No. This won’t do. Britain’s Left in general, and its Labour Party in particular, have wallowed in Anti-Semitism. Mr. Sweet and the others he invokes cannot dilute that Anti-Semitism by trying to spread it around the rest of the British population and political spectrum.
David Barnett
3 years ago
While far right antisemitism is certainly real, it is a mistake to assign Fascism to the right.
In its origins, Fascism is one of the branches of the extreme left. Just look at the histories and policies of Mussolini or Adolf H. The name of the latter’s party “National Socialist” ought to give you a clue.
Under Fascism, favoured party members have nominal ownership of, and manage certain enterprises for the benefit of the state. If the owner/manager displeases his superiors in the party, he is removed. For all practical purposes, the state owns the enterprise.
Under Communism the nominal ownership is vested in the state. Favoured party apparatchiks manage the enterprise as long as they please their superiors in the party.
The Communists and the Fascists were opponents in WW-2. That opposition was one of rivals in a similar part of the political spectrum. Just because we assign “Left” to communism does not mean that their opponents, the Fascists, are on the “Right”.
“The name of the latter’s party “National Socialist” ought to give you a clue.”
Ah, but to the left that clue isn’t what it appears to be. Apparently Hitler and his mob explicitly campaigned on something for years using one name,when they knew all along that no one would ever notice that they weren’t really of that type. Yes, that makes sense.
Today’s ‘Tories’ have actually tried that. The trouble for them is that everyone has noticed.
100% concur. How can a “National Socialist” ever be right-wing?? Adolf Hitler was a Socialist all his life, and all his policies were socialist except that he co-opted big business to work for the state instead of nationalising it.
The manner of co-opting big business was effectively a state takeover. The same faces may have been in charge, but they had to support the party. The rewards of the apparatchik were there if did. The firing-squad if they openly opposed.
Absolutely correct. Fascists always seem to start their political journey in some kind of socialism. The terms left and right wing are an absolute menace and hugely misleading. They suggest to people’s imaginations a line with Stalinism at one end and then fascism at the far opposite extreme. A circle would be more accurate with Stalinism and fascism together down at the bottom of the circle, deep in the dark and filthy totalitarian barbarity zone. At the top, again quite close to each other would be democratic centre left and democratic centre right quite close together in the humane and civilised, clean sunlit zone.
Andrew Baldwin
3 years ago
Sweet’s piece is fascinating. It seemed that he drew a contrast between a 19th century Britain that displayed solidarity with Jews in continental Europe and the Britain of the interwar period that was often anti-Semitic. It would be interesting to have Sweet’s views on the influence of the Russian Revolution on the change. In “Russia under the Bolshevik Regime” the American historian Richard Pipes, himself a Jew, argues that the Revolution and the Civil War greatly worsened Anti-Semitism both in the territories of the old Russian Empire and in Western Europe.
lawrence.john
3 years ago
Disappointing that Mr Sweet has needed to go back to before 1950 for almost every single example of “Conservative antisemitism”. I suspect the truth lies therein.
Helen Wood
3 years ago
The debates in The Labour Party on Anti Semitism need to focus on how to be able to criticise the Israeli govt re current Palestine issues such as annexation or behaviour of the IDF in Gaza. Simoultaneosly there needs to be both advocacy and support human rights for the Palestinians while acknowledgeing the existential ties and historical events which have conferred a Jewish home in Israel. There needs to be a way of using language which demonstrates awareness of the need for a dialogic approach showing respect for Jewish members and the wider Jewish community and their sense of affiliation with Israel while still representing the rights and needs of Palestinians in terms of self determination and equality.
Jeremy Stone
3 years ago
There is much truth in this notion that anti-semitism is part of the popular culture of Britain, and perhaps endemic. I can recall sitting at lunch in the 1970s where the conversation had turned to Hampstead. The grandmother of my host then inquired innocently whether it was not the case that a lot of Jews lived there. I instance this because there was no punch line or follow up; it was just a natural question for someone of that class and age, forty something years ago. What seems wrong with the Gidley thesis is that (as reported here) it fails to distinguish the distinctive weaponised and institutionalised ideological strain that is consistently to be found on the left of British politics, but never (in living memory at least) on the right.
No. This won’t do. Britain’s Left in general, and its Labour Party in particular, have wallowed in Anti-Semitism. Mr. Sweet and the others he invokes cannot dilute that Anti-Semitism by trying to spread it around the rest of the British population and political spectrum.
While far right antisemitism is certainly real, it is a mistake to assign Fascism to the right.
In its origins, Fascism is one of the branches of the extreme left. Just look at the histories and policies of Mussolini or Adolf H. The name of the latter’s party “National Socialist” ought to give you a clue.
Under Fascism, favoured party members have nominal ownership of, and manage certain enterprises for the benefit of the state. If the owner/manager displeases his superiors in the party, he is removed. For all practical purposes, the state owns the enterprise.
Under Communism the nominal ownership is vested in the state. Favoured party apparatchiks manage the enterprise as long as they please their superiors in the party.
The Communists and the Fascists were opponents in WW-2. That opposition was one of rivals in a similar part of the political spectrum. Just because we assign “Left” to communism does not mean that their opponents, the Fascists, are on the “Right”.
“The name of the latter’s party “National Socialist” ought to give you a clue.”
Ah, but to the left that clue isn’t what it appears to be. Apparently Hitler and his mob explicitly campaigned on something for years using one name,when they knew all along that no one would ever notice that they weren’t really of that type. Yes, that makes sense.
Today’s ‘Tories’ have actually tried that. The trouble for them is that everyone has noticed.
100% concur. How can a “National Socialist” ever be right-wing?? Adolf Hitler was a Socialist all his life, and all his policies were socialist except that he co-opted big business to work for the state instead of nationalising it.
The manner of co-opting big business was effectively a state takeover. The same faces may have been in charge, but they had to support the party. The rewards of the apparatchik were there if did. The firing-squad if they openly opposed.
Absolutely correct. Fascists always seem to start their political journey in some kind of socialism. The terms left and right wing are an absolute menace and hugely misleading. They suggest to people’s imaginations a line with Stalinism at one end and then fascism at the far opposite extreme. A circle would be more accurate with Stalinism and fascism together down at the bottom of the circle, deep in the dark and filthy totalitarian barbarity zone. At the top, again quite close to each other would be democratic centre left and democratic centre right quite close together in the humane and civilised, clean sunlit zone.
Sweet’s piece is fascinating. It seemed that he drew a contrast between a 19th century Britain that displayed solidarity with Jews in continental Europe and the Britain of the interwar period that was often anti-Semitic. It would be interesting to have Sweet’s views on the influence of the Russian Revolution on the change. In “Russia under the Bolshevik Regime” the American historian Richard Pipes, himself a Jew, argues that the Revolution and the Civil War greatly worsened Anti-Semitism both in the territories of the old Russian Empire and in Western Europe.
Disappointing that Mr Sweet has needed to go back to before 1950 for almost every single example of “Conservative antisemitism”. I suspect the truth lies therein.
The debates in The Labour Party on Anti Semitism need to focus on how to be able to criticise the Israeli govt re current Palestine issues such as annexation or behaviour of the IDF in Gaza. Simoultaneosly there needs to be both advocacy and
support human rights for the Palestinians while acknowledgeing the existential ties and historical events which have conferred a Jewish home in Israel. There needs to be a way of using language which demonstrates awareness of the need for a dialogic approach showing respect for Jewish members and the wider Jewish community and their sense of affiliation with Israel while still representing the rights and needs of Palestinians in terms of self determination and equality.
There is much truth in this notion that anti-semitism is part of the popular culture of Britain, and perhaps endemic. I can recall sitting at lunch in the 1970s where the conversation had turned to Hampstead. The grandmother of my host then inquired innocently whether it was not the case that a lot of Jews lived there. I instance this because there was no punch line or follow up; it was just a natural question for someone of that class and age, forty something years ago. What seems wrong with the Gidley thesis is that (as reported here) it fails to distinguish the distinctive weaponised and institutionalised ideological strain that is consistently to be found on the left of British politics, but never (in living memory at least) on the right.