I am a lifelong Labour supporter but this issue troubles me. If they are institutionally anti-Semitic then I would want to be supporting someone else.
Each article I have read on either side of the issue carries with it a chorus of righteousness that I can’t be doing with. I know that Corbyn has long been an opponent of the actions of the Israeli government – and he wouldn’t be alone there – so what is it that makes Labour and him anti-Semitic?
I know what you’re going to say – he met with and talked to terrorist X and terrorist Y. But didn’t Winston Churchill himself say “jaw jaw – not war war”? We only achieved a peace in NI after talking to all sides, after all.
I know the issue is a powder keg but I sincerely want to know why an MP would resign on this issue . I think this is a safe place to discuss it, I hope.
In summary I can’t support Labour if they are anti-semitic. They say they’re not- so…
I found the documentary film The Lobby very interesting and enlightening on some aspects of this accusation.
Al jazeera? No possible bias there then.
So all this anti-semitism is just a Jewish conspiracy? Well, I’m glad we’ve cleared that up.
That’s certainly what the documentary seems to imply (and is clearly not true). But what it actually shows is a network of organisations and their agenda-driven antics. Doesn’t clear anything up, but shouldn’t be casually dismissed either, if only to understand another perspective.
Have you thought about fact-checking any of this?
I have indeed.
There seem to be opinions out there that if you are against the extreme right wing Israeli government that regularly carries out atrocities on the Palestinian people then you are anti-semitic. I disagree.
So do I and this is a tedious argument exaggerated by the Tory press who see it as a massive chink in his armour.
As a Jew and a Labour member, it’s not tedious to me. Sorry if we’re boring you with this, but it’s pretty bloody important to us.
The issue seems to have become, for some, not whether we should tolerate antisemitism in the first place but, ridiculously, about definitions of what antisemitism is. Not too sure what it is? Ask a Jew.
It should go without saying that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are not the same thing. Many anti-Zionists claim complete innocence of any antisemitic intent, yet they still so often borrow the classic libels of Jew baiting with regular accusations of international Jewish financial conspiracy and control of the media, They use these to support false equations of Zionism with colonialism and imperialism, or to make vicious parallels with genocide. Just earlier tonight, a Labour candidate in Scotland was rightly forced to step down by her constituency party having written in a blog that Israel was like “a child abuser” and that criticism of antisemitism in the party was ““orchestrated by the wealthy establishment”. Members like this seem to have no concept or understanding of precisely why this sort of thoughtless crap causes such offence.
It should be a matter of deep shame that the party were investigated for racism by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The only other UK political party to have been similarly investigated were the BNP, for heaven’s sake.
Sorry if I have offended you @Slug but that was not my intention to offend anyone .
My use of the word tedious was in relation to this being an issue in the most important election this country has had in decades. It is not an issue in this election it is a diversion.
No doubt you will shoot me down in flames by dismissing it but hey ho I can take it.
I have no issue with Jews or any other people for that matter. I do however have a problem with the Israeli government of Netanyahu and with Netanyahu himself. A ghastly crooked politician and yes we should be able to confront his policies which over the years have tarnished Israel’s reputation.
No problem mate. I had presumed that you were simply saying you were bored by the issue, so you hadn’t actually offended me. You’ll notice that I was much more upset by some other comments yesterday!
I share your dislike of Netanyahu’s policies and I feel they belittle Israel. He is playing the populist strongman role that is depressingly familiar with many of the world’s politicians at present. But he will be gone in time of course and the nation can hopefully return to building bridges instead of walls. Whether those bridges will continue to be dismissed is a separate matter.
Of course I take issue with your use of the word “diversion”, because that, to me, implies that the matter is merely a smear tactic used by those who would not wish to see a Labour government. I’m sure the Tories are cheering at this mess, then they’ll quietly return to blackballing Jews and Muslims at their golf clubs as normal.
If it was case that this is merely a political smear tactic, Jews in the party could laugh at its clumsiness and shrug it off. We aren’t.
I have campaigned, delivered leaflets and door knocked for the party since I joined in the mid 80s and will do so again in the forthcoming election, but at grass roots level there are some newer members, who hold effective control of the party’s administration. and they do not seem to notice any problem about lecturing their comrades over what they should or should not be personally offended by.
It is akin to a white man arguing with a black woman over what she finds offensive. It is not his decision to make.
This is absolutely not about the freedom to criticise the Israeli government’s actions. I would be astonished if you could find me any Labour supporting Jews who held an “Israel right or wrong” view. But we do all believe Israel has a basic right to exist. There are a few newer members in the party who seem quite keen that this is not the case, for whatever reason, and voice that view in, at best, a thoughtlessly rude manner.
I am, it will surprise no-one, not enamoured with Corbyn. I don’t believe for one second that he is some sort of closet antisemite and recognise he has a long record of siding with oppressed people, which the Palestinians currently are. I also think he has been involved in “radical agitprop” politics for so long that he is set in the ways of student politics; undoubtedly committed and sincere but also astonishingly blinkered to other opinion and with a narrow view of the world as it fits his ideals. This single mindedness greatly appeals to some members, hence the personality cult that has grown up around him. For me, I am repulsed by the “Oooo, Jeremy Corrrbyn” brigade. It seems trite, and all personality cults in politics are by definition a bad thing.
It feels like he has dealt with this issue by flat batting it away patiently until it gets bored and gives up. By saying “Hmm, yes it’s a very bad thing and we’ll definitely sort that out” until the problem goes away of its own accord. And never mind that the party is actually investigated for institutional racism, he behaves as if that’s an everyday occurrence and of no more seriousness than a parking ticket.
Part of me admires him for his devotion, part of me wants to scream in frustration at his vacillation. It is that which reflects so badly on him and causes him to have such a poor personal rating in the country.
I hope we win the election, but if we do it will be by default, through a split Tory vote. I’m not holding my breath in all honesty.
A very erudite response @Slug which I largely agree with. What confuses me is when the anti-Semitic strain came into the Labour party because I do not recall it being there when Blair was the leader or indeed any of his predecessors.
If it has become an issue with the Labour party then clearly something has changed and needs to be nipped in the bud.
If the issue is as big as it is being portrayed then clearly there is a problem not just for our Jewish community but also the rest of us that will have to endure another 5 years of Tory rule. I am genuinely concerned that the intervention of the Chief Rabbi may lose Labour significant support. As you say the Tories will be rubbing their hands together.
@Slug: I’ve given up completely on the euphemistic ‘anti-Semitic’ and prefer ‘Jew hatred’ because that’s what it always boils down to. Same goes for ‘anti-Zionist’ which is used by your more upscale Jew hater.
At the very least your ignorant and precious view does go some way to differentiating between religion and politics.
Not a view, really, it’s more a personal preference that helps me illuminate both terms to my own satisfaction.
They are not anti semitic & Jeremy Corbyn is not anti semitic.
There are very well funded and highly motivated people who really want you think that they are anti semitic.
They have a very specific agenda which in essence works full time to demonise Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular. Their worst fear is a clear path to a 2 state solution for Israel and the Palestinians, & they will gladly smear anybody in the most despicable ways to ensure such proposals have little chance of ever happening.
Meanwhile demolition of houses & whole villages continues, Trumps moves the US Embassy, ‘settlers’ act with impunity, & lots of kids keep getting shot (as in dead).
It’s been said that an anti semite used to be somebody who hates Jews for being Jews. It now means anybody whom (some) Jews dislike & want to give a damning label to.
The OP was specifically talking about antisemitism within the Labour Party, and not the Arab- Israeli conflict, was it not? .
You want to make a separate point , fair enough, but then why allow yourself to wander down that dusty old “global conspiracy by a monied elite” route?
And with respect, you can fuck right off your own definitions..
Charmed, I’m sure.
The two things are inextricably linked, to pretend that they are not is disingenuous to the point of stupidity. The current leader of the Labour Party holds a different view on the ‘Palestinian issue’ than previous leaders, in that he is long established supporter of the Palestinians – a perfectly reasonable and respectable position – but should he become PM, there is the possibility of a change in emphasis of actual government policy on the issue. This is something the current state of Israel does not want to happen. There is no dark, hidden conspiracy – rather a very efficient political lobbying group, with well placed supporters in positions of influence that plays for keeps. They are doing a very good job with the brief, and if that entails smearing Corbyn as an anti- Semite to undermine him, then so be it.
I hate to break it to you, but you don’t speak for all Jews, any more than I speak for all gentiles, or Mike Tyson speaks for all African Americans.
Have a look at last night’s BBC Question Time, a young lass on there who was Jewish from an all Jewish family explicitly spelling out that none of them are ‘scared’ or have any misgivings about Corbyn or the Labour Party. There is no homogenous block of opinion, whatever the JC would like the public to believe.
As for me fucking off my ‘own’ definitions, I was paraphrasing Dr Hajo Meyer, Dutch physicist, political activist and Shoah survivor.
His full quote was as follows – ‘Formerly an anti-Semite was somebody who hated Jews because they were Jews and had a Jewish soul, but nowadays an anti-Semite is somebody who is hated by Jews’
I consider him more than qualified to comment on the issue.
I know someone rather well who for the last year has being doing a lot of digging around for Tom Watson (Haven’t talked to him today but I guess he’s busy looking for a new job).
After rather a lot of red wine one night my friend said “You would not believe what’s going on behind Corbyn’s back. There are some serious ideological nutters there and two guys in particular who hate and despise not only the state of Israel but the entire Jewish race.” My friend has let a couple of other things slip about his investigations to which I said “You’re joking” but a few days later turned out to be absolutely true. In the forty years I voted in the UK I never once voted anything else but Labour. If I still lived there I would most probably still vote Labour but dearie dearie me it’s come to a pass when the options are Boris or Jezzer
After watching The Lobby (above) and seeing filmed evidence of some ridiculously unfounded accusations of anti-semitism, by such people as Joan Ryan MP, I feel extremely sceptical regarding anecdotal gossip.
Tom Watson eh? He’s got a terrific record on uncovering major conspiracies.
This. The party isn’t institutionally anti-semitic. It does however contain a small number of lunatics with their own agenda who make a lot of noise and have somehow not been removed. The party does need to look at itself and ask why they haven’t been removed.
Excuse my scepticism, but I’d want names and evidence.
Who was the Labour MP suspended last year for saying that there was a “huge Jewish conspiracy against Jeremy corbyn”. He was initially reinstated but public sentiment saw him face disciplinary charges.
The documentary above shows evidence of an influential Jewish conspiracy against Corbyn.
Oh, look!. Another conspiracy by us? Ain’t it amazing how we can keep so many of them going at the same time?
Actually, on reflection, Gary’s remark has pissed me right off. Not acceptable, obnoxious, and just plain hateful. Same old crap tropes.
Gary, If you don’t understand why I’m angry, then read some history of antisemitism.. Please try harder, think before typing, and you’ll avoid being an offensive racist twat.
I wasn’t giving my opinion, but describing what the documentary alleges and shows its evidence of.
It alleges that there is a conspiracy that involves the Jewish Labour Movement, the Union of Jewish Students, the Parliamentary Friends of Israel, BICOM (Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre) and various other organisations. It shows its evidence of this conspiracy.
To describe a film as showing evidence of a conspiracy that involves specific influential Jewish* organisations is a very far cry from making the patently ridiculous claim that all Jewish people are somehow involved in a conspiracy.
Of course Al. Jazeera can be accused of bias, but their investigation undeniably captures some controversial conversations on film (including unfounded accusations of anti-semitism made against specific Labour Party members that simply can’t be justified).
If there is anti-semitism in the Labour party it absolutely needs to be called out and purged, but on the basis of clear evidence.
*Should I refer to them as Jewish organisations or pro-Israel organisations, or Zionist organisations? I’m not sure and I’ll ask you to forgive my ignorance on that one.
Gary, my “evidence” for obvious reasons has to remain anecdotal but all I can repeat is that my friend is a good guy and there are other stories he has told me that turned out to be 100% correct. And as for quoting that ridiculous video….
And Moose- Tom Watson is a grave loss for the Labour Party. Yes he fucked up over the sex abuse stuff but …
I didn’t quote it, but why is it ridiculous?
Gee, Mr Picky, I Wrongly used the word quote. Try fact-checking before posting propaganda videos. There is nothing wrong with criticising many of the vile actions of the Israeli state – there is everything wrong with racial slurs on all Jews
But it doesn’t make racial slurs on all Jews. At all in the slightest. It shows the involvement of some specific Jewish/pro-Israel/Zionist (I’m not sure what to call them) organisations in British politics. It’s the opposing perspective to the recent Panorama Special on anti-semitism in the Labour Party, which I also found interesting and enlightening and biased.
Also: “Try fact checking before you post propoganda videos” – It’s the filmed conversations in the video that interest me most. But nontheless I’d be interested and open to hear which facts you, or anyone else, dispute.
You want me to fact-check “your” video? It’s a bit early in the morning for reasoned political debate but I wasn’t saying the video proclaims “hate all Jews” just reasserting my claim that inside the inner Labour machine there are bigoted zealots in there who not only believe Israel is “bad” ( a good case to be made there) but also all Jews are evil. I don’t think the hapless Corbyn is one of them but some of his pals are decidedly dodgy. And by the way, I fact-checked everything I just said and I am 100% Right
It was you wot told me I should do some fact checking of the video. I just want to know which facts I should check.
Like I say, I’m very open to looking into any names and evidence regarding anti-semitism in the Labour Party. However, some people and incidents shown in the documentary have made me sceptical of accusations without evidence.
In this age one must believe nothing, nothing I tell you. Go away and examine and investigate everything this video claims. Then get back to me. in the meantime you must accept everything my friend told me as 1000% true
I would never doubt one of your friends. It’s of great comfort to me that you have any.
You need to fact check “Friends of Wrongness”
The ladyboy bar in Chang Mai?
“If there is anti-semitism in the Labour party it absolutely needs to be called out and purged, but on the basis of clear evidence.”
Ah yes, “evidence”. Always key. Just so long as we discount what Jews in the party say about it, eh? I mean, what do they know about antisemitism anyway? They’ll ALWAYS be against it, won’t they? So blinkered. It’s not as if you can trust their evidence in the first place, ’cause with all that money and influence, they’re all obviously Tories.
Those certainly aren’t my thoughts when thinking of the concept of evidence.
I got into this a little bit with a Jewish friend. I said I didn’t think Corbyn was anti-semitic, although his position on Palestine may have attracted some people around him who are. She said no, he’s definitely anti-semitic. She’s Jewish, I’m not, so I’m not going to tell her she’s wrong.
But surely you’d want some evidence? The BBC has a clear guide/fact check thingy on some of the claims:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45030552
That BBC page seems to me to be just a digest of the accusations and counter-claims.
Mostly it’s “X says this, Y says that” and not much detail on who some of the X and Y actually are and why they could be making the claims that they are. As indeed is most writing from all angles on this very thorny subject.
There can be no denying that anti-semitism is alive and kicking just about anywhere you care to look and also that there are some lobbyists who have an agenda of labelling anyone in opposition to them as anti-semites, thus garnering the support of otherwise sensible people who happen to be jews. Sadly the waters are so muddied that both anti-semitism and false accusations of it can sometimes go unchallenged by people who really should be more critical.
Yep.
The £20,000 that Corbyn trousered from the Iran’s PressTV TV station troubles me. He did declare it in the Register Of Interests, but why would he accept that amount of money from a TV station with very few viewers (and even fewer shortly after once OFCOM removed their license for various breaches)?
The whole thing stinks, and there are enough people making the claims that I tend to think that there is something there.
Here’s what he said about English Zionists: “…clearly have two problems. One is they don’t want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either … So I think they needed two lessons, which we can perhaps help them with.”
If anyone else had made that kind of remark about any other racial or ethnic group, they would be getting hounded.
But I wonder how many people caught Baroness Warsi flaming Nick Boles about Islamophobia in the Tories earlier?
He is getting hounded isn’t he?
Let me rephrase. If anyone had used that phrase about any other racial or ethnic group, they would have had to resign
It seems to me that nobody has to resign any more.
English Irish Unionists clearly have two problems. One is they don’t want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either.
Corbyn clearly doesn’t think he’s an anti-semite. Yet he has a consistent record of sharing platforms with, carrying wreaths for, inviting to parliament etc. people who want to kill Jews. “Our friends” in Hamas, for example. Not surprisingly, many in the Jewish community find this a bit hard to take.
In addition, Corbyn has acted as a giant bam magnet, attracting similarly inclined people from the far left fringes that are their natural home. The obsession with Israel – by any standards, one of the better countries in the Middle East – is just plain weird.
As a card-carrying Labour member for nearly 40 years, I still can’t believe that we’ve ended up in this state.
“One of the better countries in the Middle East”. What does that mean?
They occupy territory that does not belong to them, and routinely violate international law, killing countless Palestinian civilians inc children. Not all Palestinians are angels, but they are shat on like almost no other people. Despicable.
It means that, despite the actions of its current (democratically elected) political leadership, it remains the only free liberal democracy in the middle east. Try being a woman, or being gay, or holding non Muslim religious faith, in any of its neighbours. .
So do you then go the one step further and say that all vehement criticism of Israel, and the philosophy on which it is apparently based, is anti-semitism? The lack of clarity on this issue is a source of much trouble. I think there are people whose politics consists in blurring, more or less deliberately, this distinction.
Sigh.
Only a fool would claim that all criticism of Israel is by definition antisemitic. Thanks for suggesting I’d maybe want to do that.
Really, there is no lack of clarity whatsoever other than what you choose to comprehend or not. I think it is not genuinely difficult to understand. Criticise the actions of the Israeli government by all means, fine. They deserve to be held to account. But use ancient anti-Jewish tropes that involve well-known classics such as global conspiracy, deviousness, and financial double-dealing to voice those criticisms and you are most likely a vile racist cnut. Simple.
You appear to argue that there is a deliberate policy to tie all criticism of Israel to antisemitism. I think that’s yet another very convenient conspiracy theory, certainly as far as the internal issues of the Labour Party are concerned. Please don’t seek to presume that people who take offence at a remark don’t have grounds to be offended. Maybe they know what they are feeling better than you do?
I don’t think it is a conspiracy. Those narratives are nazi stuff and you shouldn’t put those words in my mouth. What I do think, for example, is that many Jews, but by no means all, have a knee-jerk response to a questioning of Israel and then tend to cry anti-semitism.
You don’t seem to realise that I am not just talking about the Israeli government, but the regime itself. I believe it is founded on racism, as I’ve said in other posts below. Similar case to that of apartheid S. Africa.
Wow. Patronising git.
So, just how many Jews have you met and discussed this with? Hundreds ? Thousands? There’s only about 300,000 of us in the UK to begin with.
“Many, not all” is an observation based on what, exactly? Some videos you’ve watched? Because it sounds like nothing more than baseless supposition.
By ‘regime” (and look it up, it means “a government” or “system”. The Israeli ‘system’ is parliamentary democracy by universal suffrage ) I am hazarding a wild guess that you actually mean Zionism. Which is fair enough, your opinion and you’re entitled to it, even though I think your wrong. No need to be disingenuous.
Funnily enough I’m not sure what part of what I said you’re objecting to. Yes, certainly what I meant by regime is the state of Israel, established on the basis of Zionism.
So what is patronising? My opinion? But you say I’m entitled to it. So what exactly is your problem?
Israel is the representative democracy that it’s cool to hate. Jew hatred is out in the open – and essentially trendy – among politicians across Europe* and America**.
*A considerable number of Labour candidates in the forthcoming election, as well as the usual far-right arseholes. Thus was it ever.
** The Democrats in the US – Tlaib, Omar, take your pick.
It means that, for example, you could read and contribute to a forum like this, without worrying about a knock on the door in the middle of the night.
Unless you are Palestinian probably.
Meanwhile in those nations surrounding Israel, which all conveniently ignore the plight of their Palestinian brothers, you’ll be thrown off buildings for being gay, whipped in the street for daring to be a woman, and garroted for speaking out against your local despot. Probably.
Being the least bad kid in the playground doesn’t make you teacher’s pet though.
@Slug “in those nations surrounding Israel you’ll be thrown off buildings for being gay” etc etc
Er… This is on a par with saying “if you are Israeli, you support the aggressive occupation of Palestinian land”
i.e. a dreadful misrepresentation. The actions of deluded followers of ISIS etc do not define the Arab world.
Is your argument that Arab nations are in fact bastions of enlightenment where women enjoy equal rights and homosexuality isn’t an issue at all?
Seems to be a lot of whataboutery being batted back and forth here.
It’s not a beauty contest. I don’t think much of any of them, personally, apart from possibly Tunisia which is currently the only fully-democratic arab state.
Orthodox Judaism isn’t exactly a beacon of moderation on those particular issues.
@sitheref2409 – No, I know that’s not the case. This is whataboutery at its best. Personally, I find the actions of the current Israeli government towards the Palestinians to be utterly contemptible. I’ve seen the conditions people in Gaza are forced to live in, you would go mad too if you had to put up with that life, day in day out.
But having lived 10 years in the Gulf, I know that sweeping generalisations are simply not true. I can’t claim all Israelis are evil or bloodthirsty lunatics just as I think its inaccurate to label the entire Arab world as equally bloodthirsty, murderous and bigoted. Such binary opinions are what has got us into much of this mess.
From what I’ve seen, after 10 years living and working in the Gulf is that most societies in the region are progressive and eager to join the 21st century, gradually eroding the diminishing rearguard action against the same.
The Arab world is changing massively at the moment – especially in the Gulf. Young populations, many of whom aspire to Western lifestyle, cultural and materialistic values, reject the Wahhabist extremism that prohibits homosexuality, legislates gender inequality etc. The governments in places like the UAE also are coming around to realising that supporting such policies runs counter to their avowed aims of being global ‘players’ etc. It comes down to the fact that in Saudi, UAE, Bahrain etc, they know that to avoid brain drains in years to come now the oil wealth is in peril, they have to modernise and liberalise.
I work with artists and art institutions in the Gulf world who espouse change and progress. One example, the Misk institute in Saudi recently, has Royal patronage. This is a contemporary arts body that is directly challenging and highlighting the many entrenched problems in the country. They clearly have a very long way to go, but the fact that such bodies now exist represents some small incremental progress in some way.
Elsewhere, have you been to Lebanon, Jordan or, pre-war Iraq or Syria? I have. Damascus for instance, before all the mayhem kicked off was a tolerant and thriving city, where Christians, Jews and Muslims co-existed fairly harmoniously, according to the people I met there. Lebanon is incredibly progressive – Beirut is fantastic, a lively gay scene, a thriving cultural identity, and social equality. Brilliant nightlife. In a world where today, we in the UK are having to challenge sexism, racism and extremism in our societies, places such as these certainly aren’t incomparable to our supposedly enlightened societies.
The common perception of gay men being strung up, dissenters imprisoned and executed, women downtrodden and powerless is true, if you look at the ideologies of deranged extremists such as Islamic State, the hardcore Wahhabists in Saudi or the mullahs in Iran. But they are in retreat, all of them.
This is just my two cents (or dirhams) but I think defending Israel by trotting out the old cliche “the only democracy in the region” is somewhat incorrect. There are so many problems and issues in that region, exacerbated by the proxy wars being conducted by players worldwide, but change is happening
Many many thanks for properly informed information. Top top post
Up.
Well, if you choose to vote for Hamas as your government, I’m afraid that’s the kind of thing they do.
And why the Labour left’s relative silence about China compared to its relentless condemnation of Israeli oppression of Muslims?
Most estimates have more than one million Muslims currently detained in Chinese government ‘re-education camps’, and yet I don’t seem to hear much about this from Corbyn supporters.
There seems to a knee-jerk defensiveness of former or nominal communist countries, and a very different sort of knee-jerk response to Israel’s behaviour.
Labour MPs are routinely criticised for being at functions/meetings with, say, members of the IRA.
The likes of Foot and Benn would always be paraded on the front page of Mrs. Dale daily for this.
“How dare they. Traitors. Go back to Russia!”
Fast forward a couple of decades and Major and Blair are (rightly) congratulated for their efforts in Ireland. Their tactic? Erm … to get round a table and talk to the IRA!
I can’t recall Foot or Benn ever meeting with the IRA. There is, in any event, a difference between negotiating in the interests of peace- which is a proper function of government- and meeting with violent extremists as a hobby, because you support their cause.
Two Labour PPCs have stood down in the last 24 hours because of anti-semitic remarks they made (or, if you prefer, remarks that could be interpreted as anti-semitic). One defended himself by saying he didn’t realise Shylock was a Jewish character, or that the term might be offensive.
They’re not helping themselves, are they?
@chiz: I remember seeing footage of a Tory candidate in the last election canvassing a voter and mentioning some of the Labour leader’s less desirable associations. The lady’s reply in essence was that those affairs didn’t concern her when trying to make ends meet, see a GP, keep her kids in a decent school etc. At this stage, the Chief Rabbi could be hog-tied and pelted with rotten fruit and many voters wouldn’t be arsed.
Actually this ‘Shylock’ case is quite interesting. A complaint had been made to the central Labour party in July but the guy was still chosen as candidate this week. He apologised and said at the time that he didn’t realise the term was offensive – not that ignorance is a defence – but he waited for it to go public (during the election campaign, unhelpfully) before he stood down. Presumably, with his apology, he thought the party would have no issue accepting him as an MP.
What gets me is that as a labour councillor of many years standing he must have attended hundreds of meetings, and read all the briefings from HQ about the need to root out anti-semitism; yet he still didn’t know he couldn’t say that. Even if you don’t think Corbyn’s anti-semitic himself, you’d have to say the party’s response on this issue has been piss-poor.
Piss poor doesn’t cover half of it. The issue should have been called out and stamped on within minutes of the first trumpetings from the usual quarters.
It’s also interesting to wonder what the reaction would have been if, in describing a third party who was trying, in his opinion, to obtain more than they actually deserved (which is what I understand the gist of the conversational context to have been), he had instead used the phrase “get their pound of flesh”.
Are we now to avoid using that expression too, for fear of being accused of anti-semitic behaviour? It’s just as clearly directly associated with the same Shakespearean character as the man’s name. This is a slippery slope, and the more people gleefully push us down it, the more our slide gains speed.
yeah it is interesting and I think if I were a Labour councillor I’d try and avoid the phrase ‘pound of flesh’ just to be on the safe side. You’d never hear the last of it from the vegans, for a start. And the Remainers would insist on 450g…
When it comes to being professionally appalled by minor indiscretions and loose language I think the Corbyn outriders probably lead the field. They’re usually first to trawl through years of old tweets to find the evidence of low morals. Remember Chuka Umunna, when he was still a Labour MP I think, getting the full fake outrage for using the phrase “call off the dogs?” It is a slippery slope and the glee with which we’re pushing each other down it is really quite alarming.
Ha, 454g . Excellent !
For a good description of what institutional racism is, and why British Jews are worried about it in the Labour Party, there is a very good thread by Maajid Nawaz on Twitter, which he was also posted on Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/135775283156412/posts/2590972064303376?sfns=mo
I’d add that something that depresses me even more about the Labour Party under Corbyn, was the reaction to the whistle blowers who had the courage and integrity to appear in the Panorama programme. Legal threats from enormously expensive lawyers, and nasty personal attacks on them in the media. Hard to believe that at one time, Labour stood up for workers. It is now rapidly becoming a right wing party.
@David: to be a little mischievous here, is Labour well on the way to becoming a Soviet-era throwback? The Politburo brooked no dissent, either.
Labour are returning to being an authoritarian collectivist party seeking people to blame based on class or failing to follow their ideology and these people will be punished if they come to power. Sounds pretty sinister to me. If the Tories had that history of ‘infelicitous’ comments and failed-to-notice ‘mistakes’ it would be pilloried, and rightly so (and plenty of Islamophobic jibes deservedly dropping them in it). I don’t care about Tory whataboutery – they have plenty of their own problems. Labour need to clean up. they won’t until Wolfie Smith and Rik from “The Young Ones” get chucked out. Not that the options to replace them are great.
Possibly it is – it’s often said that some of Corbyn’s circle like Seamus Milne and Andrew Murray are genuine admirers of Stalin. But as well as the moral objections to harassing whistle blowers, I think there is a practical one. Without wanting to peddle what might sound like a management training platitude, in my experience if an organisation tries to silence criticism it won’t learn from experience and keep on making the same mistakes.
In this instance, the Labour leadership decided it didn’t have a problem, but has lost 6 parliamentary candidates since the election was declared due to their anti-Semitic views.
This ranting chappie, whoever he is, states that “Jews are both a people and a religion.”.
News to me. I thought a Jew was simply someone who followed the Jewish religion – so, for example, I could become a Jew myself if I felt compelled to share the beliefs of Judaism.
But that wouldn’t make me a member of a “people” would it? How would that work? Is there perhaps some sort of hierarchy of a first and second class type of Jewish person, depending upon whether or not the individual identifies themselves as being part of some “people” as well as sharing the religious beliefs of Judaism?
So what’s does this term “people” mean here? Stuffed if I know, I’m sure. Are there any other religions that claim this unusual duality? If I’m a Christian or a Muslim, or a Hindu or a Jedi, what “people” am I a part of as a result?
It’s no wonder everyone is confused when the social mediasphere is full of such crass statements.
Many jewish people identify as jewish but don’t follow the religion, they see themselves as genetically and culturally jewish, descended from jews. David Baddiel for example is an atheist and a jew but perhaps we should let him know that he is mistaken.
Well that makes me jewish too then. Really, all this cultural baggage stuff is just tosh isn’t it? We ought to be able to live without it as a species. It’s the 21st century ffs.
Corbyn has spent his whole political life campaigning against the Israel government’s actions against Palestine. Fair enough. In doing so he has met and stood on platforms with terrorist groups and other political organisations who are fighting for the Palestinian and Arab cause. OK, so maybe he is helping to broker peace and stop the violence. Well no actually. He has supported groups who stated they wanted to destroy Israel and kill Jews. He approved. Some of these groups resort to antisemitic tropes and racist stereotyping like holocaust denial, the conspiracy theory of Jews controlling world finance and general hatred against Jewish people. Corbyn was present when such things were said or written and he did not condemn them or walk out. He also has endorsed certain writings which contain a degree of antisemitic content. This kind of swimming in murky waters is a feature of the far left. An obsessive preoccupation with one particular cause over other equally bad or worse governments. The evidence is out there if you want to look for it.
Edit: I see that I am not alone on this thread in pointing this out.
When moderate reasonable people like Luciana Berger and Louise Ellman feel they have to leave the party because of the anti Semitic vitriol they have faced from within the party, and because they have no confidence in Corbyn’s ability or intent to deal with it, then I, as a non Jew, am not going to tell them they are wrong, but I’m going to listen, as I would to Black or Asian members if they were saying they are experiencing racism in the party, or Muslims were saying they are experiencing Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Of course the issue is being used by many to undermine the Labour Party election campaign, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a real problem.
I have no idea if Corbyn is consciously, deliberately anti Semitic. For what it’s worth, I don’t think he is, but in his actions, and language I think he is at least unconsciously so. His real failing as on so many issues is his inability to take a strong leadership stand on the matter and to make it his business to be accountable for dealing with it, partly because of his unwillingness to go against some the hardline left of the party.
If anyone is in any doubt about the existence of anti Semitism in parts the Labour Party I urge you to read Chris Williamson MP’s recent resignation letter. It is genuinely shocking. The good news is that this came after he was refused the opportunity to represent Labour at the General Election. I believe Labour are now working to deal with the problem, albeit they have a lot of ground to make up to win back the confidence of many Jewish people, as Rebecca Long Bailey said on Radio 4 the other morning, because they have been so slow in dealing with it.
I don’t agree with those who say no one with any conscience could vote for Labour because of this matter. The Party are addressing the matter; most in the party are clearly not anti Semitic, and its policies are not anti Semitic. But there is a fringe there that is poisonous and Corbyn hasn’t done enough to distance himself from it. He needs to do that.
The Labour leader’s needed to create that distance for years. Judging by the calibre of some candidates, he may be finding it a struggle. (Edited: I asserted in an earlier version of this post that Corbyn was satisfied with the current controversy and I have no evidence to support that assertion. Thanks)
I agree. And more broadly, I can see that many of the candidates replacing moderate Labour MPs who are standing down for this or other reasons are squarely to the left, Momentum types. Same at local Council level – in the recent Council elections a perfectly solid, decent, local Councillor of long standing was dumped and replaced by someone whose election brochure said more about the Middle East than about bin collections and local schools.
Same in the Tories as well – there seems to be a mass exodus of the Centre ground which leaves me very pessimistic about what this next Parliament (you know, the one that’s going to sort everything out) is going to be like.
@BlueBoy: The centre – which is exactly where I want to be, if just a smidge to the right – is under siege. No question about it, I dread this out-turn in current events. At the same time, my initial impression of you is that you’re a sensible, doughty cove, happy to assess the balance and chary of dwelling on one extreme or the other. I suspect there are many more of you in Great Britain than those ‘full of passionate intensity’.
The Doughty Coves. TMFTL
And my overall position? I’m a lifetime Labour supporter, firmly in the centre of the party, and one of those hateful types who think Blair Brown and their Cabinet did more good than bad and aren’t war criminals. I think Corbyn is a disaster as a leader but there is a lot of the current party who I actually think are pretty impressive, and I don’t think are lunatics. I’d certainly rather have a government led by them than Johnson and Co. But, but, but, as I’ve said here before, I won’t be voting for them in this election in protest at the way the sitting MP Louise Ellmann has been treated. Not that it’ll make any difference.
I consider myself to be Blairite scum & I have pretty much the same opinion as you on the Blair/Brown years.
And I’m not convinced by the line that “he’s alright but he’s got some dodgy friends.
He seems as susceptible to a nice Jewish conspiracy as the next headbanger – don’t forget he told Iranian Press TV “I suspect the hand of Israel” when he was discussing a jihadi attack that killed 16 Egyptian policemen.
This raises the question of whether Jew=Israel I raised above. I don’t see how any clarity can ever be achieved in this debate without resolving this question.
(One of the most strongly anti-zionists I have ever met was an Israeli Jew. He told me horrific stories of anti-Arab racism in Israel.)
I’m not sure even what is meant by a Jew in many if these discussions. As I say sometimes it is equated with Israeli citizenship, other times with a ‘race’, a religion, a culture, etc. As someone who is neither religious, racialist or nationalist in thinking, this type of thing naturally creates difficulties for me.
Take for example this reasoning: If Jews are a ‘race’ and Israel is a Jewish state according to Zionist ideology, i.e. mainly reserved for Jews, then it seems to me to follow that Zionism is quite literally a form of race-ism. When Corbyn is accused of being a racist on the basis of his stated anti-zionism, then this falls squarely within the same logic, doesn’t it? If Israel is a place for Jews and Jews are a ‘race’ … ? All this according to the matrilinear notion, I guess.
The trouble with these debates though is that they are not carried out on any rational basis, as most recently evidences by Mr Austin’s ‘powerfully emotional’, potentially Oscar winning, performance yesterday.
You don’t need to know the answer to understand saying Sherlock isn’t OK. The Facebook post that David has posted above deals with the uncertainty you express BTW.
Sorry too long and ranting to answer in detail. But just one of his points:
“no serious Jewish voice or organisation has ever said it’s racist to criticise Israel”
I doubt whether he is correct in this statement. But, what if one questions the very establishment of Israel as a homeland for Jews, as itself being racist? Don’t tell me that Jewish organisations don’t label that as anti-semitism. They do, routinely.
BTW what is a “people”?
A people? Ethnic group that share culture and descent isn’t it?
I think it’s quite straightforward to understand what racism is when it comes to Jewish people and to understand that that is separate from criticism of a government of a country. There can of course be areas that are tricky and less clear cut. In general it’s not so hard to grasp though.
Good grief, what about Dr. Watson? And is Mrs. Hudson equally persona non-grata in polite conversation?
Oops!
You raise a good point about language and terminology in this debate – a lot of these words mean different things to different people.
It is of course quite possible to argue one is anti-Zionist and not anti-Semitic, though I suspect many Jews would say you can’t be the former without also being the latter.
Where it gets more muddy is that anti-Semites often like to hide behind the perceived respectability of being anti-zionist – that is, I’m objecting to you on political grounds, not race or religious ones.
The problem is they often give themselves away – such as when Corbyn said of Zionists “having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, [they] don’t understand English irony either”.
If would be a very strange things to say about a Conservative, social democrat or any other political persuasion. Easy to imagine it referring to Jews or any other religious or racial minority, though.
Farage and his lot used the same trick in the referendum campaign when they discovered they could get away with saying “Muslim” to mean black and brown people.
The interpretation you give of Corbyn’s comment is certainly possible, and it is a careless statement indeed. But there is another interpretation: which is to say that ‘of the Jews, who have been in Britain a long time, there are many who are zionists.’
But the important point is that there are many anti-zionist Jews. Lefties like me tend to be impressed by that. The conquest of a people and driving them out of their ancestral lands resonates here in South Africa and many Jews who have participated in the liberation movement here are determinedly anti-zionist too. Many, not one or two.
An analogy: Western elites who used to brand the ANC a terrorist organisation tended to have very good relations with the apartheid regime, For reasons of such analogies many South Africans, including Jews, refer to Israel as an apartheid state.
Just BTW, I don’t think Corbyn should have been so pally with religious-fundamentalist orgs. Just for the record.
If what you say is true, I can’t quite grasp how opposing the right of Jews to establish and protect a homeland of their own – the historical definition of Zionism that applies to the chosen and the gentile alike – is viewed as a badge of honour on the left in South Africa, or anywhere else for that matter. Would you prefer them to wander the earth like so many acolytes of Ahasuerus or just integrate into polite society like good boys and girls and not be too Jew-y ?
Ah Neilo, I can always count on you as a sparring partner.
I don’t know any Jews who are wandering the earth. Most of them are citizens of the countries in which they live. You know, like Catholics for example?? That’s why inter alia they join organisations like the British Labour Party. Packing them all off to some ‘homeland’ was pretty much a nazi idea.
What I do know and you should know is that people who were born and grew up in places like Eastern Europe migrated to a place in the Middle East where they had never set foot before, and then turfed the locals whose families had lived there for millennia out of their homes and country by violent means.
The fledgling state of Israel may have ‘turfed out’ quite a few but many others flew the coop after being on the losing side in the first Arab/Israeli war – they wrongly assumed a pan-Arabist slaughter of the Jews would finish Nazi Germany’s business – and helped populate the greatest boondoggle in recent history: the Palestinian diaspora. I never knew it possible to be a refugee for three generations with your own UN agency while moving a few miles east or north. I’d say that takes chutzpah but…..
Oh come on, you can do better than that.
Some of the Poles I know are of a displaced third generation, people whose parents were the children smuggled out from under the Nazi’s jackboots in the 30s.
Their family homes were long ago lost, deemed on the wrong side of a line drawn on a map by powerful people who cared nothing for their history.
Would you tell them that they are not in any sense refugees?
How long do they have to wait before they get their lands back? How long do they have to wait before they should be expected to put up and shut up?
Why shouldn’t they complain to the rest of the world that they have been tossed to one side by historical changes beyond their control?
Is it because they were displaced earlier than 1948?
Up
A naughty thought: you know how the right dogwhistle about foreigners and immigrants to attract voters who may have unsavoury and ignorant views? Ever thought some of Labour is doing the same with it’s creative ambiguity about anti-Semitism/ anti-Zionism the executive using the ‘not me, guv’, excuse? There are a lot of votes to be had from people raised to be suspicious of Jews, and wondering who represents their views.
Intriguing stats about Jewish representation within British Politics, showing a proportion consistently higher than in the general population. Historically most seem to be socialist, but currently more are tories. My naive explanation has/had always been, at least until seeing the current balance, that maybe folk experiencing prejudice, and with a family background of prejudice (all the way up to attempted annihilation) might instill a greater sense of justice and a drive to see that enacted. Or is that wishful thinking? Or just plain naive?
Is there deemed as much intrinsic racism within the conservative party, I wonder? It is traditionally depicted as anti of anything outside male and married WASP territory, yet seems increasingly full of women, of people of colour, and lesbian/gay persuasions. Yet seem overall to still be just as bigoted and inhumane as ever.
Confusing, innit?
I don’t think that’s a naive view at all. I think it’s reasonable.
I pick up on this too. For a party being accused of anti-semitism, Labour hasn’t half given a lot of Jews the opportunity of becoming MPs. That has come across to me, this not-very-active party member, as one helluva contradiction.
It’s almost as though most of them got in before the current Leadership.
So they’ve had considerable influence for many a year, but now others are getting a louder shout that they were previously denied.
I’m not inclined to give Corbyn the benefit of the doubt on this largely because of his initial support for that mural in Newham, a grotesque demonstration of anti-semitism that would have looked in place in Nazi Germany. He may have retracted his support and claimed that he hadn’t looked at it properly, but if that’s the case it proves he’s stupid.
A few years ago it would have been unthinkable for Labour to have been embroiled in a controversy like this, and just four years ago it was led by Ed Miliband, who came from Jewish descent. It shows how Corbyn and his allies have sown something rotten in the party that is making a lot of us centre-left types reluctant to vote for it.
I am not voting Labour again until Corbyn (who was nicely parodied as Keith in “Nuts in May”) and his student union trots are out on their ear.
Kudos for getting Nuts in May into this thread. One of the great TV dramas and Alison Steadman’s Candice-Marie is even greater than her Beverley in Abigail’s Party
The last football team, including Tottenham, I’d support if I was anti-Semitic would be Arsenal!
4 in every 5 Jews I’ve ever met, and I worked in a Jewish solicitor’s office for five years, has been an Arsenal supporter.
Being opposed to the foreign policy of the current Israeli administration does not necessarily equate to being anti-semitic.
Being prepared to enter into dialogue with Muslim states, known or suspected to be bases for terrorist organisations does not necessarily equate to being pro-Islam or pro-Terrorist.
What both are however, is an indication that anyone thinking such, likely prefers to seek an end to civilian suffering via negotiation and diplomacy rather than force or violence.
Of course, anyone vehemently pro Israeli foreign policy, or anti Muslim, or who feels negotiating with terrorists is a non-starter, may well see things differently.
We have a satirical, humour programme on Swedish TV, called Svenska Nyheter: Swedish News.
To their credit, they did a rather powerful piece this evening on anti-semitism in Sweden. There’s a lot of it about,
Ultra-right Nazis. Pro-Palestinian centrists who see Israel as a threat.
During the week, the Prime Minister, Stefan Lövfen,, has expressed his wish to rid his party of anti-semitism.
I will sit heroically on the fence about Corbyn and Co but am pleased to see that this thread has had such a response.
On second thoughts, I must sy that I agree with what BlueBoy wrote.
Just read this long thread and have found it very illuminating. Apart from the music and the ask the massive handy help these sort of threads make this blog unique.And,once again, I find myself nodding my head to the comments of my old mate @Tahir-W
Take care!
I showed this thread to my daughter, a politics student particularly interested in this subject. She was just impressed we got to the end without anyone being called a paedo. “Excellent work” was her verdict
I don’t get religion at all. Identifying as being Jewish would seem to be aligning to a religion to me but some people choose to do that and don’t follow any of the religious rules.
Any religion is an abstract construct that cannot be proven.
Believe in what you see around you and exist…there is nothing else.
Sent you a PM @uncle-wheaty
I have to go all the way back to the premise of the OP. If the party is anti-semitic, should I be voting for them? But what is the alternative? Under our electoral system, most of us have a choice between two. The alternative to Labour for me and the majority of others is the ‘are you thinking what we’re thinking’ party, the party that happily bragged about creating a ‘hostile environment’ to deter immigration, the party that presided over the whole sorry Windrush saga, the party now being run by those who knowingly played the race card by suggesting that Turkey was about to join the EU, the party being led by a man who likens burqa wearers to letterboxes and bank robbers, knowing full well that he is blowing his dog whistle. The Tories have presided over and encouraged a marked backwards step away from what I see as liberal enlightenment and, I firmly believe, have made it permissible again to be racist in the pubs and clubs around the country. This particular incarnation of the party seem keen to rip up the foundations of our society; they want to re-set those foundations and EU membership was getting in the way.
When Ian Austin, former Labour MP, tells people to vote Conservative this time, he is telling people to vote for all of the above. When I hear about people from the left questioning whether they can vote Labour this time round, because of alleged anti-semitism, it strikes me as self-indulgent. Are they not thinking of the potential horrors of a majority Boris Johnson government unchecked by compromise or coalition? The idea of Patel, Raab, Rees-Mogg et al having unbridled control over this country, by mandate, terrifies me.
I feel the same, Chesh. More importantly to me, I feel that whatever anyone thinks of Corbyn, he can’t possibly do as much lasting damage, in charge of a weak Government in its first term, as I believe Brexit will do.
Turkey would have joined the EU, without the influence of their current leader.
I think there were other concerns about Turkey’s proposed membership before Erdogan’s election made it completely impossible.
They would have found it difficult to meet membership requirements, but that could of been said of quite a few others who nevertheless became members.
The EU’s border with Turkey is one of the most awful places. Lorries are queuing on the roadside for miles and the detritus of so many hours spent waiting, not to mention whatever other nefarious activities occur in such an environment; can be seen in the hedgerow.
The Labour Party is not anti-semitic. It contains, for example, the Jewish Labour Movement as an affiliate (and has done since the 1920s). It’s the current leadership clique that I have doubts about. I don’t think it’s self-indulgent to express those doubts – I think it’s more of a duty.
Yes, I will still be voting Labour because, as you rightly point out, the alternative is much worse – and doubly so in Scotland. However it will be with a heavier heart than I ever imagined possible.
Agreed, it’s not the expression of doubt that is self-indulgent, it’s the squandering of a vote that I think is – the parading of one’s holiness by saying ‘I must make a stand by not voting with my normal tribe’ while the other, far more dangerous, tribe runs amok.
Extraordinary to me to suggest a Jewish person should vote for a party they believe to be antisemitic.
And yet, as already mentioned, the party has Jewish candidates and accommodates Jewish organisations. If anti-semitism were official party policy, I would certainly agree with you. But by your rationale it’d be equally extraordinary to expect gay people to vote for a party led by Johnson. Yet many will, because some questionable comments made by the party leader are not the main concern right now.
Would hardly be party policy. It’s more a judgement many have made based on actions and language used. It depends on your assessment of the party as to whether you think it’s too far gone or not.
All of this has helped me greatly and the Aterword remains a good place to discuss things “without anyone being called a paedo” which is a phrase I particularly enjoyed – thanks IanP’s daughter!
This is an interesting one. I grew up in an area where there were very few Jewish people (the west of Scotland) – and likewise now live in area where there are very few Jewish people (the east of Scotland).
In between that, I moved to London for a couple of years when I worked on the civil service graduate scheme. During that time I also got involved in the Labour party, not just in London, but in all over the country. This was during the Ed Miliband years.
As a result of this, the majority of British Jews that I know are those that I met through the Labour party. Some have left the party; some have stayed. I think most of them intend to vote Labour, although they all have misgivings over Corbyn. As do I, admittedly. On issues like this, I mainly take my lead from them.
Now that I’m back in Edinburgh, I think I’m going to vote Labour. That’s mainly because I really like my local MP, Ian Murray. Were I somewhere else, with a different Labour candidate, I would have to think about that a lot more. I really like a lot of mooted Labour policies – perhaps more so than I did when I first got involved with Labour in 2014 – but a lot of the other stuff that goes along with it is incredibly distasteful.
This piece sums things up pretty well. Vote for this disaster to stop that disaster:
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/09/think-youll-dodge-a-painful-political-choice-youre-away-with-the-fairies-general-election?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium=&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true
Only one problem with the piece, & that’s the name on the by line – Nick Cohen – which in my book means I wouldn’t wipe my dog’s arse with it (if I had one) as N. Cohen Esq. is consistently amongst the most vituperative toss pots the Graun can muster these days & that’s quite an achievement when he has the likes of Jonathan Freedland & Hadley Freeman to contend with.
Sorry to be clearly be playing the man & not the ball, but I wouldn’t give him the steam off my piss, let alone the time of day.
As the Master of Wrongness I can categorically state your post is the Wrongest I’ve seen on here for a long while. Well done!
Hooray!
Glad to be of service.
As well as, oops, Cohen, Freedland and Freeman are all, shh, Jewish, perhaps thus able to have some perspective and right to an opinion based thereupon…. At least include Kenan Malik and Gary Younge to throw us off the scent of your argument. Or offer another.
Ooh blimey, no smoke without fire eh?
Their race , individually or collectively is irrelevent – it’s what they write that’s objectionable – they are bellends. Simon Jenkins is also a bellend if you feel the need for balance.
You can add Martina Hyde ( woman of the people) & Polly Toynbee to the list of Graun bellends as well ( for further balance).
Wow! You have surpassed even the Wrongness of your Wrongness!! Marina (without the t) is the sanest and wittiest commentator in the entire fucking universe.
I’m going to channel Gary here – “with the greatest respect” you are a complete and total (the following thirty seven words, some of them frankly not very nice, have been censored by those wishy-washy Admins who wouldn’t recognise informed and passionate debate if it bit them (the following forty four words have been censored))
My heart soars like a hawk that you should be offended on her behalf!
We only have a limited number of summers before we shuffle off this mortal coil & in my case at least that’s not enough time to be concerned with the thoughts & missives of the former Marina Elizabeth Catherine Dudley-Williams.
Peace.
Cohen, Freedland and Freeman are all jewish writers so they can be expected to have perspective? Yeah. And??
I’ve always understood perspective to be about looking at something from a point of view in relation to it’s place among everything else. There’s no denying they can see things from their individual perspectives but there’s no reason for theirs to be regarded as the definitive ones. There is no such thing as a definitive perspective.
I agree with you but it seemed a bit of a gaping chasm that @junglejim was entering, by just happening to mention a trio of similar heritage. It seemed a risky invitation to offend. His later posts have helped, um, redress the balance, as it seems he has equitable opinions about most of the Guardian cabal of opinion writers. (Uncertain how a double-barrelled former name, mind, necessarily adds to any confirmation of any point made.)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/02/stop-jeremy-corbyns-trial-by-media-over-antisemitism
Just for the sake of clarity, the stance of the signatories of the open letter to the Graun in April of last year pretty much sums up my own position – the fact that they are in essence calling out The Guardian for taking a partial view on the issue speaks volumes. It is abundantly clear that they believe the paper is, even if by omission of opposing voices, putting forward a biased agenda.
To its credit the paper published the letter, but given its avowed stance on free speech and tolerance it could hardly refuse, for fear of the embarrassment it would cause if it did. The crap from Cohen, Freedland & others has continued unabated in the interim however, along with censoring Steve Bell on the matter.
This is significant because nobody would expect a fair shake in the Times or the Torygraph, but this is ‘the right on’Guardian. Never mind that its deputy political editor is quite relaxed about cosying up to Boris Johnson to be photographed at a social bash – when any decent minded individual’s skin would crawl at the thought of being embraced by that vile heap of walking garbage.
As for the estimable Nick Cohen, he’s the one thing the right wing love even more than offshore tax dodging schemes: a genuine lefty turncoat, raised by barmy leftists since childhood who’s seen the light & will knock out a column to order in any reactionary publication you like, highlighting the error of his ways & the cranky ways of his former ‘ comrades’. Careful not to call him on it though, or he’s liable to brand you an anti Semite. Contrast this with Alexei Sayle for example. Raised by actual Stalinists! Still a committed Socialist (not a Stalinist) who is a vocal critic of right wing Jewish groups in the UK & abroard, and is a strong supporter of Corbyn. Oh, & he’s 10 times the writer that Nick Cohen will ever be.
After many years of buying the Guardian but now hating the Guardian you seem to still read the Guardian a lot. If I were you I would think of my ongoing anger issues and stop reading the Guardian.
Who says I *bought* The Guardian, just because I read it?
For many years I also read the Torygraph, because it was circulated at work. That would have been in the days of the high profile rotter Conrad Black being the owner – it doesn’t mean it wasn’t sometimes a good read – but you automatically have a ‘Telegraph filter’ when you read it, being fully aware of where it’s coming from socially & politically. In contrast, the Graun fastidiously positions itself as a bastion of tolerance, objectivity & progression. The truth is a little different- the letters page has frequently revealed that the paper is often uneasy, if not emabarressed by its readership, which is typically far more radical than the editorial line, which prefers a cosy & smug view of things.
Just because it’s crap in many respects doesn’t mean it isn’t the best of what’s on offer – but for non-readers to buy into a notion that ‘Guardianistas’ are right on radicals is truly hilarious.
I was merely suggesting that if it upsets you so much then stop reading The Guardian. I had a similar conversation with my wee son recently (in this case wee=mid forties) who rants in similar fashion against the “obvious” anti-Corbyn bias. His argument as well was “what else is there to read?” but honestly there’s enough online alternatives to ensure your heads don’t blow off in righteous indignation. By the way I also subscribe to The Times cos it’s ridiculously cheap in Europe. The Times roster is full of excellent journalists and there are some amazingly liberal-minded people in there. There is also a whole heap of right-wing fuckwits as well. Every so often you might hear me say “Pah” or “You cannot be serious!” but jeeze there are more important things to worry about than reporters you don’t agree with
Agree re The Times – I got the free subs to the digital edition and then signed up – it’s renewal time and the merest hint that I may depart led to a further three months half price. I was surprised at how balanced it is, and you don’t have stupid articles such as “Is it time to ban the word ‘cyclist” that you see in the Graun (mind you I still read the Observer on Sunday).
I don’t worry about reporters I don’t like in the slightest, anymore than I lose sleep over how crap The Guardian is these days. I can’t even rely on the Guardian to reliably report on my football club, such is its bias!
What’s more disheartening is that these days youngsters don’t have much in the way of good ‘trad’ titles with which to build a believable picture of the truth behind the headlines – & with the Guardian being the best on offer, it’s a poor show.
As for the Times, I always found it dreary & appallingly laid out when it was circulated at work & as it’s owned by Voldemort, nothing would pursuade me to pass a penny his way for an online version.
Twitter is fine for news feeds , but a reliable collection of stories would be nice.
Youngsters read actual newspapers? I did an exhaustive survey of my three nephews and not one has ever bought such a thing. I know it’s hard to forget that Murdoch owns The Times but because the Evil One actually pays his reporters/correspondents very well there are some very fine writers there now including a whole tranche of ex-Guardians. Give it a whirl – take your tablets first, mind
One person’s voice of reason is another person’s vituperative toss pot it seems. I usually find his stuff to be pretty good I must say.
I would still vote Labour on the basis that there are many good people in the party and some policies I agree with. I would vote for whatever centre to left of centre candidate has best chance of beating the Tory, so possibly Libdem. Corbyn and corbynism are bad news though. If Labour worked together with remain parties they could see off Johnson but sadly Libdems and Labour won’t play ball. If only a different Labour leader had been chosen with remain as the policy.
He’s vituperative, but this was interesting to this conversation
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/09/jews-brexit-boris-johnson-jeremy-corbyn
Please see my comment above about Freedland being a bellend with refernce to his dissembling ( let’s call it lying shall we?) in the column above
This is a verbatim tweet from @davidrosenberg on Twitter today
‘ Word of warning to those who have seen statistics saying 87% of British Jews think Corbyn is an antisemite, and 47% would consider emigrating if he became PM…the questions were put to just 0.28% of the Jewish community. In other words, it’s bollox!’
David Rosenberg is obviously a partisan Corbyn supporter but the fact remains that Freedland ( who is not remotely stupid) knows exactly what he is doing by putting deliberately misleading ‘statistical information’ within his piece with the explicit intention of creating a false impression of Corbyn. It’s a straightforward hatchet job, masquerading as objective truth – in other words, a smear, plain & simple.
That’s why I have contempt for Freedland & why the state of a once great title – that I’ve been reading for over 40 years makes me sick.
Someone obviously doesn’t understand how polls work. You don’t have to ask everyone the questions, that’s the point.
As any B Tech Sociology student knows, you can’t extrapolate meaningful data without a reasonable sample.
Isn’t 0.28% a reasonable sample?
Compared to 0.03% on a national voting intention poll? You’d think so
Hang on a sec.
Misleading implies that you think that he posted was actually wrong.
It’s a small sample set, but there isn’t sufficient evidence to suggest that he’s actually wrong is there? I assume you would have posted it if there was.
Corbyndefenders, ask yourself this: if all the points that have been ,ade against Corbyn had been made against Johnson, or Redwood, or May, would you still be reaching for this righteous defence? I suspect not. His comments, that I posted above, about not getting English irony, sealed the deal for me. He is anti semitic; FFS, if the Guardian says that his words were anti semitic but he wasn’t – the jig is up.
I usually stay well clear of these political debates (although I like to read them) but I’m going against my instinct here and I’m going to chip in. Go easy on me please! I have a firm belief that consensus comes from open and honest communication, so please tell me if I’m wrong and please accept that any offence from my comments is unintentional.
First, for full disclosure. Someone up there (I can’t locate the comment right now) said they were from the west of Scotland where there is a minimal Jewish population. I grew up there, I now live there, and I can concur. That makes me slightly uneasy at commenting on something I have no direct experience of. Still, I think there are parallels with Catholic/Protestant bigotry which IS rife in the west of Scotland and which I have direct experience of. I’m a Catholic by birth and by upbringing, but an atheist by choice. I regard sectarian bigotry and derogatory language as more silly and pitiful than offensive. It baffles me and tires me out, but to a point I would still be interested in the psychological and social root causes. (It seems to me it is driven by the tribalism of football more than anything else, which is interesting in itself.)
My political affiliation – Green party first. But as they don’t have a candidate in my area – SNP.
Anyway, I digress.
I have to say I don’t believe Corbyn is antisemitic and I have sympathy for him. What is my opinion of the Zionist/anti-Zionist dispute? I honestly don’t think I have one – I can see both sides and I think there are strong arguments each way. But – and this is crucial – I respect someone who is brave enough to reach their own view and express this rationally. And, from what I can see (I’ve done a bit of reading and googling since this thread started), that is what Corbyn has done – or at least tried to do.
And you can’t deny it’s a bit of a minefield. It must be really difficult to express an anti-Zionist view (which has to be an acceptable point of view in a free-thinking society) WITHOUT coming across as antisemitic (which can NEVER be an acceptable point of view in a free-thinking society).
Do I think Corbyn should do more to call out and tackle antisemitism in his party? I don’t know, I really don’t. I can see that if he did something more, or admitted it was a problem for the party, that would instantly be pounced upon by his opponents and the tabloids and would legitimise and solidify the issue as a Real Thing rather than an Allegation.
His comment in his speech in 2013 (the one about “English irony”) seems to have been the tipping point for most people. It sounds shocking out of context. And a little baffling as well. But since this thread started I’ve read about it, listened to it, considered the context and read the full speech transcript. And I think it was innocent at best, clumsy at worst. I really just don’t see it as absolute and damning evidence that he is antisemitic. The reference to Zionists was specifically in reference to the people who protested after Manuel Hassassain’s earlier speech – I don’t think he was generalising or using a sweeping, derogatory term. And the reference to “irony” (which I was confused by at first) makes sense when you look at Manuel Hassassain’s speech itself – he was the one who referred to the situation being “ironic”.
On balance, to jump to an interpretation of Corbyn’s speech as self-evidently antisemitic is wrong and is inferencing a layer of meaning he didn’t intend. I respect if someone disagrees me on that point, but I think at the very least you have to admit it is open to opinion.
Sitheref2409, I’m intrigued by your question up above: “Corbyndefenders, ask yourself this: if all the points that have been ,ade against Corbyn had been made against Johnson, or Redwood, or May, would you still be reaching for this righteous defence? I suspect not.”
My answer – Yes… yes I think I would also defend Johnson, Redwood, May etc on an issue like this. The closest comparison is Rees-Mogg’s Grenfell comments and (here goes) I am actually (to an extent) on Rees-Mogg’s side.
Let me explain…
Rees-Mogg said, pretty much, if the Grenfell residents had common-sense they would have evacuated the building rather than locking themselves in. And he also implied that in the same situation he would have acted differently. That sounds shocking and inflammatory out of context, I agree. Apologising for offense caused is absolutely the right thing to do after such a comment (and whether or not he has adequately apologised is a different matter). But… I don’t think he actually meant it that way. I think his comment (like Corbyn) was clumsy and I think jumping on this and assuming the worst interpretation (again, like the Corbyn situation) is hysterical and unwarranted, and it also distracts from the real issues. Here’s what I think Rees-Mogg meant to say: “We can’t deny that one factor was that the residents followed the official fire brigade advice and stayed in their homes instead of trying to evacuate. In hindsight, that was a tragic mistake. It’s a struggle to imagine what you or I would do in that situation, but the impulse to ignore fire brigade advice and evacuate must have been absolutely the first natural reaction of anyone in that building. The tragedy is that more people didn’t follow that instinct.”
Is that what he meant? I think so. Am I willing to give him the benefit of the doubt? Yes.
Same for Corbyn.
I’ve spoken clumsily on many occasions and wished in hindsight I could have re-worded something and said it in a different way. (My thread comment here might just turn into one of those occasions….) It’s one reason I’d be terrified to be any kind of public spokesperson for anything… and I have ultimate respect for anyone brave enough to do so.
That’s a very considered response. Unfortunately it’s not one I can buy in to.
There have been too many missteps. Either they reflect his true opinion on these issues, or he’s so damn incompetent he shouldn’t be a Party Leader.
Nicely written piece on a subject most of us find very confusing. My evidence of several Corbyn cronies being properly anti-Semitic is something I absolutely believe to be true but none of it (except some tape recordings which I guess somebody could say were doctored) would stand up in court. Anyways to repeat, nicely written
FWIW I read his use of the phrase “English irony” to refer to the fact that anyone in England criticising the actions and behaviours of the state of Israel is doing so from within the very state that played the biggest, most cavalier and politically expedient – and hence easily criticised with the benefit of hindsight – role in creating that state in the first place!
I think I am fair-minded too. However, I do think the Rees-Mogg comment about Grenfell was interpreted correctly. He said he would have taken the “common sense” approach and left the building. That’s not to say he wasn’t greatly saddened/shocked by the tragedy – I am sure he was. But, quite clearly, he said if he was in that building he would have survived – said with the certainty of someone who considers himself on a higher plane than most.
He was saying “anyone with any sense would have got out of the building”. You can see why the people who followed Fire Brigade advice would be upset by this.
Precisely. I’d have been queasy about staying put myself, but I’d probably have done so anyhow.
I’d have been operating on the principal that if I’d asked the Fire Brigade for advice about putting out a burning chip-pan they’d have told me to get the damp towel out etc, whereas Grease-Bogg would have just told me to “Get nanny to deal with it, it’s what we pay her for after all”.
Hm, yes I can see that interpretation. It was something like “If you or I were trapped….” which I think was a clumsy way of saying “If one were trapped….”
The fact that he feels on certainty he is on a higher plane than most is indisputable though!
Well, the Chief Rabbi has declared his position:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50552068
Let’s hope there’s a corresponding public comment from the Muslim fraternity.
And from the Hindus and the Catholics, and, and, and everyone else and his or her imaginary God, prophet or divinity.
FFS
I’ve been looking forward to this moment, but we’ve just had the Tories at the door, asking for our support. I explained why they won’t be getting it in detail. To be honest, I was a tad disappointed when they walked away, as I hadn’t finished. They’re going to win this constituency though, because the Lib Dems, who apparently want to stop Brexit, are fighting hard to win votes (when they usually perform poorly round here) and will win enough to let the Tories in. We’ll then have a Tory MP in Barnsley. My grandad, who was a miner, will be turning in his grave.
The trick is to keep them talking as long as possible so they haven’t got the time/energy/enthusiasm to hassle many more people.
This goes for all politicians BTW.
I’m one of those people who go door-knocking. We are told not to get involved in lengthy “discussions” when canvassing for exactly that reason. No point trying to talk round a dyed-in-the-wool Tory whose enjoyment of early evening telly you’ve just interrupted. Let him shout at you, thank him for his time, and try next door. Just enjoy the fact that you’ve pissed him off a bit. Canvassing is largely about confirming voting intentions so that the local party has a list of people to knock-up on election day if they haven’t yet voted. It’s not about trying to change minds,
That said, given recent events, I’m very glad indeed I don’t live in Hereford or Rotherham.
Terribly sorry Slug, I really was pulling your leg when I asked you to clarify your position on the Schleswig-Holstein question…
(pulls up chair)
No actually I’m very glad you asked me that because I’ve always felt that the plight of the Danish population of southern Schleiswig is under-represented in the media and I’m certain that if we can …hello?
DING DONG!
‘Kinell, I fell asleep against my own doorbell!
I’m 52 and have never had a knock on the door from any party in an election campaign. I don’t recall it happening to my parents either. Is that unusual? I don’t think I have even seen any canvassers on the streets at any time.
Have you lived in safe seats of one colour or another all your life? If so, that’s often the case.
Also, the thirty-foot flaming cross in your front garden might put people off.
I’ve only ever lived in one seat which changed party (Lancaster in 97; I vote then moved to the other end of the country on the same day). For the last 20+ years I’ve been in Chelmsford where the weigh the Tory vote instead of counting it and the MP (a former MEP who took over from the retiring member) got more than 50% of the votes cast.
I’m sensing panic in 1997. “Shit! I can’t live in a Labour constituency…. I’m going to be an Afterworder one day!”
…I’ll get me donkey jacket.
I moved to Taunton which went Conservative to Lib Dem on the same day, so that little trick backfired. Doing the online tests and so on I have actually surprised myself with how antipathetic I am to the Conservatives this time round, even by my own high standards.
Is that the test that just consists of twenty different pictures of Boris Johnson’s face?
One of them is his arse and you have to identify it. Not for the squeamish.
That’s no way to talk about Dominic Cummings etc
Not at all unusual. Canvassing has never been a popular task to volunteer for (for obvious reasons), and there’s an awful lot of front doors to knock on.
Also depends on whether the constituency party can drum up enough members at anti-social hours, and whether the constituency itself is really worth canvassing – if you are fighting or defending a large majority, you are probably wasting your time. Better to travel and help out local marginal constituencies.
As I implied above, the perception of being a “safe seat” can make a difference one way or another. Allegedly one of the reasons Portillo lost his seat in ’97 is that he didn’t campaign in his own seat because he didn’t feel the need to bother.
Michael Portillo always had a sense of inferiority, right since his schooldays. This was because he went to Harrow High School with that suave, smooth-talking intellectual giant and Afterword mainman, Kaisfatdad. No: it’s true!
Ah, but there is a pattern…. old Harrovians tend towards the wilfully exotic in later life. KFD engages with oddballs in the tvättstuga and posts music of mind-boggling obscurity on the Afterword; Portillo travels the world by train while wearing a series of improbable jackets.
In the episode I watched whilst doing the ironing, Portillo appears to be dressed as a carrot (orange strides and green shirt). Well, either a carrot or Shaggy Doo.
By strange thought process, I’ve just realised who/what Mar Francois has been reminding me of for months: Scrappy Doo.
“Lemme addim! Lemme addim!”
It’s not Harrow School, where Churchill went Moose, it was Harrow County Boys, a grammar school which my brother and I both failed to get into, for different reasons.
*tugs forelock furiously*
Yew carn’t hexpect a lowly menial such as hi yem to know that kind of hinformation, your grace!
I’ve had several over many years. Alliance Party last week – a civil chat but I explained why I wasn’t voting for them or anyone else now: because they’re all still taking taxpayers money for MLAs at Stormont when the thing has been shut for 3 years. That’s my red line. If I ever open the door to the bigots and b******ds of the DUP, the exchange will be less civil.
You don’t want to be civil to them. After all it’s only one step away from “civil rights” and they don’t like that sort of talk…
Re: “….so that the local party has a list of people to knock-up on election day if they haven’t yet voted”
I’d say that local party activists in the USA would be unlikely to put it this way, given the meaning of “to knock up” over there. Arf arf!
I was waiting for that.
In the old pre-alarm-clock days a “knocker-upper” was a chap who went up and down the streets of working class districts tapping on upstairs windows with a stick in order to wake people up in time for work.
Hence Victoria Wood’s joke, “‘Appen in my day we were knocked up every morning by a man with a ten-foot pole”
PS. Boris Johnson would be happy with either meaning, particularly the not-hanging-around-very-long-afterwards aspect.
We had a Labour canvasser around last week, and this seat was the 32nd safest at the last election, with a Labour majority of 30,000. The MP, Keir Starmer, is also personally popular as he does a lot of constituency work.
The Liberals won around here in the European elections, so maybe that’s made Labour slightly nervous. That might be reading too much into it, and it might just be that they have a lot of members round here. If Labour are worried though, it’s interesting as the constituency next to ours, which had a similar majority, is Corbyn’s.
All MPs do a lot of constituency work, if you look at it. I bet even BJ does some.
It’s only councillors and MEPs who can get away with doing fuck all. I’m looking at you, Farage.
Pfeffel’s constituency work probably consists of Googleing to see if there’s an Oddbins in the neighborhood, and then wondering about the availability of a suitably local peripatetic stain removal service.
We’ve heard nothing from our Con. candidate who, in his book (available in the far-right British National Party bookshop, should anyone want a copy), claimed that germs carried by immigrants would bring “death to our lands”. I can’t wait for him to ring the bell, so I can set Mrs F on him in full-on Mad Spaniard mode.
Nothing at all from our Lab. candidate, so I don’t know his views on foreigners.
I missed our LD bloke’s visit on Saturday morning, he was walking away down the road as Offspring The Younger and I returned from football. Had it been Heidi Allen, I would have run and caught her up.
Trouble is, LD man has posted me and Mrs F a letter – I kid you not – every single day for two whole weeks (so far). And an extra hand-delivered one addressed to me, since I’m a postal voter. At what point can I claim harrassment?
Yes, but isn’t there that pesky court order thing with Heidi? 😉
I suppose I’ll have to dismantle the shrine on Dec 13th.
I’ve warned Audrey Fleurot that you’ll be at a loose end.
Step away from the cake!
To complete the AW holy trinity, would Susanna Hoffs consider standing to be a MP?
Look here feller, politics isn’t just about fulfilling your sexual fantasies.
You’re confusing yourself with Boris Johnson.
Only if she knew what she wants…
Campaign rally: “Let’s make some noise….”
Oh stop it.
I was talking to Heidi Allen only this morning. She did a photo op in Hitchin.
And you’ve recovered enough to put pen to paper in only 12 hours or so.
She’s coming to our Carols round the tree thing in the cafe again. Mrs F might have to slip some valium into my mulled wine.
I hope this isn’t racist. Maybe it is.
Living in, say, England, why should anyone, Jewish or otherwise, care unduly about the situation in Israel, Palestine, Jerusalem etc.
Aren’t your drains or kids dealing drugs outside your front door more important?
If someone is uninteresting enough, and, boy, they’d have to be, to give an opinion (negative or positive) on Palestine etc. (and Corbyn’s chief problem is that he is very uninteresting), why would that make that person anti-Semitic, or for that matter not anti-Semitic.
If I suddenly got passionate and negative about the Clean Air department of the Swedish Government, would that make me racist towards Sweden?
If there was a Venn diagram for all this, I’m sure that the circle marked “Smear campaign” would be considerably bigger than the one marked “Anti-Semitic.”
I’ve just been outside to get some lunch right here in downtown Stockholm, and I’d say the air was pretty clean. So, nothing to get negative about at the moment, Mr daze.
As an aside, there’s a whole different context to this in Northern Ireland (what a surprise, eh?). Somehow, Palestine has become a cause of people with strong nationalist views, to the extent of huge banners on hillsides overlooking Belfast, posters in bars, etc. Clearly, this affects discourse about Israel and no doubt Jews in general – though from my limited conversations with friends of a nationalist bent they seem careful to separate Jewishness from Zionism. I’m not aware that there is any visible ‘Jewish community’ in NI. I’m sure there must be people of that faith here, but what I mean is that – as far as I’m aware (and the caveat is that I tend to avoid local news) – one never sees them represented on NI TV news, one never sees people in orthodox dress walking down the street. I imagine with all the very visible pro-Palestine stuff, they’d probably just avoid talking about it.
Just thought you’d like to know yet another of NI’s socio-political peculiarities.
It’s not straightforward to separate Jewishness from Zionism, or anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism for that matter. Zionism is about the right of the Jewish people to establish and protect their own nation.
Regardless of the West Bank issue, Zionism is at the heart of Jewish identity for many, and even though its origins pre-date the Holocaust, that fuelled the urgency for Europe’s displaced Jews to find somewhere safe and secure to settle.
Therefore, if you condemn Zionism outright, you may be, in essence, denying the right of the state of Israel to exist, hence you are then anti-semitic.
I’m not saying there aren’t different interpretations/manipulations at work in the whole current Labour Party anti-semitism issue, but I really don’t think Corbyn is helping, nor are the most fervent of his supporters.
The problem is that taking up causes tends to drive people to passionate but simplified stances, eg all Palestinians are good/victims, all Israelis/Zionists are oppressors, and wouldn’t it be easier if Jewish people in the UK distanced themselves from Israel and its policies.
Thanks for risking a roasting by trying to clarify things. I’ll risk the same by asking further questions.
Can anyone tell me why any religious group should have the right to demand an exclusive geographical location as their own in this overcrowded world?
Other groups of people (e.g. the ethnic Kurds) have been seeking the same thing for aeons, but no major players seem to be up in arms about the fact that they keep being ignored.
As for Israel, political expediency or indifference on the part of various militarily victorious nations seems to have played a large role in the establishment of the state of Israel, rather than any purely ideological intent.
So why shouldn’t anyone be able to question the right of the state of Israel to be tolerated – as it is today; a bullying oppressive presence for many people in the region – without risking an accusation of anti-semitism?
What do we all think of the Andrew Neil interview with Jeremy Corbyn last night? I think it was a total car crash for Corbyn and I could hardly watch it.
I stand by my comments above – that I genuinely don’t agree with the “anti-semitism” smear – but by Jove he made a right hash out of trying to sidestep the issue. Surely it was obvious he was going to be asked to apologise? In which case, is there not a way of wording an apology to retain the moral highground and assert your view while still appeasing your detractors? As it was he gave Prince Andrew a run for his money in how to act shifty and petulant in an interview.
Every time I decided that maybe I’ll vote Labour after all, he goes and fucks it up again. I thought he simply didn’t look or act like a Prime Minister – and that’s a pretty low bar these days. He behaves as though he’s still arguing the toss in the People’s Republic of Haringey.
And now the leaked NHS documents, which make me think I should vote Labour again. I just want it to be over.
For people like me, interested enough to want to vote but not really interested enough to invest the time and energy really required to dig too deep into the policies, manifestos and quirks of each option. It feels like the choices are the equivalent of putting your hand in a bucket of acid, a mincer or a fire. It’s going to hurt but which one will hurt less.