BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 16 - 05:10 PM

Labour Party's anti-Semitism Struggle: Recognizing Jews Are a People, Not Just a Religion

I left the U.K. Labour Party when I received my Green Card. I felt it was odd to continue to be part of a British political party when I had officially moved overseas for good. Yet, watching the party miserably fail to deal with anti-Semitism over the past ten days, and Ken Livingstone's unending obsession with Hitler and the Jews, took me back to my days on the National Executive Committee of the National Union of Students, an organization that has been a feeder to the front lines of left-wing national politics in Britain for decades.

In 2008, I was elected as one of the 27 national executive members of the NUS. As Sam Lebens, a friend and mentor who served there two years before me, wrote in the Forward, the NUS was often a tense place for Jewish students, especially when they tried to get the majority to accept that anti-Semitism should be taken seriously.

During my own year on the NEC the first Gaza war, Operation Cast Lead, took place. We debated motions about whether NUS would march with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign or condemn the usage of anti-Semitic imagery at the rallies. At another point during that year, I had to confront the hard left on the National Executive Committee about a leaflet that was being handed out that claimed that the Holocaust killed thousands of trade unionists, disabled people, gays and communists. While these groups were indeed victims, the pamphlet omitted one key group: Jews. Here we had dedicated anti-racists educating about the Holocaust while airbrushing out its Jewish victims.

In-between votes on theses issues, I would engage those who were part of the hard left — those who saw themselves as belonging to the same leftist faction as Ken Livingstone — on how they could possibly justify their anti-racist credentials when they were doing things that were so offensive to the Jewish community.

It all came down to their inability to understand why Jews were anything more than a religious group.

They felt that assigning Jews a peoplehood status would be to agree with the eugenics of the Nazis that Jews were "different" or "other;" that only the far-right fascists could see Jews in this way, rather than as just normal white folk. By reducing the Jewish experience into a religious dogma, the hard-left concurred, they were doing Jews a favor.

Jews did not have a place in the traditional liberation campaigns of the NUS. Being Jewish was not the same as being black, LGBTQ, female or disabled. Jews were hated by fascists; the hard left just wanted them to assimilate. According to the hard left in the NUS, being particularist about your Jewish ethnic background was to buy into a racism that was forced upon you.

The hard left was simply incapable of learning the lessons of why Jews felt that the enlightenment did not go their way (read: the Dreyfus affair) and insisted on "flattening" what it means to be a Jew into a solely religious experience.

The utter refusal of the hard left in Britain to accept that anti-Semitism can morph from the traditional eugenics into parts of modern-day anti-Zionist discourse stems from its rejection of Jews as a people. It is an unfortunate fact that Judaism comes from a time before census surveys began separating the "religion" box from the "ethnicity" box. In their worldview, Jewish peoplehood is a categorical error.

The core problem will not be solved until the hard left in Britain recognizes that the Jewish people are more than just a religious community. But the hard left is finding it hard to see that modern anti-Semitism exists beyond the far right, and in fact extends into its own territory.

Therefore, their obsession with Israel — and their inability to distinguish anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism — is based in their rejection of the concept of the Jewish people. The nation state was never a construct that the hard left liked in the first place. When coupled with a people that the hard left denies exists outside a religious context, Zionism becomes for them the embodiment of everything they oppose. The Jewish state reminds them that a Utopian view where a leftist emancipation will heal all wounds fails the test of history, and that demography and territory is something that oppressed people do aspire to.

The personalities within Britain's Labour Party who are being accused of having an anti-Semitism problem are of the same political bent as the hard left that I came into contact with during my time on the NEC of the NUS. It's therefore clear that Labour's anti-Semitism problem won't go away until the hard-left elements within the party accept that Jews are more than a religious group. It won't matter how many people are suspended from the party if its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, can't bring himself to say "anti-Semitism" without qualifying it alongside other forms of racism.

Without recognizing the particular challenge of modern anti-Semitism, the new inquiry into anti-Semitism that the Labour Party has launched will — I fear — achieve nothing.

Joel Braunold is the Executive Director of the Alliance for Middle East Peace. He served on the National Executive Committee of the National Union of Students in 2008.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:46 PM

"This is about the problems of the Labour Party!"
In your opinion maybe - it is about Israel using the accusation of Antisemitism against anybody who criticies their terrorism - inluding the Labour Party as far as I am concerned.
You are once again attempting to avoid the awkward bits by squaeling "thread drift".
We will debate this and every topic in whatever way we see fir - it's called 'freedom of speech' - look it up.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:16 PM

"That really is just denial.
Whenever Livingstone and the MP made those statements it would have been picked up.

I would point to the above quote from pro Israeli academic / activist"David Hirsh" posted by bobad,
which serves very adequately to reinforce my 'suspicion' that a network of bloggers and well funded 'think tanks/research groups'
are constantly monitoring and cataloguing every social media post by problematic individuals
they regard to be anti israeli...

Someone, somewhere needed to dig up those old social media statements by 'the MP' Naz Shah and bring them to high profile media attention
so close in the run up to elections..... 😣

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:14 PM

You do not have to pay to read the Haaretz article if you arrive via Google.
Google "Labour anti semitic"

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:11 PM

Jim
This is, as far as I am concerned, about the Israelis using the Holocaust as an excuse for its behavour -

Why Jim?
This is about the problems of the Labour Party!

(It is bollocks BTW but I will not discuss it here.)

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:04 PM

"Jim, I am not sure what point you are making with that IT piece."
This is, as far as I am concerned, about the Israelis using the Holocaust as an excuse for its behavour - they have accused all Jews who criticise as "self-haters".
They have accused Livingstone of Antisemitism on the same basis, even though there are top figures in the Israeli establishment of saying exactly the same thing - there always have been.
Former heads of Mossad accused the Israeli regime of acting as did the Nazis.
When those at the top say these things the accusation is validadted on both sides.
Not surprised I had to spell it out for you but I'm grateful for the opportunity to make that clear.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 03:01 PM

PFR
I have more than made clear my informed suspicion that any Labour party 'problem' with antisemitism
has been fabricated by 'agencies' outside of the party,

That really is just denial.
Whenever Livingstone and the MP made those statements it would have been picked up.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 02:58 PM

Jim, I am not sure what point you are making with that IT piece.

Re Bobad's link, I was able to read the whole article earlier though not a subscriber. not sure what is going on.
The article is by a former Labour member who was on the NEC of the NUS in 2008.

Steve,
It is not a whim to state that a country that is at least a quarter non-Jewish should not be calling itself a Jewish state.

That is how it was set up and that is what it is, notwithstanding your whim Steve.

anyone attacking its policies is attacking the Jewish state, therefore attacking Jews.

Ridiculous. Of course not.
Israel's policies are attacked every day in its parliament and by its free media.
Any country's policies can be attacked and of course that is not racism.

what you'd think if you were a Muslim or a Sikh, or even an ex-Catholic atheist, who happened to have been born in Israel.

You could make the same point about "Islamic states" and "Arab States."
Why don't you?
Why single out the Jewish state again?

Wiki,
The "Jewish state" is a political term used to describe the nation state of Israel.
Modern Israel came into existence on 14 May 1948 as the homeland for the Jewish people. It was also defined in its declaration of independence as a "Jewish state," a term that appeared in the United Nations partition decision of 1947 as well. The related term "Jewish and democratic state" dates from 1992 legislation by the Israeli Knesset.

You are entitled to your whims Steve, but they are irrelevant to reality.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 16 - 02:47 PM

"Btw bobad - why do you keep wasting your time linking to articles in specialist interest international media
that few if any of us subscribe to and are able to read...??????"

Probably because he didn't realise it wasn't free, and almost certainly because he hasn't read it. One thing that's clear about this bloke is that he debates by soundbite and sniping.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 16 - 02:14 PM

'Trouble in Paradise'
From this morning's Irish Times
Jim Carroll

Netanyahu says army general's Holocaust remarks "unacceptable'
MARK WEISS
in Jerusalem
Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu has launched a scathing attack on the eputy Israel Defence Forces (IDF) chief of staff Maj Gen Yair Golan for "disrespecting the memory of the Holocaust".
Gen Golan sparked controversy last week when, during a speech honouring Holocaust remembrance day, he said he identified trends in contemporary Israel similar to those in pre-war Europe.
"If there is something that frightens me about the memory of the Holocaust, it is seeing the abhorrent processes that took place in Europe, and Germany in particular, some 70, 80 or 90 years ago, and finding manifestations of these processes here among us in 2016, " he said.
Not a comparison
After a public outcry, the general clarified that he hadn't intended to compare Israel to Nazi Germany.
"I had no intention of making that comparison - it is absurd and unfounded, " Gen Golan said. "There was no intention of creating that impression or to criticise [Israel's] political echelon. "
However, Mr Netanyahu said Golan's comments were "unacceptable".
"The comparison implied is outrageous and baseless. These remarks should not have been made at all, and certainly at the time they were said. These remarks wrong Israeli society and disrespect the memory of the Holocaust. " Culture minister Miri Regev, from Mr Netanyahu's ruling Likud party, called on the general to resign, saying he had joined those who delegitimise' Israel.
Retired generals along with politicians came to the general's defence, most notably defence minister Moshe Ya'alon, who issued a statement in support of Golan, saying his words were twisted in an attempt to "politically damage the IDF and its officers".
Israel's opposition leader Yitzhak Herzog praised Gen Golan as a courageous commander. "The crazies who will now start screaming against him should know: this is what morality and responsibility sound like. "
Former IDF chief of staff Benny Gantz said: "Golan's statement was poignant and brave. Neither the left nor the right have a monopoly on ethics. "

"Simple denial is not useful."
It's served you well enough for as long as I can remember
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 02:03 PM

Bobad / Keith - sorry but when I'm consumed with worry about my old mum's health care,
how long we wait for appointments, how reliable the diagnosis by an overtired and stressed Dr might be,
if the medication will be the correct one, how the hell we will cope if and when the dementia worsens
and we need to find any remaining affordable day care... etc.. etc.. etc..

.. under such circumstances.. the theoretical academic concerns on the finer points of anti-anything-ism will not be our families greatest priority...

Now, I'd hate to sound like a petty minded insular nationalist xenophobe..

... plenty enough real ones of those to point at in UKIP and the tories..

but our votes for the UK Labour Party are for fairer Health, social welfare and working conditions that are more immediately relevant to our needs...

I'd guess the same counts for most other ordinary Labour supporters...

We can't be oblivious to what is happening on the other side of the world, and how it might impact us at home,
but it can't be pragmatically as important to us as it is to the over vociferous zealots obsessed with making a meal of it for their own self absorbed ends...

Btw bobad - why do you keep wasting your time linking to articles in specialist interest international media
that few if any of us subscribe to and are able to read...??????

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 16 - 01:44 PM

Hmm. Click and you can get the convoluted one-liner, as in the post above, but you have to pay to read any more. Perhaps our poster would care to explain it to us carefully. Sorry, mate, you'll have to be bobad this time, not an anonymous sniping Guest...

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 09 May 16 - 01:36 PM

"The reason Britain's hard left refuses to accept that anti-Semitism can morph from traditional eugenics into parts of modern-day anti-Zionism is because it utterly rejects the notion of Jewish peoplehood."

U.K. Labour's anti-Semitism Struggle: Recognizing Jews Are a People, Not Just a Religion

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 01:01 PM

.. like how it winds me up everytime I see a a high ranking tory or UKIP buffoon on TV declaring Britain is a christian nation upholding christian values..

..excuse me... I'm a 25% genetic jew 75% Scrumpyshire agnostic/atheist humanist punk hippy if you don't mind... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 16 - 12:45 PM

The soi-disant Jewish state (which is precisely what it is) is no such thing. It is not a whim to state that a country that is at least a quarter non-Jewish should not be calling itself a Jewish state. It's absolutely clear why it would want to do so: anyone attacking its policies is attacking the Jewish state, therefore attacking Jews. A clear attempt to broaden the definition of antisemitism. Keith, you never have a thought of your own. You think you can prove points by telling us all the time what other people think, whether it's some EU committee, selected historians or Israeli politicians. Well I'm telling you what I think, and I think there is no justification on earth for Israel's calling itself the Jewish state, and I've given you my reason, which you can't refute, as it happens to be a fact. Israel already has a name, Israel. That'll do me. Let me ask you what you'd think if you were a Muslim or a Sikh, or even an ex-Catholic atheist, who happened to have been born in Israel. If you were asked where you came from, would you cheerfully reply "from Israel, the Jewish state, of course!"? A true Jewish state would contain hardly anyone except for Jews. No such country exists. And some of those non-Jews, or their ancestors at least, were living in the area long before it became Israel. All of a sudden, without being consulted, the ones who weren't actually expelled were told they now lived in a Jewish state. You really can't see this, can you?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 12:06 PM

Who has denied the probability of a minority of racists in the labour party ?

But probably far fewer than in the other parties....
and wider society a whole...

I have more than made clear my informed suspicion that any Labour party 'problem' with antisemitism
has been fabricated by 'agencies' outside of the party,
who have lobbed truck loads of mud with the desperate intent that some sticks...

Strategically timed for the recent elections.

Genuine racists within the Labour movement must be identified and dealt with.

.. but of course, if all this is really about the Labour party attracting an influx of new muslim supporters
it's certainly easier for the rabid detractors to accuse Labour of antisemitism
rather than publicly exposing themselves to be islamophobes.... 😣

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 May 16 - 11:52 AM

Could I suggest you cite your sources.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 11:49 AM

Anyone anything to say about the Labour Party and its current problems including antisemitism.

Simple denial is not useful.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 11:25 AM

From your earlier Wiki piece Steve,

"in his book, The Deadliest Lies, Abraham Foxman referred to the notion that the pro-Israel lobby is trying to censor criticism of Israel as a "canard."[85] Foxman writes that the Jewish community is capable of telling the difference between legitimate criticism of Israel "and the demonization, deligitization, and double standards employed against Israel that is either inherently anti-Semitic or generates an environment of anti-Semitism." Jonathan Rosenblum expressed similar thoughts: "Indeed, if there were an Israel lobby, and labeling all criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic were its tactic, the steady drumbeat of criticism of Israel on elite campuses and in the elite press would be the clearest proof of its inefficacy."[86]

Alan Dershowitz wrote that he welcomes "reasoned, contextual and comparative criticism of Israeli policies and actions."[87] If one of the goals of the pro-Israel lobby was to censor criticism of Israel, Dershowitz writes, "it would prove that 'the Lobby' is a lot less powerful than the authors would have us believe."[87] Dershowitz himself, claims to have written several critical pieces on specific Israeli policies.[citation needed] Dershowitz disagrees with those who believe that the media is uncritical of Israel and cites the frequent New York Times editorials and even an editorial in The Jewish Daily Forward against some of Israel's more right of center policies as proof.[citation needed] Dershowitz also denies that any significant, mainstream leader in the American Jewish community equates criticism of Israel with antisemitism

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 11:22 AM

Steve,
And what if I don't agree that Israel should be referred to as "the Jewish state,"

Your whims are irrelevant to the actual facts Steve.

Wiki,
The "Jewish state" is a political term used to describe the nation state of Israel.
Modern Israel came into existence on 14 May 1948 as the homeland for the Jewish people. It was also defined in its declaration of independence as a "Jewish state," a term that appeared in the United Nations partition decision of 1947 as well. The related term "Jewish and democratic state" dates from 1992 legislation by the Israeli Knesset.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 10:56 AM

International politics made easy: more schoolyard analogies...

Little Israel is a spoilt brat rich kid bully protected by even richer, bigger, older bullies.

The UK Labour party is a nice decent thoughtful considerate kid, maybe a bit too much of a do gooder,
who is pen pals with some poor kids who Israel is not friendly with and tends to pick on.
Israel and those poor kids keep getting in tit for tat scraps.

Israel does not like the UK Labour party being too friendly with those poor kids,
so has started to troll internet social media anonymously bullying the Labour party....

This will only end in tears.

Israel needs to be told off and sent to bed early without it's favourite pudding... 😜

[or some more appropriate telling off in the grown up real world....]

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 May 16 - 10:53 AM

Nice one Punkfolkrocker !!!! Very succinctly put.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 May 16 - 10:52 AM

It's like working with a nail in yer boot....

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 16 - 10:31 AM

And what if I don't agree that Israel should be referred to as "the Jewish state," knowing as I do that at least a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish and that a good number of the rest do not adhere to the Jewish religion? Keith, the reason that you and Israel refer to Israel as the Jewish state is so that you and they can protest that we're attacking "the Jewish state," when all along we are attacking the Israeli regime's abuses towards the Palestinians. You want us to look antisemitic when we are no such thing. You are trying, dishonestly, to widen the meaning of antisemitism, which can only be attacking Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS. When we attack the actions of a state, or at least of its regime, we are doing so because we think that they are doing bad things. Not because they are Jewish. We can discuss other states' bad behaviour in a different context. We often do: in the "Rising" thread I attacked the US for its foreign policy abuses. But this thread revolves around questions of antisemitism, therefore it tends to be in large part about Israelis, Jews and people who may seem to oppose them. I don't see why I should have to balance my accusations against the Israeli regime and the Israel lobby by cataloguing the abuses of other nations every time just to keep you happy. You are the first to moan and groan about thread drift, remember? As for holding Israel to different standards, we treat them to a different, more privileged standard, especially in providing massive military aid. I'm saying that that should come with conditions attached. I also think we should stop selling arms to Saudi Arabia, and training their military, until they stop their human rights abuses. If I give a child a toy, only to find that he then uses it to beat his little sister over the head, I won't let him him keep the toy. Are you happy now?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 16 - 10:07 AM

This is Keith's thread, it's his football, and he can move the duffel coat and anorak goalposts any where and whenever he likes... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 May 16 - 08:19 AM

"If not because it is the Jewish state, then why?"

In this instance possibly because the thread mentioned anti-Semitism in the first post .............. by yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 08:04 AM

steve,
Your Wikie piece does not support your assertion that "The pro-Israel lobby in America also seeks to widen the definition,(of antisemitism")

My highlighting the "balance" does not change that.

If I criticise Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS I am antisemitic. If I criticise the actions of a person or a group of people because I think they are perpetrating injustices, I am not.

You are if you ignore worse offenders and always and only criticise Israel.
It means you are singling out Israel, and holding it to a different standard to its neighbours and enemies.

You need to explain why it is not antisemitc to single out Israel for attack while ignoring worse offenders.
If not because it is the Jewish state, then why?

Paul,
More recent occupations.
Tibet. Kashmir. Japanese islands occupied by Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 May 16 - 04:47 AM

I was honest enough not to edit the balance out of that passage, Keith. You have simply chosen to edit the relevant bits out in your head. Your modus operandi, of course. One more thing. I don't give a stuff about what you've dug up from some EU document you keep droning on about. We all know that you can't even read a simple sentence in a newspaper article without wilfully misinterpreting it, so that game isn't worth the candle. If I criticise Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS I am antisemitic. If I criticise the actions of a person or a group of people because I think they are perpetrating injustices, I am not. Of course, if I use that opinion to denigrate those people BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS, I may be. But I don't. It's really simple, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 May 16 - 04:20 AM

Ireland 1170 to 1922?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Paul Burke
Date: 09 May 16 - 04:05 AM

"There are many previous and worse example of occupation by other states that are ignored. "

I'm sure you're right Keith. The occupation of South America by the Iberian powers since the 16th century, North America by (notably) the British and French from the seventeenth, and Australia by the British since the eighteenth spring to mind. Though it's possible that you have better examples to share?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 May 16 - 01:44 AM

Steve,
I have told you in very simple terms what antisemitism is, Keith

No. You stated your opinion, and I stated the considered opinion of the 28 states of the European Union which flatly contradicts yours.

Your Wikle piece does not support your assertion that "The pro-Israel lobby in America also seeks to widen the definition,(of antisemitism"

Have you anything else that does?
It does say,"some criticism of Israel really is rooted in anti-Semitism"

Paul,

Because soft handling of "the only Jewish state in the world" has left the west in an impossible position

Nonsense.
There are many previous and worse example of occupation by other states that are ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 08 May 16 - 10:27 PM

Ah yes, Jimmy Carter, the long time anti-Semite and Israel basher bought and paid for by the Saudis to parrot their racist, Jew hating agenda. It is no surprise to see Shaw quoting this despicable, senile old bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 16 - 07:40 PM

Just telling me that you don't agree with two of my points, then failing to explain why, is a bit lame in a discussion forum, Keith, don't you think?   I have told you in very simple terms what antisemitism is, Keith. It is disparaging or attacking Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS. Not because of their politics or what their regime gets up to. It's so simple. People like you and the pro-Israel lobby expend a great deal of energy dishonestly trying to expand that very simple definition. If I say that Jacob Zuma is a prick and that it's regrettable that so many ANC members support him, that does not make me a racist. If I say that Jacob Zuma was bound to fail because he's black, and managed to take so many black people with him, that's racist. Keith, you want a broader definition of antisemitism so that you can then use it to suppress debate about the evils of the Israeli regime, which you unconditionally support no matter what injustices they perpetrate on Palestinians. By the way, Keith, it wasn't my idea to call Israel a Jewish state. One quarter of the people who live in Israel are not Jews. To me, that makes Israel a state with a predominantly Jewish population, but not a Jewish state. To call it that is inaccurate at best and racist at worst. My view is that Israel receives special and privileged treatment from the West, therefore we should expect high standards of behaviour in return. As much of that aid is military, I think we should expect at the very least the quest for peace and security for its own people and for its neighbours, built on a position of strength, precisely the opposite of what actually happens. We can't expect anything as particular from countries that we don't aid in the same way, though we may hold them to certain international standards when it comes to human rights. In other words, Keith, there should be conditions attached to that massive aid. The fact that it doesn't happen in the case of Western aid to Israel is the very reason why, for decades, peace talks involving Israel have been a sham. Israel knows that it can do what it likes but the aid will keep going in. They never need to give a single inch. Now all that is my opinion. If you think a single word of it is antisemitic, you'd better give a clear explanation as to why you think so. And, for a change, let's hear what YOU think, not some higher authority. Think for yourself for a change, Keith. It would be quite refreshing.

Can I support my assertion that the pro-Israel lobby tries to broaden the definition of antisemitism in furtherance of its interests? Why yes, I can. This is from wiki, Keith.

Zunes [Professor of Politics at the University of San Francisco and specialist in Middle East politics] writes that "assaults on critics of Israeli policies have been more successful in limiting open debate, but this gagging censorship effect stems more from ignorance and liberal guilt than from any all-powerful Israel lobby." He goes on to explain that while "some criticism of Israel really is rooted in anti-Semitism", it is his opinion that some members of the Israel lobby cross the line by labeling intellectually honest critics of Israel as antisemitic. Zunes argues that the mainstream and conservative Jewish organizations have "created a climate of intimidation against many who speak out for peace and human rights or who support the Palestinians' right of self-determination." Zunes has been on the receiving end of this criticism himself "As a result of my opposition to US support for the Israeli government's policies of occupation, colonization and repression, I have been deliberately misquoted, subjected to slander and libel, and falsely accused of being "anti-Semitic" and "supporting terrorism"; my children have been harassed and my university's administration has been bombarded with calls for my dismissal."

In an opinion piece for The Guardian, Jimmy Carter wrote that mainstream American politics does not give equal time to the Palestinian side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that this is due at least in part to AIPAC. George Soros pointed out that there are risks associated with what was in his opinion a suppression of debate:

"I do not subscribe to the myths propagated by enemies of Israel and I am not blaming Jews for anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism predates the birth of Israel. Neither Israel's policies nor the critics of those policies should be held responsible for anti-Semitism. At the same time, I do believe that attitudes toward Israel are influenced by Israel's policies, and attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby's success in suppressing divergent views."

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Paul Burke
Date: 08 May 16 - 03:22 PM

"Why else would you single out the only Jewish state in the world?"

Because soft handling of "the only Jewish state in the world" has left the west in an impossible position- when Putin invades Ukraine, there's no answer. Israel colonises occupied territories, so why shouldn't Russia?

Because no state should be "Jewish"- it's exactly as bad as being "Muslim" or for that matter "Aryan" and for the same reason. States should be non- religious and non- racist (and avoid other forms of discrimination too) and when they are either it's totally justified to oppose them.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 16 - 02:01 PM

"on a sale from 0 - 100...???"....

sale...???

Seing as this is primarily a music website..

...Gimme a 'C'...!!!




Please don't be that shocked... it's not like I asked you to show us all your wedding tackle... 😜


Of course it don't matter... I said that before you did...


.. no big deal either way if we all get our cards out on the table or play with the royals and aces hidden up our sleeves....

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 16 - 01:45 PM

That is not antisemitism.

That is your opinion Steve, but I think you are wrong.

. The pro-Israel lobby in America also seeks to widen the definition,
Can you support that assertion?
And, the groups on the EUMC board were not part of any pro-Israel lobby.

its (Israel's)place in the Middle East as the only Western nation there that is propped up by special deals with the West and a huge unconditional subsidy to its military by the US.

No it is not.
You must come up with some other reason to single out the only Jewish state.

we can apply standards we don't expect from nations we don't treat the same way.

EUMC says you are antisemites then Steve.

but the obstinate fact that that criticising Israel for its regime's actions are never antisemitic.

It is if you ignore other regimes with an worse record.
Why else would you single out the only Jewish state in the world?

You have an agenda, Keith, that prevents you from seeing this with any clarity.

Me, and the EU.

Pfr,

I haven't a clue about Keith's degree of jewishness on a sale from 0 - 100...??? 😜

I am a little shocked that you ask.
Is my ethnicity an issue?
(The answer is zero)

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 May 16 - 10:43 AM

PFR -- Yay OK, see what you mean. But I try in the main to avoid sarcasm/irony/whevs: a notoriously double-edged weapon - however bitterly despair-inducing the provocation...

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 16 - 08:21 AM

oops.. "Corbyn should have done"

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 16 - 08:19 AM

Btw.. Keith - "SPB, Labour has done much worse than previous leading opposition parties in mid term elections, presaging a very low result in the general election.
Labour should have made large gains and the government large losses.
You should also have expected a boost from a new leader, from a government civil war on Europe and a budget that is an ongoing fiasco, yet Labour barely "held on."


..so.. regarding predictions of how well or badly labour lead by Corbyn have done...

At this point in the early 21st Century, the world is such an entirely different mess of complex reactionary conditions...

.. and Corbyn does not exist in a vacuum...

Any sensible observer / participant should be very wary of making predictions...

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 16 - 08:08 AM

MGM - sarcasm, counterproductive...???

A sad sense of humour born from despair at the stupidity of human existence....

At least i seem to have stirred you into posting a seriously interesting anecdote founded in your authentic personal historic perspective... 😎




As for Keith and his 'hidden' agenda...

I'm only 25% jew..

I haven't a clue about Keith's degree of jewishness on a sale from 0 - 100...??? 😜


Not that it matters, any misguided fool can side and identify with aims of a hostile repressive ideological regime.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 08 May 16 - 08:05 AM

Well, Keith, of course all Labour supporters would like it to have been better, and one would have to be blinkered not to recognise more needs to be done. But it is worth knowing Conservatives lost twice as many seats as Labour and that if you look at the first set of council elections after Blair and Cameron became leader, Corbyn has done better than either.

As always there are many ways to look at the set of results, but claims it was a disaster are a deliberate careful selection of viewpoint on someone's part.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 16 - 05:47 AM

Is never antisemitic, and that wasn't the only glitch. It's the small print.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 16 - 05:45 AM

"Richard, I am sure you deny your antisemitism even to yourself, but it was revealed in your post where you accused the EUMC board members, mostly Jewish, of having a "vested interest" in widening the definition of antisemitism to gain more "influence."

That is not antisemitism. The pro-Israel lobby in America also seeks to widen the definition, even though many of its supporters are not Jews. Get it into your skull, Keith: antisemitism is disparaging or attacking Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS. Attacking Jews for their political stance or machinations is not antisemitism.


There is nothing antisemetic in criticising Israel, unless you hold it to standards not expected of other states.

Israel has a specific responsibility apropos of its place in the Middle East as the only Western nation there that is propped up by special deals with the West and a huge unconditional subsidy to its military by the US. yes we can apply standards we don't expect from nations we don't treat the same way. And Israel itself does not uphold the standards that it purports to expect from its neighbours. We can squabble about that 'til kingdom come, but the obstinate fact that that criticising Israel for its regime's actions are never antisemitic. Attacking Israelis BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS is antisemitic. You have an agenda, Keith, that prevents you from seeing this with any clarity. And it isn't a very honest agenda either.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 16 - 05:04 AM

SPB, Labour has done much worse than previous leading opposition parties in mid term elections, presaging a very low result in the general election.
Labour should have made large gains and the government large losses.
You should also have expected a boost from a new leader, from a government civil war on Europe and a budget that is an ongoing fiasco, yet Labour barely "held on."

It is not an indication of a conspiracy that the media refers to this.

You refer to a hostile press.
Most people do not read papers anymore, and anyway there is a left wing press but few people subscribe to it.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:13 AM

Well, the election is done and dusted, my feet and legs are recovering, and we won the London Mayor and kept our GLA rep in spite of the stupidity of some of those who, in the public eye, represent the Labour Party, and don't know when to shut up.

The media in the UK is so screwed and biased that all it takes is Labour representatives to say one word out of place they pounce upon it, sidelining the real issues that are impacting on people's lives day by day - Vilification of people with disabilities and long-term conditions, housing (particularly private rented, and attacks on social rented sector), NHS (pushing Junior Doctors to take industrial action), reductions on front-line local services, etc etc. Virtually all the things that matter ignored in the run-up.

Labour has a lot to do. We have a government that sneers at scrutiny, and hostile press. Our membership of EU is under threat - a threat that is led by those who do not want to be fettered by a consensus obligation towards social responsibility.

Anyway, I need a break from campaigning for a week or two.


We

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:12 AM

An observation for attention of PFR -- Heavy sarcasm is usually counterproductive.

This pertinacious drift has reminded me of a conversation with my father in my teens, soon after the 1948 declaration of the state of Israel. He was an influential longtime political Zionist — back when that term simply applied to a specific political movement with specific aims & had not yet acquired its, comparatively recent, highly pejorative overtone of aggressive nationalism.

"You will have to realise" I said "that the Arabs are your Red Indians" (another term one could use then but now for some idiotic reason tabu & non-pc). "Nonsense," he replied, "they are nothing of the sort."

But I thought, and still think, I was right. One analogy -- settlements established where treaty agreements have previously stated that they wouldn't.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:02 AM

PFR, no government is above criticism.
Unlike many countries including its neighbours, Israel allows dissent and criticism of its government in its free media and parliament.

There is nothing antisemetic in criticising Israel, unless you hold it to standards not expected of other states.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Paul Burke
Date: 08 May 16 - 03:51 AM

So let's make a few important points:

(1) There is antisemitism in the Labour Party
)2) It ought not to be there, and has been allowed to creep in through laziness and political opportunism.
(3) It is no more prevalent than in society in general - it ought to be much less prevalent because members should be more aware.
(4) It is not confined to Corbyn supporters
(5) Criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitic (it can be), and no community can be immune from criticism.
(6) Many Jews are not zionist - now and historically. They are not antisemitic either.
(7) To claim special status for any so- called racial group- whether negatively or positively- is racism
(8) If you justify any form of racism, you implicitly justify all - including against youself. Racism is indivisible.
(9) Remember that there is a powerful force operating in politics- spin. This "antisemitism" episode bears all the marks of a political ambush, in its timing and biased application. It's a bad idea to tie important principles to ephemeral events.

I would have thought it unnecessary to emphasise these points, but some people seem determined to try to make the issue simplistic. You will also note that the term "racism" is too restrictive, and we really need a different word to cover the whole complex of religion, ethnic history, DNA heritage, and cultural tradition. For example, Muslim Bosniacs are genetically indistinguishable from Christian Serbs. The only difference is their ancestors' cultural response to the 15th centuray OIttoman invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 16 - 02:59 AM

So basically then, everyone is 'antisemitic' to some extent
unless they publicly declare they agree the israeli govt & military regime are absolutely brilliant and the best regime ever...!!!??????? 😕


Btw... ever since i was a teenager, I've been extremely wary of, if not absolutely despised,
people who rely on the "if your're not with us, you're against us" mentality of belligerent cohersive argument... 😣

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 May 16 - 02:01 AM

Richard, I am sure you deny your antisemitism even to yourself, but it was revealed in your post where you accused the EUMC board members, mostly Jewish, of having a "vested interest" in widening the definition of antisemitism to gain more "influence."

Livingstone and others also deny their antisemitism, but there it is.