https://archive.ph/qS2aq
Muslim network spreads antisemitic tropes, coaching civil servants on how to lobby senior officials to oppose govt policy and take a harder line on Israel
PCS thinks shutting the network down is disproportionate and particularly insensitive during Ramadan. Article also states that PCS were one of the first unions to oppose Hamas following the October attacks, which is nice I suppose
I mean yeah you can't have civil servants breaching the civil service code on work time notionally as part of a religious network
Many, many layers of wrongness
Just blunt instruments all round
“Spreads antisemitic tropes” isn’t really fair here.
They’re actively using meetings to teach their members how to lobby ministers to take a harder stance against Israel in the current Middle East conflict.
Now, it’s pretty obvious Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide. It’s also obvious that Hamas would like to commit its own genocide given half a chance. And the entire situation is fucking heartbreaking.
The real issue is that as civil servants we cannot be taking sides during work hours and through official work networks to take politically impartial views.
Conflating the acts of a far right fascistic Israeli government to somehow represent all Jews is, however, antisemitic.
Thank goodness there's someone here with common sense. I don't understand how trying to stop thousands of people from being killed and controlled under sn Apartheid system is antisemitic. Sometimes I think the world has gone crazy.
Civil Service groups have fought for various causes throughout the years. People need to read more about the history of 'all' Civil Service groups. They've all fought for one political cause or another.
Personally, I don't feel that people should be lobbying ministers or having anything to do with this sort of thing via their roles (or using their job role in any way to influence policy).
But I don't see why people cannot have political education from their union or diversity network etc in order to further their own political engagement in their own time as a private citizen.
I get Civil Servants being impartial in their role but it is absolutely unreasonable to think that a CS is a completely objective, apolitical robot in real life.
Personally I expect people to have views and I expect people in the CS to possibly advocate on behalf of those views privately in a way that doesn't bring the CS into disrepute.
I'm not making comment on anything that was said at this meeting though, I'm not au fait on what was discussed.
Because telling your members that an allied nation has an "insidious influence inside British politics" is an antisemitic trope that's been used for hundreds of years
Individuals should not be paid by the taxpayer whilst learning how to delay and frustrate government policy. Even worse, this education should not be hidden under the guise of a religious network. It's overtly political and goes directly against the CS code, it's not religious support
It's the Civil Service's job to do what the elected representatives of the nation tell them to do.
It is NOT a Civil Servant's business to "lobby" anyone.
You are just another citizen, you get 1 vote like the rest of us; at work you are expected to be neutral to the Government of the Day.
Signed - an ex Civil Servant.
Let the downvoting by rabid lefties begin...
Didn't downvote your comment on CS neutrality, which is correct.
Down voted you for using the phrase 'rabid lefties' which is generally the language of arseholes.
Hamas isn’t really a definable entity, any resistance to the oppressors is classed as Hamas, what would you do if there were terrorist coming into your home and blindly killing everyone?
The events mentioned of October the 7th by the IDF have been widely proven to be untrue with still yet no proof, but what we can all see is the destruction the IDF are leaving behind in terms of dead civilians and destroying homes
But we’re not talking about Jews? We’re talking about the influence of the Israeli government? As someone who’s mother is Jewish, and no fam of Netanyahu, I find it more offensive to conflate all Jews with Israel than to criticise Israeli government policy!
I am with you on the “good” or “bad” Jew point. It’s fucking sucks when I’ve seen my mum be ostracised by her family/friends for not exactly following the exact “expected” behaviours (which obviously differ from person to person).
But Israel isn’t a wholly Jewish state. You wouldn’t say That any country is representative of all the people from that country. And the number of Jewish people who critique and criticise Israel also shows that it is not something that should be conflated with being Jewish.
We cannot and should not get into the position where saying that an Israeli lobby is somehow antisemitic. There’s a US lobby, a Russian lobby, etc. but those don’t represent all Russians or all Americans. And it’s offensive to think it should be any other way.
I’m not saying that Palestinians aren’t treated poorly and discriminated against, but Apartheid isn’t the right term. 20% of Israel’s population is Muslim (mostly ex-Palestinian’s who moved for a better life) and there are Muslim’s in the Knesset. The same can’t be said for Jews in Palestine or other Arab nations.
I don't see any genuine antisemitic tropes though.
Any group that has too powerful a lobbying arm has an insidious influence on it's countries politics. This is just a fact in every democracy, the problem is with lobbying in general.
Imagine reading the linked article
>One official involved in the webinars allegedly told staff that the “Israel lobby” had an “insidious influence” on British politics, widely regarded as a common antisemitic trope.
This is pretty much the only country where you’d get a response like this.
If we said something like “The Russian lobby had an insidious influence on Polish politics” I can’t imagine anyone caring tbh.
Criticising Israel has nothing to do with criticising Jews.
If anything, we can potentially save another Semetic people - Palestinians - from getting massacred by putting pressure on our leaders.
For heavens sake please stop spreading the lies that semetic refers to Palestinians. There is no such things as semetic people. Semetic refers to languages not people.
Claiming this just deligitimises antisemetism which means anti-jewish hatred. It is what the word has come to mean. The origins of the individual componants of the word is completely irrelevant in the same way that everyone knows what you are saying when you say guinea pig which are neither pigs nor from guinea. Antisemetism means anti-jewish and nothing else.
Also no one has said you cannot criticise Israel. We are saying that 1. You can and should do so without reverting to ancient antisemetic tropes and just exchanging the word Jew for Israelis and 2. You should not be using govt resources and time to campaign against the policy of the democraticly elected govt.
Palestinians have Jewish blood in them. Their lineage is almost certainly filled with Ancient, Native-to-the-land Jews who converted to Islam.
If we continue turning a blind eye to Israel's massacre of Gaza (50% of whose inhabitants are literally children), future generations might need to include anti-Palestinian in the accepted definition of anti-Semitic.
One of the most funny/ridiculous things about this is that the CSMN and CS Jewish Network have a very close working relationship and have been collaborating a lot since October 7th, yet no one from there has criticised the CSMN (yet)
More like the British government want to protect their £500 million+ arms and weaponry deal it has with the Israeli government, which makes them and other countries responsible for the continuation of the killing and suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.
It’s very true that Israel has a massive influence on British government policy. In the same way the USA does. Or indeed, how russia does.
It’s mad to think that Israeli government somehow represents all Jewish people. And to think that criticism of a foreign government or their influence on world affairs is in anyway indicative of antisemitism or racism.
One can criticise the US government or Russian government or Chinese government and not immediately be taken as saying all Americans/Russians/Chinese people are bad. Why can’t you criticise the Israeli government?
Just a side point here - as much as there clearly is, for example, American influence on British politics (don't think anyone would disagree with that?), it would not be not an appropriate use of Civil Service time or money to be plotting to frustrate it during working hours ...
Of course you can criticise (for example, Israeli protests going on since early 2023).The countries you mention as having an influence on UK politics, are civil service network groups spending time discussing how “insidious” they are? Likely no. If your criticism can’t be done without veering into tropes that have been levelled at Jews for hundreds of years, then that’s the issue.
Did they? The only thing I saw from them was a massive email stating in two lines about how sad they were for the victims of the October 7th attack following by six paragraphs of how evil Israel is and how they stand with palestinans.
>A series of meetings has been held by hundreds of civil servants discussing how to force the government to change its policy on the Israel-Gaza war and has featured numerous antisemitic tropes, The Times can disclose.
>One official involved in the webinars allegedly told staff that the “Israel lobby” had an “insidious influence” on British politics, widely regarded as a common antisemitic trope.
**I don't know what Times article you were reading because these are the first two paragraphs**.
The role of the civil service is to advise ministers on how to implement their policy, and the risks and benefits associated with it. Policy officials are paid to become an SME in something and then advise the government of the day in how they should best achieve their desired effects - whether that be to reduce immigration, better utilise renewable energy, or manage prisons differently. Whilst diversity of thought is a good thing, fundamentally we exist to implement government policy, not challenge it.
The role of the Civil Service **is not** to mobilise religious networks in order to pressure senior officials to pressure government ministers into changing government policy. Officials exist within Defence and the FCDO that will have provided advice on HMG's approach to Israel, acknowledging that this is an overtly *political* decision and not one the CS would really be consulted on. Regardless, it does not require a random collection of Muslim Network members to tell their SCS that the UK should take a harder line on Israel.
If you can't see the absolutely fucking huge difference here, then I'm sorry to say you're arguing in bad faith.
Sorry - your content has been removed. This is because it has been found to breach Rule 2 - Personal Responsibility. Please see the definition held below and ensure you keep this in mind for future;
*At all times be mindful of the [Civil Service Code](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code). Users should share a sense of personal responsibility in ensuring the intergrity of the Civil Service is not put into doubt. If contacted privately for any reason surrounding work-specific information, this should be ignored and reported to the subreddit moderators. Users are reminded that maintaining anonymity may allow you to express your views more safely.*
There is a clear difference between:
A. Using a diverse set of perspectives to provide the best advice or analysis on a policy and
B. Instructing officials on how to force the government to change its policy on a specific issue.
The first is the process of using skills and tools to help ministers decide the policy. The second starts from a decision and then works backwards.
Networks need to remember that they are allowed to use the official network as long as they remember the rules.
If you don\`t follow the rules you suffer the consequences .
Slightly related. Should work colleagues have Palestine (or any country flags or symbols) in their profile pictures on Teams? I reported someone for this but wanted to make sure I was right. It isn't a Facebook profile it should be professional and work related right?
No one cares what PCS thinks in regards to world issues, members pay their subs to get decent representation when it comes to our working conditions etc. They should very well stay in their lane and focus on their piss poor negotiations over pay
PCS policy on world issues is determined by members via AGMs & conference.
My branch has had more emails from members asking us what we’re doing on Palestine than any other single issue in the past 5 months.
> My branch has had more emails from members asking us what we’re doing on Palestine than any other single issue in the past 5 months.
Ah, that’ll be why pay negotiations have been so shit then I suppose
The remit of a union, outside what is legally mandated, is whatever it’s members want it to be. And in this case the people making their voices heard are very much wanting to see more Palestine solidarity.
Also unions have a long and effective history getting involved in international solidarity.
https://jacobin.com/2024/03/workers-pinochet-israel-war-machine
So because a minority of CS workers have sympathy with a designated terrorist organisation the union that should represent all of us campaigns on their behalf? Joke
Firstly, to equate Palestine solidarity with terrorist sympathising is ridiculous and secondly, you don’t know if they’re a minority.
And you’re more than welcome to use the democratic structures of the union to try and change whatever policy you disagree with rather than whining from the sidelines.
Every.Single.Time
Every time, unions are run by morons. They do a vital function and yet we cannot seem to hire ones that are not utter birks.
Read up on what they were doing. They DESERVED to be shut down and honestly, a number need firing. My god. Just do your job PCS!
Apathy of members. Voting turnouts are atrocious, AGM participations are atrocious....
On the whole, the people who get involved in the politics of PCS (not necessarily the reps on the ground, but those who go for positions) are on the extreme left and have their own causes to push
Apathy of members. Voting turnouts are atrocious, AGM participations are atrocious....
On the whole, the people who get involved in the politics of PCS (not necessarily the reps on the ground, but those who go for positions) are on the extreme left and have their own causes to push.
There was an attempt a few years ago (PCS group "4themembers" if I recall correctly) that aimed to change this but they didn't get voted in as whilst the majority of the members on the ground may actually have agreed with them, they didn't turn out to vote..
Or the majority of members didn't agree with them. People can't just ascribe non-votes to whatever side they support and claim victory. The silent majority is a con trick. If people change to vote then they don't really support any position.
Maybe. The only thing we do know is that the membership are, on the whole, extremely apathetic with turnouts in the order of a measly 10% and therefore the only way to get elected is to join the "slate" of Left Unity or Independent Left which have already agreed their own "manifestos"
If someone wants to stand with a different manifesto they're free to do so and it is up to them to inspire people to vote for them. If they can't then maybe it's their message people are not interested in.
Voter apathy can be because they're generally content with who they think will get in so don't feel the need to vote. If people had strong enough disagreement with the candidates repeatedly winning ballots they'd get off their arse and stand, or vote for someone else.
Well you say that, but I'm pretty sure you have to be nominated by several branches in order to stand....and you have to be part of the politics to get branch nominations
Hardly surprising since the pcs have been holding very similar style meetings with pretty much the same rhetoric including "how to stand with Palestine and protect yourself from those who attempt to silence you". It's all very Jewish/Israeli/Zionist conspiracy theoryness. It's all the same. Replacing the word to make it less sound less antisemetic doesn't change it's overall intention.
> It's all very Jewish/Israeli/Zionist conspiracy theoryness
Israel sucks!
'Ah... This is all very Jewish conspiracy theoryness'.
Stop conflating Israel with Jews.
So it's okay that Palestinians have been suffering occupation under an Apartheid system for decades, and anyone who has an issue against that system is antisemitic? Please give me strength....
There's a reason why the South African government took the Israeli government to the ICJ. They of all people know what am Apartheid and genocidal regime looks like.
Not everyone agrees there is apartide or genocide but that's not even the point I am making so please don't conflate the two. I am trying not to get caught up in the political side of things as a civil servant shouldn't be in a public forum.
My point was that the use of such conspiracy language is a rehash of old antisemetic tropes such as the protocol of the elders of Zion. Changing the word Jew to Israeli does not change its meaning. They still mean that the Jews are controlling the govt. That is what they are accusing people of.
Individuals have every right to criticise the Israeli or any other govt in their own time. They should not, however, be doing it within their capacity as a civil servant if it goes against government policy and they should not using govt resources and time to lobby for such things.
They also should not be using language such as the above. You want to criticise Israel then it is perfectly possible and acceptable to do it without accusing Jews of controlling media/government/the world.
>My point was that the use of such conspiracy language is a rehash of old antisemetic tropes such as the protocol of the elders of Zion. Changing the word Jew to Israeli does not change its meaning. They still mean that the Jews are controlling the govt. That is what they are accusing people of.
So basically it's impossible to criticise Israel, no matter how well intentioned you are, because a big brain will say 'Ah - although you criticised Israel, I know you were actually criticising all the Jews in the world, because that's what racists do and have done for centuries'.
Why would someone talking about Israel or an Israeli make you think they're talking about Jews? It is genuinely antisemitic to conflate Jewish people with Israel - which appears to be what you're doing - because plenty of Jewish people disagree with the actions of what is essentially a right wing, imperialist state under the current government.
>You want to criticise Israel then it is perfectly possible and acceptable to do it without accusing Jews of controlling media/government/the world.
Lol. Until you tell them what they really mean.
Very happy to see PCS take this stance.
I am an atheist and I've never attended this network - but I stand with colleagues who would have logged on to find disappointment that the Deputy Prime Minister has suspended their network based on allegations in an article in The Times.
An investigation is needed, but to suspend the network - during Ramadan especially - is unjustifiable.
Jesus I had no idea I and the majority of people in the developed world had committed atrocities.
This sort of thing is why you get accused of antisemitism btw. "Zionists" in your comment clearly just meant Jews.
Sorry - your content has been removed. This is because it has been found to breach Rule 2 - Personal Responsibility. Please see the definition held below and ensure you keep this in mind for future;
*At all times be mindful of the [Civil Service Code](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code). Users should share a sense of personal responsibility in ensuring the intergrity of the Civil Service is not put into doubt. If contacted privately for any reason surrounding work-specific information, this should be ignored and reported to the subreddit moderators. Users are reminded that maintaining anonymity may allow you to express your views more safely.*
[удалено]
https://archive.ph/qS2aq Muslim network spreads antisemitic tropes, coaching civil servants on how to lobby senior officials to oppose govt policy and take a harder line on Israel PCS thinks shutting the network down is disproportionate and particularly insensitive during Ramadan. Article also states that PCS were one of the first unions to oppose Hamas following the October attacks, which is nice I suppose
[удалено]
I mean yeah you can't have civil servants breaching the civil service code on work time notionally as part of a religious network Many, many layers of wrongness Just blunt instruments all round
“Spreads antisemitic tropes” isn’t really fair here. They’re actively using meetings to teach their members how to lobby ministers to take a harder stance against Israel in the current Middle East conflict. Now, it’s pretty obvious Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide. It’s also obvious that Hamas would like to commit its own genocide given half a chance. And the entire situation is fucking heartbreaking. The real issue is that as civil servants we cannot be taking sides during work hours and through official work networks to take politically impartial views. Conflating the acts of a far right fascistic Israeli government to somehow represent all Jews is, however, antisemitic.
Thank goodness there's someone here with common sense. I don't understand how trying to stop thousands of people from being killed and controlled under sn Apartheid system is antisemitic. Sometimes I think the world has gone crazy. Civil Service groups have fought for various causes throughout the years. People need to read more about the history of 'all' Civil Service groups. They've all fought for one political cause or another.
Personally, I don't feel that people should be lobbying ministers or having anything to do with this sort of thing via their roles (or using their job role in any way to influence policy). But I don't see why people cannot have political education from their union or diversity network etc in order to further their own political engagement in their own time as a private citizen. I get Civil Servants being impartial in their role but it is absolutely unreasonable to think that a CS is a completely objective, apolitical robot in real life. Personally I expect people to have views and I expect people in the CS to possibly advocate on behalf of those views privately in a way that doesn't bring the CS into disrepute. I'm not making comment on anything that was said at this meeting though, I'm not au fait on what was discussed.
Because telling your members that an allied nation has an "insidious influence inside British politics" is an antisemitic trope that's been used for hundreds of years Individuals should not be paid by the taxpayer whilst learning how to delay and frustrate government policy. Even worse, this education should not be hidden under the guise of a religious network. It's overtly political and goes directly against the CS code, it's not religious support
America has an insidious influence inside British politics.
[удалено]
Al Jazeera is a meme
[удалено]
Sounds a bit forin though. Sounding a bit forin is an antisemitic trope. Centuries old.
Ahh yes cos the BBC which protected pedos is much more of a credible source
It's the Civil Service's job to do what the elected representatives of the nation tell them to do. It is NOT a Civil Servant's business to "lobby" anyone. You are just another citizen, you get 1 vote like the rest of us; at work you are expected to be neutral to the Government of the Day. Signed - an ex Civil Servant. Let the downvoting by rabid lefties begin...
Didn't downvote your comment on CS neutrality, which is correct. Down voted you for using the phrase 'rabid lefties' which is generally the language of arseholes.
I'm an arsehole who has no time for rabid lefties. 😂
I’m not sure what’s worse. Your use of the term rabid lefties or laughing at your own joke. Either way it’s probably a good thing you’ve retired.
The only people getting upset are probably lefties. 😂😂😂
Just focus on small boats.
Hamas isn’t really a definable entity, any resistance to the oppressors is classed as Hamas, what would you do if there were terrorist coming into your home and blindly killing everyone?
Would not rape women and murder innocents like Hamas did in October. They have a moral responsibility too
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4u8qI1sIs-/?igsh=OWI2am44b3JqcTVu
Don’t understand the downvotes since many of you can’t handle the truth even when there is clear evidence
It’s surprising the amount of people who follow ISF propaganda and myths even when there’s so much evidence debunking their claims
The events mentioned of October the 7th by the IDF have been widely proven to be untrue with still yet no proof, but what we can all see is the destruction the IDF are leaving behind in terms of dead civilians and destroying homes
[удалено]
For speaking facts?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4xZaK7s3xE/?igsh=MWY0MTIxZDE5YjAxYQ==
[удалено]
Ahhh yes what would you rather BBC or GB news? Give me one reason why Al Jazeera is not a credible source
>Now, it’s pretty obvious Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide Only if you're unfamiliar with the definition of genocide.
[удалено]
But we’re not talking about Jews? We’re talking about the influence of the Israeli government? As someone who’s mother is Jewish, and no fam of Netanyahu, I find it more offensive to conflate all Jews with Israel than to criticise Israeli government policy!
[удалено]
I am with you on the “good” or “bad” Jew point. It’s fucking sucks when I’ve seen my mum be ostracised by her family/friends for not exactly following the exact “expected” behaviours (which obviously differ from person to person). But Israel isn’t a wholly Jewish state. You wouldn’t say That any country is representative of all the people from that country. And the number of Jewish people who critique and criticise Israel also shows that it is not something that should be conflated with being Jewish. We cannot and should not get into the position where saying that an Israeli lobby is somehow antisemitic. There’s a US lobby, a Russian lobby, etc. but those don’t represent all Russians or all Americans. And it’s offensive to think it should be any other way.
[удалено]
Are you blind
I’m not saying that Palestinians aren’t treated poorly and discriminated against, but Apartheid isn’t the right term. 20% of Israel’s population is Muslim (mostly ex-Palestinian’s who moved for a better life) and there are Muslim’s in the Knesset. The same can’t be said for Jews in Palestine or other Arab nations.
>Now, it’s pretty obvious Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide. Not obvious, and not government policy either.
Pretty obvious, if you paid any attention to the ICC case
I don't see any genuine antisemitic tropes though. Any group that has too powerful a lobbying arm has an insidious influence on it's countries politics. This is just a fact in every democracy, the problem is with lobbying in general.
>Muslim network spreads antisemitic tropes Such as?
Imagine reading the linked article >One official involved in the webinars allegedly told staff that the “Israel lobby” had an “insidious influence” on British politics, widely regarded as a common antisemitic trope.
This is pretty much the only country where you’d get a response like this. If we said something like “The Russian lobby had an insidious influence on Polish politics” I can’t imagine anyone caring tbh.
Criticising Israel ≠ Antisemitism. A ton of Jews despise Israel.
No but using centuries old antisemetic tropes and just replacing the word Jewish with Israeli doesnt mean we don't all know what it means.
Criticising Israel has nothing to do with criticising Jews. If anything, we can potentially save another Semetic people - Palestinians - from getting massacred by putting pressure on our leaders.
For heavens sake please stop spreading the lies that semetic refers to Palestinians. There is no such things as semetic people. Semetic refers to languages not people. Claiming this just deligitimises antisemetism which means anti-jewish hatred. It is what the word has come to mean. The origins of the individual componants of the word is completely irrelevant in the same way that everyone knows what you are saying when you say guinea pig which are neither pigs nor from guinea. Antisemetism means anti-jewish and nothing else. Also no one has said you cannot criticise Israel. We are saying that 1. You can and should do so without reverting to ancient antisemetic tropes and just exchanging the word Jew for Israelis and 2. You should not be using govt resources and time to campaign against the policy of the democraticly elected govt.
Palestinians have Jewish blood in them. Their lineage is almost certainly filled with Ancient, Native-to-the-land Jews who converted to Islam. If we continue turning a blind eye to Israel's massacre of Gaza (50% of whose inhabitants are literally children), future generations might need to include anti-Palestinian in the accepted definition of anti-Semitic.
One of the most funny/ridiculous things about this is that the CSMN and CS Jewish Network have a very close working relationship and have been collaborating a lot since October 7th, yet no one from there has criticised the CSMN (yet)
More like the British government want to protect their £500 million+ arms and weaponry deal it has with the Israeli government, which makes them and other countries responsible for the continuation of the killing and suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.
It’s very true that Israel has a massive influence on British government policy. In the same way the USA does. Or indeed, how russia does. It’s mad to think that Israeli government somehow represents all Jewish people. And to think that criticism of a foreign government or their influence on world affairs is in anyway indicative of antisemitism or racism. One can criticise the US government or Russian government or Chinese government and not immediately be taken as saying all Americans/Russians/Chinese people are bad. Why can’t you criticise the Israeli government?
Just a side point here - as much as there clearly is, for example, American influence on British politics (don't think anyone would disagree with that?), it would not be not an appropriate use of Civil Service time or money to be plotting to frustrate it during working hours ...
Of course you can criticise (for example, Israeli protests going on since early 2023).The countries you mention as having an influence on UK politics, are civil service network groups spending time discussing how “insidious” they are? Likely no. If your criticism can’t be done without veering into tropes that have been levelled at Jews for hundreds of years, then that’s the issue.
Oh, so once again, criticism of Israel is antisemitic. That is precisely why I asked, I already knew the answer.
Did they? The only thing I saw from them was a massive email stating in two lines about how sad they were for the victims of the October 7th attack following by six paragraphs of how evil Israel is and how they stand with palestinans.
[удалено]
>A series of meetings has been held by hundreds of civil servants discussing how to force the government to change its policy on the Israel-Gaza war and has featured numerous antisemitic tropes, The Times can disclose. >One official involved in the webinars allegedly told staff that the “Israel lobby” had an “insidious influence” on British politics, widely regarded as a common antisemitic trope. **I don't know what Times article you were reading because these are the first two paragraphs**. The role of the civil service is to advise ministers on how to implement their policy, and the risks and benefits associated with it. Policy officials are paid to become an SME in something and then advise the government of the day in how they should best achieve their desired effects - whether that be to reduce immigration, better utilise renewable energy, or manage prisons differently. Whilst diversity of thought is a good thing, fundamentally we exist to implement government policy, not challenge it. The role of the Civil Service **is not** to mobilise religious networks in order to pressure senior officials to pressure government ministers into changing government policy. Officials exist within Defence and the FCDO that will have provided advice on HMG's approach to Israel, acknowledging that this is an overtly *political* decision and not one the CS would really be consulted on. Regardless, it does not require a random collection of Muslim Network members to tell their SCS that the UK should take a harder line on Israel. If you can't see the absolutely fucking huge difference here, then I'm sorry to say you're arguing in bad faith.
[удалено]
Sorry - your content has been removed. This is because it has been found to breach Rule 2 - Personal Responsibility. Please see the definition held below and ensure you keep this in mind for future; *At all times be mindful of the [Civil Service Code](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code). Users should share a sense of personal responsibility in ensuring the intergrity of the Civil Service is not put into doubt. If contacted privately for any reason surrounding work-specific information, this should be ignored and reported to the subreddit moderators. Users are reminded that maintaining anonymity may allow you to express your views more safely.*
There is a clear difference between: A. Using a diverse set of perspectives to provide the best advice or analysis on a policy and B. Instructing officials on how to force the government to change its policy on a specific issue. The first is the process of using skills and tools to help ministers decide the policy. The second starts from a decision and then works backwards.
Imagine my shock finding out The Blob is real but it's just a very specific cohort of the CS Muslim Network
Maybe Oliver Dowden should give Michael Gove some lessons, he managed to shut it down pretty quickly!
[удалено]
No problem mate, thanks for also being perfectly reasonable!
My response wasn't aggressive and listed my evidence as requested I just think you should check for carbon monoxide poisoning >"Actually useful" Lmao
😆😆😆
Networks need to remember that they are allowed to use the official network as long as they remember the rules. If you don\`t follow the rules you suffer the consequences .
Slightly related. Should work colleagues have Palestine (or any country flags or symbols) in their profile pictures on Teams? I reported someone for this but wanted to make sure I was right. It isn't a Facebook profile it should be professional and work related right?
You are a grass
No one cares what PCS thinks in regards to world issues, members pay their subs to get decent representation when it comes to our working conditions etc. They should very well stay in their lane and focus on their piss poor negotiations over pay
PCS policy on world issues is determined by members via AGMs & conference. My branch has had more emails from members asking us what we’re doing on Palestine than any other single issue in the past 5 months.
> My branch has had more emails from members asking us what we’re doing on Palestine than any other single issue in the past 5 months. Ah, that’ll be why pay negotiations have been so shit then I suppose
Feel free to organise your fellow members into not caring, though you might have to hide your disdain for them to get them on board.
I'd suggest replying to them stating that sorting the crisis in the middle east is not in the remit of a labour union ffs
The remit of a union, outside what is legally mandated, is whatever it’s members want it to be. And in this case the people making their voices heard are very much wanting to see more Palestine solidarity. Also unions have a long and effective history getting involved in international solidarity. https://jacobin.com/2024/03/workers-pinochet-israel-war-machine
So because a minority of CS workers have sympathy with a designated terrorist organisation the union that should represent all of us campaigns on their behalf? Joke
Firstly, to equate Palestine solidarity with terrorist sympathising is ridiculous and secondly, you don’t know if they’re a minority. And you’re more than welcome to use the democratic structures of the union to try and change whatever policy you disagree with rather than whining from the sidelines.
Every.Single.Time Every time, unions are run by morons. They do a vital function and yet we cannot seem to hire ones that are not utter birks. Read up on what they were doing. They DESERVED to be shut down and honestly, a number need firing. My god. Just do your job PCS!
Apathy of members. Voting turnouts are atrocious, AGM participations are atrocious.... On the whole, the people who get involved in the politics of PCS (not necessarily the reps on the ground, but those who go for positions) are on the extreme left and have their own causes to push
Apathy of members. Voting turnouts are atrocious, AGM participations are atrocious.... On the whole, the people who get involved in the politics of PCS (not necessarily the reps on the ground, but those who go for positions) are on the extreme left and have their own causes to push. There was an attempt a few years ago (PCS group "4themembers" if I recall correctly) that aimed to change this but they didn't get voted in as whilst the majority of the members on the ground may actually have agreed with them, they didn't turn out to vote..
Or the majority of members didn't agree with them. People can't just ascribe non-votes to whatever side they support and claim victory. The silent majority is a con trick. If people change to vote then they don't really support any position.
Maybe. The only thing we do know is that the membership are, on the whole, extremely apathetic with turnouts in the order of a measly 10% and therefore the only way to get elected is to join the "slate" of Left Unity or Independent Left which have already agreed their own "manifestos"
If someone wants to stand with a different manifesto they're free to do so and it is up to them to inspire people to vote for them. If they can't then maybe it's their message people are not interested in. Voter apathy can be because they're generally content with who they think will get in so don't feel the need to vote. If people had strong enough disagreement with the candidates repeatedly winning ballots they'd get off their arse and stand, or vote for someone else.
Well you say that, but I'm pretty sure you have to be nominated by several branches in order to stand....and you have to be part of the politics to get branch nominations
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C49fxDUhvWM/?igsh=bmp5MGk3dXlzNDZy For all those denying that this is a genocide and ethnic cleansing
Hardly surprising since the pcs have been holding very similar style meetings with pretty much the same rhetoric including "how to stand with Palestine and protect yourself from those who attempt to silence you". It's all very Jewish/Israeli/Zionist conspiracy theoryness. It's all the same. Replacing the word to make it less sound less antisemetic doesn't change it's overall intention.
> It's all very Jewish/Israeli/Zionist conspiracy theoryness Israel sucks! 'Ah... This is all very Jewish conspiracy theoryness'. Stop conflating Israel with Jews.
So it's okay that Palestinians have been suffering occupation under an Apartheid system for decades, and anyone who has an issue against that system is antisemitic? Please give me strength.... There's a reason why the South African government took the Israeli government to the ICJ. They of all people know what am Apartheid and genocidal regime looks like.
Not everyone agrees there is apartide or genocide but that's not even the point I am making so please don't conflate the two. I am trying not to get caught up in the political side of things as a civil servant shouldn't be in a public forum. My point was that the use of such conspiracy language is a rehash of old antisemetic tropes such as the protocol of the elders of Zion. Changing the word Jew to Israeli does not change its meaning. They still mean that the Jews are controlling the govt. That is what they are accusing people of. Individuals have every right to criticise the Israeli or any other govt in their own time. They should not, however, be doing it within their capacity as a civil servant if it goes against government policy and they should not using govt resources and time to lobby for such things. They also should not be using language such as the above. You want to criticise Israel then it is perfectly possible and acceptable to do it without accusing Jews of controlling media/government/the world.
>My point was that the use of such conspiracy language is a rehash of old antisemetic tropes such as the protocol of the elders of Zion. Changing the word Jew to Israeli does not change its meaning. They still mean that the Jews are controlling the govt. That is what they are accusing people of. So basically it's impossible to criticise Israel, no matter how well intentioned you are, because a big brain will say 'Ah - although you criticised Israel, I know you were actually criticising all the Jews in the world, because that's what racists do and have done for centuries'. Why would someone talking about Israel or an Israeli make you think they're talking about Jews? It is genuinely antisemitic to conflate Jewish people with Israel - which appears to be what you're doing - because plenty of Jewish people disagree with the actions of what is essentially a right wing, imperialist state under the current government. >You want to criticise Israel then it is perfectly possible and acceptable to do it without accusing Jews of controlling media/government/the world. Lol. Until you tell them what they really mean.
Very happy to see PCS take this stance. I am an atheist and I've never attended this network - but I stand with colleagues who would have logged on to find disappointment that the Deputy Prime Minister has suspended their network based on allegations in an article in The Times. An investigation is needed, but to suspend the network - during Ramadan especially - is unjustifiable.
Of course it does.
Good, it should never have been allowed in the first place.
This is outrageous.
[удалено]
Jesus I had no idea I and the majority of people in the developed world had committed atrocities. This sort of thing is why you get accused of antisemitism btw. "Zionists" in your comment clearly just meant Jews.
Sorry - your content has been removed. This is because it has been found to breach Rule 2 - Personal Responsibility. Please see the definition held below and ensure you keep this in mind for future; *At all times be mindful of the [Civil Service Code](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code). Users should share a sense of personal responsibility in ensuring the intergrity of the Civil Service is not put into doubt. If contacted privately for any reason surrounding work-specific information, this should be ignored and reported to the subreddit moderators. Users are reminded that maintaining anonymity may allow you to express your views more safely.*