Summary
Sen. John Fetterman faced backlash from progressives after his first post on Truth Social calling the hush-money case against Trump “bullshit” and suggested pardons for both Trump and Hunter Biden.
Fetterman reiterated his stance from recent interviews, arguing such cases erode public trust in institutions.
The response has been divisive, with Trump supporters and progressives both criticizing him.
Fetterman’s broader shifts, including support for Israel and mocking climate activists, have alienated some Democratic supporters while gaining him favor among conservatives.
You’re oversimplifying history by equating Second Temple-era zealots with modern Zionists. The contexts, motivations, and methods are completely different, and ignoring that weakens your argument.
Saying “nothing has changed” since the Jewish-Roman wars ignores how much societies, politics, and conflicts evolve over time. History doesn’t work in simple repeats.
Oh really. Like what, be specific.
Hurray! I get to be specific.
Context
Zealots fought against occupation by Rome, while Zionists emerged in response to antisemitism and the rise of nationalist movements across Europe.
Motivations
Zealots were religiously driven, while Zionism is largely a secular nationalist movement.
Methods
Zealots relied on insurgency and rebellion against an occupying empire. Zionists have used political lobbying, immigration, colonialism, and apartheid rule to ethnically displace Palestinians.
The goal of Zionism is to establish and maintain a Jewish state in the land of Israel. Employed terrorism, murder, political maneuverings, and genocide.
The goal of the Zealots was to establish and maintain a Jewish state in the land of Israel. Employed terrorism, murder, political maneuverings, and genocide.
Are you saying they have the same goals but the “motivations” are different? That doesnt make sense to me. Nor do I agree that one is secular and one religious. The basic law in Israel was modified by the zionists to say specifically, “National rights in Israel belong only to the Jewish people.” Explicitely excluding Muslims. A “nationalist movement” would include non jews. Therefore Zionism is not a secular movement.
Not continuing this nonsense conversation, but let me add some context to your dogwhistles and outright bullshit for the mods and anyone else watching. Also, it’s hilarious how you can’t cite a single thing to back up your claims 😭🤣.
Zealots didn’t commit genocide, and no credible scholar says they did. You’re just making things up. The Zealots used violence and rebellion, but nothing they did comes remotely close to the ethnic violence carried out under Zionism. If you have a credible source (you don’t lol) go ahead and share it. (For the record, they did use terrorism, but that’s not genocide. Learn the difference.)
Zionism was secular from the start. Here’s a direct quote to shut this down:
If you want to argue that Israel isn’t a secular state, fine. But that’s not the point you asked about. You wanted the difference between Zionism and the Zealots, and I delivered.
Zionism, at its core, was a secular nationalist movement aiming to establish a Jewish state in the 19th century, while the Zealots were driven by religious motives in their fight against Roman rule. The fact that Israel’s modern laws don’t reflect that original secular vision doesn’t change the historical distinctions between the two movements.
You asked for specific differences, and I gave them to you on a platter. If you want to keep spouting revisionist nonsense without sources, keep it up—it just makes it clearer to the mods that you’re here for bad-faith arguments, not facts. 🥰
Haha. Liar. Name even one scholar of repute who believes this. Your credentials as “student of history” are severely maligned by this and it might be time for you to hit the books.
I would love to continue a conversation with you but this single malignant statement from yourself has poisoned the well. Ending the discussion here. 🙃
smart.