Policing the party

Jeremy talks to people he doesn't consort he is very well respected abroad unlike here with the MSM smear campaign and labour right ect against him.

No, because they are not consorting with those governing Gaza and their concern is based entirely on humanitarian considerations.

M0nca Christian Aid are currently asking people to e-mail the Prime Minister asking for him to apply pressure to end the blockade of Gaza. Are they anti-semitic? www.christianaid.org.uk/get-involved/campaigns/stand-palestinians-and-israelis-call-lasting-peace-today

M0nica

I think Corbyn always had an eye to the main chance and enjoyed being awkward for the sake of it. He espoused the Palestinian cause and consorted with its leaders.

You cannot do that and not be antisemitic in actions and words, because, even a hint that you were not antisemitic and the Palestinians would have broken every connection with him. For the Palstinian terrorist leaders it was all or nothing, if you were pro Palestinian you were anti Israel and anti semitic. For the terrorists the two come as a package.

I'm not defending Palestinian terrorists, but do you seriously think that the way Israel is treating Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank is acceptable?

You appear to be claiming that people who oppose the Israeli state are anti-semitic, which contradicts what you were saying earlier.

But that is pure assumption MOnica. IF there is evidence, let's see it.

I think Corbyn always had an eye to the main chance and enjoyed being awkward for the sake of it. He espoused the Palestinian cause and consorted with its leaders.

You cannot do that and not be antisemitic in actions and words, because, even a hint that you were not antisemitic and the Palestinians would have broken every connection with him. For the Palstinian terrorist leaders it was all or nothing, if you were pro Palestinian you were anti Israel and anti semitic. For the terrorists the two come as a package.

And if anti-Semites left the Party then good riddance eh?
But they haven't. The people who were in head office and who were responsible for delaying dealing with complaints about anti-semitism to blacken Corbyn, were re-instated by Starmer.
Whereas the "Wrong sort of Jew" like Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi has been thrown out!

M0nica

Where have I suggested anything else, but the bulk of person to person antisemitism has nothing to do with Israel. it is simply being prejudiced against someone because they are jewishs.

I don't disagree with you. My interpretation of anti-semiticism is the the same as yours, but it is a fact that there are people who call out criticism of the Israeli state and support for Palestine as anti-semitic. That's where the argument becomes muddled. It's rumoured that the Israeli state and hard-liners are behind propaganda which jumps on anything with a hint of criticism of the state. My personal belief is that it's true that there is propaganda, but also that it's exaggerated by those against the Israeli state and "classic" anti-semites. The current scenario can't be explained by the historic interpretation of classical anti-semiticism.

One only has to read comments by people who called Corbyn an anti-semite to know that there's a different agenda. I don't believe for one moment that Corbyn has ever been anti-semitic. However, he has called out what is going on in Palestine and that's where there's a conflict of interest. Palestinians and Muslims in general are the world's current bogeymen and I think Corbyn is an instinctive supporter of the underdogs.

The issue is that once a person has a label as anti-semitic, many people interpret that as being anti Jew, including being a supporter of the holocaust and it becomes taboo. I think Corbyn was too naive and/or convinced that he was right to see what was going on around him. He didn't seem able to understand that some people aren't quite so anti-racist/anti-semitic as he is.

Starmer has a problem to sort out and he can't just ignore it, as Corbyn did.

Where have I suggested anything else, but the bulk of person to person antisemitism has nothing to do with Israel. it is simply being prejudiced against someone because they are jewishs.

M0nica

Most anti-semitism has nothing to do with apartheid in Israel. It is just good old fashioned anti-semitism that goes back to to the early days of christianity. Cherry picking one small corner of anti-semitism and using that to symbolise the whole is - anti-semitic.

But there are people who deliberately link "traditional" anti-semiticism to opposing the modern Israeli state and support for Palestine.

Starmer might bankrupt the party before he has the chance to take it to "the middle ground" whatever that is.

He didn’t cull Party members trisher they just left because Corbyn didn’t succeed in gaining Number Ten.
And if anti-Semites left the Party then good riddance eh?
The only chance Labour has to gain power is to come nearer to the centre ground in politics.You may not like it, and many very left wing members won’t like it, but there is no other way.

Does anyone remember Starmer's promise to unite the party? Can anyone explain to me how getting rid of people is uniting anything? I know I am to the left of most on GN, but if we are looking at party policies and Labour values I am quite willing to debate them. Starmer now seems to be culling the party he has already substantially reduced in number. No debate, no discussion, no appeal. It isn't Labour. It isn't democratic and there is no evidence that it will win votes and bring power. I am wondering the last cries of a drowning man?

Labour shuts down London conference entirely in middle of chair’s speech to prevent her criticising Keir Starmer

Starmer’s sockpuppets and apologists now desperately trying to claim Kathryn Johnson was being libellous, which delegates say is a lie. She will have chance to deliver it in full on Socialist Telly on Monday night

Labour has outraged members today by shutting down its London conference in the middle of the outgoing Conference Arrangements Committee chair’s speech, apparently because she was speaking critically of Keir Starmer – and, ironically, of the party’s anti-democratic conduct.

skwawkbox.org/2021/07/25/labour-shuts-down-london-conference-entirely-in-middle-of-chairs-speech-to-prevent-her-criticising-keir-starmer/#comments

Gagajo ''But if we just have a replacement Boris, what is the point?''

this oft repeating statement is totally unfair. How can anyone equate Starmer for Johnson?

The First Past the Post system produces impossible monsters. In the vast majority of Democratic countries, neither the 'right' or 'the left' is forced into one big lump, but is split into different factions which have big differences within. Currently both Labour and Cons are totally artificial constructs for all the wrong reasons.

The fact is however, that if the 'left' of the Labour Party does not support Starmer, and does not unite, the FPTP system will ensure that they are never re-elected.

Septimia

We should be voting for individuals or policies that represent what we want - not blindly for a party because we've always voted for that party.

Hallelujah to that ???

Astonishing thread pulls together five years of Labour right sabotage and war to destroy Corbyn and the left

Superb summary thread by @iwaslabour distills betrayal by so-called ‘moderates’ on full display

skwawkbox.org/2021/07/24/astonishing-thread-pulls-together-five-years-of-labour-right-sabotage-and-war-to-destroy-corbyn-and-the-left/#comments

Exactly Grany.

@BeckettUnite

When you inherit the largest socialist party in Europe, lose over 115k members, alienate Left trade unionists, create disunity, take your party to the brink of bankruptcy. And your answer is to proscribe groupings. Appalling.

Being electable has got nothing to do with abandoning your principles. Any political party should have underlying principles and a philosophy that provides a justification for them.

It is then a question of 'it is not what you do, its the way that you do it' You develop policies that make you electable then implement them through ways that are based on your core principles.

Thanks for your post Monica.

But if we just have a replacement Boris, what is the point? Although, much as I am not a fan of Starmer, I have to admit, he is a huge improvement on the blonde idiot.

Being true to principles is all very well and good, but sadly, it does not get the Labour party elected.

This x 100. At this rate we'll be stuck with BoJo for another 4 years.

Opposing apartheid in Israel has nothing to do with antisemitism. It is simply opposing a nation state , which is acting in a way that ignores the human rights of a group of its citizens.

The two events are entirely different. To conflate the policy of a nation state with the treatment of a group of people who used to live in that geographical area, in many cases more than a millenium ago and use it as a reason for that group to be persecuted is an act of antisemitim in relation to the people, not the behaviour of the state.

Anti-semitism is picking on a group of people with a common history and denigrating them and being prejudiced aagainst them not for what they are but for past events they have no involvement inthis one issue.

M0nica

Most anti-semitism has nothing to do with apartheid in Israel. It is just good old fashioned anti-semitism that goes back to to the early days of christianity. Cherry picking one small corner of anti-semitism and using that to symbolise the whole is - anti-semitic.

I'm confused by your comment. Are you saying that opposing apartheid in Israel is anti or not anti-Semitic?