Come on now. “Jewish” can of course refer to the religion of Judaism but “Jew” is definitely a term for an ethnicity, both in common usage and more formal realms.

Who is a Jew? “Jewish identity is also commonly defined through ethnicity. Opinion polls have suggested that the majority of modern Jews see being Jewish as predominantly a matter of ancestry and culture, rather than religion.” “The term “Jew” lends itself to several definitions beyond simply denoting one who practices Judaism.”

If you don’t like Wikipedia “Jews are a distinct ethnicity due to a combination of shared cultural, historical, and ancestral ties. Below are some examples of key factors that make Jews an ethnicity…”

University of Michigan, “Religion or Ethnicity? : The Evolution of Jewish Identities”. “Jewish identity has been defined as an ethnicity, a nation, a culture, and even a race.”

Pew Research “Religion is not central to the lives of most U.S. Jews. Even Jews by religion are much less likely than Christian adults to consider religion to be very important in their lives (28% vs. 57%).”

Israel is not Jewish people.

That’s exactly what I said, and I said it because it’s necessary to remind people of that. Antisemitism is absolutely on the rise, so the distinction matters to me.

Israel claims that the 27 hospitals and 12 other health facilities they’ve bombed hid Hamas. Rape, murder, torture, hiding behind civilians, illegally abusing things like medical immunity…every accusation is a confession. What a wretched country. And to be clear: I don’t mean all Jews - just the ones perpetrating this ethnic cleansing and their allies whether Jewish or not. Couldn’t care less about where they were born or their genetics, just what they’re doing in full view.

I disagree that “their humiliating defeat on November 5 was due largely to their undeniable role in the Israeli war and genocide in Gaza.” I definitely think it played a role and Dems would have won more voters with concrete promises to halt Israel’s genocide and enforce US laws like the Leahy Law. People are justifiably upset with Israel crossing lines without Biden enforcing consequences, and the huge amounts of money going to fund genocide as opposed to being used domestically.

Was it really THE major issue affecting votes though? IMO the more significant issues were things like a feeling of “more of the same” when people are struggling and focusing on trying to win “moderate” Republicans instead of motivating a base they thought was guaranteed. Still, it’s an article with valid points.

A lot of people did in fact set aside Gaza until Trump was stopped. As for those that didn’t, they should have listened to Bernie Sanders. I did months ago and went all-in on Dem support. There were multiple times when I wrote up an angry post about US support of Israel and then didn’t post it because I didn’t want to turn a voter into a non-voter or worse a Trump supporter.

I understand their position of never rewarding ethnic cleansing and war crimes though. They chose to make sure the Dems know they would never “settle” for the illegal killing of civilians. The support for Israel made it especially hard for Arab Americans to vote Dem. It’s difficult to support a party that has been in power during the whole conflict yet gives unconditional support for the internationally condemned murder of Arabs.

I’m sure a lot also felt disenfranchised by the bipartisan protest suppression and condemnation. Even in Dem states peaceful protesters were punished, and sometimes pro-Israeli protesters who attacked got away with it. Then there was the whole “vote with us or else” pressure that went on for months. Dissenters like the “uncommitted” voters were insulted by the party that wanted their unconditional support.

So it’s not like it’s completely insane. But as Sanders points out that position only makes things worse and has done so.

I’m surprised it’s that low. In the first several weeks alone Israel dropped hundreds of 2,000lb bombs. “The heavy munitions, mostly manufactured by the US, can cause high casualty events and can have a lethal fragmentation radius – an area of exposure to injury or death around the target – of up to 365 meters (about 1,198 feet), or the equivalent of 58 soccer fields in area.” That doesn’t even count all the other munitions used.

I like that it’s moderated fairly lightly but reasonably. Often I can have an actual discussion with someone who doesn’t agree with me without either of us getting banned by a mod who likes one side or the other. From what I see generally a user needs to be very obviously abusive/racist/violent before a mod steps in, even if the content is controversial.

I dislike that I’ve needed to heavily restrict my use for my mental health until after the election. A lot of people (not all by any means) believe it’s ok to bully and abuse other users because their cause is righteous - it’s already shown up in this thread. E.g. the daily posts and comments, with a lot of upvotes/support, that label anyone who disagrees with or criticizes Kamala (used to be Biden)/Democrats a bot, idiot, worse than useless, foreign agent and so on. I’m not talking about downvoting which is just expressing disagreement - I’m talking about outright insults and upvoting those. The attitude of “vote with/support me or else” has no place in a democracy founded on free voting without persecution, even if the bully is sure they’re right. If I didn’t mention it, perhaps even though I have, we might see a version of “but it is actually ok this time” and reasons why. It’s happened before.

Guess what? Very few “policy bullies” think they are evil - they’re positive it’s justified. Christians demand abortion bans, Muslim deportation, religion in schools/government and so on because they truly believe they are saving eternal souls. I was raised in that environment. That a sizable amount of Lemmy users believe it’s correct/admirable to insult others into “proper” behavior makes them very similar in character to those religious extremists IMO. Apparently when the issue is really important abuse is ok.

I’ll end by saying Gaza/Palestine is incredibly important to me - I am legitimately very upset frequently by the stories and media. However, Bernie Sanders convinced me to support Biden and then Kamala. Bernie laid out his argument with logic and facts and did not once insult my position. I also doubt the aggressive posts/comments are winning over undecideds. “I wasn’t sure if I should vote Democrat until I was called a harmful idiot and had my concerns dismissed as being in bad faith”.

“We don’t care what the previously established laws say, we’ve decided our rules say you can’t criticize us”. Sounds like that city council was primarily selected from a pool of Reddit moderators.

“Hang loose” is what you tell someone who needs to chill out and let the waves carry them away from their problems man. Align your chakras with the Earth and so on.

Seriously though, the reason I wrote like that is I’m using the slang of roughly 90s/2000s-ish California surfer culture, which is where the hand signal was used to tell people to relax and be happy. Or say hi and let them know you are relaxed and happy. If you imagine it as a gang sign for surfer hippies you aren’t far off.

Dude, radical emoji. That’s just a gnarly way of tell someone to hang loose, bro. I’ve usually seen it done left-to-right instead of up-and-down, but the universe is infinite so if you wanna flip it that’s totally copacetic.

Edit: I started thinking about surfers and it dragged up memories of this legend on Tosh.0

All too true. It hurts to see. It’s also worth mentioning the sabotage/blockade of aid by Israeli protesters and that the UN says it’s out of stockpiled supplies.

As much as the “hurt with one hand, help with the other” approach bothers me, I really hope this enables sufficient aid to safely reach the civilians who so desperately need it.

I have a lot to say when reading a headline like this, but it boils down to: I really hope advances like this and EV’s topple the fossil fuel industry that’s hurting our planet.

For a moment I thought it was Columbia University and was a little shocked by the reversal. After correcting myself: it’s good to hear another nation is drawing some lines in the sand regarding behavior. Rules of war should mean something.

I can think of two fairly active potential homes for that content: Showerthoughts, which is for random trains of thought that you think others might relate to. Lemmy Be Wholesome is for content that you feel elevates people’s moods, is supportive, shares good vibes and so on.

That’s a solid criticism and I upvoted. I hadn’t thought about YouTube. Anecdotally I’ve had factual comments about how many kids are killed, what Israeli politicians say, etc. auto-moderated into oblivion on YouTube. But at the same time I get a lot of the facts I use from YouTube (basically never been on TikTok) so it holds water. I also get a lot of info from other sources, but I can’t think of something specific I’d get from them that I could never find on YouTube.

In my defense, I’m basing my opinion on why TikTok is particularly targeted on interviews like this one with Ted Cruz. He talks about how TikTok is specifically designed to push messages that are harmful to America, including what he calls pro-Hamas content but I suspect is actually anti-Israeli policy, pro-Palestine content. That is why I would argue there’s some evidence of a campaign against TikTok in particular that might skip over YouTube or other major platforms. Perhaps the Western powers feel that YouTube is still acceptably moderated towards their interests whereas TikTok isn’t. Perhaps Google is just too influential domestically.

Edit: I found a video I was looking for: Biden talking about passing the TikTok/Israel funding/Ukraine funding package. A bit of language he uses that I think is telling is “it continues America’s leadership in the world and everyone knows it” which could signal US dominance as a motivation and thus TikTok as a target and not US companies.

That doesn’t mean your point isn’t worth discussion, or that my points aren’t opinion. I’m interested to see how it develops. I’ve based my opinion on the conversations I can find and language used, but I’m open to adjusting my view if evidence prompts that.

I 100% admit that my take on the TikTok ban is opinion based on the hearings and arguments + the scope of the bill, so you aren’t being unfair. I have never heard that about the Twitter purchase - I had read it was a poor decision Musk made only half-seriously and then was basically forced to follow through with.

Here’s Bernie Sanders from a year ago talking about how a handful of companies control the news people see, read, and hear. TL:DR - He makes the argument that it’s not fake news, that journalists are usually hard-working and honest. He says the problem is the limitation of allowed discussion - what topics make it to the consumer. He says for instance that he’s never asked about wealth and income inequality.

I believe TikTok is being banned because as it stands now it brings topics outside the limits of allowed discussion to a lot of eyes in ways US government/companies haven’t proven able to control. If the issues justifying a potential ban were truly data security or mental health as some argue (not without merit mind you), then the legislation to address those issues would look a lot different and include companies like Meta, Google, Instagram, etc. Those are valid concerns but the new measure is clearly not designed around them.

Finally, we’ve seen how Trump can tie up the courts for months on end even after all his self-snitching. Thus I very much doubt we’ll see any actual action in the 9 months + 3 months grace period laid out for the resolution of the TikTok matter. There are too many constitutional and business law challenges in my (admittedly layman’s) reading of expert opinion.

The footage of the premature baby born to a dead mother killed in a bombing, who then followed her into death moments later, was especially chilling. Can you imagine the outrage if that happened to someone from New York, or Britain, or Germany? But because they’re Palestinians the mother and newborn, both killed inside a “safe zone”, will be just a footnote.

There are no safe zones for Palestinians as far as Israel is concerned. Just in the last day Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich has called for the “complete destruction” of Gaza and stopping peace talks with Hamas. "He said Israel needed to attack Rafah “as fast and as strongly as possible, and then continue with the strip until its complete destruction”.

Heat stress is estimated to have killed about 61,000 Europeans in 2022. If Western wealth and healthcare can’t keep up with increasing heat then these countries have no chance.