Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The danger for Corbyn is that his vulnerability on antisemitis
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The danger for Corbyn is that his vulnerability on antisemitism will haunt him as long as he stays
Uptil now during Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party it has really been quite amazing that his less than robust views on antisemitism has never been a big problem for him.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5542965/Corbyn-says-Labour-use-foreign-aid-billions-spread-Left-wing-feminist-ideals-globe.html
I think there was a misprint there, shouldn't The Conservatives actually read The Jews?
Jeremy Corbyn has been accused by Jewish leaders of holding “conspiratorial views” about their community and treating them like a “hostile entity”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/25/jeremy-corbyn-branded-hostile-jewish-leaders-labour-anti-semitism/
I don't know what he can do that he would actually be willing to do to resolve this.
He isn't going to throw Livingstone under the bus. He isn't going to denounce his friends in Hamas and Hezbollah. He isn't going to make any personal apology where he admits personal failing. The statement talks in the abstract not the specific.
He has allowed himself to be painted as someone who, at best, tolerates anti-Semitism because to oppose it would upset his worldview regarding the West and Islam. At worst he looks like someone who does hold anti-Semitic views but pretends otherwise for political reasons.
McDonnell has been quiet... He must be enjoying it. And counting the days
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/977978506029289472?s=20
Whether this issue will be resolved I dont know, his power base within the Party is not likely to change much, unfortunately people are very quick to criticise Israel and not consider how that relates to their own prejudices.
https://twitter.com/eddiemarsan/status/978030630649856000?s=20
https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/977998385650298880?s=20
The voters don't like funny foreign religions and they also don't like (((international bankers))) and other such Jewish-stereotypical things. I don't think there's been a Jewish Prime Minister in over a century (hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong), and the last two to run, Ed Miliband and Michael Howard, were both widely considered not quite right, for some mannerism-related reason that it was hard to put your finger on.
Is there any actual evidence that anti-semitism is a liability as opposed to an asset? NB polling "do you dislike Jews" or something probably isn't reliable, as the voters generally understand that it's considered bad manners to be openly racist.
https://antisemitism.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Antisemitism-Barometer-2017.pdf
Which might suggest we could win over some Tory voters with it.
Although there has been a lot of effort to get the message out there so we must be reaching saturation point on that one.
Believing the current myth that the best policy is to apologise whatever the circumstances just shows badly he is being advised. It makes him look weak feeble and unprincipled. Previously three of his strongest assets
With the large numbers in other parties agreeing to at least one anti-semitic statement, it would suggest it isn't a vote losing proposition.
In fairness to the Conservatives though it does seem to be an age thing partially with older people being more anti-semitic than younger people.
If young people could be convinced that Corbyn is anti-semitic it could lose him votes. Although I would say the same about misogynist considering women supported Labour in greater numbers than men. Neither claim seems likely to be widely believed among Labour voters, mainly because their rubbish, partially though because the media have been crying wolf so long about Corbyn it would be a struggle for them to get the message across if they did decide to tell the truth.
It accuses Mr Corbyn of being unable to "seriously contemplate anti-Semitism, because he is so ideologically fixed within a far left worldview that is instinctively hostile to mainstream Jewish communities".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43536830
Firstly, jamming. I have no idea how the military jamming of GPS signals works, but it's interesting to consider. They could jut try jamming the frequencies, denying the signals to the enemy. However much better would be to spoof the signals, to make the enemy think they're somewhere they are not. The latter potentially creates much more confusion.
Secondly, military-grade Galileo. It seems rather silly to say that the EU should not have a secret 'military' signal, as GPS, GLOSNASS and BeiDou have. The technology is there, and it seems sensible to have a system that can deny the signals to an 'enemy' whilst allowing our own people to have them. It's common sense as we don't know what the future holds.
Thirdly, it should be remembered how much the world owes the US for GPS. It has been a transformative technology. These aren't the figures I remember, but the scale of savings is huge:
"Use of GPS and the mapping and navigation technologies which depend on it have produced extraordinary benefits for consumers. A recent study commissioned by Google found that these technologies have reduced travel time by over 1.1 billion hours per year worldwide by getting people to their destinations more efficiently. The economic value of this time saving is $5 billion in the U.S. alone and $17 billion per year worldwide. In addition, the study estimated that more efficient travel reduced global fuel consumption by nearly 1 billion gallons, creating an additional $4.8 billion in fuel savings each year, and a corresponding reduction in carbon emissions and air pollution."
http://www.gpsalliance.org/transportation.aspx
Or more:
"It has been reported by the GPS Innovation Alliance that the economic benefits of using GPS within a commercial environment are estimated to be over $67.6 billion per year in the United States. (GPS Innovation Alliance)."
https://www.pdvwireless.com/analyzing-the-benefits-of-gps-technology-within-the-commercial-environment/
Ill health, death and him deciding the cause can be better served without him leading it seem the only likely scenarios for it happening. Without events shifting Labour members views quite dramatically he cannot be overthrown.
The media whipping up a storm will shift at best a tiny percentage of members opinions. Within Labour members there is what you could call a pro Corbyn block and an anti Corbyn block, with probably a small amount more or less in the middle (the dreaded centrists
The pro Corbyn block (defining it quite lightly not just the hardcore) outnumber the anti Corbyn block and those in the middle. To actually defeat Corbyn would require the votes of tens of thousands (at least) of those in the pro Corbyn block.
It is an oversimplification of it, there are of course a number of groups and interests within and overlapping each group. In terms of their basic view it works to an extent though.
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/978139986687070208?s=20
The problem isn't so much that people who vote Labour (as in the majority) think Corbyn is anti-semitic but that is okay, it is that they don't think he is.
(Sighs theatrically)
The media reporting a truth that you do not like is not them 'whipping up a storm'. The blame lies not with the media, but with the Labour leadership and a small but appreciable number of members and followers who have led their great party into this problem.
They fall into two categories:
1) The genuine antisemites.
2) The 'my team or none' who will excuse their 'team' anything.
We have none of the former on here now, but several of the latter.
Labour has a sickness at its heart. You appear to think its fit and healthy. It is not; and like many illnesses, if not cured it can spread.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2143499-ships-fooled-in-gps-spoofing-attack-suggest-russian-cyberweapon/
There is some limited evidence that anti-semitism may be a liability in the tiny number of areas with a significant Jewish population, as discussed yesterday in the thread about Barnet council. However, overall, I think that you are correct, and in some areas, a hostile view of the Zionist state is likely to be popular. Labour's improved performance in GE2017 compared to GE2015 is evidence in favour of your supposition.
Corbyn should have said nowt. Overall, he has reinvigorated Labour, but talking about this subject won't help him or his party. Individuals and organisations fare better when they focus on strengths, not weaknesses.
https://twitter.com/SophiaBesch/status/978017039112654848?s=20
The idea that the media can't create a narrative using the 'truth' (which means their take on it) seems a bit naive (although I don't think you as a person are)
Also to clarify I didn't actually refer to the storm being a lie, although I guess the phrase may indicate that. The reason the media being filled with negative headlines about Corbyn (which might be another way of saying media whipping up a storm) will not really have much of an impact is because they have been mostly filled with negative headlines since he became Labour leader if not just before that.
Have to say I was astonished that this was the top story. But good that it is.
Edited extra bit: forgot to mention, my post-race analysis of Australia is up here: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/australia-post-race-analysis-2018.html
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-to-present-new-brexit-backstop-plan-on-ireland/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
This has been an ok batting performance although it is disappointing that so many got 50s and not one managed to go on and produce an innings that the others could bat around. The test was lost on the first morning which is as it should be. No one should get away with a performance like that in test cricket.
I repeat. Pompous bollocks!
I agree that the impact might be slight. However reasonable Labour members need to ask themselves what sort of party they want to be part of, ad what behaviour they are willing to defend.
Edit: in fact, that goes for members of any party.
You seem to be saying that anti-semitism can, indeed ought to be ignored, if so doing is of political advantage ?
As to why It's a problem - perhaps the public don't care about anti-Semitism, but it does really hit his benevolent old social justice campaigner image. His apology will probably avert the worst of the damage, but still, smart interviewers should ask why he hasn't apologised personally for his actions.
There will be wizards in every major country trying to work out how to take best advantage of their potential 'enemies' reliance of satellite navigation if there was to be a war.
I wonder when some MPs will accept that the control is with the crown in parliament.
In the past the anti-Semitism on the left was covered up by the fact all the Labour leaders were Pro- Israel.
Corbyn is the first Labour Leader whose CV is based on being anti-Israel and the amount of anti-Semitism on the left is now getting exposed.What is worrying is that hundreds of thousands of people since Corbyn`s election have joined the labour party
A more savvy reaction by Root to his injury would have seen him batting today, which might well have seen out the draw. The wickets of Bairstow and Stokes showed clearly that they haven't shaken off the one day instincts - pretty well inevitable given the lack of preparation for this short series.
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67211/1/CAmmaerts_Journalistic representations of Jeremy Corbyn_Author_2016.pdf
Preferably I want a party that ignores the media, have done since well before Corbyn become leader of the Labour party. I used to say to people years ago that criticised politicians that it wasn't all their fault the media is to blame as well. Which isn't to say the media is all evil either.
Could be something of a cross over, as a Manchester United fan I used to like the Fergie approach to the media, they have their uses but never bow or cower to them. Make sure they know who is in charge.
https://twitter.com/chrismullinexmp/status/978160263848394752
In the comments...
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/978165373974573056
One of the more extended discussion I had was in a restaurant in Antwerp where I tried to understand the complex beliefs around dietary permissions. I still find that difficult to understand.
I can accept these religious beliefs however. This doesn't stop me disliking the practice of unstunned killing of animals. This is not antisemitism. I also feel anger that unstunned meat can enter the wider UK food chain unlabelled. This is also not antisemitism.
Although my wife and I disagree about the majority of political topics, we can both agree that the current position of the Israeli government on the situation in the Middle East is wrong and that there has been successful lobbying of the US political agenda towards Israel over the years.
I think a clearer understanding of the differences between antisemitism and criticism of Israeli policies is needed for the wider population before it is possible to easily call out true antisemitism.
This is NOT a defence of Corbyn.
In addition, it would be good to see a similar study, performed in a similar manner, against (say) Ed Miliband in 2014, Cameron in 2014, and May in late 2017. This may tell us if such a factor is unique against Labour.
There's also the question of whether the media were correct to be antagonistic towards Corbyn. Certainly, there is good reason to be, as recent events have shown.
Perhaps the 'biased' media are actually representing Corbyn as he actually is?
On food: in the past, there were a great many restrictions imposed by the church (there were fewer days you could eat meat than you were banned from doing so). It led to things like puffins and beavers being classed as fish so they could be eaten almost all year round.
One group of monks, forget which, had a rule that meat couldn't be eaten in the rectory. Being dodgy, they then invented a second dining room called the misericord, in which meat could be eaten (though only half of them were allowed in there).
LBC can reveal that more Brits would prioritise leaving the European Union than maintaining the United Kingdom in its current form.
Our poll with YouGov shows that 36% of people think leaving the EU is more of a priority than keeping Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom (29%).
And 71% of people that chose the EU over Northern Ireland voted Brexit.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/eu-referendum/brits-would-rather-leave-eu-than-keep-n-ireland/
Sure the media and opponents have seized on it, but they didn't start the fire they are just warming their hands by it.
You might like the following Unreal Engine 4 demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=770&v=Vh9msqaoJZw
It doesn't even really matter if you have a particularly opposite belief as a party to the prejudice as I heard in the last couple of years (can't find a link) of a Councillor getting kicked out of Labour for making homophobic comments and from what I remember it wasn't simply saying something insulting about LGBT people but actually her beliefs about them. I don't think Corbyn himself and I doubt anyone with any sense claimed there was never any anti-semitism within Labour.
The problem with the statement there is a problem within Labour with anti-semitism, and this is from a conversation I had a year or so back before the general election, is surely one anti-semite within Labour is a problem? In which case Labour has and will have a problem for a very long time regardless of anyone's actions and so has every other party (of a decent size)
You can then argue about a major problem or not, but I can't actually see any advantage of arguing with people about the definition of major problem when people are talking about racism. If you want to simplify the argument right down any racism is a major problem, but then saying a party has a major problem with racism indicates something more.
The argument, I imagine for anyone with any common sense is the level of it within Labour and then how much the media might be increasing the appearance of the issue for political advantage.
It is just as wrong to assume that if one's Jewish (or even merely not anti-semitic) one "must" like Israel and its policies, as the reverse, to think that if one's sympathetic to the horrible situation of many Palestinians one should start worrying about Jewish conspiracies. Both some passionate Zionists and some passionate pro-Palestinians fall into the trap of conflating the two.
Although, when the new consoles come out I'm going to have to wait. Disregarding poverty (#worldssmallestviolin), I have a bad habit of buying one 6-12 months before a slimmer, better model comes out, *and* last time the dickish manufacturers decided to try and pretend consoles are like phones and released a SwankyEdition. I don't want to be lumbered with the PeasantEdition of a console because the manufacturers are oafs (assuming I get the PS5 or whatever it is).
(I tried googling but all the 'union'-related polling appears to be EU-ish).