EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 915
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10953 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12534 Posts
On July 18 2017 10:04 LegalLord wrote: The complaints themselves don't underlie antisemitic attitudes - the propensity with which they are propagated do. The concentration on Israel of all countries by the aforementioned groups can be described as nothing short of obsessive. Israel gets a lot of focus because very few people get to do bad shit and have a bunch of people jump to their defense and say that everything's fine. We could say that ISIS or Saudi Arabia are bad all day too, but when we do that we never encounter voices that argue the opposite, so we tend to move on quicker. | ||
|
mozoku
United States708 Posts
On July 18 2017 10:11 Nebuchad wrote: Israel gets a lot of focus because very few people get to do bad shit and have a bunch of people jump to their defense and say that everything's fine. We could say that ISIS or Saudi Arabia are bad all day too, but when we do that we never encounter voices that argue the opposite, so we tend to move on quicker. It's not just on internet forums though. According to Wistrich, "a third of all critical resolutions passed by [the UN] Human Rights Commission during the past forty years have been directed exclusively at Israel. By way of comparison, there has not been a single resolution even mentioning the massive violations of human rights in China, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Syria, or Zimbabwe." Source What's the UN's excuse? | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
| ||
|
mozoku
United States708 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:24 a_flayer wrote: Are you saying the UN is anti-Semitic? No, I'm saying that the UN's focus on Israel can't be explained by human rights or the fact that they can "just move on" because nobody is defending Russia, China, Syria, North Korea, etc. However, the UN is a body of individual states. If enough of the states have veiled anti-Semitic views, it would show up in the UN's resolutions. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18441 Posts
On July 18 2017 13:33 mozoku wrote: No, I'm saying that the UN's focus on Israel can't be explained by human rights or the fact that they can "just move on" because nobody is defending Russia, China, Syria, North Korea, etc. However, the UN is a body of individual states. If enough of the states have veiled anti-Semitic views, it would show up in the UN's resolutions. Wow, that's quite a stretch. 1) Israel is a particularly difficult conflict that has been going on for 70 years (in its current format). The only other conflict that comes close to that is NK, but unless they mess with SK or build nukes, nobody really gives a shit what they do, because their human rights abuses are internal, whereas Israeli HR abuses are seen as those of a conquering nation oppressing Palestinians. Whether that's true or not is irrelevant: it's not seen as an internal affair and the surrounding Arabic nations love to use this narrative. You could point to China and Tibet, but China has a veto, so any resolution against China is doomed from the start. 2) it's also not talking about Europe. Moreover, Israel is used as a political pawn to rule up anti-America sentiment in Arabic countries (and Iran). It's easy: propose anti-Israel resolution in UN, wait for US to veto, then complain internally how US hates you. There is an anti-Semitic component to that too, but I doubt you'd find many ppl disagreeing that Arabic countries are quite anti-Semitic. The few times the US doesn't veto are also political. Europe doesn't really have much to do with this: it's a political game between the US and Arabic nations (and Iran). So those are at least 2 pretty large issues about how UN resolutions are a terrible proxy for illustrating anti-Semitism in Europe. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Bing it and pick an article to your liking, I will link neither extreme of un-nuanced news coverage on this issue, but it's been a fairly big deal over the past few days. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Bad news for those Soros haters: in your system money lives on in the hands of those that Soros wants it to have. You don't want a system that breaks dynasties? Then deal with the personal political wishlists of the few, not the many. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1967 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2889 Posts
I also happen to think that this view is largely correct. I do get that many people who identify with the left feel insulted and get defensive when such things are said but that doesn't necessarily make them any less true. I think the main reason is that some (it might even be many) people in leading positions within the leftist movements as well as fringe organizations with ties to movements are more or less anti-semitic even if the grass roots are not. While a grass root supporter might not be opposed to jews or Israel in particular he doesn't really have any qualms about protesting against them or participating in a boycott. However every time something happens in Israel (and often when nothing happens as well) a multitude of people in leading positions or fringe groups around the left call for protests on the street, in the stores and in the media. While there is certainly a point to the protests the leanings of the instigators means that their is a volume of protests against Israel from the left that is completely unproportional to any other country. Over time it's become politically correct to protest Israel so it's difficult for anyone to question this from within the left themselves. Examples of this is when two leading politicians from the Green Party in Sweden (one of them a minister) had to leave because of their radical Islamist leanings. If you look at more organized protests against Israel you also often find organisations with ties to PLO and such in the background. As an outside observer the picture is pretty clear that driving individuals and groups would rather talk about Israels abuse of human rights than Saudi Arabia abuse of human rights and that this shows in both the amount of protests and reporting. Again, I don't think this reflects the view of the average person with ideals that lean towards the left or the average journalist (who also have ideals that lean towards the left) and it doesn't necessarily have to be manipulative in nature either. It's very difficult to make people think or do something but it's far easier to make them talk about something (agenda setting) and if you already think that it's something bad from the start you are far more likely to protest it or write a negative op-ed piece every time it's brought up. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12534 Posts
On July 19 2017 02:02 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: The original point was that much of the criticism from the left was anti-semitic. This is way different from all of the people with left leaning ideas hating jews. I also happen to think that this view is largely correct. I do get that many people who identify with the left feel insulted and get defensive when such things are said but that doesn't necessarily make them any less true. I think the main reason is that some (it might even be many) people in leading positions within the leftist movements as well as fringe organizations with ties to movements are more or less anti-semitic even if the grass roots are not. While a grass root supporter might not be opposed to jews or Israel in particular he doesn't really have any qualms about protesting against them or participating in a boycott. However every time something happens in Israel (and often when nothing happens as well) a multitude of people in leading positions or fringe groups around the left call for protests on the street, in the stores and in the media. While there is certainly a point to the protests the leanings of the instigators means that their is a volume of protests against Israel from the left that is completely unproportional to any other country. Over time it's become politically correct to protest Israel so it's difficult for anyone to question this from within the left themselves. Examples of this is when two leading politicians from the Green Party in Sweden (one of them a minister) had to leave because of their radical Islamist leanings. If you look at more organized protests against Israel you also often find organisations with ties to PLO and such in the background. As an outside observer the picture is pretty clear that driving individuals and groups would rather talk about Israels abuse of human rights than Saudi Arabia abuse of human rights and that this shows in both the amount of protests and reporting. Again, I don't think this reflects the view of the average person with ideals that lean towards the left or the average journalist (who also have ideals that lean towards the left) and it doesn't necessarily have to be manipulative in nature either. It's very difficult to make people think or do something but it's far easier to make them talk about something (agenda setting) and if you already think that it's something bad from the start you are far more likely to protest it or write a negative op-ed piece every time it's brought up. You'd need a lot more than what you offered in this post to make an accusation such as this. It isn't supported by the (little) evidence you provide. It's also a standard that I doubt you apply to every case. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2889 Posts
I also think these people are a minority and that most people join in because the criticism is generally neither unfair or untrue. The end result has been that the volume of criticism is very large however and that it sometimes feels unproportional. Amnesty international regularly does drives to put the spotlight on various topics that are underreported. I dont see how it would be controversial to say that there seems to be a variety of groups which aim to place the spotlight at Israel at all times and that in general they seem to be pretty effective at that. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
Oshuy
Netherlands529 Posts
On July 19 2017 09:42 Nyxisto wrote: related to anti-semitism, what's going on with Macron's statement about the Vel d'Hiv crimes and the rejection of responsibility from Mélenchon and the far-right? This is again one of these things where the far-left and the far-right start to sound alike. Accepted fact for both sides : the Vichy government in occupied France actively helped rounding up and arresting 13 000+ jews in 1942. The arrests were made by the french police forces and only about 100 out of 13 000 survived the camps. In 1995 the president J. Chirac accepted the responsibility of France, this year Macron repeated the statement. This line considers that regardless of who requested the arrests and who gave the order, french people carried them out and the country and its people share the guilt. The other side is linked to a decades long debate on the legitimacy of the Vichy government. Le Pen, Melenchon (and a few others) state that since the republic was abolished on July 1940, the Vichy government wasn't representative of anything and was just a puppet of the 3rd Reich. This means Vichy actions cannot be seen as incriminating for the country as a whole. This line considers the people carrying the orders only have an individual responsibility and since the orders were coming from the Nazis and not from a legitimate french government, the responsibility does not lie with France as a country. | ||
|
corumjhaelen
France6884 Posts
In that, at least, Mélenchon et Le Pen are the rightful heirs to de Gaulle :D Also, French police went further than German orders stated, arrests for instance including children... | ||
| ||
