• captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      That comes with the boldest admission I’ve ever seen, that we as the entire rest of the world are uniformly unwilling to stand by and protect the Jewish people in our communities and countries. Fuck that. No, we must protect our Jewish neighbors, we must be willing to take in Jewish refugees of antisemitism. We must take it upon ourselves be the place where Jews are safe. Saying Israel is the source of Jewish safety is a fucking cop out and it’s a disgusting one at that.

        • djsoren19@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          There are lots of marginalized groups that do not have the benefit of having a homeland country that are continuing to survive. Maybe we were more barbaric in the past, and there’s certainly still antisemitism to root out, but I don’t agree with the take that countries couldn’t protect their own Jewish populations.

          • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            There are no other groups that had 2/3rds of their population in Europe and almost half their worldwide population systemically murdered, while the world refused ships full of Jews and had hard quotas on how many Jews were allowed in.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis

            Should these countries protect their population? Yes. Did they? Maybe their own. But they sure didn’t protect Jews in the rest of Europe. Did the US have a duty to protect German citizens? Do we today? What has actually changed?

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      What total horse shit. Mark Zuckerberg’s safety is in no way conditioned on the existence of Israel.

      But Biden isn’t a liberal (in conventional US usage anyway) and I doubt he’d describe himself as one. He’s an establishment centrist if there ever was one.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        He’s a neoliberal Clintonite. He’s in the most right wing part of even that right wing form of liberalism, but still a neoliberal, which is the DNC default kind of liberalism and has been since 1992.