Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find that a good sniff-test in politics is to change the actor in a claim to be Jewish and then consider if that make the claim an antisemitic conspiracy theory. Works surprisingly well. For example: > facing an enemy [Hamas] who does everything they can to get their own people killed to make you look bad Imagine the "enemy" in that sentence was not "Hamas", but "The Jews" - that would be a very antisemitic narrati…
> Imagine the "enemy" in that sentence was not "Hamas", but "The Jews" - that would be a very antisemitic narrative, Your substitution turns a true statement into a false statement; this mechanism is at best meaningless. Yes, making false claims about Jews is antisemitic, but that has no bearing on statements that aren't false.
No. Making false claims about Jews is just lying about Jews.
Antisemitism deals in lies, but the defining characteristic of antisemitism is not the lie itself, it's the use of the lie to cast out the Jewish people from the circle of humans to make them into an outsider and threat to humanity itself. The lie is just a tool and it depends on the kind of lie.
> that has no bearing on statements that aren't false.
your assertion here is that the statement in question
> [Hamas] does everything they can to get their own people killed to make you look bad
is true and not false.
What you are claiming it that Hamas is breaking a very fundamental rule of being human, in that they not only don't care about their own being killed but that they "do everything they can to get their own people killed."
Which is a standard propaganda tactic to assigning to you enemy the most depraved characteristics to convince your side that the enemy is not even really fully human.
It's a transparent and stupid tactic, and it begets hatred.