Using a very extreme example: if I got 4 people to call you a pedophile, then people will believe it until you submit proof that you're not.
The problem is that it's impossible to prove the absence of something, so you're forced to push back on me: "Where's your proof that I'm a pedophile", where I can reply with anecdotes or other useless information.
The point is not to "prove" you are a pedophile in that case, the point is to make people associate your name with pedophilia, and to make it unclear if you are or if you aren't. 80% of people will not look further into it.
Pedophilia is probably too extreme of an example and people may be more critical of pedophilia accusations than, say, racism ones.
for what it’s worth, i’m yet to find an individual that was able to concretely identify a single anti-semitic action or statement both in the run up to, and after the november 2019 election.
edit: probably worth mentioning, i read the report of the external investigation (all ~300 pages of it) on antisemitism in the labour party. to call it thin on the ground is somewhat of an understatement.
It's also easy to find "presence of anything" in some members of any large group, including satanism, doesn't mean it defines the group or is a big element of it.
Are you implying that all those Jews worried about anti-semitism in the Labour Party lack basic sense? I'm not sure they're likely to find that a comforting response.
Are you weasel-wording strawmen? Maybe, don't do that?
First, who are "all those Jews"? This is handwaving to make it sound like multitudes.
Second, people worrying about anti-semitism in the Labour party in general, either lack common sense (if we accept your argument that is "this attitude" I wrote about above that is their concern), or conflate anti-semitism (as in Hitler, Nazis, pogroms, and co) with criticism of actions by the state of Israel.
In fact, actual jews in favor of Corbyn and the party have been accused of "anti-semitism" (!) - like the Jewish Voice for Labour (jewish members of the UK Labour Party, because they are nonetheless critical about the situation with Palestine).
This "5x more likely" sounds horrific ... until you look at how it was reached:
"""
According to Labour statistics, by March 2021 there had been 1,450 "actioned complaints" against Labour party members in relation to allegations of antisemitism - equivalent to 0.29 percent of Labour’s membership, which averaged 500,000 between 2015 and 2020, when Corbyn was leader.
By contrast, says JVL, there were at least 35 actioned complaints against Jewish members. This is equivalent to 1.4 percent of Jewish members, who the group estimate to have numbered around 2,500 during the same period.
"""
Having 35 "actioned complaints" against Jewish members does not sound like a purge from the Labour Party, and portraying it as such is pretty misleading. I'm also wondering if there's some careful wording here, since they're comparing a total number of actioned complaints against Jewish members, vs number of actioned complaints specifically relating to allegations of antisemitism. Interesting that one of the two authors of the article is a Conservative (ie, the party Labour is in opposition to)
>Having 35 "actioned complaints" against Jewish members does not sound like a purge from the Labour Party
35 isnt a purge. > 1000 IS a purge. The fact that being an Jewish made it 5x more likely you would be purged simply underscored the fact that it was exclusively a project to purge anti-racists who were critical of Israel.
This point was underscored again when the party hired an ex Israeli intelligence agent.
I have misunderstood you then, I thought you were saying this was an purge designed to target Jewish members of the party, which didn’t seem to be the case to me.
Using a very extreme example: if I got 4 people to call you a pedophile, then people will believe it until you submit proof that you're not.
The problem is that it's impossible to prove the absence of something, so you're forced to push back on me: "Where's your proof that I'm a pedophile", where I can reply with anecdotes or other useless information.
The point is not to "prove" you are a pedophile in that case, the point is to make people associate your name with pedophilia, and to make it unclear if you are or if you aren't. 80% of people will not look further into it.
Pedophilia is probably too extreme of an example and people may be more critical of pedophilia accusations than, say, racism ones.