Talk:Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the IHRA definition of antisemitism[edit]

A new section is sorely needed here to clarify the following:

Comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany is considered a form of antisemitism and is citied in the examples of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism: "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."

International Holocaust Rememberance Alliance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacker1968 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist is NOT Judaism so this is not antisemitic. Israel is not a Jewish “country”. Real Jews want nothing to do with either Zionism or Israel. Roleplaying as Jews does not make either Jewish. 100.40.108.190 (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
my thoughts exactly! criticism of "israel" is not antisemitism; such logic never extends the other way. its just a way to victimise oneself and shut down conversation. 24.249.169.39 (talk) 22:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism template[edit]

Is an absurd addition here, you know full well it is not generally accepted as antisemitism and claiming this is part of a series on antisemitism is baldly tendentious. nableezy - 16:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for raising this. You are absolutely right. Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany are not universally accepted as antisemitism. The related page New antisemitism is also a disputed characterization. Nevertheless, the navbox is included there, so I added it here for consistency and to help navigation between related articles, as recommended by the essay WP: A navbox on every page. This is absolutely not meant as endorsing a specific viewpoint. Marokwitz (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Having said that, I'm open to discussing other Navboxes that would be appropriate here, or other ways to facilitate convenient navigation, as I understand what you are saying. Marokwitz (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But that actually is an article about antisemitism, namely a disputed definition of antisemitism. This is not that. Please remove the template. nableezy - 23:29, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you mean by adding it for "consistency". The articles are about quite different subjects. Endwise (talk) 01:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The content of this page is almost entirely about a debate whether this rhetorical stape of anti-Zionism is antisemitic, very closely mirroring the article New antisemitism . But OK. Marokwitz (talk) 08:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Translated that means that quite a lot of effort has been put in by a few editors to try and frame the topic uniquely in terms of the asserted nexus between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. I observe that you use, like the page, the term rhetorical stap(l)e of anti-Zionism as a 'fact'. You shouldn't do that: it is one thesis. Familiarity with the topic would tell any disinterested editor that one can be anti-Zionist and make the comparison without being 'rhetorical' (Toynbee) and that quite a few severe critics of Israel (Anthony Loewenstein, Sara Roy etc) can disavow the comparison (and are usually lambasted nonetheless by the usual foghorns as anto-semitic.Nishidani (talk) 09:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Inclusion of this template seems entirely appropriate as a navigational tool for users to read about forms of antisemitism (and discussions of things that are widely considered antisemitism). I support the inclusion of the navbox. Thank you @Marokwitz. Thmymerc (talk) 12:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This isnt widely considered antisemitism, so the rest of the comment does not follow. nableezy - 13:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It clearly falls under the working definition of antisemitism which is widely recognized. Let's not be obtuse or treat this as some sort of lawyering exercise. Thmymerc (talk) 13:22, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it can fall under the examples of that definition that are not widely recognized. I invite you to read and internalize WP:NPA and refactor your second sentence. nableezy - 13:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't wish to engage in a prolonged back and forth here which I can only imagine would not result in any sort of resolution. Just to be clear, this clearly falls under the examples of antisemitism provided by the IHRA which is widely accepted by the same entities which accept this definition. This article is clearly discussing a form of what is widely considered antisemitism and therefore the template is appropriate. Thmymerc (talk) 13:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not "clearly discussing a form of what is widely considered antisemitism", that is untrue, full stop. The examples are not widely accepted by the same entities who accepted the definition. And anybody who reads that article will see that what you are saying is not true. nableezy - 14:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
'this articled is clearly describing a form of what is widely considered antisemitism'. Then read the lead at least, This article's lead fumbles to make the point that some views hold it is antisemitic per se, others that comparisons are not intrinsically antisemitic. You are espousing a POV as if it were factual or underwritten vby a large consensus (as opposed to being a hammered meme of hasbara). The IHRA definition is widely acknowledged to be a defective attempt to limit what is sayable about the I/P conflict, endeavouring to legislate punitively limits on what one might be allowed to say publicly onb the conflict. It is a political instrument, not an analytic tool.Nishidani (talk) 14:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying the article doesn't need improvement to reflect more clearly the wide consensus that this is considered anti-semitism. That said, I'm done replying here unless someone comes with an argument that isn't simply contentiously making the same statement as if repeating it enough times will make it true. Thmymerc (talk) 07:55, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may be helpful to quote from WP:SIDEBAR:
    Navigation templates located in the top-right corner of articles (sometimes called a "sidebar" or "part of a series" template) should be treated with special attention, because they are so prominently displayed to readers. The collection of articles in a sidebar template should be fairly tightly related... Note that the placement of sidebars in an article lead is discouraged by MOS:LEAD (though they may be permitted on a case-by-case basis)
    Every article that transcludes a given navbox should normally also be included as a link in the navbox, so that the navigation is bidirectional. The use of navigation templates is neither required nor prohibited for any article. Whether to include navboxes, and which to include, is often suggested by WikiProjects, but is ultimately determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article.
I think, per WP:SIDEBAR, we need to be careful about the use of sidebars due to their prominence, particularly when placed in the lead. Additionally, the article should be a natural fit for inclusion in the template itself for the template to be placed here, and I find it difficult to believe that a series of articles informing readers on the nature of antisemitism would include this article. IMO this is a good case demonstrating why care is needed when using sidebars. It is not generally/universally believed that comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany are an aspect of antisemitism, so prominently displaying a sidebar which implies it is such is problematic. Endwise (talk) 08:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ADL is a literal lobbying arm of the Israeli government. Please remove their quote.[edit]

It is well documented by credible journalists that the ADL works in tandem and takes orders from Israeli intelligence agencies. They are foreign agents and have zero credibility on this issue. State actors should not be quoted in an article analyzing said state. 2603:8081:6440:FC:EDFA:D2E3:462C:5D44 (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al Jazeera is cited here and that is Qatari state media and several journalists have been exposed for Iranian, Hamas and Hezbollah ties. If anything, AJ should not be here. AJ Arabic had an incident where one of its clerics called for the mass murder of Jews. The ADL does important research and education on antisemitism and the Shoah. SalomeofJudea (Maria) (talk) 19:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why not remove them both if multiple people have issues with it? I don't think it's fair to say "we can leave in this biased quote because there are OTHER biased quotes in the article." garriefisher (talk) 22:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Debate on whether comparisons are antisemitic"[edit]

I feel this section gives too little space to people who say that such comparisons aren't antisemitic. Eldomtom2 (talk) 18:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some potential sources that could be added to this article:
Levivich (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Chavez quote source literally does not exist anywhere on the internet.[edit]

Reference 9 (as of me writing this) cites a quote from this source. This page is entirely dead. Moreover, I cannot find any archive of this article anywhere on the internet. The Way Back Machine's first archive of it shows that even in 2007 the page displayed a 404 error. Every subsequent archival of this page that I have checked has also shown various forms of HTTP errors. Google searching the headline in quotation marks only gives results from other Wikimedia pages using the same reference. The same goes for searching for just the quote itself. Midknight13 (talk) 14:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The statement appears real (Chavez making a comparison to the Holocaust), just the translation into English unique. Here is the translation given by BBC of the same speech: Israel has gone mad. It's attacking, doing the same thing to the Palestinian and Lebanese people that they have criticised - and with reason - the Holocaust. But this is a new Holocaust.
Looks like the quote was added into the Israel–Venezuela relations Wikipedia page back in 2006, and then copied here in 2024. Probably what happened is that the quote is really the translation Dow Jones gave in 2006, and was added here in good faith, but the article 404'd before being archived by the Way Back Machine in 2007. Possibly we could replace it with an alive source/translation (like the BBC one) if we want. Endwise (talk) 09:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comparisons_between_Israel_and_Nazi_Germany&oldid=1220949697"