## CONTEXT
According to the Actantial Model by Greimas with the actant label set ['Subject', 'Object', 'Sender', 'Receiver', 'Helper', 'Opponent'], the actants are defined as follows:

* Subject: The character who carries out the action and desires the Object.
* Object: The character or thing that is desired and transferred.
* Sender: The character who controls the Object and transfers it to the Receiver.
* Receiver: The character who receives the Object.
* Helper: The character who assists the Subject in achieving its goal.
* Opponent: The character who opposes the Subject in achieving its goal.

We want to identify which actors and objects subsume these actantial roles in YouTube comments. In particular, comments that were posted under YouTube videos discussing the Israel-Palestine conflict.

## QUESTION
Based on the Actantial Model, please recognize the actants in the following comment.

Comment: {{ text }}

## CONSTRAINTS
1. Start by selecting an object from the following object list. Choose the one that closest matches the central object of the comment.

Object list: {{ object_labels }}

2. Continue with the Subject, Sender, Receiver, Helper, and Opponent. Only choose actors from the following actor list.

Actor list: {{ actor_labels }}

3. If you cannot find an actor in the list, and there is not one that closely resembles it, leave it blank.

## EXAMPLES
Object
- The Object is the most central actant. The choice of all other actants depends on it. Therefore, it is important to choose the Object first. 
- As the Object is usually a bit different from the other actants it has its own list of potential objects.
- You identify the Object by considering the central object of desire in the comment.
- If a comment mentions several potential Objects, focus on the writer’s intent. Usually, the person writing the comment emphasises the desire of a certain group for a certain object. If this is unclear, choose the one discussed in more detail. If this is also unclear, go with the one mentioned first.
  - For example: “Even Israel gave the land for Palestine to live but still they were not given freedom to live peacefully.” This comment features both the Palestinian desire for Territory and Rights/Freedoms. However, the commenter emphasises that, although they received the land, they are still lacking freedom. Thus, Rights/Freedoms is the main object.
- There are two main levels of narratives: conflict-related and meta. Conflict-related narratives focus on the Israel-Palestine conflict and its actors. Meta-narratives discuss the video, its quality and its impact. For instance, many comments criticise the video content. In these cases, the main Object is Information—a meta-narrative. However, once the commenter offers a substantial narrative on the conflict, you should focus on that instead.
  - For example: “After watching more videos, I feel like she missed important information. She didn’t explain the reasoning enough for Israel.” This comment mentions Israel as an actor, but the main focus is criticising the video content. Thus, the main Object is Information which the commenter desires and the video creator withholds.
  - This example changes if we add a sentence on the conflict: “After watching more videos, I feel like she missed important information. She didn’t explain the reasoning enough for Israel. They just want to be safe from Hamas terrorism.” The reason the commenter criticises the video is now clear: israel desires Security/Safety and is opposed by hamas. The main objective of the comment is not to just criticise, but to offer this alternative narrative.

List of objects
- Territory: Physical spaces under dispute, such as Gaza, the West Bank, Jerusalem, or land in general.
- Rights/Freedoms: Political or civil rights, recognition of statehood, individual liberties, religious autonomy, or human rights.
- Security/Safety: Protection from harm, physical safety of civilians, security of borders.
- Violence: Acts of violence, attacks, terrorism, or the infliction of harm.
- Peace: The reduction of tensions, peaceful coexistence, or efforts toward conflict resolution.
- Power: Control over resources, political or military power, financial resources, or international influence and support.
- Information: Accuracy of information, access to knowledge, control of narratives, propaganda, or media representation.

Object distinctions
- Rights/Freedoms vs. Security/Safety
  - Security/Safety refers to the protection from immediate or physical danger.
  - Rights/Freedoms is concerned with ongoing conditions of freedom or oppression;
  - Examples:
    - "Jews should be free from antisemitism wherever they live"-Rights/Freedoms
    - "Israeli civilians fear rocket attacks from Gaza"—Security/Safety
    - "Palestinians are denied freedom of movement and subjected to checkpoints"—Rights/Freedoms
    - "Civilians in Gaza need safe zones from airstrikes"—Security/Safety
- Security/Safety vs. Violence
  - Security/Safety emphasises preventing harm or protecting people.
  - Violence emphasises the act of violence itself through listing, describing, or condemning it;
  - Examples:
    - “Israelis need bomb shelters to stay safe.”—Security/Safety
    - “Palestinians need protection from airstrikes.”—Security/Safety
    - “These airstrikes are targeting civilians.”—Violence
    - “Terrorist attacks like these are unacceptable.”—Violence
- Rights/Freedoms vs. Peace
  - Rights/Freedoms focuses on conditions of life within or across groups, not the relationship between them.
  - Peace focuses on conflict resolution and the relationship between sides, not individual or collective dignity.
  - Examples:
    - “Israelis want to live without conflict with their neighbours.”—Peace
    - “Both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live free from hate and discrimination.”—Rights/Freedoms
    - “There won’t be a future unless Israelis and Palestinians learn to live together.”—Peace

Subject
- The Subject desires the Object and carries out the action. and therefore follows directly from the choice of the Object.
- If you have two Subjects that desire the same thing, apply the same rationale as before. Writer’s intent > more detail > mentioned first.
- The commenter has a special role in this situation. As they wrote the comment, they always have a stake in the matter. However, it is again important to distinguish between conflict-related and meta-narratives. 
  - For example, consider the following comment: “I love Palestine! The Israelis have no right to this land, it belongs to the Palestinians.” Although the commenter clearly cares about the Territory, it is the Palestinians’ desire—and the Israeli opposition—that they are trying to emphasise.
- As you choose the Object based on desire, most comments should have a Subject. Only if you cannot find a suitable Subject in the Actor List, leave this blank.
- Important: The Subject is determined by the Actantial Model Object you have chosen before. It is the actor that desires exactly this Object. 
- Do not negate desire. If the Object is Violence, the Subject is the actor that wants to cause harm or favours violence. The actor who wants to prevent violence in this case is the Opponent.

Sender & Receiver
- The Sender controls the Object and communicates it to the Receiver. As we deal with short comments, the narratives are often incomplete. Thus, you might find narratives that lack a clear Sender, Receiver, or both.
- It is not always necessary that the Object is actually transferred from one actor to another to have a Sender and Receiver present. For the Sender, it is enough if one actor is portrayed as the one in control of the Object. For the Receiver, we look for an actor who is the target of a potential transfer.

Helper & Opponent
- The Opponent prevents, or tries to prevent, the Subject from achieving its desire. With this, the Opponent takes up a special role. It can negate relationships. 
- For example, being both the Sender and the Opponent usually implies that the actor controls the desired Object, but refuses to transfer it. 

General
- When to put an actor? Most of the comments are short, thus we need to rely on the context to sometimes infer actors without making things up. Here are some heuristics on when to select an actor that is not explicitly mentioned in the text.
- First, is the function present? In other words, are desire, communication, power, or substitutes of these functions present? 
- Second, are there sufficient hints as to who the actor is?
- If any of the two are missing, so if the function is not mentioned or if the actor is not clear, leave it blank!

## OUTPUT FORMAT
Provide the answer in a JSON format.

{
  "Object": [],
  "Subject": [],
  "Sender": [],
  "Receiver": [],
  "Helper": [],
  "Opponent": []
}

If no corresponding entity exists for a specific actant, return an empty list for that role.

## ANSWER: <think>
