The New Leader of the Labour Party

[Numero Veinticinco]

16 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I believe in the right of the Jewish people to self-determination. What would you call that?

I’d not call it Zionism, which even in the most basic definition - which neglects all context and history - is a nationalistic position. That’s clearly different to believing in the right to self-determination. 

 

So, I’ll elaborate. Do you support nations being made based upon a ethnic and/or religious basis. White states. Muslim states. Jewish states. I don’t. I’ve no issue with Israel continuing to exist - as if I could do anything about it even if I did - now that it does, but it shouldn’t, in my view, be a Jewish state. Just a democratic state. I feel the same about Islamic states. It doesn’t sit right with me. 

Following in from that, defined as many of its proponents as a nationalist movement for a Jewish state, are you a Zionist? It’s not a trick question, I’ve just defined it. I’m not going to turn around and say ‘ha! You support murder!’. I’m questioning your view on legitimate foundational principles for a state. 

[Bjornebye]

26 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I believe in the right of the Jewish people to self-determination. What would you call that?

I'm pretty certain most normal human beings would also believe in that right. The difference here is do you believe in it at the expense of the lives of innocent people in their home land while it is occupied? 

 

Israel is committing genocide and is illegal occupying land that isn't theirs with a "we are more important, you are beneath us, we will destroy you for our own gains" attitude and by and large the worlds governments let them get along with it and those few voices who speak out against it are automatically called Anti-Semitic. 

 

Labour MP's are terrified of being decent human beings like Corbyn and denouncing Israels atrocities because they know the anti-semitic label will be thrown at them and they will lose via media lies and smear. 

 

This is not up for debate. Its an absolute fact. It is a fucking disgrace. Corbin has more decency in his left foot than any of these cunts. 

[aRdja]

8 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I’ve no issue with Israel continuing to exist - as if I could do anything about it even if I did - now that it does, but it shouldn’t, in my view, be a Jewish state. Just a democratic state.

I’ve always argued that the most democratic, by far, is a one-state solution wherein every person has the same right as another regardless of race and religion. However I do accept that expressing that view would be tantamount to political suicide in the current political climate.

[Bjornebye]

11 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I’d not call it Zionism, which even in the most basic definition - which neglects all context and history - is a nationalistic position. That’s clearly different to believing in the right to self-determination. 

 

So, I’ll elaborate. Do you support nations being made based upon a ethnic and/or religious basis. White states. Muslim states. Jewish states. I don’t. I’ve no issue with Israel continuing to exist - as if I could do anything about it even if I did - now that it does, but it shouldn’t, in my view, be a Jewish state. Just a democratic state. I feel the same about Islamic states. It doesn’t sit right with me. 

Following in from that, defined as many of its proponents as a nationalist movement for a Jewish state, are you a Zionist? It’s not a trick question, I’ve just defined it. I’m not going to turn around and say ‘ha! You support murder!’. I’m questioning your view on legitimate foundational principles for a state. 

 

Everyone is scared of speaking out against the murdering fucking bastards for fear of being labelled.

 

Corrupt cunts. 

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, viRdjil said:

I’ve always argued that the most democratic, by far, is a one state solution wherein every person has the same right as another regardless of race and religion. However I do accept that expressing that view would be tantamount to political suicide.

Communist 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, viRdjil said:

I’ve always argued that the most democratic by far is a one state solution wherein every person has the sam right as another regardless of race and religion. However I do accept that expressing that view would be tantamount to political suicide.

Aside from a belief that it’s unlikely to be accepted by either side, it would be a much better solution. One person, one vote, equal rights. Like do many things in that region, it sounds great but it’s entirely questionable whether it could work in practice. 

[aRdja]

3 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Aside from a belief that it’s unlikely to be accepted by either side, it would be a much better solution. One person, one vote, equal rights. Like do many things in that region, it sounds great but it’s entirely questionable whether it could work in practice. 

They’re already living side-by-side in the settlements without killing each other (in the main).

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, viRdjil said:

They’re already living side-by-side in the settlements.

Righto. That’s that sorted then. 

[aRdja]

7 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Communist 

Yep including Kibbutz too.

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Yep including Kibbutz too.

Maybe the government could take example from the many decent Jewish people out there eh. 

[SasaS]

35 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I’ve always argued that the most democratic, by far, is a one-state solution wherein every person has the same right as another regardless of race and religion. However I do accept that expressing that view would be tantamount to political suicide in the current political climate.

 

You already have a relatively democratic (for that region) one-state solution with Arab minority represented in the parliament within Israel, the problems begin when you factor in nationalism and democracy goes out of the window. Most Jews in Israel want Israel to be a guaranteed Jewish majority state, Palestinians would make that impossible, therefore it seems better to separate them or hope that somehow Zionism or Palestinian nationalist feelings would suddenly go away. Which is not going to happen, because what would be the point of Israel then?  

[SasaS]

And now, Trans Rights.

[moof]

1 hour ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Oh the irony. 

Lol. The hubris of ignorance speaks up. 
 

You have very little of value to add to this conversation 

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I’d not call it Zionism, which even in the most basic definition - which neglects all context and history - is a nationalistic position. That’s clearly different to believing in the right to self-determination. 

 

So, I’ll elaborate. Do you support nations being made based upon a ethnic and/or religious basis. White states. Muslim states. Jewish states. I don’t. I’ve no issue with Israel continuing to exist - as if I could do anything about it even if I did - now that it does, but it shouldn’t, in my view, be a Jewish state. Just a democratic state. I feel the same about Islamic states. It doesn’t sit right with me. 

Following in from that, defined as many of its proponents as a nationalist movement for a Jewish state, are you a Zionist? It’s not a trick question, I’ve just defined it. I’m not going to turn around and say ‘ha! You support murder!’. I’m questioning your view on legitimate foundational principles for a state. 

 

Any belief in the right of a nation of people to self-determination would appear to be inherently "nationalistic", would it not?

 

In a perfect world I'd prefer that nations were not organised along ethnic lines - in actuality, I'd prefer a world with a much looser type of "nation" altogether - but this is an imperfect world, and nations based on ethnicity are an imperfect solution to the intractable problem of ethnic conflict. One day in the distant future I hope it won't be necessary, but until then we have a Croatia for the Croats, a France for the French, an Ireland for the Irish and, indeed, an Israel for the Hebrews.

 

If I am going by the established definition - "the movement which supported first the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland and now supports the continuation of a Jewish state in Israel" - then I am as much of a Zionist as the Labour Party leadership contenders.

 

Honestly though, it doesn't really matter what you want to call it. What matters is that the next leader of Labour will definitely be someone who has sympathy with the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. And that is all that anyone ever wanted. Acceptance of its right to exist. After five years of a leader who openly consorted with people who were dedicated to wiping it off the face of the planet, it will be a very welcome return to normality.

[Bjornebye]

7 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Any belief in the right of a nation of people to self-determination would appear to be inherently "nationalistic", would it not?

 

In a perfect world I'd prefer that nations were not organised along ethnic lines - in actuality, I'd prefer a world with a much looser type of "nation" altogether - but this is an imperfect world, and nations based on ethnicity are an imperfect solution to the intractable problem of ethnic conflict. One day in the distant future I hope it won't be necessary, but until then we have a Croatia for the Croats, a France for the French, an Ireland for the Irish and, indeed, an Israel for the Hebrews.

 

If I am going by the established definition - "the movement which supported first the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland and now supports the continuation of a Jewish state in Israel" - then I am as much of a Zionist as the Labour Party leadership contenders.

 

Honestly though, it doesn't really matter what you want to call it. What matters is that the next leader of Labour will definitely be someone who has sympathy with the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. And that is all that anyone ever wanted. Acceptance of its right to exist. After five years of a leader who openly consorted with people who were dedicated to wiping it off the face of the planet, it will be a very welcome return to normality.

France and Ireland are very much multi-cultural. 

 

Israel is dedicated to wiping Palestinians out for their land for the benefit of its own people. I support anyone who fights for freedom. Not always the way they go about it of course but their right to fight back absolutely. Stop making Israel out to be the victim. It isn't. It is a genocidal bully who screams blue murder when people point out that what they are doing is wrong. 

 

Interesting that its picked up so much that Corbyn met with Hamas when in-fact the government itself is one of the biggest terrorists on the planet. Arms deals with the Saudis and god knows who else just gets ignored because you know... we can't rock that greed boat can we. 

[Strontium]

Just now, Bjornebye said:

France and Ireland are all vastly multi-cultural lands. 

 

France certainly is something of a melting pot, but the majority of people in those countries are ethnic French and ethnic Irish. And let us not forget that until recently, the Republic of Ireland laid territorial claim to a piece of the UK, based on the fact that some of the people living there self-identify as Irish.

 

I'm not even touching the rest of your post. But I am shaking my head.

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

France certainly is something of a melting pot, but the majority of people in those countries are ethnic French and ethnic Irish. And let us not forget that until recently, the Republic of Ireland laid territorial claim to a piece of the UK, based on the fact that some of the people living there self-identify as Irish.

 

I'm not even touching the rest of your post. But I am shaking my head.

I am too SD. I am too. Its out of pity. 

[moof]

“Return to normality”

 

 

It’s just meaningless prevarication. Doublespeak. “Normality” in this instance is effectively the legitimisation of a genocidal ideology. 

[polymerpunkah]

A Canada for Les Canadiens?

[lifetime fan]

17 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

France certainly is something of a melting pot, but the majority of people in those countries are ethnic French and ethnic Irish. And let us not forget that until recently, the Republic of Ireland laid territorial claim to a piece of the UK, based on the fact that some of the people living there self-identify as Irish.

 

I'm not even touching the rest of your post. But I am shaking my head.

 

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Go far enough back and none of us have a claim to any land. Just depends where you draw the line.

[Stickman]

Great thread

 

 

[Jairzinho]

1 hour ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

 

 

Honestly though, it doesn't really matter what you want to call it. What matters is that the next leader of Labour will definitely be someone who has sympathy with the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. And that is all that anyone ever wanted. Acceptance of its right to exist. 

Why do you write this shit? You don't believe it. You're not an imbecile.

[sir roger]

I genuinely can't remember a single person in the Labour party or on here denying Israel's right to exist. People have criticised actions of its government internally and against their neighbours, but as SD shows this is being twisted into a ridiculous ' They want to destroy us ' narrative.

[Strontium]

20 minutes ago, sir roger said:

I genuinely can't remember a single person in the Labour party or on here denying Israel's right to exist.

 

The internet remembers so you don't have to.

 

https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/29/jeremy-corbyn-questions-israels-right-exist-resurfaced-interview-11240739/

 

Jeremy Corbyn questions Israel’s ‘right to exist’ in resurfaced interview