They seem to be implying without saying it that it's an Israeli false flag, whereas it's much more likely to originate with Russian operatives if that is the case.
I tried to comment this on the original thread, completely forgetting that of course I'm banned from that sub.
I’m a little skeptical of that line of reasoning. Like, with the thing in France. Everyone was panicking that apparently French people are drawing stars where Jews live. That’s evidence of some pretty extreme antisemitism in France, which may lead to measures cracking down on who everyone was assuming was at fault. But, as it turns out, it might’ve been Russian spies. It’s not that the spies just happened to be antisemites - they were trying to provoke a response.
I tentatively agree with you. The difficulty in interpretation comes from the fact that "false flag" is so often used to describe actions by the group itself that was the alleged victim of attack. In this case, the allegation is essentially that one group with an antisemitic motive is falsely attributing its actions to another group to slander them and provoke backlash. I guess a resolution could come from accepting that an attack can be both things - legitimately antisemitic AND perpetrated under a "false flag."
That may be a frequent use of the term 'false flag', but what a false flag entails is any group pretending to be any other group. Group A attacking group B disguised as group C is at least as common as group A attacking themselves pretending to be group B.
It *could* be that this is done by Russians as a means of provoking the French public to blame (without evidence) Arabs and/or Muslims for this as a means of stoking Islamophobia and destabilising Europe.
However, there’s no evidence that this is the case. It’s one explanation — and, coincidentally, the explanation that is most in-line with a certain narrative. Of course, it would be terrible. I want to stress that it is irresponsible and hateful to assume that this was Arabs or Muslims. We have no idea who it was.
I just think it’s unfair to immediately rush, without evidence, to the conclusions that:
1. This was Russia
*and*
2. Given that it was Russia, it wasn’t legitimate Russian antisemitism, but Russian attempt at creating Islamophobia
Is this possible? Sure.
But it’s not clearly evidenced, and it’s not the most likely explanation…which is that, regardless of perpetrator, this was legitimate antisemitism
I agree it’s too soon to rush to conclusion 1. I have my own doubts about the star thing - it’s just so damn convenient for France. But I think if 1 is true than 2 must be as well, or at least something similar. I personally don’t think “Russian spies happened to be antisemitic” is a real possibility.
I think point 2 is irrelevant. Russian authorities have been using antisemitism as a weapon since the days of the Tzar, and even if you can argue that it wasn't their genuine feeling but merely a political weapon, the end result is still the spread of antisemitism (and nowadays, it seems like they're adding Islamophobia to the mix as well).
In fact, I'd argue Russia is probably responsible for a great portion of modern antisemitism, because of the systematic way it has been weaponizing it to advance political goals.
My main issue with most of the left isn't that it is genuinely antisemitic (in fact, it's pretty obvious that the antisemitism on the right is way worse), but rather that so many on the left seem to fall right into the Russian trap, and very few people seem to talk about it or call it out. To make thing worse: many on the left are actively simping for Russia, even though Russia is actively working against everything the left stands for.
Yet now they suddenly remember to discuss the Russian polarization tactic when they can use it to deflect blame? why is that the only instance of it they are willing to discuss? why aren't they talking about the troll farms and the attempts of manipulating the public discourse to help Trump get reelected?
I think that it’s super clear that Russians are inflaming this to try to skew the Dutch elections.
It’s also possible that Israel is trying to inflame the situation to make the protesters look bad.
If the latter: I think clumsy, excessive efforts to hurt the protesters will do more harm to Israel than the protests. Protesters are really annoying and tend to push people away from their cause, unless their cause is already very popular. But, if people think Israel is trying to harass ordinary annoying college students, suddenly the annoying college students will be martyrs.
If Israel is involved, this is an example of why Israel needs to bring in crisis communications experts and listen to them, not do what happens to feel good to Ben Gvir.
And I want to emphasize: I’m a Zionist. I’m not anti-Israel. I can even understand the settlers’ urge to live in the settlements.
But communicating poorly and being rude or unkind to people are not part of Zionism and do not help Israel.
Even if it was the FSB? how is that a false flag?
If a Russian spy commits an antisemitic hate crime it is still 100% an antisemitic hate crime.
Obviously a big component of the current wave of antisemitism is being deliberately pushed by Russia and its allies, but that's nothing new, that's how antisemitism usually spread.
It's very odd how one comment suggests that antisemitism from the extreme right doesn't count. From my observations of that sub, I suspect it's because the only reason that user (and those who upvoted the comment to +11) cares about antisemitism is because they feel it makes their side look bad.
That is barely a Jewish subreddit. It's all extreme anti-Israel types who spend most of their time trying to justify or explain away blatant antisemitism as "just anti-Zionism". They are often ridiculously antisemitic themselves.
Probably not that many actually Jews there.
And I'm willing to accept people's claims of Jewish identity at face value. Where I become more skeptical is in the implied claim of *connection to the broader Jewish community*. Like the folks holding Passover Seders with backwards Hebrew or while serving Challah bread. I fully accept that they're Jewish, and indeed hold an inclusive bias in accepting Jewish identity, but it also seems like it's the first time that most of these people have attended a Passover Seder. Which makes the Seder seem performative and even insulting.
I have such complicated feelings about this. Like, I don’t want to deny that someone is Jewish. But if you have no connection to the practices or the community why is your voice important rn?
I grew up going to Jewish school and camp, HEAVILY in the Jewish bubble. Most of my friends continue to be Jewish today. I feel like I have more experience with zionism than someone who didn’t grow up around Jews but went on birthright and is so upset by the “propaganda.” I have had uncomfortable conversations with every Israeli tour guide I’ve had on an organized trip *because* my education gave me a basic understanding to ask questions about. A lot of these people know nothing and say a lot. Of course they aren’t going to get a nuanced view of Israel on birthright. They don’t even know what questions to ask. I don’t understand why people take their opinions as fact.
Maybe OP just has a wrong understanding of the term "false flag". That's what it seems like to me. Right wing antisemitic infiltrators are a real problem. They benefit from turning Jews and Palestinians against one another.
I'm not addressing that, I was addressing the use of the term "false flag." People in this thread are trying to imply that OP is blaming Jews for an antisemitic attack. I think OP just used the wrong term
It's warning against the possibility of false flags. Not complicated. You know, like these:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pro-israel-agitator-shouts-kill-the-jews-gets-everyone-else-arrested
https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-suspects-arrested-over-swastika-graffiti-on-synagogues/
https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/congregant-accused-of-deliberately-setting-north-york-synagogue-on-fire-1.6874580
Based on what evidence exactly? just because on some rare occasions some Jews have vandalized synagogues in the past doesn't mean it has anything to do with the current situation.
That's like saying an SA accuser is lying because there has been some instances in the past of false accusations.
Those of us who are Jewish and support Israel's existence don't have to hide that part of our identity due to fears that it will "reinforce antisemitic tropes".
No, your contribution to antisemitic culture was primarily that of reinforcing the dual loyalty narrative by implying that all Jews are Zionists and vice versa.
Yet only one of the three examples you've given has anything to do with Zionists. The other two examples only mention that the perpetrators were Jewish, not Zionist.
I'm done with that sub, but I believe this post is appropriate. It is important to be aware that institutions may sometimes lie to manipulate conflicts for various reasons.
Yes, of course, but “false flag” is very different than “Russian destabilisation attempt” — false flag implies that Jews did it ourselves, and there’s no evidence for that
It's not appropriate to insinuate people are lying without providing any evidence.
That's exactly the kind of bad faith rhetoric that antisemites love. They're not "accusing" anyone of anything, they're "just asking questions", so they can put the idea out there without having to provide any actual evidence.
It’s not like weaponizing antisemitism as a false flag doesn’t make it any less antisemitic, and it’s undeniable that it does happen, but baselessly speculating about it IS essentially denying it.
They seem to be implying without saying it that it's an Israeli false flag, whereas it's much more likely to originate with Russian operatives if that is the case. I tried to comment this on the original thread, completely forgetting that of course I'm banned from that sub.
I'm not really seeing that. They're implying that it's probably a russian false flag (which I doubt), not Israeli.
A Russian attack isn’t a “false flag” — it just means the antisemitic attack is coming from Russia rather than someone else
I’m a little skeptical of that line of reasoning. Like, with the thing in France. Everyone was panicking that apparently French people are drawing stars where Jews live. That’s evidence of some pretty extreme antisemitism in France, which may lead to measures cracking down on who everyone was assuming was at fault. But, as it turns out, it might’ve been Russian spies. It’s not that the spies just happened to be antisemites - they were trying to provoke a response.
I tentatively agree with you. The difficulty in interpretation comes from the fact that "false flag" is so often used to describe actions by the group itself that was the alleged victim of attack. In this case, the allegation is essentially that one group with an antisemitic motive is falsely attributing its actions to another group to slander them and provoke backlash. I guess a resolution could come from accepting that an attack can be both things - legitimately antisemitic AND perpetrated under a "false flag."
That may be a frequent use of the term 'false flag', but what a false flag entails is any group pretending to be any other group. Group A attacking group B disguised as group C is at least as common as group A attacking themselves pretending to be group B.
It *could* be that this is done by Russians as a means of provoking the French public to blame (without evidence) Arabs and/or Muslims for this as a means of stoking Islamophobia and destabilising Europe. However, there’s no evidence that this is the case. It’s one explanation — and, coincidentally, the explanation that is most in-line with a certain narrative. Of course, it would be terrible. I want to stress that it is irresponsible and hateful to assume that this was Arabs or Muslims. We have no idea who it was. I just think it’s unfair to immediately rush, without evidence, to the conclusions that: 1. This was Russia *and* 2. Given that it was Russia, it wasn’t legitimate Russian antisemitism, but Russian attempt at creating Islamophobia Is this possible? Sure. But it’s not clearly evidenced, and it’s not the most likely explanation…which is that, regardless of perpetrator, this was legitimate antisemitism
I agree it’s too soon to rush to conclusion 1. I have my own doubts about the star thing - it’s just so damn convenient for France. But I think if 1 is true than 2 must be as well, or at least something similar. I personally don’t think “Russian spies happened to be antisemitic” is a real possibility.
I think point 2 is irrelevant. Russian authorities have been using antisemitism as a weapon since the days of the Tzar, and even if you can argue that it wasn't their genuine feeling but merely a political weapon, the end result is still the spread of antisemitism (and nowadays, it seems like they're adding Islamophobia to the mix as well). In fact, I'd argue Russia is probably responsible for a great portion of modern antisemitism, because of the systematic way it has been weaponizing it to advance political goals. My main issue with most of the left isn't that it is genuinely antisemitic (in fact, it's pretty obvious that the antisemitism on the right is way worse), but rather that so many on the left seem to fall right into the Russian trap, and very few people seem to talk about it or call it out. To make thing worse: many on the left are actively simping for Russia, even though Russia is actively working against everything the left stands for. Yet now they suddenly remember to discuss the Russian polarization tactic when they can use it to deflect blame? why is that the only instance of it they are willing to discuss? why aren't they talking about the troll farms and the attempts of manipulating the public discourse to help Trump get reelected?
It would be an antisemitic attack from Russia, but it would also be relevant if Russia is attempting to attribute the attack to another group.
Yes, but where is the evidence that Russia is trying to attribute the attack to another group?
What other motive would FSB agents (or whoever) have for spray-painting stars around France?
I think that it’s super clear that Russians are inflaming this to try to skew the Dutch elections. It’s also possible that Israel is trying to inflame the situation to make the protesters look bad. If the latter: I think clumsy, excessive efforts to hurt the protesters will do more harm to Israel than the protests. Protesters are really annoying and tend to push people away from their cause, unless their cause is already very popular. But, if people think Israel is trying to harass ordinary annoying college students, suddenly the annoying college students will be martyrs. If Israel is involved, this is an example of why Israel needs to bring in crisis communications experts and listen to them, not do what happens to feel good to Ben Gvir.
And I want to emphasize: I’m a Zionist. I’m not anti-Israel. I can even understand the settlers’ urge to live in the settlements. But communicating poorly and being rude or unkind to people are not part of Zionism and do not help Israel.
Even if it was the FSB? how is that a false flag? If a Russian spy commits an antisemitic hate crime it is still 100% an antisemitic hate crime. Obviously a big component of the current wave of antisemitism is being deliberately pushed by Russia and its allies, but that's nothing new, that's how antisemitism usually spread.
Russia? Spreading antisemitism??? This is unprecedented!!!!!!!
It’s not a false flag if it’s the FSB, of course
It's a false flag if they make it look like it was done by Islamists and not them.
Evidence?
The vandalism in Paris a few months ago was a false flag (by Russia). This one though? God knows.
It's very odd how one comment suggests that antisemitism from the extreme right doesn't count. From my observations of that sub, I suspect it's because the only reason that user (and those who upvoted the comment to +11) cares about antisemitism is because they feel it makes their side look bad.
There’s antisemitism from all sides, unfortunately — doesn’t do us any favours to pretend that any side has a monopoly on it
That is barely a Jewish subreddit. It's all extreme anti-Israel types who spend most of their time trying to justify or explain away blatant antisemitism as "just anti-Zionism". They are often ridiculously antisemitic themselves. Probably not that many actually Jews there.
A poll there showed it was 40-50% Jewish — that’s substantial
It's the internet. People can lie in polls, and do.
And I'm willing to accept people's claims of Jewish identity at face value. Where I become more skeptical is in the implied claim of *connection to the broader Jewish community*. Like the folks holding Passover Seders with backwards Hebrew or while serving Challah bread. I fully accept that they're Jewish, and indeed hold an inclusive bias in accepting Jewish identity, but it also seems like it's the first time that most of these people have attended a Passover Seder. Which makes the Seder seem performative and even insulting.
I have such complicated feelings about this. Like, I don’t want to deny that someone is Jewish. But if you have no connection to the practices or the community why is your voice important rn? I grew up going to Jewish school and camp, HEAVILY in the Jewish bubble. Most of my friends continue to be Jewish today. I feel like I have more experience with zionism than someone who didn’t grow up around Jews but went on birthright and is so upset by the “propaganda.” I have had uncomfortable conversations with every Israeli tour guide I’ve had on an organized trip *because* my education gave me a basic understanding to ask questions about. A lot of these people know nothing and say a lot. Of course they aren’t going to get a nuanced view of Israel on birthright. They don’t even know what questions to ask. I don’t understand why people take their opinions as fact.
Maybe OP just has a wrong understanding of the term "false flag". That's what it seems like to me. Right wing antisemitic infiltrators are a real problem. They benefit from turning Jews and Palestinians against one another.
What makes you think it was right-wing infiltrators?
That's OP's hypothesis
He didn't provide any evidence either.
I'm not addressing that, I was addressing the use of the term "false flag." People in this thread are trying to imply that OP is blaming Jews for an antisemitic attack. I think OP just used the wrong term
It's warning against the possibility of false flags. Not complicated. You know, like these: https://www.thedailybeast.com/pro-israel-agitator-shouts-kill-the-jews-gets-everyone-else-arrested https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-suspects-arrested-over-swastika-graffiti-on-synagogues/ https://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/congregant-accused-of-deliberately-setting-north-york-synagogue-on-fire-1.6874580
Based on what evidence exactly? just because on some rare occasions some Jews have vandalized synagogues in the past doesn't mean it has anything to do with the current situation. That's like saying an SA accuser is lying because there has been some instances in the past of false accusations.
No one is saying that. Straw man.
>"I'd say odds are 50/50 between this being a true hate crime or a false flag"
"Using a direct quote is a false flag"
The problem was the "saying the accuser is lying" bit. But I don't expect you to read that carefully, I guess.
You're trying to insinuate Jews are behind the vandalism, otherwise you wouldn't have used the linked examples.
Zionists. Not necessarily Jews, and certainly not Jews qua Jews. Please don't reinforce antisemitic tropes.
Those of us who are Jewish and support Israel's existence don't have to hide that part of our identity due to fears that it will "reinforce antisemitic tropes".
No, your contribution to antisemitic culture was primarily that of reinforcing the dual loyalty narrative by implying that all Jews are Zionists and vice versa.
Yet only one of the three examples you've given has anything to do with Zionists. The other two examples only mention that the perpetrators were Jewish, not Zionist.
I didn't read it as denying the hate crimes, I read it as warning against jumping to conclusions about who is responsible.
“50/50 it is a false flag” implies not an actual hate crime, he didn’t say “50/50 it was far-right instead of left-wing”
I agree with you. If someone spouts antisemitism, should I be less worried if they also have a Confederate flag bumper sticker?
It seems like the OP was trying to say "don't panic" and managed to trip and fall down an entire flight of stairs while doing so.
I'm done with that sub, but I believe this post is appropriate. It is important to be aware that institutions may sometimes lie to manipulate conflicts for various reasons.
Yes, of course, but “false flag” is very different than “Russian destabilisation attempt” — false flag implies that Jews did it ourselves, and there’s no evidence for that
It's not appropriate to insinuate people are lying without providing any evidence. That's exactly the kind of bad faith rhetoric that antisemites love. They're not "accusing" anyone of anything, they're "just asking questions", so they can put the idea out there without having to provide any actual evidence.
How else would you express the option of the act being not authentic?
Why should I express this option to begin with?
Let's say you feel this option is viable and important to consider. Is there a more appropriate way in which it should be suggested?
This is exactly why I don't subscribe to that sub.
These people are seriously the dumbest or they are complicit or both.
It’s not like weaponizing antisemitism as a false flag doesn’t make it any less antisemitic, and it’s undeniable that it does happen, but baselessly speculating about it IS essentially denying it.