Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by pwa »

firedfromthecircus wrote:
pwa wrote: But he has allowed a blurring to occur around opposition to the Israeli government in its relations with the Palestinians, and genuine anti-Jew attitudes. He has not made the distinction clear enough, often enough.


Why is it that he should make that distinction clearly and often? Because it's Israel?
You can be critical of USA domestic and foreign policy without it being suggested you are anti-Christian or anti-Western, so why not critical of Israeli domestic and foreign policy without being accused of anti-Semitism?
It seems to me that there is far too much conflation between perfectly valid criticism of the behaviour of the State of Israel and anti-Semitism, and often for political points scoring or as a stick to beat those who raise concerns. The sooner it stops the better for all concerned.


Antisemitism is a highly sensitive issue, and given the long history of persecution of Jews it is natural that sometimes people see antisemitism where it doesn't actually exist. That is why Ken and others should be especially careful. Not because it is Israel, but because it is Jews. If I were a Jew I am sure I would need the occasional reassurance that any verbal attacks on Israel did not involve anti-Jewish sentiment. Because of history. Ken should know that.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by reohn2 »

Tangled Metal wrote:So you don't think there could be an element of Ken stepping down to help Corbyn by removing one of the causes of Corbyn's accusers saying he hasn't taken strong enough action on those accused of making anti-semitic comments. That he hasn't taken the lead in this matter. That he has been leader of a party that's taken over two years on Ken's case without any sign of a conclusion. By taking the case off the agenda Ken has partly helped Corbyn. Do you not think?

(I'm not giving odds on the answer to that question. Don't bet against a certainty!)

I've not gone right into the Livingstone thing but I know an attack on the present and true Labour party by the Tories when I see it.

It's no secret that you and I are at different ends of the political spectrum That's our freedom and choice.

There's one thing that nearly always outs a right wing Tory,when they're losing and being shown up for what they are,they switch from attacking the policies of the opposition to attacking the individual Ive experienced it on this forum,not from you I hasten to add but from one or two others,and they show themselves up for the bigots they are.

Corbyn is popular,he's popular because he has an alternative agenda based on people and he's honest,dishonest people don't like it,I even saw Cameron try to belittle Corbyn on his clothing once.Honest people see and identify with the current real Labour party because they are real people and not pretenders to some great UK that only ever was for an upper class in a sickly class system.
IMO the Tories are dishonerable shysters interested in keeping the status quo by hook or by crook,lining there own pockets by exploiting the poor and claiming there's no other solution

I don't think Livingstone is an antisemite as I don't think the Labour party is antisemitic,yes there's antisemitism in it like there'll be racists,and an anti gay element just like any other political party.

All that said I do think it's about time someone pointed the finger as to where the middle East problems lie and that predominantly is with Israel and it's expansion and crushing of the Palastinians then claiming they're not the aggressors when the Palastinians react in the only way they can.
Am I an antisemite?
No,but I'm anti Isreal in what its policies are and the way they're being implemented.
I'm also opposed to present hoodlum currently in the Whitehouse who seeks to provoke war and mayhem by moving the US embassy to Jerusalem in a deliberate and antagonistic move toward the whole Arab world.

To be clear,I wish the whole of religion could be seen for what it is,exclusivism an insurance policy that never pays out and mechanism for war and distrust among people,but that's for another thread.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
I could just say that Labour never or have never in the past attacked Tory.
Sometimes defensive tactics turn into offensive and who is attacking who.
The person in question...........I Don't like for him, not any other reason.
There is I feel a deeper meaning of dislike for him other than political I think we can all see that.
(you need I think to look deeper on people in power and who their friends are and who and why they would support such people)
I am sure he has friends in many organisations and he will rear his head again.

I agree whole heartily on the Israel thing, there is I feel a hidden agenda with the way USA supports Israel with billions.
Edited for grammar :oops:
Last edited by NATURAL ANKLING on 23 May 2018, 9:33am, edited 1 time in total.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by reohn2 »

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
I could just say that Labour never or have never in the past attached Tory.
Sometimes defensive tactics turn into offensive and who is attacking who.
The person in question...........I Don't like for him, not any other reason.
There is I feel a deeper meaning of dislike for him other than political I think we can all see that.
(you need I think to look deeper on people in power and who their friends are and who and why they would support such people)
I am sure he has friends in many organisations and he will rear his head again.

You'll need to be a little more clear on what you mean in you assertions of Livingstone

I agree whole heartily on the Israel thing, there is I feel a hidden agenda with the way USA supports Israel with billions.

HIDDEN!
It's as clear and obvious as the nose on yer face,the US and UK have been supporting Israel on what ever they do.
And so as not to appear antisemitic,the same goes for Saudi Arabia another despotic regeme we and the US fall over ourselves to support in anyway we can :evil:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by bovlomov »

Much focus is directed towards Labour's supposed anti-semitism and associations with anti-semites, while the Conservatives get a free ride. Yet the Tories' record on this seems a lot worse than Labour's. Informally, Tory MP's have regularly associated themselves with anti-semites, holocaust deniers and white supremacists, and there is an endless stream of Tory activists and councillors being exposed for their racist views. Formally, the Conservative Party is part of a rather unpleasant group in the European Parliament that includes people with all sorts of colourful opinions. That the Board of Deputies and the Israeli Embassy are so quiet about this suggests that accusations of anti-semitism are being thrown around for political advantage.
The Board of Deputies doesn't represent Jewish opinion. Yet they are given the airtime as if they do, and they exploit that to promote a blatantly party political agenda. While the outgoing president of the BOD, Jonathan Arkush, accused Corbyn of swimming in a sewer of anti-semitism, he could have taken the opportunity to speak about the sewer that Theresa May swims in. He didn't, I assume, because his dislike of Corbyn's policies is stronger than his desire to tackle anti-semitism.
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by mercalia »

I looked at online some of the articles that criticise Livingstone - they all claim he was wrong in his views in that Hitler "supported" Zionism but that assumes a hostile interpretation of what "support" means ie they want it to mean "believe in" or "sympathetic to" and Hitler clearly was neither of those. But there is another way to read "supports" which is more instrumental and real politik - Hilter "supported" anything that would remove the jews from Germany. I am puzzled this very natural interpretation is ignored. One reason I think is that Livingstone seemed to want to rehabilitate Hitler in saying that he went mad when he decided to kill them all? that suggests he wasnt mad before? And that makes Jews uneasy and feel threatened, rightly so, since Hilter's policies were heinious before his ultimate soln. On the other hand the word "mad" in common use is a slippery word and can mean so many things, not a good word to use therefore. Before the ultimate solution Hitler may have "just been" rational but evil, after, some thing else, mad as a hatter: but probably not a distinction worth making?

I think the anti-livingstone brigade made it worse than it needed to be, keeping on harking back to some thing that happened more than 2 years a go. what was a casual & careless remark from a man from an era where things were less sophisticated where now you have to cross every "T" and dot every "I". It should have been a blip, it is not as if he keeps on making these type of comments ( those were his only ones? I stand to be corrected) unlike Boris who keeps on putting his foot in his gob? Livingsone keeps on reiterating what he said the way he said it as his antagonists wont let it rest? They have created the noxious atmosphere, a self fulfilling prophecy? if you keep on picking at a wound no wonder it dont heal

Livingstones comments came as support for a fellow ( lady) mp who published a cartoon of Israel superimposed on the USA - that was attacked and she was made to recant. More unfair treatment as it seems the cartoon was a criticism of US policy insupporting Israel what ever they did, refusing to criticise them and support UN judgements. You could have captioned the cartoon, "USA if you like them so much give them space in the USA and let the Palestinians have their land back"? This is nothing about denying jews the right to self determination at all.
Last edited by mercalia on 22 May 2018, 11:13am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by bovlomov »

I agree with most of the above. But I don't think Livingstone was trying to rehabilitate Hitler. I think he was trying to be provocative, but he hadn't thought it through, and he over-egged it.

For me, it was the 'before he went mad' bit that jarred. The rest of Livingstone's argument was pretty uncontroversial. Even if you disagree with his analysis, he wasn't saying anything outrageous - unless, of course, it suits you to be outraged.
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by mercalia »

bovlomov wrote:I agree with most of the above. But I don't think Livingstone was trying to rehabilitate Hitler. I think he was trying to be provocative, but he hadn't thought it through, and he over-egged it.

For me, it was the 'before he went mad' bit that jarred. The rest of Livingstone's argument was pretty uncontroversial. Even if you disagree with his analysis, he wasn't saying anything outrageous - unless, of course, it suits you to be outraged.


I have changed seems to seemed as it was matter of how it appeared to onlookers?

Did livingstone ever clarify what he thought hitler was before he went mad? dont think so, as all the critical attention was put on the "support" aspect, wrongly I think, so he never felt the need to clarify. as I said "mad" is a slippery word ok in ordinary banter but probably not a good word to use where Livingstone did
Last edited by mercalia on 22 May 2018, 11:22am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by bovlomov »

mercalia wrote:
bovlomov wrote:I agree with most of the above. But I don't think Livingstone was trying to rehabilitate Hitler. I think he was trying to be provocative, but he hadn't thought it through, and he over-egged it.

For me, it was the 'before he went mad' bit that jarred. The rest of Livingstone's argument was pretty uncontroversial. Even if you disagree with his analysis, he wasn't saying anything outrageous - unless, of course, it suits you to be outraged.


I have changed seems to seemed as it was matter of how it appeared to onlookers?

Ah, yes.
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by pwa »

Ken speaks freely, like some bloke down the pub. The trouble is, if the bloke down the pub says something that could be interpreted as meaning Hitler had a phase when he was normal and acceptable, he can correct himself and everyone will make a joke out of it. Ken lives in the public eye and by now he should have acquired a bit more discipline about what he says in public.
Ben@Forest
Posts: 3647
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by Ben@Forest »

mercalia wrote: I think the anti-livingstone brigade made it worse than it needed to be, keeping on harking back to some thing that happened more than 2 years a go. what was a casual & careless remark from a man from an era where things were less sophisticated where now you have to cross every "T" and dot every "I". It should have been a blip, it is not as if he keeps on making these type of comments ( those were his only ones? I stand to be corrected) unlike Boris who keeps on putting his foot in his gob? Livingsone keeps on reiterating what he said the way he said it as his antagonists wont let it rest? They have created the noxious atmosphere, a self fulfilling prophecy? if you keep on picking at a wound no wonder it dont heal


Livingstone has held this belief for a lot longer than that. His book 'You Can't Say That' (2011) quoted extensively from a book called 'Zionism in the Age of Dictators' by Lenni Brenner. Brenner is a Jewish Marxist historian whose work has been sometimes been controversial and may be described as revisionist. It was Brenner's views that Livingstone was repeating but it is clear that this is the mindset Livingstone has had for long time. It's also worth noting that Brenner's work is often used/quoted by far-right groups though Brenner himself absolutely stresses that the Holocaust happened.
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by mercalia »

Ben@Forest wrote:
mercalia wrote: I think the anti-livingstone brigade made it worse than it needed to be, keeping on harking back to some thing that happened more than 2 years a go. what was a casual & careless remark from a man from an era where things were less sophisticated where now you have to cross every "T" and dot every "I". It should have been a blip, it is not as if he keeps on making these type of comments ( those were his only ones? I stand to be corrected) unlike Boris who keeps on putting his foot in his gob? Livingsone keeps on reiterating what he said the way he said it as his antagonists wont let it rest? They have created the noxious atmosphere, a self fulfilling prophecy? if you keep on picking at a wound no wonder it dont heal


Livingstone has held this belief for a lot longer than that. His book 'You Can't Say That' (2011) quoted extensively from a book called 'Zionism in the Age of Dictators' by Lenni Brenner. Brenner is a Jewish Marxist historian whose work has been sometimes been controversial and may be described as revisionist. It was Brenner's views that Livingstone was repeating but it is clear that this is the mindset Livingstone has had for long time. It's also worth noting that Brenner's work is often used/quoted by far-right groups though Brenner himself absolutely stresses that the Holocaust happened.


is strange that it was only then in 2016 and his defence of the fellow mp I mentioned ( cant remember her name now ) that it all got heated up? or was it heated up in 2011 also?

What belief? thats the question. it seems that Livingstone was dealt with in a deliberate hostile way viz interpreting what " supports zionism" means - no one denies that for a time the nazis played along with the idea of deporting the jews - I understand that about 50,000 went that way and it was part of a ruse to stop a boycott of German goods by jews worldwide, where they had to translate their property and wealth into means to buy german goods when they got to Palestine. That part of Livingstones views are not controversial. What makes his views controversial is a deliberate intention to claim that Livingstone believed that the Nazis wanted/believed in an Israeli state. Did Livingstone ever claim that? dont think so. So why the hostile interpretation?

a few references

look at the headline
https://www.timesofisrael.com/livingstone-quits-uk-labour-party-says-anti-semitism-claims-are-a-distraction/

I cant at the moment refind the articles I looked at last night from journalists who deliberately interpreted Livingstone in a hostile way. Search seems to have changed since last night, now all about him leaving the party
firedfromthecircus
Posts: 310
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 7:50pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by firedfromthecircus »

pwa wrote:
Antisemitism is a highly sensitive issue, and given the long history of persecution of Jews it is natural that sometimes people see antisemitism where it doesn't actually exist. That is why Ken and others should be especially careful. Not because it is Israel, but because it is Jews. If I were a Jew I am sure I would need the occasional reassurance that any verbal attacks on Israel did not involve anti-Jewish sentiment. Because of history. Ken should know that.


All racism is a highly sensitive issue for those who experience it, and there is a long history of persecution of many races. Singling out one form of racism as a special case worthy of extra reassurance is arguably racist!
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by pwa »

firedfromthecircus wrote:
pwa wrote:
Antisemitism is a highly sensitive issue, and given the long history of persecution of Jews it is natural that sometimes people see antisemitism where it doesn't actually exist. That is why Ken and others should be especially careful. Not because it is Israel, but because it is Jews. If I were a Jew I am sure I would need the occasional reassurance that any verbal attacks on Israel did not involve anti-Jewish sentiment. Because of history. Ken should know that.


All racism is a highly sensitive issue for those who experience it, and there is a long history of persecution of many races. Singling out one form of racism as a special case worthy of extra reassurance is arguably racist!


I'll risk that. Israel was set up as the home of the Jews. So when someone lays into Israel on a regular basis they are laying into the land of the Jews. And there is a real danger that it can look like they are targeting the Jews, as a people. I know of no other land set up for an ethnic group. That itself is racist, of course, but that's another matter. Nobody is saying other forms of racism don't matter, but in this case Ken has badly misjudged sensitivities, and if he didn't think that mattered then, he probably thinks it matters now.
Ben@Forest
Posts: 3647
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Ken Livingstone has left the labour party

Post by Ben@Forest »

mercalia wrote:What belief? thats the question. it seems that Livingstone was dealt with in a deliberate hostile way viz interpreting what " supports zionism" means - no one denies that for a time the nazis played along with the idea of deporting the jews - I understand that about 50,000 went that way and it was part of a ruse to stop a boycott of German goods by jews worldwide, where they had to translate their property and wealth into means to buy german goods when they got to Palestine. That part of Livingstones views are not controversial. What makes his views controversial is a deliberate intention to claim that Livingstone believed that the Nazis wanted/believed in an Israeli state. Did Livingstone ever claim that? dont think so. So why the hostile interpretation?


What Livingstone said was "Adolf Hitler was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews". Now if you think that persecuting people, extorting money from them and allowing some of those who fled to get some of their stolen assets back is Zionism you have a very odd definition. Just as Livingstone does.

And the 'Hitler went mad" bit is disingenuous too- he was already mad. Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf (published in 1925 eight years before he came to power):

"While the Zionists try to make the rest of the World believe that the national consciousness of the Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb Goyim. It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organisation for their international world swindler, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.”


Does that sound like someone who was pushing for a Zionist state?
Post Reply