and Annuder Oik who was at least gracious enough to withdraw the collective responsibility taking after taking on board others arguments as to why that was a shit attitudeIf you're talking about on here, a very similar attitude was taken towards Jews and Israel by a poster, Falcon, who was torn to shreds for it.
One easy telltale sign that you're talking to an antisemite is the use of the definite article 'the', as in 'the Jews'. I don't think it's difficult to tell where people are coming from in their arguments. It's actually very hard to hide your underlying attitudes - they leak out.and Annuder Oik who was at least gracious enough to withdraw the collective responsibility taking after taking on board others arguments as to why that was a shit attitude
ok, just to be annoying then, what do you reckon of Jackie Walker's question (on her facebook) "what debt do we owe the jews"?One easy telltale sign that you're talking to an antisemite is the use of the definite article 'the', as in 'the Jews'. I don't think it's difficult to tell where people are coming from in their arguments. It's actually very hard to hide your underlying attitudes - they leak out.
Can you give me some context? She could be using the term sarcastically, after all.ok, just to be annoying then, what do you reckon of Jackie Walker's question (on her facebook) "what debt do we owe the jews"?
Are we really going to recycle this again? Wasn't my intention. This is all i've got.Can you give me some context? She could be using the term sarcastically, after all.
So no chance of context thenAre we really going to recycle this again? Wasn't my intention. This is all i've got.
It is of course possible that the invisible interlocutor said something about 'us' owing a debt to 'the Arabs', but i think that is unlikely.
View attachment 93523
Yes, that's been done plenty. It did sadden me that the Jews For Justice For Palestinians weekly newsletter felt the need to do this, trying hard to agree with her that jews were not the main victims of the nazi death camps: Feverish witch-hunt against Jackie WalkerHolocaust memorial day does focus on other genocides, too. Has anyone looked at the website?
Thing is everyone fucking knows that criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitic. What I do have a problem with is people who just add a token mention of Israel to excuse antisemitism. Or explain it by the fact the Israeli government are wankers. You wouldn't fucking use isis as a reason why someone complaining about islamophobia on the left should be ignored, well some people would but a lot of the people doing this shit think they are better than that.
Yes, that's been done plenty. It did sadden me that the Jews For Justice For Palestinians weekly newsletter felt the need to do this, trying hard to agree with her that jews were not the main victims of the nazi death camps: Feverish witch-hunt against Jackie Walker
(There is a small sentence in the middle of this rambling essay which says "However it may not be true that ‘proportionately [Jews were not] the main victim of the Nazis'", then it launches into the attempt to explain why she may have made this mistake.
I have to admit that when I looked at that latest newsletter I wondered too. I signed their statement years ago and have been a subscriber ever since but not sure tbh, after this latest seemingly desperate contortion.I have to wonder about stuff like this, who are these people and why are they motivated to defend something so obviously and manifestly untrue and offensive?
I have to wonder about stuff like this, who are these people and why are they motivated to defend something so obviously and manifestly untrue and offensive?
I have to admit that when I looked at that latest newsletter I wondered too. I signed their statement years ago and have been a subscriber ever since but not sure tbh, after this latest seemingly desperate contortion.
First I've seen of it, sorry. Be nice to see the question before as well, but her final answer is rambling and incoherent, and yes, the whatabouttery of it puts me on my guard. Someone brings up the Holocaust and she replies with a ramble about Jewish involvement in the slave trade. 'many Jews were the chief financiers of the slave trade'. Hmm. Some were, no doubt, but most weren't - she comes very close to allocating collective guilt there. And what does that have to do with the Holocaust? Also, this bit ''we are victims and perpetrators to some extent through choice'? What does that even mean? Some Hegelian bullshit, or some less high-minded bullshit? I really don't know.Are we really going to recycle this again? Wasn't my intention. This is all i've got.
It is of course possible that the invisible interlocutor said something about 'us' owing a debt to 'the Arabs', but i think that is unlikely.
View attachment 93523
You're misquoting. The quote says 'national home for the Jewish people', not 'homeland'. (The 'national' bit is important - at root, Zionism is a form of Jewish nationalism.) But take out the Balfour bit if you like - Zionism existed before then after all. A belief in the need of a Jewish state, with the term subsequently becoming attached to the political movement whose aim this was.
Yeah. That's a fair cop. I'd prefer 'misremembered' but you're right. It was 'national home for the Jewish people' not 'Jewish homeland'. I'd be accusing you of hairsplitting but if I'm reading you right, you're saying 'national' already implicitly assumes self-determination and sovereignty. On this, I'm la bit...hmmmm?
Every time I read that it sounds worse. It's just wrong on every conceivable level. Even if Jews were the main financiers of the slave trade what does it matter?Are we really going to recycle this again? Wasn't my intention. This is all i've got.
It is of course possible that the invisible interlocutor said something about 'us' owing a debt to 'the Arabs', but i think that is unlikely.
View attachment 93523
Ok this is what I reckon underlies her many recent statements on the topic of of jews, when you take all her various statements together (the ones about the holocaust, the one about the slave trade, the one about security at jewish schools being nothing special cos everyone has security nowadays etc):Every time I read that it sounds worse. It's just wrong on every conceivable level. Even if Jews were the main financiers of the slave trade what does it matter?
I don't know anything about the person in question, but for me it's appears to be a prime example of the confusion that identity politics can lead to.Every time I read that it sounds worse. It's just wrong on every conceivable level. Even if Jews were the main financiers of the slave trade what does it matter?
Title of this thread seems to suggest this is the right place...or is there a reshuffle thread.
However, Abbott's appointment really does look like shark jumping. Purely in terms of the predictable effect. He must have known the reaction even if he thinks she's any use. Chakrabati..pure fuckin sleaze.
Can even think he made the calculation that criticism can be explained in terms of insecure white males objecting to experienced and educated black women...racist misogyny etc.
I'm not impressed. He seems to want to put together a team for a short burst of intense posturing and hand-wringing before they all slide off into the abyss. It's fuckin sad and a wasted opportunity.
Agree. Chakrabati's pretty sharp. No problem with her in normal circumstances. Abbott is and has long been a clown.I have residual respect for Chakrabati, however, Abbott is deeply unlikable; she'll make Amber Rudd look like the affable aunt that stuffed you full of cake when you visited her.
Agree. Chakrabati's pretty sharp. No problem with her in normal circumstances. Abbott is and has long been a clown.
Just seems to be another 'rub their noses in diversity' moment...kinda a big "fuck you' to the judge before he 'goes down'.
Holocaust memorial day does focus on other genocides, too. Has anyone looked ar the website?