This is how to criticise Israel without being anti-Semitic
Scroll to see replies
I just read the article you linked above and it said what I just said so. Yeah.
Original post by Youngmetro
Im talking about the issue with Palestine, im not bothered to talk about all the wrongs the Israelis have commited that makes them one of the biggest threats to world peace.
Are you seriously trying to justify the oppression the Israeli jews have perpetrated against the palestinians? You seem to continue to avoid the point; Stealing land, demonstrating and protesting on Palestine land, general oppression such as forcing Palestinians to carry and ID card and separating their settlements in a divide and conquer style tactic, hiring private men that profile palestinians and soooo many more examples. The world knows that Israel and the jews who live in these illegal settlements are criminals and oppressive thieves who have no right to the Palestinian land so save the calls of anti semitism because the world has had enough of the ******** going on.
Are you seriously trying to justify the oppression the Israeli jews have perpetrated against the palestinians? You seem to continue to avoid the point; Stealing land, demonstrating and protesting on Palestine land, general oppression such as forcing Palestinians to carry and ID card and separating their settlements in a divide and conquer style tactic, hiring private men that profile palestinians and soooo many more examples. The world knows that Israel and the jews who live in these illegal settlements are criminals and oppressive thieves who have no right to the Palestinian land so save the calls of anti semitism because the world has had enough of the ******** going on.
I agree with you:-)
Original post by AhmedMA99
1- Most of these countries DON'T exist now.
2- The other part that still exists includes countries that U.S. wouldn't want to destroy their relationships with. If that happens U.S. would probably lose so much than it would gain from legalizing Israel.
3- Israel is not benefiting U.S. anymore, hence why U.S. has redeployed their armies in the middle-east. Israel was America's secret hand to control over the middle-east.
2- The other part that still exists includes countries that U.S. wouldn't want to destroy their relationships with. If that happens U.S. would probably lose so much than it would gain from legalizing Israel.
3- Israel is not benefiting U.S. anymore, hence why U.S. has redeployed their armies in the middle-east. Israel was America's secret hand to control over the middle-east.
I disagree, the majority of the world vastly benefits from Israeli products, no modern mobile phones would work without the chip created in Israel, dry regions of Africa have benefitted from Israel's irrigation systems, the Pharmaceutical industry receives a lot of its products from Israeli companies. Don't underestimate Israel's global influence.
For as long as America continues to fear and dislike Iran, Iraq, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS etc, it will continue to support its only western ally in the region surrounded by these agressors.
Original post by *Alisha*
Lol because everything is controlled by Jews. Even ISIS are Jews you just didn't know that as they are stirring up the teaching of Islam.
Sarcasm?
Original post by simbasdragon
In theory your argument sounds logical, but in reality, the existence of this shield is questionable when Israel has received the amount of criticism which it has. On a diplomatic scale, Obama condemned Israel alongside numerous other countries, including the UK, for Operation protective edge.
Most significantly however, and I'd appreciate it if you directly responded to this, in a session of the UN in November 2015, the UN adopted 6 resolutions. Not a single one of these related to Syria, ISIS, Saudi Arabia, China or Russia, despite the human rights abuses they were commiting.
Every single one of those resolutions were ones entirely condemning Israel. How can you argue that the international community fear criticising Israel? The UN clearly doesn't.
Most significantly however, and I'd appreciate it if you directly responded to this, in a session of the UN in November 2015, the UN adopted 6 resolutions. Not a single one of these related to Syria, ISIS, Saudi Arabia, China or Russia, despite the human rights abuses they were commiting.
Every single one of those resolutions were ones entirely condemning Israel. How can you argue that the international community fear criticising Israel? The UN clearly doesn't.
The americans criticise but they dont act upon it. The Israeli economy will crumble if American aid is pulled away and yet america has yet to even threaten Israel with such sanctions. You think criticism is enough? They criticise because it is their duty to denounce anything unjust in fear of criticism for not doing so. If you really think the international community give a damn about the cries from Palestine, then you're wrong. The Americans back Israel because they're their strongest ally in the Middle east. The British obviously dont care.
The UN are powerless and irrelevant. The Israelis dont give a **** about the UN and their laws and dont listen to them. Ever.
Original post by simbasdragon
For as long as America continues to fear and dislike Iran, Iraq, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS etc, it will continue to support its only western ally in the region surrounded by these agressors.
For as long as America continues to fear and dislike Iran, Iraq, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS etc, it will continue to support its only western ally in the region surrounded by these agressors.
Yes, this is exactly why Israel are able to get away with everything they do.
Interesting how you also talk about 'Americans' when not all americans necessarily agree with Israel. Further proof and double standards that highlight the special treatment Jews receive.
Original post by Youngmetro
The americans criticise but they dont act upon it. The Israeli economy will crumble if American aid is pulled away and yet america has yet to even threaten Israel with such sanctions. You think criticism is enough? They criticise because it is their duty to denounce anything unjust in fear of criticism for not doing so. If you really think the international community give a damn about the cries from Palestine, then you're wrong. The Americans back Israel because they're their strongest ally in the Middle east. The British obviously dont care.
The UN are powerless and irrelevant. The Israelis dont give a **** about the UN and their laws and dont listen to them. Ever.
The UN are powerless and irrelevant. The Israelis dont give a **** about the UN and their laws and dont listen to them. Ever.
I doubt that Israel economically would crumble without America, its economy is one of the strongest and most developed in the world. America's 30 billion dollar a year investments only amount to 1% of Israel's GDP, a shortfall which could easily be filled as the economy continues to flourish. Even if America withdrew their funding, it would have little effect.
'The most recent global financial crisis in 2009 produced a brief period of recession in Israel, but the country’s prudent fiscal policies and regulations, combined with a particularly robust banking sector, allowed the economy to recover quickly.Israel consistently ranks high among the world’s economies in terms of its technological readiness, venture capital availability, and the quality of its research organizations. The country ranks 1st in availability of scientists and engineers, number of start-ups per capita, and venture capital investments per capita.Over the years, Israel has experienced a high average rate of growth. Given its small consumer market domestically, Israel has strategically turned beyond its borders to sell its products and offer its technologies. This year, Israel was unanimously voted to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, signifying its status as one of the world’s 34 most developed economies.'
America doesn't act upon their criticism clearly because they don't see the diplomatic benefit of doing so. There are many arguments which suggest that Israel's actions are all in the name of defending its people and its existence, and America often agree with this. Regardless, you stated that cries of anti-semitism are used to prevent diplomatic criticism, and this is demonstrably not true.
Original post by Youngmetro
Yes, this is exactly why Israel are able to get away with everything they do.
Interesting how you also talk about 'Americans' when not all americans necessarily agree with Israel. Further proof and double standards that highlight the special treatment Jews receive.
Interesting how you also talk about 'Americans' when not all americans necessarily agree with Israel. Further proof and double standards that highlight the special treatment Jews receive.
That is true, thanks for making me aware of my generalisations. I clarify that I mean the American presidents and their supporters post around 1967.
Original post by simbasdragon
I doubt that Israel economically would crumble without America, its economy is one of the strongest and most developed in the world. America's 30 billion dollar a year investments only amount to 1% of Israel's GDP, a shortfall which could easily be filled as the economy continues to flourish. Even if America withdrew their funding, it would have little effect.
'The most recent global financial crisis in 2009 produced a brief period of recession in Israel, but the country’s prudent fiscal policies and regulations, combined with a particularly robust banking sector, allowed the economy to recover quickly.Israel consistently ranks high among the world’s economies in terms of its technological readiness, venture capital availability, and the quality of its research organizations. The country ranks 1st in availability of scientists and engineers, number of start-ups per capita, and venture capital investments per capita.Over the years, Israel has experienced a high average rate of growth. Given its small consumer market domestically, Israel has strategically turned beyond its borders to sell its products and offer its technologies. This year, Israel was unanimously voted to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, signifying its status as one of the world’s 34 most developed economies.'
America doesn't act upon their criticism clearly because they don't see the diplomatic benefit of doing so. There are many arguments which suggest that Israel's actions are all in the name of defending its people and its existence, and America often agree with this. Regardless, you stated that cries of anti-semitism are used to prevent diplomatic criticism, and this is demonstrably not true.
'The most recent global financial crisis in 2009 produced a brief period of recession in Israel, but the country’s prudent fiscal policies and regulations, combined with a particularly robust banking sector, allowed the economy to recover quickly.Israel consistently ranks high among the world’s economies in terms of its technological readiness, venture capital availability, and the quality of its research organizations. The country ranks 1st in availability of scientists and engineers, number of start-ups per capita, and venture capital investments per capita.Over the years, Israel has experienced a high average rate of growth. Given its small consumer market domestically, Israel has strategically turned beyond its borders to sell its products and offer its technologies. This year, Israel was unanimously voted to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, signifying its status as one of the world’s 34 most developed economies.'
America doesn't act upon their criticism clearly because they don't see the diplomatic benefit of doing so. There are many arguments which suggest that Israel's actions are all in the name of defending its people and its existence, and America often agree with this. Regardless, you stated that cries of anti-semitism are used to prevent diplomatic criticism, and this is demonstrably not true.
You fail to realise how many times America has used its veto power within the UN to support israel, which has basically protected israel from any sanctions that could deter its own economy. The aid im talking about was really prior to 2007, where Israel received a huge amount of aid which it was dependent on before. The reason for Israel's growth is the USA, its not something the Israelis did themselves and without early aid, they would be a third world country.
If the Americans criticise them, that itself suggests diplomatic benefit. However you fail to consider the strong relationship with Israel they have, which would obviously compromise the relationship if america did anything, they would lose their strongest ally in the midde east. Therefore the reason is really for their own mutual interest. You really think america agrees with the actions and falls for the ******** excuse they give?
The point is there is a taboo of criticising Israel and Jews, so no one does it in the first place.
Original post by Youngmetro
You fail to realise how many times America has used its veto power within the UN to support israel, which has basically protected israel from any sanctions that could deter its own economy. The aid im talking about was really prior to 2007, where Israel received a huge amount of aid which it was dependent on before. The reason for Israel's growth is the USA, its not something the Israelis did themselves and without early aid, they would be a third world country.
If the Americans criticise them, that itself suggests diplomatic benefit. However you fail to consider the strong relationship with Israel they have, which would obviously compromise the relationship if america did anything, they would lose their strongest ally in the midde east. Therefore the reason is really for their own mutual interest. You really think america agrees with the actions and falls for the ******** excuse they give?
The point is there is a taboo of criticising Israel and Jews, so no one does it in the first place.
If the Americans criticise them, that itself suggests diplomatic benefit. However you fail to consider the strong relationship with Israel they have, which would obviously compromise the relationship if america did anything, they would lose their strongest ally in the midde east. Therefore the reason is really for their own mutual interest. You really think america agrees with the actions and falls for the ******** excuse they give?
The point is there is a taboo of criticising Israel and Jews, so no one does it in the first place.
As we have established, there isn't a taboo against criticising Israel, because the UN, America and global world repeatedly criticise them. You're suggesting that there is a taboo against sanctioning Israel.
You speak about America vetoing sanctions against Israel, yet the fact that these proposals for sanctions are even constantly being put forward in the first place clearly reveals that countries aren't afraid to do this. In this manner, it would only be America who block these sanctions, yet you claim that they do this for political reasons.
Therefore, which countries fear criticising Israel/voting for sanctions against Israel for fears of being labelled anti-semitic? America can only veto sanctions if they're put forward in the first place, and the fact that they are disproves your statement.
Original post by AhmedMA99
"Israel" doesn't exist..
"Israel" doesn't exist..
i am israeli
do i exist?
Original post by simbasdragon
As we have established, there isn't a taboo against criticising Israel, because the UN, America and global world repeatedly criticise them. You're suggesting that there is a taboo against sanctioning Israel.
You speak about America vetoing sanctions against Israel, yet the fact that these proposals for sanctions are even constantly being put forward in the first place clearly reveals that countries aren't afraid to do this. In this manner, it would only be America who block these sanctions, yet you claim that they do this for political reasons.
Therefore, which countries fear criticising Israel/voting for sanctions against Israel for fears of being labelled anti-semitic? America can only veto sanctions if they're put forward in the first place, and the fact that they are disproves your statement.
You speak about America vetoing sanctions against Israel, yet the fact that these proposals for sanctions are even constantly being put forward in the first place clearly reveals that countries aren't afraid to do this. In this manner, it would only be America who block these sanctions, yet you claim that they do this for political reasons.
Therefore, which countries fear criticising Israel/voting for sanctions against Israel for fears of being labelled anti-semitic? America can only veto sanctions if they're put forward in the first place, and the fact that they are disproves your statement.
You're assuming its countries that put forward the sanctions when it necessarily isnt. They may support it but it is usuallly Mahmoud Abbas who does so in the first place, or the UN who call for a trial. No one stands up to the vetos themselves, showing that it isnt a pressing issue and they dont really want to 'stand out' a mutual fear.
Bringing it back to the idea of anti semitism, no one criticises the thieving israeli jews that steal land and put men in arms into palestinian territory to profile and oppress the people itself. The people dont get any form of threat of sanction at all.
Original post by Youngmetro
You're assuming its countries that put forward the sanctions when it necessarily isnt. They may support it but it is usuallly Mahmoud Abbas who does so in the first place, or the UN who call for a trial. No one stands up to the vetos themselves, showing that it isnt a pressing issue and they dont really want to 'stand out' a mutual fear.
Bringing it back to the idea of anti semitism, no one criticises the thieving israeli jews that steal land and put men in arms into palestinian territory to profile and oppress the people itself. The people dont get any form of threat of sanction at all.
Bringing it back to the idea of anti semitism, no one criticises the thieving israeli jews that steal land and put men in arms into palestinian territory to profile and oppress the people itself. The people dont get any form of threat of sanction at all.
Individuals usually vote for sanctions as representatives of their countries.what makes you certain that others don't stand up to the veto because they're able to see a more nuance depiction of the events than you, and so don't wish to one-sidedly blame Israel?
The whole pro-Palestinian movement criticises these settlers, many international and Israeli citizens criticise them. Under the current right-wing Likud government, Netanyahu believes that the settlements fulfill an essential role in defending Israel, and so will not sanction the settlers. Hopefully under future more left-wing governments these settlements, like the ones in Gaza, will be removed.
Original post by Youngmetro
no one criticises the thieving israeli jews that steal land
lol
How can you claim no one criticises Israeli settlements in the West Bank?
There are quite literally thousands upon thousands of articles/reports that are written to specifically criticise the settlements and Israeli policy there.
Original post by simbasdragon
Individuals usually vote for sanctions as representatives of their countries.what makes you certain that others don't stand up to the veto because they're able to see a more nuance depiction of the events than you, and so don't wish to one-sidedly blame Israel?
The whole pro-Palestinian movement criticises these settlers, many international and Israeli citizens criticise them. Under the current right-wing Likud government, Netanyahu believes that the settlements fulfill an essential role in defending Israel, and so will not sanction the settlers. Hopefully under future more left-wing governments these settlements, like the ones in Gaza, will be removed.
The whole pro-Palestinian movement criticises these settlers, many international and Israeli citizens criticise them. Under the current right-wing Likud government, Netanyahu believes that the settlements fulfill an essential role in defending Israel, and so will not sanction the settlers. Hopefully under future more left-wing governments these settlements, like the ones in Gaza, will be removed.
The decisions are vetoed because they know that they are will deem Israel to have done something unlawful. That's the point of the veto.
These settlements will never be removed, a party that proposes it will never gain votes, only lose votes.
Original post by simbasdragon
For as long as America continues to fear and dislike Iran, Iraq, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS etc, it will continue to support its only western ally in the region surrounded by these agressors.
For as long as America continues to fear and dislike Iran, Iraq, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS etc, it will continue to support its only western ally in the region surrounded by these agressors.
Israel is far from the only US ally in the region. In fact, Saudi Arabia has arguably been an older and closer ally. Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain and others are also very close to Washington. Indeed, Syria and Iran are pretty much the only clearly anti-US states in the Middle East (plus Libya until the fall of Gaddafi). Obviously there are anti-US terrorist and militant groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, PKK, etc, but that's a different question.
With regard to OP. For a start, I broadly agree with the bulk of them, and it's worth noting that the author correctly points out that these are argument styles that have a potential to become (or be interpreted as) anti-semitic, rather than saying that they are inherently anti-semitic in and of themselves.
The only one I have a general problem with is No. 5.
"Zionism is no more a dirty word than feminism. It is simply the belief that the Jews should have a country in part of their ancestral homeland where they can take refuge from the anti-Semitism and persecution they face everywhere else."
This is a very sanitised description of ethno-nationalism, which is essentially what Zionism is. It's all very well and nice sounding to say "Oh, we just want to have a country of our own in this place here", but this neglects the unavoidable fact that someone already lived there. If you want to create a state inhabited mostly by X type of people in a state overwhelmingly inhabited by non-X people, you're going to need to find a way of getting rid of a large proportion of the latter.
"Unless you believe that Israel should entirely cease to exist, you are yourself Zionist."
I think this is incorrect from two perspectives. Firstly, the "post-Zionist" one favoured by some left-wing Israeli academics - that Zionism was a temporal movement with a specific goal - the creation of a Jewish homeland - and that with the completion of this goal in 1948-49, Zionism was completed as a movement, and thus calling yourself a Zionist in 2016 has no more meaning than calling yourself a Jacobite or an abolitionist.
Alternatively, there is the view of people like Chomsky and Finkelstein, who don't believe Israel should have come into existence, but accept that it now does exist as a recognised state with all the accompanying legal rights.
From a more broad perspective I don't disagree with other core arguments, but some of them are right for the wrong reasons, or are right but too simplistic:
Number 8:
- Conflates ethnic identity with genetic ancestry. The two are not the same, even though ethno-nationalists of all stripes often like to think they are. African-Americans are very genetically diverse, as they descend from slaves kidnapped from various far-apart areas of Africa, but they do not form myriad different ethnic groups. By contrast, Croats, Bosniaks and Serbs are genetically very similar, yet have considerable ethnic polarisation.
- Forced or induced assimilation is, it's true, has at times been used as a method of persecuting certain groups, most notably Native Americans. However, Jews, for the most part, have not been one of these, just as African-Americans haven't. Confining people to ghettoes and other forced segregation, forcing them to wear distinctive markings to tell them apart, warning of the dangers of "Jewish blood" and so on (and I'm talking about general historical anti-Semitism here, not just Nazism), is, to say the least, not a very effective method of assimilation. Indeed, throughout history generally the more culturally integrated and assimilated Jewish communities were the most prosperous and least discriminated-against ones. Of course, in both the Christian and Muslim worlds there were efforts to induce or even force Jews to convert - but they did that to all non-Christians and non-Muslims within their realms.
No. 11:
- While I fully accept the central point (indeed, the idea of having to be "loyal" to a state and not doing so being "treason" completely repulses me), I don't accept that "Having a connection to our ancestral homeland is natural." I understand that Israel as an arean and Jerusalem have great significance both in Judaism as a religion and in Jewish ethno-national identity, and I agree that is deserving of respect, but I don't regard either religion or national consciousness (of any kind) as "natural".
No. 17:
- "Don’t claim that anti-Semitism is eradicated or negligible. It isn’t. In fact, according to international watchdog groups, it’s sharply on the rise." These are not mutually exclusive statements. It's perfectly possible for something to be on the rise and yet still be negligible. For instance, aviation fatalities in 2014 sharply rose relative to the previous few years, but were still negligible on the whole. It doesn't mean much unless to compare to something.
The only one I have a general problem with is No. 5.
"Zionism is no more a dirty word than feminism. It is simply the belief that the Jews should have a country in part of their ancestral homeland where they can take refuge from the anti-Semitism and persecution they face everywhere else."
This is a very sanitised description of ethno-nationalism, which is essentially what Zionism is. It's all very well and nice sounding to say "Oh, we just want to have a country of our own in this place here", but this neglects the unavoidable fact that someone already lived there. If you want to create a state inhabited mostly by X type of people in a state overwhelmingly inhabited by non-X people, you're going to need to find a way of getting rid of a large proportion of the latter.
"Unless you believe that Israel should entirely cease to exist, you are yourself Zionist."
I think this is incorrect from two perspectives. Firstly, the "post-Zionist" one favoured by some left-wing Israeli academics - that Zionism was a temporal movement with a specific goal - the creation of a Jewish homeland - and that with the completion of this goal in 1948-49, Zionism was completed as a movement, and thus calling yourself a Zionist in 2016 has no more meaning than calling yourself a Jacobite or an abolitionist.
Alternatively, there is the view of people like Chomsky and Finkelstein, who don't believe Israel should have come into existence, but accept that it now does exist as a recognised state with all the accompanying legal rights.
From a more broad perspective I don't disagree with other core arguments, but some of them are right for the wrong reasons, or are right but too simplistic:
Number 8:
- Conflates ethnic identity with genetic ancestry. The two are not the same, even though ethno-nationalists of all stripes often like to think they are. African-Americans are very genetically diverse, as they descend from slaves kidnapped from various far-apart areas of Africa, but they do not form myriad different ethnic groups. By contrast, Croats, Bosniaks and Serbs are genetically very similar, yet have considerable ethnic polarisation.
- Forced or induced assimilation is, it's true, has at times been used as a method of persecuting certain groups, most notably Native Americans. However, Jews, for the most part, have not been one of these, just as African-Americans haven't. Confining people to ghettoes and other forced segregation, forcing them to wear distinctive markings to tell them apart, warning of the dangers of "Jewish blood" and so on (and I'm talking about general historical anti-Semitism here, not just Nazism), is, to say the least, not a very effective method of assimilation. Indeed, throughout history generally the more culturally integrated and assimilated Jewish communities were the most prosperous and least discriminated-against ones. Of course, in both the Christian and Muslim worlds there were efforts to induce or even force Jews to convert - but they did that to all non-Christians and non-Muslims within their realms.
No. 11:
- While I fully accept the central point (indeed, the idea of having to be "loyal" to a state and not doing so being "treason" completely repulses me), I don't accept that "Having a connection to our ancestral homeland is natural." I understand that Israel as an arean and Jerusalem have great significance both in Judaism as a religion and in Jewish ethno-national identity, and I agree that is deserving of respect, but I don't regard either religion or national consciousness (of any kind) as "natural".
No. 17:
- "Don’t claim that anti-Semitism is eradicated or negligible. It isn’t. In fact, according to international watchdog groups, it’s sharply on the rise." These are not mutually exclusive statements. It's perfectly possible for something to be on the rise and yet still be negligible. For instance, aviation fatalities in 2014 sharply rose relative to the previous few years, but were still negligible on the whole. It doesn't mean much unless to compare to something.
Original post by TelAviv
i am israeli
do i exist?
do i exist?
Yes you do exist.Quite obvious innit?
But you have either European origins or American origins.
Why you would say? Simply because your grandparent or maybe your dad migrated to PALESTINE in 1948+
Original post by AhmedMA99
Yes you do exist.Quite obvious innit?
But you have either European origins or American origins.
Why you would say? Simply because your grandparent or maybe your dad migrated to PALESTINE in 1948+
But you have either European origins or American origins.
Why you would say? Simply because your grandparent or maybe your dad migrated to PALESTINE in 1948+
What are you trying to suggest?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Michelle Donelan / Freedom of Speech
- [Official thread] Hamas-Israel Conflict
- how could anyone be pro-israel?
- Claims that a 9 year-old boy was treated poorly by staff ‘because he’s Jewish’
- I think i'm losing a friendship because of the Israel-Palestine conflict
- are you allowed to criticse the author in gcse english lit?
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
- UK professor suffered discrimination due to anti-Zionist beliefs, tribunal rules
- Anyone else not get boycotting brands or even countries trend?
- The TSR Jewish Society (J-Soc) - thread TWO
- Should i vote Labour?
- anyway to find out where news sites like The Guardian get their sources from?
- What phobias do you have?
- I am an Israeli - AMA
- 2023 King's Speech
- My very rude Islam teacher
- MyTutor is anti-Palestinian?
- Sociology essay - Education
- [Official Thread] Chancellor Jeremy Hunt to deliver Autumn Statement on Wednesday
- Computer science
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 minute ago
Is MathsFM French Alevels good for a CS degree at top uni (OX, UCL, Durham etc)Last reply 9 minutes ago
Speech therapy pre registration masters and student finance - help!Last reply 12 minutes ago
Which of these A-Level combinations would be the best to study a law degree?Posted 13 minutes ago
Studying while being stressed!? Participants wanted! :)Last reply 15 minutes ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 22 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 26 minutes ago
Durham vs Exeter Finance/AccountingTrending
Last reply 1 minute ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 8 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 4 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 minute ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 8 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 4 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
