The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, tomsky_11 said:

Not sure a local mayor hosting an "in coversation with..." about a filmmaker's work in an area about which he has just released a film is the gotcha Labour think it is, but they'll carry on regardless.

Who told you that was the reason he wasn’t on the long list?

The person who said that was the reason he wasn’t on the long list was Jamie Driscoll himself. Labour haven't said that was the reason at all, they've just said he didn't meet the high bar they'd set as the threshold.

Maybe they were annoyed that he'd already started his campaign, maybe they didn't like his proposed plans, maybe it is to do with Loach and Driscoll's refusal to condemn Loach's comments in the past over the holocaust and nazi/zionists collaborating on the final solution (and other comments deemed AS), maybe it was because Mick Lynch was endorsing his campaign (Lynch is a supporter of a different electoral party - TUSC)… there are lots of reasons why he didn’t make the list, in reality, it's probably all of the above

There is clearly a determination from Starmer not to have any far left members in positions of power, the last thing he needs is for the whole AS thing to blow up again, especially in Red Wall seats in the NE of England so yes, it probably is a bit of a stitch up to ensure that doesn’t happen but Driscoll isn’t exactly being honest in this instance either.

[tomsky_11]

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

Who told you that was the reason he wasn’t on the long list?

No one is telling me anything.

Prominent members of the NEC have been putting it out there on social media however.

16 minutes ago, bickster said:

There is clearly a determination from Starmer not to have any far left members in positions of power, the last thing he needs is for the whole AS thing to blow up again, especially in Red Wall seats in the NE of England so yes, it probably is a bit of a stitch up to ensure that doesn’t happen but Driscoll isn’t exactly being honest in this instance either.

Lol

[chrisp65]

You too vill go on zee list.

 

 

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

You too vill go on zee list.

 

 

Making his pitch for a third attempt.

[OutByEaster?]

I don't think that people are being removed for anti-semitism or sharing a stage with people who might be anti-semitic or once listening to Kraftwerk whilst eating a sauerkraut and looking stern. People are being removed because they are from Labour's traditional left and their politics don't align with Sir Keir's - anti-semitism is a convenient device.

 

 

[Chindie]

5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I don't think that people are being removed for anti-semitism or sharing a stage with people who might be anti-semitic or once listening to Kraftwerk whilst eating a sauerkraut and looking stern. People are being removed because they are from Labour's traditional left and their politics don't align with Sir Keir's - anti-semitism is a convenient device.

 

 

That's what's been true all along.

The entire antisemitism debacle is a tool. It killed 2 birds with 1 stone. Labour's right used it as an opportunity to kill the left and bury it with a story that cannot be washed off. The pro Israeli lobby used it to kill off their opposition.

One of the most despicable moments in UK politics of recent years, by a distance. To cynically use a heinous allegation to destroy those you disagree with. Disgusting. And something that Labour should not be rewarded for.

[ml1dch]

 

[magnkarl]

On 05/06/2023 at 00:15, Chindie said:

That's what's been true all along.

The entire antisemitism debacle is a tool. It killed 2 birds with 1 stone. Labour's right used it as an opportunity to kill the left and bury it with a story that cannot be washed off. The pro Israeli lobby used it to kill off their opposition.

One of the most despicable moments in UK politics of recent years, by a distance. To cynically use a heinous allegation to destroy those you disagree with. Disgusting. And something that Labour should not be rewarded for.

Just out of interest, do you think any of the AS cases labour have had to deal with were worth looking at?

Williamson? Khan? Abbott? Livingstone? Walker? Bull?

Yes, everyone can see that Keir is using some of these cases to clear out his opposition, but pretty much everyone bar the most brainwashed Corbynites can also see that there's been plenty of idiotic behaviour towards the Jewish community by many of the far left in Labour for years, especially under JC.

I'd suggest that if the Left of Labour wants to remain in politics they need to start considering the words that come out of their mouths and in their articles (Abbott). They still show a penchant for throwing tropes and idiocy around them and it leaves them totally open to being removed by the centre of Labour. It's not like it's hard to avoid calling the racism Roma\Irish Travelers\Jews face about the same as being called ginger or avoid throwing out articles by known holocaust deniers on your facebook wall. The hard left candidates show an astounding ability to not be able to adapt to the new leadership.

Edited June 6, 2023 by magnkarl

[VILLAMARV]

I know you're not asking me, but for me, part of the problem is wording stuff like that. If it's actual anti-semetism then prosecute it under the Law, it should be taken hugely seriously at every twist and turn. However if we then, in the same sentance start discussing "idiotic behaviour towards the Jewish community" we start to undermine the seriousness of the word. Because being idiotic is what politicians in my lifetime have done and do do on a regular basis. And is not an offense.

We should always also try and debate this topic under the context of the situation. I feel your question is loaded, but in the wrong way. The problem the wider public have with this whole affair is that the Isreali state has pushed for criticism of Isreal to be counted as AS - which it isn't - as any corbynite starmerite or any other type od ite could tell you - even if their IQ is lower than the nartional average. Again bastardising the word and at the same time diminishing the severity of the word and it's meaning.

Anti Senitism, like all bigotry is bad, of course it is.

Criticising the awful actions of the Isreali governments shouldn't be a political problem.

But it is. And we all know it is.

"I'm ok with a politically motivated purge because there was a bad apple here and there" is a rather unedifying take imho. and another step on the path to authoritarianism.

[chrisp65]

42 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Just out of interest, do you think any of the AS cases labour have had to deal with were worth looking at?

Williamson? Khan? Abbott? Livingstone? Walker? Bull?

Yes, everyone can see that Keir is using some of these cases to clear out his opposition, but pretty much everyone bar the most brainwashed Corbynites can also see that there's been plenty of idiotic behaviour towards the Jewish community by many of the far left in Labour for years, especially under JC.

I'd suggest that if the Left of Labour wants to remain in politics they need to start considering the words that come out of their mouths and in their articles (Abbott). They still show a penchant for throwing tropes and idiocy around them and it leaves them totally open to being removed by the centre of Labour. It's not like it's hard to avoid calling the racism Roma\Irish Travelers\Jews face about the same as being called ginger or avoid throwing out articles by known holocaust deniers on your facebook wall. The hard left candidates show an astounding ability to not be able to adapt to the new leadership.

Be very careful, you are currently sharing a platform with people that have liked Ken Loach films.

Out of curiosity, should his films now be banned, or just his name edited out of the credits?

[Jareth]

My frustration is that Labour is still completely factional, and as before AS is being used as a factional football. We can all see it laid bare with the Driscoll exclusion, this is happening now under Starmer - Labour is STILL using AS a factional football. Surely that's offensive? 

[blandy]

56 minutes ago, VILLAMARV said:

Criticising the awful actions of the Isreali governments shouldn't be a political problem.

But it is. And we all know it is.

It isn’t. Yes, I agree with you that some Israeli politicians try and conflate criticism with antisemitism, but within Labour it’s absolutely not a “political problem” to criticise the actions of Israel or its government. Nor is it a political problem generally (outside labour).

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

Just out of interest, do you think any of the AS cases labour have had to deal with were worth looking at?

Williamson? Khan? Abbott? Livingstone? Walker? Bull?

Yes, everyone can see that Keir is using some of these cases to clear out his opposition, but pretty much everyone bar the most brainwashed Corbynites can also see that there's been plenty of idiotic behaviour towards the Jewish community by many of the far left in Labour for years, especially under JC.

I'd suggest that if the Left of Labour wants to remain in politics they need to start considering the words that come out of their mouths and in their articles (Abbott). They still show a penchant for throwing tropes and idiocy around them and it leaves them totally open to being removed by the centre of Labour. It's not like it's hard to avoid calling the racism Roma\Irish Travelers\Jews face about the same as being called ginger or avoid throwing out articles by known holocaust deniers on your facebook wall. The hard left candidates show an astounding ability to not be able to adapt to the new leadership.

I've no doubt there has been and is still some anti-semitism within the Labour Party. It's a disease that affects all parts of society, just like all other forms of racism and discrimination of all colours.

I can't claim to know the ins and outs of all the cases you name, but from off the top of my head... From what I recall of the allegations against Livingstone, what he said wasn't actually wrong, he worded it badly but wasn't explicitly saying something that wasn't true, regardless of whether some found it offensive. He's guilty of lacking tact and nuance rather than being anti-Semitic imo.

Williamson as I recall was pilloried for saying the debacle was being overblown, which was then used to attack him further, in a case of 'your not agreeing with us proves we're right and the more you disagree the more right we get'. Williamson is guilty of being politically stupid but don't think he's an anti-Semite from what I'm aware of his actions. Khan I'm completely unaware of.

Abbott to my knowledge has, like in many things in her career, said things without nuance or equivocation, usually because she blunders head long into matters on her pet subjects. I don't think she's done anything that's truly anti-Semitic that I can recall, or suggested anything that implies she harbours a hatred or bias against Jewish people.

Jackie Walker is similar to Abbott as far as I can recall - her pet subject is racism focused on the black community and she's sought to have the history of black racism be taken in a context that has the same weight as the Holocaust, and when that got her attacked she chose to poke the bear by criticism of definitions of anti-Semitism itself. As she's of Jewish descent herself I think you've got a pretty high bar to cross to get to 'anti-semitism' on her part.

Bull I know nothing about.

tbc

[bickster]

27 minutes ago, Chindie said:

from what I recall of the allegations against Livingstone, what he said wasn't actually wrong, he worded it badly but wasn't explicitly saying something that wasn't true,

This is wrong, he was given plenty of opportunity to reword this and absolutely point blank refused. As it happens Ken Loach is guilty of the saying the same thing, that ZIonism collaborated with the Nazis on the FInal Solution. Livingstone was suspended from the Labour Party under Corbyn, even Jon Lansman (Momentum) said he should leave politics altogether.

 

[Chindie]

13 minutes ago, bickster said:

This is wrong, he was given plenty of opportunity to reword this and absolutely point blank refused. As it happens Ken Loach is guilty of the saying the same thing, that ZIonism collaborated with the Nazis on the FInal Solution. Livingstone was suspended from the Labour Party under Corbyn, even Jon Lansman (Momentum) said he should leave politics altogether.

 

It's not wrong.

The Nazis didn't come to power with initial aim of eradicating the Jewish people. Hitler hated Jews and viewed them subhuman satanic creatures, but his initial aim was to rid Germany of them, hence his initial thoughts in Mein Kampf being that the only Jews that 'got' what their 'problem' was was the Zionists, who understood in his view that Jews had to have some place of their own to go to as they accepted wholeheartedly that Jews were a race of people (something that wasn't accepted by some influential groups). Which in turn lead to various efforts and investigations as to what could be done to move Jewish people out of Germany - ideas that ranged from instituting laws that gave Jews leaving Germany for Palestine a marginally 'better deal' by allowing some wealth to be transferred to Palestine, to setting up a Jewish state in Madagascar. The Holocaust came about when they decided no other option was feasible and Hitler became concerned that a Jewish nation-state would become a global power.

Some of those (notably the Palestine wealth transfer policy, the Haavara agreement) were created in collaboration with some Zionist groups support. And it's been argued as a result that some Zionist groups were in part responsible for saving some Jews from the Nazis by essentially using anti-semitism as a tool to get them further towards the goal of a Jewish state - some Jews applaud the 'clever' move to use the hatred if the Nazis as a way to save themselves. Equally it's a controversial take because clearly collaboration with the Nazis also lead ultimately to attempted genocide of their people.

But it's not wrong. In the early days of the Nazi regime there was crossover in the policies of Nazis and Zionist Jews - that Jews should get out of Germany.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Chindie said:

in collaboration with some Zionist groups support

Your use of the word some is highly important, neither Livingstone nor Loach used it and neither wished to correct it either. 

It wasn't badly worded, bad wording can be corrected

[Chindie]

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

Your use of the word some is highly important, neither Livingstone nor Loach used it and neither wished to correct it either. 

It wasn't badly worded, bad wording can be corrected

How were they asked to correct it?

There's a difference between asking that you acknowledge in your response that not all supported, and asking that you disavow the comment at all.

[magnkarl]

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

It's not wrong.

The Nazis didn't come to power with initial aim of eradicating the Jewish people. Hitler hated Jews and viewed them subhuman satanic creatures, but his initial aim was to rid Germany of them, hence his initial thoughts in Mein Kampf being that the only Jews that 'got' what their 'problem' was was the Zionists, who understood in his view that Jews had to have some place of their own to go to as they accepted wholeheartedly that Jews were a race of people (something that wasn't accepted by some influential groups). Which in turn lead to various efforts and investigations as to what could be done to move Jewish people out of Germany - ideas that ranged from instituting laws that gave Jews leaving Germany for Palestine a marginally 'better deal' by allowing some wealth to be transferred to Palestine, to setting up a Jewish state in Madagascar. The Holocaust came about when they decided no other option was feasible and Hitler became concerned that a Jewish nation-state would become a global power.

Some of those (notably the Palestine wealth transfer policy, the Haavara agreement) were created in collaboration with some Zionist groups support. And it's been argued as a result that some Zionist groups were in part responsible for saving some Jews from the Nazis by essentially using anti-semitism as a tool to get them further towards the goal of a Jewish state - some Jews applaud the 'clever' move to use the hatred if the Nazis as a way to save themselves. Equally it's a controversial take because clearly collaboration with the Nazis also lead ultimately to attempted genocide of their people.

But it's not wrong. In the early days of the Nazi regime there was crossover in the policies of Nazis and Zionist Jews - that Jews should get out of Germany.

The issue with a lot of what you're writing Chindie (and I applaud you for being factual), is that a lot of the ideas that are being bandied around by people like Livingstone and Williamson (who now hands down works for Iran and Hamas) is that they're using sources which use sources who use sources of other sources who essentially once upon a time were properly racist tropey trash. The idea that Hitler supported anything bar eradicating Jews is false, and you can read several lines on this in Mein Kampf, well before he took power. It's a trope furthered by people like Livingstone who won't even write some like you did. The people that Livingstone, Williamson and also Corbyn have used as their sources are people like Hajo Meyer who is one of the most hyperbolic people out there, and the defense is that he was "one of them so he can't be wrong!'. The same goes for Jackie Walker.

Some Africans also worked on slave-trade ships, if I were Ken Livingstone I'd write 'Africans were the ones who orchestrated their own slavery!', he's been asked to clarify many times but won't budge. One time, sure it's clumsy, several times and it's a pattern. The same pattern many of Corbyn's best mates still struggle with getting out of. The man himself worked for Press TV, the same TV channel owned by Iran who essentially has it in law that Jews need to be eradicated..

Edited June 6, 2023 by magnkarl

[Jareth]

We've been through the AS greatest hits and offenders - you might say that was in the past. What did Driscoll do to be blocked? 

[Chindie]

It's a stain that doesn't deserve to be washed off. Let's keep bringing it up. The Labour Party is tainted.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Chindie