Gender critical SNP candidate ditched by party

[BlackForestCake]

Two weeks before polling day the SNP has dumped a candidate and withdrawn all support for him: www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-withdraws-support-for-kirkcaldy-and-cowdenbeath-candidate-neale-hanvey-1-5054128

Neale Hanvey, standing in Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath, will still be on the ballot as the papers have already been printed. He is accused of having shared allegedly antisemitic content on Facebook in 2016.

I am not the only one who thinks allegedly antisemitic posts are not the real reason. Hanvey supports the Women's Pledge and has met ForWomen Scotland. I think he has been targeted from within the SNP for his support for women's rights. We know that there are genderist extremists who have infiltrated the party. We can now also see that they would rather hand the seat to a unionist than have an SNP MP who supports women.

(This hypothesis is now being denounced by sockpuppets on Twitter as a "conspiracy theory", which suggests that it's correct).

[NonnyMouse1337]

He should not be singled out for special opprobrium from other wealthy Americans and corporations doing the same, nor should he be used as the 'face' of pro-trans conspiracy, imo.

Yes you're right. Based on what's been uncovered, the SNP made a good call.

[Birdsfoottrefoil]

How do we criticise the power of the extraordinary wealthy? There are very few of these individuals so you inevitably end up at the individual level with your criticism.

Philanthropy is not a neutral ‘good thing’; it is about using their money as power to over-ride governing systems. Historically there has been a lot of good done this way - a way of ‘paying back’ money (often made through exploitation of the poor). But it is still about changing society in a way an individual sees fit. George Soros’s, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet etc all absolutely need to have their individual philanthropic ideas scrutinised and held up to the light.

[JanesKettle]

Well, you don't use the image of a puppet master :(

I think I could manage to discuss what someone's wealth funds without using that image. It's not required to hold up ideas to the light.

[Goannaforanna]

I can't say that I would have identified that image as anti-semitic.

[SuperLoudPoppingAction]

People affected by antisemitism have identified these kinds of images as antisemitic.

It definitely relies on ideas around Jewish people controlling world affairs which link in with antisemitism

[Goannaforanna]

That may be true but that does not mean that anyone who does not know this is antisemitic.

[SuperLoudPoppingAction]

I have fairly strong feelings about how insidious prejudice can be when it's shown through imagery.

I think it's easy to find amusement or accuracy in an image without being as reflective around the symbolism as you might be if things were written down.

Eg that cartoon of Serena Williams.

If you don't know and you're a random member of the public then please learn.

If you're running as an MP imo you should have a sense of whether something might be too controversial to post. Or know the right people to ask.

I think a spring clean of any social media you've used is probably a good idea too.

[reginafelangee]

It will be tough for the Momentum types now - vote for one of their own or the Labour candidate.

[Germ1360]

Anti-Semitism is alive and well, sadly. But criticism of Soros which makes no reference to his faith is not Anti-Semitism. It's just criticism, and is justified.

[reginafelangee]

And Hanvey has been taken down for his anti-semitism.

Sorry to disappoint. Not everything is about the evil trans conspiracy. 😱

[JanesKettle]

The most common anti-Semitic stereotypes and narratives associate Jews with wealth, power and conspiracy.

"They promote the idea that Jews have a peculiar and amoral desire for money; that they use their alleged power to conspire for malign and selfish ends.

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/what-is-anti-semitism-the-definition-explained-and-how-anti-jewish-tropes-developed-throughout-history/ar-BBXvdIo

Super basic explanation incl some mention of common tropes.

[ScrimshawTheSecond]

Soros is wealthy and powerful. I didn't know he was Jewish. Isn't the criticism to do with how he's using that wealth and power?

[nauticant]

If most people were told that they were using anti-gay tropes, anti-immigrant tropes, anti-Muslim tropes, etc they would be horrified, would apologise, and would say they'll be more aware in the future.

When it comes to anti-Semitic tropes it's a shrug and "how was I supposed to know?"

[Goannaforanna]

I thought that that was what the candidate did, apologise?

[Germ1360]

Um, the problem here is, Soros just happens to be Jewish and purely coincidentally fit some of the ugly stereotypes (re. Money, power, influence) some people subscribe to about Jews. If we say anything re. him having any of the above, even without reference to religion, we're accused of anti-Semitism. And that ends up muddying the waters and leads people to dismiss actual anti-Semitism, which does exist and should not be denied.

[Germ1360]

Exacto, AnyOld.

[53rdWay]

Kevin Alfred Strom is a neo-Nazi. An actual neo-Nazi. Perhaps not the best authority to lean on while explaining that we're being 'ruled over' by a Jewish philanthropist, eh?

Fucking hell this thread is depressing.

[AnyOldPrion]

I’m sorry 53rd in that case. It’s a quotation I’ve heard often, I think here on this board. I didn’t the background and probably should have checked.

I have generally kept out of the argument about anti-semitism as (as has been illustrated here) I don’t know enough to comment on that topic.

But I cannot have been anti-semitic in commenting on someone I did not know was Jewish. Anyone accusing me of that in the complete absence of any evidence (how could there be evidence of it if I didn’t know?) is showing their own prejudice.

[ShesDressedInBlackAgain]

Our enemy's enemy is not always our friend. Especially not when our enemy's enemy shares anti-Semitic imagery on social media

There are a good few people here saying 'well how was I to know?' who would hand anyone turning up on FWR to plead ignorance about something misogynistic, their arse on a plate. Ignorance of anti-semitism isn't an excuse for it any more than ignorance about feminism (expressed as NAMALT/just be kind/rape myths) is an excuse for misogyny.

I agree that this thread is fast becoming entirely depressing.

[AnyOldPrion]

who would hand anyone turning up on FWR to plead ignorance about something misogynistic, their arse on a plate.

Exactly. We’re on a feminism board discussing feminist issues, and I believe this is one. Handing people their arse on a feminism board because they don’t know the ins and outs of modern anti-semitism is hardly the same as criticising them for their ignorance of feminism.

And for what it’s worth, when I first came here, I was ignorant and I did have my arse handed to me. But because there were also decent people who took the time to explain the issues with patience, I learned.

What I’m taking away from this thread is that you think I’m an idiot. And that’s one good reason why I don’t necessarily want to learn more about this particular topic.

[Cohle]

You don't want to bother learning more about anti-semitism because someone has pointed out your ignorance? That's the laziest most ridiculous excuse for prejudice I've ever heard.

[GrumpyGran8]

Here's my suggestion. Criticise Soros for what he does but before you do that read up on what he does. Particularly that his support for pro-trans causes is in the context of vast support for all kinds of progressive causes.
And he doesn't personally decide which causes his Foundation hands funds to anyway. Thewhole point of a charitable foundation is that a board of trustees makes those decisions, so that the founder can't play favourites

[GrumpyGran8]

I thought that that was what the candidate did, apologise?
Yes, here's his statement.
Please note that he didn't share the cartoon, but an article that the cartoon was embedded in; he probably didn't even see it.
Now, let me tell you a story. The very first tweet from Magdelen Berns was that I saw swas - apparently - an anti-semitic cartoon about George Soros; it was the image that came up in the tweet, with no text. As a result, I spent several months dismissing her and refusing to watch any of her videos. I really did think she was anti-semitic! It was only when i posted something to that effect (it may even have been on here) and got rightly jumped on, that I went back and searched for the tweet. It turned out that Berns had actually RTd an article on anti-semitism that was illustrated with that vile cartoon, and it was that image that had come up in the tweet.
So, I'm prepared to give Hanvey the benefit of the doubt on this.

[nauticant]

That's very informative GrumpyGran8.

If Hanvey has sincerely apologised then credit to him. The value of this thread is to see how often we see that, when it comes to anti-Semitism, "how was I supposed to know that" is advanced as a defence instead of "gosh, really, then I'm apologise for getting it badly wrong".