Israel-Hamas War 2023

[Razgovory]

This is the fundamental problem in discussing a lot of issues with you Jos.  You fundamentally believe the above statement.  If you are a leftist you believe in those values - and therefore if you're a rightest you don't.  The left wing are inherently good, and inherently on the "right side of history" - therefore anything bad must either be right-wing, or else people misunderstand it and it's really good and left-wing.

If you think that way it raises the question: Are you sure you're not left wing?

A term to describe something where the opposite wouldn't be an equally valid thing to say is rather pointless.
Thus just saying something is good is a bit shit as obviously you'd say that. Nobody would ever say it's bad.

Equality is a core belief of the left.
The right have against that... I'm struggling to come up with a single word. But the idea that some people are better than others, the poor are lazy and benefits are bad, the rich deserve to be rich because reasons, and so on.
International solidarity is a core belief of the left.
Against that the right have a big belief in nations.
Peace... Well that's a bit of a trickier one. But certainly theres a lot more love for militarism on the right.

The fact is opposing Israels actions is perfectly consistent with general left wing beliefs without needing to introduce some "they just say that about them cos they're Jews" nonsense.

I'd really like to see examples of Anti-Zionists who say that Palestinian Nationalism is bad.

Why?  Seems pretty clear that one can be both a Palestinian Nationalist and an Anti-Zionist.

Yeah, no shit.  Josq was talking about leftist who believed that all nationalism was bad.  So where all the leftists against Palestinian nationalism.

You don't seem to understand the basics of left wing beliefs here.
Nationalism in the leftist sense of national liberation is generally seen as a completely different thing to right wing nationalism in the sense of my country is inherently better than yours, my country should get more at its neighbors expense.
It's punching up and punching down.

For the record I'm not big on nationalism even in the left wing sense. But it is clearly a lesser wrong.

Yet these people openly ally with Fascists.  They call for the destruction of Israel.  You act as if these people are some fringe, they are the core of the movement.  They are the ones who organize the rallies and protests.  It's not the "well, maybe Israel shouldn't be such be dicks" constituency.  The fact is you couldn't identify anti-semtism when Corbyn was leader of labor, you defended him and Labor from those accusations.  Hell, you even denied Corbyn called Hamas and Hezbollah "Friends" till I linked a video of it.  Really, you only broke with Corbyn when you found out that fighting Western Imperialism including letting Russian tanks roll over Europe.

You're the one openly aligning with fascists here.
And no. I've never been a fan of Corbyn. He was not my selection for leader.
I do however support criticising him on his own (de)merits rather than making shit up and spinning things out of context.
This friends of Hamas thing for instance is such bollocks.  He was opening a meeting to naiively discuss peace.

You claimed that Corbyn never said that.  It was a lie.  He did say it, you are now claiming it was out of context.  The guy put a wreath on the grave of the participants of the Munich Massacre.  That wasn't a naive discussion of peace.

The anti-Israel people are allied with HAMAS they march down the streets praising them.  Hamas is a fascist group.  More so than MAGA.

I agree there are parts of the Western Left that look the other way in the cases of Nationalism and outright racism among minorities.  It's not a good thing and really fits unevenly with leftist belief.  It's why leftists looked the other way when the Algerians murdered like 80,000 people and then restricted citizenship to Muslims or flat out denied that the Khymer Rouge was committing genocide.  Often it's just Red-Brownism, like in left-wing alliances with Islamist militants in the Middle East.

[Josquius]

[
You claimed that Corbyn never said that.  It was a lie.  He did say it, you are now claiming it was out of context. 

I never claimed he didn't say that and it is a quote which has been massively exploited and used out of context which I'm sure I've pointed out before.

The guy put a wreath on the grave of the participants of the Munich Massacre.  That wasn't a naive discussion of peace.

Man, you really do have a direct feed on loony right talking points circa 2018.
This has been long since debunked. And is completely irrelevant to anything here so I'm not sure why you're even mentioning it. Corbyn is a nobody.

The anti-Israel people are allied with HAMAS they march down the streets praising them.  Hamas is a fascist group.  More so than MAGA.

Really? Every single person who protests against Israeli actions is in league with Hamas? Deluded.

I agree there are parts of the Western Left that look the other way in the cases of Nationalism and outright racism among minorities.  It's not a good thing and really fits unevenly with leftist belief.  It's why leftists looked the other way when the Algerians murdered like 80,000 people and then restricted citizenship to Muslims or flat out denied that the Khymer Rouge was committing genocide.  Often it's just Red-Brownism, like in left-wing alliances with Islamist militants in the Middle East.

Its not about "looking the other way". Left wing nationalism is a thing. See republicanism in Ireland for instance or ETA.
An oppressed group fighting for their freedom is seen very differently to an empowered group looking to oppress.

[Razgovory]

Is that what we are down to, not every last one of them is a Hamas supporter?

And it is totally about looking the other way.  When the "oppressed group" gets power and immediately starts oppressing on it's own do they become right-wing?

[Josquius]

Is that what we are down to, not every last one of them is a Hamas supporter?

Thats the point you've been making all thread...

When the "oppressed group" gets power and immediately starts oppressing on it's own do they become right-wing?

Yes. This is very possible. Why wouldn't it be?

[Razgovory]

Just, wow.

[OttoVonBismarck]

When Josq openly admits to the extreme illogic of his own leftism.

[Josquius]

I don't see what's illogical about the fact that groups change with time and what once may have been a group of plucky underdogs fighting for their freedom can in time themselves become an oppressor.
I mean.
Ever opened a history book? There's a lot of nations this can be applied to.

And politics changes with time as parties and people come and go. Yesterday's leftists can be tomorrow's far right nuts. Again. You guys clearly know nothing about history.

[Valmy]

I don't see what's illogical about the fact that groups change with time and what once may have been a group of plucky underdogs fighting for their freedom can in time themselves become an oppressor.
I mean.
Ever opened a history book? There's a lot of nations this can be applied to.

And politics changes with time as parties and people come and go. Yesterday's leftists can be tomorrow's far right nuts. Again. You guys clearly know nothing about history.

Well right. Being oppressed doesn't make one more virtuous and noble. I mean I guess it can in some very limited examples like Nelson Mandela or something, but generally being abused makes you a worse person not a better one. As can be seen in decolonized areas, for example.

[Razgovory]

I don't see what's illogical about the fact that groups change with time and what once may have been a group of plucky underdogs fighting for their freedom can in time themselves become an oppressor.
I mean.
Ever opened a history book? There's a lot of nations this can be applied to.

And politics changes with time as parties and people come and go. Yesterday's leftists can be tomorrow's far right nuts. Again. You guys clearly know nothing about history.

You seem to be saying that a left-wingers can't oppress, if they do they become right-wingers.

[Josquius]

Well right. Being oppressed doesn't make one more virtuous and noble. I mean I guess it can in some very limited examples like Nelson Mandela or something, but generally being abused makes you a worse person not a better one. As can be seen in decolonized areas, for example.

Yes. But thats no reason to say the core cause is therefore invalid.

I don't see what's illogical about the fact that groups change with time and what once may have been a group of plucky underdogs fighting for their freedom can in time themselves become an oppressor.
I mean.
Ever opened a history book? There's a lot of nations this can be applied to.

And politics changes with time as parties and people come and go. Yesterday's leftists can be tomorrow's far right nuts. Again. You guys clearly know nothing about history.

You seem to be saying that a left-wingers can't oppress, if they do they become right-wingers.

If its nationalist oppression broadly yes. But then left wingers who go authoritarian usually aren't doing it with a flag of nationalism- but as we see in Israel or the US for instance, a left to right wing shift amongst the population is very possible.
Its all very complicated and doesn't work along the simple black and white lines right wingers tend to think in.

[Threviel]

There's been lots of left wing nationalist/ethnical violence. Just look at the Uighurs or the what Stalin did to different populations over the Soviet Union for two easy obvious examples. For less obvious ones the Social Democratic Swedish government sterilized minorities into the 70's and so on and so on.

Using the sense of 'we' to oppress bothersome minorities is not a uniquely right wing phenomenon. Nor is plucky underdogness a left wing phenomenon.

The Gaza conflict, to my eyes, seem to be two more or less insane right wing governments duking it out with support from external leftist organizations in the case of Gaza.

[Josquius]

There's been lots of left wing nationalist/ethnical violence. Just look at the Uighurs or the what Stalin did to different populations over the Soviet Union for two easy obvious examples. For less obvious ones the Social Democratic Swedish government sterilized minorities into the 70's and so on and so on.

Using the sense of 'we' to oppress bothersome minorities is not a uniquely right wing phenomenon. Nor is plucky underdogness a left wing phenomenon.

The Gaza conflict, to my eyes, seem to be two more or less insane right wing governments duking it out with support from external leftist organizations in the case of Gaza.

As said, its not black and white, its complicated.
And Stalin as an example of the left....

But the point is that generally people on the left do see a difference between upwards punching independence movement nationalism, and downwards punching oppress the minorities of our land and destroy our neighbours nationalism.

[Threviel]

Do try to argue that in regards to how communist ruled China views Republic of China.

That's very much a leftist government using nationalist arguments against a plucky underdog right wing government.

With regards to Stalin, you don't get to pick and choose what you define as a leftist leader based on how much you like them. A communist is a leftie, if you don't see that then you're really out in the weeds.

[HVC]

Jos what you're saying is akin to "Germans can't be evil, therefore nazis were french". The left doesn't have some innate quality that keeps it from going wrong.

[Threviel]

My thinking being that governments and organisations tend to do what they perceive as necessary whether they are left or right. Communist Soviet Union handled Chechnya about the same as fascist Russia did. The government in Moscow had a problem and they solved it they way they tend to solve problems regardless of political affiliation.

To try and argue that there's some magical property to leftwing politics that makes it impossible for them to do selected bad things is to make the right/left wing distinction entirely meaningless. Call them bad guys/good guys or something. Good guys can go bad, just look at Zimbabwe. Affiliation on the political scale did not change, but the government sure went bad.