David Icke lecture @ Wembley Arena, October 2012

[Wilf]

Indeed, seen it on here and in real life many times. Last point very important, and why it's important to challenge and expose both types (the racists and the fellow travelers) despite the often seeming trivial non-consequential nature of it (not that it requires very much effort with people who make it as easy as on this thread).

It's a mighty derail, but similar contradictions were evident in the Respect fiasco (build the party v all kinds of 'shibboleths'). I always thought SWP members didn't ever really try and integrate contradictory positions, just believed in their leaders and putting the party over everything else. However, there must still be coping mechanisms that stop you seeing the hypocrisy of your own position(s). Again, the obvious point, I guess it's where certain types of politics attracts the kind of personalities that are able to create a narrative that ties it all together into a day to day workable mix.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How is it different? Ascribing social characteristics (positive or negative) based purely on race, we call this racism.

Exactly. You're attempting to naturalise a social characteristic, rather than recognising that it is merely a social characteristic.

 

[faux pas]

How is it different? Ascribing social characteristics (positive or negative) based purely on race, we call this racism.

Racism is inherently negative. You can argue some positive comments to be negative in a round about way, but applying this in a blanket fashion would probably be setting standards that are never met in mainstream media, or dare I say it, perhaps by yourselves.

So no anti-semitic/racist remarks from Icke then. None that don't need such specific interpretations, or misinterpretations, perhaps I should say.

 

[Spud Murfy]

How is it different? Ascribing social characteristics (positive or negative) based purely on race, we call this racism.

Not many people can be familiar with a definition of racism that extends to positive stereotypes of races or ethnic groups.

 

[frogwoman]

you don't think talking about "rothschild zionists" and the jews becoming free of the burden of collective guilt is racist? why or why not?you don't really have a clue do you?

 

[stethoscope]

'The Jews are alright when they're allowed to be themselves.'

 

[faux pas]

Exactly. You're attempting to naturalise a social characteristic, rather than recognising that it is merely a social characteristic.

Are you saying that if you don't believe race is a 'social construct' then you are a racist?

 

[xes]

Would it be ok to say, that you do not like the way that banking families run things? Reguardless of religious connotation, becasue of the way that money is hoarded, whilst people starve. The way they have control over goverments, and say who goes to war and when, for profit. The way they have power on goverment, making decisions which are against the people, swaying govermential decisions and ensuring that certain legislations which will bring them profit go through, whilst the people suffer becasue ofthese legislations. And whilst the gap between the rich and the poor gets wider and wider.

Is it ok to think like this at all? Or do we have to love the ones who rule over us, the ones whose greed has caused misery for billions? It matters not what god they serve, nor their purpose. The fact is that the world is in great imbalance, and these folks are at the root of it. Personally, I don't even know if all of the banking families are Jewish run, I'd presume not. There must be Moslim banking families, Christian banking families ect. But in my sweet, innocent little eyes, they are inherently evil, for the way that they control how the world is run. Money is the root of all evil, after all.

Or does thinking like this make me hate all Jewish people? Becasue I loved my old gramps, he was Jewish. (he did keep on and on about needing another world war to sort the youth out, but that's a generation thing, rather than an "all Jewish folk want depopulisation" thing.)

 

[Blagsta]

It's a stretch, which I've noticed members have had to do in trying to provide a straight forward racist or anti-semitic remark of Icke's.

You've had plenty of examples. You choose to deny them.

 

[butchersapron]

Are you saying that if you don't believe race is a 'social construct' then you are a racist?

Get in there! Here we go!

 

[rekil]

Someone should spike wembley's booze and food with acid and whatnot, triggering the greatest mass loon freakout of all time. October 27th eh?

 

[ViolentPanda]

it was the rothschild zionists, they suppressed that knowledge from you. now if you could just overcome your brainwashing and be yourself, maaaan

Those dirty international banking bastards!!

 

[Random]

Very funny thread. Well done all!

 

[butchersapron]

Is it ok to think like this at all? Or do we have to love the ones who rule over us, the ones whose greed has caused misery for billions? .

This is one of the reasons you often get a hard time on here. The assumptions and ignorance about other people and what they think, how they view things and what that means to them politically.

 

[butchersapron]

You've had plenty of examples. You choose to deny them.

Thrice

 

[ViolentPanda]

Are you saying that if you don't believe race is a 'social construct' then you are a racist?

No, I'm saying that constructing a social characteristic as a natural attribute of a particular "race" constitutes a form of racism.
What's up? Can't you read?

 

[xes]

This is one of the reasons you often get a hard time on here. The assumptions and ignorance about other people and what they think, how they view things and what that means to them politically.

but the thing is, you're not allowed to speak about how naughty banking families are, becasue immediatly, the wolves will accuse you of being anti this that or the other. UNless you actually spell it out word for word, people will accuse you of all sorts, and people are very quick to do so.

 

[Blagsta]

Racism is inherently negative. You can argue some positive comments to be negative in a round about way, but applying this in a blanket fashion would probably be setting standards that are never met in mainstream media, or dare I say it, perhaps by yourselves.

So no anti-semitic/racist remarks from Icke then. None that don't need such specific interpretations, or misinterpretations, perhaps I should say.

What?

 

[TruXta]

No, I'm saying that constructing a social characteristic as a natural attribute of a particular "race" constitutes a form of racism.
What's up? Can't you read?

No more of that Viking-baiting then, you hear me?

 

[Random]

So no anti-semitic/racist remarks from Icke then. None that don't need such specific interpretations, or misinterpretations, perhaps I should say.

This quote is clearly a racist slur against all jewish people.

Jewish people... will never be free until they step out of the mental and emotional control of this tiny clique, which uses them in the most merciless ways to advance its own sick and diabolical ambitions, in league with an equally sick clique of non-Jews.

 

[faux pas]

No, I'm saying that constructing a social characteristic as a natural attribute of a particular "race" constitutes a form of racism.
What's up? Can't you read?

Can someone be not racist yet not believe race is a social construct?

 

[Blagsta]

Not many people can be familiar with a definition of racism that extends to positive stereotypes of races or ethnic groups.

Most people will recognise racial stereotypes for what they are.

 

[stethoscope]

but the thing is, you're not allowed to speak about how naughty banking families are, becasue immediatly, the wolves will accuse you of being anti this that or the other. UNless you actually spell it out word for word, people will accuse you of all sorts, and people are very quick to do so.

You're not allowed to speak about banking families? Really? Where was this Xes? Anyway, that's a misnomer. The criticism is that whilst movements such as Icke's and others use religion and race as part of their 'discourse', combined with all manner of conspiracy theorising, it just diverts the attention away from the machinations of capital and class.

We've seen it permeate through the recent Occupy/anti-capitalism organising for example - people using anti-semitism as part of the blame tool for capitalism. It doesn't become about powerful economic structures or institutions, it instead can lead to using race/religious hatred.

 

[butchersapron]

but the thing is, you're not allowed to speak about how naughty banking families are, becasue immediatly, the wolves will accuse you of being anti this that or the other. UNless you actually spell it out word for word, people will accuse you of all sorts, and people are very quick to do so.

Of course you are - there are thousands of people writing books, presenting programs, doing lectures and so on about the banking system, the integration of it with industrial capital, the financialisation of everyday life and so on. They don't rely on any anti-Semitic tropes and they get taken seriously - very seriously - with no accusations such as you suggest ever coming near them. Why? because they do serious research based on evidence, logic and sustained argument.

You miss the point anyway which was your characterisation of people who don't agree with your specific perspective on this as somehow either loving the banks or arguing that you must love them - can you not see why that might piss people off, lazily dismissing them in such a manner?

 

[frogwoman]

because the view of the world that goes on about banking families is nothing to do with strucure, its just "these people control the world and are evil".

 

[Blagsta]

Would it be ok to say, that you do not like the way that banking families run things? Reguardless of religious connotation, becasue of the way that money is hoarded, whilst people starve. The way they have control over goverments, and say who goes to war and when, for profit. The way they have power on goverment, making decisions which are against the people, swaying govermential decisions and ensuring that certain legislations which will bring them profit go through, whilst the people suffer becasue ofthese legislations. And whilst the gap between the rich and the poor gets wider and wider.

Is it ok to think like this at all? Or do we have to love the ones who rule over us, the ones whose greed has caused misery for billions? It matters not what god they serve, nor their purpose. The fact is that the world is in great imbalance, and these folks are at the root of it. Personally, I don't even know if all of the banking families are Jewish run, I'd presume not. There must be Moslim banking families, Christian banking families ect. But in my sweet, innocent little eyes, they are inherently evil, for the way that they control how the world is run. Money is the root of all evil, after all.

Or does thinking like this make me hate all Jewish people? Becasue I loved my old gramps, he was Jewish. (he did keep on and on about needing another world war to sort the youth out, but that's a generation thing, rather than an "all Jewish folk want depopulisation" thing.)

Have a critique of capitalism by all means

 

[Roadkill]

Faux pas, are you ever actually going to try and answer the question I posed in posts #342 and #455? It really isn't difficult...

 

[ViolentPanda]

No more of that Viking-baiting then, you hear me?

Yes mum.

 

[faux pas]

Faux pas, are you ever actually going to try and answer the question I posed in posts #342 and #455? It really isn't difficult...

How many questions have you had posed to you on this thread?

 

[Blagsta]

but the thing is, you're not allowed to speak about how naughty banking families are, becasue immediatly, the wolves will accuse you of being anti this that or the other. UNless you actually spell it out word for word, people will accuse you of all sorts, and people are very quick to do so.

Have a critique of capitalism, based on how capitalism works. Not on some weirdo fantasy.