Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Anger as boycott of Israeli goods to becomes a criminal offense Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    I'm not fully sure you understand the point of the boycott. The goods are not discriminated against based on national origin, most of these organistations (I would have thought all) do not boycott Israeli products, but those Israeli products produced illegally on Palestinian soil.
    BDSholes tend to consider all Israeli territory Palestinian soil. Furthermore, it clearly does extend to all Israelis; the hard left has repeatedly tried to exclude even left-wing Israelis who oppose the settlements/occupation, academics and filmmakers and musicians, purely on the basis that they are Israeli. Academic boycotts of Israeli academics, simply because they are Israeli, is absolutely unlawful discrimination and shows the hard left up as the bigoted a-holes they truly are

    Also you are seriously mistaken that this is discrimination against all Jewish people. Just because Israel is the only Jewish state, boycotting the use of products grown illegally by Israel on Palestinian soil does not in any way discriminate against Judaism.
    The hard left's fixation with the world's only Jewish state, pretty much to the exclusion of all else, speaks for itself.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mkap)
    me and my family have boycotted them for a long time since i was little, i dont need a law to tell me what i can and cant buy.
    Government is not telling you to buy an Israeli product, it's simply telling people like the NUS that they have to stock it.

    Which is fair enough since referendums on the issue have a less than 10% turnout from the NUS.

    I have more sympathy for local councils in this but none for the NUS which is far more political than it should be.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    BDSholes tend to consider all Israeli territory Palestinian soil. Furthermore, it clearly does extend to all Israelis; the hard left has repeatedly tried to exclude even left-wing Israelis who oppose the settlements/occupation, academics and filmmakers and musicians, purely on the basis that they are Israeli. Academic boycotts of Israeli academics, simply because they are Israeli, is absolutely unlawful discrimination and shows the hard left up as the bigoted a-holes they truly are



    The hard left's fixation with the world's only Jewish state, pretty much to the exclusion of all else, speaks for itself.
    That may be true and shows the malice of many on the hard left, but on analysis of the boycott alone, do you really think it is an anti-Semitic move?

    I consider myself to be on the left, don't particularly like Israeli foreign policy and would consider a boycott of Israeli-produced goods on Palestinian soil both rational and reasonable, but am not anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic in the slightest. I side with the UN on the 4th Geneva Convention vis-à-vis 1967 and that's it, really.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    That may be true and shows the malice of many on the hard left, but on analysis of the boycott alone, do you really think it is an anti-Semitic move?
    I think it's anti-semitic in practice; constructive (in the legal sense) anti-semitism. And it certainly shows xenophobia; there's no question that there is significant and deep anti-Israeli xenophobia on the left. What is sad is that many people on the left would actually quite like Israel if they got to know it; they're a wonderful, hardy, pragmatic people. For the first 30 years it had socialist governments and the left used to have much sympathy for the plucky, underdog Israel.

    These were/are (are in the sense of the traditional Zionism of the Israeli Labour Party) people who believed in collective enterprise, who greened the deserts of the Levant with their hard work and appreciation of science and rationality, who didn't want for physical courage or bravery in any sense.

    It's unfortunate that the hard left's commitment basically to Soviet foreign policy (and post-Sovet i.e. Russian through a bizarre form of political nostalgia) leads them to oppose whoever is associated with America and whoever finds themselves in opposition to the old Soviet client states like Syria

    I consider myself to be on the left, don't particularly like Israeli foreign policy and would consider a boycott of Israeli-produced goods on Palestinian soil both rational and reasonable
    I don't support the settlements either, but BDS promotes the boycott of all Israelis, period. The call for boycotting all Israeli academics is characteristic of the movement, and boycotts of Israeli film too. The irony is that Israeli academics and artists are those most likely to oppose the post-67 activities and the Netanyahu government
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    I side with the UN on the 4th Geneva Convention vis-à-vis 1967 and that's it, really.
    Do you realise that in 1968, the Israelis offered to return all the land they had conquered in the unfortunate but necessary '67 war in exchange for peace and recognition.

    The Arab world, Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the PLO etc etc gathered in Khartoum and agreed the "Three Nos". No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no to negotiations.

    It must be the first time in history the victorious party couldn't even negotiate to give back the land they had conquered in a defensive war. The Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Thus, you have to take into account their repeated failure to make a deal with the Israelis when considering the conduct of Israel
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    I think it's anti-semitic in practice; constructive (in the legal sense) anti-semitism. And it certainly shows xenophobia; there's no question that there is significant and deep anti-Israeli xenophobia on the left. What is sad is that many people on the left would actually quite like Israel if they got to know it; they're a wonderful, hardy, pragmatic people. For the first 30 years it had socialist governments and the left used to have much sympathy for the plucky, underdog Israel.
    That is undeniably true, for better or worse - but can a boycott not be viewed on its own merits?

    I don't support the settlements either, but BDS promotes the boycott of all Israelis, period. The call for boycotting all Israeli academics is characteristic of the movement, and boycotts of Israeli film too. The irony is that Israeli academics and artists are those most likely to oppose the post-67 activities and the Netanyahu government
    This is not just an anti-BDS move but also a move against those who simply take issue with the occupation.

    Do you realise that in 1968, the Israelis offered to return all the land they had conquered in the unfortunate but necessary '67 war in exchange for peace and recognition.

    The Arab world, Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the PLO etc etc gathered in Khartoum and agreed the "Three Nos". No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no to negotiations.

    It must be the first time in history the victorious party couldn't even negotiate to give back the land they had conquered in a defensive war. The Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Thus, you have to take into account their repeated failure to make a deal with the Israelis when considering the conduct of Israel
    Yes, I did know that, and I think the AL's obstinate approach to Israel is a major hindrance to peace in the region, but it would seem quite understandable that a year later the resentment prevailed. I don't think you can remotely legitimise Israeli settlements in the West Bank by saying 'but it was offered back a year later'.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon_g)
    if you would actually had one of them in your hands, you wouldn't BS like that
    well it would be difficult to type wouldn't it

    :facepalm2:
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mkap)
    me and my family have boycotted them for a long time since i was little
    I suppose that Israeli goods are not much upset by this fact..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mkap)
    me and my family have boycotted them for a long time since i was little, i dont need a law to tell me what i can and cant buy.
    Then how are you even posting on the internet loool? :rofl:


    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    I don't think you can remotely legitimise Israeli settlements in the West Bank by saying 'but it was offered back a year later'.
    Israeli settlements in West Bank and Gaza didn't really begin in any serious way until the late 1970s when Likud first won power after continuous Mapai/Labour governments since '48.

    In 1967, the Israelis conquered the West Bank and Gaza in a defensive war forced on them by the Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians. In 1968, they offered the land back. In 1973, Egypt and Syria again declared war on Israel. It wasn't until the late 1970s that any serious numbers of settlers were present.

    What '68 shows, along with the failure again in the mid-90s, and in 2000, for the Palestinians to grab a deal, is that they themselves have failed to take up opportunities that would have dealt with the settlement issue before it became one
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    It depends. If, for example, you propose to ban an Israeli academic from your conference or ban an Israeli filmmaker from your festival simply because they are Israeli (which is what BDS proposes), then that is clearly unlawful discrimination and bigoted to boot.
    With regard to the academic boycott at least, that is not what BDS proposes - it explicitly states the boycott to be of institutions, not individuals. This is not explicitly stated regarding the cultural boycott, but I would argue it is still implied by referring to institutions.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    Do you realise that in 1968, the Israelis offered to return all the land they had conquered in the unfortunate but necessary '67 war in exchange for peace and recognition.
    Not true. In the negotiations with Jordan in 1968, for example, Israel wanted to keep vast chunks of the West Bank, and refused to even consider negotiations on East Jerusalem.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    In 1967, the Israelis conquered the West Bank and Gaza in a defensive war forced on them by the Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians.
    It wasn't defensive, several contemporary Israeli cabinet ministers and generals have admitted that the supposed imminent Egyptian attack they claimed to be pre-empting was a fiction, which is also confirmed by the intelligence of the Johnson Administration.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    Generally speaking, councils operate with some degree of autonomy based on the wishes of the local population..
    Councils operate within a degree of autonomy laid downs in the laws made by Parliament and regulations made under those laws by Parliament, Local authorities don't get to decide the breadth of their autonomy. Hull can't operate its own fisheries policy, Aldershot its own defence policy and Clackmannanshire, its own Middle East policy.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Stupid law from stupid people. Local authorities should have autonomy over what they buy/where they source things. Universities shouldn't even be included in this as they aren't government bodies - there's literally no reason to include them.

    There are also ways to get around it, e.g. environmental reasons
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GoldenFang)
    (1) It is absolutely fair to hold local authorities, universities etc to the law; that is, you can't discriminate based on national origin. It seems that people are quite wiling to countenance discrimination if it's against Jews (I say Jews because, notably, the only state they protest against is the world's only Jewish state)

    (2) It is fair for the government to say that it is not for local authorities to make their own foreign policy. Foreign policy is an area reasonably within the purview of the executive, it's ludicrous for jumped up local councillors to make their "nuclear free zones" in Slough or to declare they are sanctioning a country.
    Woahhhhh wait.... that law that prevents discrimination against nationality. . It exists?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abruiseonthesky)
    Stupid law from stupid people. Local authorities should have autonomy over what they buy/where they source things.
    So it's okay if a local authority hands out contracts to the leader of the Council's brother in law?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellie0497)
    If it is illegal to boycott those goods it means we should purchase them.
    Wrong.

    1. Private individuals can boycott whatever they like (almost)
    2. It means public bodies can't actively boycott them. My local corner shop doesn't buy smarties but I don't think it's a boycott

    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    I'm not fully sure you understand the point of the boycott. The goods are not discriminated against based on national origin, most of these organistations (I would have thought all) do not boycott Israeli products, but those Israeli products produced illegally on Palestinian soil. Also you are seriously mistaken that this is discrimination against all Jewish people. Just because Israel is the only Jewish state, boycotting the use of products grown illegally by Israel on Palestinian soil does not in any way discriminate against Judaism.

    I'm sure you are very passionate about this, but that doesn't automatically make you right. If you were saying boycotting is wrong, the only way forward is diplomacy, I would be more inclined to agree with you, but as it is, you just come off as someone with a loud voice, but no idea!
    I notice you didn't respond to the second point about foreign policy...


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abruiseonthesky)
    Stupid law from stupid people. Local authorities should have autonomy over what they buy/where they source things. Universities shouldn't even be included in this as they aren't government bodies - there's literally no reason to include them.

    There are also ways to get around it, e.g. environmental reasons
    Usually agree with what you say but unless the councils specify they have a mandate of BDS and the local population are given the change to vote on this issue (most aren't they are simply voted in by the council members) then any attempt at BDS is wrong.

    besides the government decides our foreign policy not the local councils who should be more worried about getting the bins emptied and getting improvements to schools not worrying about the conditions in Palestine
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    So it's okay if a local authority hands out contracts to the leader of the Council's brother in law?
    No, but councils often do grant contracts depending on which contractor can bribe the decision makers the best.

    Exceptions sometimes occur when contracts are handed out on the recommendations of an ajudicating body the council might use. In these cases the contractor will attempt (and often succeed) in bribing them instead. However golf is also a good way to get things.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.