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.”
Nazis: “we will fight to the death for your right to speak it!”
Divest israel: “Believe it or not, jail, right away.”
Nazi rhetoric already fits the definition of antisemitism though.
Calling for a divestment of Israel isn’t being made illegal or even defined as antisemitism by this bill, so both examples don’t really make sense.
What the fuck?
Fuck zionists and their disproportionate amount of control over the world.
Good thing their silly religious stories will never come true.
Imagine being disappointed for eternity.
Zionism is a racist colonial ideology, merely using religion as a tool. Theodor Herzl, founder of zionism, said so himself
“We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should as a neutral State remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence.” Source [II]
It used religion simply as a component of typical XIX-century romantic nationalism. It was a secular ideology until the last 10-20 years.
The genocidal world order. The civilized nations see them for the monsters that they are.
Looks like a goddamn Risk map.
Always the same map
A bit surprising that “israel” didn’t vote against it, but that would be a bit too on the nose I guess.
Wild to me that China is not a part of “core world trade”
China didn’t colonize the world like western Europe and Japan did, then make neocolonial institutions like the IMF and World Bank to preserve those colonial relations.
They’ve mostly escaped colonialism and become the manufacturing hub of the world now, but wealth isn’t being extracted from the Global South / “former” colonies to China like they are being transferred to the imperial Core.
Whiteness index map
It seems like the US voted against it because Russia was using it as a political ploy and excuse to try and invade Ukraine. (Ukraine is “full of Nazis” sound familiar?)
That’s why Ukraine voted against it too.
The United States says it was one of three countries to vote against a U.N. resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism over freedom of speech issues and concerns that Russia was using it to carry out political attacks against its neighbors.
Ukraine and Palau were the other no votes.
“We condemn without reservation all forms of religious and ethnic intolerance or hatred at home and around the world,” said Deputy U.S. Representative to the Economic and Social Council Stefanie Amadeo, explaining the U.S. vote.
“This resolution’s recommendations to limit freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the right to peaceful assembly contravene the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and must be opposed,” Amadeo said.
The UN resolution wanted to quash “antisemitic” protests very much like the ones we’re seeing in the US right now. So really if you’re against the Bill this post is about, you should be okay with the US voting no on that UN resolution.
Always the same map
Bruh literal facism
I mean, what do you call a person that performs ethnic genocide?
American?
😂😂😂😂😂
He’s out of line,
But he’s right
Hey!
Aw who am I kidding, I know my country’s bloodstained history despite my public education. I wish I could say it was in our past and that we’re better now, but we’re literally funding this exact genocide. 🫠
I know my country’s bloodstained history despite my public education.
I fucking can’t stand that this is a thing. I experienced the same thing and honestly it was “earth shattering.”
When you’re a kid and you’re brainwashed into believing “America the Great” and how we’re always the Good Guys™ always Fighting for Democracy™ only to graduate and then learn on your own how absolutely fucking disgusting we are as a nation it absolutely fucks with your head and how you trust information.
These fucking morons can’t figure out where so many conspiracy theorists come from? It’s from people like me who find out their entire social studies class was a fucking lie to indoctrinate you and then fall down a rabbit hole when they start learning about actual history… Thankfully I was “smart” enough to dig my way out of that hole before becoming some crazed Neonazi but still… Damage was done.
Hey there, one of the good ones 👋🏽
What an odd thing to say…
If this happened under Trump liberals would be up in arms. But it’s happening under Biden, so they don’t give a shit.
Democrats, Republicans, its the same picture.
Dems don’t even talk about Republicans or their policies anymore, they just namedrop trump then start preemptively blaming leftists for their losses as they tell leftists to eat dick and die.
Once Obama got in office, Democrat stans suddenly didn’t care about the Global War(s) on Terrorism anymore. They were silent on his star chamber as well. It was a real wake-up call for me.
Adding IHRA’s definition to the law would allow the federal Department of Education to restrict funding and other resources to campuses perceived as tolerating anti-Semitism.
The campus crackdown is definitely going too far. Vietnam War protestors were treated the same way. It escalated, and the cops opened fire at Kent State.
The state guard fired on students at Kent State not the cops.
The difference today is kids got guns and will fire back.
So about that freedom of speech…
What about it? You are still free to say exactly what the government wants you to say
I get the feeling a lot of our more vocal free speech absolutists are going to be conspicuously quiet on this one.
Pointing out hypocrisy on the part of the regime; that’s -100 points to your FICO score; hand over the deed to your home
That’s double-plus ungood wrongthink, citizen. Report for re-education.
But Nazism is completely legal in the US?
Looking very much so.
Thereby rendering the definition of antisemitism meaningless.
Having it in the laws as something separate from racism was racist in the first place.
And what’s so bad about being called an antisemite?
I mean, personally I’m highly again all types of organised religion. The abrahamic ones included.
So the shoe fits, I guess.
What does it mean to be against a religion? As in you don’t follow it? Or that you oppress people following it?
That’s what happens when corrupt politicians are paid by AIPAC
Got your cart before the horse: the US controls Israel, the control Israeli lobbyists have over it is secondary to that.
If the US truly controlled Israel, they could force them to comply with UN resolutions, force them to ban settlements or force them into a ceasefire. The US built Israel, but these criminals are now strong enough not to have to listen to the US or anyone, not even the UN or the ICC.
If the US truly controlled Israel, they could force them to comply with UN resolutions, force them to ban settlements or force them into a ceasefire.
Could, but why would they want to? They have a little buddy doing their dirty work for them.
How does the US benefit from Israel committing a genocide?
Does the US benefit from stopping them?
Yes. War always has a negative impact on the economy, and trust me, if the US care about one thing, then that is money.
The oil, the real estate?
I’m a little confused why this is in the news. First off, it’s just a House Resolution. It’s has no legally binding repercussions. It’s basically the House of Representatives as a group making a statement: “We don’t like anti-Semitism”. The definition of anti-Semitism they decided to point to is the thing that’s really in contention. But again, this affects nobody but the US House of Representatives.
Secondly, the vote on this took place in December. So it seems kind of late to be raging over it.
Full text of the resolution: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres894/BILLS-118hres894ih.pdf
Summary of action: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/894/all-infoIf you’re in the US and it really bugs you, I’d suggest looking up how your district representative voted and let them know how you feel about it.
I have contacted all my reps several times about Palestine and cease fire and the only response has been that they fully support Israel against the terrorists. They don’t care about our opinion.
Democracy amirite
Get it in writing and share it
No, this definitely seems different and new from all the recent articles about it I’ve seen. This vote passed Wednesday, not in December. It’s a response to the protests at universities. And it’s a bill, so it can be passed into law. I think you’re confusing two different things.
This expands the definition of antisemitism to bring critical of Israel at all or comparing Zionism to Nazism, and would codify it into law if it, passes the Senate and is signed by the President. So there is still time to stop this, and it’s a big deal, so people should be angry about it.
Honestly, this was a helpful comment. And now I am super extra charged to vote Jimmy Gomez out.
If the Israelis don’t want to be compared to Nazis maybe they ought to stop acting like Nazis
It would also help if more than a handful of people in the House knew semitic is a pretty archaic term and would include Palestinians in Gaza as well as Israelis and people from several other countries as well.
Protected classes are race, religion, national origin, age, pregnancy status, gender, citizenship, disability or veteran, family status or generic information. Nobody gets protections for genocide.
