Are labour antisemitic?

Author
Discussion

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Ian Geary said:
Not studied this topic in any length, but it seems to me the clarification of free speech ability to criticise Israel would not have been needed if the pro Israel lobby didn't try to shut down any/all criticism of Israel's (ie the government's) actions as anti-sematic.

They've reaped what they sewed. It's left them flat footed and flailing round with nonsense like a racists charter.

Now, all we need Labour to do is to agree the same clarification for every other group that pulls out their "ism card" when faced with legitimate criticism...

...as if...that would be Labour's bread and butter gone.

In this way alone, I can see how Israel is being singled out, because their protected characteristic obviously isn't as special to Labour as other groups'.

I still wouldn't call that anti semitic though
The clarification doesn't achieve what you appear to believe...

The IHRA are entirely fine with criticism of Israel - no shouts of anti-semitism there.

The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.

George Smiley

5,048 posts

82 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
its bloody stupid to be classing criticism of the Israeli govt as antisemitic.

they are as bad as others we openly criticise

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
George Smiley said:
its bloody stupid to be classing criticism of the Israeli govt as antisemitic.

they are as bad as others we openly criticise
No one is?

Biker 1

7,741 posts

120 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
George Smiley said:
its bloody stupid to be classing criticism of the Israeli govt as antisemitic.

they are as bad as others we openly criticise
Methinks you are missing the point - see the post above yours....

The Dangerous Elk

4,642 posts

78 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Biker 1 said:
George Smiley said:
its bloody stupid to be classing criticism of the Israeli govt as antisemitic.

they are as bad as others we openly criticise
Methinks you are missing the point - see the post above yours....
This is exactly the "Brain Fart" endless loop there are in.

Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Russian Troll Bot said:
If you mean Jewish Voice for Labour, they're a tiny fringe movement who are about as representative of Judaism as the Westbro Baptist Church are to Christianity
THey were one group

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

127 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
Give me a list of three other countries established post-war that you don't think have any right to exist... There's a long list of countries that didn't exist in their current form before WW2 - a majority of those in the world - so Israel is hardly some exception in being newly-founded, or founded by political process.

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
I'd say it's pretty extreme to state that any nation shouldn't exist...

Pre-1948 is rather irrelevant. There's a vast difference between 'should not be formed' and 'should cease to exist'.

Camoradi

4,294 posts

257 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
I laughed out loud at the Labour announcement.

1) "We've adopted the IHRA definition" smile
2) "But we've qualified it in terms of our right to criticise Israel" scratchchin

and the best bit

3) Jeremy Corbyn wanted to go further with step 2)

Are they mad? hehe

The Surveyor

7,576 posts

238 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
The key issue isn't whether Labour are antisemetic, the key issue is whether Labour are fit to govern.

This whole topic has been hijacked and magnified by the different factions in Labour (and plenty outside Labour too) to try and score points and gain some control, or claw control back. Corbyns credibility to unite the party has taken a very public beating, failure to quash pointless internal bickering like this shows weak leadership IMHO.

Those in Labour who oppose Corbyn have scored a few points, but more worrying is that we have an opposition which is as weak and dysfunctional as the Government. A sad state of affairs.

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
I'd say it's pretty extreme to state that any nation shouldn't exist...

Pre-1948 is rather irrelevant. There's a vast difference between 'should not be formed' and 'should cease to exist'.
How is pre-1948 irrelevant? And if something was created in your local park without agreement you'd want it removed. It's an argument that is fair to have and is not racist. Am I being racist by pointing this out?

Octoposse

2,164 posts

186 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
To an extent, I don't quite understand why a specific definition of anti-semitism is required - given that is just another form of racism (usually) or religious prejudice (occasionally).

It's not different, yet there seems a mind set that it is - Naz Shah's "light hearted" endorsement of genocide and ethnic cleansing - can you imagine her making that joke (?) about any other group? Corbyn's support for a mural with crude racial stereotypes, or his comments along the lines of "despite having lived most of their lives here..." - inconceivable that anyone outside the EDL, or the moron wing of the Conservative party, would apply terms like that to anybody else.

Nobody else gets a lecture on why they're not actually the victims of racism when they complain.

And the obsession with Israel of a slice of Labour activists (plus one LibDem politician I can think of) is so bizarre it's almost pathological - as if there are absolutely no other problems in the world.

Still, occasionally I can see the funny side of "we're not antisemitic - it's all a plot by rootless cosmopolitans" as a defence. If you could buy self-awareness in tons, I'd pony up and donate some myself to Labour. The 'Momentum Defence' has overtaken the Nuremburg for the moment, but, given the increasing importance of party discipline, who knows.

For the record, I've been a criticism of various policies of the government of Israel for as long as I can recall, and yet not once have I ever been accused of anti-semitism. It's not really that hard.

Edited by Octoposse on Wednesday 5th September 09:34

jakesmith

9,461 posts

172 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
No one is?
North Korea? 100,000’s of people in brutal forced labour camps often for no better reason that a relative expressed dissatisfaction at the leadership of the country

Contrast that with Palestine where the circumstances of existence there are due to the uncompromisingly commuted aggression of the terrorist organisation that is in charge

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
jakesmith said:
Sway said:
No one is?
North Korea? 100,000’s of people in brutal forced labour camps often for no better reason that a relative expressed dissatisfaction at the leadership of the country

Contrast that with Palestine where the circumstances of existence there are due to the uncompromisingly commuted aggression of the terrorist organisation that is in charge
You've completely missed the context of my post you've quoted...

'no one is' was reference to claims that criticising the Israeli government or policies were decried as anti-semitic. Which no one is stating...

Really not sure of the relevance of North Korea to that point?

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
I'd say it's pretty extreme to state that any nation shouldn't exist...

Pre-1948 is rather irrelevant. There's a vast difference between 'should not be formed' and 'should cease to exist'.
How is pre-1948 irrelevant? And if something was created in your local park without agreement you'd want it removed. It's an argument that is fair to have and is not racist. Am I being racist by pointing this out?
Yes.

If you cannot see the difference between a short term parish council grumble, and the spoils of war leading to the formation of a new nation /shifted national boundaries - 70 years ago - then I'm afraid we're unlikely to come to the same view.

That's why pre-48 is irrelevant.

Plenty of other nations have been formed/shifted in the intervening years - any examples of any other nation where it's 'normal' or 'non discriminatory' to call for it to cease to exist?

Can you really not see the extremism there?

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
I'd say it's pretty extreme to state that any nation shouldn't exist...

Pre-1948 is rather irrelevant. There's a vast difference between 'should not be formed' and 'should cease to exist'.
How is pre-1948 irrelevant? And if something was created in your local park without agreement you'd want it removed. It's an argument that is fair to have and is not racist. Am I being racist by pointing this out?
Yes.

If you cannot see the difference between a short term parish council grumble, and the spoils of war leading to the formation of a new nation /shifted national boundaries - 70 years ago - then I'm afraid we're unlikely to come to the same view.

That's why pre-48 is irrelevant.

Plenty of other nations have been formed/shifted in the intervening years - any examples of any other nation where it's 'normal' or 'non discriminatory' to call for it to cease to exist?

Can you really not see the extremism there?
So in your world it's racist to question the existence of Israel the State? Even though I'm saying nothing about the Jews who lived there before 1948 when Israel didn't exist.

You're not a big believer in free speech are you.

With all of this land grabbing thats been going on in order to grow Israel - would I be racist to say that that too shouldn't exist and should be handed back to the Palestinians?

Sway

26,321 posts

195 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
LoonyTunes said:
Sway said:
The clarification specifically relates to challenges to Israel's right to exist, which is something rather different.
So it's racist to say that a state shouldn't exist...any state...?

Israel didn't exist before 1948.
I'd say it's pretty extreme to state that any nation shouldn't exist...

Pre-1948 is rather irrelevant. There's a vast difference between 'should not be formed' and 'should cease to exist'.
How is pre-1948 irrelevant? And if something was created in your local park without agreement you'd want it removed. It's an argument that is fair to have and is not racist. Am I being racist by pointing this out?
Yes.

If you cannot see the difference between a short term parish council grumble, and the spoils of war leading to the formation of a new nation /shifted national boundaries - 70 years ago - then I'm afraid we're unlikely to come to the same view.

That's why pre-48 is irrelevant.

Plenty of other nations have been formed/shifted in the intervening years - any examples of any other nation where it's 'normal' or 'non discriminatory' to call for it to cease to exist?

Can you really not see the extremism there?
So in your world it's racist to question the existence of Israel the State? Even though I'm saying nothing about the Jews who lived there before 1948 when Israel didn't exist.

You're not a big believer in free speech are you. I'm a huge believer in free speech. That doesn't mean absolutely unmoderated in any form. Think what you like, but having a platform to call for the destruction of a nation state is crossing the line in my view (and I'd posit the view of the majority). Change the word 'Israel' for any other nation and scan it back...

With all of this land grabbing thats been going on in order to grow Israel - would I be racist to say that that too shouldn't exist and should be handed back to the Palestinians? That's an entirely different point, and would come under the freedom to criticise policy and action, rather than existence...

jakesmith

9,461 posts

172 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
You've completely missed the context of my post you've quoted...

'no one is' was reference to claims that criticising the Israeli government or policies were decried as anti-semitic. Which no one is stating...

Really not sure of the relevance of North Korea to that point?
Well, your post reads two ways doesn’t it

But great I’m glad I got the wrong one smile

Sway said:
George Smiley said:
its bloody stupid to be classing criticism of the Israeli govt as antisemitic.

they are as bad as others we openly criticise
No one is?

LoonyTunes

3,362 posts

76 months

Wednesday 5th September 2018
quotequote all
Sway said:
LooneyTunes said:
With all of this land grabbing thats been going on in order to grow Israel - would I be racist to say that that too shouldn't exist and should be handed back to the Palestinians?
That's an entirely different point, and would come under the freedom to criticise policy and action, rather than existence...
No it's not, those areas taken are now part of Israel - so by saying they should be given up I'm effectively calling for the dismantling of part of Israel.

Am I racist for saying that Israel shouldn't exist in those parts 'land grabbed' since 1967?