Current Affairs The Labour Party

[tsubaki]

Who has done that explicitly? And what is the answer? Could it involve both sides, those using anti semitism to undermine the LP or is it a chicken and egg situation?

Explicitly? No-one. Implicitly? Several, indeed the last dozen pages have seen loads of posts by people who aren't anti-semites but who are doing things that could easily be seen as anti-semitic.

For your second point - there are people who will use anti-semitism as an issue to harm Labour - there were under Miliband, and even during Blair's time (albeit that wasn't against the leadership). These people won't go away, but they will get a lot less traction if people actually look at what they are doing and change it - and it won't be difficult to do; when the Israeli government does something horrific again just say that the Israeli government did it, rather than it was the work of "Zionists". When Ryan comes out with a statement exculpating them of responsibility, ask her why on earth that is rather than calling her a Zionist.

 

[tim cahill]

Comrade, I have been actively campaigning with the BDS movement for years. I'm a huge opponent of, what I believe to be an apartheid state, Israel. I am vehemently anti-racist, and as such am anti-Zionist.

Moreover, I have gone door to do with Jewish members of the Labour Party and have been fortunate to attend JLM events at University. I am a huge opponent of all forms of racism, and as such I believe anti-Semities need to be removed from positions within civil society.

It's not a black and white thing.

It was a tongue-in-cheek comment to be honest. I’d support everything you’ve said above.

 

[Number_25]

But according to some on here it is just that.

I would question the motives of the people you are referring to.

 

[davek]

He offered up a veiled threat to Corbyn, using alleged anti semitism and to paraphrase 'go back, look again and come back with the right conclusion this time'.
Democracy eh?.

It's a test for Corbyn and his allies in the PLP now: draw strength from their base outside parliament or make the long walk back to the centre-right ground that turned so many people off the LP in the post-Blair/Brown era.

 

[Boss_Blue]

*inserts Grandpa Simpson walk in walk out gif

 

[Number_25]

It's a test for Corbyn and his allies in the PLP now: draw strength from their base outside parliament or make the long walk back to the centre-right ground that turned so many people off the LP in the post-Blair/Brown era.

I'm tempted to say that our current policy platform is a fine balance of New Labour pragmatism and New New Labour idealism. Keep it this way.

 

[dholliday]

lesson in what's offensive and what's not:

offensive: calling people "scummy" because they vote for the UK's most popular political party. Definition of scummy: unpleasant, nasty.

not offensive: calling a jew a zionist because he supports Israel's most popular national doctrine. Definition of zionist: a person who believes in the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.


language is important. the debate really needs to be about the methods of that protection, but instead the debate is whether zionist is an offensive term (like scummy), when it's merely a factual descriptive term of a political belief system (like conservative or tory).

 

[dholliday]

Further reading:

Is Zionist a rude word? Words are deployed as moves in a strategic battle. Antisemitism is apparently everywhere yet last year the Crown Prosecution Service prosecuted a record 15,442 cases of hate crime, but we are only aware of a dozen prosecutions for hate crime against Jews. Of course the CAA deduced from this that “British Jews are being denied British justice” and that the Labour Party & Corbyn aren't doing enough to combat anti-semitism.


If we are to be deflected from debate about zionist's methods of protectionism, then we can debate why such a big deal is being made for a problem that doesn't really appear to be there. But then we've already answered that: deflection.

As this is the Labour thread, what do those deflecting have against Corbyn? Would his policies as PM not be so zionist-friendly? Likely not, as he's a pacifist who has sympathy for the Palestinians.


What does banning discussion of Israel's national doctrine, or mentioning it specifically by its name, do to debate? The more language becomes controlled, the less open & free one can think. The less free one thinks, the more you are controlled. The more we are controlled, the more those in power can get away with. The more they can get away with, the more innocent victims there will be.

And who wants that? None of us, I'm sure.

Further reading on how controlling language controls thought itself. @abelard will appreciate this as he loves it when I mention Orwell:

George Orwell and Language Control

Orwell Got it Right: How Language Manipulates and Controls

Does Language control thought?

 

[magicjuan]

Further reading:

Is Zionist a rude word? Words are deployed as moves in a strategic battle. Antisemitism is apparently everywhere yet last year the Crown Prosecution Service prosecuted a record 15,442 cases of hate crime, but we are only aware of a dozen prosecutions for hate crime against Jews. Of course the CAA deduced from this that “British Jews are being denied British justice” and that the Labour Party & Corbyn aren't doing enough to combat anti-semitism.


If we are to be deflected from debate about zionist's methods of protectionism, then we can debate why such a big deal is being made for a problem that doesn't really appear to be there. But then we've already answered that: deflection.

As this is the Labour thread, what do those deflecting have against Corbyn? Would his policies as PM not be so zionist-friendly? Likely not, as he's a pacifist who has sympathy for the Palestinians.


What does banning discussion of Israel's national doctrine, or mentioning it specifically by its name, do to debate? The more language becomes controlled, the less open & free one can think. The less free one thinks, the more you are controlled. The more we are controlled, the more those in power can get away with. The more they can get away with, the more innocent victims there will be.

And who wants that? None of us, I'm sure.

Further reading on how controlling language controls thought itself. @abelard will appreciate this as he loves it when I mention Orwell:

George Orwell and Language Control

Orwell Got it Right: How Language Manipulates and Controls

Does Language control thought?

I'll add

 

[dholliday]

and one more, the BBC have a really good balanced piece on it which fields those who believe the term has become code for slandering all jews:

What's the difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism?

• Anti-Semitism is "hostility and prejudice directed against Jewish people" (OED).
• Zionism refers to the movement to create a Jewish state in the Middle East, roughly corresponding to the historical land of Israel, and thus support for the modern state of Israel. Anti-Zionism opposes that.
• But some say "Zionist" can be used as a coded attack on Jews, while others say the Israeli government and its supporters are deliberately confusing anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism to avoid criticism.

So because "some" say this, while "others" say that, what should we do? Who should we listen to?

As ever, we are free to make our own minds up. Personally I'm not anti-zionist per se, but I am anti- the aggressive methods used by the Israeli state to support that doctrine.

If we are no longer allowed to refer to that doctrine by name, it does real damage to the debate. Context is key. The crackpots & actual anti-semites using the zionist term in an offensive manner don't get to be the reason that debate is shut down. That they're being used as tools to do so is interesting, to say the least.

 

[dholliday]

I'll add

The first video is very interesting (brilliant cartoon design too!).

Two questions and answers:

1) who are the chiefs of the largest US media conglomerates? The largest are Comcast, Disney, Fox, CBS & Viacom. The chiefs are:

Comcast: Brian Roberts & David Cohen. Both are jewish.
Disney: Bob Iger. He is jewish.
Fox: the Murdochs.
CBS: Strauss Zelnick & Les Moonves. Both are jewish.
Viacom: Sumner Redstone. He is jewish.

So from the 5 largest media firms in the US, 4 are led by jewish persons. A remarkable statistic given that jewish folk represent only about 1% of total US population. Whether these media leaders also support zionism? That is a fair question to ask. The only one not jewish is Fox, which has a reputation being constantly battered by other media as being stupid or worse.

I don't watch crackpot TV ala Alex Jones & his ilk. But you can see that they use real-world facts as a basis for their conspiracy theories.

How does this relate to the pressure on Corbyn and the use of the term zionist in mainstream debate?

Well...


2) who does the poor guy remind you of who didn't get in and got battered by the bouncer in the cartoon for wanting to break stories that didn't fit with the accepted media narrative? The one who is then villified, his reputation battered?

To think he still managed to influence the US election enough to unseat the Democrats proves the powers that be aren't as powerful as they like to think.

 

[magicjuan]

The first video is very interesting (brilliant cartoon design too!).

Two questions and answers:

1) who are the chiefs of the largest US media conglomerates? The largest are Comcast, Disney, Fox, CBS & Viacom. The chiefs are:

Comcast: Brian Roberts & David Cohen. Both are jewish.
Disney: Bob Iger. He is jewish.
Fox: the Murdochs.
CBS: Strauss Zelnick & Les Moonves. Both are jewish.
Viacom: Sumner Redstone. He is jewish.

So from the 5 largest media firms in the US, 4 are led by jewish persons. A remarkable statistic given that jewish folk represent only about 1% of total US population. Whether these media leaders also support zionism? That is a fair question to ask. The only one not jewish is Fox, which has a reputation being constantly battered by other media as being stupid or worse.

I don't watch crackpot TV ala Alex Jones & his ilk. But you can see that they use real-world facts as a basis for their conspiracy theories.

How does this relate to the pressure on Corbyn and the use of the term zionist in mainstream debate?

Well...


2) who does the poor guy remind you of who didn't get in and got battered by the bouncer in the cartoon for wanting to break stories that didn't fit with the accepted media narrative? The one who is then villified, his reputation battered?

To think he still managed to influence the US election enough to unseat the Democrats proves the powers that be aren't as powerful as they like to think.

Would assume from today's standards it makes Chomsky a self hating jew. Whodathunkit?

 

[dholliday]

and one more, Kenan Malik of The Guardian has a timely article today with some interesting points which mirror mine & others' arguments:

Antisemites use the language of anti-Zionism. The two are distinct. Zionism is a form of ethnic, as opposed to civic, nationalism. To oppose Zionism but not other forms of ethnic nationalism would indeed be antisemitic. But to oppose Zionism because one opposes ethnic nationalism is a legitimate view.

 

[dholliday]

Would assume from today's standards it makes Chomsky a self hating jew. Whodathunkit?

Indeed. There are many jewish folk against zionism. The suggestion that we should be banned from using that word because it offends all jews is preposterous:

 

[Aberblue]

Just a suggestion - why not have a thread for Zionism/Anti Semitism /Israel/ Jewish matters in general?