Tumgik
#nazism
o-kurwa · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media
17K notes · View notes
politijohn · 7 days
Text
Tumblr media
Source
Tumblr media
Source
2K notes · View notes
fiercynn · 8 days
Note
Can you elaborate more on how hindutva is tied to zionism and white supremacy? I'm not trying to hate I'm genuinely curious.
tbh i don’t have the energy rn to write up an explanation myself, but here are some sources to get you started:
hindutva’s ties to fascism, nazism, & white supremacy broadly
hindu fascism 101: what is hindutva?, by the alliance for justice & accountability
why white nationalists are working with hindu supremacists, by safa ahmed at progressive
why white supremacists and hindu nationalists are so alike, by audita chaudhery at al jazeera
white and hindu supremacists are a match made in heaven, by amardeep singh dhillion at novara media
when hindu nationalism and white nationalism meet, by thomas crowley at jacobin
hindutva & zionism specifically
united in hate: the similarities and solidarities between hindutva and zionism, by ananya ray at feminism in india
the hindu nationalists using the pro-israel playbook, by aparna gopalan at jewish currents
why zionism rules the hearts of hindutva acolytes, by shreevatsa navatia at frontline (a magazine of the hindu)
in state repression and its justification, india and israel have much in common, by achin vanaik at the wire
violent majorities: indian and israeli ethnonationalism, a discussion between balmurli natrajan, lori allen, and ajantha subramanian at recall this book podcast
how hindu nationalists became best friends with israel, by goldie osuri at jacobin
india's hindutva proponents and zionist israel: strange bedfellows, by kavita chowdhury at the diplomat
1K notes · View notes
zonatcannibalism · 3 months
Text
Can't believe i need to say this but "zio" isnt a cute, funny way to say zionist. It's a fucking slur. It is used by literal nazis. If you use it, im going to assume you are a nazi. Its not funny. Its just going to let me know youre an awful person. If you are actually not antisemitic and just antizionist, DONT USE SLURS MADE BY NAZIS.
signed, jews. I dont ever claim to speak for all of us, but i think were actually pretty unanimous on this one.
492 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
The Zone of Interest (Jonathan Glazer, 2023)
340 notes · View notes
latent-thoughts · 5 months
Text
Asking everyone, very graciously, to please refrain from using the word SWASTIKA when referring to the symbol used by Nazis/Nazism. That's not the correct term.
The term you're looking for is HAKENKREUZ.
Swastika/Swastik is an ancient symbol which is holy and sacred to Hindus (and other ancient cultures). We Hindus still use it in our rituals, and it's highly offensive to us to see the use of the word Swastika in relation to Nazis.
It's a symbol of auspiciousness and prosperity, of good luck and celebration. Let it remain so in the collective consciousness. Please don't kill its true meaning by perpetuating the hateful theivery of Nazis.
Thank you.
Tumblr media
281 notes · View notes
thealiveshadow · 6 months
Text
You know, I think it’s so ironic (and fucking sickening) that the same so called “leftists” and “progressives” who were criticizing the Nazi being invited into the Canadian Parliament and given a standing ovation, are the same people spreading absolutely horrible antisemitic dogma during these times. And they say it SO unflinchingly, things like “Jews control the media that’s why no ones reporting more fairly for Palestine” or “Why are Israeli Jewish people scared, they can just go to their second home in New York hahaha”. Do they just not see how disturbing and antisemitic that actually is???? If you have the balls to spread such harmful conspiracy theories, than maybe you never gave a shit about the Nazi in Parliament, maybe you just care more about what supports your ideology and feelings than actual, living people.
344 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
Claiming The Nazis Were Leftwing Is Holocaust Revisionism.
In addition to being straightforwardly false, this claim obscures a key component of Nazi brutality: the mass murder of trade unionists, socialists and communists and the total subjugation of the working class.
Dachau concentration camp was opened in March 1933, mere weeks into the Nazi regime. Its original purpose was the internment of "political opponents", i.e. communists, socialists and social democrats. It was later expanded to imprison Jews, Roma and other victims.
The Nazi death machine, stretching from Normandy to the Volga, Tripoli to Trondheim, linking camps, death squads, gas chambers, population registers, secret police and collaborators annihilated millions of human beings.
You erase an enormous number of victims when you deny the anti-communist basis of the Nazi regime.
They were communists, socialists and trade unionists murdered by Fascists.
We will not let their martyrdom be sullied by rightwing freaks playing silly games.
817 notes · View notes
ohsalome · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
286 notes · View notes
blackpearlblast · 4 months
Note
hey, if my ask is insensitive or simply too much work/you dont want to give your opinion/energy thats ok, and im sorry for bothering you if it is. ive seen many jewish people say "from the river to the sea" is a dogwhistle/generally antisemitic phrase to use, but you used it in your golem art's text part(incredibly moving text btw.) im asking you bc you mentioned youre jewish and i thought you might have insight or thoughts to give on why you use it/what you think about the first statement about the phrase?
hi, yes, i would be glad to talk about my perspective on this! first of all, i do want to say that i think a lot of palestinian bloggers have already talked about this and their voices will always be what you want to seek out first when educating yourself. however, i do know the crowd of people claiming that "from the river to the sea" is antisemitic/genocidal has been very loud so i understand why you would want to hear a jewish perspective on it too. second, in order to explain why i think "from the river to the sea" is not antisemitic will involve me comparing it to actual antisemitic, nazi slogans and dogwhistles and talking about what they mean. so just a heads up for that before it comes up.
the full phrase is "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free!" i think a lot of times in accusations of antisemitism people leave off the second half of the phrase in order to claim it is calling for something else to happen from river to sea (like the expulsion or execution of all jews.) but that's just like, not, ever, a thing? that is said? you can tell the pieces of the phrase go together because they rhyme and also are said together by palestinians and allies near constantly. it's "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free." and i think all of the fearmongering relies on a good bit of ambiguity beyond that too. "what does a 'free palestine' mean? could it meant they want to throw all the jews into the sea?" - some zionist when i tried to look up the origin of the phrase in case there was anything really important i was missing that i should cover in this. there's like this idea that they can't really be asking for a free palestine, there has to be some kind of catch.
i think it's also important to look at the circumstances that this slogan was born under. the thing about modern day palestine and occupied palestine, on which israel tries to build itself, is that even though spatially the land stretches from river to sea, the people's experience of it does not. because of the apartheid system of checkpoints, ID-based restriction of movement, and blockades (in the case of gaza), there exist great gulfs in the land that are impossible or near impossible for people to cross. there can be a place a couple miles away, that due to lacking the "proper credentials", is more distant for palestinians living under apartheid than perhaps a destination a cross-country trip away would be for you. so i see the call for a free palestine specifically "from river to sea" to remove those gulfs and allow freedom of movement for everyone. i find very little of this has to do with jews, personally. the only connection is that the people who set up and maintain this system of apartheid happened to be jewish. and i hope that we would all agree that resisting one's oppressors- even if those oppressors are also marginalized and oppressed in other ways- is not a bad thing.
but it is true that many white supremacist/antisemitic slogans may focus more on the creation of a (white) nation than actually the jews themselves, since they have already established among themselves that a white nation has to mean no jews. so let's look at some of the more famous nazi rallying cries and how different they are from "from the river to the sea."
the fourteen words are most primarily known to be "we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." wow! i guess we could find some superficial similarities between this and river and the sea, like if we really wanted to stretch it. but personally, there's a ton of alarm bells in my head that this phrase sets off while river to the sea doesn't. the emphasis of "we" and "our" when used in this way really implies an us versus them narrative. and here the ambiguity really is present and malevolent! a "free palestine" is a palestine unrestricted by apartheid and colonialism. a "secure existence" and "future for white children" is uhhh, what does that Mean. like, we Know what that means right. but they aren't saying it. we can very easily find people saying what a free palestine means if we listen to palestinians. please, please listen to palestinians. there are so many people talking about what their idea of a decolonized palestine looks like, but the basics are generally one state, for all people, with equal rights for all, and the ability for those who were expelled from their homes in the nakba and all of the many long years following it, to return.
"blood and soil" is even vaguer. but thankfully(?), nazis were very enthusiastic about explaining what the phrase meant to them. "blood" is the superior aryan bloodlines and eugenic values that they wished to propagate and the "soil" represents the land of germany and the desire to "reject modernity and embrace tradition" by leaving urban life behind and living in the idealized countryside. (see we got a twofer here!) the only possible connection i could make to from the river to the sea here is the emphasis on the land but that on its own doesn't feel significant to me. land and the place where you live is very important to all kinds of humans all over the world. and i think another particular aspect of "blood and soil" is the emphasis of how you are living on the land. it's not just enough to be able to live in your homeland with freedom of movement and the ability not to be killed with impunity by occupying soldiers (lucky you!), you want to live there in a state of racial purity exemplified by eugenic values. in general, in nazi slogans, there is a particular fixation with a society shaped to represent these specific values. the call is not for freedom from repression, from an actual occupying colony, but instead from the considered bad actors and impure values coming from within their society. freedom from having degenerates sullying their perfect aryan nation. there is a plea to be able to get rid of those who do not match their view of a perfect society. the plea for a free palestine is, so much, a plea to be able to keep their family members, their friends, the friendly stranger down the block. that is not a fascist ideology, that is the will to live. and though i am referring to the ideology surrounding "blood and soil" in past tense because i am referencing the coining of the phase, these sentiments and slogans are obviously (and unfortunately) alive and well today. though, there is a particular irony to white american neo-nazis chanting it on stolen land.
"they will not replace us"/"jews will not replace us" refers to the "great replacement" theory, that jews are orchestrating a mass replacement of white people with immigrants (specifically non-white, often muslim immigrants.) i do not think this slogan has even any superficial similarities to from the river to the sea. you could definitely compare this sentiment to israel's attempts to maintain an artificial ethnic majority, since in many ways the potential "solution" to the "great replacement" would also need to involve creating/maintaining an artificial ethnic majority. (this is obviously not saying that israel subscribes to the great replacement theory, but that the tactic of maintaining artificial ethnic majorities is shared between zionism and great replacement theorists, since both ideologies rely on a specific ethnicity being the majority in their country.)
dogwhistles like 88, triple parenthesis, etc. rely on being vague symbols so that only those who know what the symbols stand for know what they mean. (88=HH=heil hitler, the triple parentheses representing the supposed (((echoes))) of jewish influence throughout history.) "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free" is a complete phrase that directly names its cause. people who say "free palestine" want you to know they stand with palestine. i guess if you wanted to be going for the most bad faith reading possible you could say "free palestine from what?", to which every palestinian and everyone who has been remotely paying attention to what palestinians are saying would shout: "from apartheid, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, and currently, very open and deliberate genocide!" like, it is true that if you felt you did not glean every aspect and detail of what the people in the occupied territories are calling for, you would be correct! but they are answering this. they want to talk about it. the reason i do not believe from the river to the sea is genocidal or antisemitic is because i have been reading and listening to what palestinians are saying and none of them have said they want to kill all jews. they do not want genocide, they want to go home! they just want to go home. i don't know most of this was written pretty tongue in cheek because i was talking about nazi slogans and nazis are pathetic and even more pathetic when held up against a movement of people who are legitimately trying to fight against a great wrong that was committed against them, but i just get so sad saying this. they just want to go home. haven't you ever felt that way before?
in the end, words mean things, and even more importantly, the contexts they're said in mean things. and while it's true that antisemites do hide behind dogwhistles and vague statements for plausible deniability, the alternative meaning does have to actually be established somewhere for them to be effective. from the river to the sea lacks an established alternative meaning. fearmongering from people who refuse to listen to what palestinians are actually saying does not make sense to me as legitimate definitions of the phrase.
also!!!! i'm sorry this got so Fucking long, thank you if you actually made it this far! i intentionally used "from the river to the sea" in my artists statement because it frustrates and upsets me so much to see people making such a big fuss about it when actual antisemitism goes unpunished. like a lot of the phrases i talk about here were chanted at the charlottesville neo-nazi march in 2017 and while many people were deeply upset and angry at what happened, the jewish community was not rallied around even Close to as much as it right now. and with joe biden saying "if it weren't for israel, not a single jew in the world would be safe" at a fucking hanukkah celebration i just. i don't know. the push back against "from the river to the sea" has so much to do with backing colonial and imperial interests and so so little to do with our actual safety. the concept of our identities and safety is being weaponized against palestinians, and at the same time makes it harder to identify actual antisemitism. and that hurts.
189 notes · View notes
Text
Now that Canadian parliament has ignited an international conversation about the dark side of Ukrainian nationalism by giving a standing ovation to Waffen-SS veteran Yaroslav Hunka, it might be worth revisiting the role Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland’s grandfather played in recruiting young men like Hunka to the Nazi cause.
During Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky’s September 22 House of Commons visit, Freeland was one of hundreds of parliamentarians who stood to applaud after now-former speaker of the house Anthony Rota announced the presence of a “Ninety-eight-year-old Ukrainian Canadian who fought for Ukrainian independence against the Russians during the Second World War.”
The ensuing controversy must have created a sense of déjà vu for Freeland, who is long overdue for setting the record straight about the nationalist hagiography she’s constructed around her Ukrainian nationalist forebear — if only the media would ask her about it.
Michael Chomiak, Freeland’s maternal grandfather whom she’s repeatedly cited as a political inspiration, edited a Nazi newspaper for Ukrainian exiles in occupied Krakow called Krakivski Visti, which was printed on a press seized from a Jewish owner. [...]
Continue Reading.
Tagging: @politicsofcanada
153 notes · View notes
newsfromstolenland · 7 months
Text
The speaker of Canada’s House of Commons resigned Tuesday for inviting a man who fought for a Nazi military unit during World War II to Parliament to attend a speech by the Ukrainian president.
Just after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivered an address in the House of Commons on Friday, Canadian lawmakers gave 98-year-old Yaroslav Hunka a standing ovation when Speaker Anthony Rota drew attention to him. Rota introduced Hunka as a war hero who fought for the First Ukrainian Division.
Observers over the weekend began to publicize the fact that the First Ukrainian Division also was known as the Waffen-SS Galicia Division, or the SS 14th Waffen Division, a voluntary unit that was under the command of the Nazis.
Full article
Tagging: @allthecanadianpolitics
243 notes · View notes
creature-wizard · 1 year
Text
The first thing you need to understand about the New Age movement right now is that it's chock full of people who believe that a race of tall, blond, white European-looking aliens (the Pleiadians) are fighting a war against a race of scheming reptilian aliens who exploit and feed on humans and supposedly exert special influence over the Jews.
Sounds kinda Nazi-ish, doesn't it? Sounds a bit like blood libel, don't you think?
The people who believe this aren't outliers in the movement. They are the movement. They aren't perverting something that used to be pure and good. The alien lore was always this bad, even if it wasn't always exactly identical to this.
If you and your friends didn't know about or believe in this? Good for you, but know that this is by design. You're in the early stages of what's known as the New Age to Alt Right pipeline. If you continue, it's just a matter of time before you're indoctrinated into the more blatantly fascist crap.
Get out while you still can.
418 notes · View notes
eternal-echoes · 4 months
Text
White Nationalism isn’t a traditional Christian value.
From Pope Pius XI’s Mit Brennender Sorge:
Tumblr media
released on March 14, 1937, 25 years before Second Vatican Council
87 notes · View notes
zonatcannibalism · 4 months
Text
Dear goyim: To YOU the Holocaust is a universal sad story that happened and helped you learn a general message about genocide. To US the Holocaust is something that happened to us less than a 100 years ago and we barely survived, and after it we decided that we are never going to let it happen to us again, and we have to protect ourselves. This is real to us.
343 notes · View notes
newyorkthegoldenage · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
Dorothy Thompson, a columnist for the Herald Tribune and host of a nationally syndicated radio program, was one of the few American journalists who recognized Hitler for the danger he was. Despite being ridiculed, she wrote and broadcasted repeated warnings about the Nazi threat throughout the 1930s. In 1939, she was ejected from a German-American Bund (American Nazi Party) rally for heckling the speakers. Here, she receives an ovation as she speaks at a "tolerance meeting" at Carnegie Hall, March 3, 1939, which was held in response to the Bund rally. She addressed a capacity crowd.
Photo: Murray Becker for the AP
59 notes · View notes