It’s an awful choice of misogynistic language that distracts from an important topic.
Yeah totally agree - what a fucking awful thing to say.
I’m not watching Eurovision this year for the obvious reasons, and yeah I’d prefer Madonna not to play, but hypocritically calling just her out and using SW-phobic and misogynist language is just completely unacceptable. What a tool
As if the misogyny is the only problem (although it’s obviously loathsome). The whole interview is a car crash. He’s not an anti-Semite though because he likes the Marx Brothers. Dickhead.
I really wish people who want to go on tv to advocate for Palestinians (or other oppressed groups) would get themselves media trained and get well briefed by the people affected before going on. It’s not helpful at all and can sometimes make it harder for Palestinians to argue their case. The transcript of this is going to read that he doesn’t support the human rights of Israelis (or even on another interpretation, Jewish people). If people wanna be spokespeople for something they dont know much about or aren’t affected by, they should put the work in.
It will ‘read like’ he doesn’t support those things because he clearly doesn’t support them.
Elights calls Bobby Gillespie an “embarrassing twat” for being an embarrassing twat.
Shame - I love Primal Scream (Xtrmntr particularly), but he’s clearly always been a twat.
Didn’t he call EVERYONE a prostitute on ‘Exterminator’?
When it comes to politics, Gillespie is so out of his depth. He was awful on This Week back in October, not having a clue what he was talking about.
As someone with Jewish roots I have no issue with people criticising Israel if those criticisms are legitimate, not anti-Semitic and are based in fact, but it showed a severe lack of knowledge when Gillespie stated that the whole of Israel has ‘been stolen’. The occupied territories of Gaza, East Jerusalem, Golan Heights, West Bank, fair enough, but the whole of Israel has ‘been stolen’?
You’re not helping, Bobby. Seriously.
Looking forward to his thoughts on every country in North, South and Central America and on Australia and New Zealand etc. I assume he will be questioning the right of those countries to exist too.
Israel is fairly unique in that the ‘nation’ in the nation state only includes about 75% of the population. Palestinians and other minorities are consitutionalised as second class citizens and settler-colonialism is central to the constitution of the state of Israel.
If another settler colonial state like Australia reconstituted itself in a way that gave the right to exercise national self-determination to only one ethnic group, many people would also probably question that state’s ‘right’ to exist as an inherently discriminatory ethnostate.
many people would argue that jewish people don’t have a ‘right’ to exercise self-determination at the expense of Palestinians, and that states don’t have the right to constitute themselves in ways that violate precepts of international law.
this isn’t even going into the question of whether sovereign states have ‘rights’ (I don’t think they do)
You think native Americans and indigenous Australians haven’t been treated as ‘second class citizens’ throughout the history of those countries?
That’s a ridiculous reading of her statement, come on.
do the constitutions of either the US or Australia actually establish either of those states as belonging to one ethnic group, at the exclusion of indigenous people and other minorities?
Until 1962 indigenous Australians were not allowed to vote. Restrictions on native Americans voting weren’t fully removed until 1965.
My point was really that Gillespie saying that Israel has no right to exist because it is ‘stolen land’ is ridiculously selective. It is ‘stolen land’ but then so are half of the countries in the world. If you single just one out and declare it’s whole existence as invalid then you can expect people to consider you an anti-Semite.
I think it’s safe to say he’s not got the best grasp of what he’s talking about and his statements shouldn’t be used as the basis of any political discussion on this.