Why in western democratic countries Zionism is not banned like Nazism?
Seriously, what Israel is doing today is no different from what the Nazis did before and at the beginning of World War II, extreme nationalism, illegal expansion, annexation of foreign territory claiming it historically belongs to them, propaganda using the latest technology, terrorizing neighbors, military at the center of society.
Being a Nazi is not only not banned in most countries, in some like the US it's explicitly legal (i.e. "Freedom of Speech"). That said, it is (kinda) banned in Germany, yet they are still around over here, because you can't ban people from believing in stuff.
All a state can do is to try and prevent them from gaining too much traction, and I do not feel like Zionism has all that much tbh. Israel's recent actions are very unpopulat in the west, even though most people are not even affected by them in the slightest. Many of the people who protest them probably have no direct connection to Israel or Gaza. So what's the goal of a ban even?
I can only speak for Germany, but here an Israeli sniper and alledged murderer fled the country, bacause he is being persecuted for warcrimes, i.e. the murder of civilians. You also cannot call for the extermination of anyone without riscing consequences. This does not prevent people from being Nazis, Zionists or anything else. It just sanctions them for publicly expressing it.
'All a state can do is to try and prevent them from gaining too much traction, and I do not feel like Zionism has all that much tbh.'
Are you serious? Just look around you ffs.
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
Buying a house is legal, but annexing and building on occupied territory is illegal according to international law.
if you frame it that way, no, but if you take into account the open terrorism of irguin, the murders and ethnic cleansing of the nakba, 80 years of apartheid and casual killing, and the genocide since 2023, its all crimes for 80 years. So try again with the framing of the problem.
Found the zionist! You need to read up on the history of Palestine, rather than echo israeli hasbara.
Try 'A Very Short History of the Israel-Palestine Conflict' by Ilan Pappe to start 🙂.
Unless a Palestinian tries to do it, of course.
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
Nazism is only outright banned in a few democratic countries. Even in ones where it is, like Germany, there are parties that skirt around it, like AfD. Who are getting uncomfortably popular, BTW.
It's very hard to actually ban an ideology even in heavily authoritarian countries. Doubly so when it's something that's really hard to define, like Fascism. And no, the Ur-fascism paper isn't even the final word on that subject.
Looking at America, obviously Nazism isn't banned, we have elected a ton of the fuckers.
Because being involved in international politics at the state level has a similarly effect on one's morals as the One Ring
Because those same countries were never ideologically opposed to fascism in the first place. America was a major inspiration for Hitler, namely in its jim crow laws and eugenics. Before world war 2, America loved Hitler. And the western powers are the reason why Zionism exists as an influential ideology to begin with. Britain gave the land for zionists to colonize to begin with. All of these same countries also committed the same atrocities themselves when colonizing places like the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Liberal governments have never been opposed to colonialism, genocide, or fascism.
Capitalist countries rarely enforce their policies on right wing extremism. Fascism is a guard dog of capital they think they can keep leashed. In the 20th century that guard dog was pointed east so that it could harm the communists which threatened capital then. Today that guard dog is used to control resources in west asia and hide the dirtier work of imperialism that the west doesn't want as seen on their hands. They can't ban zionism because they need Israel and zionism is foundational to Israel.
AIPAC
Nazism isn’t “banned” per se, at least in the U.S. as the First Amendment does not allow for viewpoint discrimination, however repugnant a viewpoint might be. But the First Amendment does not protect against cultural, social, or other forms of non-government backlash for those who support disgusting ideologies like Nazism.
So there is no “banning” that could take place of the Zionist viewpoint, if we were to consider it on par with Nazism. By and large in the U.S., Zionism and Nazism are not seen as equally repugnant viewpoints in the cultural landscape, hence the difference in how supporters of these views are treated. Hope that makes sense.
Nazism isn't even banned. Just look at all the fucking nazis in the governments of the world.
The only illegal group I am aware of, in the states anyway, is the KKK. And they still fuckin' exist too! 😬
because Nazis was the enemy and declared war on them while Zionists are the west allies.
Well, at least in the US, Israel “donates” money via groups like AIPAC to politicians and scores them lucrative business deals in return for political favors and financial aid to Israel, using taxpayer money.
Which they turn around and give a part of it back to the politicians in their next bribe. It’s massively profitable for both Israel and the US politicians, as well as the military contractors who make the weapons the US “sells” to Israel.
In short, Israel helps US politicians embezzle taxpayer money legally for their personal gain.
This genocide really brought home how brainwashed I was by the likes of AIPAC.
Zionism unlike the Nazis is not a threat to western democracy. They want a Jewish state in the Middle East, which is not part of the West. As long as the West is not involved, it usually does nothing or just some arms export bans on the countries and some sanctions on leaders. Currently that is happening in Sudan, which is about as bad as Gaza, but has really nothing to do with the West. There is nothing about it in the news at least in the West.
The real intressting part is more that the West is not sitting on the sitelines, but is somewhat aiding Israel. It obviously depends on the country and some do not do it at all. However even so, you see Western countries moving away from Israel. All but the US that is.
The only thing that might be "surprising" for some in the support for Israel by Governments in the West (not to be confused with the general population, which just about everywhere seems to be far more anti-Genocide than the politicians) is how it massivelly contrasts which the last decades of talk of Freedom & Democracy from the politicians as well as the long running official posture towards the last bunch of Genocidal Ethno-Fascists - the NAZIs - which was mainly justified on their ethnic cleansing atrocities.
For those who all along were suspicious of the former words being nothing more than self-serving propaganda from some Western nations to excuse them de facto imposing their will on the people of other lands, usually to take their stuff (most commonly, Oil), and the latter being the useful parts of the truth whilst the inconvenient parts (like, for example, how Churchill himself was a Genocider or how the US profited from the War and only really entered it because of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor) were as much as possible not talked about, none of what's going on is surprising, except perhaps the pleasant surprise of the reactions of the actual population (not the politicians, especially not the governing ones) in several such countries, often going against the will of the power elites and the heavy propaganda being deployed to convince them otherwise (for example, for all the Genocide-support of the UK Government and the BBC, not that long ago there was a demonstration with half a million Britons against the Genocide - think about it: 1.5% of the British population came out in a demonstration which is entirelly for the good of somebody else, not themselves, so 100% a question of Principle).
The politicians in general are and always have been Sociopaths, but on this which is a massive issue of Moral and Principle (it's hard to come up with a stronger issue of Moral and Principle than the mass murder of children), most of the population are not Sociopaths nor are they following the Sociopaths, even in those countries were they are swamped by pro-Genocide Propaganda, some of which quite subtle and using techniques from Psychology to try and manipulate people's perceptions.
What Israel is doing nowadays IS different from what the NAZIs did: the Zionists aren't yet attacking the "superior" races.
The Humanitarianism in Western "Democracies" was always performative, the least democratic the nation the more performative it was, which I why generally you see the most support for Israel in the countries with the least democratic voting systems like the US and the UK (though present day Germany is a bit of an exception to this since they have a mixed voting system with a Proportional Vote component).
Way back in the beginning of NAZIsm the European and American elites loved the NAZIs and their ideas (for example, there is a picture of young British Princess Elizabeth, later Queen Elizabeth, being taught how to do a NAZI salute by her uncle, the then King) and it was only when the NAZIs attacked other Europeans that they turned against the NAZIs. This actually makes lots of sense as the NAZI ideas of the inherent superiority of some over others, especially along ethnic lines, were normalized in early XXth Century American and European society and very popular amongst the old-wealth elites (which naturally saw themselves as inherently superior to the rest, as that explained their higher status and priviledges in their societies - they deserved to be born into wealth because they were superior people)
We're looking back at the NAZIs from the end of a long track that included a period of propaganda heavilly against them which was necessary to inspire the population to support the war effort against them - in the period betwen then and now all the shit they did came out and none of it was reframed to seem justifiable (as is being done right now for the Zionist Genocide by many politicians and news media), quite the contrary: through some of the most powerful means to do so - dramatic films - we were made to experience and empathize with some of the pain of the victims of the Holocaust, mainly the Jewish (curiously, that of the Roma and Sindi was pretty much ignored) as well as repeatedly made to feel pride in the actions of the men and women that fought against the NAZIs in WWII and in the Resistance movements in places like France (just compare the portrayal of the Resistance Française to how Hamas is being portrayed)
I have little doubt that had the NAZIs just sticked to exterminating "lesser races" (like in the eyes of just about every Racist out there the Zionists are doing), the "pragmatism" (read, treating Principles as secondary to the Economic interests of the elites and themselves) of those in "Democratic" governments would have a lot of them justifying, reframing, denying and excusing the murderous actions of the NAZIs and claiming they didn't really do a Genocide, same as they do now for the murderous actions of the Zionists.
By the way, this also explains the massive difference in the reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the reaction to the Israeli Genocide in Gaza, even though the latter is thousands of times more murderous for civilians.
The Humanitarianism in Western "Democracies" was always performative, the least democratic the nation the more performative it was, which I why generally you see the most support for Israel in the countries with the least democratic voting systems like the US and the UK (though present day Germany is a bit of an exception to this since they have a mixed voting system with a Proportional Vote component).
I don't think that there's any causal link there. New Zealand still doesn't recognise the Palestinian state and has arguably the most democratic voting system. Australia has just recognised it (same as the UK) but still fund it, and we have a fairly democratic voting system.
True, I'm a bit unsure on that front.
It's true that the least democratic (in terms of voting systems) of the so-called "Democratic" nations, such as the US, UK and even Canada are invariably amongst the ones whose governments most support Israel even against public opinion, but there are several examples of countries which have supposedly much more democratic voting systems and whose governments still strongly support Israel.
Clearly how close a country is to democratic "perfection" in terms of the allocation of parliamentary representatives matching the choice of the population through their vote, is far from the full picture in terms of explaining the posture of politicians in those countries with regards to this Genocide.
Today, Christofascism is, if not just strongly allied to Zionist ethnic supremacy, is subservient to it. Biblical passages that validate all Netanyahu actions become the most important biblical passages, for scum like Ted Cruz to say out loud. It's a common goal to exterminate Islam. The only explanation for the confluence is Zionist money determining elections is also Zionist money determining Christian pastor sermons. It started with rapture absurdity, but it's now total agreement that Jews are the chosen people and deserve every land claim. The bribery to accept Jewish supremacy does not ever go away, and supposed rapture moment where Jews are supposed to convert to Christianity, will never come.
Gaslighting the right/christofacsits to support Israel is encouraging their violent fascist support that is useful to Israel. Anytime a Jew is harmed in America, media must do 24/7 Zionist/Israel supremacy propaganda, and so the best possible outcome for Zionism.
My interpretation is that for the politicians involved, Religion and Political Ideology are nothing more than the means via which they manipulate other people in order to maximize their own personal upsides - the politicians playing the crowd have zero belief in those things and via their statements in those domains are merely using them as levers to be pulled in the mind of the common people to make them do what is in the interest of the patrons of those politicians.
As far as I can tell just about all that we're seeing in modern politics is explained by the Sociopaths shamelessly using Tribalism and Religion (neither of which they actually believe in) as tools to move the public in order to achieve things that either make them wealthier or which they are being forced to do because they are being blackmailed by people who have proof of them having commited attrocious deeds in the past.
Unlike for a normal person, for a Sociopath the consequences of their actions being the deaths of tens of thousands of babies are entirelly irrelevant - they couldn't give a rats arse about the suffering or joy of people who cannot pay them back for them making it happen, and for a Western politician Palestinian babies are definitely in the "whatever we do to them there will never be any payback" class.
All of this shit just feels outrageous and almost unimaginable to us because we're not Sociopaths or Psychopaths and their way of relating to other people entirelly without feeling or empathy is so alien to us that we instinctivelly do not want to believe human beings will behave like that - for example, even though logically and intellectually I know that Trump doesn't care for truthfulness or lack of it and just says whatever is convenient for him, and even given all that he has done so far, when I hear the guy there is still a part of me which wants to give him the benefit of the doubt, same as for everybody else out there, and just doesn't want to accept that somebody doesn't have a single redeamable trait. This is all me and nothing the guy: my emotional side simply doesn't want to accept that a person, any person, will have no limits to how far they will harm others for their own personal goals (because that's entirely outside my own experience), and this even while my intellect has logically conclude that they are indeed like that and even my instincts are ringing alarm bells about "dangerous untrustworthy asshole" from how he moves and talks.
Because up until recently Zionists weren't committing a genocide
IMO all religion that says you're entitled to shit should be banned from practicing publicly
And it would be easier and more fair to just ban all orginized religion
This is the reason.
I think there's an argument that they've been slowly committing one since 1948 or even prior, but things have accelerated recently and the world seems to actually be aware of it now.
Well, at least here in the US it's because our politicians are openly bribed by Israel.
Because... gestures at wikipedia. It's a long story.
People are still pretty sorry about the Holocaust, there's Christian mysticism associated with it, the Middle East is a rough neighborhood and Zionists have used all of those things to great effect.
Because Zionism is not per se a problematic thing let alone comparable to Nazism. It's basically the idea that Jews should have their own nation in any form or shape. It's a national liberation movement.
What Netanjahu and his racket is making out of it is Religious or Revisionist Zionism specifically. And it's at least slightly problematic comparing that to Nazism as well.
I mean, there's also the whole issue of the planned site for the state being occupied, and not even wanting to share with the original inhabitants.
Less problematic than Nazism, though? Sure.
I mean, before starting with Zyclon-B, also the Nazis wanted the Jews to just move to Madagascar.
So I really just see a temporal offset.
However, the problem is that these extremist influences are not a new occurrence in Zionism but have been a part of it since the beginning of the political movement. The question of how to deal with the fact there was basically no habitable place on earth left uninhabited to found a state in, was answered very differently by different parts of the movement.
depends entirely on how you see the concept of zionism. If you limit it to jews thinking they need a homeland, fine. It you think it means they need a homeland and it needs to be where a bunch of people already live now, then thats clearly a huge problem. Ben Gurion said it had to be on the site of the old kingdom, and the people there needed to be driven out. Thats ethnic cleansing and it has led to genocide and untold oppression and crimes against humanity. Its currently worse than the nazis because the rank and file israelis know exactly the severity of crimes going on in their name, which was not the case for nazi germany.
How do you even define that? Why is pro Russianism not banned?
What should they do after you have been found guilty of Zionism?
PS Nazism ist not banned, it's alive and well.
it is called ruscism.
"Western democratic" countries love their manifest destinies and their Lebensraums. The reason they, after a lot of infighting, mostly agreed the Nazis were bad is that they also did it to white people. Zionists are just continuing that proud tradition, now on a target they agree is subhuman, so it's illegal to be against it.
Sadly, Nazism isn't banned in most western countries.
They couldn't even get that right.
Mostly because a lot of western nations got occupied/ bombed by the Nazis, but not by zionists
The Zionists are in charge of CIA, and CIA is in charge of every democracy. Democracies not sufficiently supportive of NATO/Israel are rogue authoritarian regimes with rigged elections, that need more CIA NGOs, and media takeover, there to help.
I am not sure how correct you are but you are probably more correct than a lot of responses.
looking at russia, you can see nazis everywhere. Even the putin's Wagner terror group is based on nazism ideologies.
Even ruscism ideology is not banned.
Are you writing about Russia?
Zionism was originally an idealistic thought and evolved into something unrecognisable today. It was supported by most people across the world before. Zionism is inspired by nationalism, as was Nazism. If we bring your logic to its ultimate conclusion, then it goes to the circular questioning as to why is nationalism not been banned, despite causing so much harm and atrocity? Why is African nationalism not banned? Or Indian nationalism? Or Ukrainian nationalism? Even the history of nationalism has started with the best intentions. As had happened with most ideologies, however, they don't end well. I think even the the mildest form of nationalism will eventually end up extreme. Nationalism is making a pact with the devil and expecting the due will never come. That is what happened on German nationalism leading to Nazism, and Israeli nationalism leading to Zionism. And soon, American nationalism leading to MAGA nationalism.
No actually it had always been considered a pretty dangerous far right idea, right up until the state of Israel was founded and then anti zionists became the fringe.
Nazism isn't banned anywhere. If it were, Zionism and any other nationalism would most certainly be banned.
To answer your question, because it serves capital.
Zionism =/= Israel
Blame the culprit. They're just morally holding the world by the balls, if most western countries are christian predominantly. They bend the knee to their great spiritual grandpapa because they're run by scared old men who cling to one last fantasy. For they have abandoned all other, even humanity and kindness.
Zionist beliefs are not great in my opinion and I take a lot of issues with it, but it is the action that makes it transcend boundaries.
In the US nazism is only ever promoted
Old Zionism is good Zionism. Most of my life, Zionism was seen as good. After the atrocities of wwii, it was quite reasonable to support a Jewish state where they could defend themselves. For the next half century as various surrounding countries vowed to destroy them and kill them all, Zionism as the goal of a Jewish homeland seemed like a good thing.
But now Zionism is the aggressor, rather than defender, the perpetrator rather than victim. They have their own country to defend themselves and it’s mostly accepted by their neighbors but wtf are they doing to Palestinians? How can they not look back on their own history to wwii and not be horrified by what they’ve become?
Zionism has never been good
The nakba was in 1948. So Nazis would be okay if they only did a nakba and then stretched it out over 60 years? US middle school explanation
OP is saying they used to be better at managing media narratives that made them out to be the good guys. Social video of genocide is hard to hasbara over, but so is very naked political extremist speech. They used to be better at appearing reluctant to do offensive operations.
Europe is America's removed and America is israel's removed
Law is a social construct
They have the same intent, but there's no proof that there is a plan to really actively murder all Palestinians. Also, people in Gaza now have about as much food to eat as inmates of Nazi concentration camps had in the first half of 1940's, but the rest of the horrible torture is not being done.
So, basically, people are okay with what the Nazis did between 1932 and 1941. But from 1941 onwards, Nazis went over some line that is not acceptable.
In my opinion, Nazis were horribly evil already in 1932 and what they did back then was already absolutely condemnable, but it seems that most people in our society don't share my view on this. You are allowed to commit a genocide using starvation and bullets, like the Nazis did until 1941, but when you start using actual gas chambers, it becomes a no-no.
So, basically, people are okay with what the Nazis did between 1932 and 1941. But from 1941 onwards, Nazis went over some line that is not acceptable.
The US has always shared NAZI ideology relative to the threat of Communism. That pre-1941 honeymoon period was due to shared ideology.
All the western countries done their own genocides within recent history, and have run out of victims. But the basic colonial mindset never went away.
It must be like a breath of fresh air that, yet again, brave Europeans have a frontier to conquer and savages to tame.
That, and most leaders are being actively blackmailed by the Israeli intelligence services; and also, a good chunk of their population thinks Israel is required for their Sky God to kill most of the people on earth and reap their souls in judgment day.
Western democracies have done a lot of progress the last generations, but scratch at the surface and one will find a medieval mindset. Scratch at that and one finds a stone age mindset.
frontier to conquer and savages to tame.
I hear that but I don't see any fucking taming being done - zero countries except Palestine are active, Ukraine is occupied with their own oppression, so zero leaderships are deserving of my recognition or respect. Every single leader is either a weak-chinned worm refusing to object to evil, a savage and cruel monster oppressing the weaker or a nothing who abstains from conflict, and all need to be burned out and replaced by people who can lead.
We need fucking liberation armies
all need to be burned out and replaced by people who can lead
I suspect effective and able leaders are being selected against, in many parts of the planet, due to recent changes of economies and technology.
But even in the older days they were very rare. Societies enable sociopaths regardless of government philosophy. They always have.
I think the Palestinians are victims of an alignment of malice, indifference and arseholes. They cannot be rescued unless evacuated. And the West Bank will follow Gaza later.
Anyone who is not a spineless worm is checked by the American military parked nearby. And contrary to the hopes of many, America will be there for all the steps, and will not just go away due to issues
The people deciding what gets banned are zionists.
That sound an aweful lot like a conspiracy.
Not really. They're pretty open about it. A lot of them campaign on it.
you sound an "aweful" lot like a terrorist.
Basically, because NATO and Russia are in an economic stand-off where Iran is the key, and Israel is really the only plausible excuse for the US to invade Iran
NATO and China.
Russia is a pawn in the game now.
Because we have freedom of speech so ideas can compete with each other on their own merits, as they should, rather than ideas being forced upon people on the barrel of a gun.
Nazi was about the so called Aryan race supermasism, zionism is about the Jewish supermasism. So why oen is ok under freedom of speech and the other no?
Everything is allowed to be spoken about under freedom of speech, no matter how despicable people find it.
Oh yeah, just like an individual citizen or a large multinational corporation can both donate to a party or hire a lobbyist.
... people like you don't understand scale and proportion. Ideas don't win based on merit, they win based on mass funded propaganda and ubiquity.
So competing based on the barrel of a gun is better? You do have a point, that the majority's beliefs affect more a random person's beliefs if the random person is irrational than the merit of an idea, but surely enforcing the ideas of a minority - or even a majority - is even worse?
IMO it's because the western oligarchs are making bank selling military tech to israel.
This is it. Israel is too profitable for them to detox from. They get to test out sick new tech to spy on and abuse their citizens, they get to put pressure on nations in the surrounding area with resources they want, and just the sheer amount of money selling weapons in general.
It's one of the most lucrative grifting exercises the western nations have ever designed.
I wonder how much the "ignore your genocide" fee is.
And getting land and other natural resources, likely.
What land? The booby trapped gravel pit that used to be Gaza? Nobody wants that.
Since other Westerners are paying, it's not actually a net gain.