The United States House of Representatives has overwhelmingly passed a bill that would expand the federal definition of anti-Semitism, despite opposition from civil liberties groups.
The bill passed the House on Wednesday by a margin of 320 to 91, and it is largely seen as a reaction to the ongoing antiwar protests unfolding on US university campuses. It now goes to the Senate for consideration.
If the bill were to become law, it would codify a definition of anti-Semitism created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”.
According to the IHRA, that definition also encompasses the “targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity”.
The group also includes certain examples in its definition to illustrate anti-Semitism. Saying, for instance, that “the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” would be deemed anti-Semitic under its terms. The definition also bars any comparison between “contemporary Israeli policy” and “that of the Nazis”.
Rights groups, however, have raised concerns the definition nevertheless conflates criticism of the state of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism.
In a letter sent to lawmakers on Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) urged House members to vote against the legislation, saying federal law already prohibits anti-Semitic discrimination and harassment.
“Instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism.”
Archive link
These people must know all this does is destroy the legitimacy of your authority. Israel is committing genocide. Its happening. Changing legal definitions will not change how many bodies are piled in Gaza. The mounds of dead children cannot be legislated into something moral.
I think I know what they think - that their authority doesn't stand on legitimacy, it stands on power. The difference between now and 20 years ago is that modern Web and mass media are better controlled by them, and modern surveillance is another world.
They don't care about "moral", they think we'll just eat it and shut up.
They are fine with a few protests which won't change the outcome.
Notice how protests in the last decade or so have become less violent, while the crimes against humanity of those governments have become more blatant.
That's not a coincidence, it's a strategy of controlling population bringing fruit. People more likely to lead movements are detected and neutralized without ever knowing it, maybe through connectivity, maybe through disinformation, maybe through directing their attention at wrong things, maybe through various kinds of pressure, and I'm sure in a miraculous case where these don't work nobody will notice a sudden death here and there.
Internationalization of KGB has happened. In Soviet times that was simply a very inefficient system, so it sucked balls compared to the western ones. But now the west both gradually reduced freedoms considered normal, making such control less expensive, and also modern technologies raised its efficiency quite a lot.