To wonder why the Corbynite left is so obsessed with Palestine?

[Antigony]

To be clear - I don't agree with everything the Israeli government is doing.

But there are vast numbers of governments around the world who are doing terrible things. There's the Chinese government's treatment of the Uighur Muslims, the Australian government's offshore internment of asylum seekers for years driving some to suicide, the Saudi Arabian government's warmongering and bombing in Yemen, Maduro in Venezuela stopping food aid from reaching his starving people, the Iranian government hanging gay people etc.

Why have so many people on the British left seized on and fetishised this one injustice? Why do they all put Palestinian flags in their twitter bios and jump on every opportunity to criticise Israel, but don't do the same for these other countries?

Oh and the Corbyn "Israel has a right to exist" thing.

I love that.

It was 8 years ago, it was before the UK had adopted the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism.

Its also quoted out of context, as with many things that they try to pin on him.

I'm no fan, at all, I think he's weak and although the policies are good he will never be able to form a government, personally I think another leader would be able to win an election with them and he should resign.

However, this weak stuff smacks of desperation.

Corbynite Left don't like Saudi (wants two-state solution) but excuse Assad's crmes (wants one-state solution.) Complain about rightwing regimes in Colombia and Honduras but excuse Venezuela and Nicaragua. And not a word about Myanmar.

Everyone I know on the left is much more obsessed with Chile, Venezula, Zapatistas, Cuba, (in the context of US imperialism) and sometimes concerned about Palestinian rights, usually when there's a a high level of Israeli-Palestine conflict in the news. I don't wehre this idea that the left is only obsessed with Palestinian rights comes from.

But there is a standard we expect of a modern democracy that we do not expect of a dictatorship.

Reductio ad absudrum: the actions of Israel are worse than the Holocaust, because Germany was a dictatorship at the time so they can't be held to the standards of a democracy.

This is a really interesting discussion/fight. But, I think the real answer to the OPs question is that people are lazy and use it as political signaling. The vast majority of people with this stuff on their social media couldn’t give a 10th of the explaination people are giving on this thread.

Palestine = left for many people. And that’s a deep as the thought process runs, sadly.

@BorisBogtrotter

"Oh and the Corbyn "Israel has a right to exist" thing.

I love that.

It was 8 years ago, it was before the UK had adopted the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism.

Its also quoted out of context, as with many things that they try to pin on him"

It wasn't quoted out of context at all. Context was that he was interviewed on Iranian TV (oh, yes, Iranian TV, since we all know their very high standards of democracy) and asked about the BBC and Israel. So he goes off on one, insisting that the BBC is biased due to israeli pressure (without any evidence of such) and then, as examples of this bias, includes the BBC saying that Israel has a right to exist.

Here's the link to help you:

It was anti semitism, pure and simple.

But then we get Betrand saying

1. oh, he didn't say that
2. ok, he did say that but it was out of context
3. ok it was in context and, well,......
4. well, whatever, every criticism of Israel is considered anti semtiism.

I can see you're at point number 2 right now.

The link:

With all the context.

It is mostly lazy thinking.

Israel = "The West" Jews all come from Europe and America. (Most Israelis today descend from African, Asian and Ex-Soviet migration.)

Jews are white. Arabs are people of colour. (There are black jews in Israel)

Israelis are all jews. Palestinians are all Muslim. (One fifth of Israelis are Arabs. One third of Palestinians are Christian.)

Isarael (Founded by Kibbutzim socialists) is reactionary. Hamas (Throw gays off rooftops, drag beheaded corpses behind motorbikes) are progressive.

ETC

I don’t see how complaining about bbc bias is antisemitism. Aren’t Palestinians also semetic people or don’t they count? I do think Israel exerts an I fluence the UK. As a settler colony it relies on support from the west.

To be fair to the left I remember they were demonstrating against Apartheid and for LGBT rights when the right were calling Mandela a terrorist and the Murdoch press was full of moral panic about the loony left's obsession with gays and lesbians. I don't see their push for Palestinian rights as any different.

Corbyn quote on BBC bias:

"They are very assertive towards all journalists and the BBC itself. They challenge every single thing on reporting the whole time. “I think there is a bias towards saying that Israel is a democracy in the Middle East, Israel has a right to exist, Israel has its security concerns.”

Now as we know, there is debate about whether Israel is a democracy, there are debates about the creation of Israel, as shown here and questions over Israel's use of security issues for its actions.

What you, and those using this as a smear are doing are going back and quoting out of context, a point which is now held up as being anti semtitic, using a set of rules that were adopted after it was said.

Its tenuous to say the least.

It's also a question of proportion.

In terms of humanitarian crisis and human rights abuses, Yemen is not in the same league as Palestine. Syria is not in the same league. South Sudan, Myanmar, Russian actions all over. If you're motivated by humanitarianism, you have your pick of many many other far worse situations.

And I don't think it's just a question of democracy. Turkey is ostensibly a democracy but has imprisoned more journalists than any other nation and bombed the shit out of Kurdish civilians. Nary a word is heard about Turkey. Or Russia etc

I also don't recall there being any demonstrations against Myanmar and its genocide against the Rohingya back in the end of 2017 in the same way there were during the Gaza incursion. And, again, however bad Gaza was, what happened in Rakhine was many many many time worse. One million people were displaced as refugees, thousands murdered. But hardly seems to be in the public conscience.

It's not to say Israel shouldn't be held accountable, of course it should. That's not anti semtiism. But if there's a disporportionate interest in one situation not explained by the scale of the abuse or suffering or other objective characertisitcs, and where there is clear evidence already of anti semtiic statements, it's not a dififcult jump to figure out the motivation of this singular interest.

In this regard, I always found it intersting that Corbyn was a member of Deir Yassin Remembered, a group to memoralize a massacre which took place in the 1947/8 civil war. Now, it was certainly a tragedy and a war crime. But it's a well-documented massacre. Anyone studying Israeli/Palestinian history will know of it and it's not a forgotten massacre. So why would Corbyn choose Deir Yassin over the many many massacres which have taken place since 1947? Surely he would have his pick of many far worse massacre, far less well documented and, indeed, those committed by the British which might explain why he would want to ensure their rememberance. Say, for example, those in Kenya or Malaysia or India/Pakistan. As it ahppened "Deir Yassin remembered" was shown to be an anti-semitic group (surprise, surprise) which even many Palestinians refused to go near, including the Palestinian Solidarity Committee, but Corbyn (as usual) didn't know, didn't realise, didn't understand. But, aside from his usual ease with which he associates with anti semites, it is very telling that out of all the possible massacres of civilians which have happened in the world, many which truly have been forgotten, Corbyn decided on this one.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/20/jeremy-corbyns-10-year-association-group-denies-holocaust/

Only antisemites question whether Israel has a RIGHT to exist. As per the definition of antisemitism.
If you think Israel (as opposed to, say, every other country in the world) shouldn't exist, you are antisemite. I know that's quite hard for many to accept but that is just a definitive fact.

Again the links are tenuous.

Smacks of desperation.

"But, but, but, he was inlvolved with a group that someone else was involved with said this."

Why does no one apply the same standard to the Tories who sit in the EU parliament with the far right and many people who say similar things?

The problem you have really is that all of the evidence is tenuous at best and really shoehorned in there, whilst claims against other groups and parties who have similar, if not more blatant, actions are not treated in the same way.

He didn't question whether Israel has the right to exist, he says the BBC shows bias towards anything that questions Israel.

www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-viktor-orbans-war-on-george-soros-and-hungarys-jews/

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/viktor-orban-conservative-european-parliament-theresa-may-a8534401.html

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/viktor-orban-conservative-european-parliament-theresa-may-a8534401.html

...And peaking as one who did the essays on British decolonisation of the Middle-East, I am personally sick to the back teeth of having the simplistic pre-digested and regurgitated one-sided narrative of the Naqba inflcted on me: Entirely innocent Palestinians minding their own business until forcibly expelled by Zionists.

Not That Simple, and to say it is not that simple is not to endorse the equally false Zionist narrative of Palestinians all packing up and going of their own accord under duress from their pro-Nazi leadership.

Related to this is the narrative of Britian conspiring to create Israel when the UK govt at the time it got out fully expected and probably wanted the infant to be strangled at birth by the overhwhelming might of seven Arab armies. Understand why that war was somehow lost and you begin to get a handle on the continuing dispute.

as a part whose grandad was kicked out of the country as a kid in 1948 and his family is scattered across the globe... I wonder what kind of human you have to be to “wonder” why any human being would be overly invested in Palestine... when it is an ongoing issue of people’s lands being swollen and lives being taking and kids in prisons.

“I don’t agree with the Israeli government” is an understatement. And whoever said it’s antisemitism is making my blood bloody boil from the stupidity.

Palestinians consider themselves semites as well, the descendants of Sam the son of Noah. So consider yourself an anti Semite if you want to minimize the genocides to them too.

Perhaps because Britain was the direct enabler for these people’s decades worth of suffering and genocides and Continues to be, because a simple stance from Britain and US could end this. Perhaps that’s why??

Perhaps have you also “wondered” why Europe is so “obsessed” with the hollocuast? Should we minimize it too since I’m sure there were other things happening at the time.

The conflict between Saudi and Yemen is a serious one that saddens me, supplying weapons to them is quite shit and Corbyn has spoken about that.

But what’s happening in Palestine is an indication of racism and ethnic cleansing, and that is a bigger issue to turn a blind eye to.

I have little trust in whoever doesn’t sympathize

My understanding of Corbyn in that clip is that he is objecting to the fact that every single criticism or questioning of Israeli government policy is met with “But Israel is a democracy, Israel has a right to exist, Israel has security concerns”. As if those statements somehow legitimize bombing civilians.

The same tactics are used on here. Put crudely. Person A. “Israel is behaving atrociously.” Person B “ Are you denying Israel’s right to exist?”

@BorisBogtrotter

The evidence is there and overwhelming - there's so so much and I haven't the time to start rehashing it as it's all out there. You refuse to see it. The fact that Corbyn's own words regarding 'Israel's right to exist' are twisted in to 'oh, he was just talking about BBC bias' (on Iranian TV, shame he hasn't some English irony) just really says it all.

I don’t agree with the definition of antisemitism to only include Jews, surely that anti Jewish. Palestinians are semites. Many Arab people see Israel as a colony like when France was in Algeria. They want an end to colonial rule. I don’t see that as anti semetic although it would fit the current definition. Personally I think disbanding Israel is extreme viewpoint although understandable for Arab people. Similarly I think wanting Palestine to not exist, for the Palestinian people to go elsewhere is also an extreme viewpoint.
My viewpoint is that Isreal has to stay but the status quo is not acceptable for the Palestinians. Something must change.

Surely though if you are pro Israeli or pro Palestine we all want the same thing which is Peace.
I saw Trump saying he wanted to be the broker of peace in this region. I wonder what he means by that. Cynically I think it mean the status quo with the Palestinians bombed into submission.

@MillytantForceit
Completely agree. It was complex and it still is complex. Demonizing one side and beatifying the other helps no one.

Incidentally, I hope all the Corbyn is guilty by association people are publically condemning May’s association with the Saudis. And her Party’s friendship with Pinochet. To name but two.

Like I said, you are applying the IHRA definition before the UK had adopted it, in an interview 8 years ago.

He was talking about BBC bias, he didn'#t say or question himself Israel's right to exist.

Bertrand's understanding of it is correct, the continual twisting of every and any event that could possibly be considered anti Semitic by Corbyn is ridiculous.

@BetrandRussell

Stop excusing him. That's not what he said at all. His words were clear and distinct. Or he's a complete idiot (which is admittedly a reasonable assumption too)