Credit: Christopher Furlong / Getty
I’m a longstanding, active and pretty opinionated member of the labour movement, so it goes without saying that I must have a fixed and unambiguous view on the whole drama over anti-Semitism that has dogged the Labour Party for half a decade now — and, as a result of yesterday’s decision to suspend Jeremy Corbyn, looks set to explode into a full-scale internecine conflict.
Except that, well, I don’t. By which I do not mean that I don’t have any views at all on the issue; more that the opinions I hold are the kind which are ignored or dismissed by most in the party, because they can’t easily be co-opted by either of the two warring tribes (and therefore leads both to regard me as some kind of faintheart or enemy).
After 26 years of activity in the labour movement, there are some things about which I am sure. One is that there is a strain of the Left — mainly embedded within the far-Left — that is anti-Semitic, virulently so, in some cases. It is small, but it exists. It will often cloak its anti-Semitism in criticism of Israel. Indeed, its obsession with the transgressions of that small country, when the misdeeds of certain other nations are more numerous and at least as bad, leads one to conclude that there is something else going on. Occasionally, it will lay bare its true beliefs with swivel-eyed rantings about “Zionist” control over the media or financial system. It is, quite frankly, comprised of irreconcilable extremists who are beyond reason.
I think it reasonable to conclude that the election of Corbyn as Labour leader, and the concomitant upsurge in far-Left influence and activity, led to a growth in the number of these crackpots infecting the party’s ranks. And, from my own vantage point inside the party, I saw that they were not identified and expelled with anything like sufficient vigour.
I know, too, that while most who raised concerns about anti-Semitism inside the party were well-meaning and justified, a small number chose to weaponise the issue because they loathed Corbynism and wanted rid of it. To say so is regarded as heresy in some quarters, but you don’t have to be a Corbynite to recognise that there has been some degree of naked politicking in this debate. It is idle to pretend otherwise. This politicking by a minority has served to create something of an accusatory — and deeply unpleasant — atmosphere across the Left which, on occasion, saw legitimate vigilance and a desire to clean the stables develop into hyper-sensitivity and recrimination.
I experienced this first-hand last year. In a Twitter debate over free movement with the folk singer Mike Harding, I argued that Britain’s working class was rooted, communitarian and patriotic whereas its middle class was more rootless, cosmopolitan and bohemian. The debate had absolutely nothing to do with Jews or Jewishness in any way, but when some anorak pointed out that Jewish intellectuals were referred to as “rootless cosmopolitans” in Stalin’s Russia, I was condemned by some on the Left as an anti-Semite.
It became clear to me pretty quickly that all resistance was useless. I could have pointed out that I was a supporter of Trade Union Friends of Israel and had joined one of its delegations to the Middle East, that I had visited Auschwitz and laid a wreath on behalf of my own union, or that the Israeli ambassador had invited me to a reception celebrating the 70th anniversary of his country’s creation. But, frankly, it wasn’t worth it. Pitchforks had been drawn and minds made up. Even my own union leadership publicly denounced me. People were walking on eggshells everywhere.
So, then, just as there are some things about which I am certain, there are others about which I am not. I do not know if Jeremy Corbyn is an anti-Semite. Truly I don’t. If I believed he was, I would say so without hesitation. And as much as partisans in the debate claim to know the truth of this, I do not think they possibly can.
We know that Corbyn has consorted with undesirables, some of whom are unquestionably foul anti-Semites and from whom most decent people would run a mile. We have seen the stories about murals and wreath-laying near the graves of those linked to the Munich massacre. But we also know the Corbyn who stood against apartheid and has been a lifelong and vocal campaigner against racism. So to the question of whether Corbyn dislikes Jews for no other reason than that they are Jews, I can only respond that I am unable to make a window into the man’s soul and provide the answer for you. And I am sceptical of anyone who asserts certain knowledge on the point.
This makes some allies of mine tear their hair out in frustration. I think of two in particular, both as hostile to Blairite “centrism” as they are to the far-Left. Neither is driven by political factionalism on this question. One cannot understand how anyone could see Corbyn as anything other than a rabid anti-Semite; the other cannot fathom how anyone could see him as anything other than the victim of a wicked smear operation. Both would be pleased if I intervened publicly on their side of the argument. It isn’t going to happen.
This local dichotomy reflects the divide on the issue across the wider party over the past five years. One is either anti-Corbyn or anti-Jew. Subtlety and nuance can go whistle in this most ugly and tribal of internal clashes in which only primary colours will do.
That those who harbour feelings of hostility to Jews must be drummed out of every place within the labour movement where they reside, and that a party with deep and proud roots in Anglo-Jewry must never again be seen as a home to such individuals — no matter how small they are in number — goes without saying. While always allowing for due process, the party machine must be leaner, sharper and more efficient in despatching anti-Semites from its ranks in the future. Sir Keir Starmer will, I am certain, continue to make improvements in that regard.
The effect of this terrible affliction on the Labour Party should grieve anyone who cares about it. Indeed, it should grieve those with little affection for the party itself but who understand the importance of a viable and reputable opposition. The last thing that either the party or Britain needs at the moment is a Labour civil war. Yet, with yesterday’s decision by the general secretary, David Evans, to suspend Corbyn, that prospect seems inevitable.
One cannot help but conclude that Evans has boxed in Sir Keir in a way that raises the stakes dramatically. Any decision to reinstate Corbyn would be perceived as weakness and an affront to Jews, while his expulsion risks a veritable bloodletting. The gauntlet has been well and truly thrown down.
For the sake of my party and my country, and no less significantly for the health of the future relationship between Labour and a Jewish community that deserves so much better, I hope these people know what they are doing.
Paul Embery is a firefighter, trade union activist, pro-Brexit campaigner and ‘Blue Labour’ thinker
PaulEmbery 
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeCorbyn is not a villainous anti-Semite, but he is a self-regarding idiot with a sizable following – not dissimilar in some ways to Trump. As such, the retribution now visited on him by becoming a pawn of his own party’s manouverings is not so much unfair, as Kafkaesque. And this is the point, the *entire* blame lies with the upper echelons of the Labour party in 2015, the Blair/Brown machine, who allowed Corbyn to ‘happen’.
And any party that manages to get itself into the state that Labour has now, is ipso facto incapable of reforming itself to the extent required to extricate itself from the resulting disaster – this very British tragedy started in fact after Brown lost power in 2010, and will now play out to the final act, when there will be a lot of bodies on the floor and not a dry eye in the house.
Take for example, the lunacy of the Labour PLP in 2015: they kept Corbyn’s candidacy alive at birth when it was close to stillborn, for the alleged sake of “diversity in debate” – the likes of Margret Beckett “lending her vote” etc. This act of intellectual-left hubris is now reaping a terrible if comical reward. But I ask you seasoned pros at the head of Labour, many former ministers amongst them, cast your mind back to 2015 and ask yourselves: what on earth were you playing at? Did you think that the public’s opinion of you would be enhanced?
Also take the complete divorce from reality of the Labour membership, who insisted on taking Corbyn on (did I mention twice?). Did you lot hear nothing, I mean *nothing*, of what your constituancy was telling you on the doorstep across the north and midlands of their values, and of what the real pain points in peoples lives were, that you decided on such a fatuous course of actions just to satisfy you political pet-projects?
Fantastic reply.
I think sadly your last paragraph illustrates the complete disdain for everyday British people that many modern day Labour members have
“The complete disdain for everyday British people that many modern day Labour members have”.
For example, under previous Labour leaders, the party either opposed taking the railway franchises back into public ownership (Blair, Brown) or wouldn’t give a straight answer to the question (Miliband). Under Corbyn, the party committed itself to do so. 65% of the British public support that. So Corbyn showed his complete disdain for everyday British people by siding with two-thirds of them, rather than with City of London folk who see the privatised railway companies as an investment play…… oh, sorry, this doesn’t really add up, does it?
You’ve raised a strong point there, Chris. However I fear it doesn’t go the full distance in answering any of the other issues raised in Prashant’s post, or indeed the general thrust of Ben’s reply. Maybe it’s possible to admire some aspects of the Corbyn era whilst admitting the numerous failings of the man, and Momentum.
That’s a nice strawman, Chris. So now please explain the fall of the Red Wall.
Let me guess – the mass media dun it?
Ah, the pain felt by tens of millions of Britons that the railway is still in private ownership… dear me.
‘That those who harbour feelings of hostility to Jews must be drummed out of every place within the labour movement where they reside…’
Not going to happen. Labour needs the Muslim vote.
Labour losing the Muslim vote, both biridari and legal votes amongst 1st and 2nd wave migrants. They share the Tories dislike of tax and big government, most realise Boris is not a true Tory. 3rd and 4th wave, Blair and Merkel’s guests are still Labour as they have no stake in our economy. Once they do they will move right aswell.
Yeah. It’s that global Muslim conspiracy.
Is it your view that anti-Semitism in the ‘muslim community’ is at roughly the same level as the general population?
No idea. It’s my view that people on this site can and do publicly say there is a Muslim lobby influencing politics and they aren’t labelled racist. If you suggest there is a Israeli lobby influencing politics you are labelled racist.
Israel, like all countries, sometimes seeks to lobby other countries. Nothing anti-Semitic about that. Israel is a country. It is right that as such it should seek to look after its own interests, to garner support in other countries. Especially as it has been under attack from almost all sides – explicitly or implicitly – for decades.
Islam is a religion. It is an ideology. There are those who would wish to promote and defend the ideology, warts and all.
What most certainly IS racist is to suggest “the Israeli lobby” trumped up the stories (for example) about the horrific abuse heaped on (for example) Luciana Berger MP.
What is deeply questionable (at best) is the careless (or deliberate) blurring of “the Jewish lobby” and “the Israeli lobby,” as part of a general effort at in obfuscation, to provide a smokescreen for anti-Semitism. And it is common.
I don’t believe for a second that Corbyn is antisemitic or that antisemitism is more prevalent in the Labour Party than in any other.
What Corbyn has definitely been is pro-palestinian and critical of the Israeli government.
If there has been obfuscation and conflation, it’s been mainly driven by the Israeli state, which seeks to make itself immune from criticism by crying “antisemitic” at the first sign any attack.
Starmer knows this, so I’m sure do all Corbyn’s accusers and political adversaries.
There is an unbelievable and shameful level of cowardice in this whole affair.
Where are the concrete examples of Corbyn’s antisemitism? I can’t find a single one.
I am not interested in debating this with you.
The only possible reason you “can’t find a single” example of Corbyn’s personal anti-Semitism is a willful choice not to see what is in plain sight.
Your dismissal of the claims as mere pro-Israeli campaigning is in and of itself a standard anti-Semitic trope.
Yes, Corbyn has been critical of Israel (even while taking coin from the Iranians; fancy that…). He has also been anti-Semitic. They are not the same thing, though arguably the fanatic obsession with Israel’s alleged sins (above all other states’) is further evidence of anti-Semitism.
Corbyn is not antisemitic,
Venal cruel bloodthirsty liar
“If you suggest there is a Israeli lobby influencing politics you are labelled racist”
That’s because if you demonise one country for doing what all countries do, then you are indeed being racist.
Think it through.
But I don’t demonise one country. I object to any country using religious or ethnic criteria as a determinant of citizenship. That includes the UK, USA, Iran, India, Pakistan and Israel. If all countries do it it is still wrong.
I have seen many articles similar to this and the general consensus seems to be that people are undecided. The unquestionable facts though are that he consorts with people who, as you say, are virulently antisemetic and he actively supports nations and organisations that are anti-Israeli. The TV shows on Iranian TV, support for Hamas and Hezbollah would point to someone who has deep anti-jewish feelings but as it is shown in a pro-Palestinian light rather than an anti-Isreali or anti-Jewish light, the answer remains elusive.
Precisely this.
We cannot know from what we see if Corbyn is antisemitic. But we can know that he chooses some despicable company purely out of his own radical prejudices. I would hazard he will just support anyone who he deems by his own bias downtrodden and/or anti-Western rather than out of pure antisemitism, but we will probably never know.
But we do need to be careful not to be pulled into the culture of ‘cancel them for being objectionable-adjacent’. Many of us rail against that when it is a loony progressive tactic. Corbyn may have done enough to be overlapping rather than adjacent, but the mere fact of association should not be enough to condemn.
True, as the saying goes. “A man is judged by the company he keeps.”
Also I think this problem stems from the fact thay many on the left (including Corbyn) think anti semitism is a problem of the right, they fail to see or turn a blind eye to their own and islamist anti semitism.
For goodness sake, of course nobody can look into Corbyn’s soul to see if he is an antisemite, but we can look at his behaviours, the people he calls friends and the language he uses. His preferences and choices scream ‘Jew hatred’ to anyone who cares to look and listen.
That is a wonderful, simplified version of an extremely complex question, it reminds me of all these people being asked why they want Brexit their answers were almost identical to that of mainstream media, meaning an original thought or argument was never given.
I must hand it to the Conservatives they understand that the Great Unwashed can only handle one liners.
Is this satire?
He certainly did far too little to stop antisemitism when he was is a position to do so. The problem however goes back much further, as Paul says. A name like Ken Livingstone has been in the party for more than half a century and never got called out, until now.
What a load of nonsense why would anyone be looking for that .
All this moaning about,anti semitism, iskamophobia and racism is infantilising our political debate
With Len McCluskey stepping in to back Corbyn (no surprise there) it looks as though the far left may split off and form their own party. If so, it will be interesting to see what the electorate thinks of them when they don’t have a moderate party to ride on the back of.
I wish they’d hurry up and do it. Almost a year since the electoral wipeout and I’m still seeing the same people threatening to quit the party.
Rather like pretending to take in a refugee, or pretending to emigrate to Scotland after the EU ref – it’s just something these people drone on about endlessly.
They’ll struggle to get 5 MPs…well…one even, actually.
Remember Arthur Scargill’s “Socialist Labour Party”? He left Tony Blair’s New Labour in disgust and formed a “true” Marxist party (which is of course what the people are supposed to really want). He didn’t win a thing ““ not even in local elections.
Certainly the most sensible article I’ve read about this issue. Albeit that’s a very low bar!
I’ve seen so many on the left throw around unfounded accusations of racism or insinuate others are racist as a cheap smear that I couldn’t care less whether Corbyn is anti-Semitic or not. I’m just enjoying watching his supporters get a taste of their own medicine.
Sadly, none of this will make any of those self-appointed Racist-Finders General, Inquisitors and denouncers question their own actions.
Like every question today, there is no middle ground. This has come about because the left (owing largely to their younger demographic) weaponised social media. The right stood about clueless, but have now got their act together.
So just like UKIP were successfully branded as racists, “the right” have seen they can do the same to Labour in the shape of Jeremy Corbyn.
Facebook and their fact-checkers are needed – it is just a huge shame they are politically way to the left as well, thus we won’t get any fairness.
There’s also something in common about the “meme wording’ of “black lives matter” and “anti-semitism”.
The cheaper MSM journalists can just get away with asking the same sort of “So you support anti-semites then do you …?”
good point…
This all seems to come down to what your definition of anti-semitism is …. and what real information is available to assess activities in relation to that definition.
If you shared Corbyn’s view that criticism of Israel government actions, and criticism of individual’s actions (who happen to be Jewish) are not anti-Semitic acts, then you would come up with an entirely different perspective to those who hold a different definition.
Until such time as we have real corroborated data on the specific alleged events, then surely we can’t reach any evidence-based conclusion (or achieve a points tally for each different definition)
Corbyn’s behaviour in this area is flawed, but do we really know much else … ?
The Labour movement has promoted a world wherein any criticism of transgender theory makes you “transphobic”; any criticism of Islam means you are “Islamophobic” – etc. etc. on it goes. Why should they be surprised when others equate their relentless criticisms of Israel with anti-semitism? I don’t necessarily make that connection myself, but the irony is quite something.
Quite right.
Well put Ian,
You know I never heard the Head Rabbi in Britain being very politicsl until the Labour Party begang gsining in popularity under Corbyn, suddenly a week or so before the elections he attacks Corbyn for being anti-semitic.
The question then arises what is his agenda? Is this an attack on the leader of a party who may just look at Israeli relations with Palestine as being totally one-sided? Favouring Israel most of the time, we know that they have gone against all international laws by confiscating Palistinian land, I believe their territory has expanded by over 70% after the wars they get involved in.
Many, look st Corbyn and throw stones but are you not being manipulated yourself, one of the most powerful lobby groups in America is the Israeli lobby group, of course it is not called that, but nevertheless, they are extremely powerful.
So as Ian rightly “do we really know much else”? Don’t rely on the media to give you the real state of affairs, they cannot othereise they would be deemed antisemitic.
This conspiracy theory about the “Israeli lobby group” and aspersions cast on the chief Rabbi example are a great example of the kind of baseless attack that was given a free pass by Corbyn’s Labour.
OR how about an often overlooked position that ALL countries including Israel are allowed to adopt
“we will defend our people using any means necessary so mind your own f…kng business”
It is always okay to criticise Israeli government actions. However due to the sensitive history, baseless criticism is unacceptable – as would be unfounded criticism of Arab nations. For example the accusation in Maxine Peake’s interview about use of airway obstruction during arrests. Maxine did the right thing, accepted her mistake and apologised.
Under Corbyn’s leadership the people promoting that kind of conspiracy theory were protected, that is the problem.
I don’t suppose he’s an anti-semite per se. It just so happens that most Jewish people tend to be hard working, productive and entrepreneurial people who do not depend on the state for their existence. Quite plainly, Corbyn would detest, and wish to destroy, any such people of any creed or colour.
That said, he did take 20K from an Iranian TV station.
Generalising about Jews in the way you do is, of course, racist.
Corbyn loves hard working people.
After the Christchurch massacre Corbyn visited the new Zealand embassy to sign the book of condolence, he then went to Finsbury park mosque to show solidarity. He is an apologist for political islam. Why ? my guess is that it’s a case of “my enemys enemy is my friend”
I have been a member of the Labour Party since 1972, and active through most of that. I struggle to recall any of the various branches I was a member of where there were not Jewish members who were welcomed and valued. We are the Party of Manny Shinwell, Ian Mikardo, Joel Barnett, Gerald Kaufmann and many others at national and local level.
I am surprised that you have not encountered the “rootless metropolitan liberal intellectual elite” as an antisemitic slur before. It is pretty universal particularly at the end of the 19th Century and into this one. The idea is that if you are Jewish you cannot inhabit the soul of the nation. “Rootless metropolitan liberal intellectual elite” was the trope used by the Spectator about Ed Milliband and his father, added for good measure that he went to school in Hampstead.
I supported Corbyn in the 2015 and 2016 leadership elections because I had watched for 5 years from 2010 every Coalition outrage not opposed by by Labour for fear of not wanting to appear remotely “extreme” as a result by the 2015 election no-one had much of an idea what we stood for, we gained very few votes and lost Scotland.
There is a list of occasions from 1977 (when as a young Councillor in Haringey) Corbyn organised a counter march to a National Front March through a area with a high number of Jews) to blocking the bulldozing of a Jewish cemetery in his constituency, to various parliamentary motions, to highlighting the dog-whistle antisemitism I refer to above, to highlight the plight of the tiny Jewish community in Yemen; all of these Corbyn has stood firm when others have not. He has a good relationship with the Jewish community in his constituency.
As a back-bencher he used his freedom to talk with a wider range of political organisations that most and while he was talking with Sinn Fein it is undoubtedly the case that the Government had back-channels to the IRA .
Anyway the deed is done, Keir Starmer will lead the party back to the centre and nail his colours firmly to the fence. Do I bother to vote in the NEC elections?
Nobody doubts that Corbyn did such things. He may well have been involved in far right counters but only the incredibly naive would think that that in itself absolves him from these accusations. You only have to look at his actions and words to understand why these accusations stick
I nhave never heard that *Rootless cosmipolitan….* thing is an anti-semitic slure..but then I wasn’t alive in the late 19thC and early 20th, though I read a lot of History.
Does this make David Doodhart’s distinction of *Anywheres* Vs *Somewheres* as the real class struggle of our age (or culture war as we now call these things) also an anti-semitic tract?
*Rootless* Anywheres?
And me an anti-semite for thinking it is something that describes the new political reality more usefully than the old Left-Right thing.
I wonder what Baroness Shami Chakrabarti has to say about this. I’d really like to hear what she thinks.
AFAICT the Corbyn worldview insists on seeing Jews and Israel as ‘white’, ie inherently suspect, likely bad/evil/oppressive, and refuses to classify them in the non-white/oppressed/good category. Personally I don’t think whites are any worse than anyone else, by and large, so I’m against the white/non-white moral distinction. But I tend to respect Corbyn & co’s consistency. Unlike them I tend to be pretty pro-Israel; but I want Israel judged by the same standards as other countries, neither ‘can do no wrong’ nor ‘can do no right’.
Not really true. The Jewish=”white”=oppressive is more of a Black Lives Matter thing.
That is a young leftie’s way of thinking.
He would morelikely have thought Palestine=Oppressed=Candidates for Class Struggle and Israel=American Allies=Evil Incarnate.
And Corbyn doesn’t change his mind when the facts change.
So Corbyn was caught in a trap. Post 9/11 he couldn’t say
“No, I’m not anti-semitic, I’m just pro Hezbollah, and come to think of it all anti-western movements”
Also he’s fiercely loyal to a bunch of senile demented old pals, who _are_ anti-semitic. And unlike most people these days Corbyn doesn’t denounce his mates.
“He would more likely have thought Palestine=Oppressed=Candidates for Class Struggle and Israel=American Allies=Evil Incarnate.”
Yes, that seems right.
‘That those who harbour feelings of hostility to Jews must be drummed out of every place within the labour movement where they reside…goes without saying’
There goes the Muslim vote
The muslim vote is only temporary anyway. Islam is using Labour as useful idiots until they can stand as a muslim party. Any Labour politician is unwise to think any different.
Andreas de Rick I do hope that was tongue in cheek
Is he an anti-semite? I don’t care. That’s not that I don’t care about anti-semitism. I do. But why bother with what he might be when I already know what he IS. He’s a socialist and therefore a looter. It’s a bit like saying to me “You know that guy who’s a murderer, he might be a shop lifter as well.” It’s irrelevant.
Thomas, really, you are swallowing it by the bucket loads.
I wonder do you know how much of Britain’s land is in the hands of the nobility? Check that out and then tell me who is looting?
We need voices like Corbyn, who stands up against ‘the echo chamber’, and it seems you are a fully paid up member
Downvoted for the personal attack. Let’s keep it civil!
Attack?
An Irish socialist. There’s something you don’t see everyday. (that’s sarcasm in case you missed it.) Just to get this right. Because William the Conqueror and his mates stole a load of land that makes you and your unwashed bolshevik mates justified in stealing my earnings? I’m on to you. Another one of the pigs looking to stick your nose deeper in the trough, trying to tell me how you are fighting for my rights. Really trying to fill your own pockets with other people’s money. Peddle your snake oil somewhere else to other poor working class dupes ready to swallow it by the spoonful.
Did he stand up for Sarah Champion..? No wait.m he SACKED her…ask yourself why then get back to us.
Thats a a resonable reason to critique JC.but that’s not the same as whining about socialism
You venal bloodthirsty low quality person.
We saw the banks bailed out, givt sponsored bonuses,
We have failing privatised utility monopolies,
Housing problems
(All the land still owned by the nobility)
What does that have to do with Corbyn stealing my earnings? I’m not the nobility. So because Lord snooty owns all the land…..I have to be robbed?
What is the world coming to. A political leader being held to account for action, or rather here, inaction, regarding something unacceptable.
It’s irrelevant whether he is an anti-Semite or not. The fact is he saw it happen and lacked the moral courage to stop it. In his position as leader of the opposition to have done nothing, or even be found wanting, is not acceptable. We should all expect more form the people who either govern us, or want to in future.
Jack,
All politicians are the same ie only really interested in themselves and garnering the support they need to obtain and cling to power. With the fall of communism they have had to find new global issues to demonstrate their continued relevance like global warming the global war on terror etc. Liberal democracy is the worst political system -apart from all the others. The switch to neo Marxist postmodernist identity politics is just the latest threat threat ordinary rational people face from political activism. Take John Lennon’s “Imagine” and remove all the religious stuff and insert political equivalents and you would have a much better unachievable Utopian dream.
I think you are obfuscating .. Corbyn on many occasions, never managed to say the right thing that could without doubt deny he is an anti semite.
Lord Triesman a Labour peer, said he counted 132 occasions where Corbyn could have said something, but didn’t.
Andrew Neil gave Corbyn an opportunity to apologise for the hurt felt by UK Jews, and Corbyn made no apology.
https://youtu.be/tecUadXe82k
Yesterday’s findings by the EHRC, Corbyn had to try and have the last word.
There can be no doubt, Corbyn hates Israel and has no time for the Jewish people. An antisemite through and through.
He certainly has a very low opinion of the State of Israel. And that, by itself, makes him an obvious target. For reasons unknown, the pro- and anti- Israel lobbies, and the pro-Palestinian lobby, take far more British MPs to Israel and Palestine than to any other place in the world.
Perhaps it’s because, apart from the US, the major international supporter and provider of arms to Israel is the UK? Certainly in the early days, Israel has a lot to thank us for. The armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria ground to a halt against American planes and British tanks in the 1967 and 1973 wars.
Perhaps it’s because, as Britain was the international “major player” to instigate the creation of the State of Israel, the leaders of that country still want to foster a close connection?
Perhaps because Corbyn has a seemingly unsuppressible urge to support the underdog everywhere, especially those downtrodden by the Affluent West, his allegiance with Palestinian causes was unavoidable? And many patriotic Palestinian organisations are deeply anti-Israel, and most likely anti-Jewish too? Like Irgun was anti-Arab and even anti-British not so long before 1948!
There is no necessary connection between any of these things and anti-semitism.
Perhaps because Corbyn has a seemingly unsuppressible urge to support the underdog everywhere
It’s an oddly selective “urge”. Very little for Tibet, or West Saharans. Or for the 300,000 Turkish speaking Bulgarians expelled from Bulgaria in the 1980s, Or for the 800,000 Jews expelled from the Muslim paradise lands between 1948 and 1970. And then there’s his support for the people who are planning a second holocaust. Or perhaps Corbyn thinks it will be a “holocaust of peace” …
He sacked Sarah Champion in space of 24hours…that tells us EVERYTHING we need to know about his loyalties..
I try to take the compassionate side in arguments whenever possible.
From a long way away, Corbyn appears to be on the side of anyone who says anything against Israel or Jewish people in general.
The Hitler experience SHOULD have informed folk that judging folk by the groups that individuals belong to will end up with lack of justice.
It is small, but it exists.
Keep telling yourself that it’s small. That’s the sort of attitude that has allowed this toxin to come out of the woodwork in the US, echoed by NYC’s mayor and more than a few members of Congress. The left has created its own mess and while uncomfortable to watch, there is something interesting in watching leftists attack their own for various thought crimes, though hating Jews or Israel is not yet among them. Corbyn’s problems seem more that Labour has noticed the revulsion that his comments elicit and see that as a bad look for the party, not as a a sentiment that is wrong in itself.
Nonsense.
Anti semitism,racism,islamophobia ,
All just nonsense
It’s not merely that Corbyn and the Left are anti-Semitic – there’s always been a stream of antisemitism in the Left, so it’s nothing new – but what is new and particularly despicable about Corbyn is that he consorts with people who are actively planning a second holocaust.
The Labour party under Corbyn clearly had an anti-Semitism problem. Anyone who does not recognise the Mear One mural or the Hobson Imperialism book as anti-Semitic is either blind or anti-Semitic. But being highly critical of Zionist behaviour is natural for the Left, and not unjustifiable. The confusion of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is not helpful in dealing with the latter, while the confusion of both with anti-Corbynism is even less helpful. Clearer thinking would help, as the author suggests…
This is nonsense.
Boris has written certain pieces that could plainly show him as an anti black racist and islamophobe.
If you start playing these games ,we are just going to end up with an even more poisonous political culture
I’m no fan of Boris any more, but no he hasn’t. To take one example, the letter box comment was in a piece DEFENDING the right of Moslem women to be veiled…
An interesting and well written piece.
I’m a supporter of Corbyn and believe the decision to suspend was wrong and ill judged.
The usual suspects Hodge, Berger, et al have been wheeled out for their anti Corbyn sound bites and tell us nothing new.
Starmer says there’s no need for a civil war but his dumb decision to support Evans action will ultimately cause one with the Labour Party being the loser.
A ridiculous over reaction.
I am bemused by the fact that this discussion, here and in the real world, is taking place without consideration of the concurrent discussions on Unconscious Racism and Bias.
Central to that idea is that someone may believe themselves to be non racist and free of bias and but behave in ways that indicate unconscious underlying attitudes and beliefs that demonstrate the opposite.
Corbyn undoubtedly believes himself to be not anti-Semitic, but as Angela Rayner said today:
Jeremy Corbyn has an “absolute blind spot and a denial” when it comes to issues raised in the Equality and Human Rights Commission report into antisemitism within the Labour Party.
Equally he has long had a blind spot with regard to the dubious anti-Semitic company he keeps
“Corbyn undoubtedly believes himself to be not anti-Semitic”
That’s witchfinder talk.
Unconscious Racism and Bias is about as scientific as third nipple divining.
Why not burn Corbyn for believing he’s not possessed by the Devil?
The whole Critical race Theory and Unconcious Racism and Bias is a conclusion thrashing around in search for some evidence.
The unconscious brain is just the way we are made as humans and why we survived and thrived to become the dominant species on the planet – we still need it today to drive cars safely and every other aspect of our lives. The point is to be aware of it and the potential biases that will be inherent in it and engage the conscious brain before acting. Trying to use the biological fact of its existence as a weapon against people you don’t like is totally objectionable, but that is the disease that neo Marxist postmodernist zealots are trying to infect as many impressionable people as possible with.
It doesn’t matter what you or I think- antisemites think he is antisemitic. It takes one to know one maybe. They’re hardly going to proclaim it loudly to everyone they meet.
As for the anti- apartheid stuff- he chose the City of London group, the ones that didn’t like the peaceful, non- violent approach, and wanted to turn the movement into some kind of pan-African revolution. Mandela hated them.
One way to say suggest something IS the case without running the risk of saying it out-right, and therefore having to defend it, is to phrase what you want to say as a question.
It puts the idea ‘out there’ without the speaker or writer having to take responsibility for making a direct claim.
The opposite tactic ““ suggesting something is NOT the case ““ can be done the same way. All one need do is insert the word ‘really’ into the question. Add the sneaky ‘really’ in
there and the person asking is looking to seed doubt.
Is Jeremy Corbyn an anti-semite?
Is Jeremy Corbyn ‘really’ an anti-semite?
With a title like that to the piece I knew there’d be ‘something’ an author leaked onto the page. There always is.
“We know that Corbyn has consorted with undesirables, some of whom are unquestionably foul anti-Semites and from whom most decent people
would run a mile.”
What an interesting way of phrasing things. Hamas and IRA types referred to as ‘undesirables’.
That’s rather generous. Would anyone else agree? That’s the first thing with those two lines.
The second is the (almost) subliminal suggestion that Corbyn is *more* than a ‘decent’ person – he’s a ‘brave’ one.
I could go on ““ but why bother?
The reason those who have racist hatred for Jews will give themselves a nervous breakdown denying it is that they can’t see it. Their hatred has disguised itself. The self-delusion is impressive ““ but it’s an obvious move of psychological misdirection.
If a person hates ‘A’ they can express their hatred by professing love (or “solidarity” if anyone prefers) with ‘B’.
How often has Corbyn worked himself into a sweat over the “illegal occupation”?
That’ll be the illegal occupation of Northern Cyprus by Turkey.
The problem is the whole thing has become polarised. Like many other identity issues. The reality is most people are ambivalent ie neither love nor hate Jews, blacks, Muslims, gays, transsexuals … and the list goes on. What those with extreme agendas do is exactly what you have done ie create a pseudo analysis of the wording in order to expose someone as something they are not.
Personally I think (being a Tory) that Corbyn in the best thing that could have happened to our country. Just think what might have happen had there been a strong and united opposition to the hopeless May-bot. With Boris now floundering ever more, the labour party destroying itself over issues like this is again what we really need.
I find it astonishing that Paul Embery could have remained in a party led by a man, Jeremy Corbyn, who invited Sinn Fein/IRA into Parliament two weeks after the Brighton bomb murdered 5 Tory party members, and attempted to murder a great many more. Where was Embery’s moral compass, decency, or the patriotism he lays such a persistent claim too?
Imagine if a Tory politician had done something similar after the murder of Jo Cox. In acknowledging the discrepancy between the levels of outrage each would have produced, we glean an important insight about Corbyn; the real charge against Corbyn is that he’s a Marxist Revolutionary (as were the Brendan Hughes generation of IRA mass murderers) an adherant of *the* most murderous creed of the 20th Century. This leads us to the surely more coherent and intellectually honest supposition that Corbyn’s, and Corbynites, opposition to Israel has its ideological roots in Marxist anti-Imperialism, not in anti-semitism.
This of course leads us into complicated terrain, not reducible to a simple ‘gotcha’ accusation. However, worked through with intellectual and historical imagination transposing Corbyn to the Marxist state he hoped to bring about here, one can only see Corbyn as a zealous undying supporter of a regime (Soviet, Maoist, central American), governing through terror and mass murder often on a scale exceeding Nazism, in which dim fanatics like Corbyn were enthused participants.
The charge of potential murderer may ring as to extreme on empirical English ears, for Corbyn has committed no such crime. Perhaps the true wickedness of Corbyn can better be suggested by seeing him as a “nark”, grassing on an overheard conversation, not through fear or coersion, but through extreme devotion to the State and its ideological principles. That narking would have seen the accused more often murdered leads us back to the gravest charge.
But societal revulsion at terms like ‘Marxist’ and ‘revolutionary’ has never been established in the way Nazi, fascist and, consequently, anti-semite have. So to “get Corbyn” a false narrative as to Corbyn’s ideological impulse has been constructed.
What distinction that can be drawn between Corbyn’s wreath laying *near* (according to Embery) the Munich attackers graves and his parliamentary welcome for IRA murderers, clearly weighs the greater moral disgust lying by far with the later. Yet it is the ‘wreath laying’ that garners the far greater opprobrium, because it carries the taint of anti-semitism and is therefore communicable as being wrong/evil in a way that the provable, indeed uncontested, fact that Corbyn gave support to those who attempted to murder the entire British cabinet, astonishingly, is not.
Had Grenfell happened three weeks earlier it is quite conceivable that Corbyn would now be Prime Minster, a man as morally unfit for the post as he is intellectually and physically. And Paul Embery would have helped put him there. It isnt the Labour party that needs to undergo a long night of the soul. It is every Labour Party member and voter too. The Party is a sewer the effluence is its thinking and the moral character of its members.
It is the moral justification of only allowing an elite group to ask the questions and make decisions while other groups can not. In fact some opinions should be allowed because they are dangerous and hurtful to minorities that it is best to leave the decision making to the elite. In the progressive left, the elite believes a perfect understanding of reality is gained with a university education and therefore, no need to consider other points of view. They are exploiting the friction between groups to justify their power.
Nobody, at stage in the debate, has defined what is this anti-semitism. I’ve no idea what it looks or feels like. I’m a Christian and subject to routine anti-Christian societal behaviours and laws. I’m not, for example, permitted to express classically orthodox Christian views on God’s character and nature, as revealed in nature and the bible, in my place of work. I take this form of prejudice that as inevitable within a nation that has long abandoned the Christian gospel as a central tenet of its law making and educational syllabus. If I wish to maintain my position, as a public servant, I must express culturally orthodox positions on sex, gender, marriage, family, relationships and pre-born children. Is that the kind of anti-Jewish prejudice we’re talking about? Is it that they are barred from expressing classically orthodox Jewish positions on God and family? I would like to know.
Yet again Disqus moderators have taken something of mine down which was by no means controversial, was measured, thoughtful and specifically relevant to the article and the question it raised.
In the interests of saving limited personal time and effort, at least it’s good to know what they’re NOT looking for in future
I hear you, G. It has happened several times to me, but I’m still making myself believe the reason is some sort of algorithmic glitch rather than intentional. If not Unherd seems to have a mole in their ranks.
Corbyn AntiSemite or not. Who gives a toss Paul?
Isn’t it enough that this malignant piece of trash and his gang of bullies has ruined your party forever?
You know who they are..your work now should be working with all your might by fair neans OR FOUL, to get rid of the f…king wreckers.
What a venal attitude.
To falaciously try and destroy someone.
He didn’t “wreck” the party he breathed life into it after it was ruined by Tony Blair
JC was bullied non stop by the blairites.
“Breathed life into it”..like some kind of God you mean?
I’d suggest his moribund ideology had the effect of halitosis.
Of course he isn’t. If there was ever an example of identity politics it was the campaign against Corbyn.
Any involvement with Iran’s press TV other than outright condemnation is a sign of a racist anti-semite.This goes beyond anti-Zionist or even Anti Israel.To take their money, as Corbyn did, brings him down to the level of an active Nazi collaborator. That such people are at liberty and even flourishing in Britain bodes ill for the country’s future.
He’s not an anti-Semite, he’s just a very naughty boy. In all seriousness, however, anti-Semitism, like “racism” in general, is a charge that’s brought out WAY too often, usually for cynical motives.
in his early days as a union official he had dealings with clothing manufacturers. he tried it on too often. Guess what, moved on.
‘All political careers end in failure’, as the saying goes, and this looks like the not so new and shiny Labour Party under Sir Keir ‘it wasn’t me, Guv’ Starmer and his less than fresh new faces from his frontbench are keen to take this to another level with Jeremy Corbyn.
Finally, very publicly, nailing his political coffin shut, they believe, with one of the ultimate ignominies, the dreaded and dreadful historically loaded charge of being an ‘anti-semite’.
Only just stopping short of the worst accusation one could ever throw at any sentient human being, ‘not having a sense of humour’.
Sorry, Paul, if people attacked you for being Anti-Semitic simply for using the term “cosmopolitan” to describe the British middle class. I am quite familiar with Soviet history and the term “rootless cosmopolitan” but would have taken you at your word, and never thought you were making that kind of connection. Maybe you would be happier on the right, where people aren’t looking for dog whistles all the time. Also, if you don’t think the evidence supports Corbyn being anti-Semitic, do you think the evidence supports Joseph Stalin being anti-Semitic? Not a rhetorical question, I would really like to know.
‘Is Corbyn really an anti-Semite?’
this is a rhetorical question posed for purpose of creating a cudgel to beat the Labour Party about the head and shoulders by an editor who once worked for the mouthpiece of the Tory party.
I am sorry to see Paul Embery, whom I very much respect, refusing to show solidarity with Jeremy Corbyn on whether he is or is not an anti-semite. Paul surely knows he is not, and would probably have said so before he developed such a strong distrust of the Labour left. Paul is also wrong to say that there is anti-semitism on the far left. There is anti-semitism in the Islamist movement, and parts of the left are weak on the question of Islamism, but that is not the same thing.
I prefer Paul’s approach which is fact-based. Rather than base solidarity on affiliation or tribe, integrity requires that action be consistent with known facts. And I totally agree with Paul that it’s impossible to tell whether or not Mr Corbyn is an anti-semite.
It is pretty clear that he has worked to protect friends who are anti-semites, which illustrates the problem with solidarity taking precedence over truth.
Good piece, Paul. I despise any nation state that defines itself on racial or religious grounds which includes UK, Pakistan, USA, India, China and Israel. Am I anti-Semitic?
You could be if you then went on to call for the destruction of the state of Isr@el. This act, if it happened would cause gen0cide. The effect of Corbyn’s calls for the “right” of return and his alliances with Hamas and Hezbollah would be that. So yes, certainly, by what you say you could fall into that trap.
You mentioned that you were once a supporter of “Trade Union Friends of Israel”. That means you support the fact that Israel came into existence by expelling Palestinians from the land that they have lived in for hundreds, probably thousands of years. It also means you support the Brutal oppression of Palestinians, including the murder of Hundreds by the IDF in the past 4 years alone, not to mention the thousands that have been maimed by exploding bullets.
I was an active member of the Palestine Solidarity Movement for many years, and there were a lot of Jews involved, many of whom questioned Israels “right to exist” as an apartheid state.
You refer to these Jews as swivel eyed antisemites.
Imagine the reaction in the Labour Party if there had been a “Trade Union Friends of White South Africans” in the 70s and 80s.
Also, many of the comments on this thread show a great deal of contempt for the Black lives matter movement, as well as extreme Islamophobia. Is this meant to be an overtly racist publication?
Can you give us a link to an objective source – something like Amnesty International – to back your assertions about exploding bullets?
It’s a bit more complicated than you make it out to be. When the state of Israel was proclaimed, with the approval of the United Nations, it was immediately attacked by its neighbours, who did not agree with the UN decision. Some of the Arabs in Israel joined in these attacks, and when they were unsuccessful, fled the country to avoid the consequences of their actions. Others were certainly chased out. It’s not clear how to work out what the proportions were.
To quote Wikipedia “the Arab population of Palestine doubled during the British Mandate era, from 670,000 in 1922 to over 1.2 million in 1948, and there has been considerable debate over the subject on how much of this growth was due to natural increase, as opposed to immigration.” The Arab population of Israel now is about 1.9 million.
In any case, at least some of the people who left in 1948 or thereabouts had not been there for hundreds or thousands of years.
You are certainly correct that some Jews are not happy about Israel, including some who live in Israel. Look up “Peace Now” for an example.
There are no perfect solutions to any problem. The creation of the state of Israel was a justified yet imperfect counter solution to Hitler’s final solution. The reality is the Jews got a pretty shit bit of land to call their own – roughly in the area of “the promised land” though it certainly does not flow with milk and honey nor the modern equivalent – oil. The fact is that despite not having much in the way of natural resources and despite all the tensions in the region, the population of the state of Israel has made a pretty good fist of things all things considered. If they were left alone by other states, then I have no doubt they would make an even better fist of it.
I watched the attacks on Corbyn from day 1. They tried everything and none of it made any difference including a second leadership election. Note well anti semitism wasn’t ever mentioned during that process, why not ?. Then one day they threw the anti semitism grenade and the Jewish press pulled the pin. It was quite astonishing to see prominent Tory Jewish figures wading into this debate and nobody in the media stated “hang on why him” (yes almost exclusively men).
Jeremy Corbyn has been hung in an attempt to re-brand the Labour Party in the Blairite image. It won’t work, it will simply add to the already growing disillusionment with party politics. I wait with baited breathe to see what the Tory party will do to itself once they stop hiding behind Covid.
Pray tell, which publications are you thinking of when you say, ‘the Jewish press’? Genuinely interested to know.
Jesus Christ. Maybe you should read the EHRC report and learn something about anti-Semitic tropes.
‘It was quite astonishing to see prominent Tory Jewish figures’
You mean people like Sir Alan Sugar, Margaret Hodge and Luciana Berger?
So it’s all just a smear campaign agains poor old Jezza “a man who has fought racism all his life” (as his supporters never tire of telling us).
Don’t try to pretend this is just a post-election defeat rebranding issue. The far left have a long history of hostility to Jews. Corbyn’s meteoric rise from fringe figure to party leader was probably due to the McCluskey inspired £3 membership wheeze.
Huge numbers of young, protest intoxicated, far left activists (doubtless thoroughly indoctrinated in the evils of Zionism and “Jewish” capitalism) were able to join up and gain voting rights. Hardly surprising that the party’s anti-semites felt emboldened.
Oh the webs you weave;
You do realise after this,they can go after boris for anti black racism and islamophobia.
YOU must realise (if you have actually bothered to follow developments over the last couple of years) that absolutely anyone can be accused of anti-black racism ““ if it is not overt then it must be unconscious. It MUST be there and can be winkled out by the determined and righteous activist. All white people especially must confess and seek atonement. The cult of black suffering will not be denied.
Oh, the webs that are weaved around you in the name of social justice!
Islamophobia, you should realise, is a recently concocted term designed to provide an equivalent to the term “anti-semitism” ““ to protect Islam from criticism and cast muslims in a quasi-Jewish victim garb. It is a tactical misuse of language implying as it does that criticism of Islam can only be the result of an irrational fear leading to mindless bigotry.
Oh, the webs of whataboutery that you weave!
Notably, to his defence leaps former Speaker, John Bercow, a Jewish man and a former staunch Conservative. “Never suspected Corbyn of anti-semitism, never heard anything anti-semitic from him in my entire Parliamentary career”