| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Is this a less then subtle way of insinuating I have a mental illness? That I’m brainwashed and in your opinion have the mental capacity of a ten year old because I don’t share alt right nonsense?Originally Posted by RonnieBird
My limited education also goes as far as having a law degree and managing to hold down relatively well paid jobs but please do enlighten us oh wise one.
Your wasting your breath with anti semitsim and new socialist, they are all in denial ,nothing has been said , no investigation or suspensions , the social media rants are fake news the Labour party members who complained about it are Blairites .The Jewish arm of Labour party is making it all up and they are very happy and not asked many times for apologizes .
As Bowie famously said its hunky-dory ( דורי האני )
I never said anything of the sort, what I did say was that it was logically implied!
But only one group can be right. For example, climate change cannot exist and not exist at the same time
PS Icke has said some interesting things, it's not all lizards and aliens! You just need the ability to process multiple sources of information and then know how to collate the results. Relying on a person at the Guardian to do this for you is a fatal mistake
,But only one group can be right. For example, climate change cannot exist and not exist at the same time
PS Icke has said some interesting things, it's not all lizards and aliens! You just need the ability to process multiple sources of information and then know how to collate the results. Relying on a person at the Guardian to do this for you is a fatal mistake
So you believe everything you read on certain alt right sites and you're an independent thinker, I sometimes question what I see in the Guardian and on the BBC website and I'm brainwashed? I see.
I'm a socialist who is critical of Labour on anti Semitism and Brexit, where do I fit into your stereotyping?
Excuse me, you did.
Having now read what Ronnie Bird said, I may as well reply to him. About a fortnight ago, I resolved that I would not allow myself to get so worked up about what certain posters said on here and I've stuck to that resolution. If Mr Bird thinks that suggesting that climate change deniers nearly always share certain other views (e.g. the ones Cardiff Irish 2 listed) when there is so much evidence around to back it up and that suggesting that there is brainwashing going on of both the political right and left is a sign of mental illness, then I would suggest that, if anyone is suffering from mental illness, it isn't Cardiff Irish 2 or I.
No, I wasn't insinuating that you, Bob Wilson or ten year olds have a mental illness. Nor was I saying that you've got the mental capacity of a ten year old, but rather referring to the fact that ten year olds have been involved in politics which they don't understand by their teachers and globalist interest groups. That's a different but hugely more effective form of brainwashing of course.
Funny you should mention Law degrees because I've got one of those myself, but I tend to think it's a different sort to yours. Mind you, the term 'education' has a wider meaning than that doesn't it ?
Well as I also had to explain to Cardiff Irish, I didn't say that either of you were mentally ill. That was a separate point in a different paragraph and suggested that increased levels of mental illness might be the result of someone warping the minds of those who are vulnerable to it.
Now, in point of fact the people who invented the climate change scam are very right wing capitalists who border on fascism. Don't you think there's something a bit worrying about the term " climate change denier " by the way ?
Can you personally explain this " science" which proves man made climate change by the way , or are you just repeating the phrase ?
It's a computer prediction you know, just like the ones Wales Online publish about the championship final table ,or predict which horse will win a race . That's about as scientific as it gets in reality and I know people of all political persuasions who can see that it's bollocks.
Who has said there is no anti-semitism amongst Labour Party members?
On here or in the Labour Party? A single name will do - any poster or any Labour representative (from any part of the party).
Getting tedious again and risks this thread turning into another Groundhog Day. But, anyway....
What do you understand anti-semitism to mean if you think you can claim that 'socialists' defend it? Maybe leave out your warped idea of what socialism is about (collectivism, equality of opportunity, fighting discrimination and exploitation.... you know, what normal people with no mental illness understand by the term) and focus on anti-semitism.
If you mean hatred of and/or discrimination against Jewish people as Jews then you are talking your usual crap.
If you mean opposition to the political ideology of Zionism and criticism not just of the policies of the Israeli state but also the central state ideology (explicitly since the Jewish State bill was passed in July 2018) combined with publicly discussing the terrorist mass murders and ethnic cleansing from the 1948 Nakba - expulsion of 700,000 Palestinian Arabs - onwards, then you are right - a lot of socialists of all kinds defend that view.
Some of the people charged and expelled from the Labour Party were anti-semites or at least made clear anti-semitic comments usually on social media - often repeating age-old racist tropes. Many were anti-Zionists. Many of those are Jewish themselves (like Tony Greenstein) and from families that went through the Holocaust (like Cyril Chilson) - in a few cases the anti-Zionist critics denounced by Margaret Hodge (90% of the names on her lists turned out not to be Labour Party members) and others as anti-semites are Auchwitz survivors (Hajo Meyer for one). Hundreds of people accused in the anti-semitism witchhunt have finally been cleared (again a high proportion are themselves Jewish) but not before they were dragged through the mud.
In my opinion the independent and academic analysis of anti-semitism in the Labour Party shows that it exists and has to be stamped out - and it has not just emerged with Corbyn. Labour (according to the research I have read) is no more at fault here than any other party and racist/anti-semitic attitudes amongst its members are lower than most (certainly than the Tories) and dropping. However, to use the buzz-word, it has been weaponised to achieve the joint objectives of attacking Corbyn and silencing critics of Israel (especially in the DBS movement). Both objectives have been successful.
Corbyn has not handled it well - he cannot always hand-wring and try to avoid conflict, and John McDonnell has been far to keen to appease the LFI and right wing media. It doesn't close the crisis down, it just encourages those who are cynically using it for their own purposes. It also makes it much harder to confront real anti-semitism (not the 'new' anti-semitism of the IHRA definition plus 11 garbled examples that the Israeli government has been pushing for years).
I have little sympathy for some like Ken Livingston but I do for Jackie Walker (mostly), Thomas Suarez and many others who now find themselves libelled and abused because they are anti-Zionists and critics of the Israeli state. In a week when there have been more anti-semitic murders in Germany, and a rising count of incidents from grafitti to verbal abuse to desecration of cemetries,
My understanding of both anti semitism is quite precise, as would yours be if you'd read stuff on the subject.
Socialism as we know it today is defined in the multifarious books of Karl Marx, particularly "Das Kapital" and the "Communist Manifesto". I suggest that you read them and then it will no longer be a matter of debate or opinion to you. Unlike a lot of people here , you'd probably be capable of doing this, so I recommend it.
Given that he invented modern socialism , it's no big surprise that Mark himself was as mad as a badger, and he wrote so many books that I doubt whether he had time to do anything else. Anyhoo...one which pertains here particularly is an entertaining little number called ,
"On the Jewish Question".......
You really should read it, but here's a little snippet,
"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew – not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities…. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange…. The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.[...] The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him, money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews. [...] In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism."
By the way Huxtering is using false logic to con people.
I don't read alt right sites. I follow an equal number of left/right journalists, politicians and social commentators on Twitter, including lardy's favourite ones.
And yet so many of the things you post on here come off Alt right sites. What you say doesn't reflect the point I was making though, even if you did read all of the stuff you claim to do -, you, without fail, come to the same anti globalist conclusions, whereas I am at least capable of sometimes being critical of the people and organisations I generally support and yet I'm the one who is brainwashed?
Thanks for the reading advice. I have read The Communist Manifesto (many times) and On The Jewish Question too. I have to confess that I only managed to get through Volume 1 of Capital, and that was 40 years ago. I somehow doubt that your reading on these subjects is as wide or deep as you imply. You certainly manage to throw book titles and ideas around as if you had only just stumbled on them on Wikipedia, and managed to misunderstand (willfully or not) most of it.
Your claim that Marx 'invented modern socialism' (I assume in your mind there is something very distinctive about 'modern' socialism) is clearly nonsense. He was a major contributor to the socialist and emerging communist movements, but not the inventor. Even if you choose to ignore the British legacy from the Peasants Revolt (though not many peasants involved) - 'When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?' - through the English Civil War (Freeborn John Lilburne and the Levellers), into the eighteenth century and Jacobin support for the American and French revolutions, you still come up against a tapestry of emerging socialist ideas and organisations in Britain and across Europe that predate Marx by decades at least.
You are right to say that the language of On The Jewish Question has been used by many critics to label Marx as an anti-semite. Many other commentators have refuted the claim. It was written in the early 1840s as a polemic against a pamphlet by Bruno Bauer, and was arguing for the political emancipation of Jewish people in Prussia. Marx was disputing the idea put forward by Bauer that Jews would first have to ditch their religion before achieving equality! The language is clearly of its time and would not be acceptable now - but I don't think it is evidence of anti-semitism or that it was proof that Marx was a 'self hating' or 'the wrong type of' Jew to use the current labels thrown about by political Zionists.
I was just having a look at some of the comments on Marx's use of language and saw this reference to the former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks from his book The Politics Of Hope: 'he regards application of the term "antisemitism" to Marx as an anachronism because when Marx wrote "On the Jewish Question", virtually all major philosophers had expressed similar views, and the word "antisemitism" had not yet been coined, let alone developed a racial component, and little awareness existed of the depths of European prejudice against Jews. Marx thus simply expressed the commonplace thinking of his era'
This is the same Jonathan Sacks (Zionist pro-Tory) who denounced Corbyn as an existential threat to the British Jewish community of the back of his comment in a Westminster event with a Palestinian ambassador that a couple of Zionist hecklers 'lacked a sense of British irony' even though they had probably been born in the UK. According to Sacks this was more shocking and threatening than Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech. He is not a natural defender of Marx or socialism - but even he understood the period and the context.
What I have posted will become mainstream news, I am just ahead of the curve. We already know that everything lardy posted on the subject was a load of rubbish. Once the truth is revealed, I will be vindicated.
That's a lot of nonsense. You can't possibly relate all these historic events to socialism and to try to do that shows a misunderstanding of the concept. Mostly these people wanted equality ,freedom and representation, which is quite contrary to socialism with its all powerful state and destruction of the individual, together with his religious and racial identity, and his ability to succeed or excel .
I doubt whether anyone has read Marx over and over because it's so boring, but if what you say is correct then you should read some other stuff too. Since you like lefties so much check out Trotsy's views of socialism and anti semitism.
If you read Mein Kampf you'll see that Adolf says some pretty similar stuff about Jews , as did Stalin ,and that's because it's the default position of socialists. As with labour today, there's always an excuse or qualification for anti semitism , ( the Jews are clever people but they are a danger to Germany because they trade with the enemy ..... It's not the Jews we hate, but the actions of the Israeli government against Arab Moslems we also invade and bomb ......)
Dress it up however you like. It comes down to the same evil thing and ,unlike the stuff we ban and make a fuss about today, it is genuinely dangerous to many human beings. I don't accuse you of wanting another hollocaust because I'm sure you don't understand what your dealing with - nor did the mass of people in Germany who fell for it , but it's no less dangerous or wicked for any of that.
I have just realised that was supposed to be a reply to me not to Paul.
What an incoherent, ignorant pile of horseshit! Even if you intended to talk about communism not socialism (which makes a nonsense of your attack on the 'socialist' Labour Party) and you were even more narrowly trying to describe the objectives of a Leninist Party after 1905 (clearly you are not looking at the 1st or 2nd Internationals in the period between the 1848 revolutions and the Paris Commune - the period of Marx) you have succeeded in confusing yourself and substituting crass propaganda (worthy of Goebbels) for history.
I have done many years of checking out Trotsky's writings, thanks. What point or reference are you grasping for? He, like many of the members and leaders of left-wing organisations in that period and later, was Jewish. The Bolsheviks believed that the Tsarist regime was inherently anti-semitic (through the Orthodox Church, secret police, black hundreds and periodic pogroms for political purposes) and had to be overthrown if Jews were to be free. Most of the leaders of the revolution had the same view (it was part of the party programme). When Stalin seized power over the party and state apparatus some Tsarist anti-semitic language was given space again.
If your attack is on Stalinism why not just say so? I would agree with some of that. But instead you have gone back to your sad little rant about equating Nazism with socialism (by way of Stalin it seems) and then seem to imply that socialists and other anti-racists are working (deliberately or unknowingly) to bring about another holocaust.
You really are disgraceful! I thought I'd seen it all from you, but there you go finding a new and sickening low.
I think you're getting silly with the name calling there Jon, which is your only option I suppose.
As far as dissecting the various incarnations of socialism in order to cherry pick the less wicked and dishonest examples, good luck with that. Similarly with disowning the better known socialist atrocities.
I'm sure you believe this stuff, so I won't start calling you "disgraceful" or anything, but I'm afraid that most people these days just don't.
Incidentally, it's not disgraceful to disagree with anyone or any philosophy , it's just an alternative opinion. Of course socialism doesn't allow dissenting opinions as we know by virtue of the many people it has murdered for that .
Finally, it's just daft to say that socialists are anti racist when even the modern Labour Party has been caught out for anti semitism ....but that's where we came in
Come on Ronnie, give up gracefully. Anyone can see you're just a very average guy with a debilitating grievance and shit scared of Socialism. I'm afraid you don't really contribute anything material to any debate. Give in son, you've been skewered intellectually though I imagine you could be a brilliant bricklayer or plasterer so that's all to your credit.
Just comparing Ronnies comment against the content of your response its a bit rich casting doubt on his intellect , (give in son ) almost Ray Winstone , (bricklayer or plasterer) arnt they the bread and butter of socialism? bit nasty to suggest they may lack intelligence because of thier skill sets , not very inclusive , or social minded 😂
LOM - before you post anymore drooling nonsense I would like this answered too.
After my degree, Masters and professional qualifications, I had a fantastically rewarding career. I was an examiner for a chartered body and served on its international committee. I regularly met and advised ministers and was seconded to advise and support foreign governments before moving on to lead major change programmes and then grow my own company. I have been honoured for my services.
Now some of these things are true, some are exaggeration and some are total lies. You can be anybody you want to be on a social messageboard and I guess if you hoover up the odd gullible sycophant per 1000 posts then if you were of a certain narcissistic tendency then you might think the effort was worthwhile.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
