Originally posted by @pap
Originally posted by @Nottarf-Krap
This gives some balance to the recent nonsense regarding the supposed anti semitism in The Labour Party since Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Throws some light on the way that treacherous members of the PLP are aligning themselves with their Tory mates to undermine Corbyn at every opportunity as well.
http://www.jewishsocialist.org.uk/news/item/statement-on-parliamentary-report-on-antisemitism
It’s extremely sad that this angle of attack continues to be deployed, and potentially damaging to the Jewish communities that are alleged to be under threat. How many times has this specific kind of attack been tried?
Antisemitism is a concept that is poorly understood by the lay community, and poorly explained by those seeking to educate. Deliberately so. Here is what Eric Pickles thinks it should be.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/a-definition-of-antisemitism
Check this little snippet from his definition.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to :
Not limited to. It’s open-ended. The definition lists some specific examples as well, some with less problems than others, but all venturing into space where you are not allowed to express opinion.
Corbyn tags on “and all other forms of racism” whenever he’s condemning antisemitism. First question that I always ask when considering whether something is antisemitic is “is it racist?”.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Not sure if that’s necessarily racist given the right context. Pickles is also no stranger to double standards himself.
This is antisemitic, according to his definition.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
And yet, this statement, made by Pickles, is presumably fine.
Nine days previously, Pickles had spoken at a conference on antisemitism in Berlin, where he described the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign as akin to the Nazi boycott of Jewish goods. “There’s nothing complicated to it,” he told the audience. “It’s the same thing happening 70 years later. It’s the same ideology, it’s the same language, it’s the same threats.”.
BDS was designed from the get-go to be a non-violent form of protest. If I wanted to draw a parallel, I’d be looking for other non-violent movements, not one of the most murderous and most malign regimes in history.
It’s alright for Pickles to compare non-violent campaigners to Nazis, but antisemitic to suggest that Israeli policy may share hallmarks with those of another government. Double standards indeed. Pickles should cope. He looks like a man who knows how to have his cake and eat it.
It’s a disgraceful tactic, as was the banning of municipal bodies from taking part in the boycott. Groups like Jewish Socialist have been invaluable in providing their take on this. Given the fury we’ve seen descend on others perceived to cross the line, you can see why people are reluctant to grasp the nettle.
Pickles should have gone for another cake.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/ben-white/shifty-antisemitism-wars
The problem as i see it is that any legitimate criticism of the State of Israel regarding their indefensible treatment of Palestinians is immediately answered by accusations of anti-semitism, thereby closing down the argument. It is a deliberate tactic by the Israel firsters, they know that nobody likes to be tarnished as a racist. It never used to be the case, accusations of anti- semitism used to be the tactic of last resort, now it is the first card out of the pack. Because that is the only argument they have.
The power of the Israeli lobby both here and, especially in the USA cannot be overstated. Successive Prime Ministers here, Labour and Conservative have all been prominent and vocal members of the ‘Friends of Israel’. Just pointing out this fact brings immediate screams of anti-semite. This deliberate blurring of the lines between 'anti-zionism, (legitimate opposition to a political philosophy), and ‘anti-semitism’, (deliberate hatred of a whole people because they happen to be Jewish), is an insidious and intellectually barren tactic. But sadly it is effective. It immediately shuts down any legitimate criticism of Israel’s criminal and inhumane behaviour towards the Palestinian people. Lets face it, if any other nation behaved in the same way as Israel, displacing families, collective punishment, (which is classified as a war crime), indiscriminately slaughtering civilians, (a high proportion of whom are women and children), dropping white phosphorous bombs in civilian areas, etc etc, there would be uproar by the very same people who turn a blind eye to all this. A few mutterings along the lines of ‘please show some restraint’, while at the same time continuing to arm Israel to the teeth with weapons needed to carry on doing it. The hypocrisy and double standards are staggering.
Jeremy Corbyn is one of the very few frontline politicians who has consistently over a long period of time vocally supported Palestinian rights, unafraid to openly criticise Israel for their cruel and barbaric behaviour. This is what all the anti-semitism accusations is really about. He is a threat to the status quo, he is quite prepared to name and shame. The ardent Zionists like Murdoch, Blair, Mandelson etc will do whatever they deem necessary to stop his arguments being heard. They defend the indefensible. The irony is that by their obvious support for the right of Palestinians to be treated as third class people, sub human even( cockroaches) to quote Netanyahu, they are exposed as the true racists in this argument.
