In Germany, disapproving of Israel is considered an unacceptably nuanced take on whether the holocaust was bad. That’s literally the legislative basis that feddit’s moderation is required to comply with. Germany, through it’s anti-Nazi and anti-genocide-denial policies, trapped its people in a situation where they are unable to condemn another genocide.

Authoritarian draconic standards are bullshit. Nuance can be used to overdamp the response to wrongdoing, but its absence can also leave responses underdamped, and assholes can selectively overdamp and underdamp responses in specific categories to serve their own interests. (A clear example is how wind turbines need to go through a lot of red tape to address the concerns of everyone in a wide area while meat industry farms can poison people without issue).

If we want justice, we have to be able to fight against these assholes in both directions - reducing the damping of overdamped systems to allow us to fight genocide effectively even when it doesn’t serve the interests of the powerful, while also increasing the damping of underdamped systems to prevent the powerful from oppressing people using fighting genocide as an excuse.

So yes, we do need nuanced takes on “whether genocide is bad”, sometimes. Other times these “nuanced takes” are indeed ploys to hold back appropriate responses. Which is which is going to depend on the specific situation.

In this case, feddit is complying with German law and policy to go to bat for Zionism, so their “nuance” can get fucked.