Enlil said:

The role of politics is to create these packages and sell them to the public.

---

Politics is mostly theatrical story-telling.

Zotoh Zhaan said:

This is why I generally try to stay away from political labels when defining myself. You don't want to be associated with something you're not. A good philosophical argument begins with defining the terms its using so that there's no confusion and ideas can be debated on their own merits.

---

shivas.wisdom said:

Zotoh Zhaan said:

This is why I generally try to stay away from political labels when defining myself. You don't want to be associated with something you're not. A good philosophical argument begins with defining the terms its using so that there's no confusion and ideas can be debated on their own merits.

---

True, but most philosophical arguments define terms once, and then quickly settle into the use of labels - because the former facilitates preciseness in communication, whereas the later facilitates ease of communication. The Buddhist label of 'the self' is better defined as 'the mind-body-complex, with all the implications of compound phenomena, interacting in a way to constitute an individual' - that's already a mouthful and I've still abbreviated much. It's important that people understand what 'the self' defines, but it's similarly important that I can refer to 'the self' as a contained concept in discussion.

To refer to your first post here, I think you've commited your own sin of hyper-focused labelling when you claim anti Zionism as "the languages of these Nazis". Hitler also wrote exhaustively about the Jewish problem, but I'm certain that you see the absurdity in suggesting that Jewishness is the language of Nazis. Zionism predates both Hitler and Nazism - it originated in the late 19th century, among secular Jews in Central Europe as an ethno-nationalist colonial movement - some of the earliest anti-Zionists were themselves European Jews. Yes, Zionism has since diverged into a half-dozen variations, they all still share the same ethno-nationalist colonial roots. This is not a Nazi fabrication.

Let's examine your Andy and George example now. Yes, we can certainly see how moving beyond labels, we can identify these two seemingly have more in common with each other than their fellow Zionist/anti-Zionist - but I think that going beyond political rhetoric, and examining peoples actions gives even more insight. Did Andy serve in the IOF, or did he refuse? Does Andy defend the IOF as the 'most moral army' forced into killing civilians because of Hamas? Does Andy deny that a genocide is occurring in Palestine? Does Andy continue to benefit from the Israeli institutions that oppress Palestinians? If his rhetoric aligns him with George, but his actions align him with Bob - is it incorrect to group Bob and Andy together?

---

Enlil said:

The idea that you're going to reason with people to come to understanding is wildly optimistic, though.  People are stupid.  People, for the most part, have neither the desire nor the ability to engage in nuanced discussions about any of that.  Navigating life in a complex society such as ours takes all of their focus and energy.  They want ideas prepackaged with clean labels and clean lines.

The role of politics is to create these packages and sell them to the public. 

Sure, it would be amazing if we could all be free thinkers and rational actors working toward a common good.  Kumbayah and shit.  Humans aren't that species, though. We're not going to logic our way into skipping millions or billions of years of evolution necessary to get to that point. As a result, labels are important to corral the stupid masses into their groups so they aren't in the way of creating and maintaining a marginally functional society where we're not all killing each other.

Lofty ideas are cool.  Let's not confuse those with solutions, though.

---

shivas.wisdom said:

Okay, but if, when commenting on this conflation, you frame it as 'self-labeled anti-Zionists don't understand the ideology' and 'others think anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism because they better understand the ideology' - this is making a value judgment that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism - why else would better understanding lead to that conclusion?

---

Quote:

If that wasn't your intent, what are we left with? 'Self-labeling as anti-Zionist will result in your conflation with anti-Semitism' - likely true, but I think we can go further - bad faith political opponents don't even require the self-labeling. Take the use of communism as a perjorative in US political rhetoric - it's used widely against milquetoast Democrats who have never even come close to self-labeling as such. Clearly, avoiding self-labeling isn't sufficient to prevent this - and avoiding all labels is itself a limitation on political discussion - so where does that leave us?

---

Quote:

Use labels that you deem appropriate, take the time to ensure that labels are similarly defined before getting into a political debate, but also, don't base your language on the criticism of bad faith opponents. Anti-Zionist is an appropriate term, and I'm willing to take the time to educate others on its meaning, but I'm not willing to cater to criticism that I feel has no merit.

---

Quote:

To touch back on the George and Andy example - your example went beyond labels, but still limited itself to rhetoric in order to highlight how George and Andy, despite different labels, hold similar beliefs - but your example falls apart when we move to action instead. Removing labels didn't suddenly turn Andy into an ally. How will dropping my self-labeling of anti-Zionists help me find common ground?

---

Zotoh Zhaan said:

This is why I generally try to stay away from political labels when defining myself. You don't want to be associated with something you're not.

---

RJ Tubs 202 said:

Zotoh Zhaan said:

This is why I generally try to stay away from political labels when defining myself. You don't want to be associated with something you're not.

---

How do you choose who to vote for?  Do some issues matter to you more than others?

---

shivas.wisdom said:

You didn't say this? "Whenever someone calls themselves anti-Zionist I know that they don't really understand what Zionism is." I'm confused now, because that's a direct quote. Let's go all the way back and define some things: do you think anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism? Before we get into the discussion about conflation and labels, because your initial post seemingly implied as much with the framing around 'better understanding'. Futhermore, can you explain these trends (history + trends) that reveal anti-Zionism is better understood as anti-Semitism? It might help me understand your confusing use of labels here.

---

Quote:

I'm more than willing to meet people in the middle, in terms of adopting different language if it helps to better explain something - I don't just keep repeating 'anti-Zionism isn't anti-Semitism' - that should be sufficient for those who are merely ignorant. But it's wrong to pretend that bad faith accusations of anti-Semitism aren't a widely used rhetorical defence of the Israeli state. "Drop the self-labeling of anti-Zionism and you'll no longer be called an antisemite by confused people" is blatantly false, when activists who avoid the use of anti-Zionism are still met with accusations of anti-Semitism. For example, children's entertainer Ms. Rachel has never self-indentified as an anti-Zionist (as far as I'm aware) but her advocacy for Palestinian children still had her named as a finalist for StopAntisemitism's "Antisemite of the Year".

---

Quote:

This bad faith weaponization of anti-Semitism is, imo, the predominant motivation behind conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism - not well-intended ignorance - and can't be separated from discussion. I've yet to see an argument put forth that identifies anti-Zionism as anti-Semitic (maybe you'll do this when explaining those trends you mentioned) - and until that point, I won't adjust my own language to cater to something I consider both unreasonable and bad intentioned. I'll take the time to discuss an issue beyond surface level labels, I'll avoid prejudging others based solely on surface level labels - but I won't adjust my language in response to bad faith rhetoric.

---