Is the green party starting to regret it's association with Islamists?

[mids2019]

The green party, ostensibly about climate protection and general progressive values seems to have gotten into bed with Islamist sympathisers and the amount of anti semitism and basic hatred of their own country is now obvious.

The green party now at least locally are known as a party that has sympathies towards all manner of Islamist causes including Hamas's objective to wipe Israel of the face of the Earth.

Wouldn't be surprised if they produce a motion declaring climate change a Jewish conspiracy........

I think many (mostly well-meaning) people have a blind spot when it comes to the type of far right that Islamism represents.

What political ideology would that be?

And how exactly do you know that ‘the actual agenda was always to commit an internationally defined crime against humanity, an ethnic cleansing of an entire indigenous population’?

It looks like Hamas didn’t have access to the same secret sources you do. Otherwise, they surely would have tried to avoid kicking this supposed 'secret plan' into gear by choosing to attack on October 7th.

I feel like I'm living in some kind of alternate reality here. People who have vociferously defended the psychopathic actions of the most far right, ultra nationalist government Israel has ever had are saying the Greens are far right!!

Your mistake is in thinking "far left" is synonymous with "peaceful and tolerant" but that "far right" is antonymous.

The far left and the far right shake hands up to the elbow on authoritarianism.

Every accusation is a projection. There is nothing to suggest that the pro-Israel posters here support Israel unconditionally, and yet Hamas seem to have no shortage of useful idiots.

(And would you believe it, the straw man poster still hasn't addressed the point about why they don’t rail against other contemporaneous partitions like Pakistan.)

Authoritarianism in itself is not a bad thing. For example, coming down hard on people who disrupt community cohesion via racism, transphobia or homophobia is a just and proper way to run society. The paradox of tolerance illustrates this perfectly.

What makes the far left different from the far right is that the left's Authoritarianism comes from a desire to make everybody's life safer and more equtible, wheras the far right only seek to give power to the elite castes.

They are not the same.

You're hilarious.

"Racism" is the accusation used to prevent the Jews having a tiny homeland in a sea of Islamism.

"Transphobia" is the accusation used to prevent women from protecting hard-won rights.

"Homophobia" is the accusation used to force-team LGB with TQ+, the latter actually being incredibly homophobic.

What makes the far left different the far right is how fucking sanctimonious they are. Both sides think that everyone needs to "educate themselves" rather than realising that liberal democracy, despite being the worst possible form of government, is a damn sight better than all the others that have been tried from time to time.

So there's a perfect definition of all these things (made, no doubt, by left wing authoritarians) and any attempt to speak freely can be happily stamped on because it's for the greater good?
And expressing a worry about male couples commissioning babies to buy from poor women is homophobia/saying that children shouldn't be sterilised is transphobia/calling for clamp downs on violent exorcism in African-majority churches or FGM in mainly African populations is racism? And nobody should be allowed to say these things in your left wing authoritarian utopia?

Thanks, but I prefer a society with freedom of speech and diverse viewpoints even if some of those expressing their freedom of speech are numpties who need to have common sense knocked into them.

And of course no left-wing dictators ever existed. Oh wait...

The ethnosupremacist version of Zionism that is currently and has historically been official policy.

Because I have eyes and ears.

I think I'll wait a bit longer for more truths to come out before I address that issue.

I've said it before that I do not entertain whataboutisms. It's a weak and disingenuous tactic used purely to deflect from the subject at hand.

Well we know that most pals were on the side of the far right during the Second World War. That the pals ever had their own troop in the German army.

That Gaza did have two different Hitler shops until recently and they often have flown far right flags.

That pro pals hold signs saying Hitler was right and refer to the final solution etc.

Therefore yes I agree with you some of the Islamists and Communists currently in the Green Party are basically far right.

“What makes the far left different from the far right is that the left's Authoritarianism comes from a desire to make everybody's life safer and more equtible, wheras the far right only seek to give power to the elite castes.”

Pol pot, Stalin, Mao, - they just wanted to make everyone’s lives better 🤣

100% agree

Islam is much more in line with right thinking politics in General. I have not known any of the muslim people I know vote anything other than Tory until recently. For moderate muslims it is the obviously choice that is mostly in line with their more conservative views on family and how society should behave. I can only speak about the people I personally know and don't have voting information on this though.

Therefore it makes totally sense that more extreme thinking muslims would have very far right view apart from the anti coloured people stuff. Though they obviously hold racist opinions of their own.

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem famously collaborated with Hitler
“Thus, in March 1933, only two months after Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor, it was in fact the mufti who sought contact to the new German authorities and not vice-versa. In a March 31 telegram to Berlin, the German general consul in Jerusalem, Heinrich Wolff, reported on his meeting with Husseini:
The Mufti explained to me today at length that Muslims both within Palestine and without welcome the new regime in Germany and hope for the spread of fascist, anti-democratic forms of government to other countries. Current Jewish economic and political influence is harmful everywhere and has to be combated. In order to be able to hit the standard of living of Jews, Muslims are hoping for Germany to declare a boycott [of “Jewish” goods], which they would then enthusiastically join throughout the Muslim world “

https://www.hoover.org/research/mufti-and-holocaust

I must agree because say you do sometimes sound like you live in an alternative reality to the rest of us

I blame the whole comprehension thing when you read posts. To be frank you don't read stuff in the manner it is written, maybe because you have such strong feelings about the topic. However mean you have tendency to be in a different reality to a lot of posters.

Though to be fair we all come from different places and all have very different angles and some have very different lived experiences of the topics we talk about. What's your story then? Why do you feel so correct about things, that your opinion on a topic is the right one?

Shake hands, at this point in the Green party they are shagging behind the sofa

I wonder, if the Palestinians were predominantly Buddhists and not Muslim, would the racism du jour be Buddhist nationalists infiltrating the Green party.

After that conference vote, they're shagging openly on top of the sofa, in a naked tryst with anyone who tries to dismiss the obvious double standard as "whataboutery".

Motivation is different but what they do once given any power will feel the same to most people

The lack or tolerance and hate that comes out of them towards groups that hold different opinions and won't follow their narrative

The physical harm to others they are willing to turn a blindeye to if it is one of their own commiting it.

They are not the same but they kind of are and might as well be.

😂

Sorry I can't help it

What on earth was even the point of writing that post

Say what you think or don't

The need to tell people you don't want to post about something just so you can use the word ethnosupremacist is hilarious at this point

Indeed. Four legs good, two legs bad.

Yes and no

Because if you are not willing to look at other conflicts or states formation etc then what you are in fact doing is focusing solely on one situation rather than having a balanced opinion or outlook on the situation involved

Sometimes comparison is used not in the context of a debate is just a tactic, whataboutism. However if used within the debate correctly comparison is highly valid and correct to use. For example if someone is totally fixated on a singular issue and needs to step back a little to see the wider issue or the flaws in their own agreement.

Yes he did. I used to have some historical photos and a recording of him doing just that. Don't think I bothered keep because you can now find it all online.

I answered two out of three of their comments. I simply explained to her I wasn't answering the third yet as although I believe there is substantial evidence to support a theory I, and many others now have, a little more evidence would be absolutely conclusive and I believe it's coming soon. Until then, I'll hold my tongue.

Only if they were spouting a lot of racist rhetoric towards a vulnerable ethnic minority group in the UK and they trying to turn the party into some sort of I hate tbe UK group

I think the difference you willingly are choosing to ignore is what Islamists have done in other countries and the damage people fear they could do here

Not sure but Buddhists (at least modern day ones) don't seem to have the same type of track record