• communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s also not even a dogwhistle? Dogwhistles are meant to provide plausible deniability over what you’re really signalling. “Decolonize Palestine from the river to the sea” is an extremely straightforward and explicit demand that already says what it means.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      There is another saying that uses ‘from the river to the sea’ and ‘decolonize’ is not in it. I think that might be the dog whistle they’re talking about.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 days ago

      Because recognizing the slogan as a Zionist invention, which advocates for colonizing Palestine from the river to the sea, would destroy their own narrative.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        recognizing the slogan as a Zionist invention

        Clipping off the bit about freedom is a Zionist framing, certainly. But when every expression of Palestinian solidarity is criminalized, there’s little to be gained in a debate about “framing”. At this point, “Death to Israel” is a perfectly valid and legitimate sentiment. The state is rotten to the core, from its corrupt fascist parliament to its bloody-fisted imperial expansion.

        Pretending that “Israel has a right to exist” is any different than some Boer slogan championing White South Africa or a Neo-Confederate rallying cry for the restoration of America’s slave-owning past is what really plays into the Zionist’s hands.

  • NotMushroomForDebate@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is a good moment to point out that an open source alternative to Figma, Penpot, exists and has come a very long way and is almost feature-complete with Figma. It also has its own unique features.

    I’ve personally been using it for a long time for various use-cases and I’m more than happy with it.

  • Ostrichgrif@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Anyone know any good replacements for Figma? I’ve used it a couple of times over the last few years for brainstorming UI but obviously that won’t be happening anymore

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I do in fact think “from the river to the sea” is neither an acceptable or advisable thing to say

      “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an unacceptable or inadvisable thing to say in the midst of a genocide of the Palestinian people, because it suggests that the state responsible for the genocide shouldn’t exist?

      I’ll say “free Palestine” all day long but will never use the other slogan.

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        3 days ago

        “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an unacceptable or inadvisable thing to say in the midst of a genocide of the Palestinian people, because it suggests that the state responsible for the genocide shouldn’t exist?

        Uh… yes. Germany exists. Turkey exists. Russia exists. Unless there’s something about Israel in particular that you especially don’t like but aren’t willing to say in public?

        • mrdown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Urss used to exists now it decomposed to many countries, we are fine witb it so what is the problem to have a one state solution ? Israel made the mess and occupied gaza and the west bank in 67 then nevwr stopped building settlements making the two state solution a non viable solution

        • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          2 days ago

          Nazi Germany didn’t have a right to exist, nor did Apartheid South Africa, nor Rhodesia.

          People have a right to exist.

          Apartheid has no right to exist. Genocide has no right to exist. Ethnic cleansing has no right to exist.

          You can either prioritize that people have a right to exist, or that an ethnosupremacist state committed to ethnic cleansing of native populations has the right to exist.

          That is the situation. You are clearly choosing the latter. Maybe because there’s something in particular about the people being exterminated that you especially don’t like but aren’t willing to say in public?

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          3 days ago

          Unless there’s something about Israel in particular that you especially don’t like

          Not a big fan of the genocide.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Congratulations, Zionists also consider “free Palestine” a dog whistle for the destruction of Israel, so you’d better stop saying that too.

      Though at this point, hand ringing about whether people are calling for the destruction in Israel is like hand ringing about whether people were calling for the destruction of Nazi Germany in 1942.

      • Samsuma@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        How’d you come to that conclusion? Are you saying that “From the river to the sea” is distinct from “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”?

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea

          The precise origins of the phrase are disputed. According to the American historian Robin D. G. Kelley, the phrase “began as a Zionist slogan signifying the boundaries of Eretz Israel.”

          The Israeli-American historian Omer Bartov notes that Zionist usage of such language predates the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 and began with the Revisionist movement of Zionism led by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, which spoke of establishing a Jewish state in all of Palestine

          • Samsuma@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            And the indigenous reclaiming or reappropriating words and phrases totally never happened in history, ever. “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is fundamentally different from “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty”. Notice how the Euroanglo-Zionazis never utter the former phrase.

            Understand that the former phrase is more than just a reappropration to the latter, but a call for the liberation of indigenous land from occupation by settler-colonialists. It’s no dogwhistle, and it is very crystal clear what it means: not one inch for Euroanglo-Zionazis.

            Likewise, it’s very crystal clear what Euroanglo-Zionazis mean with their Lebensraum ass phrase: total wipeout of indigenous land and its people in favor of Euroanglo-Zionazis.

            • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Well yes that is directly what happened. Both Israeli and Arabic are fundamentally not English languages, so the phrase “From the river to the sea” is always a translation.

              The Palestinians saw the Israelis using the phrase and hijacked it, finishing it differently as a form of resistance. What many people get wrong though is that they claim only the first part of the phrase is already against Israel, while that part of the slogan was invented by Israel.

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                If anything, it’s a testament to why the full emancipatory slogan should be said instead of simply the first half

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        3 days ago

        “Zionism is when you don’t want the wholesale dissolution of an entire country”

        That one’s going in the .ml hall of fame, thanks

          • cygnus@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            27
            ·
            3 days ago

            This is my last comment to you before I block you for being a histrionic liar: laws can be changed without destroying a country. The USA for example used to wholesale endorse slavery and managed to get rid of that without wiping out the country altogether.

            • thanks AV@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              3 days ago

              Nah we basically did wipe out the country, and our failure to hang every single confederate is directly responsible for the state of the country today. So maybe reconsider the statement, guy. See also: germany, nazis

            • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              If you change Israeli basic law then it is no longer Israel.

              Either you’re unaware of what you just said, or you too are advocating for the abolishment of Israel.

              • thanks AV@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                3 days ago

                Also, we basically did wipe out the country in the civil war, and our failure to hang every single confederate is directly responsible for the state of the country today. See also: germany, nazis

            • thanks AV@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              3 days ago

              Nah we basically did wipe out the country, and our failure to hang every single confederate is directly responsible for the state of the country today. So maybe reconsider the statement, guy. See also: germany, nazis