Derek Hatton

Not cycling, but still important.

Moderator: Joan

Iris
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 755
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by Iris » 4 years ago

JohnToo wrote:
4 years ago
Could I nonetheless entice you into venturing an opinion as to whether the reported comments are antisemitic?
No, you can't. As I said, I'm not commenting either way.
0 x

Iris
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 755
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by Iris » 4 years ago

Regulator wrote:
4 years ago
Nope....

Try asking Jo Maugham.
Well, that's cryptic. And borderline twattery.

At 7:15 I read your comment, claiming that Freedland had not withdrawn his accusation, and marked "3 hours ago". I pointed out that Freedland had in fact withdrawn his comment, and apologised for his error, before you posted, making you wrong. And all you can do is invoke someone completely different?
1 x

ransos
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 335
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by ransos » 4 years ago

Iris wrote:
4 years ago
No, you can't. As I said, I'm not commenting either way.
That's a shame. I was hoping that you'd explain these complex problems to us thickos.
0 x

User avatar
Joan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3117
Joined: 6 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by Joan » 4 years ago

Antisemitism is a minefield. Legitimate criticism of Israel is silenced by the accusation; genuine antisemitism often wraps itself in a pro-Palestine/anit-Israeli cloak.

That being said, and with no context except this quote from the JC
Like many abusers, unable to reflect on their own abuse, and ending up recreating it in the abuse of others, exerting their power in those weaker than themselves because once they were the powerless."
I think <deep breath> it seems pretty antisemitic to me. It's glib and facile and insulting. It has the patina of "legitimate criticism", but it doesn't bear deeper thought.

Yes, obviously, Israel's entire defensive posture is based on their experience in WWII - and through all of their history. But the analogy is crude and dismissive.

And worse: Suggesting that Israel or the Jewish diaspora has not been able to reflect on their history is .... I do not have the words to describe how bad that is.

Acting like the only reason that Israel could have a problem with Palestinians is because they are "acting out" over WWII; that if they took time to reflect they would not feel threatened by Palestinians - many of whom would like to see the end of the Jewish state.

(I do not think much of what Israel does is right, and of course the Palestinians have the right to exist and to have a home. Middle East is complicated and a solution will be nuanced and unattractive to both sides in many aspects. It's going to require more than CBT or EMDR to fix)
1 x

User avatar
JohnToo
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 620
Joined: 6 years ago
Location: Leatherhead

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by JohnToo » 4 years ago

Joan wrote:
4 years ago
Antisemitism is a minefield. Legitimate criticism of Israel is silenced by the accusation; genuine antisemitism often wraps itself in a pro-Palestine/anit-Israeli cloak.

That being said, and with no context except this quote from the JC

I think <deep breath> it seems pretty antisemitic to me. It's glib and facile and insulting. It has the patina of "legitimate criticism", but it doesn't bear deeper thought.

Yes, obviously, Israel's entire defensive posture is based on their experience in WWII - and through all of their history. But the analogy is crude and dismissive.

And worse: Suggesting that Israel or the Jewish diaspora has not been able to reflect on their history is .... I do not have the words to describe how bad that is.

Acting like the only reason that Israel could have a problem with Palestinians is because they are "acting out" over WWII; that if they took time to reflect they would not feel threatened by Palestinians - many of whom would like to see the end of the Jewish state.

(I do not think much of what Israel does is right, and of course the Palestinians have the right to exist and to have a home. Middle East is complicated and a solution will be nuanced and unattractive to both sides in many aspects. It's going to require more than CBT or EMDR to fix)
Thank you, both for the insights into the issues and for demonstrating that it is possible to debate these issues in a rational, civilised way. :)

On the issues, I readily accept that there are limitations as well as insights in the abused/abuser analogy. Where I am still not clear in my mind is when something that is presented as critical of Israel actually becomes antisemitic.
1 x

User avatar
The Real Ravenhurst
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 500
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by The Real Ravenhurst » 4 years ago

If everyone who made a simplistic, crass or glib analogy was some sort of irredeemable bigot who was unfit for public office or ought to be banned from social media, then there'd be no candidates left, and we'd all be offline. The 'cycle of abuse' theory is questionable anyway, even before we consider whether or not is an apt analogy for Israel's oppression of the Palestinians. But lots of people find it persuasive and so it's unsurprising that it pops up as an explanation for things, just as people are persuaded by other things which are not really an adequate explanation of anything but have just enough basis in the observable world to be plausible - the idea that immigrants undercut wages and take jobs from the natives, for example, or that women and men are different creatures. Why on earth someone saying something along these lines can't simply be met with a conversation like the one we are having here, and must instead be greeted with some kind of moral sorting-hat judgement about the core of their motivation and their fitness for public life, I'm not sure, unless it's part of a general authoritarian and profoundly undemocratic tendency to shut people up.* Everyday understandings of complex matters are frequently underpinned by beliefs that are damaging and untrue, and that have a long and tenacious grasp on the public and private imagination.

*I do think that's exactly what this obsessive policing of public and online discourse is, actually. It's by talking and writing about this stuff that we figure out what we think.
4 x

User avatar
The Real Ravenhurst
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 500
Joined: 5 years ago

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by The Real Ravenhurst » 4 years ago

BTW although it might be a 'minefield', we've got ourselves into it by failing to meet the issue head-on. In order to talk about Irsael without giving ground to anti-semitism, we first have to talk about Israel, and that means tackling the liberal taboos surrounding it. Israel as it currently exists is a Jewish ethno-state (I'm not being provocative - a bill was passed to precisely that effect in the Knesset last year) that, arguably, can only be maintained by violence. Thinking, as many of us do, that this is not a just basis for a nation, means (in a sense) arguing for an end to 'the Jewish state'. This is emphatically not the same as wishing for or advocating an end to Jews - in Israel/Palestine or anywhere else,. On the other hand quite a lot of people who believe in the idea of a Jewish state in the Middle East appear to think that Jews with no connection to the place belong in it - the not terribly subtle implication being that they do not really belong where they are.

Anyway, good piece out by Antony Lerman: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-eu ... a-machine/
3 x

User avatar
JohnToo
Hero Member
Hero Member
Posts: 620
Joined: 6 years ago
Location: Leatherhead

Re: Derek Hatton

Post by JohnToo » 4 years ago

Joan wrote:
4 years ago
....
Acting like the only reason that Israel could have a problem with Palestinians is because they are "acting out" over WWII; that if they took time to reflect they would not feel threatened by Palestinians - many of whom would like to see the end of the Jewish state.
.....
Clearly, I can't answer for the intent of other people who have used this analogy/line of argument. For myself, I fully recognise the existential threat faced by Israel. I have previously caused considerable (though unintended) offence by suggesting that, if Israel acted in the restrained, civilised manner, in full accord with international law etc etc, advocated by some western liberals, they would probably have been eliminated as a state by now. So it's not that I think you need to invoke psychological theories to do with the holocaust and the rest of the history of antisemitism to explain the basics of modern Israel and its behaviour.

But I do think there is something about the culture of modern Israel, something about the way they view Palestinians, something about the treatment they mete out on them, that goes beyond mere survival, or perhaps carries the dictates of survival into uncomfortable places. And it's at that margin that I think it is interesting and valid to explore the psychology.
1 x

Post Reply