[Politics] Labour has suspended former leader Jeremy Corbyn

[Hugo Rune]

You think abandoning democratic principles is a price worth paying for getting your favorite candidate into power?

Maybe says a bit about you and the bloke you vote for.

What democratic principles have been abandoned?

Get back in your lane FFS.

 

[BadFish]

1. His leadership failed to deal with the anti semitism in the party, despite claiming there was zero tolerance.

2. Political interference from the leader’s office and others in the complaints process. Interfering in decisions as to whether to investigate and whether to suspend. In itself discriminatory and unlawful.

3. Interfering in the complaint over Corbyn’s support for the anti semitic artist, not allowing due process.


https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-of-the-ehrc-inquiry-into-labour-antisemitism

Thanks I appreciate that.

Does this lead to a conclusion that he himself is an anti semite? I am struggling with this part, especially since he seems fairly renowned for pro Jewish action in his career.

Is Jeremy Corbyn really anti-Semitic?​

Is Jeremy Corbyn an anti-Semite? I began researching the answer to this question well before Danny Finkelstein’s recent revelation in the Times that eight years ago Corbyn had written a glowing foreword to a new edition of Imperialism: A Study, written by the radical economist John Atkinson...

www.spectator.co.uk

Poor leadership? Yes, and I can see how the accusation can be leveled at his but if you take the weight of evidence throughout this career then the cause of the poor leadership is surely more likely to be something other than anti semitism?

 

[BadFish]

Double post

 

[Swansman]

I am still confused about what Corbyn did that was anti semetic?

There was obviously some stuff going on in the labour party that he didn't deal with and he has been critical of Israel (but this isn't anti semetic in its self is it?).

Can someone help me out?

His politics posed a threat to the normal take-from-the-poor-give-to-the-rich politics so people with power shoved him away. Same as always.
I'm sure they considered both the "he's a paedo" or "he knows someone in Russia" options before settling with the always useful "lets just take some vague words, actions or lack of action about something or someone and call the bloke anti-semite".

Always works and the majority always buy into it, and the next incompetent criminal robbing you on behalf of the rich will be installed while you pat yourself for not voting for the alleged antisemite. Like stealing candy from a kid.

 

[BadFish]

His politics posed a threat to the normal take-from-the-poor-give-to-the-rich politics so people with power shoved him away. Same as always.
I'm sure they considered both the "he's a paedo" or "he knows someone in Russia" options before settling with the always useful "lets just take some vague words, actions or lack of action about something or someone and call the bloke anti-semite".

Always works and the majority always buy into it.

So you are saying there was no antisemitism in the labour party?

Does that mean the European Human Right Commission's investigations are compromised also?

This seems to be going a bit far to me.

 

[Swansman]

So you are saying there was no antisemitism in the labour party?

Does that mean the European Human Right Commission's investigations are compromised also?

This seems to be going a bit far to me.

There appears to be 400 000 members in the labour party. so yes there's antisemitic people in that party, like in any other group of 400 000 people.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Thanks I appreciate that.

Does this lead to a conclusion that he himself is an anti semite? I am struggling with this part, especially since he seems fairly renowned for pro Jewish action in his career.

Is Jeremy Corbyn really anti-Semitic?​

Is Jeremy Corbyn an anti-Semite? I began researching the answer to this question well before Danny Finkelstein’s recent revelation in the Times that eight years ago Corbyn had written a glowing foreword to a new edition of Imperialism: A Study, written by the radical economist John Atkinson...

www.spectator.co.uk

Poor leadership? Yes, and I can see how the accusation can be levelled at him but if you take the weight of evidence throughout this career then the cause of the poor leadership is surely more likely to be something other than anti semitism?

This, from a right-wing magazine surely has to be the closest to the truth we’ll get:

“But the grounds for labelling him an anti-Semite simply do not exist.”

Corbyn is good a poking, criticising and calling out the Government. Leadership? Not his bag.

 

[aolstudios]

I am still confused about what Corbyn did that was anti semetic?

There was obviously some stuff going on in the labour party that he didn't deal with and he has been critical of Israel (but this isn't anti semetic in its self is it?).

Can someone help me out?

&...

 

[BadFish]

There appears to be 400 000 members in the labour party. so yes there's antisemitic people in that party, like in any other group of 400 000 people.

I am not really sure what this truism has to do with what we were discussing.

I guess the question I was trying to ask was how if (as your post suggested) there was no basis for the calls of antisemitism at all?

My suggestion was that if the European Human Right Commission's investigations found some serious and illegal instances of it, they would surely have to be 'in' on the conspiracy?

So I guess my question is how much antisemitism do you believe there was in the Labour party and how much responsibility should Corbyn have to bear for it?

my feeling is that your post suggests that it was a kind of random, "what shall we say to discredit him?" situation. I think that there is more basis for it than that.

 

[BadFish]

&...

Some good examples in there that certainly require further investigation. However, I do not accept that criticism of Israel over its treatment of Palestinians as antisemitism (wich most of them seem to be). I think this is a really illogical and dangerous idea.

Edit: I have had a read of the thread and come to a couple of conculsions.

1. There are some accusations on there that need some closer scrutiny (the tweeter says they are not accusations but facts. However without evidence to back them up I am still going with accusations at this stage).
2. The tweeter seems somewhat unhinged and unable to hold any debate with anyone. Hardly surprising on Twitter of course.
3. A quick google of the sunderland poly ban shows that this was a somewhat more complex situation than the tweet suggests. Again it seems to centre around the debate around Israel and Palestine.
4. As a list of accusations it is probably pretty comprehensive, as a list of evidence I feel it leaves a little to be desired.

 

[ShandyH]

I am not really sure what this truism has to do with what we were discussing.

I guess the question I was trying to ask was how if (as your post suggested) there was no basis for the calls of antisemitism at all?

My suggestion was that if the European Human Right Commission's investigations found some serious and illegal instances of it, they would surely have to be 'in' on the conspiracy?

So I guess my question is how much antisemitism do you believe there was in the Labour party and how much responsibility should Corbyn have to bear for it?

my feeling is that your post suggests that it was a kind of random, "what shall we say to discredit him?" situation. I think that there is more basis for it than that.

Knowledgable and patient reply.

 

[Swansman]

I am not really sure what this truism has to do with what we were discussing.

I guess the question I was trying to ask was how if (as your post suggested) there was no basis for the calls of antisemitism at all?

My suggestion was that if the European Human Right Commission's investigations found some serious and illegal instances of it, they would surely have to be 'in' on the conspiracy?

So I guess my question is how much antisemitism do you believe there was in the Labour party and how much responsibility should Corbyn have to bear for it?

my feeling is that your post suggests that it was a kind of random, "what shall we say to discredit him?" situation. I think that there is more basis for it than that.

The investigation appears to have found:

- some bloke named Ken had defended another persons posting of a picture that said that Israel should be in the USA. Antisemitsm according to the European Human Right Comission, social commentary on power relations according to me.
- the party did not investigate complaints about some 50 perceived antisemitic likes someone had made on social media. Someone needs to be locked up.

Probably a truthful report that the media could use as a nice batting tool to make sure you'll never have a leftist leadership.

 

[BadFish]

The investigation appears to have found:

- some bloke named Ken had defended another persons posting of a picture that said that Israel should be in the USA.
- the party did not investigate complaints about some 50 likes someone had made on social media

Probably a truthful report that the media could use as a nice batting tool to make sure you'll never have a leftist leadership.

It's like talking to a politician

Just for clairty, is your answer to this question

"So I guess my question is how much antisemitism do you believe there was in the Labour party and how much responsibility should Corbyn have to bear for it?"

Not much? or None?

(Point of order, I have a 'leftist' leadership as I live in Australia. FWIW as all the states bar Tasmania are Labor-run I am concerned that it is too much.

 

[e77]

Funny that Corbyn has never sued anyone calling him an antisemite. But that would involve being questioned under oath.

 

[jcdenton08]

The fact is he’s gone, which is brilliant for the party and the nation as a whole.

 

[Rdodge30]

You think abandoning democratic principles is a price worth paying for getting your favorite candidate into power?

Maybe says a bit about you and the bloke you vote for.

You can’t change anything in opposition, you have to be in government to make a difference, sacrificing idealism is part of politics

Democracies whether countries or political parties are governed by democratically elected representatives. In this instance the democratically elected representatives of the Labour Party are simply voting on a rule change. Not undemocratic at all

 

[Swansman]

The fact is he’s gone, which is brilliant for the party and the nation as a whole.

Yes, every day is a new success story for your country.

You can’t change anything in opposition, you have to be in government to make a difference, sacrificing idealism is part of politics

Democracies whether countries or political parties are governed by democratically elected representatives. In this instance the democratically elected representatives of the Labour Party are simply voting on a rule change. Not undemocratic at all

Changing rules so that the leader of a party can sit uncontested, with opponents within the party banned, is quite undemocratic. Its the exact same way it is done in third world-dictatorships. Remove internal criticism through banning any dissidents. We're talking proper Uganda stuff here.

 

[Weststander]

I am not really sure what this truism has to do with what we were discussing.

I guess the question I was trying to ask was how if (as your post suggested) there was no basis for the calls of antisemitism at all?

My suggestion was that if the European Human Right Commission's investigations found some serious and illegal instances of it, they would surely have to be 'in' on the conspiracy?

So I guess my question is how much antisemitism do you believe there was in the Labour party and how much responsibility should Corbyn have to bear for it?

my feeling is that your post suggests that it was a kind of random, "what shall we say to discredit him?" situation. I think that there is more basis for it than that.

He doesn’t bear responsibility for anti semites joining or becoming mouthy at that time.

But his leadership bears responsibility for failing to discipline and expel, more damning for political interference in the independent due process there to investigate.

 

[A1X]

Wasn’t the issue not so much that Corbyn himself was an anti-Semite but he allowed a culture of it to develop among some in the Labour Party due largely to his unwillingness to call out those he saw as being on his wing of the party more generally?

 

[aolstudios]

Some good examples in there that certainly require further investigation. However, I do not accept that criticism of Israel over its treatment of Palestinians as antisemitism (wich most of them seem to be). I think this is a really illogical and dangerous idea.

Edit: I have had a read of the thread and come to a couple of conculsions.

1. There are some accusations on there that need some closer scrutiny (the tweeter says they are not accusations but facts. However without evidence to back them up I am still going with accusations at this stage).
2. The tweeter seems somewhat unhinged and unable to hold any debate with anyone. Hardly surprising on Twitter of course.
3. A quick google of the sunderland poly ban shows that this was a somewhat more complex situation than the tweet suggests. Again it seems to centre around the debate around Israel and Palestine.
4. As a list of accusations it is probably pretty comprehensive, as a list of evidence I feel it leaves a little to be desired.

Maybe read both links then?
Oh, & I'd say the tweeter is less 'unhinged', more Jewish...