Israeli government

          • Artisian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            59 minutes ago

            I am not interested in telling you that you have done bad. I am interested in telling you that you could do better. I think this change is an improvement because:

            I think there is an opportunity to make a more specific point, that requires no analogy, is shorter and more precise, still works towards your political priorities (assuming you do want Israel shamed for this kind of behavior), and (I think) has a better chance of making specific, incremental, progress in political discourse.