Spurs almost got relegated
Arsenal won the Premier League
Spurs fans have no right laughing at Arsenal after they blew their biggest game in over a quarter of a century m
But…..
The Bund rejected Zionism. The Bund were all killed by Nazis and communists. For the vast majority of the Jews of the Eastern Hemisphere, the only survival and freedom they could find -- after trying every other imaginable option -- was Zionism.
Zionism is big and diverse and complex and beautiful. Zionism is also the product of a vast, unspeakable tragedy.
The Bund *should* have been able to build an interesting and flourishing Jewish world all its own, in the "hereness" of Eastern Europe. And in a better world, the Bund would have. But this isn't that world.
In this world, the Nazi war on the millenia-old European Jewish civilization was successful, the Jews of Europe were wiped out -- and old ideas that once animated Nazis and Stalinists in their murder of Bundists have now returned into fashion on left and right and gone looking once more for the Jews.
Is there a word that describes a Jew so pitiably afraid of the current whirlwind of hatred that they choose to build a fake past to live in, just so they can pretend that Jews ever had an alternative to Zionism?
The Bund's story, like Molly Crabapple's ahistorical polemics, is merely one more data point demonstrating that Zionism's case is actually -- tragically, in fact -- impregnable. That it is a story of the transformation of catastrophic annihilation into triumphant freedom and survival.
This is a devious rhetorical trick. Labeling someone a “Nakba survivor” is designed to evoke instant sympathy and a false sense of moral clarity, but it is little more than taxpayer-funded propaganda.
Consider the absurdity: roughly 99% of Palestinian Arabs alive in 1949 survived the war and its displacements. Calling the displaced a “survivor” stretches the word beyond recognition. It is a newly coined term, crafted in academia and activist circles long after the events.
Its real genius lies in creating false equivalence. It places ordinary Palestinian civilians who were displaced amid a war their own leaders launched on the same moral plane as Holocaust survivors (of whom only about one-third emerged alive).
It airbrushes away the ~6,000 Jews killed in 1948, elevates the ~12,000 Arab deaths, and erases the thousands of Jews forcibly expelled from the Old City of Jerusalem and other areas.
By anointing the displaced as sacred “survivors,” the term invites us to forget that the Nazi-aligned Palestinian leadership rejected the UN partition plan, chose war to prevent any Jewish state, and promised quick victory while urging Arabs to flee.
It glosses over Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which explicitly invited Arab inhabitants to “participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship.” And it conveniently overlooks the ~150,000 Arabs who stayed put, accepted Israeli citizenship, and whose descendants now form over 20% of Israel’s population.
This is international grievance politics pushed by the Mayor of New York City, who genuinely believes that Palestinians should be able to “return to their homes” – a nonsensical idea designed to justify perpetual victimhood and violence.
The move weaponizes real civilian hardship while inverting roles: turning a war of choice and rejectionism into an unprovoked “catastrophe” inflicted by the intended victims. It sustain grievance and does not nothing to advance peace.
The final casualty toll in October 7th War in Gaza according to Hamas's own pension payments:
▶️50K Hamas Terrorist Soldiers
▶️20K Civilians
20K civilian casaulties is "genocide." Also, a 2:1 ratio of combatants to civilians - a ratio never seen in urban combat in all military history - is also now defined as "genocide."
If ever there was proof that modern "international law" is just ideology and antisemitism masquerading as "justice" and the "rule of law," this is it.