The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #159827   Message #3791268
Posted By: Steve Shaw
20-May-16 - 06:16 AM
Thread Name: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
The issue is whether the criteria are being manipulated. In my mind, they are, wholesale, by groupings the world over. In fact, it would be totally naive to deny that. It is the reason we're haggling over what antisemitism really is. Why you think the two Labour politicians in the firing line are antisemitic, when patently they are not. The real, core definition is deadly simple: antisemitism is attacking Jews BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS. Not because they live in Israel or north Manchester. Not because of their political views. Not because of their religion. Not because they sometimes group together to form lobbies. Not because some of them hate Arabs. Not because the Israeli regime represses Palestinians. I want justice for Palestinians and for the Arab citizens of Israel. That is not remotely antisemitic. I don't think a state that is less than three-quarters Jewish should be calling itself a Jewish state. It is not antisemitic to say that: it is a considered opinion for which I've given my reasons. Not because some Jews are rich. Of course, some unjustified prejudices can be rolled together into an antisemitic whole: "Look at that typical Jew, rolling in money because he's so mean with it." It is NOT antisemitic to say that AIPAC consists largely of Jews who are pursuing a pro-Israel agenda. It happens to be a fact. Of course, like any fact it can be used tendentiously. Let's keep our antennae tuned for that, the honest thing to do. It's not even antisemitic to say that AIPAC enjoys undue and undemocratic influence over politicians in a supposedly democratic country (and I do say the same about the gun lobby and multinational corporations. I suppose bobad will be here any minute to tell us that I only mean the ones controlled by Jews). If you think that Richard made a factually incorrect statement, challenge it and correct it if you can and hold the slurs. Do not put words into his mouth as you did with Geoffrey Wheatcroft, and as you're doing with Richard in this instance, just to suit your own agenda, which is to use every means at your disposal, both honest and dishonest, to suppress any criticism of Israel. If you think that anything that I've said is OK is actually antisemitic, as opposed to factually incorrect, then you've fallen, possibly willingly in your case, into the trap of believing that widened definition.