Now got Nick Griffin tweeting support.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
Just seen that! Well done Ken!
Just another in a long line of people potentially losing their job for their opinion. Even if what he said was irrelevant, how does it provoke this kind of shitstorm?
Earlier in the thread @Kaos made a comparison with some other recent controversies, however a key difference with two of those is that they were one-shot articles or remarks. Had Shah released the statement she first wrote and awaited the due process of the party, the events of subsequent days would have been quite different. I'm not suggesting that it wouldn't have prompted questions about anti-Semitism within the Labour membership, but the infighting must certainly have been less.
What do people make of this closing section of Jonathan Freedland's article in the Guardian:
Do you think the distinction he draws is a fair one, is there a greater willingness to define offensive behaviour when the subject involves the Jewish community?
What do people make of this closing section of Jonathan Freedland's article in the Guardian:
Do you think the distinction he draws is a fair one, is there a greater willingness to define offensive behaviour when the subject involves the Jewish community?
I'm not sure I agree that these things are always defined by the particular groups affected, but I'd say it's a fair point that among the left, there's more dismissal of claims of anti-semitism than there would be for other minorities. One of the most popularly shared articles on the Livingstone side recently is one basically claiming this whole thing has been orchestrated by "the Israel lobby", which is a slightly modified way of saying it's a zionist conspiracy.
The day an ex-mayor made some terrible statements and was fired within hours, the ex Labour leader and ex-PM was revealed to be a middleman between the Saudis and the Chinese, and the current health minister faced an unprecedented strike by doctors. One of the stories was deemed newsworthy and/or one of those stories grabbed the popular attention. I don't know if that's a bigger indictment of the media or the public or both.
Are you seriously suggesting the doctors strike hasn't been amply covered by the media?
Seriously?
People love a good "This man fecked up" story. I guess i'm answering my own question posted above, but that's the simple truth.
TBH I might have been reading the Guardian international edition (it covered Ken, not the doctors) not the UK one. I saw that and the state of the threads on redcafe and I thought that's the way it's going. Fair enough if it isn't. IMO both the strike and Blair's dealing are comfortably bigger stories than an ex-mayor.
Aye and the same people would quite rightly be disgusted any talk of a "LBGT agenda", or a "black lobby".
I wonder if "We feck ourselves over, but at least we don't feck everyone else over like the Tories" would be a good election slogan.
Jeremy Hunt has been on the receiving end of fierce criticism for several months, Ken has been feeling some heat for a few days. Both are justified IMO. Your post goes to show how he's taken over a story, for it began with the resignation of Naz Shah.
Is it possible that a minority of MPs are using these developments to call into question Corbyn's judgement? Sure. Could Labour also have a problem with how some of its membership view Jews/Israel? Sadly, yes.
On the face of it, the independent inquiry should be a well led one (time will tell). It was important that any investigation was external though, as there have been doubts raised in the past over the leadership's previous willingness to dig too deeply into discriminatory practices.
The Jewish community can't define antisemitism as Zionists use it to cover criminal Israeli behaviour
Is that all Zionists, or just paid up members of the conspiracy?
I think both sides are as bad as each other for muddying the waters tbh.
Many Zionists, it's not a conspiracy, just PR as many countries engage in. You know it exists, to pretend otherwise would be stupid
I feel like this article sums up everything thats wrong with this debate at the minute.
Yes, there's good reasons why an Israeli state should exist, but you could write a similarly emotive article from the Palestinian point of view. You can't just hand wave away legitimate concerns about the plight of the Palestinians by saying 'yeah, well the Jews had it tough, and the Palestinian's do some pretty nasty shit too therefore all criticism of an Israeli state is inherently racist'. Many would see justification of the Palestinian's actions in exactly the same way as as the quote the author uses here to defend Israel: 'like telling a woman who has just smacked her child on the legs that she is no better than the father who repeatedly beat and raped her'.
I think equating anti-zionism to anti-semeticism, as the author here does – in fact going as far as to suggest that anti-zionism should be 'banned from the realms of political discourse' – is inherently counterproductive. Its as stupid as saying that zionism is effectively anti-Muslim hatred because you're denying the Muslims in Palestine the right to their own state.
And lets not even get down to how stupid the Soviet angle he's pulling at is.
Now don't get me wrong, I think an Israeli state should exist. But to argue that anti-zionism is inherently a left wing belief, or one that is inherently racist, is incredibly disingenuous. The eagerness with which people wish to conflate criticism of the Israeli state with criticism of the Israeli people is disappointing. Plenty of states are criticised without that criticism being termed racist, is criticising America for its involvement in the middle-east and the wars it fought in Iraq and Afghanistan racist? Is criticism of the Apartheid regime in South Africa racist? If the author here blames the use of the holocaust as a political point, by weirdly accusing 'the left' of holocaust denial, then you have to conclude that the holocaust can not be used as a defence of Israel either. It doesn't justify the treatment of Palestinians, and Israel's treatment of the Palestinians does not justify their response (or vice versa, the 'who started it?' debate will never be agreed on).
Racism is racism and should be condemned wherever it occurs, some racism is couched as 'anti-zionism' and should be recognised as such, but acting like criticism of Israel is inherently, and always racist, that the debate should even be off limits, as this author does, is hardly the solution.
I think on the lowest level the problem with anti-zionism is, that anti-Semites use it as a way to express their hate in a way, that doesn´t automatically give away their position. Even extremely harsh criticism of Israel can be reasonable and should be accepted. People should deal with the content of the criticism.
Yet at the same time Antisemitism (aka hate of jews for being jews) is actually still a scarily big thing. (Almost) 2000 years of vile Antisemitism doesn´t completely vanish in a couple of decades. Additionally it doesn´t help that Antisemitism (not anti-zionism) is part of the mainstream in many Muslim countries.
The validity of an argument doesn´t change, just because a racist uses it. Yet at the same time, I totally understand that people are getting thin-skinned, when they consistently encounter racists using this angle as cover to spout their hate. So tone, nuance and context become incredibly important.
Yet at the same time Antisemitism (aka hate of jews for being jews) is actually still a scarily big thing. (Almost) 2000 years of vile Antisemitism doesn´t completely vanish in a couple of decades. Additionally it doesn´t help that Antisemitism (not anti-zionism) is part of the mainstream in many Muslim countries.
The validity of an argument doesn´t change, just because a racist uses it. Yet at the same time, I totally understand that people are getting thin-skinned, when they consistently encounter racists using this angle as cover to spout their hate. So tone, nuance and context become incredibly important.
Last edited:
Oh good, Diane Abbott has been on TV to sort everything out.
Sadiq running around saying it as damaged his chances of Mayor. If he fails it will all be down to him.
Labour and the left are curious beasts.
Just as completely foul and obnoxious in their behaviour and views as some people view that of the tories, just in different ways.
Of all the groups of people they could of chosen from to not like very much, they chose the ones who have been repressed for thousands of years, and the ones that were the victims of one the abhorrent and disgusting crimes in humanities history.
GG lefties.
Irrespective of your views on them NOW and where they stand in modern day politics, its a hand you can never win, and just an example of how stupid some people can be.
Just as completely foul and obnoxious in their behaviour and views as some people view that of the tories, just in different ways.
Of all the groups of people they could of chosen from to not like very much, they chose the ones who have been repressed for thousands of years, and the ones that were the victims of one the abhorrent and disgusting crimes in humanities history.
GG lefties.
Irrespective of your views on them NOW and where they stand in modern day politics, its a hand you can never win, and just an example of how stupid some people can be.
That would be the lobby groups with an agenda. Hardy suggesting a conspiracy to say certain groups have agendas they push.
Universities here and the US are constantly in battles (sometimes legal) and fighting back against suggestions of anti-semitism whenever Israel boycots are discussed.
The terms are interchanged from both directions to suit their own purposes.
Of all of the possibilities among the shadow cabinet, Abbott has to be one of the worst candidates for damage limitation at a time like this. For heaven's sake, she was embroiled in a race row of her own during Miliband's tenure (not for the first time either).
Listening to her, the inquiry could be devalued to little more than a PR exercise. Although with it being independent that danger ought to be mitigated.
Feck sake.
You do realise that there is a difference between Jewish people and Israel ?
Of course, the Jewish people have been singled out for persecution, disproportionate condemnation after having been blamed for the world's historic ills especially the murder of children, blood libel, taking what's not their's and having too much influence.
Wheres as Israel....err...wait a minute.
What is it that Ken said the other day? Oh yeah, "a real anti-semite doesn't just hate Jews in Israel". That sentence is amazing in itself and only hasn't been talked about more because of the Hitler nonsense.
As a Corbyn-supporter it's awful to see people rallying behind Ken and calling for him to be resinstated on the basis of him being left-wing. It's obvious that some elements in the party are cynically seeking political capital from the situation (in a way that is, ironically, quite disrespectful in light of the seriousness of the issues being discussed), but that doesn't change that Ken Livingstone said something anti-semitic and should be punished for it. Instead of playing politics with anti-semitism both sides should be unifying to stamp it out.
edit - that last point goes for the media as well.
edit - that last point goes for the media as well.
https://theintercept.com/2016/04/29/british-fight-critics-israel-anti-semitism-matters-rest-us/
It's a good article explaining the left p.o.v. on this. Netanyahu is a piece of shit, but being right-wing and militaristic allows people (Ann Coulter too) to get away with their 'loose' remarks.
It's a good article explaining the left p.o.v. on this. Netanyahu is a piece of shit, but being right-wing and militaristic allows people (Ann Coulter too) to get away with their 'loose' remarks.
Marr makes mincemeat of her. Don't worry, we've only had 12 instances of hate speech since Corbyn took over.Love the way she claims there is no problem, yet they've been forced to set up an enquiry. Oh, and they're adding 'don't be a massive antisemite' into the rule book.
Her longevity in politics is a mystery.
That was particularly amazing. UKIP (rightly) get attacked over their "just a few bad apples" defence, and this is just as bad.
Love the way she claims there is no problem, yet they've been forced to set up an enquiry. Oh, and they're adding 'don't be a massive antisemite' into the rule book.
Her longevity in politics is a mystery.
In total fairness to Abbott, she does a lot of stuff for her constituency and is well liked there, which is the first thing of importance when an MP. But her being one of the main go-to media people is not good. At least when she was saying dumb things on This Week no-one was watching at the time.
Whilst I don't want to get sucked into defending Livingstone, he didn't meant anything like what you are implying he did (or that it looks like he did when plucked out of a long, run-on sentence). However once you are already under the spotlight for idiotic comments you should probably pay much closer attention to your choice of words.
See, this actually gets to the heart of how disgracefully thick Ken is, because you're quoting from a different interview from the one I was, so he's actually gone on two separate shows and said more or less the same thing twice, and to be honest, I don't think the context in your version helps him out much either. If you hate the jews in Israel, pretty sure you're a fecking anti-semite.
Anyway, here's the version I was referring to, at about 34 seconds in
Nothing he said with context was wrong, continue the circle jerk however.
I have a feeling no matter whats said by a politician in an interview someone will post it on Youtube with car crash in the headline
I have a feeling no matter whats said by a politician in an interview someone will post it on Youtube with car crash in the headline
Oh dear. I didn't realise he'd said it elsewhere. I was being generous on the context assuming it was a rather fumbling use in a single interview. That he has gone out and repeated that line twice makes it pretty awful - sinister really (that Ken thinks being anti-Israeli policy means hating Jews in Israel).
So yeah, count me out of defending Ken any further
Last edited:
Been a further two suspensions of sitting councillors today...
So the inquiry is working as intended, uprooting the bigots from the party.
Well it's not actually the inquiry, as it hasn't started yet. Guide Fawkes is just trawling through a load of Facebook and twitter accounts then publishing any dodgy stuff. Labour are acting quickly on it though, which is good.
Oh fair enough then. Don't like Guido Fawkes at all but fair play to Labour for acting on it.