Jess has taken the unusual step of having her political priorities animated, in order to appeal to younger voters in her constituency.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Really awful policy put forward by the party.Let's have a leader that prioritises serious things in parliament
Looking back it seems clear that it couldn't last any long period of time although I image if asked them what their actual intensions were it was never about create a long lasting healthily society but simply about breaking down the working class gains since the second world war and giving it all back to the capitalists.
It's odd but in no in way surprising that the people who did gain from Thatcherism have now turned into hollowed out zombie figures, peaching a mix of English nationalism and Thatcherism(Which was sort of always there with Thatcherism) - global trade without the global bit. It's basically the shite we are seeing with the hard Brexit stuff.
No surprise
Shock horror.
Yeah possibly.
Party decided that some of the examples of antisemtiism used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance aren't actually examples of antisemtism so have refused adopt them.
They have. Presumably because its guidelines include views on when criticism of Israel is anti-semitic.
The guidelines that state "criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic"?
I think all the lines that reference Israel, I've seen criticised at one point or another.
The recent surge in polling will make sure he won't become PM.
Including by a number of Jewish groups. But maybe they're the wrong sort of Jews, like the group Corbyn met or Jon Lansman or Michael Rosen.
Not sure who wants that more, the Tories or Oscie.
I've attacked the Tories many times. Your political compass seems to be stuck on 'disinterested, unless anyone dissed Corbyn'
IDS 
I try to stay away from this discussion because it's really non of my business but i do find the uproar on the removal of the examples to be a bit fabricated especially from Hodge. Labour and the NEC have clearly taken a positive step in drafting the defintions in the first place and the result of the NEC was to put it back out to consultation.
The hard left who oppose the actions of israel and the jewish groups that protect Israel's interest seem to be at battle with the NEC caught in the middle.
Sajid Javid apparently wants to give a substantial amount of money to a charity of Corbyn's choosing.
I know the membership of this site is predominantly left leaning, but it's a bit much that his party is currently debating how racist they are allowed to be, and not a whimper.
Yet anything that anyone in the Tory party does, is immediately jumped upon.
It really is a rather sorry state of affairs.
Perhaps someone can point me in the direction where this important debate is taking place?
Yet anything that anyone in the Tory party does, is immediately jumped upon.
It really is a rather sorry state of affairs.
Perhaps someone can point me in the direction where this important debate is taking place?
https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/30jewishgroupsbds/
it's hard for people to whimper if the argument is that criticising Israel is antisemitic
I rest my case.
no doubt resting it on isreal like an antisemite, how dare you, colin
That’s a very broad brush approach to the issue. I’ve been the victim of anti-semitism on countless occasions, and it’s very often cloaked as an anti-Israel criticism.
If I was British, I wouldn’t really expect someone who considers Hamas friends to understand anti-semitism better than me.
I have not really followed the anti-Semitism story. What reason did the NEC give for changing the definition?
I must admit optics don't look good but Labour must fight any attempt to label IsraeI criticism as anti-Semitic.
I must admit optics don't look good but Labour must fight any attempt to label IsraeI criticism as anti-Semitic.
Sure, that's dog-whistling and it is bad. But a completely and utter ban on criticising Israel is mad.
They changed one thing, allowing criticism of Israel. Because it's ridiculous to ban all criticism of a country.
Sorry about your experiences but it is important to emphasise that they are two different things. Anti semitism is a cancer but and I'll expect all anti semetics to be anti Israel but debate can't be shut down by labelling all criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic.
I'll have to look at the definition but I find it incredible that the definition covered any criticism of Isreal that's not linked to Jews.
The link you posted links to the IHRA definition which states:
“Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”
It then lists some instances when criticism of Israel can be regarded as antisemitic. Nowhere does it state that all criticism of Israel is antisemitic.
The specific change is that the definition doesn't allow parallels between Israel and Nazi Germany whereas Labour kind of does. So, if I were to say that the current treatment of Palestinians is reminiscent of early Nazi Germany where Jewish people were second class citizens that could be used as slaves and for human experimentation I'd be in breach of the IHRA but not the labour definition. Obviously politicians shouldn't be drawing these comparisons but it's a bit mad that an average member who gets angry next times the Israeli army rains hell on Gaza and compares them to Nazis on twitter would get kicked out of the party.
Thanks. I wanted to see that.
Eh, that’s quite different from what you’ve been posting above.
And really, this is the hill they want to die on? The right to compare the world’s only Jewish state to Nazi Germany?
I'd also have done away with this rule:
Israel is very much a racist endeavor and has just enshrined it into law. Jewish people obviously have a right to be there given most of them aren't old enough to remember a time it didn't exist. But Palestinian people also have a right to be there and should have the right to return. Until they do, and so long as the government continues it's policies it's going to be little more than South Africa with bigger bombs.
Are there many states in the world whose ‘racism’ as you see it invalidates its peoples’ right to self-determination? Or only Israel?
China, India* and Russia occupy territory that doesn't want to be occupied, off the top of my head mostly due to racist reasons**. Myanmar's genocide. America and the UK too but the reasons are more abstract.
*i realise the mood isn't as clear cut in kashmir as it is in ukraine or taiwan but still
**i realise that the people running the show don't actually give a feck and just want money/power, but their justifications "one china" etc. are racist
But I don't think that should have anything to do with it. If Israel is the only country doing something the criticism doesn't become antisemitic.
He said this:
"But Palestinian people also have a right to be there and should have the right to return."
You read it as:
"invalidates its peoples’ right to self-determination"
Which is convenient, since it makes clear that that right to self-determination is in conflict with others' (extremely basic) rights, and thus explains why people have the opposing view of that conflict.
oi I added a disclaimer