The other night the Panorama episode aired which highlighted the apparent anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. On the night I tweeted, in response to the multitude of other tweets I was seeing, that most the people calling Corbyn anti-Semitic were doing it out of sheer self-interest. Either to point the finger at others to save themselves, or to simply virtue signal. I still think this is the case for most the media pundits and political figures, but I really need to stop firing off tweets like this, as on reflection I don't think it's the best way to help the situation.
I hadn't even watched the Panorama episode myself at the time of the tweet, however I've since watched it and it seems that the problem really stems from confusing criticism of Israel with hatred of Jewish people.
This is why it's so frustrating watching the media discussion surrounding this issue. We really need impartial observers pointing this out, but everyone who otherwise would be impartial is just dogpiling on top of Corbyn through fear of being labelled anti-Semitic themselves. This is understandable in a way, but definitely not helpful.
People on the far left have a problem with Israel, not because they hate Jewish people, but because they're on the far left. Consequently they tend to see things through the victim/aggressor lens. In this case the Palestinians are the "victim" group, so they naturally support that side. Whereas Israel, along with its allies America and Britain, are the dominant force and therefore the "repressive" bad actors.
It's the same with every other area of conflict. Venezuela for example - people on the far left view Maduro as the good guy, "the victim" so to speak, and the Americans as the bad guy. Likewise on the Northern Ireland issue. People on the left, including Corbyn, tend to see the Irish republicans as the "victims" of British imperialist aggression.
Rightly or wrongly these are political viewpoints, based on political outlooks. They're not racial views, based on racist attitudes. These people aren't siding with Maduro because they racially hate Americans. Nor was Corbyn meeting members of the IRA due to a racial hatred of English genes. By all means criticise these views and call them out, but they're not racist, and they shouldn't be shut down.
By adopting a definition of anti-Semitism that includes and extends to criticism of Israel it not only creates problems, but also amplifies division by stifling real political debate.
Of course, people will point out that there's a fine line between criticism of Israel and criticism of Jewish people in general, and that often such criticism of Israel crosses this line. However, it also needs to be remembered that Jewishness is not just a racial trait, but also a cultural and religious phenomena. Such things can be discussed without it necessarily implying racism on the part of the person discussing it.
It's similar to recent events in Hong Kong. Personally, I'm very sympathetic to the Hong Kong protesters. However, someone may come along and say "Well, you would say that, you're British". Implying that there's a bias on my part because I'm British and Britain used to control Hong Kong. Now that may be the case, it may not be. Either way though people have to be able to point that fact out. It doesn't necessarily mean that they hate all British people, or that they think all British people have the exact same views on Hong Kong. They're just pointing out an obvious connection, and something that may have a bearing on the attitudes people may have towards an issue.
I'd like to think that my views are unbiased and based on pure reason, but at the end of the day I am British, and I am looking at things to some extent from a British perspective. So it's quite reasonable for people to point out that it's possible I could have a bias because of this. It only stands to reason that I may be more stirred to emotion by people waving Union Jacks on the streets of Hong Kong than someone completely unconnected to the situation.
Likewise it stands to reason that someone with Jewish ties is more likely to be moved by the problems facing Israel than someone with no connection. So this is a reasonable thing to talk about as long as it's not done in a hateful way.
In fact, the shutting down of debate is probably doing a lot of harm to Israel. Especially in this age of the Internet where vigorous and frank discussion is the norm. Again, imagine how bad it would look for Britain if we tried to censor people making reference to biases we may have in regard Hong Kong or Northern Ireland. It would make us look even more nefarious than people already think we are.
So I think the anti-Semitism debate is something of a vicious cycle. It would be better if everyone on all sides tried to be a bit more sympathetic to the views of other people. Including me with my spikey tweets :)
No comments:
Post a Comment