Some of the critical Press coverage of Sturgeon’s resignation:
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments.
I have to say it’s disappointing if not surprising that Starmer has rolled over to get his tummy tickled over any future relationship between a Labour government and Israel without any precondition or criticism of the combover despot Netanyahu. Couldn’t Starmer frighten at least one horse for the look of the thing, a little pony even?
And? Constituency parties pick from a shortlist that they pick which is vetted before the final selection is made (again by constituency members unless it's in the imminent lead up to an election). For multiple reasons Jeremy Corbyn isn't on the shortlist - firstly because he isn't a Labour Party member and so isn't eligible and then because he would be removed within the vetting process before the final vote occurred.
Corbyn is a Labour party member still, just not got the parliamentary whip at present.
Corbyn is a Curates egg as far as I am concerned, with some very good parts and some very bad ones. In particular his witting or unwitting support of anti-semitism in the party on his watch as leader. He stubbornly refuses to apologise for getting anything wrong.
On the other hand he seems a caring fellow and I imagine charming company, if off the subject of Israel.
Certainly he represents a significant strand of politics and one that deserves to be heard in the Commons, as indeed is true of Farage. These views should be heard and debated, they are nothing to fear. Democracy is stronger when diverse views are heard. We shouldn't cancel such views, we should rebut them.
RodCrosby was a charming fellow when not talking about the holocaust
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Because he was more left-wing and internationalist than leaders, at least since Blair. He has been banging the drum for Palestine for years, and was perhaps less cautious of opening the can of worms than other leaders.
ETA: and also probably less good at leading, message discipline etc. so didn't react as quickly as he should have done when things went downhill.
I can believe he didn't think he was being anti-semitic but the mural issue on that reading illustrates how ingrained his anti-semitism was. Shall we call it unconscious bias as we must these days.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
Yes, I think this is fair.
I doubt he is an anti semite but, as you say, he allowed and enabled some extremely awful fellow travellers to gain a position in the party. The same people who were shouting “Fuck Keir Starmer” at a candlelit vigil for a dead child.
Starmer is right to deal with him as he has. It’s not just about Corbyn it’s about these awful people and if he is antagonising them then he won’t lose any sleep, or many votes, over it.
This settles it; I would actually prefer the dismal decline manager to win the next GE than Starmer - the stench of entitlement and 'it's in the bag lads' emanating from Starmer is reaching us all the way from Kiev.
Shocked, I am, that Toryguy1983 would prefer the Tories to win the next GE. Stunning news.
It has nothing to do with liking the Tories. Starmer, like Sunak, is a meaningless administrator who prefers stitch ups at Davos to punch ups at Westminster.
It just so happens he's also grotesquely entitled about the outcome of the next election, which makes me marginally more sympathetic to the underdog.
If you hate 'entitled' behaviour you must have been LIVID about Boris Johnson's time in power. Must have been hard for you to get through in one piece mentally. So, hats off.
People say Keir shouldn't have served in JC's cabinet.
But without that, Keir would have never become the leader and never been able to do the work to get anti-Semitism out, which has been confirmed as having worked by the EHRC and the Board of Deputies.
I think in this case we can conclude his actions were justified.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Because he was more left-wing and internationalist than leaders, at least since Blair. He has been banging the drum for Palestine for years, and was perhaps less cautious of opening the can of worms than other leaders.
ETA: and also probably less good at leading, message discipline etc. so didn't react as quickly as he should have done when things went downhill.
I can believe he didn't think he was being anti-semitic but the mural issue on that reading illustrates how ingrained his anti-semitism was. Shall we call it unconscious bias as we must these days.
Perhaps. I genuinely don't know. I think @Theuniondivvie put it very well a few posts ago: "I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments."
Despite the hours and hours of debate on this on here and elsewhere ad nauseam, I still don't feel confident where the line is between legitimate criticism of the Israeli government's approach to Palestine, and anti-semitism, thus can't say whether Corbyn had deeply ingrained anti-semitism or a principled stance that he wasn't willing to bend to match the reality of leading a major political party.
Some of the critical Press coverage of Sturgeon’s resignation:
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
“Critical press coverage” = rabid British assimilationist frothing
“Notes on Nationalism Notes on Nationalism is a free newsletter offering analysis and commentary of Scottish and UK politics alongside strategy and arguments for defeating nationalism. By Blair McDougall”
The mood is incredibly pessimistic in Sweden regarding the NATO membership application. The Establishment is slowly, slowly, slowly beginning to accept the likelihood that Sweden is quite simply not going to be able to attain full membership.
Finland: probably. Sweden: highly unlikely.
They are devastated. The consolation prize of being de facto nearly full members is just not jingling their bells.
Combined with the lowest growth rate in the entire European Union and the mood is uncharacteristically grim.
Seems extraordinary that an authoritarian like Erdogan has the ability to exclude a model democracy like Sweden from a defensive alliance that is supposed to protect democracies from authoritarian regimes.
Wonder what the process for ejecting members from NATO is. Is there one?
Some of the critical Press coverage of Sturgeon’s resignation:
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
I recognise that but for me the bigger problem was her total lack of interest in the Scottish economy. Her eyes famously glazed over when economic matters came up and there have been a series of calamities on her watch, the ferries, Prestwick, the discouragement of investment in the North Sea, BiFab, these are just recent examples. The sad fact is that Scotland as an independent nation is a lot less viable than it looked in 2014 and much more dependent on UK money and cross subsidy. As a Unionist I deeply regret that. I can only hope that her successor pays more attention.
This settles it; I would actually prefer the dismal decline manager to win the next GE than Starmer - the stench of entitlement and 'it's in the bag lads' emanating from Starmer is reaching us all the way from Kiev.
Shocked, I am, that Toryguy1983 would prefer the Tories to win the next GE. Stunning news.
It has nothing to do with liking the Tories. Starmer, like Sunak, is a meaningless administrator who prefers stitch ups at Davos to punch ups at Westminster.
It just so happens he's also grotesquely entitled about the outcome of the next election, which makes me marginally more sympathetic to the underdog.
If you hate 'entitled' behaviour you must have been LIVID about Boris Johnson's time in power. Must have been hard for you to get through in one piece mentally. So, hats off.
If Starmer wins the next GE he'll be entitled to become PM; if he wins a 250 majority, will he be 'grotesquely entitled'?
Some of the critical Press coverage of Sturgeon’s resignation:
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
“Critical press coverage” = rabid British assimilationist frothing
“Notes on Nationalism Notes on Nationalism is a free newsletter offering analysis and commentary of Scottish and UK politics alongside strategy and arguments for defeating nationalism. By Blair McDougall”
This settles it; I would actually prefer the dismal decline manager to win the next GE than Starmer - the stench of entitlement and 'it's in the bag lads' emanating from Starmer is reaching us all the way from Kiev.
Shocked, I am, that Toryguy1983 would prefer the Tories to win the next GE. Stunning news.
It has nothing to do with liking the Tories. Starmer, like Sunak, is a meaningless administrator who prefers stitch ups at Davos to punch ups at Westminster.
The mood is incredibly pessimistic in Sweden regarding the NATO membership application. The Establishment is slowly, slowly, slowly beginning to accept the likelihood that Sweden is quite simply not going to be able to attain full membership.
Finland: probably. Sweden: highly unlikely.
They are devastated. The consolation prize of being de facto nearly full members is just not jingling their bells.
Combined with the lowest growth rate in the entire European Union and the mood is uncharacteristically grim.
Seems extraordinary that an authoritarian like Erdogan has the ability to exclude a model democracy like Sweden from a defensive alliance that is supposed to protect democracies from authoritarian regimes.
Wonder what the process for ejecting members from NATO is. Is there one?
I'm not sure ejecting Turkey would be a sensible move for NATO. Leaning on Turkey to flex it's opposition makes more sense.
I seem to miss the poll discussions these days. Or is that because there isn't any as they all seem to be saying the same thing?
I can’t recall much comment, but I did post this:
That was the interesting one where the % amounted to 99% without the LDs, who must have been 1% or lower. I think we should wait a little to see how it develops. Anyway, as usual it didn't show the sort of support needed for Ref2 to get off the runway.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
"Anti-Semitic enabling" = Toryspeak for criticism of Israel.
It is racist to criticise Israel if criticism is discriminated according to race.
Try to express that thought in comprehensible English.
Racism is to discriminate according to race. It is racist to criticise if that criticism is discriminated according to race.
It is racist to criticise Israel if the same criticisms can be levelled at everyone else in the area, but no criticism is made. That is: If the problem is segregation, the solution is not the Islamic middle-east. If the problem is targeting civilians, the solution is not Hamas. If the problem is firing missiles, the solution is not the west nor the middle east. Etc.
There are other racist elements too, for example the comparisons to Apartheid that are often made, which is cultural appropriation of the suffering of black south africans, for example, who were never denied the vote by other black south africans who were given governance powers and then refused to call any more elections, as Hamas have done.
The truth is the focus on Israel usually comes down to self-hatred being deflected onto the Other.
Gosh. Sounds like it's easier to pass through the eye of a needle than criticize Israel without being racist then. Just about possible, though, I guess. Sight that narrow path and stick v v carefully to it. I'm up for the challenge. I think I can do it.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments.
I have to say it’s disappointing if not surprising that Starmer has rolled over to get his tummy tickled over any future relationship between a Labour government and Israel without any precondition or criticism of the combover despot Netanyahu. Couldn’t Starmer frighten at least one horse for the look of the thing, a little pony even?
I missed this - what did he say/not say?
I must apolgise to SKS, predictably it was spokesmen rather than the non-commital man himself.
'“The Labour Party has returned to its traditional position as being a very good friend and supporter of the State of Israel,” MP Steve McCabe, Labour Friends of Israel chairman, told The Times of Israel on a rainy Tuesday morning in Jerusalem. “A Keir Starmer-led Labour government will put that as a very high priority, and the people of Israel will be able to rely on it.”
'Asked about Starmer’s view on working with Netanyahu the spokesperson added Labour “always want to have a close working relationship with a number of countries across the world of which Israel is one. “The relationship between Britain and Israel is one that we value, and it is important for the future.”'
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
For sure his leadership made it very uncomfortable for me to support Labour. Not just embarrassing, but troubling. I still think they were better than the Tories but I hated so much about the party under his leadership. Equally I should say although I didn't like him I was surprised at what an effective communicator he could be. And I think it was useful for Labour to think about what it stood for and not just default to centrist managerialism - even if that is ultimately where we have ended up. I don't think there's much mental gymnastics involved. I think the following statements are all true and are not contradictory: Corbyn was not an antisemite in his personal opinions and dealings. Corbyn allowed and encouraged entry from the far left that included antisemites. Corbyn was blind to antisemitism on the left and obstructed efforts to deal with it. Corbyn encouraged a conspiracy theory anti capitalist mindset that shares too much DNA with antisemitism. Antisemitism is sometimes used as a label to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel. Antisemitism was used as a stick to beat Labour with by its opponents, to the extent of exaggerating its extent within the party. Corbyn was a terrible Labour leader and the party is better off without him. Corbyn is an idealist who has devoted his life to fighting against injustice. All these statements are in my opinion true.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
No mystery about it at all. It was just a smear campaign to discredit a popular politician on the left.
Corbyn does seem prone to giving credence to the kind of conspiracy theories which are found in antisemitic circles. When Russia annexed Crimea, he wrote a piece implying that Putin was saving it from financial destruction "at the behest of the bankers of the world".
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
For sure his leadership made it very uncomfortable for me to support Labour. Not just embarrassing, but troubling. I still think they were better than the Tories but I hated so much about the party under his leadership. Equally I should say although I didn't like him I was surprised at what an effective communicator he could be. And I think it was useful for Labour to think about what it stood for and not just default to centrist managerialism - even if that is ultimately where we have ended up. I don't think there's much mental gymnastics involved. I think the following statements are all true and are not contradictory: Corbyn was not an antisemite in his personal opinions and dealings. Corbyn allowed and encouraged entry from the far left that included antisemites. Corbyn was blind to antisemitism on the left and obstructed efforts to deal with it. Corbyn encouraged a conspiracy theory anti capitalist mindset that shares too much DNA with antisemitism. Antisemitism is sometimes used as a label to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel. Antisemitism was used as a stick to beat Labour with by its opponents, to the extent of exaggerating its extent within the party. Corbyn was a terrible Labour leader and the party is better off without him. Corbyn is an idealist who has devoted his life to fighting against injustice. All these statements are in my opinion true.
Yes, I think that's either completely right or pretty damn close to it.
What a ridiculously misguided headline. What is this website, Pravda? Exceptionally misjudged the very morning after a personal friend sent footage of an avowedly left-wing crowd chanting "F*** Keir Starmer"! I don't see how it's possible for anyone who sang "Oh Jeremy, Jeremy" a few years ago to even consider voting for the party that's treated him so appallingly. I'm Jewish, for what it's worth, and the most antisemitic attitudes I've encountered come from the Starmerites, cynically manipulating the fears of Jewish people to blacklist their internal opponents. It's absolutely horrific. The only people who seem to want Starmer are disaffected One Nation Tories who think "he's one of us, deep down", those elitist Tories who'd rather lose "honourably" than ever give their constituents the kind of working class conservatism they actually want!
You'd rather have a Tory government again than vote Labour. Uh-huh, figures.
If there's no difference between the two, other than Labour under Starmer are more authoritarian and callous towards their own members, then yes.
Well you're just another Tory supporter then.
No thats SKS voters, Labour are the Tories with a red rosette
So anyone voting Labour is a Tory and, er, real Labour supporters should vote Tory.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments.
I have to say it’s disappointing if not surprising that Starmer has rolled over to get his tummy tickled over any future relationship between a Labour government and Israel without any precondition or criticism of the combover despot Netanyahu. Couldn’t Starmer frighten at least one horse for the look of the thing, a little pony even?
I missed this - what did he say/not say?
I must apolgise to SKS, predictably it was spokesmen rather than the non-commital man himself.
'“The Labour Party has returned to its traditional position as being a very good friend and supporter of the State of Israel,” MP Steve McCabe, Labour Friends of Israel chairman, told The Times of Israel on a rainy Tuesday morning in Jerusalem. “A Keir Starmer-led Labour government will put that as a very high priority, and the people of Israel will be able to rely on it.”
'Asked about Starmer’s view on working with Netanyahu the spokesperson added Labour “always want to have a close working relationship with a number of countries across the world of which Israel is one. “The relationship between Britain and Israel is one that we value, and it is important for the future.”'
Thanks for the detail.
Tbh, considering that's the chair of Labour Friends of Israel, I'd say the endorsement of Netanyahu was conspicuous by its absence. Carefully chosen words, no doubt, and I think about where I'd want a spokesperson in that position, speaking in Israel, to be right now. Reads like a govt in waiting.
This settles it; I would actually prefer the dismal decline manager to win the next GE than Starmer - the stench of entitlement and 'it's in the bag lads' emanating from Starmer is reaching us all the way from Kiev.
Shocked, I am, that Toryguy1983 would prefer the Tories to win the next GE. Stunning news.
It has nothing to do with liking the Tories. Starmer, like Sunak, is a meaningless administrator who prefers stitch ups at Davos to punch ups at Westminster.
OT (sorry): I wenrt to see Mogwai in Bath last night. They dedicated one song to 'the people who threw that statue in the harbour'*.
There is of course a very predictable response on here to things like this (somewhere in the response will be the word 'wokerati', possibly in capital letters) but I'm more interested in the debate about the role of statues in learning history.
At the time, on one side, many people argued that we should learn from statues and to remove them was to try to erase history. On the other side many argued that statues were a poor way to learn history.
I always felt that tearing that statue down (whatever it's other merits or otherwise) was making history. And to me, the fact that a Glaswegian band who are famously taciturn on stage bother to dedicate a song to an act of public destruction that happened a few years ago suggests to me that history has been made. History as spectacle, if you will. Which I find a lot more interesting than history as a lump of marble or metal that most people wander past without noticing and a few people feel thoroughly excluded by.
Anyone care to disagree?
*Yes, they did get the wrong city. But, then, nothing interesting ever happens in Bath, so you can't really blame them.
I like Mogwai, but just don't really share their politics. I've been to quite a few gigs where bands just make stupid and naive political statements. One folk singer in 2017 told a story about an assassination attempt on Mussolini in 1931, her conclusion was the would-be assassin 'had the right idea'. There is another band I really like, First Aid Kit, who were giving poorly advised speeches in America about the 'benefits of immigration', as if it was a 'light over dark' type of struggle.
I don't mind statues of colonialists getting taken down but think it is better to try and do this through a democratic process, rather than the mob rule hysteria that went on in 2020. I see it as a low point in history, on a par with the 2011 London riots. It was the failure of democracy. People who celebrate things like that show that they just don't respect the value of things like order and democracy, it is sad, but I will carry on listening to their music.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments.
I have to say it’s disappointing if not surprising that Starmer has rolled over to get his tummy tickled over any future relationship between a Labour government and Israel without any precondition or criticism of the combover despot Netanyahu. Couldn’t Starmer frighten at least one horse for the look of the thing, a little pony even?
I missed this - what did he say/not say?
I must apolgise to SKS, predictably it was spokesmen rather than the non-commital man himself.
'“The Labour Party has returned to its traditional position as being a very good friend and supporter of the State of Israel,” MP Steve McCabe, Labour Friends of Israel chairman, told The Times of Israel on a rainy Tuesday morning in Jerusalem. “A Keir Starmer-led Labour government will put that as a very high priority, and the people of Israel will be able to rely on it.”
'Asked about Starmer’s view on working with Netanyahu the spokesperson added Labour “always want to have a close working relationship with a number of countries across the world of which Israel is one. “The relationship between Britain and Israel is one that we value, and it is important for the future.”'
So, let me get this right. You’ve uncovered that the Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, while visiting Israel, asserted to the Times of Israel that Labour is a friend of Israel. And that fact indicates that Starmer personally has “rolled over” to have his “tummy tickled” by Netanyahu.
That’s some Woodward and Bernstein level shit you’ve got going on there. Well done!
The mood is incredibly pessimistic in Sweden regarding the NATO membership application. The Establishment is slowly, slowly, slowly beginning to accept the likelihood that Sweden is quite simply not going to be able to attain full membership.
Finland: probably. Sweden: highly unlikely.
They are devastated. The consolation prize of being de facto nearly full members is just not jingling their bells.
Combined with the lowest growth rate in the entire European Union and the mood is uncharacteristically grim.
Seems extraordinary that an authoritarian like Erdogan has the ability to exclude a model democracy like Sweden from a defensive alliance that is supposed to protect democracies from authoritarian regimes.
Wonder what the process for ejecting members from NATO is. Is there one?
- “… a defensive alliance that is supposed to protect democracies from authoritarian regimes…”
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Because he struck a fashionable posture on Israel/Palestine and the truly antisemitic elements in the Party took that as a green light?
Last night BJO joyously posted a video of a thousand Momentum- type supporter Citizen Smiths chanting **** Keir Starmer. When these same people conflated Israeli.aggression in the occupied territories with Jewish Labour MPs. they were not dissuaded from effectively chanting **** Luciana Berger by Corbyn. That may not make him an anti Semite in some people's book, but it does in mine.
Some of the critical Press coverage of Sturgeon’s resignation:
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
“Critical press coverage” = rabid British assimilationist frothing
“Notes on Nationalism Notes on Nationalism is a free newsletter offering analysis and commentary of Scottish and UK politics alongside strategy and arguments for defeating nationalism. By Blair McDougall”
The leader of BetterTogether.
Who you fancy for Nicola successor, Stuart?
I’ve got an open mind. I like a lot of the names I’ve seen mentioned. Know some personally. All good folk.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
"Anti-Semitic enabling" = Toryspeak for criticism of Israel.
It is racist to criticise Israel if criticism is discriminated according to race.
Try to express that thought in comprehensible English.
Racism is to discriminate according to race. It is racist to criticise if that criticism is discriminated according to race.
It is racist to criticise Israel if the same criticisms can be levelled at everyone else in the area, but no criticism is made. That is: If the problem is segregation, the solution is not the Islamic middle-east. If the problem is targeting civilians, the solution is not Hamas. If the problem is firing missiles, the solution is not the west nor the middle east. Etc.
There are other racist elements too, for example the comparisons to Apartheid that are often made, which is cultural appropriation of the suffering of black south africans, for example, who were never denied the vote by other black south africans who were given governance powers and then refused to call any more elections, as Hamas have done.
The truth is the focus on Israel usually comes down to self-hatred being deflected onto the Other.
Gosh. Sounds like it's easier to pass through the eye of a needle than criticize Israel without being racist then. Just about possible, though, I guess. Sight that narrow path and stick v v carefully to it. I'm up for the challenge. I think I can do it.
Of course you can. Give it your best shot. And don't get too hot or bothered about the distinction. Be true to the Labour Party you love.
The mood is incredibly pessimistic in Sweden regarding the NATO membership application. The Establishment is slowly, slowly, slowly beginning to accept the likelihood that Sweden is quite simply not going to be able to attain full membership.
Finland: probably. Sweden: highly unlikely.
They are devastated. The consolation prize of being de facto nearly full members is just not jingling their bells.
Combined with the lowest growth rate in the entire European Union and the mood is uncharacteristically grim.
Isn't the problem fundamentally about Turkey, and not Sweden? That is how it looks to me. Clearly the value of tying Turkey in to an alliance with the US is higher than Finland or Sweden due to realpolitik. I wonder how reliable the whole NATO alliance is anyway, the worst outcome to my mind would be if Sweden and Finland got in and relied on it too much.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Israel/Palestine has indeed been an issue for the left for decades. The key point is that the niceties of the dividing line with anti-semitism had long been crossed but only in the far left fringe parties and groupings. These were made up of people with whom Corbyn has a natural affinity. In 2015 those people flooded into the Labour Party to vote for Corbyn and the whole nature of the party changed at the time Corbyn became leader. Those with anti-semitic views were now prominent among the party members who worshipped him and he chose to turn a blind eye to such political allies.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I find it quite easy to accept that Corbyn (a holy rather than a malevolent fool) turned a blind eye to antisemites posing as anti Zionists on the left while simultaneously believing that the Israeli government expends very substantial resources in portraying any criticism of the state of Israel as antisemitism. The real tell is from those fixating on one or other of those assessments.
I have to say it’s disappointing if not surprising that Starmer has rolled over to get his tummy tickled over any future relationship between a Labour government and Israel without any precondition or criticism of the combover despot Netanyahu. Couldn’t Starmer frighten at least one horse for the look of the thing, a little pony even?
I missed this - what did he say/not say?
I must apolgise to SKS, predictably it was spokesmen rather than the non-commital man himself.
'“The Labour Party has returned to its traditional position as being a very good friend and supporter of the State of Israel,” MP Steve McCabe, Labour Friends of Israel chairman, told The Times of Israel on a rainy Tuesday morning in Jerusalem. “A Keir Starmer-led Labour government will put that as a very high priority, and the people of Israel will be able to rely on it.”
'Asked about Starmer’s view on working with Netanyahu the spokesperson added Labour “always want to have a close working relationship with a number of countries across the world of which Israel is one. “The relationship between Britain and Israel is one that we value, and it is important for the future.”'
So, let me get this right. You’ve uncovered that the Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, while visiting Israel, asserted to the Times of Israel that Labour is a friend of Israel. And that fact indicates that Starmer personally has “rolled over” to have his “tummy tickled” by Netanyahu.
That’s some Woodward and Bernstein level shit you’ve got going on there. Well done!
Isn't Netanyahu increasingly pro-Putin these days?
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Because he struck a fashionable posture on Israel/Palestine and the truly antisemitic elements in the Party took that as a green light?
Last night BJO joyously posted a video of a thousand Momentum- type supporter Citizen Smiths chanting **** Keir Starmer. When these same people conflated Israeli.aggression in the occupied territories with Jewish Labour MPs. they were not dissuaded from effectively chanting **** Luciana Berger by Corbyn. That may not make him an anti Semite in some people's book, but it does in mine.
It's a reasonable view but then I have to say that because it's Mrs PtP's view too!
She did some research into the matter in connection for some work she did for the Jewish Chronicle and changed her opinion as a result but I never saw anything definitive myself, so I have to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Israel/Palestine has indeed been an issue for the left for decades.
Why not Northern Cyprus? (occupied by Turkey since 1974) Why not Western Sahara? (occupied by Morocco since 1975) Why not Kashmir? (occupied by India since 1947)
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Israel/Palestine has indeed been an issue for the left for decades.
Why not Northern Cyprus? (occupied by Turkey since 1974) Why not Western Sahara? (occupied by Morocco since 1975) Why not Kashmir? (occupied by India since 1947)
It used to drive Blair to distraction.
Why did the left never turn out to protest about Robert Mugabe?
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Israel/Palestine has indeed been an issue for the left for decades.
Why not Northern Cyprus? (occupied by Turkey since 1974) Why not Western Sahara? (occupied by Morocco since 1975) Why not Kashmir? (occupied by India since 1947)
So rather than striking a blow against China the USAF have pissed off a couple of amateur radio nerds and the mother of a kid's birthday party in Alaska?
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
For sure his leadership made it very uncomfortable for me to support Labour. Not just embarrassing, but troubling. I still think they were better than the Tories but I hated so much about the party under his leadership. Equally I should say although I didn't like him I was surprised at what an effective communicator he could be. And I think it was useful for Labour to think about what it stood for and not just default to centrist managerialism - even if that is ultimately where we have ended up. I don't think there's much mental gymnastics involved. I think the following statements are all true and are not contradictory: Corbyn was not an antisemite in his personal opinions and dealings. Corbyn allowed and encouraged entry from the far left that included antisemites. Corbyn was blind to antisemitism on the left and obstructed efforts to deal with it. Corbyn encouraged a conspiracy theory anti capitalist mindset that shares too much DNA with antisemitism. Antisemitism is sometimes used as a label to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel. Antisemitism was used as a stick to beat Labour with by its opponents, to the extent of exaggerating its extent within the party. Corbyn was a terrible Labour leader and the party is better off without him. Corbyn is an idealist who has devoted his life to fighting against injustice. All these statements are in my opinion true.
Much in this, though Jezza's blindnesses were so multiple you wonder about culpable blindness.
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
"Anti-Semitic enabling" = Toryspeak for criticism of Israel.
It is racist to criticise Israel if criticism is discriminated according to race.
It’s pretty simple
- Netanyahu is a corrupt arsehole who is racist due to his actions X, Y, Z. This is not racist. - Jews kidnap children to use their blood in wacky ceremonies. This is racist.
Magic Grandpa repeatedly defended and tried to get a visa into the U.K. for an “activist” who spread, on a number of occasions the racist statement above (the Blood Libel).
Cons have kicked out the moderates and (most?) Cons supporters on here are furious.
Lab have kicked out the radicals and (most?) Lab supporters on here are furious.
Personally I think kicking out Magic Grandpa is a little bit mean spirited but I wouldn't say I'm furious about it.
What is it about his anti-Semitic enabling that you miss.
None of it. That's why I'm not furious about him being kicked out. Since I don't believe he is personally anti semitic and because he has devoted his entire life to the Labour Party I think kicking him out is a bit mean spirited.
Seems that none of the Lab supporters on here think that Corbyn is anti-semitic.
Makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.
He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party. But I don't think he was personally antisemitic. So he definitely deserves criticism and should never have been leader, but perhaps doesn't deserve to be thrown out of a party he has devoted his whole life to, although I'm not going to get too upset about it. It's not that hard to grasp is it?
I love it.
"He allowed antisemitism to gain a foothold in the party...but..."
Why on earth do you think that under his leadership antisemitism gained a foothold in the party?!
Why antisemitism? Why not anti-zoroastrianism?
I appreciate that he sullied the brand and made it embarrassing to support Labour but you are cleverer than to try to engage in these mental gymnastics.
In response to your first question, I'm not an expert, nor anywhere near a Labour party member, but I do think OLB's position is about right. I think antisemitism gained a foothold because the Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most enduring touchstone issues for many in Labour, particularly those further to the left, and I think it is genuinely tricky to take a considered approach on this particular topic from a place of left-wing solidarity, without that easily slipping into antisemitism.
In other words, I think antisemitism will be an enduring challenge for Labour for as long as Israel/Palestine is at the heart of what many activists care about. Just as Islamophobia will be an enduuring challenge for Tories for as long as radical Islamic terrorism is a thing. I have no idea if Corbyn was personally antisemitic, but I do think he lacked the leadership qualities to keep this particular can of worms screwed shut.
I don't disagree at all that it is all about Israel/Palestine.
But why do you suppose that under Jeremy Corbyn anti-semitism gained a foothold in the Labour Party.
Israel/Palestine has been an issue for the left for decades. Why did people suddenly feel empowered to vent anti-semitic (as opposed to continued anti-Israel) sentiment under Corbyn?
Because he was more left-wing and internationalist than leaders, at least since Blair. He has been banging the drum for Palestine for years, and was perhaps less cautious of opening the can of worms than other leaders.
ETA: and also probably less good at leading, message discipline etc. so didn't react as quickly as he should have done when things went downhill.
The Palestinian issue comes, a bit like Northern Ireland, with a fine collection of scum, chancers, thieves, gangsters, terrorists, sociopaths and racists. Often all these fine qualities are expressed with the compass of a single soul…
If you start thinking that everyone on a particular side are all wonderful fellows, you’ll be shaking hands with people that Pol Pot would have considered not quite the thing.
The mood is incredibly pessimistic in Sweden regarding the NATO membership application. The Establishment is slowly, slowly, slowly beginning to accept the likelihood that Sweden is quite simply not going to be able to attain full membership.
Finland: probably. Sweden: highly unlikely.
They are devastated. The consolation prize of being de facto nearly full members is just not jingling their bells.
Combined with the lowest growth rate in the entire European Union and the mood is uncharacteristically grim.
Isn't the problem fundamentally about Turkey, and not Sweden? That is how it looks to me. Clearly the value of tying Turkey in to an alliance with the US is higher than Finland or Sweden due to realpolitik. I wonder how reliable the whole NATO alliance is anyway, the worst outcome to my mind would be if Sweden and Finland got in and relied on it too much.
Hungary and Turkey are just negotiating a price.
Both Finland and Sweden have been defacto members of the “West” in terms of defence for decades. Complete with joint exercises and various military agreements and exchanges.
Comments
Also quite funny in an historical context, that is.
She concentrated too much on the nuts and bolts of a referendum, rather than building support for a revamped case for independence. Her focus was on keeping true believers sweet with empty promises on indyref2, instead of trying to preach to the unconverted. The Government she is leaving behind is sagging and the independence movement is drifting.
Her style of government — the concentration of power, the ideological inflexibility, the inability to build bridges with those who do not share her views — has been a large contributor to Scotland’s polarised politics and the divisions that have hardened since the referendum of 2014 [...] Sturgeon drew around her a close-knit group of family and advisers who found it not just hard to reach out to critics, but a positive distraction from the cause. It meant she embarked on policies that had more to do with establishing political platforms than listening to the mood of the country.
https://www.notesonnationalism.com/p/bonus-edition-sturgeon-resignation
And an equaliser!
I doubt he is an anti semite but, as you say, he allowed and enabled some extremely awful fellow travellers to gain a position in the party. The same people who were shouting “Fuck Keir Starmer” at a candlelit vigil for a dead child.
Starmer is right to deal with him as he has. It’s not just about Corbyn it’s about these awful people and if he is antagonising them then he won’t lose any sleep, or many votes, over it.
But without that, Keir would have never become the leader and never been able to do the work to get anti-Semitism out, which has been confirmed as having worked by the EHRC and the Board of Deputies.
I think in this case we can conclude his actions were justified.
Despite the hours and hours of debate on this on here and elsewhere ad nauseam, I still don't feel confident where the line is between legitimate criticism of the Israeli government's approach to Palestine, and anti-semitism, thus can't say whether Corbyn had deeply ingrained anti-semitism or a principled stance that he wasn't willing to bend to match the reality of leading a major political party.
That's not to excuse what happened on his watch.
“Notes on Nationalism
Notes on Nationalism is a free newsletter offering analysis and commentary of Scottish and UK politics alongside strategy and arguments for defeating nationalism.
By Blair McDougall”
The leader of BetterTogether.
Wonder what the process for ejecting members from NATO is. Is there one?
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
'“The Labour Party has returned to its traditional position as being a very good friend and supporter of the State of Israel,” MP Steve McCabe, Labour Friends of Israel chairman, told The Times of Israel on a rainy Tuesday morning in Jerusalem. “A Keir Starmer-led Labour government will put that as a very high priority, and the people of Israel will be able to rely on it.”
'Asked about Starmer’s view on working with Netanyahu the spokesperson added Labour “always want to have a close working relationship with a number of countries across the world of which Israel is one.
“The relationship between Britain and Israel is one that we value, and it is important for the future.”'
I don't think there's much mental gymnastics involved. I think the following statements are all true and are not contradictory:
Corbyn was not an antisemite in his personal opinions and dealings.
Corbyn allowed and encouraged entry from the far left that included antisemites.
Corbyn was blind to antisemitism on the left and obstructed efforts to deal with it.
Corbyn encouraged a conspiracy theory anti capitalist mindset that shares too much DNA with antisemitism.
Antisemitism is sometimes used as a label to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel.
Antisemitism was used as a stick to beat Labour with by its opponents, to the extent of exaggerating its extent within the party.
Corbyn was a terrible Labour leader and the party is better off without him.
Corbyn is an idealist who has devoted his life to fighting against injustice.
All these statements are in my opinion true.
NEW THREAD
Tbh, considering that's the chair of Labour Friends of Israel, I'd say the endorsement of Netanyahu was conspicuous by its absence. Carefully chosen words, no doubt, and I think about where I'd want a spokesperson in that position, speaking in Israel, to be right now. Reads like a govt in waiting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-64670366
I don't mind statues of colonialists getting taken down but think it is better to try and do this through a democratic process, rather than the mob rule hysteria that went on in 2020. I see it as a low point in history, on a par with the 2011 London riots. It was the failure of democracy. People who celebrate things like that show that they just don't respect the value of things like order and democracy, it is sad, but I will carry on listening to their music.
That’s some Woodward and Bernstein level shit you’ve got going on there. Well done!
Link?
https://twitter.com/stratoballoon/status/1626276038387826697
I wonder how reliable the whole NATO alliance is anyway, the worst outcome to my mind would be if Sweden and Finland got in and relied on it too much.
Corbyn = pro-Putin
Ergo, Corbyn = pro-Netanyahu
She did some research into the matter in connection for some work she did for the Jewish Chronicle and changed her opinion as a result but I never saw anything definitive myself, so I have to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I trust you can respect my view as I do yours.
Why not Western Sahara? (occupied by Morocco since 1975)
Why not Kashmir? (occupied by India since 1947)
Why did the left never turn out to protest about Robert Mugabe?
Great.
- Netanyahu is a corrupt arsehole who is racist due to his actions X, Y, Z. This is not racist.
- Jews kidnap children to use their blood in wacky ceremonies. This is racist.
Magic Grandpa repeatedly defended and tried to get a visa into the U.K. for an “activist” who spread, on a number of occasions the racist statement above (the Blood Libel).
If you start thinking that everyone on a particular side are all wonderful fellows, you’ll be shaking hands with people that Pol Pot would have considered not quite the thing.
Both Finland and Sweden have been defacto members of the “West” in terms of defence for decades. Complete with joint exercises and various military agreements and exchanges.