Jump to content

Politics


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Do you accept the difference between Zionism and Israeli illegal occupation and expansion?

 

Zionism pertaining to the creation of a Jewish homeland? Does it specify that it has to be Israel?

 

I think my longstanding difficulty with this has been that a bunch of non-white people were effectively shat upon from a great height. Had a Jewish homeland been somehow created in a white European state, or maybe if it had been developed gradually over time in the middle east, then I personally wouldn't have any discomfort with the situation. And I do feel that a homeland is vital to them and that they should of course have one (as should we all, I suppose). Does that make me a Zionist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

How is it clearly not anti semitism and what qualifies you to make that statement?

 

Well anti-semitism is of course a hatred of Jewish people, and Zionism is a political movement. That's my basis for the statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

Zionism pertaining to the creation of a Jewish homeland? Does it specify that it has to be Israel?

 

I think my longstanding difficulty with this has been that a bunch of non-white people were effectively shat upon from a great height. Had a Jewish homeland been somehow created in a white European state, or maybe if it had been developed gradually over time in the middle east, then I personally wouldn't have any discomfort with the situation. And I do feel that a homeland is vital to them and that they should of course have one (as should we all, I suppose). Does that make me a Zionist?

 

 

Why not Israel, it is historically the jewish homeland until they were shat on by white imperialism 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

 

Why not Israel, it is historically the jewish homeland until they were shat on by white imperialism 

 

Was it not the Ottomans that kicked them out of Israel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re not a genuine Jew, nor are you even allowed in the Labour Party, unless you condemn Zionism, according to this labour loon.

baddiel sums it up best

 

Edited by Dr Gloom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

A political movement based on Judaism

 

Yeah that's not the same. I could be an advocate for Zionism without being Jewish. If someone attacked me for it would that mean they were being antisemitic to me despite the fact that I'm not Jewish?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I think the "genuine Jews" comment is leading towards some manner of anti-semitic statement for sure. Is that the main issue?

 

I'm just a bit concerned that the main issue might be the attack on "Zionists". This is of course clearly not antisemitism (and would affect non-Jews in Labour as well, if I understand it correctly).

Again it's a reiteration of the old troupe that Jews are sneaky. They have hidden agendas, can't be trusted. And for that reason any 'non-geniune' Jews should have their basic rights removed.

It's not a good look, to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ewerk said:

Again it's a reiteration of the old troupe that Jews are sneaky. They have hidden agendas, can't be trusted. And for that reason any 'non-geniune' Jews should have their basic rights removed.

It's not a good look, to be honest.

 

Ok yes, I see this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

Yeah that's not the same. I could be an advocate for Zionism without being Jewish. If someone attacked me for it would that mean they were being antisemitic to me despite the fact that I'm not Jewish?

 

Anyone attacking jewish Zionists like this person is though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

They weren’t the first and Jews never completely left there has been a continuous jewish presence in Israel since biblical times.

 

The Ottomans, according to Google, took over in 1517 and held it for about 400 years. That's pre-colonialism for the white European powers. Not that I'm completely sure why we're arguing this particular point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Anyone attacking jewish Zionists like this person is though.

 

I'm not going to agree that attacking Zionism makes someone antisemitic by definition because once you get into the area of 'ideas' being untouchable and conflated with unchangeable attributes like race, it's a race to the bottom for ideologies all over the place.

 

I will agree that 100% of antisemites will be anti-Zionists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've reflected on it more anyway, and even the first part of my previous statement was nonsense. Clearly an idea can be racially problematic. Ethnic cleansing for instance is a political position which clearly is racially motivated and should be considered utterly untouchable.

 

I suppose then that all things being equal, the contention about Zionism comes down to whether or not it is 'racist' to deny Jewish people the right to take over the homeland of another group of people without the latter's consent, but while knowing that this was, some 500 years ago, actually a Jewish country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

Well obviously that's according to Ken Livingstone, his record on this may be a little patchy.

 

Oh right, I remember that now. Sorry :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

The Ottomans, according to Google, took over in 1517 and held it for about 400 years. That's pre-colonialism for the white European powers. Not that I'm completely sure why we're arguing this particular point.

 

Is that like Britain taking over Northern Ireland in 1649.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Genuine Jews are a pleasure to be around" 

 

Tell that to the people that have to share a pavement with our resident hover boarder ffs. Think before you make sweeping generalisations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Is that like Britain taking over Northern Ireland in 1649.

 

I'm not totally sure what point you're making here.

 

I looked into it further anyway, and suppose you mean the crusades (which I consider to be separate to what we broadly consider to be colonialism but I can see the logic). Apart from what looks like a few years when the Jews were fighting the Romans though, it appears it was Arab owned (later Muslim) for about 1500 years, with the exception of a 200 year Christian/Mongol/Muslim clusterfuck.

 

None of which means we can't say that this land is theirs, but I think if you're going to go back and rewrite wrongs from 1500 years ago in the same way that has been done for Israel... I mean the USA ceases to exist on the spot, for one thing.

Edited by Rayvin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.