advertisement


Labour at it again... anti-Semitism... #II

Seanm said:
I've said often enough that I think overestimating the influence of Israel, and in particular blaming Labour's woes on the Israel lobby, is borderline at best (and lets the UK off the hook). It can earn you a suspension at least from Labour in the wrong circumstances. But I wouldn't condemn anyone for stating those views, I think it's a dangerous misunderstanding of the situation rather than outright antisemitism ...
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

... it's really not up to me to police it on PFM, beyond my usual finger-wagging. But Labour officials regularly have to say, Well, what should we do with this guy? for stating exactly these views, in person or on social media.
Click to expand...

I disagree. pfm is a community and we are active members of it. iiuc we agree bigotry is unacceptable and we should do something about it.

I just don't think that's as easy as some people make out, and the proof of it is that a moderator here, who has clear views about antisemitism and about what Labour should do about it, is actually much more lax than Labour in dealing with this kind of thing, and this is with a handful of people, not hundreds of thousands.
Click to expand...

You previously asserted dealing with such ignorance is hard, but you haven't used a most basic tool provided by pfm management to help deal with this.
It's not like report automatically = ban, so your reticence in taking such an elementary step in the right direction is a puzzle.

edit: Seanm fwiw really appreciate you courageously putting your head above the parapet.
We all have blind spots & me more than average. fwiw I don't think you are at all bigoted let alone AS. I'm moderately dyslexic so apologies for my excessive directness

stephen bennett said:
Come on still. This is attempting to shut down an argument in the same way the use of ‘virtue signalling’ is.
Plus you ignored the context in which I made it.
Click to expand...

On the contrary I'm trying to stimulate the debate.
Possibly you ignored the context of my reply - nothing to do with virtue signalling.

The BBC commission a biased programme about Labour yet allow pretty much free reign to the Brexit company on their news outlets.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

And it does matter that there is/has been no Conservative investigation especially as we are having a Johnson coronation.
Click to expand...

On this thread that is whataboutery. I repeat: this is self defeating.

The BBC could have made an unbiased programme about racism in political parties/companies. Yet they did not do this.
I assume you’ve seen the reporting on the programme and the revelations about the producer and contributors? This doesn’t bother you?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any such claims from a credible source. If possible please cite one.

Mullardman said:
ISTM that you posted the above in response to this from me:
Click to expand...

correct

I stand by what I say because I do not believe that AS is a widespread 'thing' within Labour, but do not and cannot categorically say that there is no AS within Labour.
ISTM that quite apart from the confusion created by the failure on the part of many to differentiate between 'anti Semitic' and 'anti Israeli'.. Labour's biggest problem is in dealing with the notion of AS within its ranks.
Click to expand...

Possibly you've not got your priorities straight re : Labour tolerating bigotry.

'When did you stop beating your wife' can be a hellish question to deal with.
Click to expand...

It can, but I haven't asked any such loaded question.
 
Last edited:
Seanm said:
I agree. But managing that? The social media output of 100s of thousands of people? Hard enough without people deliberately blurring the line between members and non-members. And then what do you do with the stuff that's not actually antisemitic but a bit whiffy, when we're talking about ordinary members of the public, very likely politically inexperienced? Wouldn't education be better than excluding them from political participation, and the chance to learn, contribute? There's some stuff on this thread alone that is of this nature, and it's not from Labour members. Are you going to ban them? It's in your gift.
Click to expand...

Let’s make a start with the exceedingly eggy output of some very senior members, then let’s see what gets reported re social media content.

Seanm said:
I just don't think that's as easy as some people make out, and the proof of it is that a moderator here, who has clear views about antisemitism and about what Labour should do about it, is actually much more lax than Labour in dealing with this kind of thing, and this is with a handful of people, not hundreds of thousands.
Click to expand...

I’ve shut down threads, removed members posting rights, deleted many posts in the interests of fairness and unpleasantness. If the mod team perceive their to be a persistent racist tone to someone’s posts, they certainly will leave the building.

There are some Labour members who post on this thread who are I think in denial regarding this issue, and I tend to roll my eyes when I see yet another media plot or ludicrous conspiracy theory as to why it’s happening. It’s rather obvious it’s happening because the will isn’t there to deal effectively with it.
 
Still said:
Perhaps, but we are both entitled to our opinions.
istm if Jack had a physical disability it wouldn't have been mentioned by Joe in a similar manner.



You have no idea how to address Labour's anti-Semitism problems, or interest in potential solutions from others.
Thanks for the clarification.
Click to expand...
Whatever you say.

I don’t have the detail of the problem that I know to be factual. No doubt you do.
 
Still said:
I disagree. pfm is a community and we are active members of it. iiuc we agree bigotry is unacceptable and we should do something about it.
Click to expand...
I've reported posts I've thought were clearly bigoted. My point is that this particular kind of thing is difficult to call and I'd rather just address it than report it. I mean, you're pretty clear on all this, and on what should be done: do you think that overestimating Israeli influence is an expression of bigotry? Would you report it?
lordsummit said:
I’ve shut down threads, removed members posting rights, deleted many posts in the interests of fairness and unpleasantness. If the mod team perceive their to be a persistent racist tone to someone’s posts, they certainly will leave the building.

There are some Labour members who post on this thread who are I think in denial regarding this issue, and I tend to roll my eyes when I see yet another media plot or ludicrous conspiracy theory as to why it’s happening. It’s rather obvious it’s happening because the will isn’t there to deal effectively with it.
Click to expand...
I'm really not having a go, I think the place is well-moderated. But the kind of decisive action you're calling on Labour to take might well involve expelling people for single posts on the issue I've raised about Israeli influence. Certainly, the persistent denial you point to is already enough to invite disciplinary action in the Labour Party. You are yourself in a position to do something about the denialism you accuse members of here. Are you taking the actions against them that you're demanding Labour take? If not why not?

Edit: Jez's post would get him suspended from the Labour Party, no doubt. Not sure that would be the right way to go. Are you?
 
Seanm said:
I've reported posts I've thought were clearly bigoted.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Sorry for my foolish assumption.

My point is that this particular kind of thing is difficult to call and I'd rather just address it than report it.
I mean, you're pretty clear on all this, and on what should be done: do you think that overestimating Israeli influence is an expression of bigotry? Would you report it?
Click to expand...

If imo a post is a significant enough breach of pfm aup to require moderation I report it.
Ignoring bigotry helps no one, and that's what Tony L and mods ask of us.


Brian said:
Whatever you say.

I don’t have the detail of the problem that I know to be factual. No doubt you do.
Click to expand...

Illumination of your 'can't be arsed lights' duly noted.
 
In the week of the Panorama programme Andrew Neil gave Boris a proper kicking over the recent diplomatic scandal. Frustrating thing is that even though he exposed him as an untrustworthy liar he is still set to be the next PM.
 
Woodface said:
In the week of the Panorama programme Andrew Neil gave Boris a proper kicking over the recent diplomatic scandal. Frustrating thing is that even though he exposed him as an untrustworthy liar he is still set to be the next PM.
Click to expand...
Andrew Neil has special dispensation to tackle senior Tories, not least because he's part of the same far right publications/dodgy think tanks/Russian money set. As a reminder of what happens when someone without power and influence challenges Johnson on the BBC, see Aman Thakar's case: the BBC apologises profusely for the impertinence and joins in the monstering of the reprobate.

But the really pertinent comparison with the Panorama program was this week's Dispatches on Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Missed it? Easy done. You probably didn't see it discussed on Newsnight, breakfast TV and all the rest either: that's because it wasn't a story. And that's because it involved 1) Islamophobia and 2) the Conservative Party.
 
Well I must say I am shocked that my previous post has been deleted and would be very interested to see an explanation of why.. yes really, that wasn't rhetorical. After being banned from part 1 of this thread I was very careful in my choice of words in the removed post!

It seems to me that TPTB both in the Labour party, the press and yes here on pfm have kind of unilaterally decided that accusations of AS against Labour are proven and no counter argument shall be permitted?
 
Have you read the AUP, Jez?

Seanm said:
But the really pertinent comparison with the Panorama program was this week's Dispatches on Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Missed it? Easy done. You probably didn't see it discussed on Newsnight, breakfast TV and all the rest either: that's because it wasn't a story. And that's because it involved 1) Islamophobia and 2) the Conservative Party.
Click to expand...

whataboutery akimbo continues

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0003msy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48912065

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48688268

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48601134

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48434202

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47454993

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47633067
 
Arkless Electronics said:
Well I must say I am shocked that my previous post has been deleted and would be very interested to see an explanation of why.. yes really, that wasn't rhetorical. After being banned from part 1 of this thread I was very careful in my choice of words in the removed post!

It seems to me that TPTB both in the Labour party, the press and yes here on pfm have kind of unilaterally decided that accusations of AS against Labour are proven and no counter argument shall be permitted?
Click to expand...
About the only one who was 'shocked'
 
 
Seanm said:
Andrew Neil has special dispensation to tackle senior Tories, not least because he's part of the same far right publications/dodgy think tanks/Russian money set. As a reminder of what happens when someone without power and influence challenges Johnson on the BBC, see Aman Thakar's case: the BBC apologises profusely for the impertinence and joins in the monstering of the reprobate.

But the really pertinent comparison with the Panorama program was this week's Dispatches on Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Missed it? Easy done. You probably didn't see it discussed on Newsnight, breakfast TV and all the rest either: that's because it wasn't a story. And that's because it involved 1) Islamophobia and 2) the Conservative Party.
Click to expand...
Sorry to break this to you but I don't spend every waking hour watching documentaries on politics. I didn't watch the Panaroma programme either so at least I'm consistent. Brian Walden was also an excellent interviewer despite being fairly right wing, the two are not mutually exclusive. Your observation about relevant power is very valid though.
 
Arkless Electronics said:
Well I must say I am shocked that my previous post has been deleted and would be very interested to see an explanation of why.. yes really, that wasn't rhetorical. After being banned from part 1 of this thread I was very careful in my choice of words in the removed post!

It seems to me that TPTB both in the Labour party, the press and yes here on pfm have kind of unilaterally decided that accusations of AS against Labour are proven and no counter argument shall be permitted?
Click to expand...
Jez the post contained at least one antisemitic trope (Israelis controlling the world, basically), in the context of which a lot of the rest of it could be seen in the same way. I didn't report it, but I did use it as an indication of how difficult policing this issue is, and simply expelling members who unknowingly repeat common tropes is not necessarily the right way to go.
 
Still said:
How long ago did you read the aup?
imo your moderated post appeared *a bit* anti-Semitic, which is baned re: posting hateful sentiment.
Click to expand...

I am well aware of the adoption of IHRA etc and I was careful to keep within justified criticism of Israeli policy etc which is I believe (theoretically!) allowed. Surely even you could not deny the main gist of my (rather obvious I thought) argument that it is very much in the interest of Israel and its supporters to shut down criticism and to do anything possible to prevent a Corbyn gov getting in?
 
Still said:
Have you read the AUP, Jez?



whataboutery akimbo continues

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0003msy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48912065

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48688268

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48601134

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48434202

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47454993

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47633067
Click to expand...
The first link wasn't about the Dispatches programme so I assume the others aren't either. The fact that the BBC has on occasion covered Tory ISlamophobia isn't evidence of lack of bias, as you must know, having started a thread on bias. The whataboutery thing is just absurd: much of the discussion here concerns whether or not the attention Labour's getting is proportionate to the extent of the problem within the party, and one way of establishing that is to draw comparisons with a directly comparable situation. It might be whataboutery if I were denying that there is a problem, but I'm not.

Anyway, can't help thinking I should just have not got involved with this, as I'd intended. I'll leave it now. You work away.
 
I have a genuine question. Is it OK to reference Jack’s link to the Al Jazeera piece highlighting links between the Israeli embassy and groups inside political parties and more specifically to highlight the people in the Panorama programme who have unattributed links and paid positions with the Israeli embassy?
 
As I alluded to months ago, it's 'surprising' how an attack on the left at Oxford University a few years ago has now become all consuming. I think we need to re-orientate. There is a straightforward call for Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions originating from the Palestinians (not Labour Party members) against Israel. Which side are you on?
 
Arkless Electronics said:
I am well aware of the adoption of IHRA etc and I was careful to keep within justified criticism of Israeli policy etc which is I believe (theoretically!) allowed. Surely even you could not deny the main gist of my (rather obvious I thought) argument that it is very much in the interest of Israel and its supporters to shut down criticism and to do anything possible to prevent a Corbyn gov getting in?
Click to expand...

Given the topic (Labour's AS problem) your post had strong hints of Jewish conspiracy theories, which is an anti-Semitic trope as old as the hills.

Seanm said:
The first link wasn't about the Dispatches programme so I assume the others aren't either.
Click to expand...

What are such assumptions the mother of?

The fact that the BBC has on occasion covered Tory ISlamophobia isn't evidence of lack of bias, as you must know, having started a thread on bias.
Click to expand...

istm indicative your your bias in believing the BBC hasn't covered Islamphobia in Con PPP in depth.

The whataboutery thing is just absurd: much of the discussion here concerns whether or not the attention Labour's getting is proportionate to the extent of the problem within the party, and one way of establishing that is to draw comparisons with a directly comparable situation. It might be whataboutery if I were denying that there is a problem, but I'm not.
Click to expand...

It was whataboutery to make those claims on this thread due to the topic.
There is an off topic thread about Islamophobia in Con Party, but it's strangely quiet.

Anyway, can't help thinking I should just have not got involved with this, as I'd intended. I'll leave it now. You work away.
Click to expand...

fwiw I disagree and welcome your courage in doing so.
If you are half the Labour activist you appear to be how could you not be involved?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top