That Corbyn fella...

He didn’t call you a cunt. He said you were behaving like one.

It's a a nuanced description, depending on who it's directed at.

Also interesting from resident Communist (you idiot)

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1035431523858755585.html?refreshed=yes

It’s a subtle difference, I’ll admit.

You've articulated sentiments that I share far better than I could wish to.

It continues

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/01/antisemitism-row-risks-chances-of-labour-government

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/01/david-blunkett-calls-for-corbyn-project-rethink

“Either Jeremy Corbyn can lead a party into gradual decline and irrelevance, or demonstrate that he can lead a party fit for government. The choice is his.”

Decline and irrelevance in popularity with the electorate (which is a statement out of step with polling) is not interchangeable with competence in government (which seems to stem from perceived inability to "get house in order" read; unable to get pissy centrists unwilling to be lead by the left to do their jobs).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/02/israels-arab-mps-corbyn-antisemitism-row

all for empowering victims but people do take offense where none is given.

Who gets to decide whats offensive?

the dudes on the internet. ffs that was an easy one.

next!

Jonathan Sacks obvs.

Jonathan Sacks

"I learn it from a book"

Classic Poirot.

https://www.ft.com/content/142b8de0-b02b-11e8-99ca-68cf89602132

The kicker:

This speaks to the core of the dispute. A leader whose good faith towards the Jewish community was not in doubt would not have found himself in this position. But Mr Corbyn’s inability to see any failing on his part means there is little trust. Furthermore, his allies treat all criticism as politically motivated. A leader intent on solving this problem would include a consultation with community leaders and an apology for his insensitive remarks. His failure to offer either leads to the suspicion that he seeks only a political fix. He has shown himself to be inflexible, doctrinaire and lacking in empathy.

The issue is intertwined with Mr Corbyn’s suitability for high office. Last year’s election pointed to a mood for change in the UK. His radical policy programme spoke to that. But this row casts doubt on whether he is a suitable leader for the country. Judged on his response to the anti-Semitism crisis, the conclusion must be that he is not. 

The FT doesn't think Corbyn should be PM. I'm shocked!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_theword%22niggardly%22

I know this doesn't answer your question but there are a couple of good examples of offense being taken.

his allies treat all criticism as politically motivated

Not a great parallel. This is a word that sounds like, but is not related to a racial slur. This situation is about a the use of a term that describes "the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland" (I googled for my own accuracy - source but is increasingly being used as a derogatorily term for all Jews. To then turn around and tell a Jewish person that they shouldn't be offended doesn't sit right with me. This is what you seemed to do to punkture.

Free speech vs Freedom from offence

It’s always a compromise. It’s quite refreshing to see Corbyn on the side of free speech, even if events have overtaken him somewhat.

This situation is about a the use of a term that describes "the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland" (I googled for my own accuracy - source but is increasingly being used as a derogatorily term for all Jews. To then turn around and tell a Jewish person that they shouldn't be offended doesn't sit right with me.

The problem with all this is exactly what @Batt said

If the semantics have shifted and the consensus within Jewish communities is now that "Zionist" is percieved to be interchangeable with "Jew", then maybe the Jewish communities should let everybody else know what words are fine to use to discuss Israel and Zionism in meaningful terms.

"Zionist" is not a term that has its roots in hatred, which has then been reclaimed by the community but remains taboo outside it (unlike the word that "niggardly" sounds like). It's a word that originated within the Jewish community and has been in use ever since. Just recently, Benjamin Netanyahu referred to the passing of the controverisal nation-state law as "a defining moment in the annals of Zionism". Given that Zionism is therefore a perfectly valid and specific political description and that not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews, we need a new term that is exactly equivalent to "Zionist".

The problem is that in the absence of an offering of a new word for "Zionist" it's very hard to see criticisim of its use in this case as anything other than a means of shutting down a valid debate.

Corbyn's stance on racism has been absolutely consistent as has his stance on apartheid, which is a term that has increasingly been used to describe Israel's stance. Contrary to what @h2o quoted his actions suggest that he's completed uninterested in a political fix but rather that he's being completely consistent with his previous support of the Palestinian cause.

Not a parallel just a quick example (and one of my favourites).

So because some people use Zionist as a slur or code for all Jews, it now can't be used in discourse as some people will take offense? This is exactly what I mean. If someone takes offense incorrectly at the use of 'Zionist' then that has to be their problem, I would happily tell that individual, Jewish or otherwise to stop wetting the bed.

My comment to Punkture was that his pronouncements that Corbyn is anti Semitic made him look a fool. Still stand by it.

A somewhat interesting aside, TM claimed that the IHRA definition of antisemitism has been adopted by the torys in there code of conduct, but guess what, it doesn’t even mention the word ‘antisemitism’ anywhere whatsoever.

https://www.conservatives.com/codeofconduct

yeah well... the tories don't have owt to do with jeremy corbyn so they get a pass.

is this whataboutry?

EDIT: i read your reply first so out of context. didn't realise that it was a reply.

This morning May called-out Corbyn for attempting to leave labour members free to question whether Zionism is a racist endeavour.

So the tories get a free pass.

I'm late to this discussion, was this article posted?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brian-klug/code-of-conduct-for-antisemitism-tale-of-two-texts

I don't agree with all of it but it is very good at pointing out how many who claim to be opposed to anti-semitism are not exhibiting the traits you would expect.

Of course not. The opposition gets the grillin' nowadays, not the government!