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

European Court of Human Rights criminalises boycott of Israel Watch

  • View Poll Results: Is boycott an effective non-violent protest against Israel?
    Yes
    46
    69.70%
    No
    20
    30.30%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axes)
    And yet you fell into the same trap, didn't you? Your criticism is politically motivated, or you would have supported boycotts/sanctions on numerous other and worse occupied areas.
    Of course it's motivated by politics; human rights and national interest are important political considerations what else should it be motivated by?

    False again. You, speaking for the west, renounce responsibility for dozens of conflicts in which the wests hand is far more direct in causing that situation.
    I'm speaking for myself, your right, western states have a history of supporting crummy regimes, and suffering blow-back.

    The west's civilians chose to criticise Israel because it is more fashionoble, not because they see it as a result of their own actions nesseceraly.
    I can't speak for everyone, but from my own experience with my family and friends it is to do with our governments support of a regime we feel flies in the face of our values, and the cost to our nation. Just because we can't right every wrong, doesn't mean we shouldn't try when we are able, I really don't understand your pessimism.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saff123)
    Of course it's motivated by politics; human rights and national interest are important political considerations what else should it be motivated by?


    I'm speaking for myself, your right, western states have a history of supporting crummy regimes, and suffering blow-back.

    I can't speak for everyone, but from my own experience with my family and friends it is to do with our governments support of a regime we feel flies in the face of our values, and the cost to our nation. Just because we can't right every wrong, doesn't mean we shouldn't try when we are able, I really don't understand your pessimism.
    The question you must ask yourself is when Israel is criticized and threatened with boycott and whatnot on every university in the UK more than Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and China combined... is it really just criticism or is it actively discriminating against Israel, and thus is it fair for the only liberal democracy in the Middle East to suffer such treatment?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I plan to buy whatever is of the desired quality at the cheapest price tbh. regardless of where its from and unless I get word that the producers themselves are grossly exploitingly their workers.

    Boycotts like this have the same effects as all those petitions that get sent round for e-signatures... nothing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PeeWeeDan)
    The question you must ask yourself is when Israel is criticized and threatened with boycott and whatnot on every university in the UK more than Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and China combined... is it really just criticism or is it actively discriminating against Israel, and thus is it fair for the only liberal democracy in the Middle East to suffer such treatment?

    It's a good question, if thats true then perhaps there needs to be redress on campus, I don't get involved in campus politics tbh.

    The same should also hold true on the political main-stage, Israel is lauded with more praise, aid, and sophisticated military weaponry than "Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and China", in fact public figures and the media tread so lightly on Israel compared with other controversial states that I am slightly baffled.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saff123)
    Of course it's motivated by politics; human rights and national interest are important political considerations what else should it be motivated by?


    But its not motivated by humanitarian considerations, and neither are yours. To say that a boycott of goods from the WB is just, but that other boycotts of regions ruled by far worse entities are not, is the height of hypocricy.




    I can't speak for everyone, but from my own experience with my family and friends it is to do with our governments support of a regime we feel flies in the face of our values, and the cost to our nation. Just because we can't right every wrong, doesn't mean we shouldn't try when we are able, I really don't understand your pessimism.

    Well, to be honest, I would say that Israel's actions are far more gentle than the US, when it found itself in a similar situation. Other than that, the US is supporting dozens of other regimes, some of them far worse. I ask myself, after the US gives Egypt 2 billion a year, if there are any planned boycott by Americans of Egyptian goods due to the horrendous treatment of copts and darfuren refugees..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saff123)
    It's a good question, if thats true then perhaps there needs to be redress on campus, I don't get involved in campus politics tbh.

    The same should also hold true on the political main-stage, Israel is lauded with more praise, aid, and sophisticated military weaponry than "Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and China", in fact public figures and the media tread so lightly on Israel compared with other controversial states that I am slightly baffled.
    What I am trying to say is that all this criticism lacks credibility. Israel is nothing but a state in danger which acts in self defense. I blame only those who provoke Israel so it is right we are "treated lightly"
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gcampb)
    Well not exactly, it means now that if I were to choose to petition my University to boycott Israeli culturally and academically then I could be stopped. It's up to the UK government to enforce this and it's by no means mandatory - but it means they could do it. This is not unlikely seeing as how government organisations such as the Charities Commission has stepped in, in the past to seize funds destined to Palestine.

    That's what is so dangerous about it, it is criminalising the right to boycott because it is deemed as 'discriminatory'.

    You want to boycott Israel, go ahead! You're a hypocrite because you (that's a generic 'you' aimed at all SWP/trots/StWC-ites) don't ever call to boycott any other country.

    Oh, and trying to force a students' union to have a boycott policy IS discriminatory. You're discriminating against the jewish/zionist, israeli and israel-supporting members of the union. After all, an SU's primary aim is the welfare of all of it's members and if the union passes any decrees that makes students less likely to come to them for help, they're contravening their own constitutions. So if you and your little weed-smoking, dread-wearing friends want to boycott the 'ethnically cleansed land' then go ahead but stop trying to force your fringe, extremist opinion on an entire student population.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axes)
    But its not motivated by humanitarian considerations, and neither are yours. To say that a boycott of goods from the WB is just, but that other boycotts of regions ruled by far worse entities are not, is the height of hypocricy.
    Given the realities on the ground, your presumption that my opposition to Israeli settlements is based on following a fashion trend is seriously insulting, and I don't feel I need to justify that accusation.


    Well, to be honest, I would say that Israel's actions are far more gentle than the US, when it found itself in a similar situation. Other than that, the US is supporting dozens of other regimes, some of them far worse. I ask myself, after the US gives Egypt 2 billion a year, if there are any planned boycott by Americans of Egyptian goods due to the horrendous treatment of copts and darfuren refugees..
    The US hasn't been in the same situation since cowboys and Indians. And yes we acted abysmally but one ought to hope that standards have improved since then. Egypt recognized Israel which is why it receives so much aid, the two states formed a buffer against Soviet encroachment, and were given a free pass on human rights.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amandacalifornia)
    Clearly we disagree on some basic premises here. I'm not sure how a private citizen is supposed to boycott against a state.
    I believe that private consumers and organizations should be allowed to say and do whatever they like with their private property, and that almost any speech is free speech. And I think a economic boycott is especially appropriate when the country they take such issue with is a democracy.
    It is not a life-threatening act to reduce a company's profits. And I don't see how it's less discriminatory for a state to do so.

    Are you really that stupid? The ruling didn't say that boycotting Israel was illegal or that people can't boycott Israel. All it is saying is that it is discriminatory to try and force an entire municipality to do so. It is illegal for a councillor to try and make their council ward boycott a country because it is discriminatory.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PeeWeeDan)
    What I am trying to say is that all this criticism lacks credibility. Israel is nothing but a state in danger which acts in self defense. I blame only those who provoke Israel so it is right we are "treated lightly"
    As I said before I wouldn't support a boycott of Israel, just the settlers in the occupied territories.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saff123)
    I don't support a full boycott, but we should boycott goods produced in the West Bank and I would go further, companies who do business in the West Bank should not just be boycotted, but held up to sanctions.
    I already boycott settlement goods but the issue of 'do business in' is sticky. I mean, most Israeli companies sell to settlers because they make a profit from it. How far do we go in enforcing this 'do business in' because surely selling nappies to young parents in the settlements is enabling/prolonging the occupation. The issue is far too complex so I just stick boycotting goods from the settlements.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So far... 70% saying Yes vs. 30% saying No, on the poll "Is boycott an effective non-violent protest against Israel?"

    Boycotts like this have the same effects as all those petitions that get sent round for e-signatures
    Actually, so far the BDS movement has put many Israeli's out of business, mainly through divestment, which is brilliant. Some supermarkets and shops have dropped Israeli products through direct protests, which although may not exactly cripple Israel's economy it is nevertheless a win. Oranges don't taste so good when they are grown on ethnically cleansed soil

    But the BDS movement is not just about economic boycott, it includes Cultural and Academic boycott. Every time a protester gets arrested it's a win for us because it means more publicity for the movement.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danielf90)
    I already boycott settlement goods but the issue of 'do business in' is sticky. I mean, most Israeli companies sell to settlers because they make a profit from it. How far do we go in enforcing this 'do business in' because surely selling nappies to young parents in the settlements is enabling/prolonging the occupation. The issue is far too complex so I just stick boycotting goods from the settlements.
    Fair points, I wouldn't favor a ban on the nappy trade, I was thinking more in terms of slowing or halting expansion. I have no clue about the feasibility of such a proposal, but that's why we have government bureaucrats.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Meus)
    We both know that is BS mate. There is no secondary effect here, the only effect is towards the populace, hence to pressure the authorities in the face of public dissent. Tell me how sanctions against Iraq, Iran and North Korea has impacted the lifestyles of the government? Was Saddam going without meals in his countless palaces? Are the Iranian authorities flying around in unstable airplanes? Is Kim living in a dark room with little to eat like most of his people? The only difference in this context is that there is no UN resolution to go with it, it is informal, a practice by the individual. The motivation behind is due to the behaviour of that nation's government, just like 'sanctions'. It is a political protest designed to cause public dissent towards that government, it is not designed out of resentment towards the jewish people. If such a thing is, then I'd like to see how you differentiate between a real boycott/sanction and discrimination.

    Honestly, that suggestion is more laughable than this in which I'm trying to understand.

    If this was a case involving a proven racist trying to start a boycott of products from some neutral African country that is not involved in any controversy or situation, in other words no grounds for a political boycott, then I could understand the argument that it is purely designed to discriminate on race or ethnic. But someone having a problem for the Israeli state's policies? I mean, it's not like Israel is involved in any controversy is it, deary me. What next, anyone who protests against the state is now anti-Semitic?
    You're going about this the wrong way. The question is about the legality of the call for the boycott of Israeli goods; you are simply questioning the legality of past actions, which is irrelevant to the debate. This boycott targets people based on their nationality, without regard for the person opinions or preferences. In other words, for many people it targets them simply because of where they were born. French law considers it illegal to discriminate based on nationality (presumably because someone's nationality is often arbitrary and practically unchosen), and so the boycott was illegal, and so the ECoHR upheld the ruling.

    I was discussing boycotts with a Muslim the other day and I think it is clear that morally there are undoubtedly problems with some boycotts. The call for an Israeli boycott is more morally complex than, say, the Muslim call for a Danish boycott (which was clearly immoral); it is an interesting topic to think about.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I really don't see the problem in boyottng Israeli products if Israelis themselves boycott Israeli products.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    You're going about this the wrong way. The question is about the legality of the call for the boycott of Israeli goods; you are simply questioning the legality of past actions, which is irrelevant to the debate. This boycott targets people based on their nationality, without regard for the person opinions or preferences. In other words, for many people it targets them simply because of where they were born. French law considers it illegal to discriminate based on nationality (presumably because someone's nationality is often arbitrary and practically unchosen), and so the boycott was illegal, and so the ECoHR upheld the ruling.
    Would a boycott of Apartheid South Africa resulted in the same ruling? If so, didn't the French participate in the boycott?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danielf90)
    You want to boycott Israel, go ahead! You're a hypocrite because you (that's a generic 'you' aimed at all SWP/trots/StWC-ites) don't ever call to boycott any other country.

    Oh, and trying to force a students' union to have a boycott policy IS discriminatory. You're discriminating against the jewish/zionist, israeli and israel-supporting members of the union. After all, an SU's primary aim is the welfare of all of it's members and if the union passes any decrees that makes students less likely to come to them for help, they're contravening their own constitutions. So if you and your little weed-smoking, dread-wearing friends want to boycott the 'ethnically cleansed land' then go ahead but stop trying to force your fringe, extremist opinion on an entire student population.
    :p:
    Who said anything about a Students Union?
    Extremist! Ha that's a good one, coming from a supporter of a totalitarian state with a right wing government.

    And for the record I dont smoke weed and dreads are appalling:eek:
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Sakujo)
    Would a boycott of Apartheid South Africa resulted in the same ruling? If so, didn't the French participate in the boycott?
    I don't know the details of the case and so can't comment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saff123)
    Given the realities on the ground, your presumption that my opposition to Israeli settlements is based on following a fashion trend is seriously insulting, and I don't feel I need to justify that accusation.

    If Im wrong than I appologize, but I just don't see you supporting sanctions on dozens of other occupied territories where the 'oppression level' is infinately worse.




    The US hasn't been in the same situation since cowboys and Indians. And yes we acted abysmally but one ought to hope that standards have improved since then.


    Im speaking, rather, of the last 30 years.


    Egypt recognized Israel which is why it receives so much aid, the two states formed a buffer against Soviet encroachment, and were given a free pass on human rights.

    And yet you support sanctions on the area in which israel is, allegedly, performing human rights violations, yet you do not apply the same to Egypt.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gcampb)
    :p:
    Who said anything about a Students Union?
    Extremist! Ha that's a good one, coming from a supporter of a totalitarian state with a right wing government.

    And for the record I dont smoke weed and dreads are appalling:eek:

    Totalitarian, Israel? :confused:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 1, 2009
  • 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
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
    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.