Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
But the question is why has the country become so intolerant of other peoples views positions?
Just look at the Vote Leave social media and you’ll get your answer.
Two points. The people in the country wanted to talk about immigration for a long time, I do not believe they wanted to talk about immigration in a racist way. They were continually denied, told lies and insulted over it. Just basic intolerance. The Leave Campaign fed off this in as you say another intolerant way.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads, they were thick ignorant, racist, northerners who then every one of them went on a hate crimes spree. Just more intolerance all they did was vote. Now we are on to anti-semitism and on it goes. We are in a spiral of intolerance and two wrongs do not make a right. How do we sort this mess out should be the burning question for all political parties at the moment.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads..."
That would include the editors of the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph would it? In fact, can you show me a link to any paper that "poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads"?
On the other hand we had: 'Crush the Saboteurs' and 'Enemies of the People' from the Daily Mail, 'Great Britain or Great Betrayal' from the Sun, and 'The Brexit Mutineers' from the Telegraph. Who is pouring a whole load of shit over whom?
That is my whole point we are in a spiral of intolerance. What you quote was the reaction to the former. The spiral.
It's not confined to this country.
TBH, anger is no surprise, after the events of 2008-09, but it's inflamed by social media.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
Israel is a right radical, nationalist state where the "staatsvolk" are treated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Zionism has a lot in common with the nationalist philosophies of pre-war Eastern European states, particularly Poland, where Zionism has its roots. It should comes as no surprise that Israel is now particularly friendly with countries like Hungary, despite the antisemitic tendencies of right radical movements there dating back up to 100 years. Hungary's current leader, Victor Orban was given a very cordial welcome by Netanyahu when he visited Israel recently.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
The 'I am not anti-Semitic in any way. I've actually got Jewish friends.' explanation is given to Huff Post. Classy way to keep the story going for the weekend.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy. .
Personally, I cannot get too excited over a dispute over the precise point that Anti-Zionism becomes Anti-Semitism. I quite like many aspects of Israel, and it is the only Middle Eastern country in which I could live safely as an observant Christian.
Labour anti-Semitism is a bit like the golliwog dispute, or about the occassional kipper who goes off the rails about Ting Tongs or Bongo Bongo land. Yes it is racist, and needs calling out, but it is hardly in the same league as The Nuremberg Laws, Ku Klux Klan lynchings or slave trade. While all predjudice or bigotry is deplorable, there are degrees of offensiveness. The row shows up the dark side of the hard Left (I suspect that many of the left wing anti-semites are not party members), but is not terminal.
I disagree. When a party starts fighting for the right to be anti-semitic, it is disappearing down a very dark and nasty rabbit hole. It may be electorally successful (I am sure you can think of examples) for a while but it has crossed a bridge which no decent party should ever cross. And anti-semitic statements rarely stop there. That is why the Jewish community has talked about an "existential threat". They know - and have good reason for knowing - that once you start down the road of anti-semitic discourse and insults, there is no saying where this could end. Why take the risk?
It ought to be a matter of shame that we have even had to have the sight of the Jewish community demonstrating outside Parliament against the Labour Party, that all representatives of the Jewish community in this country have come together to say how concerned and frightened they are.
Paranoid? Wouldn't you be if you were Jewish and Britain ended up with a PM happy to engage with a group whose founding charter explicitly states that it wants to kill all Jews?
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
Israel is a right radical, nationalist state where the "staatsvolk" are treated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Zionism has a lot in common with the nationalist philosophies of pre-war Eastern European states, particularly Poland, where Zionism has its roots. It should comes as no surprise that Israel is now particularly friendly with countries like Hungary, despite the antisemitic tendencies of right radical movements there dating back up to 100 years. Hungary's current leader, Victor Orban was given a very cordial welcome by Netanyahu when he visited Israel recently.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
Israel is a right radical, nationalist state where the "staatsvolk" are treated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Zionism has a lot in common with the nationalist philosophies of pre-war Eastern European states, particularly Poland, where Zionism has its roots. It should comes as no surprise that Israel is now particularly friendly with countries like Hungary, despite the antisemitic tendencies of right radical movements there dating back up to 100 years. Hungary's current leader, Victor Orban was given a very cordial welcome by Netanyahu when he visited Israel recently.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
"Hugo Rifkind says ‘Whatever you think of the referendum result, we can’t ever let there be a campaign like this again.’
Tough luck Hugo — if your side gets its way and there is another referendum, Vote Leave 2 will be much much worse for your side than VL1 was. VL2 will win by more than VL1 and the logical corollary will be to morph into a new party and fight the next election ‘to implement the promises we made in the referendum because the MPs have proved they can’t be trusted’.
"Hugo Rifkind says ‘Whatever you think of the referendum result, we can’t ever let there be a campaign like this again.’
Tough luck Hugo — if your side gets its way and there is another referendum, Vote Leave 2 will be much much worse for your side than VL1 was. VL2 will win by more than VL1 and the logical corollary will be to morph into a new party and fight the next election ‘to implement the promises we made in the referendum because the MPs have proved they can’t be trusted’.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
Israel is a right radical, nationalist state where the "staatsvolk" are treated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Zionism has a lot in common with the nationalist philosophies of pre-war Eastern European states, particularly Poland, where Zionism has its roots. It should comes as no surprise that Israel is now particularly friendly with countries like Hungary, despite the antisemitic tendencies of right radical movements there dating back up to 100 years. Hungary's current leader, Victor Orban was given a very cordial welcome by Netanyahu when he visited Israel recently.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
The murder of Rabin was a disaster.
Ditto Sharon falling into a coma.
Seeing Netanyahu become PM didn't half give me Deja Vu.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
But the question is why has the country become so intolerant of other peoples views positions?
Just look at the Vote Leave social media and you’ll get your answer.
Two points. The people in the country wanted to talk about immigration for a long time, I do not believe they wanted to talk about immigration in a racist way. They were continually denied, told lies and insulted over it. Just basic intolerance. The Leave Campaign fed off this in as you say another intolerant way.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads, they were thick ignorant, racist, northerners who then every one of them went on a hate crimes spree. Just more intolerance all they did was vote. Now we are on to anti-semitism and on it goes. We are in a spiral of intolerance and two wrongs do not make a right. How do we sort this mess out should be the burning question for all political parties at the moment.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads..."
That would include the editors of the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph would it? In fact, can you show me a link to any paper that "poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads"?
On the other hand we had: 'Crush the Saboteurs' and 'Enemies of the People' from the Daily Mail, 'Great Britain or Great Betrayal' from the Sun, and 'The Brexit Mutineers' from the Telegraph. Who is pouring a whole load of shit over whom?
That is my whole point we are in a spiral of intolerance. What you quote was the reaction to the former. The spiral.
My point is that, to a very large extent, the 'whole load of shit' has only been poured by one side, the intolerant side: Leave.
Not, I hasten to add, by the vast majority of Leave voters but by that part of the elite who, for reasons largely associated with preserving and enhancing their own wealth and power, want us out of the EU and want the EU to fail.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporters will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
I agree. It’s absolutely baffling.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
But the question is why has the country become so intolerant of other peoples views positions?
Just look at the Vote Leave social media and you’ll get your answer.
Two points. The people in the country wanted to talk about immigration for a long time, I do not believe they wanted to talk about immigration in a racist way. They were continually denied, told lies and insulted over it. Just basic intolerance. The Leave Campaign fed off this in as you say another intolerant way.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads, they were thick ignorant, racist, northerners who then every one of them went on a hate crimes spree. Just more intolerance all they did was vote. Now we are on to anti-semitism and on it goes. We are in a spiral of intolerance and two wrongs do not make a right. How do we sort this mess out should be the burning question for all political parties at the moment.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads..."
That would include the editors of the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph would it? In fact, can you show me a link to any paper that "poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads"?
On the other hand we had: 'Crush the Saboteurs' and 'Enemies of the People' from the Daily Mail, 'Great Britain or Great Betrayal' from the Sun, and 'The Brexit Mutineers' from the Telegraph. Who is pouring a whole load of shit over whom?
That is my whole point we are in a spiral of intolerance. What you quote was the reaction to the former. The spiral.
My point is that, to a very large extent, the 'whole load of shit' has only been poured by one side, the intolerant side: Leave.
Not, I hasten to add, by the vast majority of Leave voters but by that part of the elite who, for reasons largely associated with preserving and enhancing their own wealth and power, want us out of the EU and want the EU to fail.
So remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist is perfectly acceptable? Right then.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wismitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy. .
Personally, I cannot get too excited over a dispute over the precise point that Anti-Zionism becomes Anti-Semitism. I quite like many aspects of Israel, and it is the only Middle Eastern country in which I could live safely as an observant Christian.
Labour anti-Semitism is a bit like the golliwog dispute, or about the occassional kipper who goes off the rails about Ting Tongs or Bongo Bongo land. Yes it is racist, and needs calling out, but it is hardly in the same league as The Nuremberg Laws, Ku Klux Klan lynchings or slave trade. While all predjudice or bigotry is deplorable, there are degrees of offensiveness. The row shows up the dark side of the hard Left (I suspect that many of the left wing anti-semites are not party members), but is not terminal.
I disagree. When a party starts fighting for the right to be anti-semitic, it is disappearing down a very dark and nasty rabbit hole. It may be electorally successful (I am sure you can think of examples) for a while but it has crossed a bridge which no decent party should ever cross. And anti-semitic statements rarely stop there. That is why the Jewish community has talked about an "existential threat". They know - and have good reason for knowing - that once you start down the road of anti-semitic discourse and insults, there is no saying where this could end. Why take the risk?
It ought to be a matter of shame that we have even had to have the sight of the Jewish community demonstrating outside Parliament against the Labour Party, that all representatives of the Jewish community in this country have come together to say how concerned and frightened they are.
Paranoid? Wouldn't you be if you were Jewish and Britain ended up with a PM happy to engage with a group whose founding charter explicitly states that it wants to kill all Jews?
The interesting thing about otherwise sensible "storm in a teacup" responders is why they should think that there could or would never be further consequences, unintended or otherwise, or that the history of this issue will stop at this point rather than progress as it picks up Momentum (pun intended).
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
But the question is why has the country become so intolerant of other peoples views positions?
Just look at the Vote Leave social media and you’ll get your answer.
Two points. The people in the country wanted to talk about immigration for a long time, I do not believe they wanted to talk about immigration in a racist way. They were continually denied, told lies and insulted over it. Just basic intolerance. The Leave Campaign fed off this in as you say another intolerant way.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads, they were thick ignorant, racist, northerners who then every one of them went on a hate crimes spree. Just more intolerance all they did was vote. Now we are on to anti-semitism and on it goes. We are in a spiral of intolerance and two wrongs do not make a right. How do we sort this mess out should be the burning question for all political parties at the moment.
Then after the vote, the so called leaders of the country whether politicians, editors, University chiefs poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads..."
That would include the editors of the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph would it? In fact, can you show me a link to any paper that "poured a whole load of shit over the leave voters heads"?
On the other hand we had: 'Crush the Saboteurs' and 'Enemies of the People' from the Daily Mail, 'Great Britain or Great Betrayal' from the Sun, and 'The Brexit Mutineers' from the Telegraph. Who is pouring a whole load of shit over whom?
That is my whole point we are in a spiral of intolerance. What you quote was the reaction to the former. The spiral.
My point is that, to a very large extent, the 'whole load of shit' has only been poured by one side, the intolerant side: Leave.
Not, I hasten to add, by the vast majority of Leave voters but by that part of the elite who, for reasons largely associated with preserving and enhancing their own wealth and power, want us out of the EU and want the EU to fail.
So remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist is perfectly acceptable? Right then.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
He screwed up his own strategy because he didn't understand the EU and didn't understand the nature of his enemies.
I think Dave will admit his biggest failing was not being prepared or adapt to Vote Leave running the campaign he’d expect from Farage.
Simply he didn’t think Gove, Hannan et al would focus on immigration/dog whistle stuff on Turkey.
He didn't think Gove would be pushing Leave at all....
Depending on who you talk to Gove had assured Dave he wouldn’t campaign for Leave.
But when he saw that Leave was likely to be fronted by Boris and Farage he thought Leave would lose 75/25.
So he thought if he joined in Leave would lose 45/55 and the EU would see it as this far and no further.
It’s a theory but undermined by the fact Gove declared for Leave (alone) way before Boris did, who was still on the fence at the time.
Personally, I think Gove always wanted to Leave and was merely conflicted by his sense of loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
Israel is a right radical, nationalist state where the "staatsvolk" are treated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Zionism has a lot in common with the nationalist philosophies of pre-war Eastern European states, particularly Poland, where Zionism has its roots. It should comes as no surprise that Israel is now particularly friendly with countries like Hungary, despite the antisemitic tendencies of right radical movements there dating back up to 100 years. Hungary's current leader, Victor Orban was given a very cordial welcome by Netanyahu when he visited Israel recently.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Why do you need polling, just look at the behaviour of the Labour Party on this issue since Corbyn took over. Look what they have done to Margaret Hodge. Apparently though because she is a jew it is ok.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy. .
Personally, I cannot get too excited over a dispute over the precise point that Anti-Zionism becomes Anti-Semitism. I quite like many aspects of Israel, and it is the only Middle Eastern country in which I could live safely as an observant Christian.
I disagree. When a party starts fighting for the right to be anti-semitic, it is disappearing down a very dark and nasty rabbit hole. It may be electorally successful (I am sure you can think of examples) for a while but it has crossed a bridge which no decent party should ever cross. And anti-semitic statements rarely stop there. That is why the Jewish community has talked about an "existential threat". They know - and have good reason for knowing - that once you start down the road of anti-semitic discourse and insults, there is no saying where this could end. Why take the risk?
It ought to be a matter of shame that we have even had to have the sight of the Jewish community demonstrating outside Parliament against the Labour Party, that all representatives of the Jewish community in this country have come together to say how concerned and frightened they are.
Paranoid? Wouldn't you be if you were Jewish and Britain ended up with a PM happy to engage with a group whose founding charter explicitly states that it wants to kill all Jews?
Sure, there is the slippery slope argument, and I am not comfortable with any degree of anti-semitism, but the Labour dispute is very much an indepth discussion of where exactly the boundary between anti-semitism and anti-zionism lies. Both sides agree that anti-semitism is unnacceptable and anti-zionism is a legitimate political view-point.
I ran a teaching course for a fortnight in the West Bank, including a visit to Hebron. Whilst most Israelis are just trying to get on with their lives in the freeist country in the region, the behaviour of the settlers in the West Bank is appalling. Unfortunately the settler parties decide the government, so get pandered to.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
All of this could have been avoided if Labour had honoured their promises on a Lisbon treaty referendum.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
He screwed up his own strategy because he didn't understand the EU and didn't understand the nature of his enemies.
I think Dave will admit his biggest failing was not being prepared or adapt to Vote Leave running the campaign he’d expect from Farage.
Simply he didn’t think Gove, Hannan et al would focus on immigration/dog whistle stuff on Turkey.
He didn't think Gove would be pushing Leave at all....
Depending on who you talk to Gove had assured Dave he wouldn’t campaign for Leave.
But when he saw that Leave was likely to be fronted by Boris and Farage he thought Leave would lose 75/25.
So he thought if he joined in Leave would lose 45/55 and the EU would see it as this far and no further.
It’s a theory. Personally, I think Gove always wanted to Leave and was merely conflicted by his sense of loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
He was always backing Leave. His initial view was that he wouldn’t campaign much for Leave bar an odd article and speech.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporters will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
I agree. It’s absolutely baffling.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
Agreed. As a left supporter I find it baffling - it will push me back to the LDs, even though I liked the Labour manifesto policies better than the LDs.
I can only think the Corbynites have got so wrapped up in their long-term support for the Palastinian cause that a) they cannot distiguish between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, and b) they think the public at large will see it the same way.
If this hasn't been put right by Labour before the next GE it will hurt them badly.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
He ies.
I think Dave will admit his biggest failing was not being prepared or adapt to Vote Leave running the campaign he’d expect from Farage.
Simply he didn’t think Gove, Hannan et al would focus on immigration/dog whistle stuff on Turkey.
He didn't think Gove would be pushing Leave at all....
Depending on who you talk to Gove had assured Dave he wouldn’t campaign for Leave.
But when he saw that Leave was likely to be fronted by Boris and Farage he thought Leave would lose 75/25.
So he thought if he joined in Leave would lose 45/55 and the EU would see it as this far and no further.
It’s a theory. Personally, I think Gove always wanted to Leave and was merely conflicted by his sense of loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
He was always backing Leave. His initial view was that he wouldn’t campaign much for Leave bar an odd article and speech.
He was largely going to sit the referendum out.
Oh I see. Misread your post.
As the campaign went on, though, Gove ended up fighting for the win.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged quement.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Not every Labour member is an anti-semite (and first, cf. Raab's we are not stockpiling food, consider for a moment the state of the Labour Party such that that statement needs to be made), but the behaviour of Corbyn, Milne, et al, has legitimised anti-semitic behaviour in their Party.
It is as though a teacher has come into a class of 15-yr olds smoking a joint. It may still be against the rules but if you are one of those 15-yr olds then you are going to be emboldened to smoke also.
He has created an environment whereby people are likewise emboldened to be anti-semitic because they don't think that Corbyn will care that much if they are. And you know what? That feeling even extends to Labour councillors in Bognor Regis, of all places, bugger it.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporte will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
I agree. It’s absolutely baffling.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
It isnt part of any elecroral strategy. It think this is all rooted in long term grievances about Palestine.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporters will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
I agree. It’s absolutely baffling.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
Because the hard Left is deeply intolerant of other people's views and opinions. They think they are right about this and will die in a ditch for it.
Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
NPXMPX2 was telling us this morning that Jewish media concerns about anti-semitism was "unhelpfully OTT".
Its a typical NPXMPX2 comment.. its sort of blaming Jews for the mess Labour is in. Its nonsense ./
beneath the friendly exterior NPXMP is was and always will be a committed hard left true believer - he spent his youth in one of the richest and most successful western democracies where income inequality is incredibly low and STILL thought there was a need for communism - he's a true believer and would chuck pretty much anything under the bus to see a 'proper' socialist government.
I disagree. When a party starts fighting for the right to be anti-semitic, it is disappearing down a very dark and nasty rabbit hole. It may be electorally successful (I am sure you can think of examples) for a while but it has crossed a bridge which no decent party should ever cross. And anti-semitic statements rarely stop there. That is why the Jewish community has talked about an "existential threat". They know - and have good reason for knowing - that once you start down the road of anti-semitic discourse and insults, there is no saying where this could end. Why take the risk?
I would have said personally that the real problem with the way Labour has approached this is that in saying that legitimate criticism of Israel is sometimes stifled by accusations of anti-Semitism, they are rather overlooking that what far too many of their members are doing is making anti-Semitic remarks cloaked as legitimate criticism of Israel.
For example, it is perfectly OK to say Gaza is being brutally oppressed by the Israelis. It is fine to say that Israel's blockade is inhumane and probably illegal. It's fair enough to condemn the way Israel blocks medical supplies and thereby causes avoidable deaths. Those are all true, and they are all the result of deliberate policy choices by Israeli governments of many stripes over literally decades. They are reprehensible.
It is absolutely not OK however to compare it to a ghetto, concentration camp or extermination camp (or indeed to Leningrad and Stalingrad, Mr Corbyn). This is partly because the parallel reveals a profound ignorance of what those things actually were, or what they did. For example, nobody in Gaza is forced to do slave labour for the enrichment of senior officers in the IDF, as the Jews were in the ghettos. But it is also because the comparison being made is between Jews and Nazis. Now, leaving aside the fact that however bad they can be - and I'm no fan of Netanyahu - Jews are certainly not Nazis, both because fortunately very few people are (albeit that is unfortunately not a comment we can make of all Corbyn's friends and supporters, cf. Paul Eisen and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) and because it is impossible for a Jew to meet the one key consistent requirement of being a Nazi, that is for very obvious reasons a grossly offensive parallel and designed to be offensive.
It may well be because as Cyclefree said they believe themselves to be so morally superior to everyone that whatever they do is automatically right. In fact, alarming though that is for such an unpleasant bunch, it's about the only explanation that makes sense.
But it still runs the risk of making them look like, at the very least, apologists for racism. That didn't altogether end well for UKIP and the BNP.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporters will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
I agree. It’s absolutely baffling.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
Because the hard Left is deeply intolerant of other people's views and opinions. They think they are right about this and will die in a ditch for it.
In fairness, the same can be said of Ultras of any political shade. I work hard to keep a balanced mix of views on my various social media timelines, and the sheer vitriol of Brexiteer Ultras calling for May's head (in some cases, literally) is quite shocking. I find it all very unEnglish.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
This is quite a good analysis of what's happening within the left and why antisemitism has reemerged as a result of irresponsible opportunism.
However, it’s also hard to overstate the importance of what Eitan Hersh describes as political hobbyism in understanding the Corbynite insurgency. In the social media age, political hobbyists form an increasingly important electoral-political asset, and wherever polarisation happens, we can find cybernat-type political movements that no longer have a materialist grounding in an economic struggle, but instead treat political discourse as a tribal pastime.
Tough luck Hugo — if your side gets its way and there is another referendum, Vote Leave 2 will be much much worse for your side than VL1 was. VL2 will win by more than VL1 and the logical corollary will be to morph into a new party and fight the next election ‘to implement the promises we made in the referendum because the MPs have proved they can’t be trusted’.
That would be interesting.
If all the headbangers defected, would the Tories put up candidates against them? And who would win? Would they just split the vote?
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
So we've got the Mail, Sun, Express Telegraph vs......MURALI OF PB!!
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
So we've got the Mail, Sun, Express Telegraph vs......MURALI OF PB!!
Not fair on those papers, that said.
I think that's a fair point. The New European has been pretty disdainful of Leave voters, but it's hardly a media titan. Remain Ultra epithets are usually personal and confined to social media. My view is that both fringes are so unhinged that their drooling is more amusing than hurtful, but I'm from the 'sticks and stones' generation.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Metaphorically speaking he sold them the weapons they used to destroy him. He brought UKIP defectors back into the party. He promoted ideologues to the cabinet and then let them campaign against him from a position of authority. He created the perfect context to allow other Conservatives to stand against him by misrepresenting his 'renegotiation'.
I very much agree with those who say the party won't split over this anti-semitism row. Instead, some more of the decent and sane Labour MPs and supporters will drift off, disillusioned, like those who have already gone.
In electoral terms, it won't in itself have much of an impact, but there is a curious aspect to it which deserves more attention. This is the question of why Corbyn and his cabal haven't just shut down the issue, but instead seem intent on inflaming it. I really don't understand this, but it indicates at the very least an insouciance about turning friends and supporters into enemies. And if they're happy to throw away Jewish support (as well as the support of decent folk generally) for no advantage, who else are they going to alienate gratuitously?
The answer is that this is a quite deliberate attempt to get the right of the party to drift off, disillusioned so that they can increase their control of the party.
For the same reason, the hard left are currently boasting about being Communists (when they aren't). They're goading the right to leave.
Long-term control is secured by the MPs, regardless of their current impotence. Because it's difficult to see moderates ever replicating the Corbynista playbook. So every MP that can be deselected, or persuaded to resign, or not stand again, gives them greater long-term control.
Of course, some of these left-wing MPs will drift rightwards over time, just as Blair had former communists in his Cabinet.
Just long enough to get our majority of 2. We must win in 2022, a Corbyn victory needs to be taken off the table, even if it means we have to use VL style tactics to win. If the Tory party isn't in favour of winning then what's the point of it?
IF it does manage a majority of 2, the years 2022-27 will make 1992-7 look like a picnic as Labour moves back to the centre and in 2027 the Conservatives will get a result which will make them look fondly on 1906 and 1997.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
He fought passionately for Remain, which is more than the leader of the Labour Party did.
That you edited out the other part of my comment says a lot.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
I'd be greatly surprised if Labour split. Labour defections are rare, and they love their brand. To be fair, I was surprised when Labour MPs made a real effort to oust Corbyn, although they've since reverted to sheepish type, but I'd be significantly more surprised if they split.
But, and it's a big, Beyonce-sized but, if they do the political situation puts a new soft left (or right) party into a position where it could do very well, very quickly.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Emphatically not. After winning in 2015, he was forced to live up to a campaign pledge whose main aim was to minimise the scale of the expected defeat to Ed M's Labour Party.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Emphatically not. After winning in 2015, he was forced to live up to a campaign pledge whose main aim was to minimise the scale of the expected defeat to Ed M's Labour Party.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
I read a thorough analysis by someone close to the discussions somewhere that argued he did in fact get a reasonable deal from the EU (but didn't sell it very well), except on the issue of free movement, which he didn't see as a priority.
Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
NPXMPX2 was telling us this morning that Jewish media concerns about anti-semitism was "unhelpfully OTT".
Its a typical NPXMPX2 comment.. its sort of blaming Jews for the mess Labour is in. Its nonsense ./
beneath the friendly exterior NPXMP is was and always will be a committed hard left true believer - he spent his youth in one of the richest and most successful western democracies where income inequality is incredibly low and STILL thought there was a need for communism - he's a true believer and would chuck pretty much anything under the bus to see a 'proper' socialist government.
Can't be bothered to engage at this level, but anyone concerned by this supposed quote should have a look at my two posts on the last thread that it's, um, adapted from.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
One of the advantages (dubious though it may be) of bubbles and echo chambers is that we have to seek out opportunities to be offended. I doubt died-in-the-wool Eurofederalists read the Mail, anymore than I'm queuing up to buy the NE.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Emphatically not. After winning in 2015, he was forced to live up to a campaign pledge whose main aim was to minimise the scale of the expected defeat to Ed M's Labour Party.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
Party before country, eh? 'Twas ever thus with the Tories
There is something seriously wrong with a political system that allows the likes of Grayling, Fox, the blessed mother and the idiot who screwed up NHS reform in the Coalition years to have long, well paid and apparently successful careers in politics. I could make the same point about the other parties, indeed the current Labour front bench is truly desperate.
Maybe the French are on to something in that you normally have to run something smaller and less material before you get let loose on the national stage. The US used to do the same with State governors etc but are moving more to celebrity culture.
In normal times it maybe doesn’t matter too much but when the government is asked to do something a little more complicated, such as Brexit, the lack of talent becomes painfully apparent.
The Roman Republic, at least in its pomp, had the cursus honorum, which has a certain appeal.
It does. Of course we don’t elect managers. The Civil Service bears a lot of responsibility for this never ending incompetence. Another great British institution which seems incapable of meeting modern requirements.
Most unfair, Mr DavidL. It was you Tories who trashed the Civil Service. As indeed you trashed the education service, the health service, local government - and all ideological of course and in pursuit of personal gain.
Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
NPXMPX2 was telling us this morning that Jewish media concerns about anti-semitism was "unhelpfully OTT".
Its a typical NPXMPX2 comment.. its sort of blaming Jews for the mess Labour is in. Its nonsense ./
beneath the friendly exterior NPXMP is was and always will be a committed hard left true believer - he spent his youth in one of the richest and most successful western democracies where income inequality is incredibly low and STILL thought there was a need for communism - he's a true believer and would chuck pretty much anything under the bus to see a 'proper' socialist government.
Can't be bothered to engage at this level, but anyone concerned by this supposed quote should have a look at my two posts on the last thread that it's, um, adapted from.
"um, adapted"
Classic, Nick - and I note you didn't respond to it as you did to Southam and Josias.
Allow me to repost it:
Thanks Nick. I have to say your first paragraph makes a lot of sense. Your second is extraordinary.
You are the one to determine that a concern for any particular community is OTT, is that right? The Labour Party is legitimising discrimination which surely acts to push the barriers of what is and what is not acceptable behaviour. If it's OK for the Labour Party, it's OK for "us". Certainly the existence of the Jewish community is not dependent on whether a political party has exactly the right guidelines for membership, but if that political party is one of the two main parties in the country, and it tacks towards discrimination against that community, or rather, fails to uphold the seemingly objectively highest standards of non-discrimination, then that has a significant effect.
And as for an unsubtle different agenda? You mean all the Jews who hitherto voted Labour and were Labour Party supporters? Those people? What agenda do they have?
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
This is quite a good analysis of what's happening within the left and why antisemitism has reemerged as a result of irresponsible opportunism.
However, it’s also hard to overstate the importance of what Eitan Hersh describes as political hobbyism in understanding the Corbynite insurgency. In the social media age, political hobbyists form an increasingly important electoral-political asset, and wherever polarisation happens, we can find cybernat-type political movements that no longer have a materialist grounding in an economic struggle, but instead treat political discourse as a tribal pastime.
Yes, quite an interesting article indeed. I think "hobbyism" is a rather pejorative term, but there has certainly been a transition from politics defined by economic struggle to politics based upon values and attitudes. So for example Brexitism could reasonably be considered the same sort of "hobbyism".
There is something seriously wrong with a political system that allows the likes of Grayling, Fox, the blessed mother and the idiot who screwed up NHS reform in the Coalition years to have long, well paid and apparently successful careers in politics. I could make the same point about the other parties, indeed the current Labour front bench is truly desperate.
Maybe the French are on to something in that you normally have to run something smaller and less material before you get let loose on the national stage. The US used to do the same with State governors etc but are moving more to celebrity culture.
In normal times it maybe doesn’t matter too much but when the government is asked to do something a little more complicated, such as Brexit, the lack of talent becomes painfully apparent.
The Roman Republic, at least in its pomp, had the cursus honorum, which has a certain appeal.
It does. Of course we don’t elect managers. The Civil Service bears a lot of responsibility for this never ending incompetence. Another great British institution which seems incapable of meeting modern requirements.
Most unfair, Mr DavidL. It was you Tories who trashed the Civil Service. As indeed you trashed the education service, the health service, local government - and all ideological of course and in pursuit of personal gain.
Um, I am not actually a Tory but putting that to one side it seems to me that the Civil Service is a 19th century solution to 21st century problems. It was supposed to be impartial, clever and capable of doing anything, whether that was running a colony or a nationalised industry on the back of intelligence and a sound education.
The modern world is vastly more complex and requires experts (I know, I know) and specialisation with relevant experience over years. It is hard to imagine an institution less well designed to cope with modern complexity than the Civil Service. It needs radical reform.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
But Cummings is suggesting they would stand explicitly on BoZo's "Fuck business, stockpile spam" manifesto.
How many sitting Tory MPs would actually join that campaign?
Mr. Stodge, to be fair, many expected a straightforward 60/40 win, and the final result was close enough that it could've gone the other way fairly easily.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
But Cummings is suggesting they would stand explicitly on BoZo's "Fuck business, stockpile spam" manifesto.
How many sitting Tory MPs would actually join that campaign?
More than half, not because they agree with such an agenda but because they would feel the anger.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Emphatically not. After winning in 2015, he was forced to live up to a campaign pledge whose main aim was to minimise the scale of the expected defeat to Ed M's Labour Party.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
Yes, the EU was unreasonable then and is being unreasonable now.
Even if we do by some contorted twist ending up remaining in the EU that is going to nothing for resolving our long-term relationship with the EU, which at best will be a sullen and bitter resignation.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
That’s a relief. I thought I just didn’t understand all the big words.
And he sat passively in the middle of the track and allowed himself to be run over.
Emphatically not. After winning in 2015, he was forced to live up to a campaign pledge whose main aim was to minimise the scale of the expected defeat to Ed M's Labour Party.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
Party before country, eh? 'Twas ever thus with the Tories
All parties believe that the national interest is best served by their party programme. It's the very essence of our political system.
I don't think he thinks he has to compromise. And for what it's worth, I don't think he has to compromise. The Labour left is so convinced of its rightness that it is willing to tell Jews what comprises anti-Semitism and how to express their dismay at Labour's stance. Quite where Labour thinks it gets the moral authority from to do this is unfathomable.
Ultimately, the Labour right will huff and puff but they won't actually do anything. They never do because they have no ideas.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
That’s a relief. I thought I just didn’t understand all the big words.
I use big words sometimes. It makes me sound more photosynthesis.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Why do you put up with it? I know you have established friendships, but I nearly joined the Tory party a long time ago (Rik W was close to getting me to sign up at a pb.com meetup many moons ago.) But there is no way that the Tory party then is recognisable now, and it's moved a million miles away from both of us. I'd have left if I'd ever joined. Why stay joined to something you have such disgust for?
Because I feel there’s enough of us to fight the good fight and bring the Tory party to sanity.
We did it before and I feel we can do it again. In four years we went from IDS to Dave.
Both of whom were complete disasters, IDS f*cked the party and Cameron f*cked the country.
And then we have May, who is so dire that many people are Considering Corbyn as a better alternative.
What have we done to deserve such an incompetent bunch of clowns?
The referendum train was coming regardless it just happened on Dave’s watch.
All of this could have been avoided if Labour had honoured their promises on a Lisbon treaty referendum.
The Tories are tearing themselves apart, and it is all Labour's fault ! Nothing new here.
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
Just had my email through about Cons Mayor of London - Boff, Bailey & Morrison.
As mentioned before, I have worked closely with Bailey & Morrison. Morrison in my view is not right for London - leaver, doesn't strike the right tone. Boff no idea, while Bailey I think is a star and well deserves the slot.
He is currently at 14 (ie 13s) on BF and this is a market with Justine Greening and Zac still quoted. That has got to be a good perhaps even only trading bet (Khan 1.37)
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
ated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Snip
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
I supported Israel in 1995 when it certainly wasn't the underdog.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
ated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Snip
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
I supported Israel in 1995 when it certainly wasn't the underdog.
Interesting to hear. But the world has changed since then still further. And Israel has not stopped getting stronger.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
It’s “pick a side”. I find myself picking a side with Trump despite him being actively against many of my core values of free trade, honesty and not being a total c*nt. yet I pick him because I look at the other side and I find them more repulsive. Same for Brexit of the single market, but then find myself along the “well go and f yourself and let’s leave without a deal” headbangers. Leaving in March without any kind of transition would be utter madness and apocalayptic in terms of chaos, at least for the short term. But I would rather pick that side then align myself with the hideous rantings of everything the Independent says on the matter or the deranged muttering of A C Grayling recorded actively pleading with the European Commission to give us a punishment beating to teach us a lesson.
Pick a side, the grays of a subtle position are becoming harder and harder to express.
But AC Grayling is nobody in the world of politics. His own family probably have to check on Wikipedia to remember who he is.
He’s not the only option available.
But I look at the remainers defining the debate. Desperately angry, desperately wanting the whole thing to disappear. People like Clegg, Blair, Ken Clarke, they should be part of the negotiating team. They should be saying “we know how it works, we know which things will work, which won’t. We disagree with the decision, but it’s happening let’s get an agreement that allows both the eu and the uk to part peacefully, let’s find a way that the bulk of people who voted either way that could find acceptable”.
But no. The remainers are as bad as the Brexiteers. Back to ‘pick a side’. People trying to find a compromise like May are so utterly piss poor at it that both sides find little in it they can accept. A comprehensive failure of our political class.
Right now the usual meme from your fellow Leavers is that Brexit would be wonderful if only it hadn't been negotiated by Remain supporters like Theresa May.
That might be their meme. May has made a whole series of strategic errors in her negotiations. She’s backed herself into a corner in what has become far more difficult. The EU will fudge. They always have. But they will want to save face if a compromise on free movement is needed. She put it as a red line. Free movement frames the context of our trade agreement and she has buggered that up with her strategy.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
That’s a relief. I thought I just didn’t understand all the big words.
I use big words sometimes. It makes me sound more photosynthesis.
I always liked Len Deighton’s definition of an intellectual: someone who uses one big word when 6 little ones would do.
But AC Grayling is nobody in the world of politics. His own family probably have to check on Wikipedia to remember who he is.
He’s not the only option available.
But I look at the remainers defining the debate. Desperately angry, desperately wanting the whole thing to disappear. People like Clegg, Blair, Ken Clarke, they should be part of the negotiating team. They should be saying “we know how it works, we know which things will work, which won’t. We disagree with the decision, but it’s happening let’s get an agreement that allows both the eu and the uk to part peacefully, let’s find a way that the bulk of people who voted either way that could find acceptable”.
But no. The remainers are as bad as the Brexiteers. Back to ‘pick a side’. People trying to find a compromise like May are so utterly piss poor at it that both sides find little in it they can accept. A comprehensive failure of our political class.
Right now the usual meme from your fellow Leavers is that Brexit would be wonderful if only it hadn't been negotiated by Remain supporters like Theresa May.
That might be their meme. May has made a whole series of strategic errors in her negotiations. She’s backed herself into a corner in what has become far more difficult. The EU will fudge. They always have. But they will want to save face if a compromise on free movement is needed. She put it as a red line. Free movement frames the context of our trade agreement and she has buggered that up with her strategy.
Quite apart from the buck-passing your fellow-Leavers are indulging in, demonstrating the practical wisdom of most Remain advocates standing aside, there's a deeper reason why they should do so. If you believe that Brexit is a catastrophic self-inflicted wound that has been obtained through xenophobic lies, you are not going to be able to make it something good. At best it can be mitigated. If others genuinely believe that it's wonderful, let them navigate the pitfalls.
Since in that scenario UK fisherman won't be able to sell half of their current catch to the EU, it looks like it's going to be a significant stock recovery in British waters.
Of course the fisher folk won't be happy (when are they ever?).
Japan and China will take it. Like they do so much of other seafood. Our fish has an extraordinarily high reputation there.
Same in my part of the world. Crates of fish arrive on every flight from the UK, heading for the fish market and the local hotels.
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
It’s not unequivocal, though. It has been ambiguous, ambivalent and indecisive in its attempts to keep the remainer minority on board. It cannot agree what it wants. Hence the current mess which remainers claim “proves” that it is all too difficult.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
It’s “pick a side”. I find myself picking a side with Trump despite him being actively against many of my core values of free trade, honesty and not being a total c*nt. yet I pick him because I look at the other side and I find them more repulsive. Same for Brexit of the single market, but then find myself along the “well go and f yourself and let’s leave without a deal” headbangers. Leaving in March without any kind of transition would be utter madness and apocalayptic in terms of chaos, at least for the short term. But I would rather pick that side then align myself with the hideous rantings of everything the Independent says on the matter or the deranged muttering of A C Grayling recorded actively pleading with the European Commission to give us a punishment beating to teach us a lesson.
Pick a side, the grays of a subtle position are becoming harder and harder to express.
But AC Grayling is nobody in the world of politics. His own family probably have to check on Wikipedia to remember who he is.
He’s not the only option available.
But no. The remainers are as bad as the Brexiteers. Back to ‘pick a side’. People trying to find a compromise like May are so utterly piss poor at it that both sides find little in it they can accept. A comprehensive failure of our political class.
Right now the usual meme from your fellow Leavers is that Brexit would be wonderful if only it hadn't been negotiated by Remain supporters like Theresa May.
That might be their meme. May has made a whole series of strategic errors in her negotiations. She’s backed herself into a corner in what has become far more difficult. The EU will fudge. They always have. But they will want to save face if a compromise on free movement is needed. She put it as a red line. Free movement frames the context of our trade agreement and she has buggered that up with her strategy.
So what do you think the endpoint should look like for these issues and what should May have done differently to get there?
- Customs infrastructure and administration - Goods alignment - Services alignment - Free movement - Insitutional framework
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
... so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
Many things being said now are controversial but the way the anti-Corbynites talk and write here is as if the Israeli government are full of angels.
I have not seen here any mention of:
1.Palestinian lands being seized
2.Illegal settlements built on Palestinian lands.
3.No mention of reparations at all.
4. Hundreds of Palestinians killed without virtually no repercussions on the perpetrators.
Recently, an Israeli soldier got 9 months after being found guilty of killing a Palestinian. A Palestinian teenage girl was sentenced to 8 months for slapping an Israeli soldier !
If the land was seized from other people you would not have heard the end it.
Finally, let's talk about the Holocaust. 6 million were killed. No Palestinian was ever found guilty for it.
Europeans killed the Jews. Palestinians just lost their lands.
Of course, there are many in PB who will argue that it is all the Palestinians fault !
"Last week Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed a controversial bill declaring that only Jews have the right of self-determination in the country."
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
It’s not unequivocal, though. It has been ambiguous, ambivalent and indecisive in its attempts to keep the remainer minority on board. It cannot agree what it wants. Hence the current mess which remainers claim “proves” that it is all too difficult.
Blaming Remainers for the almighty mess that a government committed to Leave is making of Brexit is outrageous. At what point will Leavers start to accept that they and their ilk are completely screwing this up?
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
It’s not unequivocal, though. It has been ambiguous, ambivalent and indecisive in its attempts to keep the remainer minority on board. It cannot agree what it wants. Hence the current mess which remainers claim “proves” that it is all too difficult.
The remainers might be a minority, but the Conservative Party needs them in the same way they needed the Europhobic 'bastards' in the 1990s.
Oh, how joyous it is to see those bastards get their competence. It's just a shame they're not only bastards, but also utterly incompetent.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
That’s a relief. I thought I just didn’t understand all the big words.
I use big words sometimes. It makes me sound more photosynthesis.
I always liked Len Deighton’s definition of an intellectual: someone who uses one big word when 6 little ones would do.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
FPT.
ated more favourably than other citizens of the state. This policy was re-affirmed in a recent Knesset vote. Snip
The ethos of the state of Israel, like that of current Hungary and Poland, is an anathema to those on the radical left of politics, hence Labour's wish to alter the examples used in the IHRA document.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
I supported Israel in 1995 when it certainly wasn't the underdog.
Interesting to hear. But the world has changed since then still further. And Israel has not stopped getting stronger.
Do you think Israel has used its US gifted strength wisely, or has its decline towards indiscriminate brutishness accelerated as its strength has increased?
Mr. Stodge, to be fair, many expected a straightforward 60/40 win, and the final result was close enough that it could've gone the other way fairly easily.
I expected Newham to be 60/40 REMAIN not 53/47 which told me a great deal. It was the strength of the LEAVE vote in Labour areas which surprised me on the day (or night and then day to be fair).
Just long enough to get our majority of 2. We must win in 2022, a Corbyn victory needs to be taken off the table, even if it means we have to use VL style tactics to win. If the Tory party isn't in favour of winning then what's the point of it?
IF it does manage a majority of 2, the years 2022-27 will make 1992-7 look like a picnic as Labour moves back to the centre and in 2027 the Conservatives will get a result which will make them look fondly on 1906 and 1997.
I might be wrong but I don’t think so. Politics is much more polarised these days on values and identity.
Labour thinks it is right. It thinks it consists of good persons. It thinks it is anti-racist. Therefore because that is how it describes itself it therefore follows that everything it does is therefore good and anti-racist. That is where it claims to get its moral authority from.
Of course, all it shows in this narcissistic "I am good therefore everything I do is good" nonsense is that it has no understanding of what morality means. It is not what you say or how you describe yourself which is important. It is what you do which counts.
To the Labour left represented by Corbyn et al, principles are simply a way of describing how wonderful they are. They do not - and refuse to - understand that principles are a Kantian moral imperative which should determine how you act.
In their attitude to Jews (but not just them) Corbyn, his acolytes, his supporters and those who refuse to do anything about him despite their alleged queasiness are despicable, simply despicable. Their indulgence of anti-semitism, of Nazi language, of Holocaust denial, of an utter indifference to the concerns of a minority which has contributed so much to British life in the centuries it has been here and which has faced persecution and discrimination and unimaginable cruelty is a disgrace. Their actions have allowed vile racist material and thoughts and words and actions to become widespread and mainstream in a way which shames them and will shame the nation if Corbyn's Labour is ever elected into government.
I think you are describing how you see Labour. It doesn't bear much resemblance to the actual party with several hundred thousand members and some thousands of elected representatives. Though if you have some polling on refusal to understand Kantian moral imperatives etc I'm prepared to be corrected.
Kant was mistaken. His categorical imperative leads to absurd conclusions.
That’s a relief. I thought I just didn’t understand all the big words.
I use big words sometimes. It makes me sound more photosynthesis.
I always liked Len Deighton’s definition of an intellectual: someone who uses one big word when 6 little ones would do.
The greatest intellectuals are able to explain complicated subjects in fairly straightforward terms.
That might be their meme. May has made a whole series of strategic errors in her negotiations. She’s backed herself into a corner in what has become far more difficult. The EU will fudge. They always have. But they will want to save face if a compromise on free movement is needed. She put it as a red line. Free movement frames the context of our trade agreement and she has buggered that up with her strategy.
Would the EU ever have compromised on the four freedoms though? Will it ever? Could it ever?
A very modest compromise on freedom of movement during the Cameron renegotiation would almost certainly have enabled him to defeat Leave, perhaps even by a comfortable margin. I always used to think that the EU didn't attempt to make such a compromise because it was fed up of making concessions and/or woefully complacent, but perhaps it has simply become too sclerotic to make any changes that aren't within the scope of the current treaties, and the structures maintained thereby?
We (naturally) tend to focus on how good or bad Brexit might turn out to be for the UK, but it's clearly a huge negative for the EU. It's been mutilated by the decision. It's as if Scotland had voted to leave the UK, or Quebec to leave Canada: the larger union will keep going, and some people might even be relieved to be rid of the most troublesome element, but that doesn't change the fact that it'll never be the same again. One would therefore venture to suggest that the EU would've done more to head off the collapse of its North-Western flank into the sea if it were capable of so doing.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
One of the advantages (dubious though it may be) of bubbles and echo chambers is that we have to seek out opportunities to be offended. I doubt died-in-the-wool Eurofederalists read the Mail, anymore than I'm queuing up to buy the NE.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
I agree. I lamented this a few weeks ago, and I've been here since '04 (on and off). I've tried to be measured and avoid insults, but I was told by a fervent Leaver a while back that my posts on Brexit were always "as intemperate as they are imbalanced" (because, I believe, I was unhappy at being implicitly called a liar on passing on an unfortunate and unpleasant occurrence)
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
One of the advantages (dubious though it may be) of bubbles and echo chambers is that we have to seek out opportunities to be offended. I doubt died-in-the-wool Eurofederalists read the Mail, anymore than I'm queuing up to buy the NE.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
It is a matter of fact that the referendum was won with xenophobic lies. It is a central touchstone of post-referendum politics, defining much of what has happened and what is to come.
Mewling about this being pointed out is not just pointless, it is actively detrimental to understanding where things go from here.
I might be wrong but I don’t think so. Politics is much more polarised these days on values and identity.
I wouldn’t expect a collapse to 150 seats.
I have no clue either but by then the Conservatives will have had 17 years in office and while you might not think that enough I suspect you will be in the minority.
Discourse in this country has gone down the toilet.
On the Corbyn left you have people questioning the loyalty of Jews to this country and on the Brexit right anyone who voted Remain or points out Leave is going sub optimally is a traitor.
Sad.
Ft.
Zionists do not want any of this to be pointed out, so have a vested interest in trying to blur the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism, as the latter is considered unacceptable in a liberal Western democracy.
PS. Apologies to Barnesian for accidentally attributing my comment to him in the previous thread. If the previous "blockquote" is too long, part of it has to be deleted for the reply to be accepted and I made any error in doing this.
The founders of Israel subscribed to the common European view at the time that every people deserved its own State. So, they took view that there should be a Jewish State, in the same way as a Polish State, a Hungarian State, a Romanian State or a Czech State. I don't think that was a radical right position at the time, if anything, a liberal position.
As a liberal I used to be a great supporter of Israel. A Jewish friend of mine went to fight in the 6 day war in 1967 and I cheered when Israel won. I was also a great supporter of Rabin and the Oslo accords and actually cried when Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an ultra-nationalist who changed the course of history by his violent deed. It's been downhill ever since for Israel politics. A great tragedy for the Middle East but particularly for Israel.
I think what you mean to say is that as a liberal you preferred it when Israel was the plucky, bullied underdog, punching above its weight and winning against the odds. What you don't seem to be such a fan of is a strong Israel, unable to be bullied, and asserting its power where and when it can.
Classic lefty reaction.
I supported Israel in 1995 when it certainly wasn't the underdog.
Interesting to hear. But the world has changed since then still further. And Israel has not stopped getting stronger.
Do you think Israel has used its US gifted strength wisely, or has its decline towards indiscriminate brutishness accelerated as its strength has increased?
Could be. Is it supposed to be an angel? Are we? What relevance is that?
O/T I've just purchased 310 euro for £301 in preparation for a holiday in Ireland. So much for a weak euro and a disaster of a currency. How long will it be before the GB pound earns that "accolade"?
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
It’s not unequivocal, though. It has been ambiguous, ambivalent and indecisive in its attempts to keep the remainer minority on board. It cannot agree what it wants. Hence the current mess which remainers claim “proves” that it is all too difficult.
Blaming Remainers for the almighty mess that a government committed to Leave is making of Brexit is outrageous. At what point will Leavers start to accept that they and their ilk are completely screwing this up?
Whenever there is trouble there seems to be someone's ilk behind it.
Not at all. Which particular example were you referring to?
The whole of remain?!
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
One of the advantages (dubious though it may be) of bubbles and echo chambers is that we have to seek out opportunities to be offended. I doubt died-in-the-wool Eurofederalists read the Mail, anymore than I'm queuing up to buy the NE.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
It is a matter of fact that the referendum was won with xenophobic lies. It is a central touchstone of post-referendum politics, defining much of what has happened and what is to come.
Mewling about this being pointed out is not just pointless, it is actively detrimental to understanding where things go from here.
I believe that talk of splits is nearly always overrated and over stated. The fear of what happened to the SDP in a professional class with mortgages is palpable.
But I do find the suggestion that ther
There is already a grouping unequivocally committed to Leave. It's called the Conservative party and it's doing immense damage to the country right now.
It’s.
Blaming Remainers for the almighty mess that a government committed to Leave is making of Brexit is outrageous. At what point will Leavers start to accept that they and their ilk are completely screwing this up?
I criticise May for her failure to plan for no deal, failing to manage her two chief spads, failing to lead either the cabinet or the country, and her conduct during the election campaign, and the polarising tone she used in the months after the vote domestically. I blame Boris for his cowardice and poor performance. I blame Fox for his myopic focus on a US trade deal (and an unsuccessful one at that) and Davis, who started well but rapidly dissolved. I think Gove has done very well, whereas Leadsom embarrassed. I think Hammond was politically inept and not on message for far too long, pursuing an conflicting strategy to May. I have lost respect for Hannah and Carswell who have just sniped from the sidelines. Farage is now persona non grata to me. I despair at Leavers who admire Putin.
I blame Selmayr, Juncker, Tusk and Barnier for their intransigence on the EU side, their ultra-fortress like defensiveness to Brexit, their failure to do any real analysis on the reasons the UK voted to Leave, for insisting on following a penrose staircase strategy on Northern Ireland that failed to move discussions on early enough, and the need to recognise both the sovereignty of the UK and a need for a special status for NI to reflect its history. I blame the EU institutions as well (led from the top) for their ridiculous and borderline vindictive desire to exclude the UK from any and all European associations and programmes, and for failing to think at all about a new long term sustainable arrangement for a UK-EU relationship that would satisfy both sides. Funnily enough, I don’t extend that wholly to Verhofstadht who’s at least recognised the UK might need a new form of associate membership in the long term.
In short, there’s been whopping great errors on both sides about what should have always been recognising the EU status quo was simply not politically sustainable in the UK, and a new arrangement was needed.
That might be their meme. May has made a whole series of strategic errors in her negotiations. She’s backed herself into a corner in what has become far more difficult. The EU will fudge. They always have. But they will want to save face if a compromise on free movement is needed. She put it as a red line. Free movement frames the context of our trade agreement and she has buggered that up with her strategy.
One would therefore venture to suggest that the EU would've done more to head off the collapse of its North-Western flank into the sea if it were capable of so doing.
Today's reiteration of the 'Northern Ireland Backstop' (which cherry picks the Belfast Agreement) and the comments from the HoC Security Ctte on Verhofstadt's lack of understanding of the security implications make me wonder if the EU Parliament will be the ultimate roadblock to a deal....
O/T I've just purchased 310 euro for £301 in preparation for a holiday in Ireland. So much for a weak euro and a disaster of a currency. How long will it be before the GB pound earns that "accolade"?
It is just possible that the perennial PB Briteer proclamations of the collapse of the Eurozone exist in the same as Fox's trade deals.
Since in that scenario UK fisherman won't be able to sell half of their current catch to the EU, it looks like it's going to be a significant stock recovery in British waters.
Of course the fisher folk won't be happy (when are they ever?).
Japan and China will take it. Like they do so much of other seafood. Our fish has an extraordinarily high reputation there.
Same in my part of the world. Crates of fish arrive on every flight from the UK, heading for the fish market and the local hotels.
Yep. Fish caught off the Isle of Wight that is surplus to the island's requirements is trucked to Brixham fish market overnight, sold the next morning and on a plane to somewhere like Dubai the next afternoon.
So you can't really give me any examples of 'remainers calling all leavers stupid and/or racist'?
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
I can quote Murali of this parish as an example. There are many.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
Hahaha - national newspaper headlines pouring vitriol on Remainers is offset by a few posts on PB? Fair enough.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
One of the advantages (dubious though it may be) of bubbles and echo chambers is that we have to seek out opportunities to be offended. I doubt died-in-the-wool Eurofederalists read the Mail, anymore than I'm queuing up to buy the NE.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
It is a matter of fact that the referendum was won with xenophobic lies. It is a central touchstone of post-referendum politics, defining much of what has happened and what is to come.
Mewling about this being pointed out is not just pointless, it is actively detrimental to understanding where things go from here.
O/T I've just purchased 310 euro for £301 in preparation for a holiday in Ireland. So much for a weak euro and a disaster of a currency. How long will it be before the GB pound earns that "accolade"?
It is just possible that the perennial PB Briteer proclamations of the collapse of the Eurozone exist in the same as Fox's trade deals.
1999: £1 = € 1.43. 2018: £1 = €1.12
Only one currency has imploded in the last 19 years - it is NOT the EURO.
Comments
TBH, anger is no surprise, after the events of 2008-09, but it's inflamed by social media.
It ought to be a matter of shame that we have even had to have the sight of the Jewish community demonstrating outside Parliament against the Labour Party, that all representatives of the Jewish community in this country have come together to say how concerned and frightened they are.
Paranoid? Wouldn't you be if you were Jewish and Britain ended up with a PM happy to engage with a group whose founding charter explicitly states that it wants to kill all Jews?
Mayor says action needed against party-goers who buy drug as well as gang members"
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/27/middle-class-cocaine-use-fuels-londons-rising-violence-says-sadiq-khan-knife-crime
"Hugo Rifkind says ‘Whatever you think of the referendum result, we can’t ever let there be a campaign like this again.’
Tough luck Hugo — if your side gets its way and there is another referendum, Vote Leave 2 will be much much worse for your side than VL1 was. VL2 will win by more than VL1 and the logical corollary will be to morph into a new party and fight the next election ‘to implement the promises we made in the referendum because the MPs have proved they can’t be trusted’.
https://dominiccummings.com/
excuseexplanation will be when it all goes wrong again?"I've tried letting other people make some decisions; I'll just have to assume direct control over everything"
Not, I hasten to add, by the vast majority of Leave voters but by that part of the elite who, for reasons largely associated with preserving and enhancing their own wealth and power, want us out of the EU and want the EU to fail.
What on earth do Corbyn and the far Left gain by it?
And has no-one vetting candidates at Labour HQ even learnt to switch on a computer?
Personally, I think Gove always wanted to Leave and was merely conflicted by his sense of loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
Classic lefty reaction.
Also, I think the "virtuous" left is much less tolerant of political difference than the right. We've never had "never kissed a Tory" t-shirts, for example. The left seems to revel in its intolerance of the right. I don't see a lot of evidence of this among Tory members or supporters.
I ran a teaching course for a fortnight in the West Bank, including a visit to Hebron. Whilst most Israelis are just trying to get on with their lives in the freeist country in the region, the behaviour of the settlers in the West Bank is appalling. Unfortunately the settler parties decide the government, so get pandered to.
He was largely going to sit the referendum out.
I can only think the Corbynites have got so wrapped up in their long-term support for the Palastinian cause that a) they cannot distiguish between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, and b) they think the public at large will see it the same way.
If this hasn't been put right by Labour before the next GE it will hurt them badly.
As the campaign went on, though, Gove ended up fighting for the win.
It is as though a teacher has come into a class of 15-yr olds smoking a joint. It may still be against the rules but if you are one of those 15-yr olds then you are going to be emboldened to smoke also.
He has created an environment whereby people are likewise emboldened to be anti-semitic because they don't think that Corbyn will care that much if they are. And you know what? That feeling even extends to Labour councillors in Bognor Regis, of all places, bugger it.
It think this is all rooted in long term grievances about Palestine.
That's only the second time I've ever been quoted in a PB thread header.
I'll try not to make anything of it in case I get accused of being needy again! I would have said personally that the real problem with the way Labour has approached this is that in saying that legitimate criticism of Israel is sometimes stifled by accusations of anti-Semitism, they are rather overlooking that what far too many of their members are doing is making anti-Semitic remarks cloaked as legitimate criticism of Israel.
For example, it is perfectly OK to say Gaza is being brutally oppressed by the Israelis. It is fine to say that Israel's blockade is inhumane and probably illegal. It's fair enough to condemn the way Israel blocks medical supplies and thereby causes avoidable deaths. Those are all true, and they are all the result of deliberate policy choices by Israeli governments of many stripes over literally decades. They are reprehensible.
It is absolutely not OK however to compare it to a ghetto, concentration camp or extermination camp (or indeed to Leningrad and Stalingrad, Mr Corbyn). This is partly because the parallel reveals a profound ignorance of what those things actually were, or what they did. For example, nobody in Gaza is forced to do slave labour for the enrichment of senior officers in the IDF, as the Jews were in the ghettos. But it is also because the comparison being made is between Jews and Nazis. Now, leaving aside the fact that however bad they can be - and I'm no fan of Netanyahu - Jews are certainly not Nazis, both because fortunately very few people are (albeit that is unfortunately not a comment we can make of all Corbyn's friends and supporters, cf. Paul Eisen and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) and because it is impossible for a Jew to meet the one key consistent requirement of being a Nazi, that is for very obvious reasons a grossly offensive parallel and designed to be offensive.
It may well be because as Cyclefree said they believe themselves to be so morally superior to everyone that whatever they do is automatically right. In fact, alarming though that is for such an unpleasant bunch, it's about the only explanation that makes sense.
But it still runs the risk of making them look like, at the very least, apologists for racism. That didn't altogether end well for UKIP and the BNP.
No doubt there are some out there if you trawl the depths of Twitter hard enough but they won't have been plastered across the front pages of newspapers à la 'Saboteurs', 'Mutineers', 'Traitors' or 'Enemies of the People'.
You've also refused to engage my second point which k guess means you either agree or don't have a response.
https://medium.com/@pauliewaulie/labour-antisemitism-and-the-problem-of-political-hobbyism-b0d3e536eba1
However, it’s also hard to overstate the importance of what Eitan Hersh describes as political hobbyism in understanding the Corbynite insurgency. In the social media age, political hobbyists form an increasingly important electoral-political asset, and wherever polarisation happens, we can find cybernat-type political movements that no longer have a materialist grounding in an economic struggle, but instead treat political discourse as a tribal pastime.
If all the headbangers defected, would the Tories put up candidates against them? And who would win? Would they just split the vote?
Not fair on those papers, that said.
Anyhoo you only become needy when you start writing regular threads.
Or that might just be me.
Of course, some of these left-wing MPs will drift rightwards over time, just as Blair had former communists in his Cabinet.
That you edited out the other part of my comment says a lot.
As regards your second point, @John_M summarised it perfectly in his 3:12pm post: 'Ultras of any political shade are deeply intolerant'. I don't defend Left-wing intolerance any more than I do Right-wing intolerance.
I'd be greatly surprised if Labour split. Labour defections are rare, and they love their brand. To be fair, I was surprised when Labour MPs made a real effort to oust Corbyn, although they've since reverted to sheepish type, but I'd be significantly more surprised if they split.
But, and it's a big, Beyonce-sized but, if they do the political situation puts a new soft left (or right) party into a position where it could do very well, very quickly.
Even then, I suspect, Cameron thought a half-decent deal from Brussels and his own popularity would be enough but when he couldn't get anything from the EU and was forced back into an IN/OUT vote, he was forced into Project Fear.
He could have torn the Conservative Party apart by insisting the Party back him and support him as the current leader and Prime Minister but instead he tried to make the party neutral so it could regroup whichever side won.
However, even on PB, which is remarkably civil most of the time, has seen it's fair share of traitor/quisling/xenophobe/nutter slurs being traded back and forth. It's certainly put me off at times ( my fallow periods have lengthened since EUref, and I've been here since '06 when Tories were rare here believe it or not).
Classic, Nick - and I note you didn't respond to it as you did to Southam and Josias.
Allow me to repost it:
Thanks Nick. I have to say your first paragraph makes a lot of sense. Your second is extraordinary.
You are the one to determine that a concern for any particular community is OTT, is that right? The Labour Party is legitimising discrimination which surely acts to push the barriers of what is and what is not acceptable behaviour. If it's OK for the Labour Party, it's OK for "us". Certainly the existence of the Jewish community is not dependent on whether a political party has exactly the right guidelines for membership, but if that political party is one of the two main parties in the country, and it tacks towards discrimination against that community, or rather, fails to uphold the seemingly objectively highest standards of non-discrimination, then that has a significant effect.
And as for an unsubtle different agenda? You mean all the Jews who hitherto voted Labour and were Labour Party supporters? Those people? What agenda do they have?
But I do find the suggestion that there might be a new grouping unequivocally committed to Leave in the event of a second referendum dangerously credible. Remainers are playing with fire. I think May gets that and will do her level best to avoid a scenario which would be horrendously divisive in the country and quite possibly terminal to the existence of her own party.
The modern world is vastly more complex and requires experts (I know, I know) and specialisation with relevant experience over years. It is hard to imagine an institution less well designed to cope with modern complexity than the Civil Service. It needs radical reform.
How many sitting Tory MPs would actually join that campaign?
Even if we do by some contorted twist ending up remaining in the EU that is going to nothing for resolving our long-term relationship with the EU, which at best will be a sullen and bitter resignation.
As mentioned before, I have worked closely with Bailey & Morrison. Morrison in my view is not right for London - leaver, doesn't strike the right tone. Boff no idea, while Bailey I think is a star and well deserves the slot.
He is currently at 14 (ie 13s) on BF and this is a market with Justine Greening and Zac still quoted. That has got to be a good perhaps even only trading bet (Khan 1.37)
- Customs infrastructure and administration
- Goods alignment
- Services alignment
- Free movement
- Insitutional framework
No equivocation there
I have not seen here any mention of:
1.Palestinian lands being seized
2.Illegal settlements built on Palestinian lands.
3.No mention of reparations at all.
4. Hundreds of Palestinians killed without virtually no repercussions on the perpetrators.
Recently, an Israeli soldier got 9 months after being found guilty of killing a Palestinian. A Palestinian teenage girl was sentenced to 8 months for slapping an Israeli soldier !
If the land was seized from other people you would not have heard the end it.
Finally, let's talk about the Holocaust. 6 million were killed. No Palestinian was ever found guilty for it.
Europeans killed the Jews. Palestinians just lost their lands.
Of course, there are many in PB who will argue that it is all the Palestinians fault !
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/22/the-guardian-view-on-israels-new-law-popular-will-is-being-weaponised
"Last week Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed a controversial bill declaring that only Jews have the right of self-determination in the country."
Oh, how joyous it is to see those bastards get their competence.
I wouldn’t expect a collapse to 150 seats.
A very modest compromise on freedom of movement during the Cameron renegotiation would almost certainly have enabled him to defeat Leave, perhaps even by a comfortable margin. I always used to think that the EU didn't attempt to make such a compromise because it was fed up of making concessions and/or woefully complacent, but perhaps it has simply become too sclerotic to make any changes that aren't within the scope of the current treaties, and the structures maintained thereby?
We (naturally) tend to focus on how good or bad Brexit might turn out to be for the UK, but it's clearly a huge negative for the EU. It's been mutilated by the decision. It's as if Scotland had voted to leave the UK, or Quebec to leave Canada: the larger union will keep going, and some people might even be relieved to be rid of the most troublesome element, but that doesn't change the fact that it'll never be the same again. One would therefore venture to suggest that the EU would've done more to head off the collapse of its North-Western flank into the sea if it were capable of so doing.
I've tried to be measured and avoid insults, but I was told by a fervent Leaver a while back that my posts on Brexit were always "as intemperate as they are imbalanced" (because, I believe, I was unhappy at being implicitly called a liar on passing on an unfortunate and unpleasant occurrence)
Mewling about this being pointed out is not just pointless, it is actively detrimental to understanding where things go from here.
I've just purchased 310 euro for £301 in preparation for a holiday in Ireland. So much for a weak euro and a disaster of a currency. How long will it be before the GB pound earns that "accolade"?
I blame Selmayr, Juncker, Tusk and Barnier for their intransigence on the EU side, their ultra-fortress like defensiveness to Brexit, their failure to do any real analysis on the reasons the UK voted to Leave, for insisting on following a penrose staircase strategy on Northern Ireland that failed to move discussions on early enough, and the need to recognise both the sovereignty of the UK and a need for a special status for NI to reflect its history. I blame the EU institutions as well (led from the top) for their ridiculous and borderline vindictive desire to exclude the UK from any and all European associations and programmes, and for failing to think at all about a new long term sustainable arrangement for a UK-EU relationship that would satisfy both sides. Funnily enough, I don’t extend that wholly to Verhofstadht who’s at least recognised the UK might need a new form of
associate membership in the long term.
In short, there’s been whopping great errors on both sides about what should have always been recognising the EU status quo was simply not politically sustainable in the UK, and a new arrangement was needed.
Only one currency has imploded in the last 19 years - it is NOT the EURO.