3 ms·

like any other person, he had his misgivings. yes, it's a bad look, but one of his few (another one was the infantile Occupy movement). but, to be factual, an

by kmlx 6y ago

like any other person, he had his misgivings. yes, it's a bad look, but one of his few (another one was the infantile Occupy movement). but, to be factual, anti-semitism in the UK Labour Party has been a thing since the 20th century, and culminated with the recent leader Corbyn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Labour_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Labour_...

tome 6y ago
Here is a (1984, hah!) book on the topic that I found interesting https://libcom.org/files/thats_funny.pdf https://libcom.org/files/thats_funny.pdf
claudeganon 6y ago
From your own link: > In April 2020, an 860-page report into the handling of antisemitism by the party concluded that there was "no evidence" that antisemitism complaints were treated any differently than other forms of complaint, or of current or former staff being "motivated by antisemitic intent.” So how exactly did it “culminate” with Corbyn?
- notahacker 6y ago
  Because that 860 page report was written by his team to exonerate themselves and their allies and blame their rivals and whistleblowers because the party were being investigated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, an independent investigation still in progress Irrespective of the merits of the claims made in the report - itself the subject of further independent investigation and lawsuits filed by people criticised in it - it's not something which would have been written if things were going well.
  - Talanes 6y ago
    All of the things that you claim are evidence of a problem are only evidence of a public perception of a problem. In a world where they are guilty, and a world where they are innocent and it's all a smear campaign, the investigating bodies respond the same.
    - kmlx 6y ago
      but this is politics, where perception is reality.
- kmlx 6y ago
  the report written by the very same team accused of antisemitism?
pydry 6y ago
>but, to be factual, anti-semitism in the UK Labour Party has been a thing since the 20th century Anti semitism is a thing in society at large. It's bigger than it is in society in the Conservative Party. It's smaller than it is in society at large in the Labour party, but not entirely non-existent. The reason it became such an "issue" with Corbyn was about Israel attempting to shield itself from Corbyn's criticism (e.g. land expansion, abuse of palestinians, highly racist policies) and because others found it useful to jump on Israel's bandwagon. It's not because it was common. It wasn't. Tom Watson (deputy leader, never a corbyn fan) was one of those people. He even went as far as visiting Isaac Herzog in Israel with a contingent of MPs (all of whom loathed Corbyn) to "apologize" for the "anti semitism problem" in the Labour party: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/tom-watson-labour-deputy-visits-israel-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-invitation https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/tom-watson-... Isaac Herzog, then leader of the Israeli Labour party, is famous for declaring that "race mixing is a tragedy" and refusing to apologize for it. This is who the concerned "anti racists" allied themselves with - an Israeli obsessed with racial purity: https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/isaac-herzogs-remarks-racial-purity-reprehensible-any-language https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/isaac-herzogs-remarks-... The hypocrisy and pearl clutching on this issue was absolutely staggering - especially by the guardian. The fact that something like this can be used to take down an honest politician in this way gives us a terrifying glimpse into the future.
- kmlx 6y ago
  what i do not understand is why, when there are so many issues in the UK would any party focus on what happens in some far away land. was the UK labour party trying to attract the vote of palestinians? this was an entirely avoidable mess. but Mr Corbyn and his team were so bad at politics that they managed to not only make this non-issue (to the UK voters) an important one, but also be defined by it. i honestly could not believe such bad politics would ever survive. and of course it didn't. Corbyn is now again a backbencher and his group has been replaced.
  - pydry 6y ago
    You can have one of two types of politician: * A politician that will speak out against all injustices. * A politician that will speak out against injustice only when it is politically expedient. The reason people liked Corbyn was because he was the former. Why do they want the former? Well, because any day you might be the one thrown under a bus because it is politically expedient to do so. In a world where every politician is apparently a lying snake, he was somebody you could trust to be true to his word and true to his principles. It's not like he spent all of his time on Palestinian issues and none on anything else. This isn't about how he allocated his time at all. The reason this blew up is because Israel decided to engage in the nuclear propaganda option because he had already spoken out against injustice in Palestine and wasn't going to apologize for it. Consequently, they threw everything they had at him and as it turns out they had a multitude of weapons they could deploy. Note that if he had just shut up about Palestinian issues after becoming leader they would not have left him alone. They had a destroy at all costs mentality. As did many others who were similarly evil with powerful weapons at their disposal (Lord Rothermere, etc.). This is probably the primary reason we can't have honest, principled politicians (what you described as "bad"). The system will filter them out - usually before they even get to that level and as we can see it will attempt to destroy them if they do. To have avoided this scenario he would have had to grovel and apologize profusely for speaking out against Palestinian rights in the past. That's the only way this would have gone away. US politicians will do this kind of thing to appease powerful lobbies (e.g. NRA) and as we all know they are a lovely bunch of highly principled human beings who are loved by their people. The US is actually a good example of what happens over the long term when people instinctively just try to pick the lesser evil and all integrity eventually gets washed out of politics by powerful, entrenched, wealthy groups. It's a long, dark, winding road to some kind of populist fascist leader - an incompetent one if you're lucky, a competent one if you are not.
DonaldFisk 6y ago
Are you aware that David Graeber was Jewish? Here he is, defending Jeremy Corbyn and pointing out that the threat to Jews comes not from Labour, but from the far right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ8MeRagpmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ8MeRagpmc Here's Jeremy Corbyn condemning two antisemitic attacks: https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1022172377269133312 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1022172377269133312 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1100553357075382276 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1100553357075382276 Sad to read of David Graeber's death. I attended two of his talks in support of Universal Basic Income.
- kmlx 6y ago
  yes, very much so. this is why i've written this naivety was one of Mr Graeber's flaws. as for Mr Corbyn, he was an honest but very weak leader. exemplified by his failure in containing this issue. an issue which to be completely honest is actually a non-issue for the UK considering it's many, more pressing and more important problems.

by kmlx 6y ago

tome 6y ago

Here is a (1984, hah!) book on the topic that I found interesting https://libcom.org/files/thats_funny.pdf https://libcom.org/files/thats_funny.pdf

claudeganon 6y ago

From your own link: > In April 2020, an 860-page report into the handling of antisemitism by the party concluded that there was "no evidence" that antisemitism complaints were treated any differently than other forms of complaint, or of current or former staff being "motivated by antisemitic intent.” So how exactly did it “culminate” with Corbyn?

notahacker 6y ago
Because that 860 page report was written by his team to exonerate themselves and their allies and blame their rivals and whistleblowers because the party were being investigated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, an independent investigation still in progress Irrespective of the merits of the claims made in the report - itself the subject of further independent investigation and lawsuits filed by people criticised in it - it's not something which would have been written if things were going well.
- Talanes 6y ago
  All of the things that you claim are evidence of a problem are only evidence of a public perception of a problem. In a world where they are guilty, and a world where they are innocent and it's all a smear campaign, the investigating bodies respond the same.
  - kmlx 6y ago
    but this is politics, where perception is reality.
kmlx 6y ago
the report written by the very same team accused of antisemitism?

pydry 6y ago

>but, to be factual, anti-semitism in the UK Labour Party has been a thing since the 20th century Anti semitism is a thing in society at large. It's bigger than it is in society in the Conservative Party. It's smaller than it is in society at large in the Labour party, but not entirely non-existent. The reason it became such an "issue" with Corbyn was about Israel attempting to shield itself from Corbyn's criticism (e.g. land expansion, abuse of palestinians, highly racist policies) and because others found it useful to jump on Israel's bandwagon. It's not because it was common. It wasn't. Tom Watson (deputy leader, never a corbyn fan) was one of those people. He even went as far as visiting Isaac Herzog in Israel with a contingent of MPs (all of whom loathed Corbyn) to "apologize" for the "anti semitism problem" in the Labour party: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/tom-watson-labour-deputy-visits-israel-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-invitation https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/tom-watson-... Isaac Herzog, then leader of the Israeli Labour party, is famous for declaring that "race mixing is a tragedy" and refusing to apologize for it. This is who the concerned "anti racists" allied themselves with - an Israeli obsessed with racial purity: https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/isaac-herzogs-remarks-racial-purity-reprehensible-any-language https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/isaac-herzogs-remarks-... The hypocrisy and pearl clutching on this issue was absolutely staggering - especially by the guardian. The fact that something like this can be used to take down an honest politician in this way gives us a terrifying glimpse into the future.

kmlx 6y ago
what i do not understand is why, when there are so many issues in the UK would any party focus on what happens in some far away land. was the UK labour party trying to attract the vote of palestinians? this was an entirely avoidable mess. but Mr Corbyn and his team were so bad at politics that they managed to not only make this non-issue (to the UK voters) an important one, but also be defined by it. i honestly could not believe such bad politics would ever survive. and of course it didn't. Corbyn is now again a backbencher and his group has been replaced.
- pydry 6y ago
  You can have one of two types of politician: * A politician that will speak out against all injustices. * A politician that will speak out against injustice only when it is politically expedient. The reason people liked Corbyn was because he was the former. Why do they want the former? Well, because any day you might be the one thrown under a bus because it is politically expedient to do so. In a world where every politician is apparently a lying snake, he was somebody you could trust to be true to his word and true to his principles. It's not like he spent all of his time on Palestinian issues and none on anything else. This isn't about how he allocated his time at all. The reason this blew up is because Israel decided to engage in the nuclear propaganda option because he had already spoken out against injustice in Palestine and wasn't going to apologize for it. Consequently, they threw everything they had at him and as it turns out they had a multitude of weapons they could deploy. Note that if he had just shut up about Palestinian issues after becoming leader they would not have left him alone. They had a destroy at all costs mentality. As did many others who were similarly evil with powerful weapons at their disposal (Lord Rothermere, etc.). This is probably the primary reason we can't have honest, principled politicians (what you described as "bad"). The system will filter them out - usually before they even get to that level and as we can see it will attempt to destroy them if they do. To have avoided this scenario he would have had to grovel and apologize profusely for speaking out against Palestinian rights in the past. That's the only way this would have gone away. US politicians will do this kind of thing to appease powerful lobbies (e.g. NRA) and as we all know they are a lovely bunch of highly principled human beings who are loved by their people. The US is actually a good example of what happens over the long term when people instinctively just try to pick the lesser evil and all integrity eventually gets washed out of politics by powerful, entrenched, wealthy groups. It's a long, dark, winding road to some kind of populist fascist leader - an incompetent one if you're lucky, a competent one if you are not.

DonaldFisk 6y ago

Are you aware that David Graeber was Jewish? Here he is, defending Jeremy Corbyn and pointing out that the threat to Jews comes not from Labour, but from the far right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ8MeRagpmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ8MeRagpmc Here's Jeremy Corbyn condemning two antisemitic attacks: https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1022172377269133312 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1022172377269133312 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1100553357075382276 https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1100553357075382276 Sad to read of David Graeber's death. I attended two of his talks in support of Universal Basic Income.

kmlx 6y ago
yes, very much so. this is why i've written this naivety was one of Mr Graeber's flaws. as for Mr Corbyn, he was an honest but very weak leader. exemplified by his failure in containing this issue. an issue which to be completely honest is actually a non-issue for the UK considering it's many, more pressing and more important problems.