Anti semetism

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Gordaleman
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 855 times
Has Liked: 605 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Gordaleman » Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:56 pm

KateR wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:34 pm
I feel you are demonstrating a bias against America and not an unconscious one, is this true?
I've nothing against America, just the American government. Those people who think it's OK to send operatives all over the world to kill people just to preserve the Dollar as the world's reserve currency. Add to that, the fact that anyone who criticises them is then labeled Al-Qaeda or "Has links to" some other terrorist organisation and they in turn become legitimate targets.

The same government who learned a lot from their war in Vietnam with regard to casualties. The American public got fed up of body bags coming home, so when they went to war against Iraq, they employed mercenaries (What they called 'Contractors' to confuse people.) from all over the world to do the really dirty jobs. Read 'Blackwater' by acclaimed New York Times journalist Jeremy Scahill. It's a real eyeopener to how the American government works.

Synopsis

On September 16, 2007, machine gun fire erupted in Baghdad’s Nisour Square, leaving seventeen Iraqi civilians dead, among them women and children. The shooting spree, labeled “Baghdad’s Bloody Sunday,” was neither the work of Iraqi insurgents nor US soldiers. The shooters were private forces working for a mercenary company: Blackwater USA, the world’s most secretive, powerful, and fastest growing private army.

A largely untold facet of the war on terror is the widespread outsourcing of military tasks to these mercenary companies. Accountable neither to the citizenry nor to standard military legal codes, these largely unregulated corporate armies are being entrusted with ever-greater responsibilities on behalf of the nation.

Founded by fundamentalist Christian megamillionaire Erik Prince, the scion of a conservative dynasty that bankrolls extreme right-wing causes, this particular company of soldiers is now being sent “to the front lines of a global battle, waged largely on Muslim lands, that an evangelical President whom Prince helped put in the White House has boldly defined as a ‘crusade.’” Ranging their roots in Moyock, North Carolina, to the bloodied streets of Iraq, to hurricane-ravaged New Orleans, to the chambers of power in Washington, DC—where they are hailed as heroes—this is the dark story of Blackwater’s rise to power.

https://www.kobo.com/gb/en/audiobook/bl ... TpEALw_wcB

Apart from murdering 17 civilians in one shooting, they killed many, many more and were protected by Paul Bremmer (America's envoy in Iraq.) who gave them total immunity from prosecution. Something even ordinary sqaddies didn't have.

And just to make the point. It is illegal for governments to use mercenary armies in conflict. Unless of course it's the US government who make their own rules.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by AndrewJB » Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:29 pm

claretandy wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:51 pm
Good grief, you are that far down the rabbit hole that we can't see your feet anymore.
You’re the one claiming (incorrectly) it’s anti Semitic.

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:45 pm

Gordaleman wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:56 pm
I've nothing against America, just the American government.
thank you for clarifying

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by claretandy » Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:29 pm

AndrewJB wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 3:29 pm
You’re the one claiming (incorrectly) it’s anti Semitic.
So that will be me, Sir Keir, Piers Morgan and Gary Linekar all wrong ?

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10168
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4188 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:36 pm

claretandy wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:29 pm
So that will be me, Sir Keir, Piers Morgan and Gary Linekar all wrong ?

You didn't really think Corbyn's biggest defender was going to go against his love child did you ?

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12369
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5209 times
Has Liked: 921 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Devils_Advocate » Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:41 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:36 pm
You didn't really think Corbyn's biggest defender was going to go against his love child did you ?
You do realise that Corbyn isn't anything to do with the discussion Andy and Andrew are having here dont you?

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 121 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by android » Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:46 pm

AndrewJB wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:42 am
I don’t think RLB should have been sacked, but her transgression wasn’t as serious as those I’ve picked out from the Tory Party, which is why I pointed out that the Tory Party is intensely relaxed about anti semitism within its own ranks, as well as other forms of hatred. I wouldn’t even say Johnson or the others should be sacked for their use of antiSemitic language, but they should certainly acknowledge and apologise for it, and undergo training to address it.

This is where I think you’re dealing in double standards. You’ve been quite insistent that Corbyn is either antiSemitic himself or has enabled it among people around him, and this is based not on things he’s said or written, but of circumstantial evidence and against all the things he’s done for Jewish people in and outside his community, his links with Jewish groups, and the many Jewish people who support him, not to mention the nonsensical idea that a man who has campaigned against racism, war and violence would secretly harbour hatred for Jews, and would honour terrorists (when he was there to commemorate those who died as a result of a bomb attack). If you’re still going to insist Corbyn is antiSemitic, then by your own reasoning Johnson (with a history of writing hateful things, and pictured honouring Astor’s memory (she was an appalling antiSemite)), Mogg, Braverman, Patel, and Gove should also be called out for actually writing or saying antiSemitic things. I’m not claiming to be morally superior to you. I’m assuming your horror at the various expressions of antiSemitism by Labour Party members was motivated by abhorrence of antisemitism. So now I’ve pointed out some examples on the Tory front bench, you can uphold your moral authority by expressing horror at that.

Since you appear to think shouting “illuminati” at Jewish MPs isn’t serious, here’s an expert on that subject:

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institut ... illuminati

“Cultural Marxism” comes straight from Nazi Germany, and perpetuated by extreme right opinion formers. It should be worrying to everyone how much the language of the far right has come in to common use on the “mainstream right“ and perhaps that’s what the Jewish academics referred to in their letter, which you deemed unreadable. But then I’ve never seen you rebuke anyone for calling Labour “far left” so perhaps you can only see one side of the coin?
We are never going to agree on this Andrew but I must just correct one thing you said (I put it in bold if my word skills worked). All of the 3 Corbyn examples I gave ARE based on things Corbyn has said or written himself, so you were wrong to suggest the opposite.

I don't think I'm using double standards because I genuinely regard defence of a blatantly anti-semitic mural, honouring terrorists and describing a minority as lacking the qualities of the rest of us, as all being much much worse than using the words illuminati, cultural marxism and north London liberal elite. And much worse than what RLB quoted as well.

I think you have to try very hard indeed (far far too hard) to make something antisemitic out of the words illuminati, cultural Marxism and north London liberal elite. In fact it's tragic that that is the cancel culture route we are heading down. I'm done on this topic. All the best Andrew and UTC.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by AndrewJB » Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:49 pm

android wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:46 pm
We are never going to agree on this Andrew but I must just correct one thing you said (I put it in bold if my word skills worked). All of the 3 Corbyn examples I gave ARE based on things Corbyn has said or written himself, so you were wrong to suggest the opposite.

I don't think I'm using double standards because I genuinely regard defence of a blatantly anti-semitic mural, honouring terrorists and describing a minority as lacking the qualities of the rest of us, as all being much much worse than using the words illuminati, cultural marxism and north London liberal elite. And much worse than what RLB quoted as well.

I think you have to try very hard indeed (far far too hard) to make something antisemitic out of the words illuminati, cultural Marxism and north London liberal elite. In fact it's tragic that that is the cancel culture route we are heading down. I'm done on this topic. All the best Andrew and UTC.
Sorry, but I’ve given you a link from an academic which sets out how anti Semitic the term “illuminati” is when used to describe Jewish people. “Cultural Marxism” is equally odious. Mogg has gone further, insinuating Soros is a shadowy figure pulling the strings of Remain. All nailed on examples of anti Semitic language.

Corbyn expressed support for an artist, and then withdrew that support and apologised when he understood the issue more fully. He commemorated those killed by a bomb. That’s what he’s said. You could say you don’t believe him, but you wouldn’t get a conviction in a court. And I’ve explained the last one to you already. He was speaking about a group of protestors, who didn’t understand the history or irony in a speech. You’re going to insist on your interpretation however flimsy, but if you condemn on that side, you cannot sweep Braverman, Mogg, and Johnson’s anti semitism under the carpet.

It is sad that people get caught up in small details, but you might have called this out years ago when the right began looking for any small thing to discredit the Labour leadership.

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 121 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by android » Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:59 pm

Extraordinary interpretations (imo) but not unexpected on past form. Goodnight! Come on Burnley - 1 min to k.o.
This user liked this post: KateR

Gordaleman
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 855 times
Has Liked: 605 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Gordaleman » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:41 am

Israel about to annex the West Bank. Benjamin Netanyahu could make an announcement as early as 1 July. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-532 ... -west-bank

Pretty much the whole world is against it, apart from Donald Trump but try criticising the Israeli government and all you will get is shouts of 'Anti Semitism' which it clearly wouldn't be.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

IanMcL
Posts: 30402
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6386 times
Has Liked: 8733 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by IanMcL » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:49 am

Gordaleman wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:56 pm
.

A largely untold facet of the war on terror is the widespread outsourcing of military tasks to these mercenary companies. Accountable neither to the citizenry nor to standard military legal codes, these largely unregulated corporate armies are being entrusted with ever-greater responsibilities on behalf of the nation.
Sounds like Edward I !!!

He sent the mercenaries in first, as tgey were expendable and if they got killed....you don't have to pay them!

Gordaleman
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 855 times
Has Liked: 605 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Gordaleman » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:55 am

IanMcL wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:49 am
Sounds like Edward I !!!

He sent the mercenaries in first, as tgey were expendable and if they got killed....you don't have to pay them!
Taken out of context but the first thing to remember is that mercenary armies are now illegal. (Unless you're the USA. Then it's OK apparrently.) When they are killed, the military doesn't have to tell an American family that another soldier has lost his life fighting a pointless war.

IanMcL
Posts: 30402
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 6386 times
Has Liked: 8733 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by IanMcL » Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:07 pm

No issue with your post. Just reminded me that over 700 years ago, similar tactics were employed.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 11:35 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

Accidentally posted this on wrong thread.

Think it's important for context of why using the term "Cultural Marxism" is considered part of an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

Definition and culture war usage
Further information: Culture war
From the late 1990s, the Frankfurt School has been the object of a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory that identifies the school as the origin of an ongoing academic and intellectual movement, referred to by the theory's proponents as "Cultural Marxism", which intends to undermine and destroy Western culture and values.[49] According to the conspiracy theory, the Frankfurt School and other Marxist theorists were part of a conspiracy to attack Western society by undermining traditionalist conservatism and Christianity using the 1960s counterculture, multiculturalism, progressive politics and political correctness.[50][51][52]

This conspiracy theory is associated with American religious fundamentalists and paleoconservatives such as William S. Lind, Pat Buchanan, and Paul Weyrich; but also holds currency among the alt-right, white nationalists, Neo-Nazi organizations, and the neo-reactionary movement.[53][54]

In 1998 Weyrich presented his version of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory in a speech to the Conservative Leadership Conference of the Civitas Institute and then published the speech in his syndicated Culture war letter.[55] At Weyrich's request, William S. Lind wrote a short history of his conception of Cultural Marxism for the Free Congress Foundation; in it Lind identifies the presence of openly gay people on television as proof of Cultural Marxist control over the mass media and claims that Herbert Marcuse considered a coalition of "blacks, students, feminist women, and homosexuals" as a vanguard of cultural revolution.[50][51][56]

In 2014 Lind pseudonymously published Victoria: A Novel of 4th Generation Warfare, by Thomas Hobbes, about a societal apocalypse in which Cultural Marxism deposes traditional conservatism as the culture of the Western world. Ultimately, a Christian military victory deposes social liberalism and reestablishes a traditionalist and theocratic socioeconomic order based upon British Victorian morality of the late 19th century.[57][58] The anti-Marxism of Lind and Weyrich advocates political confrontation and intellectual opposition to Cultural Marxism with "a vibrant cultural conservatism" composed of "retro-culture fashions", a return to railroads as public transport, and an agrarian culture of self-reliance, modeled after that of the Christian Amish folk.[59] In the Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: The Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of the Lunatic Fringe (2011), the historian Martin Jay said that Lind's documentary of conservative counter-culture, Political Correctness: The Frankfurt School (1999), was effective propaganda, because it:

"spawned a number of condensed textual versions, which were reproduced on a number of radical, right-wing sites. These, in turn, led to a plethora of new videos, now available on YouTube, which feature an odd cast of pseudo-experts regurgitating exactly the same line. The message is numbingly simplistic: All the 'ills' of modern American culture, from feminism, affirmative action, sexual liberation, racial equality, multiculturalism and gay rights to the decay of traditional education, and even environmentalism, are ultimately attributable to the insidious intellectual influence of the members of the Institute for Social Research who came to America in the 1930s.[60]

Aspects of the conspiracy
Cultural pessimism
In the essay "New Dark Age: The Frankfurt School and 'Political Correctness'" (1992), Michael Minnicino presented a precursor of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory on behalf of the Schiller Institute of the LaRouche political movement. Minnicino said the "Jewish intellectuals" of the Frankfurt School promoted modern art to make cultural pessimism the spirit of the counter-culture of the 1960s, based upon the counter-culture of the Wandervogel, the socially liberal German youth movement whose Swiss Monte Verità commune was the 19th-century predecessor of Western counter-culture.[61][60][62][63]

In Fascism: Fascism and Culture (2003), professor and Oxford fellow Matthew Feldman traced the etymology of the term "Cultural Marxism" back to the anti-Semitic term Kulturbolschewismus (Cultural Bolshevism), which Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party used to assert that Jewish cultural influence was the source of German social degeneration under the liberal régime of the Weimar Republic (1918–1939), and also the cause of social degeneration in the West.[64]

Othering of political opponents
In the article titled Hate Crimes, Vol. 5, Heidi Beirich stated that the conspiracy theory is used to demonize various conservative "bêtes noires" including feminists, homosexuals, secular humanists, multiculturalists, sex educators, environmentalists, immigrants, and black nationalists.[65]

In Europe, the Norwegian far-right terrorist Anders Behring Breivik quoted Lind's usage of the term "Cultural Marxism" in his political manifesto 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, writing that the "sexually transmitted disease (STD) epidemic in Western Europe is a result of cultural Marxism", that "Cultural Marxism defines Muslims, feminist women, homosexuals, and some additional minority groups, as virtuous, and they view ethnic Christian European men as evil", and that "The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg is a cultural-Marxist-controlled political entity." About 90 minutes before killing 77 people in his terrorist attacks in Norway on July 22nd, 2001, Breivik e-mailed 1003 people a copy of his 1500-page manifesto and a copy of Political Correctness: A Short History of an Ideology, which was edited by Lind and published by the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation.[66][67][68][69]

In the article titled Collectivists, Communists, Labor Bosses, and Treason: The Tea Parties as Right-wing, Populist Counter-subversion Panic, Chip Berlet identifies the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory as an ideological basis of the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party. The Tea Party identifies as a right-wing populist movement; its claims of social subversion echo earlier white-nationalist claims of racial, social, and cultural subversion. The economic elites use populist rhetoric to encourage counter-subversion panics. Thus, a large, middle-class white constituency is politically deceived into siding with the ruling-class social and economic elites to defend their relative and precarious socioeconomic position in the middle class. Cultural scapegoats, such as mythical conspiracies claiming that collectivists, communists, labor bosses, and nonwhite citizens and immigrants are to blame for the economic, political, and social failures of free-market capitalism. In that manner, under the guise of patriotism, economic libertarianism, traditional Christian values, and nativism, right-wing accusations of Cultural Marxism defended the racist and sexist social hierarchies specifically opposed to the "big government" policies of the Obama administration.[70][71]

In the essay Cultural Marxism and the Radical Right, the political scientist Jérôme Jamin said that "next to the global dimension of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory, there is its innovative and original dimension, which lets its racist authors avoid racist discourses, and pretend to be defenders of democracy in their respective countries".[72] The essay titled How Trump's Paranoid White House Sees 'Deep State' Enemies on all Sides reported that an employee within the Trump administration by the name of Richard Higgins was dismissed from the U.S. National Security Council because he published a memorandum called POTUS & Political Warfare, wherein Higgins claimed the existence of an alleged left-wing conspiracy to destroy the Trump presidency and that "American public intellectuals of Cultural Marxism, foreign Islamicists, and globalist bankers, the news media, and politicians from the Republican and the Democrat parties were attacking Trump because he represents an existential threat to the cultural Marxist memes that dominate the prevailing cultural narrative in the U.S."[73][74][75]

"Political Correctness" and anti-Semitic Canards
In the speech titled "The Origins of Political Correctness" (2000), William S. Lind established the ideological and etymological lineage of Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory:

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political correctness is Cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the Hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I, to Kulturbolshewismus. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with the basic tenets of classical Marxism, the parallels are very obvious.[76]

Lind's history of the term and its meanings were described in "The Alt-right’s Favorite Meme is 100 Years Old" (2018), in which professor of law Samuel Moyn reported that social fear of Cultural Marxism is "an American contribution to the phantasmagoria of the alt-right"; while the conspiracy theory, itself, is "a crude slander, referring to Judeo-Bolshevism, something that does not exist".[77]

As I said already, I know it's long.

And not all Wikipedia copy and paste jobs are a great idea.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 12:25 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Zionism

A kind of mission statement they made in 1997.


During two millennia of dispersion and persecution, Am Yisrael [people of Israel] never abandoned hope for the rebirth of a national home in Eretz Yisrael. The Shoah [Holocaust] intensified our resolve to affirm life and pursue the Zionist dream of a return to Eretz Yisrael. Even as we mourned for the loss of one-third of our people, we witnessed the miraculous rebirth of Medinat Yisrael, the Jewish people's supreme creation in our age.

Centuries of Jewish persecution, culminating in the Shoah, demonstrated the risks of powerlessness. We, therefore, affirm Am Yisrael's reassertion of national sovereignty, but we urge that it be used to create the kind of society in which full civil, human, and religious rights exist for all its citizens. Ultimately, Medinat Yisrael will be judged not on its military might but on its character.

While we view Eretz Yisrael as sacred, the sanctity of Jewish life takes precedence over the sanctity of Jewish land.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_Judaism

Humanistic Judaism (Hebrew: יהדות הומניסטית Yahadut Humanistit) is a Jewish movement that offers a nontheistic alternative in contemporary Jewish life. It defines Judaism as the cultural and historical experience of the Jewish people. It encourages humanistic and secular Jews to celebrate their Jewish identity by participating in Jewish holidays and lifecycle events (such as weddings and bar and bat mitzvahs) with inspirational ceremonies that draw upon but go beyond traditional literature. Its philosophical foundation includes the following ideas:

A Jew is someone who identifies with the history, culture, and future of the Jewish people;
Judaism is the historic culture of the Jewish people, and religion is only one part of that culture;
Jewish identity is best preserved in a free, pluralistic environment;
People possess the power and responsibility to shape their own lives independent of supernatural authority;
Ethics and morality should serve human needs, and choices should be based upon consideration of the consequences of actions rather than pre-ordained rules or commandments;
Jewish history, like all history, is a human saga, a testament to the significance of human power and human responsibility. Biblical and other traditional texts are the products of human activity and are best understood through archaeology and other scientific analysis.
The freedom and dignity of the Jewish people must go hand in hand with the freedom and dignity of every human being.[1]

Thought both these where interesting and show how their are plenty of Jews who believe in equality and justice for all, whilst still supporting the continued existence of Israel.

Some of this goes along with what I'd been thinking.

The Shoah accelerated and massively increased support for the establishment of a modern Israel.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard

If you avoid such things as mentioned in the link above, when criticizing Israel, you shouldn't worry about accusations of antisemitism.

Just be careful and triple check your facts.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 2:56 pm

https://www.afr.com/world/europe/why-bl ... 623-p555ch

Like everything.

Strongly criticize Israel, but don't use "malicious falsehoods" which have been used historically and time and again proved as "malicious falsehoods."

Israel's breaches of human rights are done in the open.

There is no Jewish conspiracy to control the World.

Yes Jews were money lenders but only because no one else wanted to do the job or were unable to because Christians weren't allowed to.

Christians and Muslims couldn't lend at interest for instance as it was seen as immoral.

Jews involved in the slave trade, but they weren't the main force behind it.

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/376462/

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:09 pm

Interesting article, in response to the launch of The BLM platform in 2016 and the claims of Israeli genocide against Palestinians.

https://www.tbespringfield.org/black-lives-matter

I saw some attempts to defend the statement about genocide on the basis that the authors were using the word differently, to indicate extreme discrimination rather than wholesale murder, but neither that nor any other interpretations were satisfactory to most Jewish leaders, and for good reason.

I believe that to call the treatment of Palestinians by Israelis a genocide is libelous and anti-Semitic. How then should the American Jewish community respond to Black Lives Matter?

Support Black Lives Matter
There are those who claim the accusations are true and we, the Jewish community, should double down and support Black Lives Matter. The group Jewish Voices for Peace issued a statement supporting the Black Lives Matter platform, including the statements about Israel.

"We call on the U.S. Jewish community to end its legitimization of anti-Black racism through its combined attacks on the Black Lives Matter Platform and U.S. Palestine solidarity," the statement said.

Such a reaction is highly problematic to me. A willingness to accept untrue, libelous, anti-Semitic statements about Israel as part of a platform that also seeks legitimate justice for African Americans means the subjugation of one's own legitimacy for the sake of another. And that is untenable!

Stop working on behalf of the African American community
There are those in the Jewish community who argue that we Jews should walk away from Black Lives Matter. Morton Klein, President of the Zionist Organization of America, goes a little further. He argues that it is time for Jewish organizations to recognize that in supporting Black Lives Matter, they are supporting a group that is anti-police, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. Ultimately, Klein demands that the American Jewish community redirect all of its energy and money to fighting anti-Semitism. This, too, is a dangerous response. A people who have been on the receiving end of discrimination, a people who have at the core of their scriptural tradition the mandate to pursue justice, cannot pull away from the type of advocacy that so many Jewish groups are appropriately involved in.

My approach
We need to affirm our obligation to advocate for justice for everyone regardless of race, religion, ethnicity and gender. But we must realize that advocacy for everyone includes advocacy for ourselves. It is absurd, counterproductive, and most unjust for us to ignore comments made about Jews or about Israel that are libelous and anti-Semitic.

In addition, we should affirm that criticizing Israel, indeed even criticizing Israel's treatment of Palestinians and viewing the end to the occupation as an important goal, can be part of a legitimate conversation. But that does not justify making libelous, anti-Semitic statements, statements which need to be repudiated in no uncertain terms.

So my approach involves continued commitment to advocating for racial, ethnic, gender-related justice while vociferously defending Jews and Israel against the kinds of attacks that are hardly just or deserved, as distinct from legitimate criticism of Israel. In practical terms, the third path involves disassociating from Black Lives Matter while strengthening alternative avenues to pursue justice.

In staking out my position, I spoke with many colleagues; some agreed with me, others did not. A young rabbi I respect very much challenged me. She argued that "Jews involved with BLM need support from the organized Jewish community, so the movement will have a stronger analysis of and commitment to fight anti-Semitism. Any serious racial justice activist does not have the option of walking away from the most important civil rights movement in decades. That would be easier than what we have to do. And the last thing we need is for our rabbis and teachers to tell us we are wrong." I thought hard about this response. While Alana did not persuade me to change my mind, she challenged me.

In the end, I am more persuaded by the statement issued by The Jewish Community Relations Council of Boston which affirmed its commitment to finding a different partner to fight racial injustices in this country. In a recent statement, JCRB wrote, "As we dissociate ourselves from the Black Lives Matter platform and those BLM organizations that embrace it, we recommit ourselves unequivocally to the pursuit of justice for all Americans, and to working together with our friends and neighbors in the African-American community, whose experience of the criminal justice system is, far too often, determined by race."

I was especially drawn to a statement written by Rabbi Shai Held of Machon Hadar, who has been a huge advocate for racial equality and who was extremely upset by the anti-Israel sentiment in the Black Lives Matter Platform. In his statement, Rabbi Held affirms the obligation "to speak up when Jews are unfairly maligned" and declares that the Black Lives Matter statement about Israel and genocide is "frankly embarrassing and appalling." At the same time, he affirms that black lives do matter, writing, "There is a long and disgraceful history in this country of devaluing and degrading black lives. The obscenity of the charges against Israel does not change this ugly fact one whit, and all Americans are implicated in the struggle for a just and fair America. So find an organization you feel you can work with and work with them."

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Antisemitism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:22 pm


Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12369
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5209 times
Has Liked: 921 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:49 pm

"Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?" - David Starkey

Imagine if someone said this about the Holocaust and the fact the world is full of Jewish people

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9472
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1184 times
Has Liked: 779 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Jul 02, 2020 7:30 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:49 pm
"Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?" - David Starkey

Imagine if someone said this about the Holocaust and the fact the world is full of Jewish people
They did at the time that was meant to be part & reasoning towards the final solution, I think reinhard heydrich said something extremely similar until he decided to have a game of chess & the czechmate ended at that point.

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:21 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:49 pm
"Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?" - David Starkey

Imagine if someone said this about the Holocaust and the fact the world is full of Jewish people
an interesting point and is it one you disagree with? I always thought that genocide was the elimination/extermination/annihilation or even ethnic cleansing which most certainly would be appropriate applied to what the Holocaust was. Yet I always thought slavery was more business oriented and getting a commodity cheap and selling for a profit if you were in the supply chain and if you were in the end user group it was about using a cheap resource to gather another commodity to sell, of course many were employed in other areas, within houses etc. The bottom line was you did not want to exterminate slaves, rather the opposite in that had a commodity you paid for and didn't want it dead/gone IMO.

Both totally abhorrent practices performed by humans on other humans plus also there definitely were crossovers from each, Jews and others being used as cheap slave labour and older, disabled and antagonist slaves being killed or left to die. Some/many slaves were treated terribly, whipped, starved almost and generally abused.

I have seen feedback and people distancing themselves from Starkey and saying it is racist in what he has said so while putting my tin hat one I am genuinely asking if you believe slavery is genuinely applied to genocide in a strict sense to what the word means and in the greater sense of what slavery was about as a "business".

Disclaimer, I am in no way form or shape condoning slavery, racism or that the Holocaust did not happen and that Jews were not persecuted because I feel both were repugnant and yet am struggling to see how it's a racist comment to say that slavery was not genocide. I would like to understand rather than moving to insulting comments.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12369
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5209 times
Has Liked: 921 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:54 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:21 pm
an interesting point and is it one you disagree with? I always thought that genocide was the elimination/extermination/annihilation or even ethnic cleansing which most certainly would be appropriate applied to what the Holocaust was. Yet I always thought slavery was more business oriented and getting a commodity cheap and selling for a profit if you were in the supply chain and if you were in the end user group it was about using a cheap resource to gather another commodity to sell, of course many were employed in other areas, within houses etc. The bottom line was you did not want to exterminate slaves, rather the opposite in that had a commodity you paid for and didn't want it dead/gone IMO.

Both totally abhorrent practices performed by humans on other humans plus also there definitely were crossovers from each, Jews and others being used as cheap slave labour and older, disabled and antagonist slaves being killed or left to die. Some/many slaves were treated terribly, whipped, starved almost and generally abused.

I have seen feedback and people distancing themselves from Starkey and saying it is racist in what he has said so while putting my tin hat one I am genuinely asking if you believe slavery is genuinely applied to genocide in a strict sense to what the word means and in the greater sense of what slavery was about as a "business".

Disclaimer, I am in no way form or shape condoning slavery, racism or that the Holocaust did not happen and that Jews were not persecuted because I feel both were repugnant and yet am struggling to see how it's a racist comment to say that slavery was not genocide. I would like to understand rather than moving to insulting comments.
Ok lets address what he actually said first. He didn't make a claim that slavery wasn't genocide because of the reasons you outlined above but instead it was because there are 'so many damn blacks' in the world today. That logic could equally be applied to the Jews and the Holocaust and my point was imagine the reaction to someone saying that. The language of 'so many damn blacks' in the context of the discussion is also horrible and based on previous remarks he has made about black people his intentions of his words are clear

Now on the separate point (and somewhat unimportant in respect to the above) about genocide then Im happy to address this with you.

First just a couple of definitions of genocide

Image

Image

Now I think the deliberate chucking of thousands of people over the sides of ships, alongside the corpses of those who don’t survive being chained and shipped for weeks as cargo qualifies as genocide as the word is defined. They may have wanted to keep slaves alive who were fit, healthy and useful but any who were not were just deliberately killed because they were black and considered no better than chattel

Of course you could argue a very specific singular meaning to genocide and use it as a defence (not saying you are defending anything) but the only reason I can see someone trying to make this a main focus of the conversation is to deflect what is some quite clearly racist and abhorrent views that some people (not you) find uncomfortable having to criticise

I mean it wasnt even the only racist comment he made in that just that interview and some of his other historical stuff on race and other minority issues make clear the kind of person many of us who follow and care about these things have always known him to be

Erasmus
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 574 times
Has Liked: 44 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Erasmus » Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:55 pm

I don't believe that either slavery or Israeli ethnic cleansing can be classed as genocide. Both are cruel abuse of human beings by those in positions of power, but genocide is a specific term that indicates the slaughter of a class or race of people. The clue is in words ending in 'cide'.
This user liked this post: KateR

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:13 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 9:54 pm
Ok lets address what he actually said first. He didn't make a claim that slavery wasn't genocide because of the reasons you outlined above but instead it was because there are 'so many damn blacks' in the world today. That logic could equally be applied to the Jews and the Holocaust and my point was imagine the reaction to someone saying that. The language of 'so many damn blacks' in the context of the discussion is also horrible and based on previous remarks he has made about black people his intentions of his words are clear

Now on the separate point (and somewhat unimportant in respect to the above) about genocide then Im happy to address this with you.

First just a couple of definitions of genocide

Image

Image

Now I think the deliberate chucking of thousands of people over the sides of ships, alongside the corpses of those who don’t survive being chained and shipped for weeks as cargo qualifies as genocide as the word is defined. They may have wanted to keep slaves alive who were fit, healthy and useful but any who were not were just deliberately killed because they were black and considered no better than chattel

Of course you could argue a very specific singular meaning to genocide and use it as a defence (not saying you are defending anything) but the only reason I can see someone trying to make this a main focus of the conversation is to deflect what is some quite clearly racist and abhorrent views that some people (not you) find uncomfortable having to criticise

I mean it wasnt even the only racist comment he made in that just that interview and some of his other historical stuff on race and other minority issues make clear the kind of person many of us who follow and care about these things have always known him to be
Sorry but the images are not loading for some reason on my computer.

I was discounting anything historical he has said because I do not not the individual and frankly never heard of him before but was referring simply to what he said in the interview shown on BBC website so I do not know the context of why he said it.

100% agree about the having zero consciousness in terms of frail/infirm etc and throwing overboard those they did not believe would bring a price in an auction. I refer back to them as in being a commodity, much like tobacco where leaves were segregated and had different prices, women had different prices for example and some of the tobacco was also thrown if it did not meet minimum quality. That is the horror in this in that they were no more than a commodity and often times some commodities were better treated than the slaves were.

I am not trying to defend the person or what he said, how he said it just for me I don't see slavery as something that is described as genocide, just might thought, nor do I see slavery as ethnic cleansing.

For me I would say how Erasmus laid it out "sounds" right to me

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:18 pm

Sadly we don't have the option of defining our own terms.

Just as "racism" and "race" are stupidly named.

So it seems "Genocide" doesn't adhere srtrictly to the Greek.

The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group.[4][5][6]
This user liked this post: KateR

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:28 pm

Definitely Ethnocide occurred in The Era of The African Slave trade, a term I wasn't familiar with until about two weeks ago. I'm sure many of you are aware of it and obviously it's affects are still with us.
Ethnocide refers to the extermination of national cultures as a genocide component.[1][2][3]

Reviewing the legal and academic history of usage of the terms genocide and ethnocide, Bartolomé Clavero differentiates them by stating that "Genocide kills people while ethnocide kills social cultures through the killing of individual souls".[4] In addition, "since cultural genocide can only be the cultural dimension of genocide", the idea of ethnocide goes beyond the idea of "cultural genocide", because it is part of a broader genocidal process.[1]

Raphael Lemkin, the linguist and lawyer who coined genocide in 1943 as the union of "the Greek word genos (race, tribe) and the Latin cide (killing)", also suggested ethnocide as an alternative form representing the same concept, using the Greek ethnos (nation) in place of genos.[2] However, the term genocide has received much wider adoption than ethnocide.[1]

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12369
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5209 times
Has Liked: 921 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:34 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:13 pm
Sorry but the images are not loading for some reason on my computer.

I was discounting anything historical he has said because I do not not the individual and frankly never heard of him before but was referring simply to what he said in the interview shown on BBC website so I do not know the context of why he said it.

100% agree about the having zero consciousness in terms of frail/infirm etc and throwing overboard those they did not believe would bring a price in an auction. I refer back to them as in being a commodity, much like tobacco where leaves were segregated and had different prices, women had different prices for example and some of the tobacco was also thrown if it did not meet minimum quality. That is the horror in this in that they were no more than a commodity and often times some commodities were better treated than the slaves were.

I am not trying to defend the person or what he said, how he said it just for me I don't see slavery as something that is described as genocide, just might thought, nor do I see slavery as ethnic cleansing.

For me I would say how Erasmus laid it out "sounds" right to me
I tried to be very careful with both my wording about genocide and also to make clear I wasnt assigning any of my criticisms with you.

I wanted to be clear and will do so again now that the attacks on Starkey have not been because he stated slavery should not be classed as genocide but the logic and words he used about genocide in relation to black suffering.

Now had this been someone trying to use genocide as a comparison to slavery and as a basis for an argument from the black lives matters side of the argument then I would have been on the side of anyone who attacked this view as this diminishes the serious of the holocaust and I dont think the word genocide should be used lightly

This wasn't the case though and in fact it was the opposite in it being someone using the seriousness of genocide to attack the current black lives matter movement and if someone is going to try and play those games then using the dictionary definition the deliberate killing and dehumanisation of black people would technically qualify as genocide

Now I dont think the slave trade should or needs to be discussed in terms of genocide but it is definitely not for the reasons Starkey stated and I think the bigger point here is that someone who regularly gets a platform on serious news programmes and is considered a respected and credible academic by many people has these views and feels comfortable airing these views all to see

I don't think our view on antisemitism in this case differs too much but it really isnt the point and what we should be talking about.

Hopefully that clarifys my position a little better and now we've discussed the specific point around is slavery genocide what do you think of what he actually said not in terms of is it or isnt it genocide but in terms of do you think his comments are acceptable, misunderstood, wrong or racist and disgusting?

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:35 pm

Caernarfon_Claret wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:18 pm
Sadly we don't have the option of defining our own terms.

Just as "racism" and "race" are stupidly named.

So it seems "Genocide" doesn't adhere srtrictly to the Greek.

The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group.[4][5][6]
But fortunately we have the ability to look at things and make decisions on what people say/state, taking what you laid out I could say that plantation life was all about encouraging births, keeping families together in many instances plus not wanting to cause the destruction of slaves that they had bought in whole or in part. Slavery wasn't aimed at a specific nation or religious group, if you want to say anyone of a black or none white skin is a race or an ethnic group maybe. I don't believe the African tribes during this period would agree with you though and many of them were in fact the main perpetrators of the supply chain of rival tribes and in many cases, it is documented tribal elders sold there own people in to slavery, for not much more than baubles.

Completely agree stupid names and terms are often applied when they don't make the best sense of trying to convey a message, for me again slavery is not genocide, as always just my opinion. When using these words many will look at Thesaurus for example and you will never get that UN definition, words definitions continually change and certain group like to apply things to enforce an argument or point.

Main thing is we all agree on how wrong it is.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:43 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:35 pm
But fortunately we have the ability to look at things and make decisions on what people say/state, taking what you laid out I could say that plantation life was all about encouraging births, keeping families together in many instances plus not wanting to cause the destruction of slaves that they had bought in whole or in part. Slavery wasn't aimed at a specific nation or religious group, if you want to say anyone of a black or none white skin is a race or an ethnic group maybe. I don't believe the African tribes during this period would agree with you though and many of them were in fact the main perpetrators of the supply chain of rival tribes and in many cases, it is documented tribal elders sold there own people in to slavery, for not much more than baubles.

Completely agree stupid names and terms are often applied when they don't make the best sense of trying to convey a message, for me again slavery is not genocide, as always just my opinion. When using these words many will look at Thesaurus for example and you will never get that UN definition, words definitions continually change and certain group like to apply things to enforce an argument or point.

Main thing is we all agree on how wrong it is.
I don't think anyone can deny that many people from all backgrounds benefited from the African Slave Trade.

I'm not sure the African concept of slavery matched up to what was actually happening.

I believe when slaves were taken during tribal warfare their treatment was a lot more humane, but that is not based on any thorough research.

Oh well Wikipedia here we come.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa


Slavery in historical Africa was practiced in many different forms: Debt slavery, enslavement of war captives, military slavery, slavery for prostitution, and criminal slavery were all practiced in various parts of Africa.[2] Slavery for domestic and court purposes was widespread throughout Africa. Plantation slavery also occurred, primarily on the eastern coast of Africa and in parts of West Africa. The importance of domestic plantation slavery increased during the 19th century, due to the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade. Many African states dependent on the international slave trade reoriented their economies towards legitimate commerce worked by slave labor.[3]

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:46 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:34 pm
I tried to be very careful with both my wording about genocide and also to make clear I wasnt assigning any of my criticisms with you.

Hopefully that clarifys my position a little better and now we've discussed the specific point around is slavery genocide what do you think of what he actually said not in terms of is it or isnt it genocide but in terms of do you think his comments are acceptable, misunderstood, wrong or racist and disgusting?
Thank you and I did not take it as a criticism and this explains things much better. If I take his one statement that "slavery is not genocide" then I would agree with that in the simple context of that statement that might be said by any normal individual without history. I think what he said regarding "obviously not genocide because there are plenty of blacks around", then I don't agree its a valid argument and is totally wrong.

I think Jews and many in former Yugoslavia for example are still around but they were definitely subjected to an attempted genocide plus of course many African countries have gone through this long after slavery was abolished, so that would refute the latter part of his justification totally.

hopefully you can understand what I am trying to say, which is often difficult to get across in this medium.
This user liked this post: Devils_Advocate

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:59 pm

Caernarfon_Claret wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:43 pm
I don't think anyone can deny that many people from all backgrounds benefited from the African Slave Trade.

I'm not sure the African concept of slavery matched up to what was actually happening.

I believe when slaves were taken during tribal warfare their treatment was a lot more humane, but that is not based on any thorough research.

Oh well Wikipedia here we come.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa


Slavery in historical Africa was practiced in many different forms: Debt slavery, enslavement of war captives, military slavery, slavery for prostitution, and criminal slavery were all practiced in various parts of Africa.[2] Slavery for domestic and court purposes was widespread throughout Africa. Plantation slavery also occurred, primarily on the eastern coast of Africa and in parts of West Africa. The importance of domestic plantation slavery increased during the 19th century, due to the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade. Many African states dependent on the international slave trade reoriented their economies towards legitimate commerce worked by slave labor.[3]
Yes, yet most people forget important factors, such as that Brazil was a huge importer of slaves but most people focus on the US only, slaves went the way of Arabia and most slave traders were Arabic in getting them to the coast where they were sold on as part of the supply chain. Also it should be realized how much the church played it's part, in Africa but you can add all the Caribbean Islands to Africa. Let's not forget the Barracoons, which I believe is where the derogatory term came from and where the slaves were herded into and the church tried to convert them to Christianity, with even senior church figures providing a blessing as they left.

But we move on to a tangent, an interesting one but .................

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:08 pm

Funnily enough I am reading a book by James A Michener titled Chesapeake which starts with early native Indians and the arrival of the first settlers and how the colonies evolve. A large section of the book are accounts around slavery and that struggle, including USA plantations obviously and Africa but also around ships battles etc. It is the second time I have read this book, first time around 20 years or more and much I had forgotten but I would highly recommend the author and this book plus Texas as reading material.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Fri Jul 03, 2020 8:39 am

KateR wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:59 pm
Yes, yet most people forget important factors, such as that Brazil was a huge importer of slaves but most people focus on the US only, slaves went the way of Arabia and most slave traders were Arabic in getting them to the coast where they were sold on as part of the supply chain. Also it should be realized how much the church played it's part, in Africa but you can add all the Caribbean Islands to Africa. Let's not forget the Barracoons, which I believe is where the derogatory term came from and where the slaves were herded into and the church tried to convert them to Christianity, with even senior church figures providing a blessing as they left.

But we move on to a tangent, an interesting one but .................
I believe you're mixing two different slave trades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

The Arab slave trade, across the Sahara desert and across the Indian Ocean, began after Muslim Arab and Swahili traders won control of the Swahili Coast and sea routes during the 9th century (see Sultanate of Zanzibar). These traders captured Bantu peoples (Zanj) from the interior in present-day Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania and brought them to the coast.[3][8] There, the slaves gradually assimilated in the rural areas, particularly on the Unguja and Pemba islands.[9]

Author N'Diaye estimates that as many as 17 million people were sold into slavery on the coast of the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and North Africa, and approximately 5 million African slaves were transported by Muslim slave traders via Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara desert to other parts of the world between 1500 and 1900.[10] Historian Lodhi challenged N'Diaye's figure saying "17 million? How is that possible if the total population of Africa at that time might not even have been 40 million? These statistics did not exist back then."[11] However, French historian Olivier Pétré-Grenouilleau also quotes the figure of 17 million as the total number of people transported from the 7th century until 1920, mentionning it amounts to an average of 6,000 people per year.[12][13]

The captives were sold throughout the Middle East. This trade accelerated as superior ships led to more trade and greater demand for labour on plantations in the region. Eventually, tens of thousands of captives were being taken every year.[9][14][15]

The Indian Ocean slave trade was multi-directional and changed over time. To meet the demand for menial labor, Bantu slaves bought by Arab slave traders from southeastern Africa were sold in cumulatively large numbers over the centuries to customers in Egypt, Arabia, the Persian Gulf, India, European colonies in the Far East, the Indian Ocean islands, Ethiopia and Somalia.[1]

Slave labor in East Africa was drawn from the Zanj, Bantu peoples that lived along the East African coast.[8][16] The Zanj were for centuries shipped as slaves by Arab traders to all the countries bordering the Indian Ocean. The Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs recruited many Zanj slaves as soldiers and, as early as 696, there were revolts of Zanj slave soldiers in Iraq.[17] A 7th-century Chinese text mentions ambassadors from Java presenting the Chinese emperor with two Seng Chi (Zanj) slaves as gifts in 614, and 8th- and 9th-century chronicles mention Seng Chi slaves reaching China from the Hindu kingdom of Sri Vijaya in Java.[17]

The Arab Slave trade also included European slaves often captured by Christians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

The Atlantic slave trade, transatlantic slave trade, or Euro-American slave trade involved the transportation by slave traders of enslaved African people, mainly to the Americas. The slave trade regularly used the triangular trade route and its Middle Passage, and existed from the 16th to the 19th centuries. The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were people from Central and West Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans, or by half European 'merchant princes' [1] to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas.[2] Except for the Portuguese, European slave traders generally did not participate in the raids because life expectancy for Europeans in sub-Saharan Africa was less than one year during the period of the slave trade (which was prior to the development of quinine as a treatment for malaria).[3] The South Atlantic and Caribbean economies were particularly dependent on labour for the production of sugarcane and other commodities. This was viewed as crucial by those Western European states which, in the late 17th and 18th centuries, were vying with each other to create overseas empires.[4]

The Portuguese, in the 16th century, were the first to engage in the Atlantic slave trade. In 1526, they completed the first transatlantic slave voyage to Brazil, and other Europeans soon followed.[5] Shipowners regarded the slaves as cargo to be transported to the Americas as quickly and cheaply as possible,[4] there to be sold to work on coffee, tobacco, cocoa, sugar, and cotton plantations, gold and silver mines, rice fields, the construction industry, cutting timber for ships, in skilled labour, and as domestic servants. The first Africans kidnapped to the English colonies were classified as indentured servants, with a similar legal standing as contract-based workers coming from Britain and Ireland. However, by the middle of the 17th century, slavery had hardened as a racial caste, with African slaves and their future offspring being legally the property of their owners, as children born to slave mothers were also slaves (partus sequitur ventrem). As property, the people were considered merchandise or units of labour, and were sold at markets with other goods and services.

The major Atlantic slave trading nations, ordered by trade volume, were the Portuguese, the British, the Spanish, the French, the Dutch Empires, and the Danish. Several had established outposts on the African coast where they purchased slaves from local African leaders.[6] These slaves were managed by a factor, who was established on or near the coast to expedite the shipping of slaves to the New World. Slaves were imprisoned in a factory while awaiting shipment. Current estimates are that about 12 million to 12.8 million Africans were shipped across the Atlantic over a span of 400 years.[7][8]:194 The number purchased by the traders was considerably higher, as the passage had a high death rate with approximately 1.2–2.4 million dying during the voyage and millions more died in seasoning camps in the Caribbean after arrival to the New World. Millions of slaves also died as a result of slave raids, wars and during transport to the coast for sale to European slave traders.[9][10][11][12] Near the beginning of the 19th century, various governments acted to ban the trade, although illegal smuggling still occurred. In the early 21st century, several governments issued apologies for the transatlantic slave trade.

Seems to be very little or no involvement of Arabs in Atlantic Slave Trade.

So in terms of a potential Genocide, which I think you could call killing 4 million people, especially as we know genocide, without using it in the name includes the idea of the Greek word "ethnos".

Also worth reading.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Passage

Traders from the Americas and Caribbean received the enslaved Africans. European powers such as Portugal, Britain, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Denmark–Norway, Sweden, and Brandenburg, as well as traders from Brazil and North America, took part in this trade.

So again no mention of Arabs, and of course they weren't operating in this region of Africa.


An estimated 15% of the Africans died at sea, with mortality rates considerably higher in Africa itself in the process of capturing and transporting indigenous people to the ships.[6] The total number of African deaths directly attributable to the Middle Passage voyage is estimated at up to two million; a broader look at African deaths directly attributable to the institution of slavery from 1500 to 1900 suggests up to four million African deaths.[7]

For two hundred years, 1440–1640, Portuguese slavers had a near monopoly on the export of slaves from Africa. During the 18th century, when the slave trade transported about 6 million Africans, British slavers carried almost 2.5 million.[8]

Mainly Portuguese and British.

Or Roman Catholics and Protestants if you like.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Fri Jul 03, 2020 8:53 am

Presumably Brazil's involvement was because it was still a Portuguese colony.

Up until 1822 when Brazil gained independence.

Brazil abolished slavery in 1888.

So around 66 years of involvement as a sovereign state.

And around 300 years involvement as a Portuguese colony.

Similar to the US involvement first as French and British colonies and then as an independent republic.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:09 am

Also worth noting that Arab slave trade included the trading of captured Slavic and Arabic people as well as the Bantu people (Zanj).

Edit - and The African part of The Arab Slave Trade apparently focused on female slaves rather than male slaves.
Last edited by Caernarfon_Claret on Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:57 am

Don't want to steer too far from the topic of antisemitism here, but.

I think the problem with the terms "race" and "racism" is that they are open to interpretation, so whilst some of us look at them from a Scientific angle and see they are nonsense if you look at the Greek "genos" and the plural "gene" which could be translated as "race" or "kin" it was in fact used as family groupings especially noble families - so there were many "gene" in Ancient Greece.

Also historically different "races" were essentially different language groupings and then different nationalities. Nothing to do with skin colour.

I understand that many in The United States will be influenced by the way "race" is used there.
Which is predominantly due to skin colour.

It is however generally the case that "race" is a social construct, and much of it relates to how an individual self identifies.

So some of us prefer using ethnicity which is obviously more complicated as there are thousands of ethnic groupings, but these are based on shared language and culture, things of greater significance and meaning than looking at skin colour - which just clumps together whole groups that often have very little in common.

Edit.

From Wikipedia

Anthropologists long ago discovered that humans' physical traits vary gradually, with groups that are close geographic neighbors being more similar than groups that are geographically separated. This pattern of variation, known as clinal variation, is also observed for many alleles that vary from one human group to another. Another observation is that traits or alleles that vary from one group to another do not vary at the same rate. This pattern is referred to as nonconcordant variation. Because the variation of physical traits is clinal and nonconcordant, anthropologists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries discovered that the more traits and the more human groups they measured, the fewer discrete differences they observed among races and the more categories they had to create to classify human beings. The number of races observed expanded to the 1930s and 1950s, and eventually anthropologists concluded that there were no discrete races.[86] Twentieth and 21st century biomedical researchers have discovered this same feature when evaluating human variation at the level of alleles and allele frequencies. Nature has not created four or five distinct, nonoverlapping genetic groups of people.

As anthropologists and other evolutionary scientists have shifted away from the language of race to the term population to talk about genetic differences, historians, cultural anthropologists and other social scientists re-conceptualized the term "race" as a cultural category or social construct, i.e., a way among many possible ways in which a society chooses to divide its members into categories.

Many social scientists have replaced the word race with the word "ethnicity" to refer to self-identifying groups based on beliefs concerning shared culture, ancestry and history. Alongside empirical and conceptual problems with "race", following the Second World War, evolutionary and social scientists were acutely aware of how beliefs about race had been used to justify discrimination, apartheid, slavery, and genocide. This questioning gained momentum in the 1960s during the civil rights movement in the United States and the emergence of numerous anti-colonial movements worldwide. They thus came to believe that race itself is a social construct, a concept that was believed to correspond to an objective reality but which was believed in because of its social functions.[115]

Caernarfon_Claret
Posts: 5045
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:53 am
Been Liked: 1475 times
Has Liked: 634 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Caernarfon_Claret » Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:38 am

Further to the Idea of Ethnocide.

It is thought one of the distinct Ethnic groups that were captured and sold as slaves during the Atlantic Slave trade were members of the Igbo people, who were captured by the Aro Confederacy - however Igbo men usually attempted to or actually committed suicide rather then be slaves.

Igbo women were often the target of slave traders and paired with Coromantee (Akan) men.

The Akan including the Fante and Ashanti were a sizeable part of slaves taken to Jamaica and other parts of the Caribbean.

And on the Akan were responsible for numerous uprisings, wars and rebellions, this is probably because most Akan slaves were military slaves, captured during wars between different Akan tribes.

So due to Ethnocide rather than having a continuation of Akan or Igbo culture and language you have the rise of African American culture and language and Afro Caribbean culture and language.

People cut of from their heritage.

Forced to start from scratch.

The Ashanti Empire particularly known for Military prowess, wealth, architecture, sophisticated hierarchy and culture.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12369
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5209 times
Has Liked: 921 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:20 pm

What the left has to deal with with regards to accusations on antisemitism

Cooking question
Image

One of many similar responses
Image

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:23 pm

Caernarfon_Claret wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:38 am
Further to the Idea of Ethnocide.

It is thought one of the distinct Ethnic groups that were captured and sold as slaves during the Atlantic Slave trade were members of the Igbo people, who were captured by the Aro Confederacy - however Igbo men usually attempted to or actually committed suicide rather then be slaves.

The Ashanti Empire particularly known for Military prowess, wealth, architecture, sophisticated hierarchy and culture.
What about Thomas Sowell, the brilliant economist/historian/philosopher, who happens to be black? Sowell writes: "Of all the tragic facts about the history of slavery, the most astonishing to an American today is that, although slavery was a worldwide institution for thousands of years, nowhere in the world was slavery a controversial issue prior to the 18th century.

"People of every race and color were enslaved — and enslaved others. White people were still being bought and sold as slaves in the Ottoman Empire, decades after American blacks were freed."

Sowell also wrote: "The region of West Africa ... was one of the great slave-trading regions of the continent — before, during, and after the white man arrived. It was the Africans who enslaved their fellow Africans, selling some of these slaves to Europeans or to Arabs and keeping others for themselves. Even at the peak of the Atlantic slave trade, Africans retained more slaves for themselves than they sent to the Western Hemisphere. ... Arabs were the leading slave raiders in East Africa, ranging over an area larger than all of Europe."

The 15th‐century Portuguese exploration of the African coast is commonly regarded as the harbinger of European colonialism. In 1452, Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas , granting Afonso V of Portugal the right to reduce any “Saracens, pagans and any other unbelievers” to hereditary slavery, which legitimized the slave trade under Catholic beliefs of that time. This approval of slavery was reaffirmed and extended in his Romanus Pontifex bull of 1455. These papal bulls came to serve as a justification for the subsequent era of slave trade and European colonization of Africa. Once again religious doctrines cause mass pain and sufferings

Historical accounts show that slavery existed in West Africa for hundreds of years before European occupation. African kingdoms engaged in slave trading and African elites held slaves. During the Middle Ages, slaves were transported by Arab camel caravans along hazardous land routes extending northward through the Sahara (Ross 2011). The institution of slavery was well-established when the region fell under the control of the Mali and later the Songhai Empires between the 15th and 17th centuries. Most slaves were prisoners taken during battles between warring tribes or those who had become financial debtors who worked to gain their freedom. Beginning in the early 16th century, Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, French and British plantations in the newly colonized Americas generated a significant demand for manual labor. Having been assigned control over sea routes between Africa and the West Indies by the 1497 Treaty of Tordesillas with Spain, the Portuguese began trading slaves taken from West
African tribes in exchange for cloth, cooking utensils, and other products (Steinberg 2010). A triangular pattern of production, transportation and consumption emerged as slaves carried by ship from Africa were traded for sugar, cotton and cacao in the Americas (Inikori and Engerman 1992).
Raw materials were then loaded on ships bound for Europe. A portion of the profits were exchanged for finished goods—cloth, weapons, iron—that were traded with tribal leaders in Africa for more slaves. The demand for slaves remained high since production in the Americas was expanding and a slave’s life on plantations was brutal and often relatively short. Britain’s involvement in West Africa’s slave trade began through a royal charter
granted by Queen Elizabeth following the purchase of trade rights on the Gambia River from Portugal in 1588 (Cyr 2001). Established in 1660 to exploit Gambia’s gold fields, the Royal Africa Company (RAC) became the focus of Britain’s slave industry, with exclusive rights in coastal Africa. Initially, the British supplied slaves to colonies controlled by the Spanish and Portuguese. However, with demand from British settlements growing, the supply chain shifted to the West Indies (Jamaica, St. Christopher, and Barbados) and later to the American Colonies. Initially, slave ships operated out of London and Gravesend, but as profits grew they began sailing from additional ports such as Bristol, Devon, Dartmouth, Liverpool, Guernsey, Lancaster, and Portsmouth. With assistance from the Army and Royal Navy, the RAC established coastal fortifications in Africa to protect slave interests and, by the 1760s, Great Britain was the largest supplier of slaves to the Americas. Fearing disease such as malaria and yellow fever, Europeans relied on Africans to make forays into the interior to purchase or kidnap slaves. Captives were sometimes marched hundreds of miles with their hands tied behind their backs and necks connected by wooden poles in lines of 30 to 40. Because of their efficiency, rivers such as the Senegal and Gambia emerged as strategically important for transporting slaves. Chained in groups, slaves were moved downriver on boats or small sailing ships to coastal areas where they were purchased by European traders who, in turn, sold them to ship captains. Since ships were rarely filled to capacity at a single location, slaves were collected and stored, sometimes for weeks, at fortified stations such as James and Goree Islands.
During the 18th century, slavers operating out of Senegambia exported an estimated 6,000 slaves per year (Barry 1998). To maximize profits during the “Middle Passage” across the Atlantic, slaves were tightly packed in ship’s holds. Suffering from unsanitary conditions and disease during the five-to-eight week journey, slave mortality averaged ten percent. A large number of West African slaves shipped to the British colonies before the
American Revolution passed through Charleston, South Carolina before being sold at the city’s slave markets (Cohn 1985).

I know I have read numerous places regarding European traders, where the would not go far from the West African Coast as highlighted above, also I know I have read abstracts somewhere in that the majority of slaves were brought into the coastal Barracoons by other Africans. Yet sometimes Arab slave traders would use this route as they were able to keep and sell the slaves at a higher profit than going East across the Sahara route where a higher percentage of slaves were lost due to obvious reasons. Clearly the Arab slavers were much more prevalent on the East coast slave routes and enslaved more Africans than Europeans ever did but I believe they were also involved to some extent on the West coast of Africa.

Over decades I have lived in many Arabic countries and visited nearly all, discounting Iran and what is obvious is that there is a mixture of skin tones throughout but they appear to be fully integrated and no prejudice to dark skin tones from those of lighter skin tones.

If you were to compare slavery today in purely business terms it would be a multi Billion $ industry, so while there were risks to the traders it was obviously consider worthwhile for the rewards plus it was not illegal for long periods and seen as a normal way of doing business.

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Fri Jul 03, 2020 7:26 pm

Caernarfon_Claret wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 8:53 am
Presumably Brazil's involvement was because it was still a Portuguese colony.
I believe Brazil's involvement in the slave trade escalated very quickly when the Portuguese Royal family were evacuated to Brazil during the Napoleonic wars, just something I seem to remember, not 100% sure but that is definitely in the back of my mind as a major cause to the increase.

Rowls
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5102 times
Has Liked: 5172 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Anti semetism

Post by Rowls » Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:51 pm

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53489611

Looks like Labour is getting its house in order. Good to see.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Anti semetism

Post by tiger76 » Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:23 pm

Rowls wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:51 pm
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53489611

Looks like Labour is getting its house in order. Good to see.
Keir Starmer said he'd have a zero tolerance approach to anti semitism, so for once it's pleasing to see a politicians actions matching their rhetoric.

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by claretandy » Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm

Rowls wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:51 pm
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53489611

Looks like Labour is getting its house in order. Good to see.
Just need to kick Corbyn and all his cronies out Now.

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:26 pm

For Labour, this is an expensive and embarrassing outcome. Yet definitely a step in the right direction in this important regard, the attack of the whistleblowers is/was unacceptable, even in any company yet what should be a beacon to others proved to be anything but that, still some are against the ruling so the party still has some issues to resolve.

The leadership may hope that is a price well worth paying if it signals the beginning of the end of the anti-Semitism row that has caused real division in the party over the last few years. But will it?

For those unhappy with the party's previous handling of the issue, the apology sets down a marker that it really is "under new management". For some of those who were quite happy with the old leadership, though, this is going to rankle and some are already making their unhappiness clear.

This is certainly a big moment for Labour but there a likely to be many more before this issue is put to bed.

aggi
Posts: 8846
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2119 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:47 pm

Closing down this problem looks to be finally happening (albeit far too late) but I'm not convinced it will make much difference to Labour's electability or otherwise.

For some, particularly within the Jewish community, it was rightly a big issue. However, I suspect that the larger number just viewed it as another stick to beat Corbyn and the Labour party with rather than an actual issue.

Saying that the Labour party's anti-semitism is an issue and then supporting the Tory party with its myriad issues with Islamophobia (and the leadership's refusal to deal with them) makes me think that for many the anti-semitism wasn't really the issue.

KateR
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1019 times
Has Liked: 6172 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by KateR » Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:04 pm

aggi wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:47 pm
Closing down this problem looks to be finally happening (albeit far too late) but I'm not convinced it will make much difference to Labour's electability or otherwise.

Saying that the Labour party's anti-semitism is an issue and then supporting the Tory party with its myriad issues with Islamophobia (and the leadership's refusal to deal with them) makes me think that for many the anti-semitism wasn't really the issue.
I agree with the point about it not making much difference, except to the Jewish community, and people applauding the change, which is perceived by the wider audience to be the right thing to do.

Yet why bring the "supporting the Tory party with its myriad issues with Islamophobia" in to this discussion at all, it's like saying we are bad but look it's ok because we are not as bad as them?

Personally I never saw anything in the Labour Party as "anti-semitism is an issue" but obviously some did, they did so much they went out on a limb against the party and it's leader in an open forum. Presumably they had tried to resolve this issue internally and failed so miserably that they took the issue further. It is the attack on there own members and some are continuing to do it even claiming they would have won in court and payments should never have been made.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Anti semetism

Post by tiger76 » Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:08 pm

aggi wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:47 pm
Closing down this problem looks to be finally happening (albeit far too late) but I'm not convinced it will make much difference to Labour's electability or otherwise.

For some, particularly within the Jewish community, it was rightly a big issue. However, I suspect that the larger number just viewed it as another stick to beat Corbyn and the Labour party with rather than an actual issue.

Saying that the Labour party's anti-semitism is an issue and then supporting the Tory party with its myriad issues with Islamophobia (and the leadership's refusal to deal with them) makes me think that for many the anti-semitism wasn't really the issue.
Whether it will help Labour electorally is still questionable, but it's right for Starmer to try and negate this issue as an attack weapon for the Tories.

Now the onus is on the Tories to take action over the Islamophobia infecting their party.

aggi
Posts: 8846
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2119 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 22, 2020 4:02 pm

KateR wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:04 pm
I agree with the point about it not making much difference, except to the Jewish community, and people applauding the change, which is perceived by the wider audience to be the right thing to do.

Yet why bring the "supporting the Tory party with its myriad issues with Islamophobia" in to this discussion at all, it's like saying we are bad but look it's ok because we are not as bad as them?

Personally I never saw anything in the Labour Party as "anti-semitism is an issue" but obviously some did, they did so much they went out on a limb against the party and it's leader in an open forum. Presumably they had tried to resolve this issue internally and failed so miserably that they took the issue further. It is the attack on there own members and some are continuing to do it even claiming they would have won in court and payments should never have been made.
I've been pretty consistent in saying both are bad and the "we're not as bad as them" on both sides of the debate is a terrible justification for these things.

My point was that a lot of people seemed to be upset by anti-semitism in the Labour party but not upset by the Islamophobia in the Tory party (and actively tried to talk it down). If someone is upset by one but not the other then either they don't care about Islamophobia or they're just jumping on the anti-semitism thing because they don't like Labour and are looking for an excuse (which was my point about it not making much difference).

There are plenty of examples of people highlighting one whilst talking down the other both on here (for instance the poster who started this thread) and in the real world.

EDIT: I didn't mean the poster who started this thread. I thought Rowls started it for some reason, probably because he was so keen to keep it on (his) topic.
Last edited by aggi on Wed Jul 22, 2020 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: KateR

aggi
Posts: 8846
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2119 times

Re: Anti semetism

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 22, 2020 4:09 pm

tiger76 wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:08 pm
Whether it will help Labour electorally is still questionable, but it's right for Starmer to try and negate this issue as an attack weapon for the Tories.

Now the onus is on the Tories to take action over the Islamophobia infecting their party.
I guess the question is does this cost them votes or is it helping them? I'm sure that's the calculation they're constantly doing. Given that Johnson used the same campaign manager for his leadership bid as ran the Islamophobic mayoral campaign for Goldsmith I'd be surprised if it's not been a consideration.

Locked