The Political Thread

[Tjm86]

... and it appears that Wrong-Daily has given Starmer the excuse he needed ...

[IndigoPrime]

Twitter is now a minefield. I liked someone's response to a RLB fantastic: "But it was only a LITTLE BIT anti-semitic".

[Leigh S]

Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"

[Leigh S]

I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it?  The editors presumably didnt see anything hugely glaring in the claim, or they would have pulled it or hiighlighted it?  Presumably RLBs problem was not retracting immediately (but then, I think the Independent should ahve done so as well)

That said, Labour MPs should be hyper sensitive to any trigger words that might indicate such a potential whistle - a quick ctrl f before sharing perhaps?

Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"

[Jim_Campbell]

Twitter is now a minefield. I liked someone's response to a RLB fantastic: "But it was only a LITTLE BIT anti-semitic".

And yet, Rachel Reeves can eulogise for Nancy Astor, an openly antisemitic Hitler apologist, and not a peep.

[Jim_Campbell]

Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"

Are American police forces trained by the Israelis? It kind of looks like they are.

[Professor Bear]

And liberals can openly claim RLB has dual loyalties because of her religion.

I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it?  The editors presumably didnt see anything hugely glaring in the claim, or they would have pulled it or hiighlighted it?  Presumably RLBs problem was not retracting immediately (but then, I think the Independent should ahve done so as well)

Possibly the papers didn't pull the interview because Amnesty International were reporting on this as far back as 2016, and concerns about militarised policing are somewhat relevant at the moment.  There's loads of links in that Amnesty article, to organs like The Times Of Israel, The Jerusalem Post, JINSA, and AIPAC, all of which I presume must be antisemitic organisations if they are also spreading this conspiracy theory.

Anyway, Israel training cops in racism might not be real, but just yesterday, I discovered the Ash Sarkar Godfather Theory, which definitely is real: young Muslim journalist Ash Sarkar shared a picture of herself eating an orange ice lolly in a park on a warm day after months in lockdown, and within hours was bombarded by tweets calling for her death, calling her a "disgusting c*nt", pictures of nooses, etc.  You see, it was an orange ice lolly, and in the movie The Godfather, oranges are a metaphor for death, so Sarkar sharing the picture of herself in a park, eating an orange ice lolly, is a reference to the three murders in a park in Reading committed by a Libyan national, because oranges come from Libya.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm convinced.

edit: DAMN YOUR QUICK FINGERS, CAMPBELL!

[Leigh S]

Amnesty International are hardly Stormfront - well, that's what I thought... anyone want a Crisis Amnesty International Special going spare....

[Tjm86]

I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it? 

I think one of the issues is that discrimination is not just overt and we've seen how dangerous covert discrimination can be.  How many statements start with "I'm not being [racist / sexist / homophobic / transphobic / antisemitic] but ...?

It's a mine-field but it's one that needs to be navigated consciously.  If I do hold prejudices (which I know I do) but don't challenge my thinking then does that make me any better than the average "Britain First" member?

That said, Labour MPs should be hyper sensitive to any trigger words that might indicate such a potential whistle - a quick ctrl f before sharing perhaps?

This is where the party ends up with the second mine-field.  At the moment certain groups are hyper-sensitive (with potential good reason).  Any critical comments are going to be instantly seized upon and possibly over-inflated.

Long - Bailey (btw, my apologies for the slur on her name earlier, as much as she has made a mess of things in the past, personal attacks like that are unjustified) should have, as you say, recognised that any criticism of Israeli activity was going to be an issue.  Whether it was a whistle or not is immaterial.

So on the plus side Starmer has managed to send a clear message that Labour party members need to be far more circumspect.  The danger though is that it has also raised the spectre of censorship and the closing down of critical debate.

LB has only been asked to step down from the shadow cabinet though.  She has not been expelled from the party.  Perhaps a sensible and appropriate amount of contrition that suggests recognition of the sensitivity of the issue whilst keeping open space for debate could turn this into a win-win situation - show that mistakes of the past are not going to be made in the future but making it clear that there are issues that need to be discussed openly.

[TordelBack]

Several things are obvious to me in all this.

(1). The State of Israel is one of the most appalling perpetrators of Human Rights abuses in the modern world, aided and abetted by the self-interest of western politicians, geopolitical manoeuvring and an unhealthy dose of Islamophobia. As Chomsky puts it, Israel practices worse apartheid than South Africa ever did,  and yet retains the economic support of the west.
(2). The automatic conflation of criticism of the actions of the government of Israel with anti-semitism is pure weaponised bollocks.
(3). Accusations of anti-semitism frequently come from the people voted least likely to give a flying shit about anti-semitism, or any other form of racism or sectarian discrimination. Which casts reasonable doubt on their motives.

But importantly:
(4). Anti-semitism is alive and well.
(5). Politicians and commentators need to realize that Jewish people worldwide have well-founded and absolutely legitimate concerns, be fully aware of the long tragic history of anti-semitic tropes and calumnies, and thus be 100% certain that their criticisms of Israel are verifiably factual and avoid the kind of language that can be seen as contributing to that legacy of persecution.

It's hard, especially when the enemy thrives on the language of hatred and lies that no-one cares about,  but that's where it is.

[Jim_Campbell]

(2). The automatic conflation of criticism of the actions of the government of Israel with anti-semitism is pure weaponised bollocks.

Worth noting that the IHRA definition of antisemitism specifically state that conflating the state of Israel and its actions with the Jewish people as a generality is, in itself, antisemitic. Odd how that very clear statement only ever works in one direction.

I agree everything you wrote, BTW, but would also add the words of Rabbi Howard Cooper, writing in The Jewish Chronicle, in November 2019:

"Jews are not threatened with organised violence in this country. If it comes, as it might, it will come from the populist right - who have no internal countervailing voices, as the left do. We will then realise that we had our eyes on the wrong ball all along."

[Tjm86]

Worth noting that the IHRA definition of antisemitism specifically state that conflating the state of Israel and its actions with the Jewish people as a generality is, in itself, antisemitic. Odd how that very clear statement only ever works in one direction.

Aye, this was where Corbyn really ended up in hot water.  He was unwilling to adopt it in its current form for precisely that reason.  By that point the knives were out for him anyway so he had no hope of getting reasoned discussion going.

What didn't help was some of the stupidity from members of the London wing of the party such as posing a question during a recorded press conference that could be spun as anti-semitic and perpetuate the narrative. 

Arguably this is where RLB has acted in such an unhelpful manner.  Those supporting her might also be adding to the problem.  If they quietly accept this for now, they give credence to the idea that there is a different objective and make it harder for opponents to deploy the 'anti-semite' attack.

[Funt Solo]

Hoping this is a good omen:

[JayzusB.Christ]

Wearing a mask? What kind of American is he?

I see Texas's 'We're Texans - we got this' approach has been about as successful as you would expect.  The virus doesn't give a shit where you're from, people.

[Leigh S]

To be fair, it does seem a lot of Texans have got it...