Theothejonv I've never heard the term before but perhaps you could describe it that way
and yes I would consider changing my approach if it's perceived that way
the immigrant thief should be deported IMO
That sounds ridiculous to me. It has to depend on circumstances.
Obviously if someone goes on a thieving spree on the day they arrive in the UK there might be a case for deporting them.
If however they have lived and worked here for years and have a family I don't see why they should be treated any different to a UK born thief.
I have no idea what “native” means in this context
Semi-civilised indigenous?
Here's the thing, we've been talking about immigration for many pages now. This wasn't my intent, I was interested in what makes someone 'right wing' in the UK today. Say I was to completely concede the immigration point, what would be considered right wing in the UK today (immigration aside)
The thread is about far-right
sorry I meant far right not right wing.
perhaps you could argue it was a Freudian slip, that may be a thread in its own right
Well the use of the term far-right is almost exclusively used these days to describe organisations with strongly racist views.
So you are back to immigration.
Edit: Organisations such as the BNP and the EDL don't really have much to say about anything other than crass racist stuff. I mean they aren't exactly great thinkers are they?
what would be considered right wing in the UK toda
Picking out a group of “others”, blaming them for all our ills, and proposing reducing or removing or them, or giving them lesser rights, as an answer to our problems. Throw in some vibes about picking up rifles or taking matters into their own hands if the “others” aren’t dealt with by the state, and that’s your Far Right basics. Often it’s immigrants that are picked out, but not always, it could be people who have lived in the country for generations but can be cast as the enemy within somehow.
I would completely agree with your definition kelvin. Would you say that any of the views I've expressed here would fall under that category?
Maybe… I don’t know… back to Farah and saying he should be deported if he committed a crime… where does the motivation for that come from? Why him but not you? Or me? Or Boris Johnson?
this is an interesting and nuanced point. You bring up big mo, he's a national treasure I love the guy. I'd have to stick to my guns though, if he commits a crime it's different than if a 'native' commits the same crime. After the sentence is served big mo gets deported the native stays.
I would completely agree with your definition kelvin. Would you say that any of the views I’ve expressed here would fall under that category?
If you "completely agree" with Kelvin's definition you presumably understand it.
If you understand it then you can come to your own conclusion.
I reckon this is a bit of a wind up, eh billabong?
Btw are you actually Australian?
It's definitely not meant to be a 'wind up' I think I've been consistent with my views. You may disagree and I welcome the criticism
why would you ask if i'm Australian?
actually my username, I get it
After the sentence is served big mo gets deported the native stays.
Who’s a native? Am I? Is Johnson?
Say you and Farah commit the same crime… we lose him but not you? Seems a shame.
Why do you want to deport some Brits and not others? What motivates your choices?
ouch.
Sorry, do you think you’ve done something more than Farah has to be worthy of staying here?
I think this is a valid discussion though, I or anyone else shouldn't be labelled as far right for bringing it up.
You still haven’t said what motivates your opinions on deportations of British Citizens? No one is going to label you anything until you do. So don’t be shy… why talk about deporting Farah, and not me, or Johnson? Or yourself?
but yes, I'm not prepared to divulge personal info but I would argue I've done more than big mo (who i love) to benefit society
Smells like bullshit. Have a nice sleep.
again british citizens should not be deported
That's completely fair. Have a good one brother
it’s different than if a ‘native’ commits the same crime.
How are you defining native?
again british citizens should not be deported
Citizens or "natives" - there is a huge difference. You have also used UK born as well I think - a third different term describing a slightly different group
Of course immigration is a main theme for the far right - after all a political party can no longer be openly racist, anti disabled, anti pretty much anything these days can they but immigration is open season (along with those lazy people who are not working)
Most people who are not racist are able to look at immigration more objectively and see where the issues are and where it is required (need care workers, health workers etc,. don't need failed asylum seekers but that is a government admin issue not an immigration issue and a tiny number anyway in the scale of things)
after all a political party can no longer be openly racist, anti disabled, anti pretty much anything these days
There's plenty of that sort of stuff in most govts that you'd label far right. Along with racism, I reckon you could lob in Authoritarianism, ethno-nationalism chauvinism, xenophobia, probs very theocratic, certainly homophobic and transphobic, I think far right can be summed up as "We vs They" and everybody understands where the sit on that scale.
Well done OP.
You've managed to expose a few more wallopers.
Can this thread die?
Can this thread die?
Why? These are the conversations we should be having right now; far right groups and organisations are emerging all over Europe, and gaining political power. Pretty much every country now has some form of 'mainstream' political party with at least some far-right policies. Italy is once again led by fascists. This has to be of grave concern to anyone opposed to xenophobia of all kinds. If such debates can help galvanise opposition to fascism, then we should be having more such conversations, not shutting them down. Some may talk about not wanting to give extremist voices the 'oxygen of publicity'. I feel that it's often better to expose a virus to light, if you want to kill it off.
Thank you to all those that have shown patience, as always I (we) am now better informed.
I'm not sure that we got to the bottom of which countries are getting things right at the moment. The closest we got was Scandanavia but Sweden has moved to the right and Denmark is apparently looking into the idea of moving people to a different country. So I guess that leaves Norway as the winner.
I do my best to stay informed but sadly the whole world seems to dancing to the same tune to a lesser or greater degree 🙁
Can this thread die?
Or you could just not click on it? I know it's a weird idea but you can easily self-edit what you read.
Some may talk about not wanting to give extremist voices the ‘oxygen of publicity’.
You deprive them of publicity by proactively shutting them down (preferably with a boot) rather than passively ignoring them. If we've learned anything in the last 100 years it's that if we take our foot off their necks they'll start screaming again. Complacency and hubris in the face of fascism and hate is all the ammunition they need, and every now and again we need to remind ourselves of that.
If you were a native you'd be 'OxbowLake'.
Billabong, rather than asking incessant questions and then pretending not to be that interested in the subject perhaps just declare your position. Is restricting the movement of people a bad or a good thing? That's the only quesion that needs answering TBH, otherwise those who think you're trolling may have a point. And please, if you're worried about being labelled far right because of your views on immigration then maybe have a think about those views? We've been through every argument and still you cling on to nonsensical ideas about nativism when there is no rational basis for it. Where you were born is a random statistical artifact of biology. It means nothing.
Or just be honest that you picked a side.
I know this comment was meant as provocation, rather than a serious attempt to engage, but I'll answer it further.
Yes, I've 'picked a side'. That is the side of my Jewish partner, whom I love deeply and who is one of the most amazing people I've ever met. Any threat to her affects me directly, so I will do everything in my power to prevent harm to her, and I will stand up for her rights and freedoms always. Her struggle is my struggle.
I've read up a bit more on yesterday's march, and it's now very clear there was no consensus amongst all Jews for this march to go ahead. In fact, some Jewish groups have made it clear that they do not see the march as anything but a right-wing reaction against the calls for an end to the genocide. That it was attended by so many right-wing figures shows just how politicised the issue of antisemitism has become, and it's depressing to see it being used in this manner. Thousands of other Jewish people have attended the Ceasefire demos, including Na'amod, Jewish Voice for Labour, the Jewish Socialist Group and others. There are some on social media claiming that the antisemitism demo was a cover for 'pro Zionist/pro-Israel' propagandists, but I don't feel this is particularly useful or helpful. And neither are the disgusting images combining the Star of David with a Swastika; my wife feels she cannot wear a Star of David for fear of being attacked and abused. That is wrong. To conflate all Jews with the actions of the Israeli regime is ignorant and divisive. There's just no need for it. Call out fascism by all means; the actions and ideologies of the Israeli regime are definitely fascistic, but linking it to Nazism is downright hateful.
I’m not sure that we got to the bottom of which countries are getting things right at the moment. The closest we got was Scandanavia
I'm not sure you can really say rich European countries are 'getting it right' when the wealth they posess is largely generated off the backs of poorer countries or carbon emitting resources which are killing the planet. It's very easy to pretend you live in a great country if you ignore centuries of colonialism, racism, kleptocracy and environmental destruction. If you want a modern example of a countries or regions which are trying to get it right then look to the likes of North East Syria (aka Rojava - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Administration_of_North_and_East_Syria) which is at least trying to put in place a political system based on tolerance, egalitarianism and ecological sustainability.
You deprive them of publicity by proactively shutting them down (preferably with a boot) rather than passively ignoring them. If we’ve learned anything in the last 100 years it’s that if we take our foot off their necks they’ll start screaming again. Complacency and hubris in the face of fascism and hate is all the ammunition they need, and every now and again we need to remind ourselves of that.
I get where you're coming from, indeed I totally agree that sadly there are times when forceful resistance and self defence is necessary. In the 1930s, many Jewish people ignored the pleas of the Board of Deputies (of British Jews), to go and confront Mosley's fascists. In the early 90s, many people had to act to prevent fascist thugs from harming Asian communities in East London. The police were often useless or not even present. But the reality is that such extremism will always be present as there exists the socioeconomic issues that create the foundation for such int he first place. But in a world where access to information is so much greater, then it's easier to be able to form coherent, fact-based arguments to counter such views. As we've seen on this very thread; ignorant views can be exposed and shown up as wrong. If others who are perhaps undecided on such issues, see such debate, then perhaps such exposure and denouncement can help influence them more positively. Ignorance kept in the dark, can grow and fester unchallenged. The more we can achieve through peaceful means, the less we need to resort to violence.
but linking it to Nazism is downright hateful.
Nonsense. The late Gerald Kaufman, renowned Jewish politician and former Zionist, made the comparison between the IDF and the Nazis.
The idea that Kaufman, a man whose grandmother was shot in her bed by the Nazis for being Jewish, was motivated by hatred towards Jews is clearly ridiculous.
A deep sense of humanity is what motivated Kaufman to become so outspoken in his criticism of Israel.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/britains-oldest-mp-jewish-and-vociferously-anti-israel-dies-aged-86/
You might think that comparing Israeli territorial expansion, ghetto creation, collective punishments, ethnic superiority, demonisation of a people, etc, with similar Nazi policies is inappropriate, but it does not justify accusing those who make the comparison of hate.
Nonsense.
How can you dismiss it as 'nonsense' when it's clearly extremely offensive? Kaufman did not post images of Star of David/Swastika mash-ups all over social media. In fact, this is from the very article you linked to:
In his speech to the House of Commons at the time, Kaufman, who had served as shadow foreign secretary from 1987 to 1992, said it was “time to remind Sharon that the Star of David belongs to all Jews and not to his repulsive government. His actions are staining the Star of David with blood.”
Is more or less what I'm saying.
You might think that comparing Israeli territorial expansion, ghetto creation, collective punishments, ethnic superiority, demonisation of a people, etc, with similar Nazi policies is inappropriate, but it does not justify accusing those who make the comparison of hate.
No; I am condemning the attempts by some to conflate all Jews with the actions of the Israeli regime, and to Nazism. If an individual Jewish person wants to draw comparisons of other Jews to Nazis, then that's their prerogative. It is not for others to do similar.
Kaufman did not post images of Star of David/Swastika mash-ups all over social media.
The fact that Kaufman might have or might not have used social media is totally irrelevant, as is whether he drew pictures of the Star of David and Swastikas to make his point.
The fact remains that he clearly compared the IDF with the Nazis.
Read the Times of Israel article properly:
Gerald Kaufman, who served 47 years in Parliament, urged sanctions against Israel and compared IDF troops to Nazis
https://www.timesofisrael.com/britains-oldest-mp-jewish-and-vociferously-anti-israel-dies-aged-86/
I am condemning the attempts by some to conflate all Jews with the actions of the Israeli regime,
And yet the "anti-semitism" march yesterday was full of people waving Israeli flags. So apparently sometimes Jew=Israel, and sometimes it isn't.
Which by the definition of antisemitism Israel / Zionists ( not sure which) has got most of the world to accept makes him an anti semite
Its of course a bogus definition in my view
Read the Times of Israel article properly:
I did. I also understood the context; it's one Jewish person commenting on the actions of other Jewish people. As was his prerogative. It's a world away from the antisemitic tropes being circulated on social media.
If Israeli govt supporters don't like their govt's policies and their army's actions being compared with those of the nazis, there's a simple solution to that problem. Personally I think the comparison with Apartheid South Africa is a better one but I think that probably flatters the Israelis. The fact that every tinpot white supremacist fascist is lining up on the side of Netanyahu and the IDF should tell everyone what side of the argument they should be on.
And yet the “anti-semitism” march yesterday was full of people waving Israeli flags. So apparently sometimes Jew=Israel, and sometimes it isn’t.
Again, you have to understand context. Because context is very important.
Flags often mean many things to many people. Even within Israel the use of the Israeli flag can be contentious. Anti-government protestors have been waving Israeli flags for months, on weekly demonstrations across Israel, as a way of expressing their 'nationhood'. These have been mainly secular, more 'liberal' Israelis. There will have been people on yesterday's march who just want to show solidarity with a country they feel an affiliation with, same as people waving Palestinian flags. Or Ukrainian flags. Or rainbow flags. Etc. Waving a flag doesn't necessarily mean someone is a 'Zionist', same as it doesn't mean they're a supporter of Hamas.
it’s one Jewish person commenting on the actions of other Jewish people. As was his prerogative
He was comparing the IDF with the Nazis. You claim that he was entitled to because he was a Jew, but non-jews should not be allowed to make that same comparison.
That sounds like straightforward racism to me.
If Israeli govt supporters don’t like their govt’s policies and their army’s actions being compared with those of the nazis, there’s a simple solution to that problem.
Who's an "Israeli government supporter'? I find conflating all Jews with nazis absolutely abhorrent, and I'm most definitely not a supporter of the Israeli regime. I was talking more about the use of the Star of David, a symbol of Judaism that far predates both Nazism and the state of Israel. Because the Star of David has as much to do with the current Israeli government as the crescent moon has to do with Muslim extremist terrorism. The Nazis co-opted the Swastika form Hinduism, let's not forget. But using the SoD in this manner insults and demeans all Jews. I am surprised some are struggling with this.
The fact remains that he clearly compared the IDF with the Nazis.
So what? It doesn't mean that he's right or that its legitimate. There's no moral equivalence between the Nazis and the Israeli state regardless of anyone's views on the plight of the Palestinians. In my view regardless of whether you think the comparison is by itself anti-Semitic, it has two issues 1. it allows the sorts of folks who want to do harm to Jews a space to claim legitimacy and puts Jews in harms way, and 2, it invites the comparisons that Jews should be punished internationally in the same way the Nazis were.
Have the discussion within a context of the history of wider anti Semitism by all means, but just blandly making the comparisons becasue you don't like the actions of the IDF currently and you feel the need to be angry about it is misguided. Just say you don't like how they're behaving, I don't, but I also don't feel the need to compare them against horrors perpetrated against Polish Jews 80 years ago. Compare them to any invading Imperialistic force, the Americans in Vietnam, the Russians in Afghanistan is just as valid.
The fact remains that he clearly compared the IDF with the Nazis.
So what? It doesn’t mean that he’s right or that its legitimate.
Of course not.
Which is precisely why I wrote the following:
You might think that comparing Israeli territorial expansion, ghetto creation, collective punishments, ethnic superiority, demonisation of a people, etc, with similar Nazi policies is inappropriate, but it does not justify accusing those who make the comparison of hate.
You might think that comparing Israeli territorial expansion, ghetto creation, collective punishments, ethnic superiority, demonisation of a people, etc, with similar Nazi policies is inappropriate, but it does not justify accusing those who make the comparison of hate.
There's nothing wrong with making comparisons if you are examining historical similarities and parallels. As long as you remain objective and unprejudiced. But what I'm talking about is the use of imagery to demonise all Jews. To the point where my wife does not feel safe wearing a symbol of her cultural heritage. I myself have been in situations where I have had to keep quiet, or even deny my Muslim heritage. To feel unsafe in such a way, in your own country, is very scary. We are witnessing a massive spoke in racist behaviour, much of it antisemitic and Islamophobic. Against the background of the rise of the far right across Europe, this is of grave concern to many millions of people in the UK and elsewhere. So all I'm asking for, is consideration of this, and for people to be mindful of not spreading images or material that can further perpetuate hatred. It may not be the intention of the person sharing an image, but that could well be the outcome. So try to listen to others if they are expressing concern. Let's try to work towards a situation where anyone can wear a symbol of their cultural heritage, and feel safe.
So what? It doesn’t mean that he’s right or that its legitimate. There’s no moral equivalence between the Nazis and the Israeli state regardless of anyone’s views on the plight of the Palestinians. In my view regardless of whether you think the comparison is by itself anti-Semitic, it has two issues 1. it allows the sorts of folks who want to do harm to Jews a space to claim legitimacy and puts Jews in harms way, and 2, it invites the comparisons that Jews should be punished internationally <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000;">in the same way the Nazis were.
Have the discussion within a context of the history of wider anti Semitism by all means, but just blandly making the comparisons becasue you don’t like the actions of the IDF currently and you feel the need to be angry about it is misguided. Just say you don’t like how they’re behaving, I don’t, but I also don’t feel the need to compare them against horrors perpetrated against Polish Jews 80 years ago. Compare them to any invading Imperialistic force, the Americans in Vietnam, the Russians in Afghanistan is just as valid.
Very well put, and thank you NickC for your thoughts and words.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/26/tommy-robinson-arrested-march-antisemitism-london
I found this bit particularly interesting:
He felt colleagues shunning him after the start last month of the Israel-Hamas war: “I have certainly experienced a number of my colleagues who used to be warm and friendly towards me and they blank me now.
“It’s clear to me that maybe six to eight people who would usually say ‘hi Jeremy’ or ‘good morning’ don’t even look at me and it’s obvious why that is.”
If they used to be "warm and friendly" and say "Hi Jeremy" it sounds fairly conclusive that his colleagues are not anti-semitic.
If recent events has changed their attitude then it is presumably because his colleagues believe that Jeremy is supporting the current Israeli slaughter of civilians in Gaza.
This is yet another classic example of 'if you don't support Israel you are anti-semitic'.
So try to listen to others if they are expressing concern.
Nothing to add to this. It's just worth repeating.
There will have been people on yesterday’s march who just want to show solidarity with a country they feel an affiliation with
You make my point. If Jewish != Israel, why would an anti-semitism march be the place to "show solidarity" with Israel ?
Julia Hately-Brewer and someone that looks like a Harry Enfield creation, talking about Poor Brave Tommy's human rights:<br /><br />
JHB (sounds like a banned substance) telling lies about crowds 'screaming antisemitic hatred' at the peace marches (I've been to a few, and heard nothing of the sort, and very little of that nature has been reported, like a couple of individuals no more), and some rubbish about Poor Brave Tommy's right to attend a march he wasn't welcome at, and other such nonsense. I can't take someone who was happy to be photographed with the racist Boris Johnson at the march, seriously. Especially when they try to distort the truth to suit their own narrative. Guttersnipe.
You make my point. If Jewish != Israel, why would an anti-semitism march be the place to “show solidarity” with Israel ?
Everyone's got their own reasons for attending whatever demonstration they choose. I do feel that some of the waving of Israeli flags was deliberately aimed against those who show solidarity with Palestine, but others may have different reasons. The Israeli flag itself isn't the issues, it's just a flag. Its use however, particularly in this context, could be seen as problematic. For instance, neither my wife not many of her Jewish friends and colleagues would display or wave an Israeli flag (but would wear a SoD, hence my earlier pleas or sensitivity). Amongst the flag-wavers will undoubtedly be some vile, hateful racists (same as some at pro-Palestinian demos), but there will also be those who want peace, and are trying to show solidarity with Israeli friends and families, same as many people flying Palestinian flags, so we mustn't be too quick to judge.
Who’s an “Israeli government supporter’?
I would have thought that quite obvious, anyone who supports the policies and actions of the Israeli govt. Anyway, if the question here is whether the Israeli govt is far right (we really don't need to use the 'n' word) then I think it would be very difficult to say no even based on their actions prior to October 7th let alone after it. Racism, authoritarianism, violence, de-humanising of ethnic groups, it ticks all the boxes. I suppose this is why so many people are marching. We want to keep far right sentiment off our own streets but then our govt gives support or turns a blind eye to a far right govt elsewhere. Back in the 30s that would have been called appeasement.
Anyway, do you think we could stop the Israel talk before another thread is killed? This is mostly about the spread of the far right in Western European democracies and why it's happening.
And yet the “anti-semitism” march yesterday was full of people waving Israeli flags.
Sorry, must have missed that.
Unless you mean the far/extreme right wing inspired islamaphobic hate march that happened yesterday ?
I'm not yet sure how it will all play out, but it doesn't look like yesterday's march was a 'success' if it was genuinely intended as show of solidarity against actual antisemitism. Which is a massive shame, because there is definitely need for this right now. Instead, it's coming across as right-wing reactionism. That much of the talk is about Poor Brave Tommy's human rights being brutally crushed is bad, because it detracts from the serious issue of rising xenophobia in this country. Personally. I'd like to see such a demo go side by side with the ceasefire peace marches, because true solidarity is so vital right now. Nobody wins here. And with the march being so obviously right-wing in terms of its prominent attendees, that's not going to win over people like myself, who would like to show such support. If I have to 'pick a side', then it's not going to be next to the likes of Boris Johnson.
Anyway, do you think we could stop the Israel talk before another thread is killed? This is mostly about the spread of the far right in Western European democracies and why it’s happening.
I thought we were discussing a demonstration in London, which involved elements of the far right, and happened to also involve Israel. Can't really separate that from the conversation. I can't see why the thread would be closed.
Sorry, must have missed that.
Unless you mean the far right inspired islamaphobic hate march that happened yesterday ?
In what way do you think that is either helpful or progressive?
Personally. I didn't find it to be inherently 'Islamophobic' (and I do know a thing or two about that issue), any more than the ceasefire demos are 'antisemitic'. So let's not sling baseless accusations around so easily. I accept that both 'sides' will undoubtedly have nasty elements, but isn't it better to look to what unites, rather than divides us?
but isn’t it better to look to what unites, rather than divides us?
CYCLING
No..wait...bloody roadies..
Tyres.. hang on.
Trail usage... this is getting difficult... 😕
Unless you mean the far right inspired islamaphobic hate march that happened yesterday ?
In what way do you think that is either helpful or progressive?
Personally. I didn’t find it to be inherently ‘Islamophobic’
And yet the march welcomed Boris Johnson, a man who a few pages ago you happily described as a far-right racist:
Boris has made many racist statements during his career, such as describing Muslim women wearing niqabs as ‘letterboxes’, referring to black people as ‘picanninies with watermelon smiles’, and stating that black people have low IQs. By that ‘metric’, I’ll happily call him ‘far right’.
This event has an impressive list of sponsors
And yet the march welcomed Boris Johnson, a man who a few pages ago you happily described as a far-right racist:
Boris was just one attendee. I'm sure there were other far-right characters there too; such events tend to attract them. From earlier:
I accept that both ‘sides’ will undoubtedly have nasty elements
Whilst the CAA and other groups present on Sunday might be viewed as 'right wing' by others, particularly left wing Jewish groups, I'm sure not all welcomed the presence of Boris Johnson and other figures. The same as how on pro-Palestinian demos, not all the speakers and prominent attendees will be welcomed by all of the crowd. That's how it is on such large demos. They tend not to be the echo chambers that small groups and demos can be. also, I doubt many on Sunday's march will see Boris Johnson as far-right, as I do. Some might in fact see him as too liberal. We all have differing perspectives.
I think my wife is attending that.
