Jama is arguably guilty of hinting at non-verbal support for Hamas, and I get your point Evan about her catching the NDP off-guard with her statements in the legislature. However, even as a matter of political pragmatism it is not feasible of a political party in principle to try to strictly control the non-verbal language of its represe…
Jama is arguably guilty of hinting at non-verbal support for Hamas, and I get your point Evan about her catching the NDP off-guard with her statements in the legislature. However, even as a matter of political pragmatism it is not feasible of a political party in principle to try to strictly control the non-verbal language of its representatives. I am also not sure if it is clear that she lied about her planned statements or had a last-minute change of heart. It's also not clear that these mis-demeanours warrant a permanent expulsion, there are many political punishments available to the NDP beyond the simple question of expulsion-or-not, like leaving hints that she would be kept out of any Cabinet, for example.
I get you’re pissed at the OLP right but denying that women were victims of sexual violence and claiming a Zionist conspiracy “controls” the Ontario government are not misdemeanours
I had the same opinion months ago. These are differences on what constitutes fact, not necessarily differences in values. To make the case that someone is genuine scum worthy of stigmatization requires objective evidence, like say someone being decried by someone who knows and who has worked with them personally. I don't see that here with Jama, but instead see her mostly being stigmatized by people who never really worked with her.
A couple of people unfriended me on Facebook because I disputed that Israel is guilty of "genocidal" behaviour. In their view my denialism of "genocide" was de facto advocacy for it. When you shun someone you still have the opportunity to talk to, there's every opportunity for a misunderstanding.
It depends on how loosely one defines "Zionist lobby" and how narrowly one defines "controls". Regardless, whether Jama's behaviour is tolerable is not the same question as whether her claim is correct, anymore than the question of whether I am "encouraging genocide" depends on whether my arguments about Israeli behaviour are factually correct or not. Tone is what matters here, not content.
Jama is arguably guilty of hinting at non-verbal support for Hamas, and I get your point Evan about her catching the NDP off-guard with her statements in the legislature. However, even as a matter of political pragmatism it is not feasible of a political party in principle to try to strictly control the non-verbal language of its representatives. I am also not sure if it is clear that she lied about her planned statements or had a last-minute change of heart. It's also not clear that these mis-demeanours warrant a permanent expulsion, there are many political punishments available to the NDP beyond the simple question of expulsion-or-not, like leaving hints that she would be kept out of any Cabinet, for example.
I get you’re pissed at the OLP right but denying that women were victims of sexual violence and claiming a Zionist conspiracy “controls” the Ontario government are not misdemeanours
I had the same opinion months ago. These are differences on what constitutes fact, not necessarily differences in values. To make the case that someone is genuine scum worthy of stigmatization requires objective evidence, like say someone being decried by someone who knows and who has worked with them personally. I don't see that here with Jama, but instead see her mostly being stigmatized by people who never really worked with her.
A couple of people unfriended me on Facebook because I disputed that Israel is guilty of "genocidal" behaviour. In their view my denialism of "genocide" was de facto advocacy for it. When you shun someone you still have the opportunity to talk to, there's every opportunity for a misunderstanding.
How is saying the Zionist Lobby “controls an entire government operation” a question of fact
It depends on how loosely one defines "Zionist lobby" and how narrowly one defines "controls". Regardless, whether Jama's behaviour is tolerable is not the same question as whether her claim is correct, anymore than the question of whether I am "encouraging genocide" depends on whether my arguments about Israeli behaviour are factually correct or not. Tone is what matters here, not content.
Yes, her actions warrant, no, require, permanent expulsion.
A caucus is not a book club where you may accept a rude member back after sufficient apologies.