padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
it is tough, but it can be done

in either case, the stronger your words and actions are, the more you need to be able to justify them as legitimate

Corbyn has a long history of abhorrent words and actions, and as far as I can see no defense beyond "of course I'm not an anti-Semite! look at all this other stuff I've done"
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Scattered thoughts:

From Barty's original post, (1) and (2) are true - clearly there is an issue on the left around anti-Semitism, for the reasons Padraig outlines. And it's not new. From the Jewish people I know, anti-Semitism has increased recently, and how could one not hold Corbyn partly responsible for that?

I think the thread contains a false premise though, (3) - "our outrage would be far stronger had the issue centred around gay people, muslims, black people, etc". I don't see much outrage over discrimination in general - most of it goes unnoticed because it is so much a part of societal fabric. Racism. homophobia etc are endemic in this society, and only the absolute most egregious stuff is even commented upon*. And racism and discrimination function in different ways against different groups - there is not straight equivalence. This seems obvious.

Also it seems obvious that these issues cannot be separated and pitted against each other, as though they were not interconnected and many people do not receive discrimination on multiple levels - for a start, many Jews are not white, and so experience multiple levels of racism.

The 'I'm going to vote for the Lib Dems rather than Labour because there is racism within Labour' is a headscratcher too. Voting for laws that oppress poor people (who disproportionately fall into discriminated-against groups, of course) through sadistic austerity doesn't count? It sure as hell matters to poor Jewish people, for example...

*e.g. to turn your point on its head, the stuff I heard said openly at my work yesterday about gay people (not even to mention the incessant coded racist comments vs Meghan Markle...) - had 'similar' things (and of course the point is that there IS no direct mapping) been said against Jewish people, might have resulted in a call to the police, and certainly a sacking. Discriminations simply do not work in the same way, and so blunt comparison leads nowhere.
 
Last edited:

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Corbyn has a long history of abhorrent words and actions, and as far as I can see no defense beyond "of course I'm not an anti-Semite! look at all this other stuff I've done"

This is the key point, he's using his anti-racist activity in other areas as currency.

This is obviously morally bankrupt, and it is the way that wider society tends to work. The thing about Corbyn is that he's unfortunately not very different at all from all the other politicians. He's just operating in a different formation, as it were.
 
Last edited:

version

Well-known member
I think the hyperpartisan nature of politics these days exacerbates the situation as people on the left can surely see that when Corbyn does something and they attack him for it they're helping the right whereas when Boris or whoever says something the right don't give a shit and back him regardless.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
And racism and discrimination function in different ways against different groups - there is not straight equivalence...it seems obvious that these issues cannot be separated and pitted against each other, as though they were not interconnected
the basic case for intersectionality, clearly and well stated. definitely agree, tho of course it gets messier in practice.

it seems pretty clear that anti-Semitism is perceived differently b/c 1) white Jews can mostly "pass" 2) Jews are generally thought of as well off, and possibly 3) enough with the Holocaust already

in all cases, there's the idea or feeling that Jews can't be oppressed in the same way as other minorities and/or their oppression is a thing of the past

that latter seems to run as a pretty strong undercurrent in modern European anti-Semitism, as with Dieudonne M'Bala

like "how can I be oppressing Jews? they run the world lol j/k (but no, really). why can't I make Holocaust jokes? it was a long time ago. my people have it so much worse than them now."
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
it's some real sad self-divide and conquer business

what's saddest to me is that all those first two stereotypes - passing, and affluence - have long, ugly histories behind them

(some of that history was perpetrated by Jews, no doubt - if never on a systemic level, until possibly - depending how one views it - Israel)

and they're the same goddamn stereotypes that existed 100 years ago
 

john eden

male pale and stale
people don't really see the jews as a victimised minority. they see them as holding disproportionate levels of political and economic power. so that's a big part of it i think.

I think this depends on where you live.

In Stamford Hill I have seen outright racist verbal abuse of Jewish people on the streets - and there is a lot more that get reported in the Hackney Gazette. A lot of the local jewish community centres pay for their own security guards.

A bunch of neo-nazis (mainly polish skinheads) marched through Clapton a few years back allegedly to protest about the Shomrim (a beefed up Jewish neighbourhood watch / community patrol).
 

john eden

male pale and stale
Also wrt to Corbyn the point has to be made that in politics your weak points will be weaponised by your opponents. That is what politics IS to a large degree.

Complaining about it is like complaining that rain is making you wet.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
This is the key point, he's using his anti-racist activity in other areas as currency.

This is obviously morally bankrupt, and it is the way that wider society tends to work. The thing about Corbyn is that he's unfortunately not very different at all from all the other politicians. He's just operating in a different formation, as it were.

That's far too calculating and cynical. Corbyn isn't cynical. I think it's more that he's dedicated his entire life to anti-racist activity, so accusations of anti-semitism have been met with utter incredulity on his part. And he can dismiss them even more easily when they come as part of vicious political attacks which he is well practised in ignoring. All of that has left him wrong-footed on this issue and floundering about.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
I wouldn't use the word cynicism to describe it, rather a certain point at which he stops thinking about racism because he's convinced it could never apply to him (can call this arrogance, but not attached to that word). And that's a huge problem, as well as a misunderstanding of what racism is.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
it's some real sad self-divide and conquer business

what's saddest to me is that all those first two stereotypes - passing, and affluence - have long, ugly histories behind them

(some of that history was perpetrated by Jews, no doubt - if never on a systemic level, until possibly - depending how one views it - Israel)

and they're the same goddamn stereotypes that existed 100 years ago

Perhaps the reason the affluence stereotype persists is that anti-Semitism fulfils a function for certain people to discharge hatreds 'upwards' (by alleging that there is a group of people who exert power over society), whereas other racisms generally fulfil a function for people to discharge hatreds 'downwards'? And there seems to be something in human beings that cleaves to both of these ways of hating, and then simply ignores the actual diversity within the groups that are hated, because it runs counter to these established, almost archetypal, hierarchical narratives.
 

version

Well-known member
Did anyone follow the stuff with Ilhan Omar in the US, Bernie saying the US should stop aid to Israel etc? I only saw bits and pieces and couldn't quite work out what the situation was.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
I wouldn't use the word cynicism to describe it, rather a certain point at which he stops thinking about racism because he's convinced it could never apply to him (can call this arrogance, but not attached to that word). And that's a huge problem, as well as a misunderstanding of what racism is.

"complacency" is perhaps the word
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
I think it's a good word. It's this idea that if one does enough work in a particular field, one can stop thinking about it. But you can never stop thinking, especially about how different people's experiences are.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I think the hyperpartisan nature of politics these days exacerbates the situation as people on the left can surely see that when Corbyn does something and they attack him for it they're helping the right whereas when Boris or whoever says something the right don't give a shit and back him regardless.

Ultimately, this is part and parcel of the inherent disadvantage that progressive parties have compared to conservative ones. Yes, arguably Labour is being held to a higher standard over antisemitism than the Tory party is over Islamophobia, but in a sense, that is right and proper. Labour are supposed to be the good guys on this sort of thing.

I mean obviously the Telegraph would jizz in its collective pants if it found out that Caroline Lucas owned a huge gas-guzzling 4x4, even if Boris Johnson owned one too. But they wouldn't actually be wrong in pointing out that this would constitute a far greater hypocrisy on the part of a Green Party leader than it would in the leader of a party that is in no way associated with the green movement and in fact has close ties to the fossil fuel industry.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Perhaps the reason the affluence stereotype persists is that anti-Semitism fulfils a function for certain people to discharge hatreds 'upwards' (by alleging that there is a group of people who exert power over society), whereas other racisms generally fulfil a function for people to discharge hatreds 'downwards'? And there seems to be something in human beings that cleaves to both of these ways of hating
there is probably something in that

but I would be curious to hear other examples of groups - religions, ethnicities - besides Jews, that have been the target of similar upward bigotry as a people, not as individuals

because I can think of similar cases of people hating insular outside groups - ethnic Chinese in SE Asia, Sikhs in India outside Punjab, etc - but no one is accusing them of running the world

that seems unique to Jews, and I would assume it's tied up with European colonialism, and the traditional Jewish role as bankers, financiers, merchants

there are very specific historical reasons for that have to do with medieval European society - the class structure of feudalism, Church ban on usury, etc - rather than anything inherent to Judaism

it contains many bitter ironies - for one, that unsurprisingly only a very tiny minority Jews were fabulously wealthy bankers

and another, that outside that elite level, Jewish commerce was largely displaced by the Christian bourgeois once modern capitalism got going/usury restrictions were done away with
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
no one accuses, say, the Swiss of secretly running world despite their proliferation as bankers

Jews are perceived as both insular/clannish (not untrue, depending on the Jews) and as rootless cosmopolitan outsiders

it's the combination of punching upward, and vulnerability

the perfect foil on which to blame all your problems
 
Top