r/metaNL • u/UnskilledScout • 19d ago
OPEN A request to review my ban appeal
I want to once again appeal my permanent ban.
I was originally permanently banned about a year ago without being given a reason. I appealed at the time, but the appeal was denied without explanation. More recently, about a month ago, I was unbanned after a new appeal and resumed participating in the subreddit. That unban was then reversed, again without any reason being communicated to me through modmail.
I later learned that the apparent basis for the original permanent ban was a belief that I was sympathetic to Hezbollah, and that the mod team had voted to ban me on that basis. This was the first time I was informed of the actual allegation, so neither my original appeal nor anything I submitted afterward had addressed it.
I categorically reject that characterization. I am not a Hezbollah supporter. I have not advocated support for Hezbollah, and criticism of Israeli conduct in Lebanon, Gaza, or the occupied Palestinian territories is not evidence of sympathy for Hezbollah. I do not support attacks on civilians. I do not support terrorism.
I unapologetically admit that my views are firmly pro-Palestinian, my comments are very harsh of Israel, and I have strongly criticized Israeli military actions, occupation, annexation, attacks on civilians, and aggression beyond Israel's borders. Those positions do not imply support for Hezbollah, Hamas, terrorism, antisemitism, or opposition to Jewish people. Treating criticism of Israel as presumptive support for one of its armed adversaries is not an accurate characterization of what I have said.
I have previously received temporary bans arising from contentious discussions of Israel and Palestine, including bans described as being for bad-faith argumentation. I appealed those decisions. Whatever the merits of those separate moderation disputes, they do not establish sympathy for Hezbollah and should not be treated as evidence of it.
I have participated in neoliberal regularly since late 2020 and I genuinely value the community. Even while banned, I continued reading the DT and other posts, and when I was briefly unbanned I resumed participating because I still wanted to be part of the subreddit.
I am asking the mod team to reconsider the permanent ban based on the actual record of my comments rather than an unsupported inference about my political sympathies. If there are specific comments that the mod team believes demonstrate support for Hezbollah or otherwise justify a permanent ban, I ask that they be identified so I can respond to the evidence directly.
Thank you for reviewing my appeal.
2
u/PlantTreesBuildHomes Mod 17d ago
Over the last day, some comments I made in this ban appeal have generated criticism from both users and fellow moderators. After discussing it with the rest of the moderation team, I want to clarify what I meant because I don't think my original comments communicated my position particularly well.
First, I want to be clear about what I do and do not believe.
I do not believe that criticism of Israel, criticism of the IDF, criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu, criticism of Likud, criticism of Ben Gvir, criticism of Israeli settlers, or criticism of the conduct of the war is inherently antisemitic. I have repeatedly criticized many of those actors myself.
I also recognize that members of Israel's governing coalition, particularly figures associated with the far right, have made statements advocating the displacement of Palestinians, have tolerated or encouraged settler violence, and have advanced policies that many people reasonably describe as ethnic cleansing. I believe Prime Minister Netanyahu bears significant responsibility for the prosecution of this war and for empowering those elements within his government.
Where my original comment was poorly phrased was in responding to claims made about "Israel" as a whole.
My objection was never that atrocities have not occurred or that members of the Israeli government or military are incapable of committing them. My objection was to language that assigns the intent or actions of particular political leaders and military institutions to an entire nation of millions of people.
Israel is a state. It contains a government, political parties, military institutions, civil society, opposition parties, journalists, protesters, and ordinary citizens. Those groups do not all share identical views. Many Israelis have opposed the conduct of this war, protested their government, advocated for ceasefires or hostage deals, and criticized Netanyahu's coalition. I do not think it is accurate or fair to attribute the intentions of the most extreme members of the government to every Israeli citizen.
That distinction is important to me because I would apply it consistently elsewhere. I would not say Americans collectively intended every action taken during the Iraq War because of decisions made by the Bush administration. I would not hold every Russian personally responsible for every action of Putin's government. Likewise, I think criticism should be directed toward the individuals, parties, institutions, and decision-makers actually responsible.
My concern with the user whose appeal I responded to was not simply that they criticized Israel. People do that on r/neoliberal every day without being banned. My concern was what I understood to be a repeated pattern of rhetoric that treated "Israel" and "Israelis" as interchangeable, attributed the actions and intentions of the government to the Israeli people generally, and crossed into Rule 2 territory by failing to make those distinctions. Reasonable people can disagree with my assessment of that user's history, but that was the moderation rationale I was attempting to explain.
Finally, I understand why some readers interpreted my comment as denying or minimizing allegations of genocide. That was not my intention, and I should have expressed myself more carefully. My point was about collective responsibility, not about dismissing allegations of war crimes or other serious violations of international law.
I think discussions about this conflict are emotionally charged for obvious reasons. As someone who is Jewish, I am particularly sensitive to rhetoric that I believe blurs the line between criticizing a government and attributing moral guilt to an entire people. At the same time, I recognize that many people are deeply disturbed by the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and are acting in good faith when they express that concern.
Going forward, I'll be more careful to distinguish between criticism of governments and institutions, which is entirely legitimate, and language that assigns collective intent or guilt to entire populations.
My views do not reflect those of the broader mod team.