It sure looks like the likes of Javier Bardem, Joaquin Phoenix, Emma Stone, and Mark Ruffalo won’t be making movies for Paramount in the foreseeable future.
And by “antisemitic”, they are still going by the hilariously outdated notion that maybe last held sway in the 90s, and that means “not sufficiently subservient to just whatever the fuck Israel wants to do”?
Um, it’s holds quite a lot of sway all the way to 2025, sadly. It’s not outdated because things are getting worse. In the 90s nobody would have agreed with that definition. Yasser Arafat was an extremely popular dude in the 90s. He won the Nobel peace prize because of how popular his work was in the 90s. But he would have been considered hands down antisemetic by today’s modern BS definition.
Not everything that is bad is from the past. Some of these things are recent developments. The strangle hold of Israel on US politics is an increasing problem more than it is an outdated past problem.
Also support for Lebanon was very popular in the 90s. Just watch a Kids in The Hall sketch. The 90s doesn’t deserve to be maligned with the assumption that all views from then must be worse than the views we have now. You clearly never lived in the 90s.
Heh. I most definitely did live in the 90s. I’m talking about how until being able to talk directly to one another at scale, the old notion of “antisemitic” mostly held sway over us and it was a fantastic way to silence a lot of/most of dissent about Israel. Back when a handful of broadcast networks, cable networks, and newspapers were able to gatekeep nearly all discussions about Israel.
These days, that definition is openly mocked, even on corporate news, no less. Just witness the exchange between Stephen Miller’s wife and Cenk Uygur. Stephen Miller’s wife tried that nonsense and Cenk was able to rebuke her w/o having his mic cut off.
Not all aspects of being able to do an end-run around gatekeepers is necessarily a good thing, of course. So yeah, not everything from the 90s vs now is good or bad, it very much depends.
And by “antisemitic”, they are still going by the hilariously outdated notion that maybe last held sway in the 90s, and that means “not sufficiently subservient to just whatever the fuck Israel wants to do”?
Um, it’s holds quite a lot of sway all the way to 2025, sadly. It’s not outdated because things are getting worse. In the 90s nobody would have agreed with that definition. Yasser Arafat was an extremely popular dude in the 90s. He won the Nobel peace prize because of how popular his work was in the 90s. But he would have been considered hands down antisemetic by today’s modern BS definition.
Not everything that is bad is from the past. Some of these things are recent developments. The strangle hold of Israel on US politics is an increasing problem more than it is an outdated past problem.
Also support for Lebanon was very popular in the 90s. Just watch a Kids in The Hall sketch. The 90s doesn’t deserve to be maligned with the assumption that all views from then must be worse than the views we have now. You clearly never lived in the 90s.
Heh. I most definitely did live in the 90s. I’m talking about how until being able to talk directly to one another at scale, the old notion of “antisemitic” mostly held sway over us and it was a fantastic way to silence a lot of/most of dissent about Israel. Back when a handful of broadcast networks, cable networks, and newspapers were able to gatekeep nearly all discussions about Israel.
These days, that definition is openly mocked, even on corporate news, no less. Just witness the exchange between Stephen Miller’s wife and Cenk Uygur. Stephen Miller’s wife tried that nonsense and Cenk was able to rebuke her w/o having his mic cut off.
Not all aspects of being able to do an end-run around gatekeepers is necessarily a good thing, of course. So yeah, not everything from the 90s vs now is good or bad, it very much depends.