UK Politics: Unboldy Go There Where No Country Has Gone Before

[dornishpen]

@ants I looked it up again to remind myself of the context and it appears he's referring to people in an audience who were filming the Palestinian ambassador and according to Corbyn berated him afterwards (I have no doubt they spoke to him and probably disagreed with him, but I don't trust Corbyn to assess something like this impartially). These were people he didn't know. He was making assumptions about their lack of knowledge of history and lack of understanding of "British irony" based solely on being zionists or Jews. But again given the context of how Israel/Palestine things seem to work it seems quite likely they were Jewish and Zionist was code for Jewish in this instance. Given Corbyn's mishandling of antisemitism in his party while leader, I don't think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he had done a good job rooting out antisemitism in his party I think it would be different, but I think this was him letting the mask drop in public and it was caught on video.

[Rippounet]

18 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

given the context of how Israel/Palestine things seem to work it seems quite likely they were Jewish and Zionist was code for Jewish in this instance. 

Quite the contrary. What you describe points at Zionism specifically.

[Bael's Bastard]

What you are doing is gaslighting Jews, many of whom are old enough to have personally experienced, or to have grown up with close family who personally experienced, the "anti-racist" Soviet Union's invention of the substitution of the word Zionist for the word Jew in antisemitic language.

Most Jews are and have historically been Zionist, no matter the fringes that exist. "By the Rivers of Babylon" is 2,600 year old Zionism. Many Zionists show themselves capable of criticizing particular Israeli policies without coming anywhere near, let alone crossing, the line into anything that could be perceived to be remotely antisemitic, or delegitimization of the state of the indigenous Jewish people.

Jews know the language of antisemitism. And while there are no doubt well meaning people who have been sucked into things they don't know are antisemitic, the roots of anti-Zionism are inextricably antisemitic. Using Zionist in a negative connotation can be taken as nothing but antisemitic towards the Jews it is intended to include, whether or not it is intended to include all Jews. Stop jumping through hoops to explain or excuse these dog whistles. 

[dornishpen]

54 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Quite the contrary. What you describe points at Zionism specifically.

Given that 95% of Jews are zionists* and that almost all Zionist activists who attend events like this are Jewish, it's basically the same. Also lots of antisemites use Zionist Instead of Jew to try to hide their antisemitism. 

*when using Zionist to mean someone supports the existence of the state of Israel, but not necessarily the current government or policies

[Rippounet]

13 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

Given that 95% of Jews are zionists* and that almost all Zionist activists who attend events like this are Jewish, it's basically the same.

No, it's certainly not

The fact that there is a dog whistle is indisputable. That still doesn't make anti-zionism and anti-semitism the same.

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

27 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

*when using Zionist to mean someone supports the existence of the state of Israel, but not necessarily the current government or policies

Which no sane person would do. That's the narrative that often gets spun by the (far) right elements within the Jewish community. So by that definition, any hint that Israel's settlement policy and their treatment of Palestinians might contribute to the problems in the middle East gets shrugged off as anti-semitism. As far as Israel goes, nobody in their right mind, questions Israel's right to exist, or their right to defend themselves. However pointing out flaws within the state of Israel is not anti-semitism.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

8 hours ago, Werthead said:

Remember Boris saying that funding for British farmers would not only be protected and maintained after Brexit, but would be increased to match the losses from EU funding and the open market?

UK farming subsidies to be cut by 25%.

UK government refuses to guarantee food standards to protect UK farmers from cheap foreign imports.

To get back on track.

Well, at least this time it would immediately impact the right folks. They voted Brexit, so the farmers getting the short end of the deal seems fair on some levels. And that was also pretty much foretold.

[Rippounet]

44 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

That's the narrative that often gets spun by the (far) right elements within the Jewish community.

Precisely.
"Zionism" is a complicated word. It can refer as much to support of Israel's more despicable policies in the Middle-East as to Judaism as a whole, not to mention what it's supposed to mean, that is support for a Jewish state. And the Jewish far-right loves to pretend the two (or the three) are the same.
Except they're not. And well-meaning people can fall into the trap.
In the case of this video of Corbyn, context matters and does not support anti-semitism.

[dornishpen]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

No, it's certainly not

The fact that there is a dog whistle is indisputable. That still doesn't make anti-zionism and anti-semitism the same.

 

I think if someone believes that Jews shouldn't have the right to self determination or a state, while believing that other peoples like Danes or Japanese or Palestinians have the right to a state that's antisemitic. If someone doesn't believe any states should exist then it's not antisemitic. If someone criticizes the occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza, the Israeli government, military, settlements etc, but still believes Israel has the right to exist I wouldn't call that anti-Zionism and as long as the criticism doesn't include antisemitic canards it's not antisemitism either. Most American Jews criticize the occupation, settlements etc. and I'm not going to quote your reply that you just make to AHNS, but I think all of Corbyn's other actions on this issue have shown that he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. 

53 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Which no sane person would do. That's the narrative that often gets spun by the (far) right elements within the Jewish community. So by that definition, any hint that Israel's settlement policy and their treatment of Palestinians might contribute to the problems in the middle East gets shrugged off as anti-semitism. As far as Israel goes, nobody in their right mind, questions Israel's right to exist, or their right to defend themselves. However pointing out flaws within the state of Israel is not anti-semitism.

Except that believing Israel has no right to exist is a common position among people Corbyn associates with like Hamas and Hezbollah. The PLO (PA, Fatah etc) recognizes Israel, so the ambassador mentioned in the video likely does, but Corbyn also associates with a bunch of people who don't. And while I don't expect he shares all their positions, I don't understand why a leftist would want to get into bed with groups like Hamas or Hezbollah (Islamic Jihad) considering they're right wing theocratic groups who want to implement strict religious law and are blatantly misogynistic, homophobic and antisemitic, the PLO for all its issues is at least much more secular. 

[Rippounet]

4 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

I think if someone believes that Jews shouldn't have the right to self determination or a state, while believing that other peoples like Danes or Japanese or Palestinians have the right to a state that's antisemitic.

It's a bit more complicated than that.

4 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

If someone criticizes the occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza, the Israeli government, military, settlements etc, but still believes Israel has the right to exist I wouldn't call that anti-Zionism

It depends entirely how one defines Zionism and anti-Zionism.

4 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

I think all of Corbyn's other actions on this issue have shown that he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The PLO (PA, Fatah etc) recognizes Israel, so the ambassador mentioned in the video likely does, but Corbyn also associates with a bunch of people who don't. And while I don't expect he shares all their positions, I don't understand why a leftist would want to get into bed with groups like Hamas or Hezbollah (Islamic Jihad) considering they're right wing theocratic groups who want to implement strict religious law and are blatantly misogynistic, homophobic and antisemitic, the PLO for all its issues is at least much more secular. 

Well I'm not an expert on Corbyn's "other actions" so I can't really say. But who he associates with is definitely a problem.

Allow me to be blunt. Both the Arabs and the Jews can be extremely dishonest about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Many Arabs use legitimate criticism of Israel to further anti-semitic views while many Jews are perfectly fine with using accusations of anti-semitism to prevent legitimate criticism of Israel. So when someone like Corbyn or you tries to step in, one way or the other, they are likely to be tricked.
I don't think Corbyn is anti-semitic, I think his distate of Israeli policies has led him to debatable associations. Mind you, it's not uncommon for the European left to do this deliberately, as an electoral strategy.
Believe me, unless one has a dog in that fight and/or in-depth knowledge of the issue, it is best not to touch this stuff with a ten-foot pole.

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

5 minutes ago, dornishpen said:

The PLO (PA, Fatah etc) recognizes Israel, so the ambassador mentioned in the video likely does, but Corbyn also associates with a bunch of people who don't. And while I don't expect he shares all their positions, I don't understand why a leftist would want to get into bed with groups like Hamas or Hezbollah (Islamic Jihad) considering they're right wing theocratic groups who want to implement strict religious law and are blatantly misogynistic, homophobic and antisemitic, the PLO for all its issues is at least much more secular. 

I don't know what Corbyn si thinking, but judging from his history, I'd think that he considers those groups to be freedom fighters fighting for the oppressed. He also used to associate himself with the IRA. You can disagree with assessment, but that seems to be core of his thinking as far as I can tell.

I really don't like to get drawn into this Israel Palestine discussion, as in it's complicated and messy and I can't get away with my usual 3 sentence snipes. However, the theocratic theme, I consider to be a bit difficult coming from the Israeli end.

Israel was for obvious historic reasons founded as a state for the Jews, but at the same time it also strives to be a democratic state (for most parts they are succesful in that endeavour), those aims do not neccessarily correlate all the time. However the current far right goverment, is pushing really hard for the state for the Jews bit. That comes at a cost for the democratic bit (if we assume equality before the law), if you attach civil rights/citizenship to faith you get a problem with the rights of people of a different creed. That's something we can witness at the moment.

[john]

18 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Quite the contrary. What you describe points at Zionism specifically.

I think Corbyn might have believed he was referring to Zionism specifically, but that doesn’t really correspond to what he said. He said - 

Quote

[they] clearly have two problems. One is they don’t want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either ... So I think they needed two lessons, which perhaps we can help them with.

Who is the they he’s referring to? Is it non -Jewish British people who have a certain political motivation, have all their history in Britain and have inexplicably failed to grasp the concept of irony? It’s much more likely he’s referring to British Jews, who incidentally have a certain political motivation, and who have come to live in Britain during their lifetime or have a family history of only a generation or two and who therefore haven’t (according to Corbyn) grasped “English irony.” Seems like a discriminatory generalisation, even if only referring to particular attendees at one particular meeting.

I mean, I’m a Scot and just the use of the phrase “English irony” offends me somewhat, so better use of language in general would’ve been appreciated and definitely necessary to avoid anti-semitism claims.

[Heartofice]

10 minutes ago, john said:

Who is the they he’s referring to? Is it non -Jewish British people who have a certain political motivation, have all their history in Britain and have inexplicably failed to grasp the concept of irony?

Wasn't he referring to specific people, a group of people, who I am guessing would self identify as Zionists, who had been in a crowd at a talk by a Palestinian official. 

His use of "Zionist" seems pretty legitimate in this case as far as I'm aware as I suspect those he was referring to were probably quite 'zionistic' in their political views considering the talk they went to and that they berated the Palestinian official. 

Saying ""having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives … don’t understand English irony." is a bit of a strange thing to say, because as far as I'm aware they were British, and had been born in Britain. If he had said they don't understand irony then I don't think there would be a problem. If he was under the assumption they were not from Britain then it's maybe a fair enough comment. Otherwise is he suggesting they aren't properly British? Maybe. Hard to say. 

Honestly I'm absolutely no fan of Corbyn, and the way he has handled anti semitism in his party has been very poor, but I always took this as people twisting his words and intentions. 

[Bael's Bastard]

No matter how people try to spin it, the concerns about the antisemitism of Corbyn and his close allies are shared by most British Jews. Nobody is going to change their minds by gaslighting them, and goysplaining antisemitism to them.

[john]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Saying ""having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives … don’t understand English irony." is a bit of a strange thing to say, because as far as I'm aware they were British, and had been born in Britain. If he had said they don't understand irony then I don't think there would be a problem. If he was under the assumption they were not from Britain then it's maybe a fair enough comment. Otherwise is he suggesting they aren't properly British? Maybe. Hard to say. 

It’s a strange thing to say if you take him at his word that he was referring purely to Zionists. Because what about Zionism renders irony ineffective? But if you take it that he was referring to Zionist British Jews then it’s not so strange. He was making an unfortunate generalisation about their ability to appreciate irony.

[Heartofice]

40 minutes ago, john said:

It’s a strange thing to say if you take him at his word that he was referring purely to Zionists. Because what about Zionism renders irony ineffective? But if you take it that he was referring to Zionist British Jews then it’s not so strange. He was making an unfortunate generalisation about their ability to appreciate irony.

He was referencing those specific people he mentioned though. He doesn't appear to be saying that Zionism as a concept has anything that renders irony ineffective, only that those people seemed to have a lack of irony and hadn't read history.

[Rippounet]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

No matter how people try to spin it, the concerns about the antisemitism of Corbyn and his close allies are shared by most British Jews. 

If the evidence for that is a couple of polls from right-wing papers then you basically have none and you're the one desperately trying to spin this thing. 

[dornishpen]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

If the evidence for that is a couple of polls from right-wing papers then you basically have none and you're the one desperately trying to spin this thing. 

As has been pointed out multiple times one of the large polls comes from a legitimate polling company was commissioned by a large umbrella Jewish org that appears to be non-partisan and asked about all the major political parties and leaders. However some of you in this thread keep ignoring that and attributing it to right wing press because it fits your narrative better. This is exactly the sort of gaslighting Bael and I are talking about.

 

[Derfel Cadarn]

1 hour ago, dornishpen said:

As has been pointed out multiple times one of the large polls comes from a legitimate polling company was commissioned by a large umbrella Jewish org that appears to be non-partisan and asked about all the major political parties and leaders. However some of you in this thread keep ignoring that and attributing it to right wing press because it fits your narrative better. This is exactly the sort of gaslighting Bael and I are talking about.

 

I think the point they’re trying to make is the polls are opinions, and unless they exclusively polled those who’ve met or communicated with corbyn, their opinion will largely be shaped by a mostly anti-corbyn media.

 

Which he has been disastrous in countering and has a history of associating with people who’ce turned out to be anti-semetic.

But at the end of the day, all the poll really tells is, at the time it was conducted, most Jews polled believe he is anti-semetic. 

[john]

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

He was referencing those specific people he mentioned though. He doesn't appear to be saying that Zionism as a concept has anything that renders irony ineffective, only that those people seemed to have a lack of irony and hadn't read history.

No, he was speaking about British Zionism generally and extrapolating from his experience at this previous event some lessons which he thought British Zionists needed to learn.