Are labour antisemitic?

[otolith]

"Nazi" is not the only word available to describe regimes you disapprove of. And it describes a particular political movement, of which Israel is unlikely to be a member. Using it indicates a lack of vocabulary, ignorance, or a deliberate attempt to smear by association.

[avinalarf]

Biker 1 said:

Username888 said:

My belief is that Labour don't actively and passionately *hate* Jews, they are simply leaning that way in order to secure votes from certain religious cults where the majority of followers distrust Jews.

I think there is an awful lot of jealousy going on. The Jews are seen as somehow 'controlling the West', including banking, big business etc. Which to a certain extent is true, but only in that many have escaped the pogroms & the holocaust, stuck together & become educated & in many cases wealthier than Joe Public. I guess this doesn't really fit the leftie-socialist economic model.

Dear Biker....not meaning to be patronising........although well meaning your analysis of Jews being " in MANY cases wealthier" and " seen as SOMEHOW controlling the West " and " to a certain extent is true "is straying into Trope territory.
The great majority of Jews are just Joe Public.
They really are just ordinary folk.
A very few do fall into that category you characterise, albeit you reason that is why other peeps are jealous of them.
Thing is that Jew haters use those lazy generalisations to stoke the fires of racism.
When I read or hear about a successful person or a person of dubious character I never think about their race or religion or ethnicity.

[anonymous-user]

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

...why feel the need to MOCK a religion or belief system ?

Really?

In the great majority of cases ......yes ....really....

In the great majority of cases? What are the exceptions and why?

Frankly I can't think of any that I would mock....I might certainly very strongly disagree or disapprove of certain beliefs but I would not feel inclined to mock.
Throughout history learned men have been mocked or executed for their beliefs.
Beliefs that we now accept to be true.
As I've said mockery will often only reinforce that belief so it is counter productive.

So Life of Brian was unacceptable? The Satanic Verses? We mustn't mock the learned men of religion in case one of them turns out to be right? Why mock? Because done right it's funny and or thought provoking.

[Burwood]

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

...why feel the need to MOCK a religion or belief system ?

Really?

In the great majority of cases ......yes ....really....

In the great majority of cases? What are the exceptions and why?

Frankly I can't think of any that I would mock....I might certainly very strongly disagree or disapprove of certain beliefs but I would not feel inclined to mock.
Throughout history learned men have been mocked or executed for their beliefs.
Beliefs that we now accept to be true.
As I've said mockery will often only reinforce that belief so it is counter productive.

So Life of Brian was unacceptable? The Satanic Verses? We mustn't mock the learned men of religion in case one of them turns out to be right? Why mock? Because done right it's funny and or thought provoking.

All religion is free game to 'mock'. Simply because it's utter nonsense (ok i'll play along) and second, because it is insidious by nature (most of them) and the embodiment of hypocrisy.

[avinalarf]

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

...why feel the need to MOCK a religion or belief system ?

Really?

In the great majority of cases ......yes ....really....

In the great majority of cases? What are the exceptions and why?

Frankly I can't think of any that I would mock....I might certainly very strongly disagree or disapprove of certain beliefs but I would not feel inclined to mock.
Throughout history learned men have been mocked or executed for their beliefs.
Beliefs that we now accept to be true.
As I've said mockery will often only reinforce that belief so it is counter productive.

So Life of Brian was unacceptable? The Satanic Verses? We mustn't mock the learned men of religion in case one of them turns out to be right? Why mock? Because done right it's funny and or thought provoking.

You mock who or what you like mate.
I can only give you my POV
I'm not looking for any converts.
Life of Brian was a satire and it was of its time, it certainly made me laugh.
Satanic Verses, I've not read it.
It's the word mock that I find difficult to accept, it's not that I think that one cannot disagree or criticise.
To me mocking something,and by extension those peeps that share that common belief, one is indulging in a somewhat bullying stance.
Let me suggest that if you replace the word "mocking"with the phrase " taking the piss " I may make myself clearer.
I am sure you would not mind me criticising your POV, you would probably take offence if I took the piss out of you.

[The Dangerous Elk]

LoonyTunes said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

LoonyTunes said:

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, is the word Nazi when applied to any future Israeli government - no matter how brutal they are to the palestinians - forever off limits because they were once the victims of the Nazi's?

I mean if an extreme right wing nutjob became Israeli Prime Minister and ordered the slaughter of hundreds of Palestinians for whatever reason (hiding terrorists etc) and generally acted in a brutal manner can we never call them Nazi's - but we can feel free to call (say) North Korea's Kim a Nazi?

No, Nazis were a thing, they happened, they exist no more.

There is not a need to use that label in any modern context as other more accurate comparisons are available. Its use is pure ignorance/need to "make effect". It is one of the new shock words used endlessly.

But if it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi and acts like a Nazi...then whats the more accurate comparison?

It can walk like one, it cannot talk like one nor act like one. Their world does not exist anymore, it changed.

[avinalarf]

Burwood said:

All religion is free game to 'mock'. Simply because it's utter nonsense (ok i'll play along) and second, because it is insidious by nature (most of them) and the embodiment of hypocrisy.

Below are four definitions of "religion".
Do you believe all are utter nonsense ?


religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1) the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

2) "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms: faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology; More

3) a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"

4) a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.
"consumerism is the new religion"

[EddieSteadyGo]

otolith said:

"Nazi" is not the only word available to describe regimes you disapprove of. And it describes a particular political movement, of which Israel is unlikely to be a member. Using it indicates a lack of vocabulary, ignorance, or a deliberate attempt to smear by association.

+1

With the additional egregious intent of trying to define them in the same category which murdered millions of Jews in the holocaust.

[Biker 1]

avinalarf said:

Thing is that Jew haters use those lazy generalisations to stoke the fires of racism.
When I read or hear about a successful person or a person of dubious character I never think about their race or religion or ethnicity.

Couldn't agree more.

I guess I'm only trying to fathom just why the labour party seems to be doing its upmost to totally alienate a whole section of the population.
The posters here referring to nazism should be utterly ashamed - I've nothing further to comment.

[avinalarf]

Biker 1 said:

avinalarf said:

Thing is that Jew haters use those lazy generalisations to stoke the fires of racism.
When I read or hear about a successful person or a person of dubious character I never think about their race or religion or ethnicity.

Couldn't agree more.

I guess I'm only trying to fathom just why the labour party seems to be doing its upmost to totally alienate a whole section of the population.
The posters here referring to nazism should be utterly ashamed - I've nothing further to comment.

[anonymous-user]

avinalarf said:

You mock who or what you like mate.
I can only give you my POV
I'm not looking for any converts.
Life of Brian was a satire and it was of its time, it certainly made me laugh.
Satanic Verses, I've not read it.
It's the word mock that I find difficult to accept, it's not that I think that one cannot disagree or criticise.
To me mocking something,and by extension those peeps that share that common belief, one is indulging in a somewhat bullying stance.
Let me suggest that if you replace the word "mocking"with the phrase " taking the piss " I may make myself clearer.
I am sure you would not mind me criticising your POV, you would probably take offence if I took the piss out of you.

If I adamantly defended, for example, the existence of fairies then I would fully expect you to take the piss, yes. Likewise other omnipotent supernatural beings. Mockery is just ridicule, the main tool of satire. Many Christian's complained Life of Brian mocked/took the pi55 out of Christianity which it clearly and deservedly did...

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 1st August 19:56

[avinalarf]

fblm said:

avinalarf said:

You mock who or what you like mate.
I can only give you my POV
I'm not looking for any converts.
Life of Brian was a satire and it was of its time, it certainly made me laugh.
Satanic Verses, I've not read it.
It's the word mock that I find difficult to accept, it's not that I think that one cannot disagree or criticise.
To me mocking something,and by extension those peeps that share that common belief, one is indulging in a somewhat bullying stance.
Let me suggest that if you replace the word "mocking"with the phrase " taking the piss " I may make myself clearer.
I am sure you would not mind me criticising your POV, you would probably take offence if I took the piss out of you.

If I adamantly defended, for example, the existence of fairies then I would fully expect you to take the piss, yes. Likewise other omnipotent supernatural beings. Mockery is just ridicule, the main tool of satire. Many Christian's complained Life of Brian mocked/took the pi55 out of Christianity which it clearly and deservedly did...

Edited by fblm on Wednesday 1st August 19:56

I repeat...... mock who or what you like, nowt to do with me.

[anonymous-user]

avinalarf said:

I repeat...... mock who or what you like, nowt to do with me.

I've no wish to mock anyone particularly but thanks. You questioned why anyone would wish to mock religion. It took a while but finally you admitted to liking life of brian. Its funny and can be thought provoking; exaggeration often shows up the flaw in any thinking. Hopefully that answers your question.

[James_B]

Biker 1 said:

I think there is an awful lot of jealousy going on. The Jews are seen as somehow 'controlling the West', including banking, big business etc. Which to a certain extent is true, but only in that many have escaped the pogroms & the holocaust, stuck together & become educated & in many cases wealthier than Joe Public. I guess this doesn't really fit the leftie-socialist economic model.

I think it’s safe to assume that when Corbyn threatened a “day of reckoning”against bankers if he got in that the stereotype of bankers often being Jewish was not far from his mind.

[The Dangerous Elk]

James_B said:

I think it’s safe to assume that when Corbyn threatened a “day of reckoning”against bankers if he got in that the stereotype of bankers often being Jewish was not far from his mind.

JezzaNacht

Paint Pounds symbols on their windows, make them sew on Dollar badges (in yellow ?) to their jackets ?

[85Carrera]

Biker 1 said:

avinalarf said:

Thing is that Jew haters use those lazy generalisations to stoke the fires of racism.
When I read or hear about a successful person or a person of dubious character I never think about their race or religion or ethnicity.

Couldn't agree more.

I guess I'm only trying to fathom just why the labour party seems to be doing its upmost to totally alienate a whole section of the population.
The posters here referring to nazism should be utterly ashamed - I've nothing further to comment.

I’ve not read the whole thread but opposition to the state of Israel and/or disapproval of the behaviour of the Israeli government (which, let’s face it, would result in economic sanctions if perpetrated by any other state) is NOT anti-semitism.

[irocfan]

LoonyTunes said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

LoonyTunes said:

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, is the word Nazi when applied to any future Israeli government - no matter how brutal they are to the palestinians - forever off limits because they were once the victims of the Nazi's?

I mean if an extreme right wing nutjob became Israeli Prime Minister and ordered the slaughter of hundreds of Palestinians for whatever reason (hiding terrorists etc) and generally acted in a brutal manner can we never call them Nazi's - but we can feel free to call (say) North Korea's Kim a Nazi?

No, Nazis were a thing, they happened, they exist no more.

There is not a need to use that label in any modern context as other more accurate comparisons are available. Its use is pure ignorance/need to "make effect". It is one of the new shock words used endlessly.

But if it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi and acts like a Nazi...then whats the more accurate comparison?

what about calling them Rougists after the Kymher Rouge? Why wouldn't that work, after all the Kymher viewed certain parts of the populace as being undesirable. Is it possible that calling them nazis is more demeaning to Jews?

[simonrockman]

85Carrera said:

I’ve not read the whole thread but opposition to the state of Israel and/or disapproval of the behaviour of the Israeli government (which, let’s face it, would result in economic sanctions if perpetrated by any other state) is NOT anti-semitism.

So saying that the Vatican should not exist isn't anti-Catholic?

[The Dangerous Elk]

85Carrera said:

I’ve not read the whole thread but opposition to the state of Israel and/or disapproval of the behaviour of the Israeli government (which, let’s face it, would result in economic sanctions if perpetrated by any other state) is NOT anti-semitism.

Who said it was, we are talking about the fact that Labour is Anti Semitic to its core as admitted today by JMc the Red.

[Russian Troll Bot]

Jeremy Corbyn 'silenced Holocaust survivor and had Jewish protesters thrown out of anti-Israel meeting'


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/01/je...

Front page of tomorrow's Telegraph