Current Affairs Labour and Anti Semitism.......

[Number_25]

Do you think the LP should be questioning Israel’s right to exist?

I think it's a perfect valid belief to have, I'm not for one second suggesting that the Labour Party should unilaterally announce it as policy today though.

 

[tsubaki]

So which of the 7 million displaced Palestinians are you going to say can't have their land, houses or businesses back? Who is going to make that judgement? The Palestinians or those occupying their homeland? An injustice was done in 1948 and the only way to reverse that injustice is for those forcefully removed from their land, houses and businesses to be allowed to return and reclaim their homeland.

It isn’t the only way though; you can get them to agree to have something else instead.

 

[hullefc]

Well yes, but that’s to reduce the debate to a point of absurdity - Israel does exist, the issue is how it treats its own citizens (Jews as well as Arabs) and its relations with the Occupied Territories and its neighbours.



TBH I think even the right of return isn’t absolute, a fair negotiation could result in that being resolved without it being brought in. The point of course though is that no fair negotiations are on offer.

TBH the right of return is an absolute, as the Palestinians who were displaced keep saying. The 'march of return' demonstrations in Gaza are but a movement for the return to their homeland.

 

[Jebus_lives]

The IHRA definition doesn't mention any thing about 'the state of Israel' or 'a state of Irsael'.

Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

It's in the examples where 'Israel and state' are mentioned. And it's some of the examples Labour's NEC are against.

The 'state of Israel' was forged in 1948 by forcefully removing Palestinians and others, from their land, houses, apartments and businesses at the point of a gun. Peace will only ever happen in Palestine when those forcefully removed can get their homeland back.

It also, in the examples, states:

'criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic'.

Well yes, but that’s to reduce the debate to a point of absurdity - Israel does exist, the issue is how it treats its own citizens (Jews as well as Arabs) and its relations with the Occupied Territories and its neighbours.



TBH I think even the right of return isn’t absolute, a fair negotiation could result in that being resolved without it being brought in. The point of course though is that no fair negotiations are on offer.

The current Israeli state, will not be in existence forever. To reject a definition of Anti Semitism because you disagree with a Facist state seems problematic.

 

[hullefc]

It isn’t the only way though; you can get them to agree to have something else instead.

Which is? Those that were displaced and their families are the ones to be asked what they think the solution is. That is the starting point.

 

[Tubey]

So which of the 7 million displaced Palestinians are you going to say can't have their land, houses or businesses back? Who is going to make that judgement? The Palestinians or those occupying their homeland? An injustice was done in 1948 and the only way to reverse that injustice is for those forcefully removed from their land, houses and businesses to be allowed to return and reclaim their homeland.

Again, it's 80 years ago. Let's be conservative and say they were 18 when they were displaced (which, by the way, I'm not defending - it was an atrocious idea executed in an atrocious way) - that means they're 98 years old now.

It's time to deal with the realities of the situation in the modern day instead of coming up with ridiculous ideological red lines which make a solution impossible. It's like what Stewart Lee said in a joke once - with Al'Qaeda having the aim of the eradication of western culture, then the reality is you can't sit down around a table and negotiate with that can you?

The Palestinians aren't going to get their land back in totality. They may reverse some of the more modern land grabs, but there has to be a semblance of reality here that acknowledges Israel will exist no matter what at this point.

Your view, which isn't surprising, is student union politics which is fine in theory but nonsense in the real world. That is a staple of the left and a massive weakness, as it means you don't get things done.

 

[Tubey]

It also, in the examples, states:

'criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic'.

Indeed. By all means disagree with Netanyahu - I know I do, the man is a monster - but to be against the concept of Israel existing full stop is very arguably anti-semitic.

Because history is littered with annexations, land grabs through war, colonialism etc. but very few moan about the borders changing in other countries. So you have to wonder why Israel gets special treatment, and to come to the conclusion of anti-semitism isn't a very difficult leap to make.

 

[hullefc]

Again, it's 80 years ago. Let's be conservative and say they were 18 when they were displaced (which, by the way, I'm not defending - it was an atrocious idea executed in an atrocious way) - that means they're 98 years old now.

It's time to deal with the realities of the situation in the modern day instead of coming up with ridiculous ideological red lines which make a solution impossible. It's like what Stewart Lee said in a joke once - with Al'Qaeda having the aim of the eradication of western culture, then the reality is you can't sit down around a table and negotiate with that can you?

The Palestinians aren't going to get their land back in totality. They may reverse some of the more modern land grabs, but there has to be a semblance of reality here that acknowledges Israel will exist no matter what at this point.

Your view, which isn't surprising, is student union politics which is fine in theory but nonsense in the real world. That is a staple of the left and a massive weakness, as it means you don't get things done.

The land grab occupation started 80 years ago and has continued ever since. So the passage of time is the criteria and those forcefully displaced are not allowed to pass down their land, houses and businesses to their children and relatives. There is no law in the world that says personal possession cannot be passed on to family member. Is it ok for the Palestinians not to have that right, just because they may be 98, that the whole world enjoys i.e the right to leave possessions to your family? If I own a house I can leave it to my children. If I own land I am allowed to leave it to my children. If I own a business I would be able to pass it down to my children. None of those things are allowed for the rightful Palestinian owners. They were taken at the point of a gun.

Again. Which land, houses, businesses are those Palestinians with the rightful ownership going to give up? Who is going to make that decision?

 

[hullefc]

Indeed. By all means disagree with Netanyahu - I know I do, the man is a monster - but to be against the concept of Israel existing full stop is very arguably anti-semitic.

Because history is littered with annexations, land grabs through war, colonialism etc. but very few moan about the borders changing in other countries. So you have to wonder why Israel gets special treatment, and to come to the conclusion of anti-semitism isn't a very difficult leap to make.

Israel doesn't get 'special treatment'. It is claimed Russia has annexed the Crimea and sanctions have ensued. But those occupying Palestine have been allowed to land grab with impunity. Double standards hypocrisy.

There are loads of people who complain about 'border changes'. The indigenous people of Diego Garcia have never stopped complaining about being forcefully removed and want to return. Chagos islanders cannot return home, UK Foreign Office confirms ...

Native Americans complain Native American land is under threat again – who ... - The Independent

There has been a 600 year struggle in Ireland over colonial annexation.

'Israel' came into existence with the forceful removal of Palestinians from their homeland. A return to their land, houses, business etc. is the only rightful course to take to right the injustice they suffered since 1948.

 

[davids]

Again, it's 80 years ago. Let's be conservative and say they were 18 when they were displaced (which, by the way, I'm not defending - it was an atrocious idea executed in an atrocious way) - that means they're 98 years old now.

It's time to deal with the realities of the situation in the modern day instead of coming up with ridiculous ideological red lines which make a solution impossible. It's like what Stewart Lee said in a joke once - with Al'Qaeda having the aim of the eradication of western culture, then the reality is you can't sit down around a table and negotiate with that can you?

The Palestinians aren't going to get their land back in totality. They may reverse some of the more modern land grabs, but there has to be a semblance of reality here that acknowledges Israel will exist no matter what at this point.

Your view, which isn't surprising, is student union politics which is fine in theory but nonsense in the real world. That is a staple of the left and a massive weakness, as it means you don't get things done.

Their sons,daughters and grandchildren won't see it that way.The Plantation of Ulster happened centuries ago,but still has political repercussions today.

 

[tsubaki]

Which is? Those that were displaced and their families are the ones to be asked what they think the solution is. That is the starting point.

It is, but my point was that the right of return is not something that could never be negotiated away. The absence of a process - fair or otherwise - does not mean that the positions people now hold are for forever.

 

[Steve0]

No doubt, but he’s not really showing any kind of leadership and letting the thugs do the dirty work....intolerance and abuse is now the pervading character....

View attachment 49436

Such a dreadful cartoon.

 

[tsubaki]

The current Israeli state, will not be in existence forever. To reject a definition of Anti Semitism because you disagree with a Facist state seems problematic.

I wasn't saying the IHRA definition should be rejected, I was saying that arguing whether Israel has a right to exist is absurd given that it exists.

 

[Steve0]

In that time Labour won three general elections on the bounce. All it's achieved under Corbyn is not winning an election against an utterly hopeless Conservative party with a lame duck leader. I get that he's increased Labour party membership and did better than expected in the election, but do wonder if there are correlation/causation issues here. Whilst the new members can probably be attributed to Corbyn, they are nonetheless relatively small in number compared to the proportion of the electorate who vote Labour in an election. Indeed, the total membership represents around 4% of the number of Labour voters, and it's far from clear that people voted Labour because of Corbyn rather than always voting Labour, actively opposing the Tories or one of any number of reasons.

It’s far from clear but you’re qualified to announce labour won’t be winning a general election under his leadership. Erm okay.

 

[Number_25]

I wasn't saying the IHRA definition should be rejected, I was saying that arguing whether Israel has a right to exist is absurd given that it exists.

We cannot have a two state solution. It simply cannot happen.