Ben Spielberg
@benspielberg.bsky.social
Co-founder, http://34justice.com. 🌹
People who want to address actual antisemitism don’t use false antisemitism allegations to shield Israel from criticism.
And if you worry that hearing the truth about Israel makes some kids feel unsafe, maybe you should reflect on how Israel’s mass murder campaign makes other kids feel.
And if you worry that hearing the truth about Israel makes some kids feel unsafe, maybe you should reflect on how Israel’s mass murder campaign makes other kids feel.
July 9, 2025 at 6:28 AM
People who want to address actual antisemitism don’t use false antisemitism allegations to shield Israel from criticism.
And if you worry that hearing the truth about Israel makes some kids feel unsafe, maybe you should reflect on how Israel’s mass murder campaign makes other kids feel.
And if you worry that hearing the truth about Israel makes some kids feel unsafe, maybe you should reflect on how Israel’s mass murder campaign makes other kids feel.
Antisemitism, like racism and sexism, is a real problem. California law already protects students from these forms of discrimination. It does not & should not protect students from hearing perspectives critical of any country, or from hearing widely accepted terms applied to a country & its actions.
July 9, 2025 at 6:18 AM
Antisemitism, like racism and sexism, is a real problem. California law already protects students from these forms of discrimination. It does not & should not protect students from hearing perspectives critical of any country, or from hearing widely accepted terms applied to a country & its actions.
One of the things @scottwiener.bsky.social’s bill correctly defines as antisemitic: “Collective blame of Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli government.” But it’s folks like Wiener who make this more likely when they insist Jewish identity and support for Israel are intertwined!
July 9, 2025 at 6:06 AM
One of the things @scottwiener.bsky.social’s bill correctly defines as antisemitic: “Collective blame of Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli government.” But it’s folks like Wiener who make this more likely when they insist Jewish identity and support for Israel are intertwined!
Here are some of the things @scottwiener.bsky.social’s bill claims to be antisemitic:
-equating…Israelis with Nazis or Nazi Germany”
-“denigration of people who believe Zionism is inherent to Jewish identity”
-“denying the right of Israel to exist”
But none of these is bigoted nor discriminatory!
-equating…Israelis with Nazis or Nazi Germany”
-“denigration of people who believe Zionism is inherent to Jewish identity”
-“denying the right of Israel to exist”
But none of these is bigoted nor discriminatory!
July 9, 2025 at 6:02 AM
Here are some of the things @scottwiener.bsky.social’s bill claims to be antisemitic:
-equating…Israelis with Nazis or Nazi Germany”
-“denigration of people who believe Zionism is inherent to Jewish identity”
-“denying the right of Israel to exist”
But none of these is bigoted nor discriminatory!
-equating…Israelis with Nazis or Nazi Germany”
-“denigration of people who believe Zionism is inherent to Jewish identity”
-“denying the right of Israel to exist”
But none of these is bigoted nor discriminatory!
It’s also true, of course, that exercising power can have potential downsides. I’ve always noted that. Take unions when they strike, for example. Striking has real cons! But it’s also an important leverage point. The principle here is pretty straightforward.
November 7, 2023 at 4:06 AM
It’s also true, of course, that exercising power can have potential downsides. I’ve always noted that. Take unions when they strike, for example. Striking has real cons! But it’s also an important leverage point. The principle here is pretty straightforward.
One way a progressive bloc could exercise power, as is always true, is by making their support conditional on something (opposing genocide would be a very low bar, one might think). This is true in presidential elections and in a variety of other contexts.
November 7, 2023 at 4:04 AM
One way a progressive bloc could exercise power, as is always true, is by making their support conditional on something (opposing genocide would be a very low bar, one might think). This is true in presidential elections and in a variety of other contexts.
In any case, I’m not doing a “bit.” A friend of mine urged people to remember that, even though Biden is supporting genocide, we should remember that Trump is worse. I felt it was important to note that this type of commentary/philosophy can make it harder to stop genocides from occurring.
November 6, 2023 at 11:37 PM
In any case, I’m not doing a “bit.” A friend of mine urged people to remember that, even though Biden is supporting genocide, we should remember that Trump is worse. I felt it was important to note that this type of commentary/philosophy can make it harder to stop genocides from occurring.
I could say the same to you! We’d be much better off if there was less hand-wringing over a legitimate and important strategy discussion in the case where one recognizes that a progressive bloc could have power, and I think both recent and longer-term history reflect that.
November 6, 2023 at 11:30 PM
I could say the same to you! We’d be much better off if there was less hand-wringing over a legitimate and important strategy discussion in the case where one recognizes that a progressive bloc could have power, and I think both recent and longer-term history reflect that.
Hey, like I said, I wish you were right. I’ve seen far too much of it not being the case (the minimum wage is one of my favorite examples) to agree to disagree on it, though I appreciate you hearing me out and am fine to close our current conversation on it 🙂.
November 6, 2023 at 9:02 PM
Hey, like I said, I wish you were right. I’ve seen far too much of it not being the case (the minimum wage is one of my favorite examples) to agree to disagree on it, though I appreciate you hearing me out and am fine to close our current conversation on it 🙂.
It’s not a strawman, though I wish it was - it’s a philosophy that is predominant in a lot of spheres of influence in the party. It is a huge impediment to the policies millions of people need.
November 6, 2023 at 8:53 PM
It’s not a strawman, though I wish it was - it’s a philosophy that is predominant in a lot of spheres of influence in the party. It is a huge impediment to the policies millions of people need.
I agree that for some people it’s due in part to their perception that they tried things in the past that didn’t work. Another piece of it is that they’re surrounded by powerful people with bad politics and it’s a natural tendency to start believing things when you’re beat over the head with them.
November 6, 2023 at 8:52 PM
I agree that for some people it’s due in part to their perception that they tried things in the past that didn’t work. Another piece of it is that they’re surrounded by powerful people with bad politics and it’s a natural tendency to start believing things when you’re beat over the head with them.
Many of them don’t realize they are doing it. They will just tell you that reality dictates that they must do something or that something is unchangeable even when that isn’t the case. You can understand why many of them feel that way after losing fights, but it seriously impedes progress.
November 6, 2023 at 8:47 PM
Many of them don’t realize they are doing it. They will just tell you that reality dictates that they must do something or that something is unchangeable even when that isn’t the case. You can understand why many of them feel that way after losing fights, but it seriously impedes progress.
Having worked in Democratic politics, I can assure you that it is common for even good people (and you are right that there are many people in Democratic politics who do not fit that description) to reflexively play in the political sandbox they see as handed to them rather than trying to change it.
November 6, 2023 at 8:45 PM
Having worked in Democratic politics, I can assure you that it is common for even good people (and you are right that there are many people in Democratic politics who do not fit that description) to reflexively play in the political sandbox they see as handed to them rather than trying to change it.
Except - and this is my point - there is a big difference between accepting not-great options that are handed to you and recognizing that you don’t have to do that and can shift the options. Doesn’t mean you’ll always be successful, but political reality is not static. You help create it.
November 6, 2023 at 8:02 PM
Except - and this is my point - there is a big difference between accepting not-great options that are handed to you and recognizing that you don’t have to do that and can shift the options. Doesn’t mean you’ll always be successful, but political reality is not static. You help create it.
I don’t know where you got the first quote from - I certainly haven’t argued that it’s bad to encourage people to vote in every election - but I’m glad we agree on the point we are discussing!
November 6, 2023 at 7:57 PM
I don’t know where you got the first quote from - I certainly haven’t argued that it’s bad to encourage people to vote in every election - but I’m glad we agree on the point we are discussing!
I agree that the strategy has not been used effectively, in part because a large social justice voting bloc has never attempted to use it. Which is in part because members of the social justice bloc attack people who use it instead of recognizing that it’s a legit debate. Which is the whole point!
November 6, 2023 at 7:49 PM
I agree that the strategy has not been used effectively, in part because a large social justice voting bloc has never attempted to use it. Which is in part because members of the social justice bloc attack people who use it instead of recognizing that it’s a legit debate. Which is the whole point!
I agree that it makes sense for a politician to ignore you if you have conveyed you will not support them no matter what. If your support is conditional, that is not the case. And just like unconditional support may get you crumbs, unconditional opposition may decrease their chances of taking power.
November 6, 2023 at 7:46 PM
I agree that it makes sense for a politician to ignore you if you have conveyed you will not support them no matter what. If your support is conditional, that is not the case. And just like unconditional support may get you crumbs, unconditional opposition may decrease their chances of taking power.
I of course am not talking about anyone with incoherent or fringe views.
What corporate politicians do in real life is throw as few crumbs at social justice advocates as possible to mitigate the likelihood of them defecting. Because social justice advocates don’t use their bargaining power.
What corporate politicians do in real life is throw as few crumbs at social justice advocates as possible to mitigate the likelihood of them defecting. Because social justice advocates don’t use their bargaining power.
November 6, 2023 at 7:44 PM
I of course am not talking about anyone with incoherent or fringe views.
What corporate politicians do in real life is throw as few crumbs at social justice advocates as possible to mitigate the likelihood of them defecting. Because social justice advocates don’t use their bargaining power.
What corporate politicians do in real life is throw as few crumbs at social justice advocates as possible to mitigate the likelihood of them defecting. Because social justice advocates don’t use their bargaining power.
I think what happens in reality is that a lot of people who profess to be progressive call social juice advocates who have an activist, hardline approach to certain political questions “lazy and dumb” instead of trying to work together with people who have legit reasons for different strategy.
November 6, 2023 at 7:41 PM
I think what happens in reality is that a lot of people who profess to be progressive call social juice advocates who have an activist, hardline approach to certain political questions “lazy and dumb” instead of trying to work together with people who have legit reasons for different strategy.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying it can’t be the case that it causes harm and does not come with leverage; the ideas are contradictory. Does the vote or voting bloc in question matter? If it does, there’s power there to decide how to use. (If it doesn’t, then the vote is just symbolic anyway.)
November 6, 2023 at 7:36 PM
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying it can’t be the case that it causes harm and does not come with leverage; the ideas are contradictory. Does the vote or voting bloc in question matter? If it does, there’s power there to decide how to use. (If it doesn’t, then the vote is just symbolic anyway.)
Either general election votes matter or they don’t. If they don’t, nobody should care either way. If they do, there’s often a choice between leverage and a lesser-evil in that context.
The principle is much more general, though. Leverage is important, and too many people advocate against using it.
The principle is much more general, though. Leverage is important, and too many people advocate against using it.
November 6, 2023 at 7:32 PM
Either general election votes matter or they don’t. If they don’t, nobody should care either way. If they do, there’s often a choice between leverage and a lesser-evil in that context.
The principle is much more general, though. Leverage is important, and too many people advocate against using it.
The principle is much more general, though. Leverage is important, and too many people advocate against using it.
I think that’s actually a much better description of your replies than mine. I directly responded to both what you explicitly said and what you implied, noting the multiple reasons SCOTUS is how it is and the inaccuracy of your claim about democratic politics and lesser-evilsism.
November 6, 2023 at 7:25 PM
I think that’s actually a much better description of your replies than mine. I directly responded to both what you explicitly said and what you implied, noting the multiple reasons SCOTUS is how it is and the inaccuracy of your claim about democratic politics and lesser-evilsism.
The point I am making and have made many times before is that you are unable to put pressure on Democrats effectively in many cases if they know that you will always support them at the end of the day. That needs to be acknowledged. Your philosophy is coherent but it also comes with less leverage.
November 6, 2023 at 7:18 PM
The point I am making and have made many times before is that you are unable to put pressure on Democrats effectively in many cases if they know that you will always support them at the end of the day. That needs to be acknowledged. Your philosophy is coherent but it also comes with less leverage.