politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Well then our opinions overlap. If you check my comments you will find that I am a student of history. I dont know how many comments I have made about the Jewish roman wars, the state of judaism in the middle east during the ottoman era, and comparing the zealots to the zionists but its been quite a few. You wont see me citing that zionists collaborated with nazis like you just did, but I have read that somewhere before as well. I was just never sure I could trust the sources as its so inflamatory. I dont know that we'll ever truly know the whole story of why Hitler did what he did.
I disagree that the zionists came about 150 years ago. I'd argue that the zionists are the same group as the second temple era zealots, with a rebranded name. If you see any difefrences between the groups, lets see em. Zealots wanted to eject the romans and establish a judean state, which is what they did, using genocide. That state lasted 3 years until the legions marched back and counter genocided. I point this out because Nothing has changed. We're fighting the same wars for the same reasons. Same genocide, different year.
And I stand my ground on the idea that I have heard very little in the way of support for muslim people in the US media. Anti muslim sentiment is out of control, and anything that even lightly offends judaism is rapidly being criminalized, which is a violation of all of our rights, a bad precendent, and something I find odorous.
You say you're of the jewish faith, and I tell you I dont care. I'm an atheist. Your cursing and anger doesnt move me much. And if I want to draw conclusions from polls I will. I dont need to wait for a poll that shows me something like "every single person of jewish faith support zionism" before I am allowed by you to say that its logical for fetterman to support zionism in a heavily jewish district, because 2/3 of jews support the war crimes that've gone on.
Its simply math, whether you like it or not. I do think your yelling at me about what I can say and what I cant is unamerican and I flatly reject it. Your feefees dont trump my right of free speech, or my right to draw obvious and mathematically sound conclusions from polls. So wrap up all your curse words and shove them right back up your rear.
You’re oversimplifying history by equating Second Temple-era zealots with modern Zionists. The contexts, motivations, and methods are completely different, and ignoring that weakens your argument.
Saying “nothing has changed” since the Jewish-Roman wars ignores how much societies, politics, and conflicts evolve over time. History doesn’t work in simple repeats.
Oh really. Like what, be specific.
Hurray! I get to be specific.
Context
Zealots fought against occupation by Rome, while Zionists emerged in response to antisemitism and the rise of nationalist movements across Europe.
Motivations
Zealots were religiously driven, while Zionism is largely a secular nationalist movement.
Methods
Zealots relied on insurgency and rebellion against an occupying empire. Zionists have used political lobbying, immigration, colonialism, and apartheid rule to ethnically displace Palestinians.
The goal of Zionism is to establish and maintain a Jewish state in the land of Israel. Employed terrorism, murder, political maneuverings, and genocide.
The goal of the Zealots was to establish and maintain a Jewish state in the land of Israel. Employed terrorism, murder, political maneuverings, and genocide.
Are you saying they have the same goals but the "motivations" are different? That doesnt make sense to me. Nor do I agree that one is secular and one religious. The basic law in Israel was modified by the zionists to say specifically, "National rights in Israel belong only to the Jewish people." Explicitely excluding Muslims. A "nationalist movement" would include non jews. Therefore Zionism is not a secular movement.
Not continuing this nonsense conversation, but let me add some context to your dogwhistles and outright bullshit for the mods and anyone else watching. Also, it’s hilarious how you can’t cite a single thing to back up your claims 😭🤣.
Zealots didn’t commit genocide, and no credible scholar says they did. You’re just making things up. The Zealots used violence and rebellion, but nothing they did comes remotely close to the ethnic violence carried out under Zionism. If you have a credible source (you don’t lol) go ahead and share it. (For the record, they did use terrorism, but that’s not genocide. Learn the difference.)
Zionism was secular from the start. Here’s a direct quote to shut this down:
If you want to argue that Israel isn’t a secular state, fine. But that’s not the point you asked about. You wanted the difference between Zionism and the Zealots, and I delivered.
Zionism, at its core, was a secular nationalist movement aiming to establish a Jewish state in the 19th century, while the Zealots were driven by religious motives in their fight against Roman rule. The fact that Israel’s modern laws don’t reflect that original secular vision doesn’t change the historical distinctions between the two movements.
You asked for specific differences, and I gave them to you on a platter. If you want to keep spouting revisionist nonsense without sources, keep it up—it just makes it clearer to the mods that you’re here for bad-faith arguments, not facts. 🥰
Let me google that for you: According to historical records, during the Jewish-Roman wars, particularly the "Kitos War" (115-117 AD), a significant number of Greeks and Cypriots were killed by Jewish rebels, with Roman historian Cassius Dio claiming that around 240,000 Greek-Cypriots were massacred by the Jewish insurgents in Cyprus alone; this revolt saw widespread violence against Roman citizens and other non-Jewish populations across the Roman Empire, including in Cyrene and Alexandria
google aggregated results from: https://www.heritage-history.com/index.php?c=resources&s=war-dir&f=wars_romanjewish#:~:text=Second%20Jewish%2DRoman%20War%20(a.k.a.,War)%20:%20115%2D117%20A.D.&text=It%20started%20in%20a%20Jewish,killed%2C%20both%20Jew%20and%20Gentile.
"The Jewish Encyclopedia describes the Cyrene massacres:
By this outbreak, Libya was depopulated to such an extent that a few years later new colonies had to be established there. Under the leadership of one Artemion, the Cypriot Jews participated in the great uprising against the Romans under Trajan, and they are reported to have massacred 240,000 Greeks (From Dio Cassius, lxviii. 32" https://countercurrents.org/2024/03/the-new-sicarii-the-jews-face-a-hostile-world/
"The Zealots took a leading role in the First Jewish–Roman War (66–73 CE), as they objected to Roman rule and violently sought to eradicate it by indiscriminately attacking Romans and Greeks. Another group, likely related, were the Sicarii, who raided Jewish settlements and killed Jews they considered apostates and collaborators, while also urging Jews to fight the Romans and other Jews for the cause. Josephus paints a very bleak picture of their activities as they instituted what he characterized as a murderous "reign of terror" prior to the Jewish Temple's destruction. "
"The Sicarii were a splinter group of the Jewish Zealots who, in the decades preceding Jerusalem's destruction in 70 CE, strongly opposed the Roman occupation of Judea and attempted to expel them and their sympathizers from the area.[12] The Sicarii carried sicae, or small daggers, concealed in their cloaks.[13] At public gatherings, they pulled out these daggers to attack Romans and alleged Roman sympathizers alike, blending into the crowd after the deed to escape detection."
both from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealots
You see those citations [12] and [13], feel free to trace those back in the wikipedia bibliography notes if you need to.
so killing hundreds of thousands, and indiscriminately killing all romans and roman sympathizers --men, women and children, just for the crime of being Romans is definitely a genocide. The areas were emptied of people entirely and had to be recolonized by Rome. Its pretty darn close to exactly the same as zionists killing people just for being palestinian isnt it. Do you understand now why they are the same philosophy and history is simply repeating itself?
Heres a direct quote for you:
"The Zionists are heirs of the original Sicarii" https://countercurrents.org/2024/03/the-new-sicarii-the-jews-face-a-hostile-world/
So theres the quotes you demanded-- you're welcome!
And did you just cite David frickin Novak as your source, the guy who argues that zionism is only a coherent stance when done by Jews (he flatly rejects secular zionism) and calls for Israel to be a theocracy. Thats your "historian" "source" huh. You realize that your source vehemently disagrees with your assertion that zionism is secular, right? So your own source contradicts you. Thats pretty inconvenient for you, my condolences. If you need a source for Novak disagreeing with you, Here you go, from : https://www.amazon.com/Zionism-Judaism-Theory-David-Novak/dp/1107099951 "the main task of religious Zionism to be the establishment of an Israeli theocracy."
"Book Description This book argues that Zionism is only a coherent political stance when it is intelligently rooted in Judaism."
And you claim the mods might want to take a look at my comments huh, Thats hilarious. Tell me what TOS I have violated.
awesome sources! looks to me like exactly what you wrote: a massacre, huge but not labeled a genocide by any reputable source, and a zionist who wishes modern zionism was a theocracy but has written, admitting in print, that it wasn’t.
nah i don’t care go read them yourself
thanks for the opportunity to let me clarify. a few tips for an up and coming history scholar as yourself: it helps if you read the things you cite, and you might want to brush up on the accepted definition of genocide. 😊
At least my sources dont undercut my entire point like yours did.
240,000 civilians killed simply for their ethnicity by terrorist means (and kudos to you-- you admitted its terrorism) is genocide whether you like it or not. I dont need some other author to write it out for it to be true. Thats not how truth works, friend. And its why zionist repression and suppression of media and academia wont work. Zionists dont understand this.
You do care, because you are the one who brought up "the mod"s and how they should come and look at our comments, just a comment ago. Its that you utterly failed to make your point and lack the basic dignity to take the loss, thank me for the sharing of data, and walk away like a well-raised and civilized human being.
So lets summarize and close this off. Modern Zionism is functionally the exact same philosophy as historical Zealots and they conduct religious fundamentalist genocides and terrorism. You've admitted to the terrorism claim being true, and the UN and ICC substantiated the genocide. Historical fact shows us the Second temple era Zealots used the same exact means for the same exact ends, for the goal of creating an ethnically cleansed theocreatic nation state for Jewish humans only. Thanks for the conversation.
You have yourself a nice day now. I'll be blocking you now so we dont have to have a repeat of this behavior on your part.
chat isn’t this guy a storm? 😆 absolutely no regard for the HUGE difference that is a colonial power. super grateful that they blocked me so i can feel free to fact check them when they lie in the future. because im just based and anti-bigotry like that.
Haha. Liar. Name even one scholar of repute who believes this. Your credentials as “student of history” are severely maligned by this and it might be time for you to hit the books.
I would love to continue a conversation with you but this single malignant statement from yourself has poisoned the well. Ending the discussion here. 🙃
smart.
thats a quote from your comment.
so when I literally read back your own comment material to you, you say I got my facts wrong??
They are not at all dangerous. They never were. You just dont like them and are crybullying. You opened this yelling and cursing at me in a because I pointed out a statistical fact. And now you are in some sort of imagined existential danger. Time to report your comments. You have stepped over the line and violated the TOS multiple times.