Is it common for people in your country to sign loyalty pledges to other nations?

[breslin]

The really concerning thing is how frequent we are seeing these. Arkansas, Louisiana and Florida have all done them that I have heard of.

[Unholyground]

It should be a matter of personal opinion whether or not to boycott Israel.

I mean religion is the root of all of it so all those places don't matter to me.

[roboscorcher]

Is it still anti-semitic to say Jews control the government when your own government won't help you recover from a hurricane unless you swear an oath to a foreign government?

You may be technically correct when you say "Jews control the government", but given that it is an anti-semite phrase, you still sound anti-semitic saying it.

Besides, Jews are not the issue here. If you substituted Isreal for Palestine or Zimbabwe or Canada, the loyalty pledge would be equally wrong. I have to wonder why you would turn this into a discussion about anti-semitic phrasing.

- - - Updated - - -

Seems madness to me. The only pledge I've ever been expected to make was the Pledge of Allegiance (which I can still recite word for word, K-12 repetition will do that to ya) and that was to the US, not to Israel.

Forcing people in the US to pledge allegiance to either one by withdrawing access to disaster aid until doing so is absolutely supervillainously insane.

Help people who need help. That's what that disaster aid is for. Discussions on rights of protests and free speech can happen once people are safe and secured.

Exactly. These are pledges you hear about in Venezuela, where only loyal people get food rations. For a party that likes to brag about being superior to dictatorships, they sure like to stoop down to their level.

[breslin]

You may be technically correct when you say "Jews control the government", but given that it is an anti-semite phrase, you still sound anti-semitic saying it.

Besides, Jews are not the issue here. If you substituted Isreal for Palestine or Zimbabwe or Canada, the loyalty pledge would be equally wrong. I have to wonder why you would turn this into a discussion about anti-semitic phrasing.

- - - Updated - - -



Exactly. These are pledges you hear about in Venezuela, where only loyal people get food rations. For a party that likes to brag about being superior to dictatorships, they sure like to stoop down to their level.

Whether or not something is an anti-semitic phrase is irrelevant to its accuracy. My point is actually that given that the conspiacy of "Jews control the government" exists that pledges like the one in question give them credance even if its false.

[Shadowferal]

*shrugs*
I boycott Israeli products as a matter of course.

[unbound]

How much is the Isrealli government paying you?

Don't be silly. Israel doesn't need to pay people. Propaganda aimed at simpletons is much more economical.

[roboscorcher]

Whether or not something is an anti-semitic phrase is irrelevant to its accuracy.

And the phrase's accuracy in this situation is irrelevent to people's perception of you as an anti-semite. If you're going to use the phrase in a situation where you clearly don't need to, it's pretty telling that you're using those specific words to justify a specific position.

It's like when I hear a religious person use trendy Bible terms to describe non-religious things. To me, it's a total giveaway of their worldview, because a non-believer would almost never use such terms. Another example is hearing someone say "intersectionality" - I may not know their specific views, but it does narrow them down substantially.

[breslin]

And the phrase's accuracy in this situation is irrelevent to people's perception of you as an anti-semite. If you're going to use the phrase in a situation where you clearly don't need to, it's pretty telling that you're using those specific words to justify a specific position.

It's like when I hear a religious person use trendy Bible terms to describe non-religious things. To me, it's a total giveaway of their worldview, because a non-believer would almost never use such terms. Another example is hearing someone say "intersectionality" - I may not know their specific views, but it does narrow them down substantially.

So your position is that it's anti-semitic to tell the truth?

[roboscorcher]

So your position is that it's anti-semitic to tell the truth?

It's not anti-semitic to tell the truth, it's anti-semitic tell a half-truth that appeals to anti-semites.

In this case, "the Jews control the government" is a half-truth. The US gov't is not under direct control of a Jewish cabal, as your phrase implies. The GOP, which has supported Isreal for decades (probably because of WWII and Christian beliefs about Jerusalem), is now trying to cement their alliances with dirty tactics. Besides Kushner (who is rotten, but no moreso than the rest of Trump's goons), what Jews are taking over? Trump's administration is arguably more under MBS or Putin's control than Israel's.

The biggest problem with your framing is that it has nothing to do with the actual issue: the government is holding relief supplies hostage to gain political points. You can substitute Israel with, say, abortion legislation and it would still be a massive issue. If your takeaway from this story is "the Jews control the government", you're fishing for that conclusion.

[breslin]

It's not anti-semitic to tell the truth, it's anti-semitic tell a half-truth that appeals to anti-semites.

In this case, "the Jews control the government" is a half-truth. The US gov't is not under direct control of a Jewish cabal, as your phrase implies. The GOP, which has supported Isreal for decades (probably because of WWII and Christian beliefs about Jerusalem), is now trying to cement their alliances with dirty tactics. Besides Kushner (who is rotten, but no moreso than the rest of Trump's goons), what Jews are taking over? Trump's administration is arguably more under MBS or Putin's control than Israel's.

The biggest problem with your framing is that it has nothing to do with the actual issue: the government is holding relief supplies hostage to gain political points. You can substitute Israel with, say, abortion legislation and it would still be a massive issue. If your takeaway from this story is "the Jews control the government", you're fishing for that conclusion.

But I never said "Jews control the government" so your entire point is irrelevant.

[Themius]

I actually made a topic about this a few months ago:

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...-Work-With-You

I'll quote myself

We're living in a country where "money is speech" and dictating how a person can use their money whether that be spending or abstaining from certain products is extremely un-American.

and i'll quote myself again

5:25 Hester, right there is what we're dealing with a lot when it comes to America's support of Israel. Has very little to do with "big bad evil jews" in this video the rabbi of the largest jewish congregation was never even spoken to by Hester and said we don't need it.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, this is literally the use of government force.

If you recall from my topic also this applies to over half the states... which is just... ridiculous.

[MikeBogina]

Lol read the title and instantly knew it was going to be Israel.

[roboscorcher]

But I never said "Jews control the government" so your entire point is irrelevant.

Original post:

Is it still anti-semitic to say Jews control the government when your own government won't help you recover from a hurricane unless you swear an oath to a foreign government?

[breslin]

Original post:

Nowhere in that sentence is a declaration that "Jews control the government"

[Detritivores]

hilarious that in one go they took an action that goes against both the constitution and the idea of a free market all in one swift move

What are you talking about? Texas = freedum = real america = free market = capitulism!!!11!1!

In all seriousness, nothing to see here besides conservative hypocrisy. I don't know what else to say. Only in America would we scream about how exceptionally free and awesome we are while legislating treason and thought crimes.

[Flutterguy]

It's not as simple as you would think. The question is whether a business contracted with the state can use its contract as a stage for a boycott. Texas argues that Israel is a major trading partner and they would resist attempts to undermine that partnership and the pledge is designed to protect those interests. Would this be any different than say a company that contracts with California declaring anti-homosexual boycotts? It is an interesting question.

[Bildur]

To put it in a modern, internet language:

lol wut no wth?

[Wyrt]

This is compelled speech and a violation of the first amendment.