Lemmy.world reportedly bans people for being anti-Zionist. At the same time, numerous human rights organizations have documented that Zionist policies and actions amount to crimes against humanity (e.g., forced displacement, collective punishment, apartheid).
If banning opposition to crimes against humanity is itself anti-humanity, doesn’t that make lemmy.world complicit? How do you reconcile defending a platform that silences critics while atrocities continue?
I completely agree. There was an analogy used at work some years ago. If we decided to call a dogs tail a leg, would that mean that all dogs have five legs? The answer is ridiculously simple. Dogs have four legs and a tail. The names used make no difference. In this case, if Israel is committing genocidal acts, then that is just a straight fact. Renaming objection as anti-Semitic does not take away the fact of the genocide.