Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Labour & Anti-Semitism.

Concurrently? Why not just do away with number one completely?


Why would you do that?

Is it the proposed chronology that you object to? Or moving beyond stage 1?

Bear in mind that stage 1 isn't an event, it's a process, so can still be ongoing while stage 2 takes place.
 
How do you know "There's obviously many, many spurious allegations being made quite shamelessly" until you have investigated and come to some conclusions? Would there also not need to be a stage prior to your second stage to determine what are bad faith accusations and what are genuine allegations that perhaps don't meet the standards of evidence or are based on a misunderstanding in a climate of widespread racist abuse?
 
How do you know "There's obviously many, many spurious allegations being made quite shamelessly" until you have investigated and come to some conclusions? Would there also not need to be a stage prior to your second stage to determine what are bad faith accusations and what are genuine allegations that perhaps don't meet the standards of evidence or are based on a misunderstanding in a climate of widespread racist abuse?

Given that stage 1 has been underway for some time and there has been no stage 2 I'm not sure what your objection is here.

I think the Labour Party should be as proactive and as vigilant in pursuing stage 2 as they have been with stage 1, if for no other reason than to protect those wrongly accused.
 
Is it the proposed chronology that you object to? Or moving beyond stage 1?
As to your second question. Number 1 needs to be a real "process" to not only adequately resolve individual cases but to see what steps the Labour party needs to take to combat antisemitism within the party. It should not be a formality a before getting on with the real work of getting a temporary advantage in internal Labour party squabbles. It should be about making the Labour Party, the left and wider society free of anti-Semitism.

Now we've dealt with after stage 1 perhaps we should think about before. Is the current process of investigating anti-Semitism in the Labour Party fit for purpose? It would need to be to deal with these cases and for various reasons not completely the fault of Corbyn and his allies it was not when it mattered.
 
As to your second question. Number 1 needs to be a real "process" to not only adequately resolve individual cases but to see what steps the Labour party needs to take to combat antisemitism within the party. It should not be a formality a before getting on with the real work of getting a temporary advantage in internal Labour party squabbles. It should be about making the Labour Party, the left and wider society free of anti-Semitism.

Now we've dealt with after stage 1 perhaps we should think about before. Is the current process of investigating anti-Semitism in the Labour Party fit for purpose? It would need to be to deal with these cases and for various reasons not completely the fault of Corbyn and his allies it was not when it mattered.


Reminds me of the line about Gerald Ford being so dumb he couldn't fart and chew gum at the same time.

Obviously you object to stage 2 in principle, fair enough, I can understand why you would, but enough with the dissembling.
 
Given that stage 1 has been underway for some time and there has been no stage 2 I'm not sure what your objection is here.

I think the Labour Party should be as proactive and as vigilant in pursuing stage 2 as they have been with stage 1, if for no other reason than to protect those wrongly accused.
Given that stage 1 has been underway for some time and there has been no stage 2 I'm not sure what your objection is here.

I think the Labour Party should be as proactive and as vigilant in pursuing stage 2 as they have been with stage 1, if for no other reason than to protect those wrongly accused.

Stage 1 has been criticised by (and accusations made against) factions within the Labour Party both for and against Corbyn as being subject to obstruction and political interference. Does that seem an adequate process to determine the truth in accusations before moving on to your stage 2?
 
Reminds me of the line about Gerald Ford being so dumb he couldn't fart and chew gum at the same time.

Obviously you object to stage 2 in principle, fair enough, I can understand why you would, but enough with the dissembling.
I'm not completely sure what your stage 2 is but I don't think the Labour Party being "as proactive and as vigilant in pursuing stage 2 as they have been with stage 1" is necessarily the right approach particularly as those wrongly accused would be cleared by an adequate stage 1. Before I can even think about talking about stage 2 in those terms we need some sort of shared understanding of stage 1.
 
Incidentally that bit where rummo was explaining how Jews have been caused “undue alarm” that’s very much how corbyn’s statement on the day report came out felt. When he said it’s the weaponisation that has ‘hurt Jewish people’ & which must not be repeated.
Not just condescending or faux concern but just one more little kick of the football. That’s how it felt, I’m not hypothesising as to his intentions or what he meant.
 
Incidentally that bit where rummo was explaining how Jews have been caused “undue alarm” that’s very much how corbyn’s statement on the day report came out felt. When he said it’s the weaponisation that has ‘hurt Jewish people’ & which must not be repeated.
Not just condescending or faux concern but just one more little kick of the football. That’s how it felt, I’m not hypothesising as to his intentions or what he meant.
Exactly. “How upset Jews must be by all this exaggeration”.

There’s a parallel with the Johnny Depp libel case. A court finds (in a case stupidly brought by Depp) that it’s OK to call Depp a wife beater, on account of how he beat his wife.

The response of some people? “Winona says he never beat her!” That is not evidence against him hitting Amber Heard.

“Amber Heard is a head case”. Again, not evidence that Depp didn’t hit her.

“But we’ve always liked Depp. He seems funny and plays the guitar too”. Totally irrelevant.

This is what rummo and others are doing with regards to antisemitism on the left in general and the Labour Party in particular. And it’s nauseating.
 
It is difficult, but I think there is little to be gained from further engagement with rummo, who is not here to have his mind changed. I think the base and revolting nature of his thinking has been adequately demonstrated for any undecided onlookers. There is nothing of value to be achieved from including him in any future conversation - I suggest not giving him any further satisfaction.
 
There appears to be a small group of people on here who have funnelled their thought into a cul de sac which is their happy place where they can bask in their self righteousness, congratulating one another about how virtuous they are and don't want to be disturbed.

It's like an eventide home for the intellect, where everything is to be comforting and safe.

Pathetic really.
 
Back
Top Bottom