Ken Loach and dubious "anti-semitism" claims

[Fedayn]

" ..nothing has been a greater instigator of antisemitism than the self-proclaimed Jewish state itself..." Ken Loach

that is NOT what you are saying is it Fed?

Has the creation, maintenance and continuing policies of the state of Israel that self proclaims as the Jewish state lessened anti-semitism? That's not an argument claiming that anti-semitism is the fualt of Jews, nowhere does it say or claim that. To say it does is a lie. But it's an understanding that some of the behaviour of the Israeli military has fuelled and given rise to even more pernicious and shitty anti-semitism.

 

[danny la rouge]

1) i try to ignore zachors spin on look at what he has referred to

Good plan.

2) 'version' what are you suggestting he didnlt say that?

I'm suggesting it isn't the link in the OP, and differs slightly.

3) it's a fucking war .. are we going to sue?? lol

War crimes are nonetheless war crimes. I'm as cynical about international law as the next person, but sometimes the principles matter.

4) no simply no .. nasty but in a heavily built up area of 1.5 million only 1500 people were killed most of who were hamas combatents .. so yes horrible but clearly NOT one of the greatest crimes of the last decades ( turkish attacks in kurdistan, the US in vietnam, the US carpet bombing iraqi troops, the iran iraq war, lebanon several times, the jordanian attack on the PLO even etc etc are all far far worse ) ..

Your assertions about casualties are not upheld by Amnesty

Some 1,300 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including more than 300 children, and 13 Israelis, three of them civilians, were killed during the recent three-week conflict in the Gaza (source)

But aside from that, I think we're going to disagree on the nature of the Israeli operations and policy towards Gaza in recent years.

5) there is much to take a stand against .. i wonder why some take stands against some things and not others

Same as the rest of us, I suppose. Lack of omnipotence and omnipresence.

6) good

Good.

7) that is an absurd comment by him with no historical understanding or context His timeframe is "recent decades". Do you disagree that the actions of the Israeli state have generated an inappropriate racist response? And if so, can you think of any events in recent decades that have generated a comparable (misdirected, inappropriate) backlash of anti-Semitism?

8) uppity jews eh? wanted a country of their own what wrong with them? i thought lenin supportted nationalism??

The issue is not creating a safe homeland for Jews, but trying to create an overwhelmingly, if not homogeneously, Jewish state where there was an indigenous non Jewish majority. The problem is not the possible Zionisms, but actually existing Zionism, whose project has been to first ethnically cleanse, in the inter war years, and then in the immediate post WWII period, and subsequently to institute an apartheid regime, in which two sets of laws pertain, meted out depending on ethnicity, and furthermore to ignore UN resolutions and to continue to settle the Palestinian territories in the face of near universal (saving, of course, US, Israeli and less than a handful of small island states) support for a two state solution.

9) the nationalist violence of those jews in palestine can NOT be solved by simply opposing THEIR nationalism but ALL nationalism

With whom are you arguing here?

 

[durruti02]

you're ignorance is only outdone by your arrogance durutti. and such utterly hypocritical nonsense as well, it's almost funny how you are doing exactly what you are (supposedly) criticising others for. you too are joining in with the 'to criticise israel is anti-semitic' drivel.

You don't understand anything about history, racism, imperialism, or the opposition to those things. And that ignorance leads you straight to a defence of the indefensible, and having to dissemble (look it up) about others' views.

Shameful.

laughable on every level

.. btw where did i say 'to criticise israel is anti-semitic'? .. i was responding to what Loach said that Israel is the GREATEST instigator of anti semitism ..

this is one of these sad things where someone accuses someone else of ignorence when it in my case is sadly not true .. i know as much about the holocaust and the creation of israel as i do the bund and the critiques of zionism yet you feel you can say i am ignorent ( of history that is a broad brush! lol) ..

maybe i should not have accused you of ignorence re the holocaust .. but sometimes i feel that people who express what you did really have no idea of what happenned and the situation in 1945 -48

.. maybe i should apologise if i am wrong BUT you actually have NOT responded to a single thing i have said so i will reserve judgement

 

[durruti02]

It's not 1945, though. Jews are not a persecuted minority, well, anywhere now. And the 'solution' that was Israel (it was never much of a solution for displaced Palestinians) is now the problem. Any state that has set geographical borders needs to represent everyone within those borders equally regardless of race, cultural tradition or religion. Israel fails on this count, and as long as it continues to fail peace will not come.

A one-state solution is the only way to bring peace, but we're a long way from that at the moment. I'm pessimistic – it could take 50 or more years for this to be sorted.

for Israel it is a continuation of 1945 .. and until people get that into their thick skulls they will not find a solution

ALL states are exclusive and as you say .. yet why do people demand ONLY of the jews that they can neither have a state NOR use violence to defend that state .. and you wonder why they cry anti semitism??

 

[durruti02]

do you mean the Zionists who were complicit with Hitler? The ones who thought his rise would help them achieve their desire of a homeland??? You couldn't make your daftness up.

fuck off .. a minority of zionists were complicit .. but you know EXACTLY my point

.. the maj who got out and lived were zionists .. the Bund supporters stayed .. and were wiped out .. WIPED OUT belboid .. almost totally wiped out .. there is story after story of those who said they should get out and did and survice leaving behind bund who were anti zionists and who were gassed

btw your comment agian makes me think you do not have a total understanding of what went on then .. you have ficused on the tiny minority of zionists who were complicit .. this does not suggest a good understadning or it suggests a bias

 

[durruti02]

it was never a solution for the jews either, as the vast majority of them always recognised.

what then is the solution for the jews 1) in 1945 and 2) now?

 

[danny la rouge]

ALL states are exclusive and as you say .. yet why do people demand ONLY of the jews that they can neither have a state NOR use violence to defend that state ..

Nobody is saying that. What they are saying is that they cannot expel or subjugate or kill the indigenous non Jewish people with impunity, nor can they do so without provoking resistance, and that resistance is not anti-Semitism, but the resistance of people against their dispossession, expulsion, and subjugation.

To think otherwise is analogous of saying that the resistance of Native Americans against European encroachment was motivated by anti-Europeanism.

Durruti, I frequently agree with you, but on this I can't figure out where you're coming from.

 

[durruti02]

Originally Posted by durruti02
" ..nothing has been a greater instigator of antisemitism than the self-proclaimed Jewish state itself..." Ken Loach

that is NOT what you are saying is it Fed?

Has the creation, maintenance and continuing policies of the state of Israel that self proclaims as the Jewish state lessened anti-semitism? That's not an argument claiming that anti-semitism is the fualt of Jews, nowhere does it say or claim that. To say it does is a lie. But it's an understanding that some of the behaviour of the Israeli military has fuelled and given rise to even more pernicious and shitty anti-semitism.

fed i agree with what you are saying .. but that is not what Loach is saying is it?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

for Israel it is a continuation of 1945 .. and until people get that into their thick skulls they will not find a solution

ALL states are exclusive and as you say .. yet why do people demand ONLY of the jews that they can neither have a state NOR use violence to defend that state .. and you wonder why they cry anti semitism??

Only? No. I would say exactly the same thing about the Islamic Republic of Iran or the Christian state of the UK for that matter. Any state defined by geographical borders that is not strictly secular is not acceptable.

 

[belboid]

laughable on every level

yes, you are on this one

.. btw where did i say 'to criticise israel is anti-semitic'? ..

re-read your comments, it reeks of it. It's disgusting

i was responding to what Loach said that Israel is the GREATEST instigator of anti semitism ..

yeah, by chopping up his quote, how wonderfully honest of you.

this is one of these sad things where someone accuses someone else of ignorence when it in my case is sadly not true .. i know as much about the holocaust and the creation of israel as i do the bund and the critiques of zionism yet you feel you can say i am ignorent ( of history that is a broad brush! lol) ..

lol, I fuckling love your arrogance,. only you knows anything, everuyone else who has the temrity to disagree with the mighty durutti is of course 'ignornet.' The typical fallback of those without an argument.

[quuote]maybe i should not have accused you of ignorence re the holocaust .. but sometimes i feel that people who express what you did really have no idea of what happenned and the situation in 1945 -48 [/quote]
yet more arrogance. i am astounded at your total ignorance of the opposition to the founding of Israel, opposition that included many jews. None so blind....

.. maybe i should apologise if i am wrong BUT you actually have NOT responded to a single thing i have said so i will reserve judgement

Reserve whatever the hell you like, you have come out with a bunch of non-sequiturs, irrelevances, falsehoods, and slanders, why should I give a toss about your clearly faulty 'judgement'.

It is a fact, the founding of Israel was a disaster for jews as well as palestinians. It is a fact that that was widely recognised at the time, that the settler-colonial state would only survive with the support of the major imperialist powers. And so it came to pass. And sadly there were a few gullible lefties who bought into the whole tragic saga.

 

[belboid]

why do people demand ONLY of the jews that they can neither have a state NOR use violence to defend that state .. and you wonder why they cry anti semitism??

no one has made any such demand. You are a liar.

 

[belboid]

what then is the solution for the jews 1) in 1945 and 2) now?

there's no point trying to argue with liars durutti, so goodbye.

 

[durruti02]

Nobody is saying that. What they are saying is that they cannot expel or subjugate or kill the indigenous non Jewish people with impunity, nor can they do so without provoking resistance, and that resistance is not anti-Semitism, but the resistance of people against their dispossession, expulsion, and subjugation.

To think otherwise is analogous of saying that the resistance of Native Americans against European encroachment was motivated by anti-Europeanism.

Durruti, I frequently agree with you, but on this I can't figure out where you're coming from.

but the zionists in palestine did this no more than anyone else in this period .. and they were NOT the majority in israell either .. the creation of all countries exhibits this same shite .. and generally it is got over by one means or another .. it has not been in palestine due to intransigence on BOTH sides ..

my point is that the UK left has lost it's context of the existance of israel and the historical siutaionof jews as being on the edge of annihation

your note re north america is interesting .. and while we owuld argue that there needs STILL to be a rebalance re native americans 'the facts on the ground' mean we would not e.g contemplate e.g giving NYC back to whoever it used to belong to

there is a lot of shite happenned in this world and it rinsg alarm bells when Loach puts an attack that killed 1300 most of who were combatents ( yes NOT ALL ) over and above the attacks on Iraq, Vietnam, Cambodia, kurdisatn, the Iran Iraq war, attacks on the Tamils, Rwanada,

at the end of the day the behaviour of israel is exactly the behaviour of someone who is backed into a corner and yet people seem to not to want to know or understand why

 

[durruti02]

It is a fact, the founding of Israel was a disaster for jews as well as palestinians. It is a fact that that was widely recognised at the time, that the settler-colonial state would only survive with the support of the major imperialist powers. And so it came to pass. And sadly there were a few gullible lefties who bought into the whole tragic saga.

in 1945 what would you have said and done? a disaster?? .. after 6 million jews have just been gassed and Israel is THE disaster? lol ..

and you still think i SUPPORT Israel?? .. and you wonder why i think you do not understand ..

 

[danny la rouge]

but the zionists in palestine did this no more than anyone else in this period .. and they were NOT the majority in israell either ..

That's right, not until they expelled the indigenous population.

at the end of the day the behaviour of israel is exactly the behaviour of someone who is backed into a corner and yet people seem to not to want to know or understand why

And the response of the Palestinian people is what?

 

[durruti02]

there's no point trying to argue with liars durutti, so goodbye.

cop out .. utter cop out .. answer this question

Originally Posted by durruti02
"what then is the solution for the jews 1) in 1945 and 2) now?"

and this one

"and as a jew in 1945 who would you have thought had been shown to have had the right strategy .. the Zionists or the Bund? hmm"

and please point out where i have lied

 

[durruti02]

1)That's right, not until they expelled the indigenous population.

And the response of the Palestinian people is what?

1) which they didn't 2) was to invade and wiped out jews and jewish settlements they could .. oh you mean? of so yes ditto .. so we have two groups in EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION .. and yet the left back groups that talk of pushing the jews into the sea of setting up a muslim state etc

(p.s,. yes of course there are many on the left who do not fallfor this shite but many do .. )

 

[Fedayn]

Originally Posted by durruti02
" ..nothing has been a greater instigator of antisemitism than the self-proclaimed Jewish state itself..." Ken Loach

that is NOT what you are saying is it Fed?

fed i agree with what you are saying .. but that is not what Loach is saying is it?

What is he saying then? The behaviour of the Israeli state has fuelled anti-semitism, yes. In what way is this different to what Loach is saying? At best your argument is that Loach should simply word it differently.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Originally Posted by durruti02
"what then is the solution for the jews 1) in 1945 and 2) now?"

I'll answer this if you like.

1) Who cares? The 'solution', a Jewish state, has proved not to be the right solution at all. What could have been done instead is a matter for academics, maybe, but irrelevant when considering what should be done now.

2) One state, in which every ethnic, religious or cultural group, majority or minority, is guaranteed recognition, and in which certain of these groups will probably be granted a certain degree of autonomy.

 

[danny la rouge]

1) which they didn't 2) was to invade and wiped out jews and jewish settlements they could .. oh you mean? of so yes ditto .. so we have two groups in EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION .. and yet the left back groups that talk of pushing the jews into the sea of setting up a muslim state etc

(p.s,. yes of course there are many on the left who do not fallfor this shite but many do .. )

Who is talking about pushing the Jews into the sea? Anyone on this thread? No, so don't drop in stuff nobody is saying.

I'm willing to take a bet that most people who look seriously at the situation we have now would support the two state settlement, perhaps not ideal, but more achievable now than holding out for an ideologically pleasing non secular shared single state for all.

Durruti, I don't want to patronise you, and I don't know what you've read on the subject, but I recommend to you The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe, as a good starting place.

 

[belboid]

and please point out where i have lied

I pointed it out explicitly already, if you can't read that might explain why you come out with such utter shite.

i never expected you to become a liar durutti, I'm disappointed.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I'm willing to take a bet that most people who look seriously at the situation we have now would support the two state settlement, perhaps not ideal, but more achievable now than holding out for an ideologically pleasing non secular shared single state for all.

Many people who look at it seriously recognise that there can not be an equitable distribution of land and resources in any two-state settlement, and think that this will only lead to further strife. It isn't a solution at all.

 

[danny la rouge]

Many people who look at it seriously recognise that there can not be an equitable distribution of land and resources in any two-state settlement, and think that this will only lead to further strife. It isn't a solution at all.

OK, we have to have settlers withdraw, or for land which is settled to be replaced by equivalent land of equal merit, but I do think a two state settlement is achievable, if the major impediment - US dissension from the UN mandate - is removed. To hold out for a single state solution would, in my view, be to condemn generations to a continuation of the current stalemate.

So, yes, while it is ideologically pleasing to me, I am not in a position to condemn those on the ground to generations of misery in order to preserve my ideological purity.

 

[Knotted]

for Israel it is a continuation of 1945 .. and until people get that into their thick skulls they will not find a solution

You might be right there unfortunately. It looks like the slaughter will go on for decades maybe even centuries until the zionists are driven into the sea or the Palestinians are obliterated. I hope its the former rather than the latter, but I hope even more that the zionists will come to their senses and stop calling themselves 'Israelis' and live side by side with the arabs in a single state. But as you say the zionists aren't going to give up...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well, I disagree. Not to push for a single state now is to ask future generations to solve the problem.

It's not about ideological purity. It is just as practical to ask the Israel state to dissolve itself as it is to ask it to give up its best land and water resources.

 

[Knotted]

Well, I disagree. Not to push for a single state now is to ask future generations to solve the problem.

It's not about ideological purity. It is just as practical to ask the Israel state to dissolve itself as it is to ask it to give up its best land and water resources.

There might be a situation where the Palestinians get the upper hand (with Arab support presumably), but the bad blood means that they cannot live side by side with the zionists. It might be feasable for the Palestinians to carve out a viable state and leave an Israeli enclave.

However the one state solution is the only real solution unless you are feeling blood thirsty.

 

[danny la rouge]

Well, I disagree. Not to push for a single state now is to ask future generations to solve the problem.

It's not about ideological purity. It is just as practical to ask the Israel state to dissolve itself as it is to ask it to give up its best land and water resources.

OK, well, then we disagree, and I amend my earlier statement.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

so they shoud ALL have gone to america? lol

probably yes...

the USA was the place where practioners of relegions could go and practice their relegion in peace without fear of persuction.

Hell it was one of th emain reasons people started going their in the first place...

although there's no historical precidence for juedaism in the USA which would have prompted this tbh there was little in the way of precceedence to the area of palestine either...

you clearly do not know the history of 1948 either and that the arab armies invaded israel to try to wipe it out ..

yeah 10,000 displaced peoples over nearly 1 million that's comparable... really comparable...

summit wrong with your morality meter here then or are you lapping up the orwellian historical rewrites?

al-Nakba is generally accepted as being a a massive blot on the creation and formation of Isreal in 1948 pray tell what nonsense you have bought into to come to this theory that 1948 which has an alternate history to the one generally accepted as being true...

I'm all ears...

this isn't the Jews and arabs were in on it together with the british to partition up the whole area for the beinfit of the jews conspirisy bullshit is it???

it is isn't it...

 

[Groucho]

What's he saying, though? That the anti Semitism is justified, or that it's cause is the plight of the Palestinians? If the former, he's an idiot, if the latter, then he's right - it is understandable; wrong and unjust, but understandable.

I think the point he is making is that the actions of the Israeli terror state increase anti-semitism in much the same way as the actions of Al Quaida increase Islamophobia. Israel claims to represent Jews just as Al Quaida claims to represent Islam. Of course any such generalised responses are dangerous, racist and founded on ignorance. I doubt that Loach was in any way suggesting that anti-semitism is forgivable, excusable or suportable.

I think it is understandable and not at all surprising that socialist ideals were rejected by many because of the actions of the USSR - that does not mean that I, as a socialist, believe that it is right to junk socialism.

I also think it is understandable and not at all surprising that support for the Taliban is increasing in Pakistan given the corruption of the regime, their ties with the US and the massive poverty that exists there. Doesn't mean I think that the growth of the Taliban is a good thing.

Loach may have made his point badly, or he may have been selectively quoted but I don't think he is an apologist for anti-semitism.

 

[danny la rouge]

I think the point he is making is that the actions of the Israeli terror state increase anti-semitism in much the same way as the actions of Al Quaida increase Islamophobia.

I was pointing out to bluestreak that he had misinterpreted Loach, not asking if anyone could enlighten me.