"The only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews" (part three)

[stomachamelon]

Carrying on from part two....

While I appreciate the validity of what's written on the t-shirts, the choice of colour scheme feels a bit insensitive. It's the colours of the Palestinian flag, not the Hamas flag/logo, and could be felt to be supporting the "all Palestinians are Hamas" hate speech which is very upsetting to a lot of people.

That seems to be a legitimate criticism, Scirocco. I wouldn't have chosen those particular colours.

Fair point @Scirocco

Ok, fair point, hope they haven't made too many in that design.....but if it's screen print it can be changed.

Thanks @Dulra for your input on this issue.

I have also condemned antisemitism multiple times. However when I’ve tried to join in with discussions about what to do, I have been flamed because I would rather advocate for education, in the first instance, when it seems like ignorance is at play, and don’t agree with calling people ‘useful idiots’, ‘scarf wearing idiots’ or ‘shitbags’. I think I’ve become a bit of a verbal punch bag for some of the posters misplaced anger! Which is sad because I am genuinely against all types of prejudice.

@noblegiraffe you could pull out your list of demands for the protest and put it in a separate thread so it doesn’t get lost?
It is a useful list and if it’s framed more in the line of what can be done to help the Jewish community feel safer, and not inadvertently OK antisemitism, then maybe more people will read it the right way.

Somewhat relevant to this thread, I thought, is Daniel Sugarman's X post on Jews and Zionism, for anyone interested:

https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/1769650275025817658

I wasn’t asking for an opinion of the character of the author of the statement, but it helps that you agree he is not a person of unassailable character.

I am more asking for your opinion on why he made the statement that
“The only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews"

I don’t believe he really cares about us or about antisemtism. I feel like he was trolling and saying something provocative and divisive because this statement places all the marchers in opposition to British Jews.

Your list makes me more anxious because it agrees with the author that the marchers are in opposition to the very existence of British Jews just living our lives. Your list gives his comment 100% credence as if it were true that “The only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews"

It is rhetoric of division that is antisemitic imho and has had a profound effect on dividing Jewish communities:
“I spoke to many of the hundreds of Jewish marchers for peace who were outraged to be characterised as extremists.
Simon Shaw, a politics teacher from Redbridge, east London, carried a placard reading “I’m Jewish and I feel totally safe marching for Palestine in London.” He rejected any idea that the Jewish community spoke with one voice: “I come from a different London Jewish tradition to that which the media like to present,” he said, “I’m culturally Jewish but anti-Zionist and atheist, socialist. I’m going to see the new musical about the [anti-fascist] Cable Street protest after this; I see that as my tradition.”
That’s not to say that the rhetoric of division is not potent. On Friday I spoke to Jake Wallis Simons, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle. He suggested to me that in his view the majority of Jews are avoiding London on these marching Saturdays because of fears of intimidation. “From the perspective of how isolated many Jews feel at the moment,” he said, “I think hearing the prime minister stand up against a threat that feels very vivid to us came as a great relief. We finally felt somebody was drawing a line in the sand.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/09/im-jewish-and-feel-totally-safe-marching-for-gaza-london-protesters-defy-sunaks-extremist-slur

Your list makes me more anxious because it agrees with the author that the marchers are in opposition to the very existence of British Jews just living our lives.

Well that's just balls, isn't it?

The list simply states that antisemitic, intimidating and terrorist supporting behaviours shouldn't be tolerated on the marches. The list was compiled from behaviour that has been observed on the marches.

Why would you shy away from saying that behaviour is unacceptable?

@25milesfromhome

It doesn’t assume British Jews are intimidated
We may have to agree to disagree because someone stating that
“the only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews” has to presuppose that the marches are intimidating British Jews in order to proclaim this statement as if it were fact.

*This actually comes across as someone who’s fearful that their fellow protestors will turn on them if they don’t virtue signal in the approved way.. *
Your impolite tone aside, yes I am fearful because the statement is divisive and othering. It attempts to place British Jews and the marchers in direct opposition to each other. This isn’t about me being afraid I’m not “virtue signalling” in “the approved way” but about feeling secure and safe to participate in the marches despite someone having told the whole world that the “the only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews” and then there being editorials and MPs speaking out weekly on what their token Jew thinks about the marches. Why is the focus on what we think? This is as insulting as interviewing a token Muslim in the streets when the Taliban took over Afghanistan again.

If you’re worried about being othered or made a target by the suggestion that there are antisemitic elements in the marches that some Jews might find intimidating,
Obviously, no, I’m not concerned by a mere suggestion that there are antisemtic elements that some Jews might find intimidating, I am concerned about the statement “the only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews”. Which is a lot more encompassing, definitive and stronger.

I hope you can tell the difference between the two types of statements?
After all if you were told:

Substance A’s only purpose is to cause cancer
or
Research suggests that certain elements of substance A may cause cancer in some

I think you could discern there is a very wide gap between the two statements.

Nonsense. You seem very concerned about society’s approval of Jews, no need to shoehorn us all into that.
This is a thread about Antisemtism. Antisemtism includes society not approving of all the way to hating those of us who are Jewish. I’m not shoehorning all of us into a discussion on antisemtism because it is a central topic of the thread.

sorry meant to clear quote but forgot and edit function won’t allow it

Say what now?

Well I never! I haven’t shied way from saying such behaviour is unacceptable. I am talking about what the list represents. The fact that the statement was so easily believed wholesale and then caused you to think such a list was necessary speaks volumes.

If you can’t see the divisive rhetoric or the othering going on in that statement, like I and many others can, then I can’t really help you.

But you're just making crap up now.

The reason I wrote the list was nothing to do with the statement. The reason I wrote the list was because of the behaviour observed on the marches.

Listing unacceptable behaviour that has been observed on the marches with the suggestion that it should stop happening seems to be a real issue for you.

The fact that the statement was so easily believed wholesale

Who exactly do you think believes this statement? I don't think people on this thread do.

I am not “making up crap” nor do I have any issue with stopping antisemtic behaviours. These are comments unworthy of you.
Please can we keep this civil.

Your list has nothing to do with the statement that is the title of the thread and yet you post it and repost it and repost it every time someone wants to discuss the nuances of the statement on the thread?

Can you see how we might get the impression by your pattern of posting your list of things not to do that might intimidate Jews would have a lot to do with the statement “the only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews” ?

Not everything is a problem to be solved. Sometimes it is worthwhile to dig into the whys of the original statement and its wider consequences. It goes beyond antisemtic things have happened, so let’s stop them. That is the top level of things, I have been trying to open your mind to the undercurrents of what is divisive rhetoric that has divided Jewish communities and othered us all to another degree from larger society.

Would you please do me the courtesy of reading my posts. If you look upthread I quoted a Guardian article in which is this comment:
”That’s not to say that the rhetoric of division is not potent. On Friday I spoke to Jake Wallis Simons, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle. He suggested to me that in his view the majority of Jews are avoiding London on these marching Saturdays because of fears of intimidation.”

Please can we keep this civil.

Can you stop putting stuff into my mouth then? And making comments about unworthiness? It makes you appear patronising at best.

He suggested to me that in his view the majority of Jews are avoiding London on these marching Saturdays because of fears of intimidation

This statement does not support your assertion that people have believed wholesale that the only purpose of the marches is to intimidate Jews.

Do you understand the difference between the purpose of the marches being to intimidate and the fact that the marches can be intimidating?

As my list points out, there are many behaviours which have been observed on the marches which could reasonably be seen to be intimidating, and not just to Jews.

@noblegiraffe

He suggested to me that in his view the majority of Jews are avoiding London on these marching Saturdays because of fears of intimidation

“This statement does not support your assertion that people have believed wholesale that the only purpose of the marches is to intimidate Jews.”

It supports that some people have believed it, according to Wallis, the majority of Jews believe it; if you believe Wallis. You believed it enough yourself, if not to write your list, but to think it applied here on this thread such that you have posted and reposted in response to every discussion of the statement.

No, I don't believe it. As I said, stop putting things into my mouth.

Pointing out the existence of intimidating behaviour on a march and suggesting it should stop is not the same thing as saying that the purpose of the march is to intimidate.

If you still don't understand that difference then there's no point in engaging any further with you.

I didn’t say it was the same thing. You keep putting words into my mouth that I am saying it is the same thing, among many other things, when I have not and am not. Can you say that the statement has had no impact on Jewish communities, that no one has believed it at all when here we are almost 3,000 posts in still discussing this one sentence!

I agree with you there is no point discussing further as we are failing to communicate in any meaningful way.

I will leave you with one last attempt to connect- at the start you said
“noblegiraffe · 21/12/2023 12:28
Littlejohn is a bigoted piece of shit and any intervention from him is likely to be as helpful as an appearance from Tommy Robinson.”

This comment of yours, I 100% agree with and I have to wonder what happened such that you cannot concede that he may have had a nasty ulterior motive by saying that the only purpose of these marches is to intimidate British Jews. That you disagree and do not think he has said a divisive, othering, unhelpful piece of trolling rhetoric.

^This isn’t putting stuff into your mouth, after all you have said that the above is “balls” and that I was “making up crap” so it is clear you disagreed.

@KestrelMoon I really wish you’d read my posts properly. Your replies to me are generally based on cherry picking things you think I’ve said and applying your own meanings to them, most of which bears very little relation to my posts.

It’s making it difficult to have any form of coherent dialogue and I’m not sure your excessive use of divisive rhetoric is helping to curb the divisive rhetoric, nor is talking down to people as if you know better than them.

You keep putting words into my mouth that I am saying it is the same thing

You said I must believe the statement because I was posting that list.

Which is, as I believe I have pointed out, balls.

@25milesfromhome
I agree it is difficult to have a coherent discussion with you. I apologise if you feel talked down to. I try not to say someone has written nonsense, or is tiresome, or that they’ve misinterpreted Littlejohn. Wait, whoops, that was you speaking to me.

Sorry, but do believe the record shows that I said you “believed it enough” to write the list and to have used it repeatedly on all three threads. You would not have written a do not do list if you believed the marches were not intimidating.

What about the rest of the content?