I would say the media has been very biased in their approach to covering these events, right up until this past weekend. It is pretty obvious the bias our media is going to maintain toward Israel, so you know it must be pretty bad when even our media is being critical of the state of Israel. That's even with a massive imbalance in the influence over our media systems that Jews have versus Muslims.
The media bias is all over the map. CBC and the Guardian have a very different stance on the Palestinian conflict than NBC or the Wall Street Journal.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
What would a protest in Canada accomplish with Israel? JT going to politely ask Netanyahu to stop bombing?
The fact that Israel is constantly pumping out videos and conducting interviews with media where they are addressing civilian casualties in Gaza shows that they are concerned with how their military campaign looks in the media.
I think that there there is a fair bit on antisemitism being uncovered by this conflict.
That said, I think Isreal is in the middle of a long process that is horrific and unjust.
I mentioned earlier in this thread, my Sister in Law is Jewish, and I love her, and care deeply for her well being and safety. However, what she says and I think truly believes about Palestinian peoples, and Muslims in generals, is borderline genocidal.
You’re talking about about geopolitics. I’m talking about the media and public opinion.
As a former journalist, I understand that empathy is a remarkably capricious and fluid thing. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are killed in war every year. Some elicit tremendous outpourings of outrage and compassion among middle-class westerners sitting at their breakfast tables. Most are completely ignored.
It’s not simple geopolitical alliances that govern which deaths we care about and which we don’t. Where we culturally situate who is being killed and who is doing the killing plays a big part. If the deaths can be fit into an emotionally satisfying narrative, the media’s job is all the easier.
We’ve proven again and again that we don’t particularly care about non-European people in the developing world killing one another. It takes a horror the scope of Rwanda for those deaths to even appear on our radar. But introduce a Western/European/Colonial role to the story, and the engines of public outrage rev up. Because that fits a political narrative that has real juice.
I don't think that really explains it. As far as I know, there weren't any real protests in North America about the killing going on in the former Yugoslavia in the '90s. Those were Europeans getting killed, but there wasn't any kind of large movement to protest it, because what's the point? NATO conducting air strikes probably generated more protest action than the war itself.
Which is basically how it always plays out. People care when their country may get involved or when their country has some sort of influence on the outcome. People didn't protest the Iraq War but not the Yemen Civil War because they have a particular affinity for Iraqis that they don't have for Yemenis. It's because the US and other western nations were directly involved (and not in some abstract sense like selling the Saudis weapons that eventually get used in the Yemen conflict).
So as it applies to this conflict, yes, Westerners are obviously going to pay more attention and have more of a reaction to a conflict where the US President and Secretary of State are flying over to it to confer with one side's leadership, where the US sends aircraft carriers into the region as a means of supporting the conflict, and where there's a potential risk of the conflict spreading, than they are about a civil war that Western nations aren't even really involved in. I don't see what's remotely surprising about that. It's the same reason people care more about Ukraine than they do other random conflict; it's right on NATO's borders, so obviously it's going to get far more attention. That doesn't mean it's right, or that people shouldn't give those other conflicts much more attention, or that we shouldn't all consider the types of evils that our governments sometimes tacitly support around the world.
And to be honest, I think the opposite effect is happening too. In a few weeks, Israel has already killed about as many civilians as Russia has in almost 2 years, and dropped as many bombs in a week as the US did in Afghanistan in a year, but people shrug, treat it as the cost of doing business, and hand wave away potentially starving millions of people.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
The media bias is all over the map. CBC and the Guardian have a very different stance on the Palestinian conflict than NBC or the Wall Street Journal.
When you say all over the roadmap you're saying from the Western Judeo-Christian perspective, yes? We are influenced by the media we consume and the ideals of those who manage those media streams. What you consider as "all over the map" is a very small slice of the larger global perspective. The diversity of opinion presented in the media on this issue is pretty limited and not even reflective of the consumer base they try to push messages to. Now go to the rest of the world and ask whether those sources "all over the map" are really discussing the issues in the terms of residents of the other nations or cultures impacted by these events? When you say "all over the map" you're talking a street map of New York City versus a view of the entire globe.
I think that there there is a fair bit on antisemitism being uncovered by this conflict.
That said, I think Isreal is in the middle of a long process that is horrific and unjust.
I don't necessarily agree that there is as much as you think unless you equate criticism of Israel's genocidal behaviour and indiscriminate slaughter of innocents as being antisemitic.
Which is the deflective card that was played in this thread multiple times and by the Israeli apologists.
I don't necessarily agree that there is as much as you think unless you equate criticism of Israel's genocidal behaviour and indiscriminate slaughter of innocents as being antisemitic.
Which is the deflective card that was played in this thread multiple times and by the Israeli apologists.
There’s no doubt that antisemitism is a problem and that conflicts like these give antisemites an avenue to express that, but I don’t see how anyone can deny it as a manipulation tactic as well.
Asking questions like “why are people critical of Israel” is fair, and there are good explanations of it. Opendoor’s post, like usual, is one of the best in terms of offering rational, fact-based explanations. While others seem to view the question itself as proof of a conclusion that fits their narrative best, whether that be left/right stuff, identity politics, antisemitism, or whatever.
The latter can largely be dismissed. They never asked such questions about the Ukraine conflict. They never wondered why people cared about that and not any of the other conflicts brought up here as some sort of proof that Israel is being unjustly targeted or criticized.
They wouldn’t think it fair to suggest they only cared about a terrorist attack against Israel and not any of the many terrorist attacks where Muslims make up the majority of victims because they hate Muslims, yet they have no problem deploying that manipulation tactic in Israel’s favour.
I don't necessarily agree that there is as much as you think unless you equate criticism of Israel's genocidal behaviour and indiscriminate slaughter of innocents as being antisemitic.
Which is the deflective card that was played in this thread multiple times and by the Israeli apologists.
Oh calm down, you use the word genocide like it is going out of style when the population in the West Bank and Gaza continues to grow at a fast rate every year. Civilians dying does not mean genocide, i know you and the Irish are used to lobbing this word around but you seem to have absolutely zero understanding of it. Your posts are just an arrogant speedrun of how many buzz words you can throw around. Were the Americans and British committing genocide in world war 2? Such a ridiculous claim when Israel has 2 million Arab Israelis living within its borders and is the fastest growing population in Israel. What genocide exactly? If this is a genocide it is the only one in human history where the population grows continuously. Ridiculous posts you make. Are the IDF rounding up Palestinians and putting bullets in their heads? You understand if Israel actually wanted to commit a genocide this is the worst possible way to go about doing it. Again, you are so far removed from this conflict you have zero understanding of what actually is going on. Not surprising, Ireland is full of Hamas supporters and terror sympathizers.
Which is basically how it always plays out. People care when their country may get involved or when their country has some sort of influence on the outcome.
Canada is not getting involved and has no influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That hasn’t stopped Canadians in some quarters from protesting against Israel just as passionately as their counterparts in the U.S.
So no, I don’t buy that it’s a rational, utilitarian response to the foreign policy posture of their government. I’d wager if you polled a pro-Palestinian rally most participants wouldn’t have the faintest idea who Anthony Blinken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
So as it applies to this conflict, yes, Westerners are obviously going to pay more attention and have more of a reaction to a conflict where the US President and Secretary of State are flying over to it to confer with one side's leadership, where the US sends aircraft carriers into the region as a means of supporting the conflict, and where there's a potential risk of the conflict spreading, than they are about a civil war that Western nations aren't even really involved in. I don't see what's remotely surprising about that. It's the same reason people care more about Ukraine than they do other random conflict; it's right on NATO's borders, so obviously it's going to get far more attention. That doesn't mean it's right, or that people shouldn't give those other conflicts much more attention, or that we shouldn't all consider the types of evils that our governments sometimes tacitly support around the world.
What about non-Westerners? Why do you think the Palestinian conflict generates far more outrage among Muslims globally than the hundreds of thousands killed in Yemen and Myanmar?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
We've seen these behaviors in this thread. I got some time in the sin bin for pointing out this very behavior, and after being called an antisemite. Nice to see Shulamit Aloni not only acknowledge it but also own it.
We've seen these behaviors in this thread. I got some time in the sin bin for pointing out this very behavior, and after being called an antisemite. Nice to see Shulamit Aloni not only acknowledge it but also own it.
You were banned for insinuating that people may not like Jews because of my posts. So because a Jew, in this case me, had a different opinion from your own, you asserted that people, or in this case you, should dislike Jews because of my posts. Do you do that for everyone you disagree with? Or is it just Jews? Are you that daft?
Canada is not getting involved and has no influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That hasn’t stopped Canadians in some quarters from protesting against Israel just as passionately as their counterparts in the U.S.
So no, I don’t buy that it’s a rational, utilitarian response to the foreign policy posture of their government. I’d wager if you polled a pro-Palestinian rally most participants wouldn’t have the faintest idea who Anthony Blinken.
Canada and the US are effectively the same in terms of media consumption and discourse about international events. So no, Canadians aren't necessarily worried about Canada getting involved, but it's still a Canadian/Western ally killing civilians at an extremely high rate and effectively blockading the necessities of life from millions more. What other recent military action has been killing 8-10K civilians a month and threatening to starve a population? Russia is estimated to have killed 10-12K Ukrainians in 1.5 years, and that's with them laying siege to multiple cities, and they've rightly been condemned for it. So why is it surprising that the actions of an ally, that are potentially leading to a humanitarian disaster and the destabilization of a region, are getting more attention than internal conflicts in other countries?
Quote:
What about non-Westerners? Why do you think the Palestinian conflict generates far more outrage among Muslims globally than the hundreds of thousands killed in Yemen and Myanmar?
Well a lot of them hate Israel, it's not rocket science. It's a 75-year conflict that has been a flash point for an entire region for that whole time; that's always going to get more attention. And then you have to consider the sectarian issues between Muslims, where they view things through that lens and are going to respond (or not) to sectarian violence in Muslim nations accordingly.
And again, like I've said repeatedly, protests only really happen if there's the prospect of it having some kind of influence. People protesting in Egypt or Jordan isn't going to change what happens in Myanmar or even Yemen. But it can pressure their governments to influence what happens between Israel and Palestine.
I think conversations around the potential of genocide in Palestine is very important.
Not to say that it is happening, but that the conditions for it to happen are in place.
I do not agree with posters who state that people are watering down the definition of genocide. This implies that there is some acceptable limit under which genocidal practices are acceptable.
furthermore, pointing out hypocrisy with respect to concern over genocide in the digital age is not productive. Of course we grieve those in Myanmar, Uyghur, and Yazidis. The in action in those contexts is all the more reason to push back or to ask nation states to show restraint.
Well a lot of them hate Israel, it's not rocket science. It's a 75-year conflict that has been a flash point for an entire region for that whole time; that's always going to get more attention. And then you have to consider the sectarian issues between Muslims, where they view things through that lens and are going to respond (or not) to sectarian violence in Muslim nations accordingly.
Exactly. And this is why peace will never be an option. Regardless of the outcome of eradicating Hamas, the end result is more Muslims are now dead and thousands more will grow up hating Israel and the West.
I am Muslim, born here and not raised religious. I'll be honest, I don't care about Palestine or the Arab world, hell i don't really care about islamophobia as I have not experienced it. But when Israel or the U.S go to war against Muslim nations, it always feels like a personal attack even if the initial reason is to combat atrocities caused by terrorism. Conflicts like this seem to bring out feelings of being marginalized and cast a shadow over all Muslims. Muslims are clearly very tired of being at the center of so many global conflicts. Its easy to see then why Muslims all over the world are protesting and not acknowledge the act of terrorism.
Even though I know that Hamas committed an act of terrorism, its hard not to look at what's happening to the Palestinians losing their lives and feel, if Israel is so much more powerful and and so "just", then why are they holding the Palestinian people hostage in order to get their own hostages released. Then we have the media spin game. Seeing very clear biased reporting also leads to the idea in Muslim minds that the world is against them.
I'm going to go home tonight, have a crown and coke and watch hockey. But if I feel this way thousands of miles away with no connection to Palestine at all, then imagine the hatred that people in the region must really feel and will continue to feel, likely forever.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to zunie75 For This Useful Post:
Haha, that's the best one yet. "It's OK if we kill them because they reproduce faster than they get killed."
You are amazing at putting words in peoples mouths. If you and the other pro-Palestinian users in this thread want to continuously throw out words like genocide and apartheid without any evidence then go ahead. If you did not know this, generally in genocides the amount of people being killed matters and in this case it does not even come close to the disproportionate mass killings of any other genocide. Israel is attempting to eradicate Hamas, who embeds itself within a civilian population, it is not trying to eradicate the Palestinians as a people. There are already swaths of evidence that show Hamas using mosques, schools, hospitals and refugee camps to house weapons, shoot rockets, and hide behind civilians. If you want to question how the IDF is currently doing that then sure that’s fine. If you think the IDF is not doing enough to protect civilians in Gaza then sure also fine to think that. But to act like it’s a genocide is completely inaccurate. It is either the most unique and “special genocide” that has occurred in human history, or it is not a genocide. It’s a war, civilians die, it is a terrible product of war but it still is not a genocide. If it is then there should be a complete re-analysis of the word and probably add in thousands of other wars that I guess are now genocides.
