Jump to content

The Labour Party. All discussion here please

Vaati

This is the final warning we are going to give about bickering, name calling etc. If a post breaks the forum rules, report it. Any further and accounts will be suspended.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

It doesn't.

 

There are many ways to criticise Israel which do not fall foul of the categories mentioned in the IHRA definition. The IHRA definition specifically says that “criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”

 

Why should any criticism of Israel be anti Semitic?

 

Israel is a state and 99% of criticism of it is about its treatment of Palestinians largely driven by a Zionist philosophy which has a religious basis to its claim on the occupied territories.

 

So under that example, a person could be deemed anti Semitic for criticising Israel and then being unable to demonstrate that all other nations have been criticised equally, and to a similar extent. How often do you hear supporters of Israel take issue with those who criticise the IDF for firing live rounds but not the Palestinian youths for throwing stones at them. The people of Gaza are dirt poor, have a failed economy, and virtually no health and education provision. Apart from what is smuggled in from Iran, they largely fight with rocks, stones and improvised weapons. Israel on the other hand is an enormously wealthy country with a first world health and education system whose economy is propped up by the US government. It fights with cutting edge missiles, planes and vehicles bought with billions of dollars of US military aid.

 

Socialists traditionally support the underdog and the glaring inequality in the Middle East will always draw unequal criticism in favour of the Palestinians and against the Israeli government. It is this criticism that the IHRA examples are attempting to define as anti semitism.

 

This definition is deeply flawed, partisan and Labour is quite right to call for it to be made more specific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why should any criticism of Israel be anti Semitic?

 

Israel is a state and 99% of criticism of it is about its treatment of Palestinians largely driven by a Zionist philosophy which has a religious basis to its claim on the occupied territories.

 

So under that example, a person could be deemed anti Semitic for criticising Israel and then being unable to demonstrate that all other nations have been criticised equally, and to a similar extent. How often do you hear supporters of Israel take issue with those who criticise the IDF for firing live rounds but not the Palestinian youths for throwing stones at them. The people of Gaza are dirt poor, have a failed economy, and virtually no health and education provision. Apart from what is smuggled in from Iran, they largely fight with rocks, stones and improvised weapons. Israel on the other hand is an enormously wealthy country with a first world health and education system whose economy is propped up by the US government. It fights with cutting edge missiles, planes and vehicles bought with billions of dollars of US military aid.

 

Socialists traditionally support the underdog and the glaring inequality in the Middle East will always draw unequal criticism in favour of the Palestinians and against the Israeli government. It is this criticism that the IHRA examples are attempting to define as anti semitism.

 

This definition is deeply flawed, partisan and Labour is quite right to call for it to be made more specific.

 

No that is not true at all. Nowhere does it say that in order to criticise Israel you have to be able to demonstrate that 'all other nations have been criticised equally'.

 

The IHRA is quite clear. They say that claiming the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour is antisemtic. Claiming Israel is a racist endeavour is not, as has been claimed, the same as saying that Israel has acted in a racist manner, or has racist policies.

 

It says that saying the existence of there being a State of Israel is racist, regardless of their policies or the way they acted, is against the IHRA definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect that they have been deleted so I can't really comment on them, can I?

 

They have not been deleted . Its just that you choose to ignore them , again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The IHRA is quite clear. They say that claiming the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour is antisemtic. Claiming Israel is a racist endeavour is not, as has been claimed, the same as saying that Israel has acted in a racist manner, or has racist policies.

 

 

You are changing the goalposts again.

 

I was responding to the example that you quoted which actually reads, "Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."

 

So I will repeat, a critic of Israel could easily fall foul of this definition by being unable to demonstrate that they are requiring behaviour not expected of any other democratic nation, especially if they only criticise Israel. If you are a UK citizen of Palestinian decent who is appalled by the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza, it may be your #1 political concern and the fact that you don't level similar criticism of wrongdoings by every other democratic state DOES NOT make you an antisemite.

 

I will say again. This definition is deeply flawed and has at it's heart, regard for the protection of a particular strand of Judaism rather than the whole of the Jewish people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are changing the goalposts again.

 

I was responding to the example that you quoted which actually reads, "Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."

 

So I will repeat, a critic of Israel could easily fall foul of this definition by being unable to demonstrate that they are requiring behaviour not expected of any other democratic nation, especially if they only criticise Israel. If you are a UK citizen of Palestinian decent who is appalled by the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza, it may be your #1 political concern and the fact that you don't level similar criticism of wrongdoings by every other democratic state DOES NOT make you an antisemite.

 

I will say again. This definition is deeply flawed and has at it's heart, regard for the protection of a particular strand of Judaism rather than the whole of the Jewish people.

 

And the definition does not mean that this makes you an antisemite either. I think you are misunderstanding what is being said.

 

In your analogy, if I was a UK citizen of Palestinian descent, and I was appalled by the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza, for example the blockades, or the constructing settlements on disputed land, etc etc, then nowhere in the definition would that make me an antisemite.

 

We don't expect democratic nations to do that, and so it isn't covered by point 8 of the IHRA definition. It doesn't matter if you personally have criticised other countries or not - I could spend every hour of every day criticising the Israeli government's actions and never criticise any other country and it wouldn't matter at all, it still wouldn't make me an antisemite. All it means is whether the criticism is based on things that any other country would be criticised for doing, not whether you criticise them or not.

 

Also, I have not moved the goalposts. I wasn't merely referring to point 8 of the IHRA definition, which is what you quoted, but also point 7, which some people within the Labour party have taken issue with, which is 'Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.'

 

Do you think the State of Israel is a racist endeavour? And I don't mean that you think what they are doing now is racist, but if its entire existence is fundamentally racist.

Edited by Robin-H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you think the State of Israel is a racist endeavour?

 

Of course not.

 

That is a ludicrous suggestion, however claiming that it is, does not necessarily make someone anti Semitic.

 

The Jewish diaspora is geographically widespread and politically, economically and socially as varied as any other race. However, although less than 50% of Jewish people consider themselves to be in any way religious, their interests are being publically perceived globally, as being represented by a narrow sect of those who are religious.

 

The recurring theme among Jewish comrades I've spoken to since this campaign began is These people DO NOT speak for me

 

Maybe it's time these people (who represent the majority of Jews worldwide, remember) found their voice and spoke up against the religious zealots who claim to represent them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course not.

 

That is a ludicrous suggestion, however claiming that it is, does not necessarily make someone anti Semitic.

 

The Jewish diaspora is geographically widespread and politically, economically and socially as varied as any other race. However, although less than 50% of Jewish people consider themselves to be in any way religious, their interests are being publically perceived globally, as being represented by a narrow sect of those who are religious.

 

The recurring theme among Jewish comrades I've spoken to since this campaign began is These people DO NOT speak for me

 

Maybe it's time these people (who represent the majority of Jews worldwide, remember) found their voice and spoke up against the religious zealots who claim to represent them.

 

What would be a justification for claiming that the existence of the Israeli state is fundamentally racist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would be a justification for claiming that the existence of the Israeli state is fundamentally racist?

 

I've no idea.

 

It's not something I've given much thought to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've no idea.

 

It's not something I've given much thought to.

 

But you must think there is one? You said claiming such a thing doesn't necessarily make you anti-semitic. I'm just wondering what other reason there would be?

Edited by Robin-H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you must think there is one? You said claiming such a thing doesn't necessarily make you anti-semitic. I'm just wondering what other reason there would be?

 

Logic suggests that there may be a variety of reasons why someone describes the existance of the Israeli state as racist and that not all of those would necessarily be anti Semitic.

 

The point I am making is that the defence of the state of Israel should not form part of a definition of anti semitism. If someone makes a criticism of Israel based on a hatred of Jews, it is the hatred of Jews that should be condemned as anti Semitic, NOT the criticism of Israel per se.

 

That is the determination of 'intent' which Labour seeks to add to the definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Logic suggests that there may be a variety of reasons why someone describes the existance of the Israeli state as racist and that not all of those would necessarily be anti Semitic.

 

The point I am making is that the defence of the state of Israel should not form part of a definition of anti semitism. If someone makes a criticism of Israel based on a hatred of Jews, it is the hatred of Jews that should be condemned as anti Semitic, NOT the criticism of Israel per se.

 

That is the determination of 'intent' which Labour seeks to add to the definition.

 

If logic suggests it, it shouldn't be too difficult to think of one.

 

The IHRA explicitly contains sufficient caveats to render the “intent” point irrelevant - there is no need to add it other than to provide an easy get out clause for people that use anti-semitic language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.