The play is not about Israel but instead tells the story of a Jewish man preserving his family’s traditions in a village in imperial Russia at the turn of the 20th century. The performance on Monday went ahead as planned after the protest at the cafe.
“This is a performance of Fiddler on the Roof,” they wrote alongside footage of the protesters. “So, if you’re busy condemning racist demonstrations, but not this, & you don’t think they should be prosecuted, stop preening yourself. You’re happy with racism – it’s only the target that you worry about.”
The article doesn’t have any statements from the protestors about why they were protesting there. Seems like a glaringly obvious omission.
Also, it’s not exactly clear where “there” even was
A video shared on social media shows protesters holding Palestinian flags and accusing theatregoers at a cafe next to Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre of “Zionism”.
…
A spokesperson for Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre said: “The videos that emerged on social media were exchanges that did not take place at Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre. Last night’s performance went ahead as planned.”
Was this demonstration actually in response to the play performance or did they just happen to be near each other?
I was noticing that, and a suspicious lack of reason for why this play would be singled out. Those kinds of omission make this super sketchy imo, it often indicates not that the protestors had no point or were antisemitic, but that they had a point and the article is withholding it to paint them as antisemites. Hopefully there are first hand sources or less biased news articles that explain it
Also, Palestinians are Semites…
That’s not what antisemitism means. This is like thinking that antipasto means someone is opposed to Pasto. Two different words.
Not a good example. Anti = before, pasto = meal. Antipasto is what you eat before the main dish. Whether people have meant antisemitism to mean specifically Jewish persons (a bad reading), the fact remains that Arabs are Semites and Palestinians are Arabs.
This article has nothing to do with Semites. You are wandering down a pointless thought experiment, and likely attempting to derail the conversation. I can understand your confusion; antisemitism as a word is historically derived from the same root as Semite, much as “antipasto” and “pastor” are derived from the same Latin root, although they have no common meaning today. Antisemitism is and has always been a specific prejudice against Jews.
Merriam-Webster | Oxford | Cambridge | Dictionary.com | Collins | American Heritage | The Atlantic (article)
You are wandering down a pointless thought experiment, and likely attempting to derail the conversation.
That was something you just made up.
If you want to throw a definition at me that shows that antisemitism only applies to Jewish persons, then I can just as easily show you a definition that the word “literally” now means “really a lot” as in “I literally died when I heard that”. Language use changes.
What on earth are you talking about? You give me an awful lot of credit if you think I made up EVERY dictionary. I don’t think I missed any except for the community forums like wiktionary and urbandictionary. Of course language changes. That’s why professional linguists are employed by professional dictionaries to study the language and why words are frequently added or changed. That doesn’t mean words mean whatever you feel like at the moment.
You understood the use of the word in the article. You are trying to derail the conversation to make it about etymology rather than the subject of the news. You are wasting my time, as I’ve already sent you links to SIX dictionaries and an article in a major publication. You sent nothing but your personal feelings.
Just as an fyi it’s first use is in 1881 as interchangeably anti Judaic and anti semitic.
The use of anti semitic to mean anti Judaic is in fact bigoted as fuck. The word is literally taken from a racist who thought openly that Arabs were lesser than a Jew and didn’t care he was throwing them under the bus right alongside Jews. Just say anti Judaic since it’s actually accurate to an inarguable level and doesn’t make some weird bigoted class system.
This hilarious part is that I am actually a linguist. But you’re obviously sensitive to this topic so I’ll walk away.
How is that relevant?
Because the play involved Jewish protagonists even though it had nothing to do with Israel or Palestine? That’s the point.
Pro-Palestinian protests are justified, but when they do things like this or things like defacing the statue of Anne Frank, they are clearly being appropriated by those who say Zionism so they can avoid the antisemitism label.
There’s a second layer of heavy irony here when you look at what led to the Zionist movement in the first place.
Jewish persecution across Europe had always been a thing, but following the Russian revolution, there were pogroms of Jews, who were scapegoated by Tsar supporters as responsible for the revolution.
This was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It led a prominent Jewish thinker/author to conclude that Jews would never have safety or security unless they had their own country. Simultaneously, Jewish culture was undergoing changes and enlightenment at the time. All of this taken together is what gave rise to a powerful Zionist movement.
Fiddler of the Roof is the last thing anyone should protest, because preserving Jewish culture in Russia and hostilities from Russia towards it are what led to Israel in the first place!
I think it would be disingenuous to claim there aren’t a lot of antisemites involved in Pro-Palestinian protests.
Depends how you quantify “a lot”. More then none, much less than a majority.
It’s an uneven distribution, like the post demonstrates.
Uneven with what?
The challenge with the left is that any attempt to call out that antisemitism or those individuals is seen as an attempt to undermine the entire movement.
I would love to see a free and safe Palestine alongside a free and safe Israel. Some will accuse me of being hateful or at least delusional for wishing for peaceful co-existence.
The problem is (until recently) Zionists used soothing words about a two state solution while building illegal settlements in the West Bank and enforcing a brutal apartheid.
The only solution is one state with equal rights for all. But that is the one solution no one in the West is talking about because it goes against the ethno state’s raison d’etre.
If Isreal gets it’s way, it’ll be 1 state, but we won’t like how that sausage gets made.
Yup. The important part of that previous poster’s statement is with equal rights for all. Israel wants one-state but not that part, which is basically what they have now.
The real solution is a no-state solution.
It would be disingenuous to claim that antisemitism isn’t being weaponised by Zionists and their allies to muzzle free speech.
Both are true, so why do you seem to suggest they are mutually exclusive?
Because only one of those is given currency by Corporate media.
My definition of truth tries to be objective, not subjective to wanting to dismiss something because Corporate media pushes it.
How many articles have you seen from mainstream media suggesting that anti semitism accusations are just cover for silencing Pro Palestinian voices?
Now compare that to the number of articles saying that Palestinians supporters in the West are Hamas supporters, hate marches, anti semites and Iranian backed.
The narrative is hard to miss once you spot it.
I don’t know whether or not they’re antisemitic, but they do need to read the fucking room.
It is absolutely antisemitic. Fiddler on the Roof is about the Jewish culture and has nothing to do with Zionism or Israel.
This would be like protesting against Saudi Arabia actions at an Eid festival.
I’m Jewish (I’m even a mod in our Jewish community here on lemmy.world) and I am very sensitive to antisemitism, but there is also a lot of ignorance which you can call a form of soft bigotry if you like, but it does not rise to something I would consider antisemitism.
It could very well be that this was a case of a bunch of ignorant people.
Someone else suggested (based on the article itself) that it may have been coincidental and the protest just happened to be in the vicinity of the musical.
Or they were a bunch of antisemites.
I don’t feel like I have enough information to judge.
While we’re all tip-toeing around the criticize Israel minefield, remember that the Zionists don’t pay any attention to these rules. They’ll couch Israeli policy in Judaism as it suits them. And they’ll raise antisemitism as a bludgeon and the Shoah as a shield.
It’s a big disadvantage when only one side is nervous about appearing as a racist monster while the other is breaking new ground in bigotry and monstrosity.
Who is tip-toeing around the criticize Israel minefield? Criticize Israel all you like, just read the fucking room when you do it.
That’s pretty stupid.
Morons. I support the other pro-Palestinian protests.
People are dying in a literal genocide and this garbage gets upvoted?
Oh shit a protest was near a fucking play, stop the press who cares about genocide against the Palestinians let’s focus on bogus claims of antisemitism instead.
This is an obvious case of trying to tar pro-Palestine supporters as antisemitic, same as has been done every other day by the media and zionists.
Are performances about Nakba allowed in Israel? Asking for a friend.
I don’t think FelixCress is arguing in good faith, but to answer their question, yes.
The film Farha was shown in the Israeli town Jaffa, to much debate.
And, to quote the article you linked:
“It’s crazy that Netflix decided to stream a movie whose whole purpose is to create a false pretence and incite against Israeli soldiers,” said Israel’s outgoing finance minister, Avigdor Lieberman, in a statement. Lieberman also said he would look at withdrawing state funding from Al Saraya theatre in the Arab-majority town of Jaffa, which screened the film.
Now go figure.
This was in London and has nothing to do with Israel whatsoever, so how is that relevant?
So, are performances about Nakba allowed in Israel?
I have no idea. Again, how is this relevant?
Do you think all Jews are Israeli? Do you think Fiddler on the Roof has an all-Jewish cast? Do you think it’s about Israel?
It is about an individual against the oppressive state. You know, like Palestinians in Israel 🙄
So, what about performances about Nakba? I will give you a hint - organisers of such performances have their funding removed and may be persecuted in “democratic” Israel. Go figure.
Again- this is a musical in London about Jews in Russia in the early 20th century.
Please answer my questions:
Do you think all Jews are Israeli?
Do you think this production of Fiddler on the Roof has an all-Jewish cast?
Do you think it’s about Israel?
So, are performances about Nakba allowed in Israel?
You have one last chance here to explain what that has to do with this before you get banned for trolling.
The Independent - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Independent:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
