UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80

[Shamwow]

The ceremony he was at explicitly involved paying respects to the Munich terrorists though. I'm almost certain we'd not be as willing (rightfully) to absolve Boris if he was in a similar sort of situation.

The mural on its own could've been understandable but the issue is when it feeds into a wider pattern of behaviour.

I don't think Corbyn himself is a rampant anti-Semite who hates Jewish people - nevertheless I can very much understand why members of the Jewish population have concerns both with him and with the Labour party as a whole. Those concerns shouldn't be dismissed when they're so widespread.

I don't that's true or the Conservative and Lib Dem who were there would be under investigation too.

 

[Flying high]

You don't see anything wrong with this at all? If he had said just white bankers, fair enough, but why Jewish & white? It's quite clearly antisemitic.

"Honest, I'm not antisemitc, and to prove it I will make a clearly antisemitc statement." Also, the clear trope/stereotype (as used by the Nazis in their propaganda), that's is also clear antisemitism.

Only if you look really hard and need it to be to prove a point. That is clearly not why he mentioned that some were Jewish, it was in context of the criticism he'd received.

As far as I can tell, the artist is not an anti-semite. Neither is his picture overtly anti-semetic. If you are of the opinion that all evil bankers are Jewish, or all Jews are evil bankers, then maybe you could see this image as being anti-semetic. But it seems clear to me that as with nearly (every?) time this type of anti Corbyn story comes up, there is very very little in it.

 

[Sassy Colin]

Only if you look really hard and need it to be to prove a point. That is clearly not why he mentioned that some were Jewish, it was in context of the criticism he'd received.

As far as I can tell, the artist is not an anti-semite. Neither is his picture overtly anti-semetic. If you are of the opinion that all evil bankers are Jewish, or all Jews are evil bankers, then maybe you could see this image as being anti-semetic. But it seems clear to me that as with nearly (every?) time this type of anti Corbyn story comes up, there is very very little in it.

So why does he say Jewish & white, rather than just white?

 

[Ekkie Thump]

The universe didn't begin in 2017, in '15 and ''17 the Lib Dems suffered from the coalition being fresh in people's memories, this election is very different.

Current MRP estimate of voters intention in that constituency without tactical voting:

With respect Andrew Western has not made the claim that this is a two horse race - only Angela Smith has. Nothing you've posted suggests its a two horse race either does it?

 

[sun_tzu]

Only if you look really hard and need it to be to prove a point. That is clearly not why he mentioned that some were Jewish, it was in context of the criticism he'd received.

As far as I can tell, the artist is not an anti-semite. Neither is his picture overtly anti-semetic. If you are of the opinion that all evil bankers are Jewish, or all Jews are evil bankers, then maybe you could see this image as being anti-semetic. But it seems clear to me that as with nearly (every?) time this type of anti Corbyn story comes up, there is very very little in it.

First, make sure to actually look at the mural. Don’t take a fleeting glance as you prepare to tweet your outrage, but pause for a moment and take it all in. Sitting around a table is a group of rotund men: one has a full beard, and is counting money. That, in and of itself, is an antisemitic symbol.

It’s not just the big, hookednoses and evil expressions that make this iconography offensive and troubling, these depictions mirror antisemitic propaganda used by Hitler and the Nazis to whip up hatred that led to the massacre of millions of Jews. This extends to the table these figures are sat at, resting on human bodies, as the Nazis also depicted.

Context here is also important. If you haven’t yet, then research The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. An entirely fabricated text printed first in Russia during the early 1900s, it purports to document a meeting of Jewish leaders setting out plans to take over the world by controlling the media and press, and fostering religious conflict to subjugate non-Jews across the globe.

the Protocols were a key element of the Nazi propaganda programme – at least 23 editions were published by the party in the two decades that preceded the outbreak of the second world war in 1939. The domination of the world by hooknosed men wielding power and money? There is more than a visual connection in this mural to antisemitism – the messaging is full-blown Nazi too.

In other contexts Illuminati conspiracies are light-hearted and funny: it’s not antisemitic to joke that Kanye West and Taylor Swift are part of a secret, triangle-based plot to conquer the world. But the employment of an Eye of Providence symbol (often associated with the Illuminati and Freemasonry) in the offending mural is clearly antisemitic. Racist conspiracy theorists also long claimed that Jews are in control of the Freemason network – think the Rothschilds and George Soros. That is antisemitism too.

If you’re left in any doubt, just read the words of Mear One, the street artist who painted the mural: “Some of the older white Jewish folk in the local community had an issue with me portraying their beloved #Rothschild or #Warburg etc as the demons they are,” he has written.

you have to squint pretty hard to pretend its not antisemitic - even corbyn had to admit it was

 

[Flying high]

So why does he say Jewish & white, rather than just white?

If you are accused of being anti semetic, when obviously some of the leading bankers are Jewish, it would be childish to just say they are white and ignore the criticism. He's acknowledging that there are Jewish members within this group, but that isn't the focus, nor should it be.

 

[Shamwow]

So why does he say Jewish & white, rather than just white?

Because people were claiming they were just Jewish, and it was therefore racist. So part of his defence is that while some of the men are Jewish, some are also white and not Jewish.

 

[711]

That list sounds like great fun, I love home-made jam & free stuff.

I'm up for the foxes meself. If only we could arm them in some way to make it a fairer fight.

 

[Mockney]

The mural was anti-Semitic.
It’s silly to try and defend it and Corbyn was stupid to applaud it.

Something like that would never have happened under good ol’ Tony Blai....oh

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/feb/11/advertising.politics

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Yes, it was ill advised to go to this cemetery if there are black September operatives buried / plaques there. But he is in a cemetery where there is a victim's monument, containing the 47 names of Palestinians killed in 1985. Which is what the wreath was for.

This doesn't seem to be likely based on the photographic evidence. Corbyn is pictured holding the wreath in front of the Black September memorial. The final picture in the series shows the same wreath lying next to the same memorial. The monument to Palestinians killed in 1985 is in a different part of the cemetery and nowhere near where Corbyn was pictured holding the wreath. Based on the photographic evidence i'm afraid it's Corbyn's story that's the stretch.

My opinion is that he did indeed go to that cemetery to remember the victims of 1985 but was less than informed about other elements of the service. Eventually he found himself involved in the laying of a wreath at the foot of some graves without being fully cognisant of who they contained. Later on I think he's realised what happend and concluded he's better off obfuscating than coming clean because it's an utterly terrible look and the best you can say is that he was a fecking idiot.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

 

[SteveJ]

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn will face each other in a live BBC debate in Southampton on December 6, just six days before the Brits are heading to the polls.

The BBC will also present a live seven-way podium debate between senior figures from the UK’s major political parties on November 29 in Cardiff.

 

[NinjaFletch]

Only if you look really hard and need it to be to prove a point. That is clearly not why he mentioned that some were Jewish, it was in context of the criticism he'd received.

As far as I can tell, the artist is not an anti-semite. Neither is his picture overtly anti-semetic. If you are of the opinion that all evil bankers are Jewish, or all Jews are evil bankers, then maybe you could see this image as being anti-semetic. But it seems clear to me that as with nearly (every?) time this type of anti Corbyn story comes up, there is very very little in it.

I mean, he obviously is.

Painting a big, anti-semitic mural is a pretty big give away on that front.

 

[Flying high]

First, make sure to actually look at the mural. Don’t take a fleeting glance as you prepare to tweet your outrage, but pause for a moment and take it all in. Sitting around a table is a group of rotund men: one has a full beard, and is counting money. That, in and of itself, is an antisemitic symbol.

It’s not just the big, hookednoses and evil expressions that make this iconography offensive and troubling, these depictions mirror antisemitic propaganda used by Hitler and the Nazis to whip up hatred that led to the massacre of millions of Jews. This extends to the table these figures are sat at, resting on human bodies, as the Nazis also depicted.

Context here is also important. If you haven’t yet, then research The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. An entirely fabricated text printed first in Russia during the early 1900s, it purports to document a meeting of Jewish leaders setting out plans to take over the world by controlling the media and press, and fostering religious conflict to subjugate non-Jews across the globe.

the Protocols were a key element of the Nazi propaganda programme – at least 23 editions were published by the party in the two decades that preceded the outbreak of the second world war in 1939. The domination of the world by hooknosed men wielding power and money? There is more than a visual connection in this mural to antisemitism – the messaging is full-blown Nazi too.

In other contexts Illuminati conspiracies are light-hearted and funny: it’s not antisemitic to joke that Kanye West and Taylor Swift are part of a secret, triangle-based plot to conquer the world. But the employment of an Eye of Providence symbol (often associated with the Illuminati and Freemasonry) in the offending mural is clearly antisemitic. Racist conspiracy theorists also long claimed that Jews are in control of the Freemason network – think the Rothschilds and George Soros. That is antisemitism too.

If you’re left in any doubt, just read the words of Mear One, the street artist who painted the mural: “Some of the older white Jewish folk in the local community had an issue with me portraying their beloved #Rothschild or #Warburg etc as the demons they are,” he has written

I'm not a historian, so I missed the historical link to any anti-semetic images of the past. I'll take your word on that. Corbyn was probably correct to apologise in the circumstances, given the sensitive history. He should probably be more aware than the average person(me) when it comes to religious/cultural sensitivities. I guess if you are Jewish it might be the first thing you see looking at that mural. It wasn't for me at all, though I guess some could see it similar to the dog whistle type racism of the right? Not directly overt, unless you know what to look for. Sly racism?

I don't take the quote at the end to be anti semetic either. So I guess I am still in some doubt.

In terms of using it as a stick with which to constantly beat him, I still don't see it. His career of representing those of all backgrounds against persecution leads me to believe that he's not anti semetic. The whole debacle over the IHRA definition thing last year clearly showed that there are powerful lobby groups doing their best to limit criticism of Isreal. If there's a long list of his anti semetic past that I haven't seen, worse than this, then please let me know and I might need to change my mind.

 

[2cents]

Stephen Pollard and the JC printed a front page piece that is saying that British Jews are afraid of Corbyn. The implication is that they are afraid of a Corbyn government expelling them, or killing them, or putting them in camps or something, which is so patently absurd.

I think this is a good example of one of the problems with this discussion and Corbyn’s approach to this issue. Your conception of antisemitism appears to be limited to its most extreme manifestations, and I’d hazard a guess that you associate these largely or exclusively with the far-right. This is, I believe, Corbyn’s view - real, genuine antisemitism is a problem of Nazis and skinheads. If some antisemitic tropes are produced by the left, that is an unfortunate consequence of a critique of capitalism and imperialism which is essentially correct, just taken a bit too far. If Islamists, Arabs or Muslims express antisemitism, that is an unfortunate product of the protest of the weak against the powerful, and not indicative of any broader ideological framework. In both cases, it is not really something to worry about or dwell on, since the correction of society’s ills will naturally remove the impulse which has produced the antisemitism in question. Most Jews, however, don’t buy this line of thought, for historical reasons which should be obvious.

So I'm asking what are they afraid of...

But you’re not prepared to accept what they’re actually telling you, so you’ve made your own mind up. Hence my conclusion that you believe “British Jews” have fabricated this controversy. I’d hazard a guess that there isn’t another minority in the UK whose concerns regarding racism you’d dismiss so readily.

It’s also worth pointing out that even one of Corbyn’s favored Jewish organizations, Jewdas, who occupy a fairly peripheral far-leftist position within the British Jewish community, reject the claim that this is a manufactured/fabricated controversy:



I have a couple of close British-Israeli Jewish friends whose natural political home would be Labour (in Israel they’d typically vote Meretz depending on tactics to thwart the right). From what I gather the three specific episodes which have recently come to light which have troubled them most have been Corbyn’s embrace of Raed Salah and dismissal of the charges against him as a product of the “Zionist Lobby”, his reference to the “hand of Israel” in explaining a jihadist attack in the Sinai, and most of all his accusation that a couple of Jewish political opponents of his didn’t understand “British irony.” (it’s this last episode which has led one of them to wash his hands of Labour entirely). But as much as those specific episodes (which together with a host of other episodes, some mentioned above in this thread, but many more not, present a troubling enough picture), I think it’s a combination a (a) the general indifference expressed by Corbyn’s Labour Party to the problem of leftist and Islamist antisemitism which I’ve described above, and (b) what they see as a complete lack of genuine engagement/empathy with the historical and contemporary factors which drive so many British Jews to identify with Israel/Zionism today (which comprise, in large part, the story of the Jews in the modern world), which has alienated them.

 

[sun_tzu]

I think the plan must be if we carry on with all this shit then the ehrc can't ever finish / publish their report
Gideon bull (candidate for clacton) picking up the batton yesterday quitting over calling a Jewish councillor a shylock

 

[2cents]

This doesn't seem to be likely based on the photographic evidence. Corbyn is pictured holding the wreath in front of the Black September memorial. The final picture in the series shows the same wreath lying next to the same memorial. The monument to Palestinians killed in 1985 is in a different part of the cemetery and nowhere near where Corbyn was pictured holding the wreath. Based on the photographic evidence i'm afraid it's Corbyn's story that's the stretch.

My opinion is that he did indeed go to that cemetery to remember the victims of 1985 but was less than informed about other elements of the service. Eventually he found himself involved in the laying of a wreath at the foot of some graves without being fully cognisant of who they contained. Later on I think he's realised what happend and concluded he's better off obfuscating than coming clean because it's an utterly terrible look and the best you can say is that he was a fecking idiot.

Yeah, as I previously argued here, there’s a way a more knowledgeable person might have been able to twist the controversy to suit his case.

 

[Sweet Square]

Hawksbee blogged in September 2018: “The fear of many on the left is that the ideological successors of the bombers of the King David Hotel, the mass murderers who decimated Deir Yassin, would be quite happy to see a pogrom in Gaza and the West Bank, a Jewish final solution to the Palestine problem''

Insensitive and stupid but not worth someone getting fired.

 

[Red Star One]

I honestly wouldn't be too serious about racism accusations from a paper that hosted events with Farage. Is there anyone who actually believes JC goes after Labour for Corbyn's alleged hatred for Jewish faith, or most are aware it's only political play and supporting their own political/financial agenda?

 

[Shamwow]

I think it’s a combination a (a) the general indifference expressed by Corbyn’s Labour Party to the problem of leftist and Islamist antisemitism which I’ve described above, and (b) what they see as a complete lack of genuine engagement/empathy with the historical and contemporary factors which drive so many British Jews to identify with Israel/Zionism today (which comprise, in large part, the story of the Jews in the modern world), which has alienated them.

It's interesting to me partly because the part of the Jewish community that I'm close to (e.g. about half the members of my family and close friends) generally thinks that they are being marginalised by this debate. A lot of Jewish people are getting labelled as anti-semites for saying insensitive things about Israel. E.g. Jewdas for saying Israel belongs in the gutter (or something along those lines) got labelled as anti-semitic for it. I spoke to my brother who is born & raised Jewish about this recently and he doesn't agree with anything in the IHRA that mentions Israel, in fact I (a Corbyn supporter) seemed to agree with it more than he did (specifically on comparisons between the Nazis and contemporary Israeli policy).

A significant number of the people who got kicked out of Labour are Jewish themselves, which I think is something that we should be questioning more, even if the cases are justified. And while I do not like JVL at all due to some of their actions, I think that there needs to be a space for non-Israel supporting Jews, considering that the current organisations within Labour are both Israel lobbying organisations (LFI & JLM). As it stands, minority voices within the Jewish community may be being marginalised by non-Jews, which is a ridiculous situation.

 

[horsechoker]

Daily Mail coming out in favour of Labour. Which is surprising.

"War replaced with free everything"

Why is this bad?

 

[SteveJ]

I'm a Labour supporter and, while I have my own views about the Party's anti-Semitism problem, I find it literally unbelievable that candidates discussing Jewish matters would be unaware of terms like 'final solution' & ignorant of the character Shylock being Jewish. Either those people are flat-out lying or are displaying the kind of unforgivable ignorance which invalidates their 'right' to discuss this issue.

 

[Shamwow]

I'm a Labour supporter and, while I have my own views about the Party's anti-Semitism problem, I find it literally unbelievable that candidates discussing Jewish matters would unaware of terms like 'final solution' & ignorant of the character Shylock being Jewish. Either those people are flat-out lying or are displaying the kind of unforgivable ignorance which invalidates their 'right' to discuss this issue.

There's a certain type of Pro-Palestine activist that thinks they need to make their arguments in the most (for want of a better word) edgy way possible because they think it makes their point resonate or stand out more. Going off memory comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany have been very common but I'd say it's only in the last couple of years that the mainstream opinion is that this sort of language is racially insensitive at best and outright racist at worst.

 

[Flying high]

I'm a Labour supporter and, while I have my own views about the Party's anti-Semitism problem, I find it literally unbelievable that candidates discussing Jewish matters would unaware of terms like 'final solution' & ignorant of the character Shylock being Jewish. Either those people are flat-out lying or are displaying the kind of unforgivable ignorance which invalidates their 'right' to discuss this issue.

I took the 'final solution' quote as being intended to cause offence, in truth. I suspect it was to try to draw a parallel with what is happening in Gaza. Not sensible, or reasonable. Even if the Palestinian situation is disgraceful. Two wrongs etc.

 

[Ubik]

I think the plan must be if we carry on with all this shit then the ehrc can't ever finish / publish their report
Gideon bull (candidate for clacton) picking up the batton yesterday quitting over calling a Jewish councillor a shylock

Giving ChangeUK a run for their money on candidate vetting at the moment. Woeful.

 

[Untied]

Insensitive and stupid but not worth someone getting fired.

Yeah it's not antisemitic to point out there are Zionists who would like to exterminate the Palestinians

E.g. This Times of Israel piece: When Genocide is Permissible: https://archive.ph/RPf3M

 

[BobbyManc]

I think this is a good example of one of the problems with this discussion and Corbyn’s approach to this issue. Your conception of antisemitism appears to be limited to its most extreme manifestations, and I’d hazard a guess that you associate these largely or exclusively with the far-right. This is, I believe, Corbyn’s view - real, genuine antisemitism is a problem of Nazis and skinheads. If some antisemitic tropes are produced by the left, that is an unfortunate consequence of a critique of capitalism and imperialism which is essentially correct, just taken a bit too far. If Islamists, Arabs or Muslims express antisemitism, that is an unfortunate product of the protest of the weak against the powerful, and not indicative of any broader ideological framework. In both cases, it is not really something to worry about or dwell on, since the correction of society’s ills will naturally remove the impulse which has produced the antisemitism in question. Most Jews, however, don’t buy this line of thought, for historical reasons which should be obvious.



But you’re not prepared to accept what they’re actually telling you, so you’ve made your own mind up. Hence my conclusion that you believe “British Jews” have fabricated this controversy. I’d hazard a guess that there isn’t another minority in the UK whose concerns regarding racism you’d dismiss so readily.

It’s also worth pointing out that even one of Corbyn’s favored Jewish organizations, Jewdas, who occupy a fairly peripheral far-leftist position within the British Jewish community, reject the claim that this is a manufactured/fabricated controversy:



I have a couple of close British-Israeli Jewish friends whose natural political home would be Labour (in Israel they’d typically vote Meretz depending on tactics to thwart the right). From what I gather the three specific episodes which have recently come to light which have troubled them most have been Corbyn’s embrace of Raed Salah and dismissal of the charges against him as a product of the “Zionist Lobby”, his reference to the “hand of Israel” in explaining a jihadist attack in the Sinai, and most of all his accusation that a couple of Jewish political opponents of his didn’t understand “British irony.” (it’s this last episode which has led one of them to wash his hands of Labour entirely). But as much as those specific episodes (which together with a host of other episodes, some mentioned above in this thread, but many more not, present a troubling enough picture), I think it’s a combination a (a) the general indifference expressed by Corbyn’s Labour Party to the problem of leftist and Islamist antisemitism which I’ve described above, and (b) what they see as a complete lack of genuine engagement/empathy with the historical and contemporary factors which drive so many British Jews to identify with Israel/Zionism today (which comprise, in large part, the story of the Jews in the modern world), which has alienated them.

I think this is a pretty good summary of the problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour party. The main issue that hinders genuine introspection about it is that it is so obvious that it is being weaponised against Corbyn and the party and above all by disingenuous actors that it prompts a defensive response that veers into outright denial of the problem. It's frustrating to see, and it's something that I have been guilty of doing myself at times.

 

[finneh]

I think this is a good example of one of the problems with this discussion and Corbyn’s approach to this issue. Your conception of antisemitism appears to be limited to its most extreme manifestations, and I’d hazard a guess that you associate these largely or exclusively with the far-right. This is, I believe, Corbyn’s view - real, genuine antisemitism is a problem of Nazis and skinheads. If some antisemitic tropes are produced by the left, that is an unfortunate consequence of a critique of capitalism and imperialism which is essentially correct, just taken a bit too far. If Islamists, Arabs or Muslims express antisemitism, that is an unfortunate product of the protest of the weak against the powerful, and not indicative of any broader ideological framework. In both cases, it is not really something to worry about or dwell on, since the correction of society’s ills will naturally remove the impulse which has produced the antisemitism in question. Most Jews, however, don’t buy this line of thought, for historical reasons which should be obvious.



But you’re not prepared to accept what they’re actually telling you, so you’ve made your own mind up. Hence my conclusion that you believe “British Jews” have fabricated this controversy. I’d hazard a guess that there isn’t another minority in the UK whose concerns regarding racism you’d dismiss so readily.

It’s also worth pointing out that even one of Corbyn’s favored Jewish organizations, Jewdas, who occupy a fairly peripheral far-leftist position within the British Jewish community, reject the claim that this is a manufactured/fabricated controversy:



I have a couple of close British-Israeli Jewish friends whose natural political home would be Labour (in Israel they’d typically vote Meretz depending on tactics to thwart the right). From what I gather the three specific episodes which have recently come to light which have troubled them most have been Corbyn’s embrace of Raed Salah and dismissal of the charges against him as a product of the “Zionist Lobby”, his reference to the “hand of Israel” in explaining a jihadist attack in the Sinai, and most of all his accusation that a couple of Jewish political opponents of his didn’t understand “British irony.” (it’s this last episode which has led one of them to wash his hands of Labour entirely). But as much as those specific episodes (which together with a host of other episodes, some mentioned above in this thread, but many more not, present a troubling enough picture), I think it’s a combination a (a) the general indifference expressed by Corbyn’s Labour Party to the problem of leftist and Islamist antisemitism which I’ve described above, and (b) what they see as a complete lack of genuine engagement/empathy with the historical and contemporary factors which drive so many British Jews to identify with Israel/Zionism today (which comprise, in large part, the story of the Jews in the modern world), which has alienated them.

I'm quoting this as it's an incredibly articulate summary of the issue.

The way my (Jewish) wife puts it: In every other area of harm we as a society look to the victims when looking and empathising as to whether harm or prejudice has occurred. Particularly the left seem to go against this doctrine when looking at antisemitism in that if there is any possible means of applying mental gymnastics to justify something as not anti-semitic, despite the people it affecting stating it is causing them distress, then they deem it a fabricated or politically manufactured issue. This practice of applying an immeasurably high standard as to what can be classed as anti-semitic which applies to no other group/race and can rarely be met outside of obvious Naziism; is in itself is anti-semitic. That's why even the defence of Corbyn by applying the aforementioned double standards is anti-semitic.

I think this is a pretty good summary of the problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour party. The main issue that hinders genuine introspection about it is that it is so obvious that it is being weaponised against Corbyn and the party and above all by disingenuous actors that it prompts a defensive response that veers into outright denial of the problem. It's frustrating to see, and it's something that I have been guilty of doing myself at times.

Prejudice should always be weaponised in whatever fashion causes the perpetrator to take notice and change their actions. That's the only way they'll learn, through their actions negatively affecting themselves. If Johnson were caught saying the "N" word... I'd welcome anyone weaponising this to force his resignation (this isn't providing any equivalence).

 

[Sweet Square]

Yeah it's not antisemitic to point out there are Zionists who would like to exterminate the Palestinians

E.g. This Times of Israel piece: When Genocide is Permissible: https://archive.ph/RPf3M

Yeah pretty much.

The idea that anyone is having a serious discussion about Labour and anti semitism is laughable at this stage. Its simple political point scoring.

 

[Sweet Square]

 

[CassiusClaymore]

Is this like Catchphrase? Do we have to guess what it is?

 

[sun_tzu]

The idea that anyone is having a serious discussion about Labour and anti semitism is laughable at this stage. Its simple political point scoring.

Only 2 parties have ever had formal investigations by the ehrc
One was the bnp
The other is the labour party... that investigation is ongoing and there is an election on
It's totally valid

 

[Ady87]

I'm quoting this as it's an incredibly articulate summary of the issue.

The way my (Jewish) wife puts it: In every other area of harm we as a society look to the victims when looking and empathising as to whether harm or prejudice has occurred. Particularly the left seem to go against this doctrine when looking at antisemitism in that if there is any possible means of applying mental gymnastics to justify something as not anti-semitic, despite the people it affecting stating it is causing them distress, then they deem it a fabricated or politically manufactured issue. This practice of applying an immeasurably high standard as to what can be classed as anti-semitic which applies to no other group/race and can rarely be met outside of obvious Naziism; is in itself is anti-semitic. That's why even the defence of Corbyn by applying the aforementioned double standards is anti-semitic.


Prejudice should always be weaponised in whatever fashion causes the perpetrator to take notice and change their actions. That's the only way they'll learn, through their actions negatively affecting themselves. If Johnson were caught saying the "N" word... I'd welcome anyone weaponising this to force his resignation (this isn't providing any equivalence).

I feel like the standards for anti-semitism are different when compared with other forms of racism. For example, does this qualify as anti-semitism based on the last line of your statement?

 

[Sweet Square]

Only 2 parties have ever had formal investigations by the ehrc
One was the bnp
The other is the labour party... that investigation is ongoing and there is an election on
It's totally valid

The discussion is valid of course but the idea that people like yourself actually care or what an discussion is a completely different matter.

- Insert ironic anti semitic jokes here -

Although at least you only post on a football forum.






Freedland just smearing someone from the labour party as a anti Semite.(Also the countdown lady is really weird)

 

[Sweet Square]

 

[finneh]

I feel like the standards for anti-semitism are different when compared with other forms of racism. For example, does this qualify as anti-semitism based on the last line of your statement?

The standards aren't yours to decide. They're the Jewish communities.

If you know something is causing someone else distress, but you ignore that distress because you don't feel it's justified; you're at best an asshole or worse prejudicial. So Corbyn is either an asshole or he's prejudicial. Neither would be fit to govern in my view.

 

[NWRed]

 

[esmufc07]

The discussion is valid of course but the idea that people like yourself actually care or what an discussion is a completely different matter.

- Insert ironic anti semitic jokes here -

Although at least you only post on a football forum.






Freedland just smearing someone from the labour party as a anti Semite.(Also the countdown lady is really weird)

Why can’t you refer to her as Rachel Riley?

 

[Shamwow]

I'm quoting this as it's an incredibly articulate summary of the issue.

The way my (Jewish) wife puts it: In every other area of harm we as a society look to the victims when looking and empathising as to whether harm or prejudice has occurred. Particularly the left seem to go against this doctrine when looking at antisemitism in that if there is any possible means of applying mental gymnastics to justify something as not anti-semitic, despite the people it affecting stating it is causing them distress, then they deem it a fabricated or politically manufactured issue. This practice of applying an immeasurably high standard as to what can be classed as anti-semitic which applies to no other group/race and can rarely be met outside of obvious Naziism; is in itself is anti-semitic. That's why even the defence of Corbyn by applying the aforementioned double standards is anti-semitic.


Prejudice should always be weaponised in whatever fashion causes the perpetrator to take notice and change their actions. That's the only way they'll learn, through their actions negatively affecting themselves. If Johnson were caught saying the "N" word... I'd welcome anyone weaponising this to force his resignation (this isn't providing any equivalence).

It's not always been weaponised against the perpetrator though. Good example, John Mann's big speech about how Corbyn has enabled anti-semitism, where he used the example of a dead bird being posted through his letter box to his wife to highlight how horrible the situation is. Turns out that incident happened in 2012, and that it was posted by an unsuccessful challenger for the councillor position out of bitterness (as reported at the time). Nothing to do with anti-semitism but weaponised as such and used in an argument against Corbyn. (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/wirecop...after-posting-dead-blackbird-to-MPs-wife.html)

It's a bit of a gish gallop where a significant amount of spurious accusations are being mixed in with genuine ones to make the issue appear bigger than it is. And all of these are being pointed towards Corbyn being the ultimate cause which isn't true most of the time. I think this partially explains why there has been defensiveness on the left, and a lot of whataboutery but at the same time that the issue has been taken seriously and serious steps have been taken to act on it. There are definitely people who have been exposed as unapologetically racist as well.

 

[Shamwow]

The standards aren't yours to decide. They're the Jewish communities.

I don't agree with this view and it hasn't been the case for any other minority unless you can prove me otherwise.