UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[Hydesland]

"Oh most Jews think Corbyn is an anti-Semite.".

Most Jews are Tories. They'll lie and say any shit they think will help the Tory party.[

(Not all Tories *sigh*).

Back with Ed Miliband in charge 70% of British Jews voted Tory.

This is a bad argument, and this is from someone who doesn't think Corbyn is really an anti Semite.

1) An average individual person, Jewish or otherwise, just because of who they voted for last election, isn't so fanatically partisan that they'll "lie and say any shit" to help that party.
2) Most Jews didn't say Miliband and co were anti Semites despite not voting for them as you said - nor previous Labour governments. This suggests this isn't just some common trope they'll bring up against the opposition no matter what, but that there's something specifically objectionable about the current Labour party. None of this is normal. None of this is 'precisely what you'd expect' - as far as I can tell, you're just lying here.

To be clear, Jews aren't inherently Tory and haven't always been, if this is even true at all it's only a very recent phenomenon: in 2010 only 30% of Jews leaned conservative (less than labour): https://www.jpr.org.uk/documents/The%20 ... 20Jews.pdf

If there's been a sudden swing away from Labour only very recently, it might be worth asking why.

Also worth noting 73% of British Jews say "Attitude towards Israel and foreign policy" is "Very important" to how they vote.

I don't think you quite appreciate how important Israel and Jewish nationhood in general is to Jewish culture and Jewish identity for the vast majority of Jews - and this is largely independent of their political beliefs otherwise. So someone going out of their way for instance to only find the small minority Jews who don't care about Israel to make some point would be deliberately using a deeply unrepresentative sample, and is basically manipulative.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm disappointed but not surprised that Labour have shown themselves to be too tribal for their own good in not joining the Lib Dem-Green-Plaid anti Brexit pact.

[Vassenor]

I'm disappointed but not surprised that Labour have shown themselves to be too tribal for their own good in not joining the Lib Dem-Green-Plaid anti Brexit pact.

You mean the pact that's pretty much designed to hand the Conservatives the election?

[The Archregimancy]

Read the post again, Vassenor.

Nakena was clearly making a sarcastic point about Corbyn's Labour Party, not claiming that the Nazis were left-wing socialists.

So when do we get to make the same point about the more deep seated racism within the Conservative party? Or is that different?

You can make the point any time you would like. It is indeed a serious issue, and I doubt anyone here would argue otherwise. Do please feel free to make that point.



I'm serious Vassenor; this is incredibly tiresome. You seem to be functionally incapable of developing an argument. Almost your entire posting record consists of 1- to 3-sentence posts that are some combination of snark, whining, misrepresentation, or just flat-out misunderstanding of the point you think you're replying to.

Dumb Ideologies and Ifreann prove that it's possible to combine snarky short posts with substantive posts on the issues. You, in contrast, don't seem capable of doing so.

I'll TG you privately to raise a potentially related (non-moderation) point that may be relevant. But otherwise, in my posting capacity rather than my moderation capacity, I'd ask you to consider having a good long think about whether your posting style is constructive.

[Ostroeuropa]

"Oh most Jews think Corbyn is an anti-Semite.".

Most Jews are Tories. They'll lie and say any shit they think will help the Tory party.[

(Not all Tories *sigh*).

Back with Ed Miliband in charge 70% of British Jews voted Tory.

This is a bad argument, and this is from someone who doesn't think Corbyn is really an anti Semite.

1) An average individual person, Jewish or otherwise, just because of who they voted for last election, isn't so fanatically partisan that they'll "lie and say any shit" to help that party.
2) Most Jews didn't say Miliband and co were anti Semites despite not voting for them as you said - nor previous Labour governments. This suggests this isn't just some common trope they'll bring up against the opposition no matter what, but that there's something specifically objectionable about the current Labour party. None of this is normal. None of this is 'precisely what you'd expect' - as far as I can tell, you're just lying here.

To be clear, Jews aren't inherently Tory and haven't always been, if this is even true at all it's only a very recent phenomenon: in 2010 only 30% of Jews leaned conservative (less than labour): https://www.jpr.org.uk/documents/The%20 ... 20Jews.pdf

If there's been a sudden swing away from Labour only very recently, it might be worth asking why.

Also worth noting 73% of British Jews say "Attitude towards Israel and foreign policy" is "Very important" to how they vote.

I don't think you quite appreciate how important Israel and Jewish nationhood in general is to Jewish culture and Jewish identity for the vast majority of Jews - and this is largely independent of their political beliefs otherwise. So someone going out of their way for instance to only find the small minority Jews who don't care about Israel to make some point would be deliberately using a deeply unrepresentative sample, and is basically manipulative.

1. The average person maybe, the average Tory? Not convinced. You've seen how the Brexit crowd are acting.
2. They didn't say the Jewish leader of Labour was an anti-Semite? Not exactly surprising.
3. Right, in 2010 they weren't tories. So far we have a sample size of two elections, one with a Jewish leader, one with Corbyn. We also know that statistically speaking anti-Semitic attitudes in the labour party are lower than the general public, and decreased under Corbyns leadership. So it has to be something else driving this narrative.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Dumb Ideologies and Ifreann prove that it's possible to combine snarky short posts with substantive posts on the issues.

I'm going to print this out and put it on my bathroom wall.

[Hydesland]

This is a bad argument, and this is from someone who doesn't think Corbyn is really an anti Semite.

1) An average individual person, Jewish or otherwise, just because of who they voted for last election, isn't so fanatically partisan that they'll "lie and say any shit" to help that party.
2) Most Jews didn't say Miliband and co were anti Semites despite not voting for them as you said - nor previous Labour governments. This suggests this isn't just some common trope they'll bring up against the opposition no matter what, but that there's something specifically objectionable about the current Labour party. None of this is normal. None of this is 'precisely what you'd expect' - as far as I can tell, you're just lying here.

To be clear, Jews aren't inherently Tory and haven't always been, if this is even true at all it's only a very recent phenomenon: in 2010 only 30% of Jews leaned conservative (less than labour): https://www.jpr.org.uk/documents/The%20 ... 20Jews.pdf

If there's been a sudden swing away from Labour only very recently, it might be worth asking why.



I don't think you quite appreciate how important Israel and Jewish nationhood in general is to Jewish culture and Jewish identity for the vast majority of Jews - and this is largely independent of their political beliefs otherwise. So someone going out of their way for instance to only find the small minority Jews who don't care about Israel to make some point would be deliberately using a deeply unrepresentative sample, and is basically manipulative.

1. The average person maybe, the average Tory? Not convinced. You've seen how the Brexit crowd are acting.
2. They didn't say the Jewish leader of Labour was an anti-Semite? Not exactly surprising.
3. Right, in 2010 they weren't tories. So far we have a sample size of two elections, one with a Jewish leader, one with Corbyn. We also know that statistically speaking anti-Semitic attitudes in the labour party are lower than the general public, and decreased under Corbyns leadership. So it has to be something else driving this narrative.

1. The 'Brexit crowd' isn't the same as the average Tory voter. If anything average Tory voters are among the least visibly partisan (known as the shy Tory effect).
2. Nor the Labour governments before that as far as I recall.
3. "statistically speaking anti-Semitic attitudes in the labour party are lower than the general public, and decreased under Corbyns leadership" - source on this? And if it's true, is it because a bunch of people got exposed and censured/removed from the party as a result of the controversy? Certain characters have always been in the party, but have been relatively fringe until Corbyn was leader.

[The Archregimancy]

Dumb Ideologies and Ifreann prove that it's possible to combine snarky short posts with substantive posts on the issues.

I'm going to print this out and put it on my bathroom wall.

Please tell me that it's going to be in a multi-colour font surrounded by unicorns and rainbows.

[Ostroeuropa]

1. The average person maybe, the average Tory? Not convinced. You've seen how the Brexit crowd are acting.
2. They didn't say the Jewish leader of Labour was an anti-Semite? Not exactly surprising.
3. Right, in 2010 they weren't tories. So far we have a sample size of two elections, one with a Jewish leader, one with Corbyn. We also know that statistically speaking anti-Semitic attitudes in the labour party are lower than the general public, and decreased under Corbyns leadership. So it has to be something else driving this narrative.

1. The 'Brexit crowd' isn't the same as the average Tory voter. If anything average Tory voters are among the least visibly partisan (known as the shy Tory effect).
2. Nor the Labour governments before that as far as I recall.
3. "statistically speaking anti-Semitic attitudes in the labour party are lower than the general public, and decreased under Corbyns leadership" - source on this? And if it's true, is it because a bunch of people got exposed and censured/removed from the party as a result of the controversy? Certain characters have always been in the party, but have been relatively fringe until Corbyn was leader.

1. There's significant overlap.
2. 2010 was the last Labour government supported by the majority of the Jewish population. Retroactively declaring them anti-semites doesn't help the conservative party in this election.
3. It's not because of that no, the decrease happened rapidly under Corbyn within the first two years of him being leader, well before the controversy.

Compare the 2015 and 2017 Anti-semitism results:
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/03/29/exclus ... sel-115897

https://i0.wp.com/skwawkbox.org/wp-cont ... .png?ssl=1

https://evolvepolitics.com/yougov-polls ... me-leader/

Not only does the data show a marked decrease in the number of Labour voters in 2017 agreeing with anti-Semitic statements compared to those in 2015, the statistics show that all other political parties (apart from the Lib Dems whose results are comparable to Labour’s) have a far bigger problem with their voters agreeing with anti-Semitic statements.
In August 2017 YouGov asked 1614 adults from across the political spectrum whether 5 different stereotypical anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish people were either ‘Definitely true’ ‘Probably true’, Definitely not true’ or ‘Probably not true’.
And, when comparing the responses to those given by 3411 respondents to almost identical questions in 2015, the results were profound.

Analysis of both surveys shows that anti-Semitic views held by Labour voters had declined amongst every single statement from 2015 until 2017.
In 2015, 22% of Labour voters agreed with the statement that ‘Jews chase money more than other people’, whilst in 2017 the number of Labour voters agreeing with the statement had declined to 14%.
These results compare with 31% of Conservative voters who agreed with the statement that ‘Jews chase money more than other people’ in 2015, whilst in 2017 this had declined slightly to 27% who still agreed with the statement.

Here's a source timing the beginning of the Scandal partway through 2018:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5966823/l ... w-members/

Yes it's the sun but given the relatively simple thing being proved (the dates) I hope that's acceptable.

[Hydesland]

1. There's significant overlap.

The 'Brexit Crowd', if you mean vocal hard Brexiters, don't seem especially partisan - many of them were willing to vote for the Brexit party until Boris became PM - and many of them weren't Tory voters before. Also this crowd, in terms of the ones highly vocal, isn't that large.

2. 2010 was the last Labour government supported by the majority of the Jewish population. Retroactively declaring them anti-semites doesn't help the conservative party in this election.

Huh? I'm saying that I don't recall the Labour party facing allegations like this, not under Blair or Brown, anywhere near as frequently or severely as today with Corbyn.

Not only does the data show a marked decrease in the number of Labour voters in 2017 agreeing with anti-Semitic statements compared to those in 2015, the statistics show that all other political parties (apart from the Lib Dems whose results are comparable to Labour’s) have a far bigger problem with their voters agreeing with anti-Semitic statements.
In August 2017 YouGov asked 1614 adults from across the political spectrum whether 5 different stereotypical anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish people were either ‘Definitely true’ ‘Probably true’, Definitely not true’ or ‘Probably not true’.
And, when comparing the responses to those given by 3411 respondents to almost identical questions in 2015, the results were profound.

Analysis of both surveys shows that anti-Semitic views held by Labour voters had declined amongst every single statement from 2015 until 2017.
In 2015, 22% of Labour voters agreed with the statement that ‘Jews chase money more than other people’, whilst in 2017 the number of Labour voters agreeing with the statement had declined to 14%.
These results compare with 31% of Conservative voters who agreed with the statement that ‘Jews chase money more than other people’ in 2015, whilst in 2017 this had declined slightly to 27% who still agreed with the statement.

The controversy wasn't ever, as far as I recall, about Labour voters, but about key party members, activists & politicians.

[Ostroeuropa]

1. There's significant overlap.

The 'Brexit Crowd', if you mean vocal hard Brexiters, don't seem especially partisan - many of them were willing to vote for the Brexit party until Boris became PM - and many of them weren't Tory voters before. Also this crowd, in terms of the ones highly vocal, isn't that large.

2. 2010 was the last Labour government supported by the majority of the Jewish population. Retroactively declaring them anti-semites doesn't help the conservative party in this election.

Huh? I'm saying that I don't recall the Labour party facing allegations like this, not under Blair or Brown, anywhere near as frequently or severely as today with Corbyn.

The controversy wasn't ever, as far as I recall, about Labour voters, but about key party members, activists & politicians.

1. You're right. I think perhaps tribalist would be better than partisan.
2. And back then, a majority of British Jews supported Blair and Brown. Since then, they have, along with a substantial number of their countrymen, been hoodwinked into joining the far-right Brexit stuff, engaging with all the accompanying political behaviors that entails.
3. I don't see how there can be a significant difference on an issue like this. Perhaps you could explain to me. Is the contention that Labour is, in some sense, infiltrated on this issue?

It's also worth noting that Anti-Israeli sentiment is conflated with Anti-Semitism routinely. Even the extremes of anti-Israeli sentiment cannot be said to be anti-Semitic. (As in, "Israel should not exist").

56% of the British Public and 80% of Labour voters hold anti-Israel views of one kind or another, so a shellgame is needed to pretend Labour is bad for being the chief advocate against Israel in the UK. Saying "Corbyn is anti-Israel" is a vote winner. Saying he's an anti-Semite makes people critical of him.

[Hydesland]

Here's a source timing the beginning of the Scandal partway through 2018:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5966823/l ... w-members/

Yes it's the sun but given the relatively simple thing being proved (the dates) I hope that's acceptable.

Uh no, the complaints started as soon as Corbyn was made leader due to details about his relationships with groups like Hamas & Hezbollah, appearances on Press Tv etc... And if we ignore Corbyn, the controversy also blew up at least as early as 2016 with Naz Shah.

[Ostroeuropa]

Here's a source timing the beginning of the Scandal partway through 2018:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5966823/l ... w-members/

Yes it's the sun but given the relatively simple thing being proved (the dates) I hope that's acceptable.

Uh no, the complaints started as soon as Corbyn was made leader due to details about his relationships with groups like Hamas & Hezbollah, appearances on Press Tv etc... And if we ignore Corbyn, the controversy also blew up at least as early as 2016 with Naz Shah.

Perhaps we're talking past eachother. These were anti-Semitic incidents within the Labour party, but the narrative of "The labour party has an anti-Semitism problem" is younger than that, and involves weaving these incidents together into a media narrative. That appears to have occurred around 2018.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm disappointed but not surprised that Labour have shown themselves to be too tribal for their own good in not joining the Lib Dem-Green-Plaid anti Brexit pact.

You mean the pact that's pretty much designed to hand the Conservatives the election?

Quite the opposite, it's designed to make sure that the anti-brexit vote isn't split between different parties. This has already been proven to work in at least one recent by-election.

[Hydesland]

1. You're right. I think perhaps tribalist would be better than partisan.
2. And back then, a majority of British Jews supported Blair and Brown. Since then, they have, along with a substantial number of their countrymen, been hoodwinked into joining the far-right Brexit stuff, engaging with all the accompanying political behaviors that entails.
3. I don't see how there can be a significant difference on an issue like this. Perhaps you could explain to me. Is the contention that Labour is, in some sense, infiltrated on this issue?

1,2. What evidence do you have that the majority of Jews are far right Brexiters? This seems unlikely, and note the fact they supported Tories in the last election is not evidence of this at all.
3. The contention is that Labour has both a problem with young activist members (often connected to Palestinian movements) and older 'Trots' who are anti-Semitic but were relatively fringe/marginalized until now. It has very little connection to the voters.

Even the extremes of anti-Israeli sentiment cannot be said to be anti-Semitic. (As in, "Israel should not exist").

Actually, under some definitions - it can be, or at least is very borderline:
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/wo ... tisemitism
"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination"
"Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."

[Hydesland]

Uh no, the complaints started as soon as Corbyn was made leader due to details about his relationships with groups like Hamas & Hezbollah, appearances on Press Tv etc... And if we ignore Corbyn, the controversy also blew up at least as early as 2016 with Naz Shah.

Perhaps we're talking past eachother. These were anti-Semitic incidents within the Labour party, but the narrative of "The labour party has an anti-Semitism problem" is younger than that, and involves weaving these incidents together into a media narrative. That appears to have occurred around 2018.

No way, it's easy to find articles going back to 2016:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... emy-corbyn
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/l ... rassroots/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/opin ... -left.html

[Ostroeuropa]

1. You're right. I think perhaps tribalist would be better than partisan.
2. And back then, a majority of British Jews supported Blair and Brown. Since then, they have, along with a substantial number of their countrymen, been hoodwinked into joining the far-right Brexit stuff, engaging with all the accompanying political behaviors that entails.
3. I don't see how there can be a significant difference on an issue like this. Perhaps you could explain to me. Is the contention that Labour is, in some sense, infiltrated on this issue?

1,2. What evidence do you have that the majority of Jews are far right Brexiters? This seems unlikely, and note the fact they supported Tories in the last election is not evidence of this at all.
3. The contention is that Labour has both a problem with young activist members (often connected to Palestinian movements) and older 'Trots' who are anti-Semitic but were relatively fringe/marginalized until now. It has very little connection to the voters.

Even the extremes of anti-Israeli sentiment cannot be said to be anti-Semitic. (As in, "Israel should not exist").

Actually, under some definitions - it can be, or at least is very borderline:
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/wo ... tisemitism
"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination"
"Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."

1-2. I disagree, the fact they support the Tories is evidence of supporting the far-right and Brexit at this point in our electoral history given the parties policies. If Labour elected a Stalinist and I kept voting for them, I would be supporting Stalinism.
3. The contention is that Zionism is sometimes used as a dogwhistle by the far-right, therefore discussion of Zionists is de-facto anti-Semitic. Same for globalist and a number of other things. Since younger party members and older trots are against those things, they are conflated with anti-Semitism.

Under some definitions perhaps, but those are not the ones the public is familiar with nor used in common parlance. Self-determination is also not a guarantee of nationhood by the way, that's a vulgarization of It. It only requires constitutional equality and protections of autonomy.

[Ostroeuropa]

Perhaps we're talking past eachother. These were anti-Semitic incidents within the Labour party, but the narrative of "The labour party has an anti-Semitism problem" is younger than that, and involves weaving these incidents together into a media narrative. That appears to have occurred around 2018.

No way, it's easy to find articles going back to 2016:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... emy-corbyn
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/l ... rassroots/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/opin ... -left.html

I stand corrected on this point.

[Forumland]

YouGov have released a series of new polls by region for Great Britain (sorry Huskar; no NI).

The fieldwork, conducted from 17 October – 4 November

this isn’t new; much of the data was taken weeks before the election was declared. Let’s not declare Labour’s “pasokification” just yet until we see more polls which show similarly poor results.

the latest Yougov poll shows Labour at 25%, which should be higher than what they got from the aggregate of those regional polls

[Hydesland]

1-2. I disagree, the fact they support the Tories is evidence of supporting the far-right and Brexit at this point in our electoral history given the parties policies. If Labour elected a Stalinist and I kept voting for them, I would be supporting Stalinism.

Hold on, do we even know if most Jews still intend to vote Tory? When I google around I only find stuff like this: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... emy-corbyn

Also, sorry but to me simply voting for Johnson isn't sufficient to label someone far right. A lot of people just don't care that much about Brexit either way at this point, but might hold their nose and vote for a clown like Boris anyway even if they're not too fond of him, because they just can't bring themselves to vote for Corbyn. That's not evidence of hard-line partisanship at all.

3. The contention is that Zionism is sometimes used as a dogwhistle by the far-right, therefore discussion of Zionists is de-facto anti-Semitic. Same for globalist and a number of other things. Since younger party members and older trots are against those things, they are conflated with anti-Semitism.

No it's more complicated than dog whistle politics. Things like holocaust denial, conspiracism or apologia/support of explicitly anti-Semitic groups, which is among the things the accusations include, is more than just dog whistles.

Under some definitions perhaps, but those are not the ones the public is familiar with nor used in common parlance. Self-determination is also not a guarantee of nationhood by the way, that's a vulgarization of It. It only requires constitutional equality and protections of autonomy.

It's more than that - if you have a particularly perverse desire to eradicate the nation of Israel, actively working against the material interests and safety of Jews in Israel - what actual difference is there from their perspective to that of an anti-Semite?

[The Archregimancy]

You mean the pact that's pretty much designed to hand the Conservatives the election?

Quite the opposite, it's designed to make sure that the anti-brexit vote isn't split between different parties. This has already been proven to work in at least one recent by-election.

Vassenor is living in a world where Labour's refusal to join in any form of alliance is actually other people's fault, and a deliberate insidious attempt to harm Labour.

Never mind that individual attempts by Labour, LibDem, and Green constituency parties to reach local 'progressive alliance' agreements in 2017 were scuppered by the national Labour party, with Corbyn stating it wasn't a 'credible' option to work with the LibDems; never mind that the attempt to reach an agreement over a 'progressive alliance' in the Peterborough by-election were sabotaged by Labour (though that one turned out to be justified from the Labour Party's perspective after they scraped a victory); never mind that a significant sub-section of the Labour Party is opposed on principle to allying with LibDems, Blairites, and other objectionable capitalists; and never mind that Labour's convoluted policy on Brexit makes an alliance with the LibDems, Greens, and PC all but impossible anyway.

[Vassenor]

You mean the pact that's pretty much designed to hand the Conservatives the election?

Quite the opposite, it's designed to make sure that the anti-brexit vote isn't split between different parties. This has already been proven to work in at least one recent by-election.

While standing against defending anti-Brexit Labour MPs with razor thin margins?

[The Huskar Social Union]

Fun time in Northern Ireland:

UDA threaten UUP out of North Belfast
UUP continues to be a complete farce of a fucking Party with its supposed "Moderate Unionism" being tossed out the window every five minutes to cowtow to the DUP
DUP called Alliance MP candidate for North Belfast an IRA mouth piece, she is not suing him for damages
THEMUNS V USSUNS
SDLP and Greens going and looking like utter hypocrites for agreeing to pacts with Sinn Fein when they both called them out for not taking their seats in WM
Sinn Fein having a leadership contest which for some reason does not seem to be appearing in the news like... at all.
Alliance MP candidate for South Belfast mad Greens backed SDLP instead of her and generally acted like a bitch
Sylvia Hermon Steps down handing North Down to the DUP on a silver platter
DUP MP candidate for Upper Ban steps down because he fucked someone behind his wifes back, new replacement getting tirades of abuse online
Loyalists have a fun club meeting about how they can potentially fuck shit up if they dont get a result they like
Suspect in Businessman Torture case dies mysteriously of a heart attack

Huskar gets depressed and has his hope slowly die in a fire.

[The Archregimancy]

Quite the opposite, it's designed to make sure that the anti-brexit vote isn't split between different parties. This has already been proven to work in at least one recent by-election.

While standing against defending anti-Brexit Labour MPs with razor thin margins?

Labour is not a Remain party.

[Vassenor]

While standing against defending anti-Brexit Labour MPs with razor thin margins?

Labour is not a Remain party.

So what is the stance of the LD pact towards the 50+ strong Remain Labour caucus, some of whom claim to have been given the final push off the fence by said pact? Are they going to stand against them and risk spoilage, or focus elsewhere?