BelperStuff has been quiet for the past few months because a blog that seeks to spotlight the absurd in political life just cannot compete with the lunacy of politicians who deliberately lampoon themselves. Take for instance the former Tory health minister who introduced a whole raft of nonsense on the NHS, who now blames government cuts for the failure to diagnose his cancer at an earlier stage .................... well I don't wish illness on anybody but even I could not have invented a more stupid volte-face.
Now though, I feel compelled to investigate the claims
that the Labour Party is inherently antisemitic. I think of myself as being an
average sort of Labour member, a bit of an activist at election time, turn up at a
few branch meetings and sometimes turn up at conference. Oh and of course
there is this blog. It was the other morning whilst standing outside the butcher shop
in Crich at a Support the NHS event that my thoughts turned to racism;
a fellow member saying to me that he’d never witnessed any antisemitism in the Labour
Party. I looked around at the beauty of a Derbyshire village and realised
that I hadn’t experienced it either but there it is slapped all over the news
that Labour has a serious problem at its very core. Later, listening to the
radio I heard a Labour MP say that if you tried to defend Labour’s record on
antisemitism then that meant that you were also antisemitic. Up until that
point I was content on letting our elected betters get on with dealing with the
issue but being told that any attempt at trying to find out the truth of the
matter would brand me as being racist was like a red rag to a bull.
A couple of days later I was in St.Pancras
station, the grandchildren being handed over to me for their half term week in
Derbyshire. On the train journey south I had started writing this post and I
mentioned it as we ate our lunch before catching the train back to Derbyshire. My daughter
(who is married into a Jewish family) urged me not to do it, “whatever you
write will be wrong so don’t even go there”. My grandchildren (yes obviously
both Jewish), once alone with me on the train urged me to write about the
subject,”we know you can make sense of it”. The trust grandchildren place in
their grandparents is a wondrous thing.
The half term week flew by and I had allowed laziness to stop me writing but then I was brought
up sharp by the second demonstration against Labour antisemitism on Sunday,
just two days ago. I had written a blog post entitled “The wrong type of Jew”
which commented on Jeremy Corbyn choosing to attend the Jewdas seder and being
“outed” by Guido Fawkes for being with …….. well ……. the wrong type of Jew. (see here an article in the Haaretz online newspaper) and also (here for a wonderful article written by Charlotte Nichols) It
now looked somewhat dated so I deleted it, determined to write something with a
bit more substance. I was thinking, if I am going to avoid being branded antisemitic then I
should strive for objectivity. The idea came to me that using Jewish sources of
information would be a positive move and so two days of reading the
Jewish Chronicle, Jewish News online, Haaretz and the websites of the Community Security
Trust, the Campaign against Antisemitism (CAA), the Institute of Jewish Policy Research ........... followed and here we are. Am I any wiser? Some would say that writing this post proves that I am not.
It has though been an interesting journey and I have
learnt from UK Jewish sources that
“the very left-wing, and, in fact, all
political groups located on the left, are no more antisemitic than the general
population (3.6% holding at least one antisemitic view)” and that, “looking
at the political spectrum of British society, the most antisemitic group
consists of those who identify as very right-wing. In this group about 14% hold
hard-core antisemitic attitudes ………. “.
This comes from a report
written by the Institute of Jewish Policy Research (JPR) in 2017 which is
embraced by the Jewish Chronicle and the Community Security Trust (CST). Armed with
this information I found myself wondering why it was that the Jewish Leadership Council, the Board of
Deputies and the CAA felt compelled to organise demonstrations against the
Labour Party and specifically Jeremy Corbyn. The evidence from the JPR would
suggest that there was more to protest about on the right wing of politics.
The JPR report
mentions that the average British Jew equates criticism of the State of Israel
with antisemitism. I think it’s well understood that there are many on the left
who have sympathy for Palestine and it does appear from the JPR research that
on this point there is a disconnect between the left and many in the Jewish
community. Such a shame as without a proper dialogue about this most basic of stumbling blocks to peace in the middle east we are condemned
to unending conflict.
Problems within the Labour party
My researches into Jewish news sources did
throw up some disturbing incidences of Labour Party antisemitism which I am
glad to say were properly dealt with (suspensions and expulsions) but there
were also a number of careless remarks or use of social media where leading
Labour figures should have known better. I pay my dues to the Labour party
because I want our top team to strive for a better, more equal and just society
but I am frankly appalled when their behaviour falls to a level that
undermines Labour success at the polling booth. As the JPR says,
“the left tends to see itself, and is commonly regarded, as an
anti-racist and egalitarian political group, both in terms of its political
goals and its modus operandi. This image tends to impact on people’s
expectations of the left or, at the very least, draws attention to how well (or
otherwise) it performs in relation to its own proclaimed values”. When our standards slip it is all the more noticeable.
Yes the Labour Party must do better but our
shortcomings were not of a magnitude that justified two very public
demonstrations organised by the Jewish establishment egged on by the CAA. Does questioning
this make me antisemitic? There are certain Labour MP’s who say that it does.
We should have implemented the Chakorabaty
report in full and I do wonder why this didn’t happen. Perhaps our
internal wrangling has caused us to take our collective eye off the ball. There is also
the commitment to rule changes following the vote at conference last September. We must press
on with this as a matter of urgency.
Most Labour Party members are like me, they hate
racism, see the person rather than the stereotype and wish no ill will upon
anyone. Our leaders and elected members should embody the same. I do feel a
sense of being let down by the constant infighting of MP’s. They must do
better. Definitely stand up for human rights throughout the world and criticise Palestine and Israel if
needs be but be even handed and objective. A careful study of the Labour Party Rule Book - Appendix 9, would also be a positive step. (See the bottom of this post for an extract).
We in Labour have a job to do. We have to confront the 3.5% both within and without our party. We are firmly against racism in all of its evil forms and we must all work together to stamp it out wherever we find it.
Now to a digest of my researches:
Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA)
This
is the group that organised the second demonstration against Labour antisemitism
on Sunday 8th April.
CAA
details:
Chairman – Gideon Falter
Director of Organisation and Finance –
Anonymous (who might this be?)
Director of Investigations and Enforcements –
Steven Silverman
CAA is a charity (listed
on Charity Commission website) with some funding from the US Natan
organisation in 2015. Nothing intrinsically wrong with Natan but a grant to the
CAA looks out of place. (Natan seems to be a very altruistic and well meaning group). I'm not very impressed by Falter and Silverman and I do wonder that one of the directors is anonymous.
CAA listed investigations
The CAA website lists the investigations they have undertaken. The incidences relating to political parties are as follows:
Labour Party – 39
Conservative Party – 4
BNP – 2
Green party – 5
Lib Dems – 5
SNP – 2
UKIP – 5
Others – 2
The CAA therefore suggests that the Labour Party has a much deeper problem with antisemitism when compared with other parties but, looking for evidence of this from other sources such as the Institute for Jewish Policy Research it is a position that is hard to maintain.
Community Security Trust (CST)
The main organisation for the protection and
promotion of UK Jewish life is the Community
Security Trust (CST) with cross party affiliations. The CST website
has two references to the CAA with one article cross posted with Left Foot Forward which contains:
“When the new grassroots
group the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) took a non-Jewish journalist to spend an entire day last month walking
the streets of London wearing a kippah (skullcap) and a hidden camera, hoping
to expose the dark underbelly of British antisemitism, he failed to elicit a
single hostile comment from passers-by.”
The CST also link to an article in the Jewish
Chronicle which highlights the biased and unscientific methodology employed by
the CAA which contains:
“Assessing UK antisemitism is not a suitable
subject for propaganda games. Last week a new Jewish pressure group called
Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) rushed out a deeply flawed report following
the outrages in Paris. This presumably was to take advantage of the prevailing
panic to gain publicity for unfounded statements about a “tsunami” of
Jew-hatred in Britain. If headline-grabbing was the aim, it certainly
succeeded.
The community’s leading research body, the
Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) has justifiably condemned CAA’s
publication as “incendiary” and “irresponsible”. The JC (Jewish Chronicle) has published
considerably less alarming findings from its own, more reliable research”.
Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR).
This institute, refered to as JPR, is a well
established and respected organisation. Established in 1941 it has built up a
reputation of reliable and objective analysis of Jewish issues such as
antisemitism.
They published a report in September 2017 entitled,
“Antisemitism in Contemporary
Great Britain”.
I urge you to download and spend some time
with this report ……….. in fact I think we should all read it, irrespective of
our political inclination. The report is 85 pages of carefully laid out
research but the heart of the matter is contained in the conclusion where we
read:
"Looking at the political spectrum of British society, the most antisemitic group consists of those who identify as very right wing. In this group about 14% hold hard core antisemitic attitudes and 52% hold at least one attitude, compared again to 3.6 and 30% in the general population. The very left-wing, and in fact, all political groups located on the left, are no more antisemitic than the general population.
This finding may come as a surprise to those who maintain that in today’s
political reality, the left is the more serious, or at least, an equally
serious source of antisemitism, than the right. Indeed, Jewish victims of
antisemitic violence or harassment identify Muslims and the far-left as the
chief perpetrators. This perception is not limited to victims of antisemitism.
Three academic studies on the topic of left-wing antisemitism have been
published over the past two years, clearly indicating that the perception
that the left has an issue with antisemitism is quite prevalent in the minds of
Jews and scholars of political sociology and history. Is this view misguided or
rooted in error? Not quite. It is simply insufficiently precise.
The left tends to see itself, and is commonly regarded,
as an anti-racist and egalitarian political group, both in terms of its
political goals and its modus operandi. This image tends to impact on people’s
expectations of the left or, at the very least, draws attention to how well (or
otherwise) it performs in relation to its own proclaimed values. We found that
the left (including the far-left) is no less antisemitic than the general
population. This is not a trivial finding, as it runs counter to the left’s
self-proclaimed ethos. When the expectation is to find less antisemitism than
elsewhere, the finding of ‘just the same’ level of antisemitism as elsewhere is
likely to be noticed by politically attuned individuals. Simultaneously
embarrassing the left and being used as a weapon by it critics, this dissonance
becomes the centre of attention and gets accentuated.
That, however, is not the whole story. The prevalence of
antisemitism on the far-right is considerably higher than on the far-left.
However, in the context of realistic social encounters, it is not only the
prevalence of antisemitism within the group that matters, but also the size of
the group on the political map. While 14% of the far-right are strongly
antisemitic, the far-right constitutes just 1.4% of all British adults. By
comparison, while only 3-4% of the far-left are strongly antisemitic, the share
of the far-left in the British adult population is higher (3.5%). The political
centre is indistinguishable from the general population when it comes to strong
antisemitism, but it is a heavyweight political group in the population: 30-40%
of British adults self-define as belonging to the centre”.
The CAA and JPR offer wildly different
analyses and the methodology employed by the JPR makes their report far more
authoratative. The CAA is obviously not trusted by the CST and Jewish Chronicle
nor the JPR but still it managed to mobilise 500 to demonstrate against Labour
last weekend. It was not pleasant to see Maureen Lipman railing against
Labour’s antisemitism and that she would henceforth be voting Tory. There were
also chants of, “Vote Conservative” from the crowd so I do wonder about the
motives behind calling for a second event. We had enough of the racist bile of
the Zac Goldsmith mayoral campaign and now, a year on once again racist slurs
against Labour in London just before an election.
One last point; what are the relevant rules that govern the Labour Party:
Extract from the Labour Party Rule book
Appendix 9 NEC Codes of Conduct
All codes of conduct and NEC statements form
part of the agreed relationship between individual Labour Party members, and
set the minimum code of conduct expected by the Party of all its members. The
NEC may supplement or amend these codes of conduct at any time. Further codes
of conduct exist relating to internal elections, selections and other matters.
These may be found in the rule book or on the Labour Party website at
www.labour.org.uk
1. Code
of Conduct: Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination.
The Labour Party is the party of equality and has fought to ensure that society
provides equal opportunities for all and will continue to do so. Labour
strongly believes that no one should feel disadvantaged, discriminated against
or harassed due to their gender either inside the party or in the wider
society. The Labour Party understands that sexual harassment is a form of sex
discrimination that takes place when someone is subjected to unwelcome and
unwanted sexual behaviour or other conduct related to their gender. This can
range from inappropriate comments to assault, can be verbal, non-verbal or
physical and can take place both in person or online. The Labour Party will not
tolerate any form of discrimination or harassment. Labour is committed to ensuring
the party is a welcoming environment for all who share our aims and values to
engage in political activity and debate without feeling disadvantaged or
unsafe. Any behaviour that is perceived to discriminate against or harass
another due to their gender has no place within the Labour Party.
2. Code
of Conduct: Antisemitism and other forms of racism The
Labour Party is an anti-racist party, committed to combating and campaigning
against all forms of racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia. Labour will
not tolerate racism in any form inside or outside the party. The Labour Party
will ensure that the party is a welcoming home to members of all communities,
with no place for any prejudice or discrimination based on race, ethnicity or
religion. The Labour Party welcomes all who share our aims and values, and
encourages political debate and campaigns around the vital issues, policies and
injustices of our time. Any behaviour or use of language which targets or
intimidates members of ethnic or religious communities, or incites racism,
including antisemitism and Islamophobia, or undermines Labour’s ability to
campaign against any form of racism, is unacceptable conduct within the Labour
Party.
3. Code
of Conduct: Social Media Policy National Executive
Committee Statement A starting point for all our actions as members of a party
and a movement is to treat all people with dignity and respect. This applies to
all our dealings with people, offline and online. Everyone should feel able to
take part in discussion about our party, country and world. We want to maximise
this debate, including critical discussion, as long as it does not result in
the exclusion of others. Abusing someone online is just as serious as doing so
face to face. We stand against all forms of abuse and will take action against
those who commit it. Harassment, intimidation, hateful language and bullying
are never acceptable, nor is any form of discrimination on the basis of gender,
race, religion, age, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Any
member found in breach of the above policies will be dealt with according to
the rules and procedures of the Labour Party. We wish to build a diverse
movement that reflects the whole of society, so should always consider how our
actions and words may limit the confidence or otherwise exclude either those
less knowledgeable than ourselves or those already under-represented in
politics. Those with privilege, whether due to their volume of experience,
party position or status in society should have regard to how their actions may
be felt by those in different circumstances to themselves. It is perfectly
possible to have vehement disagreements without descending into personal abuse,
shaming people or exhibiting bullying behaviour. Forcefully made points and
criticisms of the political views of others are totally legitimate, personal
attacks are not. Debates amongst party members should be comradely,
acknowledging that whatever our diverse views, we are one party with shared
goals. Derogatory descriptions of the positions of others should be avoided.
Anonymous accounts or otherwise hiding one’s identity for the purpose of
abusing others is never permissible. The use of sexualised language or imagery,
and unwelcome sexual attention or advances are not acceptable, nor is the
publishing of others’ private information without their explicit permission. We
should not give voice to those who persistently engage in abuse and should
avoid sharing their content, even when the item in question is unproblematic. Those
who consistently abuse other or spread hate should be shunned and not engaged
with in a way that ignores this behaviour. We all have a responsibility to
challenge abuse and to stand in solidarity with victims of it. We should
attempt to educate and discourage abusers rather than responding in kind. We
encourage the reporting of abusive behaviour to the Labour Party,
administrators of the relevant website or social media platform, and where
appropriate, to the police. This is a collective responsibility and should not
be limited to those who have been subjected to abuse. Trolling, or otherwise
disrupting the ability of others to debate is not acceptable, nor is
consistently mentioning or making contact with others when this is unwelcome.
......... and for comparison the Conservative Party Rule book
I could find nothing in the Tory rule book that
referred in any way to the issues that are so clearly laid out in the Labour rulebook. Please correct me if I am wrong.
