Yep. You seem unaware of the history of most modern European nations, however.
Conflict between Palestine and Israel escalates
- Thread starter dreng3
- Start date
A Fraught Question for the Moment: Is Anti-Zionism Always Antisemitic?
From the halls of Congress to America’s streets and universities, a once largely academic issue has roiled national discourse, inciting accusations of bigotry and countercharges of bullying.
Generally no; Anti-Zionism isn't always antisemitic. That said the Jewish state of Israel should exist, but it shouldn't expand. But apparently, I am to the
US Congress HR888 | 2023-2024 | 118th Congress
Roll Call (2023-11-28) Reaffirming the State of Israel's right to exist. [Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.]
Because its a cudgel with which to beat Labour.
Same reason they'd use any excuse to label Labour as anti-worker, without ever once giving a solitary shit about workers.
But where would they get the idea and the reasonable clout to make that argument?
The idea is obvious, and the British press have had the clout to make it work arguably since before Israel was established.
Really? To conflate criticism of a state with an associated group is an extremely common tactic, with which anyone who has cursory knowledge of spin and smear tactics is familiar. That approach has been extensively used for centuries-- and I've repeatedly been accused of 'russophobia' for criticising the actions of the Russian government and military in another thread on this very forum.
Last edited:
Are you trying to imply that supporters of a particular state policy might try to artificially conflate hatred of their policy for hatred of a country or ethnic group?
You really can't stand to admit I'm right about even the tiniest thing, can you?
This seems like you've just checkmated yourself.
The Troubles did not end because the UK were finally able to drive all the Irish out after razing Dublin, what is the point of your example?
If the IRA had organized a day of mass rape, murder, and kidnapping of the English, that definitely could have happened.
Supporters of a state policy might do it. Or any cynical actor looking for a cudgel might do it. Its a remarkably common tactic.
You're simply wrong if you think every modern nation started in brutal conquest, and that this therefore justifies Israel acting with brutality against the Palestinians.
I can only assume you've failed to follow the point being made, then.
The imminent threat of UN school building has been annihilated, evil has been defeated, pop the champagne!
feels like am completely losing my mind, it just won't stop getting worse
feels like am completely losing my mind, it just won't stop getting worse
Last edited:
This is, flat out, an attempt to distract and obfuscate the discussion and its point. Now that you've been faced with a contention you know you cannot challenge, you're trying to keep it away from active discussion.
Then he should be excruciatingly aware of the approximately seventy years' worth of international law and legal precedent that indisputably identifies what is going on in Gaza now as genocide, and the treatment of Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli government as apartheid. This goes so far as to include recorded, public, usually live, verbal and written statements by Israeli public officials speaking as representatives of the Israeli government and military, indisputably proving intent which is almost always the most difficult legal prong and that with the highest burden of proof.
Except, it's not just about "one brief and unclear statement on a radio show", is it. It's about continued political and materiel support for Israeli over the past twenty years as Likud (and Netanyahu's political faction) drug it towards neofascism. It's about other statements being made now in support of Israel and its genocidal actions. It's about his ties to Labour Together and Third Way-ism. It's about leading the right-wing purge of left-wing Labour members under false pretense, whilst simultaneously disregarding the actual racism actively committed by his own faction.
No, the preponderance of the evidence is that Starmer actively supports this. What he may or may not think behind closed doors and away from cameras is entirely immaterial to the political positions and policies he presents. Of course that's hardly more than cold comfort, the Labour files leaks and Starmer's public disregard for the Forde report except for those excepts which helped him seize the party and purge dissent clearly demonstrate what he thinks when cameras and mics aren't on.
Ah yes, the infamous political purity test known as "opposing genocide and genocide apologists/deniers/enablers".
How unfair it is to judge neoliberal politicians on the disgusting political positions they publicly endorse.
Zionism could be considered in many ways, which run anywhere from belief in a Jewish state at all, to much more specific claims about what the Jewish state should be. Early Zionists, for instance, looked at options for a Jewish state in places all over the world. Modern Zionism means Israel, but does not necessarily in the minds of many people mean that Israel gets to occupy the entirety of old Mandate Palestine, especially at the further cost of the Palestinian Arabs.
So you think that on 11th October 2023, more than two weeks before Israel launched its invastion of Gaza, Starmer should have taken into account all the crimes by Israel up to 13th December 2023?
You appear to not realise that the primary function of the Labour Party is to work for the interests of the British people and country as a whole, preferably by getting elected.
You have no moral high ground here, because anything I have said about this issue isn't a patch on your implicit support for Russia attempting to erase Ukraine. You want to throw that accusation at others then you are just a hypocrite.
Yes, and the same goes for leftists and their disgusting political positions.
And said cynical actors are able to make that accusation because of the supporters. Said supporters are also going to try and make this claim in general in public to create an air of it being true. So guess what? The pressure came from Zionists.
What...? Cynical actors don't need genuine supporters of the ideology to make the argument. They just need people who're disposed to condemn racism, and also can't very well tell the difference between criticism of a state and racism.
Hence why the accusation of 'russophobia' was thrown at people who criticised the Russian government's invasion. That accusation didn't require loads of casual readers to be sympathetic with Russian imperialism. It was just a lazy smear.