jewish-labour-movement-3
Israel

Calls for Jewish Labour Movement to be expelled from Labour Party

Where is Baroness Chakrabarti? Anybody seen or heard from her since she took the ermine? If you bump into her anywhere, could you please tell her that she urgently needs to re-open her whitewash inquiry into anti-Semitism (“and other forms of racism”) in the Labour Party, because there’s quite a bit of it on display at the party’s conference in Liverpool. Is she in Knotty Ash? Anybody know?

You might dismiss as a fit of pique the resignation of one Jewish peer who quit over Labour’s growing anti-Semitism: the re-election (/confirmation) of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader might delight Christian socialists, but it has dismayed quite a few all reasonable, intelligent, moderate socialist Jews. Lord Mitchell explains why:

“I’m Jewish and I’m very strongly Jewish, and I make no bones about it, and there’s no doubt in my mind that Jeremy himself is very lukewarm on this subject, he’s never been as vociferous in condemning anti-Semitism as he should be, and when he does make a mention of it he combines it with other forms of racism, so he will never say specifically as far as anti-Semitism is concerned.

“But even more than that, he surrounds himself with a coterie of people who hold violent, violent anti-Israel views, and allied with it they are very hostile to Jews so, in my view, they’re pretty bad guys.”

Corbyn’s response?

“I would hope that he would reflect on that because clearly there are diverse views within the party on issues to do with the Middle East but there’s absolute unity in the party of opposing any form of anti-Semitism, any form of racism in the party. That is very clear.”

Ah, there’s that “any form of racism” again. That is very clear. The moment you qualify anti-Semitism with “other forms of racism”, you’re denying there’s any specific problem with Semites (ie Jews) at all. Is it anti-Semitic to disbelieve that anti-Semitism might be a specific problem? What the Labour leader appears to be saying, on reflection, is that holding “violent anti-Israel views” and being “hostile to Jews” are some of the diverse (legitimate?) views on the Middle East within his party, and these are worthy of reflection. Hostility to Jews may be anti-Semitic (or another form of racism), but holding anti-Israel views may be reasoned, if not enlightened, provided they’re not so strongly held as to incite physical violence. Presumably.

Which brings us to the leaflet being handed out at Momentum’s anti-Semitism meeting.

jewish-labour-movement

Yes, incredibly, approval was granted for this anti-Semitic propaganda to be distributed at a meeting to challenge assertions/perceptions that Labour has a problem with anti-Semitism. According to the College of Policing ‘Hate Crime Operational Guidance‘ (p37), to accuse British Jews of being more loyal to Israel than they are to the UK is indeed anti-Semitic. If the Jewish Labour Movement does not belong in the Labour Party, where does that leave Jews?

Ah, but this is just one extremist opinion expressed at one fringe meeting, you say. Chris Bryant MP articulates the perfect riposte. On hearing that the ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ (spot a pattern?) conference stall has been subject to anti-Semitic harassment, he said:

“‘Oh, it was just one person’, or ‘it’s just some mad person’, or whatever. There are no excuses for anti-Semitism at all and frankly the moment you engage in that excuse you are on a slippery slope to anti-Semitism yourself and you should be ashamed.

“So if you are a member of the Labour party and you wake up in the morning and you want to try and defend other people and say ‘oh, it’s just this’, or ‘it’s just that’, or ‘it’s just one person’, get out of my party. Get out of my party and get out of my party now.”

“In order to get beyond racism,” Justice Harry Blackmun once wrote, “we must first take account of race. There is no other way.” So Labour must take account of Jews in its policies and pronouncements, lest anti-Semitic prejudice and discrimination infect its whole political discourse. If a preferential report on Labour’s treatment of and attitude toward Jews was not justified (“and other forms of racism”), then how can any policy which prefers any minority be reasonably advocated? There may be moral disagreement over lists and quotas to ensure gender and ethnic diversity, but a party which believes such mechanisms to be necessary to ensure fair representation must find a compelling reason to violate the principle of equal consideration for Jews. There is none, of course.

Democracy feeds off robust disagreement: moral conflict is an imperative in reasoned deliberation, and political parties are nothing but coalitions of factions with competing interests. But forget Old Labour vs New Labour, or Blairite-Tories vs Militant, or Clause 4 vs Third Way. Anti-Semitism has become Labour’s deepest fault-line and most serious division, because it is the oldest hate crime of all. Momentum, under the aegis of Jeremy Corbyn, aided, abetted and dignified by Baroness Chakrabarti, deny there’s any problem with anti-Semitism at all, while hosting a meeting on anti-Semitism at which leaflets are distributed which advocate the expulsion of Jews from the Labour movement. Chris Bryant, recognising that there is indeed a growing problem with certain anti-Semitic members, demands that the anti-Semites get out of his party – presumably voluntarily, because, according to Baroness Chakrabarti, there is no substantial evidence to justify their expulsion. Who wins, of course, depends on who blinks first and who spins best.

  • Anton

    Everybody who is anti-semitic is anti-Israel, but not vice-versa. Nevertheless, anybody who consistently holds Israel to higher standards than its neighbours should be asked to explain why their stance supposedly is not anti-semitic. And let us remember that Labour is obviously courting the vote of a certain religion of peace which is not noted for its love of Jews.

    • bluedog

      The evolution of the Labour Party into a franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood gains momentum.

      • bockerglory

        Well said. Have experience first hand how some Moslems & Left Wing Liberals hate anytging Judaic – it is really shocking. These type blame everything that goes wrong in the world on the Judaism. This is not rational. But of course Israel is the only democracy without the death penalty in the mid East AND has trial by jury.

        Oh yes – and remember the “West” gives and sells more weapons to Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain (Sunnis) than it does Israel. And these regimes slaughter and execute people everyday under Sharia law.

        Why isn’t Labour more “Anti-Arab” and “Anti-Sharia”?

        • Inspector General

          Labour rely on muslim rich inner city constituencies to return seats. People the Labour party imported for that very purpose. At great expense – ditching the White Working Class, it cost. There never was going to be a fair hearing for Israel after that…

  • chiaramonti

    “Anti-semitism is inadmissible. Spiritually speaking, we are all Semites.” – Pope Pius XI in 1938

  • dannybhoy

    I have to admit that I do not like Jeremy Corbyn. As least as a politician.
    I didn’t much like Ed Milliband either, but that was because he seemed to be playing at politics, and gave a passable imitation of an incompetent second hand car salesman..
    Corbyn though is unpleasant in that dedicated left wingish way that some dedicated Trots have. They start off by appearing warm, friendly and reasonable, but once they realise you actually have views and that you have thought the issues through rather than absorbed them in easily digestible package form, they turn nasty. I think the influential core of Corbyn’s supporters are the same.
    Our Jewish communities have contributed so much to our country, economically and socially. Jews can be found across the whole spectrum of politics. There are Jewish doctors, Jewish social workers and of course Jewish lawyers.. They have always shown themselves loyal to our nation, fought for us in our wars and remain loyal to Queen and country. In other words they have been in the main a real blessing to us.
    So that we now see Jews leaving or being hounded out of a political party should concern us all. The shadow of tacit anti-semitism begins to hover over our one proud and tolerant nation.
    If our nation can tolerate the rantings and incitements to overthrow our nation as spouted by Abu Hamsa or Anjem Choudary; if we can pay their bills and housing benefit, yet stand by whilst Jewish citizens are driven from the Labour Party etc., we are seriously in the pits of moral bankruptcy.

    • Anton

      Let’s see what the Milibands and Mandelson have to say. All are secular Jews.

  • Gilad Atzmon, the famous ex-Jew, wrote yesterday: ‘The Jewish campaign against Corbyn was, as ever, well orchestrated and well-funded. In the last few months we have been following Jewish Labour donor Michael Foster, who thought that £400,000 would be about enough to buy the Labour party, and we learned this week that a new anti-Corbyn group is receiving funding from [Benjamin Wegg-Prosser].’

    Taking into account the level of Jewish hostility towards Corbyn, his statement on anti-Semitism is quite remarkably generous.

    Oh dear. I have just realized that the words ‘Jewish hostility’ are bound to be classed as anti-Semitic, as is any comment about Jews which falls short of fawning praise.

    • Ivan M

      A long suffering man, that Corbyn. Sixties style socialism will kill Labour, all on its own. Jewish money in politics is the cause of much of the ugliness we see around us. Nothing but abject submission satisfies them.

      • @ Ivan M—In Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil, Gerard Menuhin, son of Yehudi, quotes Nat Rosenberg: ‘Proportionately, we have more power than any other comparable group, far beyond our numbers. The reason is that we are probably the most well organized minority in the world.’ Page 158 in the print edition, page 167 in the PDF.

        • Ivan M

          JR, thanks for the link. It is alright to organise and lobby all they want, nothing wrong as it is their money. But they simultaneously want us to both acknowledge the righteousness of their causes, and the absolute error of contrary ideas. Positively Orwellian.

      • CliveM

        Garbage. one of the causes of the “ugliness ‘ around us, is the perpetuation of stupid myths and prejudices.

        • Ivan M

          Stupid myths and prejudices which would die natural deaths, given enough time.

          • CliveM

            Not if people telling them.

    • Ivan M

      I’m willing to wager that it was the unhinged nature of the Jewish campaign against Corbyn, that gave him the outsized majority. Hell if I were an emotional man, I’d have voted for him out of sheer spite, although he has fallen in my estimation as a moral man after lying about the ride on the Virgin train. Which leads me to ask if the intention all along of sad campaigns was to drive every reasonable person into Corbyn’s arms, through sheer exasperation.

      • CliveM

        I’m not sure I have ever read a more delusional post. Corbyn has a long history of ignoring or providing a blind eye towards antisemitism. Has called members of Hamas his friends and offered no help or protection to Jewish MP’s,who are being threatened by his own supporters.

        So if some Jewish people have been campaigning against him, so what. Or are they not allowed a voice and opinion?

        • Ivan M

          Notice that I wrote ‘unhinged’. If these some Jewish people had wanted to change his mind, they would not have at first base invoked Paul Beilin? (or is it Essen?) the notorious Jewish Holocaust Denier as a dreaded friend of Corbyn. They went for the nuclear option from day one. I’ve followed Corbyn’s travails with some Jews, largely through the pages of the DM, and have been impressed with the vituperativeness of the attacks on him. I have to admire his poise. I don’t care for either the Israelis or Palestinians and I don’t see why this has to be an issue in British politics for British people, but that may be because I am an Indian.

          What I see is a man who has withstood all that has been thrown at him, and he has not faltered. He has gone through the ‘ragging’ and earned his place, though as a right-wing reactionary I’ll never vote for him or the Trots.

    • Rhoda

      He can’t be an ex-Jew only an ex-Israeli.

      • @ Rhoda—Atzmon describes himself as an ex-Jew. Here, for example: ‘Gilad Atzmon takes [Shlomo] Sand’s logic further. He tore up his Israeli passport, becoming an ex-Israeli as well as an ex-Jew.’

        • dannybhoy

          If he’s an ex Jew he’s now a Goy?
          Oy Veh!

        • Rhoda

          Claiming to be an ex-Jew would not have saved him from the Holocaust.

    • Anton

      Ex-Jew? Has he sewn his foreskin back on?

  • len

    ‘Momentum’ appears to have some extremist views and perhaps we should all be concerned about ‘extremist views’ linked with ‘anti Semitism’ because we have seen this before.
    Jeremy Corbyn might find that whatever his personal views are he is pushed along by a tide of anti-Semitism fuelled by the ‘Palestinian Crisis which he cannot control.
    The ‘Palestinian Crisis has been created by the Arabs as’ a tool’ to control world opinion and to direct opposition towards Israel.

    Who are the Palestinians?…

    A Palestinian Myth Exposed http://shoebat.com/2014/03/08/palestinian-myth-exposed/

  • Orwell Ian

    First they came for the Jews.

    Well that’s hardly a surprise given the Party’s admiration of Islam and its reliance on Muslim support. It won’t stop there. All Blairites, liberals, and moderates will be systematically denounced, trounced and silenced before too long. Corbynism will now be entrenched within the Party by an unpleasant, undercover, hard left coterie who intend to purge it of everything that they see as unorthodox. Meanwhile the Dear Leader and his Politburo will remain above the fray spouting their platitudes and denials from a safe distance.

    • Anton

      The Blairites won’t take that lying down. Watch for a split. And it’s only the stronger scent of power that’s holding the ruling Tory party together too. Politics hasn’t been so much fun in years.

  • saintmark

    It was interesting in the debate between Corbyn and Smith that the MSM all noticed how people came up to Corbyn to congratulate him while Smith was ignored, nobody seemed to notice that all the people congratulating Corbyn were all men of middle-eastern origin

  • john in cheshire

    I’m puzzled why Jews would want to be members of the labour party. Why wouldn’t they gravitate to UKIP or even the Conservative Party? It doesn’t make sense to me.

    • Anton

      They’ll tell you freely enough, It’s because quite a few secular Jews genuinely believe in socialism.

      • Inspector General

        Can’t see why a Jew would want to support socialism. International socialism, or Trotsky’s ideas to be more accurate, will break down every separation man has ever come up with to not identify with his fellows. If the socialists were left to it, there would barely be any difference between men and women by the time they’re finished. Ethnic grouping will have long disappeared – on pain of ‘re-education camp’. Same with organised religion…

        • Anton

          Russian Jews reckoned, probably correctly, that it would give them a better deal than the Tsar. That said, I can’t see why ANYBODY would want to support socialism. As St Margaret of Finchley of Blessed Memory said, the trouble with it is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.

          • Inspector General

            Can’t remember who said this, but most likely a Bolshevik. Perhaps one that Stalin had shot in the 1930s even.

            “There will come a time when we no longer need to kill our enemies. We will be unassailable then. A couple of years in a Gulag will be enough to teach them where they went wrong. Then, back home to their family, to warn them and their friends about how it is going to be.”

            Not verbatim, but the essence is there.

          • Merchantman

            There are now and have been many secular attempts to mimic Jesus message in the search for an earthly paradise.

            The gospel is too hard for many ‘progressives’ to accept, so they make a sort of heavily edited version. Thomas Jefferson reducted from the Gospels the bits he didn’t like probably so he could continue his extra-marital relationship with his slave.
            Bit like Mohammad one supposes.

    • IanCad

      I think John, there is a relationship between intelligence and common sense. The more of the former, the less of what really counts.

  • David

    Bit by bit the left makes itself the tool of Islam.

  • preacher

    Politics are not a straight line – go far enough to the extreme left & you,ll emerge on the extreme right. The same happens in reverse !.
    I often wonder why so many people hate innocent others for no apparent reason, & why they nearly always go for the Jews.
    Oh well, as one famous Jewish comedian once said ” I would never join any club that would have me as a member ! “. It seems that once again history repeats itself & the same response applies.

  • IanCad

    Although Corbyn is the leader of the rather nasty LP; Is not, in fact, the most powerful member, Sadiq Khan? About seven million of souls within his bailiwick.

    • dannybhoy

      I have no doubt that militant Islamists are using every available democratic avenue to achieve their goal of bringing Islam to power in this country. It only takes time and persistence.
      Notice how our military are under attack now and being brought to Court by people willing to sell their granny so as to bring our military down, destroy morale and leave us defenceless.
      All very clever.

      • chefofsinners

        It’s not very clever. All it is, and all it needs to be, is a bit more clever than the average politician.

        • dannybhoy

          Ha! As usual you saw through my brain’s workings….

          • “We are simply not conditioned to cope with people who deal in subterfuge and deceit, and who hate women and our way of life.”

            You’ll need to demonstrate Muslim “subterfuge and deceit” as it applies to our democratic institutions. Politics always involves elements of deceit. Look at the history of the Balfour Declaration and the duplicity and dishonesty that sowed so much hatred.

          • dannybhoy

            ” Look at the history of the Balfour Declaration and the duplicity and dishonesty that sowed so much hatred.”
            Explanation?

          • See my exchanges with Anton below on the “Methodist church visitors’ book calls for Jews to be burned alive” thread.

          • dannybhoy

            I would expect a man like yourself of Jewish heritage to feel the same about the Jews as St Paul did, Jack…
            “10 Brothers,[a] my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. Romans 10:1and 2.

            I love Israel and although I recognise there are criminals and addicts and all sorts like in any other society, I still believe that according to the Scriptures they remain His Chosen people and we Goyim are recipients of the grace which they as a nation rejected..

          • Jack does believe the same as Saint Paul and shares his hope that the Jewish people will convert to Christ when her hardening of heart has passed and the full number of Gentiles have come to Him.

            However, this does not mean he has to share the opinion that Canaan belongs in perpetuity to the physical descendants of Abraham by divine right, or support the manner of Jewish return and the way the modern state of Israeli was born.

            The situation with Israel is what it is today. The State of Israel now exists and is internationally recognised as an independent nation with full rights. She deserves protection because without it her people will be slaughtered. Her existence will never be accepted by the Arabs for reasons of Islamic national pride. The enmity between them stretches back too far and is entrenched. The situation is intractable and will run until either Islam or Judaism is weakened and/or removed from the region – or Christ returns. The “two state solution” is really no solution at all and Jack doubts if anyone really believes it can be achieved. It’s all a grand geopolitical strategic dance.

            How will it be resolved? God alone knows. A humane settlement has to be achieved for the Palestinians that does not threaten Israel’s security. Neither side is able or willing to compromise. The Catholic Church is attempting to get the parties to focus on those who suffer in this dispute – children, elderly, the maimed, the poor and displaced – and by trying to develop a common understanding that there is One God and He is a God of Love.

            “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.”

          • dannybhoy

            What a good post Jack. So refreshing to read something we need not argue over!
            When in Israel I talked to many people devout or no, Messianic Christians and Palestinians. I reached the conclusion that there is no human solution to the problem, and that Israel has been reborn as a secular democratic State then it must be in God’s purpose as part of His overall plan.
            I would imagine that had there been an internet and msm at the time of the Jews exit from Egypt and entrance into Canaan, the same objections and condemnations would have been heard all over the then known world..

          • writhledshrimp

            Reading the sentance “Methodist church visitors’ book calls for Jews to be burned alive” made me feel sick. It is simply unbelievable that that sentiment is so brazenly expressed anywhere but especially in a church.

          • Agreed. There are some deranged people about.

          • Anton

            Those tempted to take this statement at face value should inspect my response to it and the subsequent dialogue on the September 24 thread.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Vaz.

        • bluedog

          Regrettably, 50% of politicians are of below the average level of ability of their calling.

      • “I have no doubt that militant Islamists are using every available democratic avenue to achieve their goal of bringing Islam to power in this country.”

        As they are perfectly entitled to do, of course. That’s what happens in a liberal pluralist democracy.

        • dannybhoy

          Quite.
          If said liberal pluralist democracy can’t tell the difference between freedom and subjugation with subsequent loss of freedom, the sooner the better..

        • bluedog

          It’s also what Muslims are commanded to do by their faith. They have of course succeeded in their objective everywhere else.

          If you look at the history of democracies, a common attribute is a remarkable inability to think and act proactively in the face of existential threats. In the face of a threat from Islam, reaction is fatal, pro-action is the only hope and involves a willingness to prosecute civil war. Nobody wants to hear this, let alone consider how it might be managed. Even though the state is well armed and equipped to deal with external threats, the re-adjustment needed to consider the possibility of an existential internal threat is very great.

          • Anton

            Islam should simply be recategorised as a subversive political movement. Secular governments understand how to deal with those.

          • Like Roman Catholicism – until emancipation? We could always bring in a requirement that Muslims renounce the temporal and spiritual authority of their Imams and deny the authority of the Quran.

          • Anton

            Something like Roman Catholicism was in the 18th century. If you don’t want your granddaughter to live the later part of her life under sharia then you’d do well to support the suggestion.

          • The IRA was a socialist, international terrorist organisation. Catholicism was not banned in Northern Ireland.

          • Anton

            I’ve been reading the Quran.

            I’m not saying that the Roman Catholic church should have been banned in NI.

          • bluedog

            We should declare the Koran to be a criminal manifesto, in that it advocates numerous hate crimes and incites violence.

  • chefofsinners

    In the Church there is ‘neither Jew nor Greek, bondman nor free, male nor female. We are all one in Jesus Christ.’

    The Labour Party is not all one in Jeremy Corbyn. The philosophy that ‘in order to get beyond racism we must first take account of race’ is fatally flawed. To get beyond racism we must focus on what unites us rather than what divides us.

  • Inspector General

    An Inspector cannot see the problem here. If Jewish Labour party members are as welcome today as a South African orange would have been in the 1970s, then damn well leave the thing! Get out. Just go.

    Where is it written that a political party MUST be representative of ALL its members views. The people who had the leaflet printed are perfectly within their rights to canvass as they are doing. They’re quite entitled to persuade, cajole, shout even, to get the leadership to go along with what they want. It’s why political parties exist. To forward what the membership taken as a whole want.

    If the only Jewish types to be tolerated, to use the word, are the ones that are anti-Israel, then that is how it will be. No doubt a Catholic in the north of Ireland has much the same problem if he wants to join a Unionist party. It would be nothing personal, but that is how human beings (free ones, that is, who can freely associate) conduct themselves in groups. It’s why they bother to form similar interest groups at all!

    • Dominic Stockford

      True, But who would want to be part of that Labour?

      • Inspector General

        Absolutely no idea, that man. And alas, the thread did not attract any Labour supporter we could ask…

  • Politically__Incorrect

    I think Labour should bear in mind that extreme right and extreme left politics tend to intersect at the same moral nadir that National Socialists arrived at. It is a point at which blind hate and ignorance take over from reason. The extreme left can be as violent and inhuman as any fascists. Indeed, Labour’s criticism of what it calls “far right” parties is looking deeply hypocritical. Labour is becoming the new nasty party. They are becoming everything for which they criticised other parties. One hopes that more moderate Labour MPs and supporters might exert some degree of restraint on Corbyn’s storm troopers though I expect we are going to hear an awful lot of intolerant racist verbage from these far left extremists.

    • chefofsinners

      This year the Labour conference in Liverpool.
      Next year the Labour camp in Auschwitz-Birkenhead.

      • Politically__Incorrect

        It’s probably no coincidence that it’s in Liverpool, home of Derek Hatton and Militant Tendency. As the Bible says: a dog returns to its own vomit.

      • dannybhoy

        Or better yet, Gaza City. Now that would be fun…

        • chefofsinners

          Yes, I believe they’ve organised a fringe event “An evening of racist jokes with Gaza.”

          • dannybhoy

            Banning Trident, banning warheads with nuclear warheads, supporting cottage (armaments) industries, better pay and conditions for martyrs..

    • Anton

      Moderate Labour MPs like Tony Blair, you mean? Let the whole thing fall to bits!

    • David

      National Socialism is Fascism. Hitler’s party was the National Socialist Party of Germany. It was one of the achievements of the post-WW2 leftists to fool most people into believing that Fascists were extreme right. As you say, at the extremes terms like Right or Left, merge and become meaningless. A more realistic spectrum has Big State Control/Globalism at one end and Freedom, Faith and Family at the other.

      • Anton

        About the size and power of the State as the deeper issue, well said! But Russian communism was family-friendly.

        • The Explorer

          There was an early attempt to wipe out the concept of the family, but it eased when it proved unpopular. However, according to Peter Hitchens, the industrial wage was set at a level that obliged both parents to work in order to survive. That left the State free to indoctrinate the kids from an early age. Where it could, the State tried to ensure that couples had their day off on different days from one another to limit family life.

          • Anton

            The wage was that low because communism couldn’t afford to pay more! And of course it aimed to indoctrinate children; that’s what communism does, but it also provided superlative State-paid science education. I hadn’t known about staggered days off, though; can you provide a reference giving details, please?

          • The Explorer

            Can’t track it down at the moment, given that Hitchens is prolific with his blog as well as his books. I recall it was when he was discussing how radical Georg Lukacs was in trying to dismantle the family while in Bela Kun’s government. The Soviets initially tried to follow suit, but backed off. I’ll let you know when I’ve tracked it down.

          • The Explorer

            Still can’t track down the holidays on different days, but for Soviet attitudes to the family see ‘The Rage against God’. especially Ch 13, and The Cameron Delusion’ p101-4.

          • Anton

            Thank you!

        • David

          Russian communism family friendly ?
          Was it really ?
          If so, I wasn’t aware of that.

  • Linus

    How typical to see such an outpouring of scorn and hatred for the Left mixed with the obligatory Islamophobic nonsense that currently fuels the extreme Right’s dystopian fantasies.

    If you’re not in charge, all Britons will be living in gulags within 6 months, eh?

    I wouldn’t worry if I were you. For the Supreme Soviet of British Workers to take power, Labour will have to make concessions to the Muslim community, so long before the gulags open for business, all you Christians will have been forcibly converted and will welcome the Islamic Socialist revolution. Well, publicly at least.

    As for dissenters, well it’s hard to dissent when most of your body is floating in the form of ash in the atmosphere, with the bigger pieces lying carbonised on the floors of your burnt-out churches. Clearly that’s the fate of all die-hard British Christians if Corbyn comes to power. How could it possibly be otherwise?

    Despite these fantasist predictions, which you might think would dissuade the British from voting for him, I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss Comrade Corbyn. In the real world of real electors (rather than the fantasy world of religious nutters like you), he’s proven himself to be a much wilier politician than anyone gave him credit for 6 months ago. Who thought he’d survive this long, much less win a new leadership election so decisively.

    And don’t forget that the Conservatives have been in power for a long time. Sleaze creeps into all governing classes after they’ve had too long a spell in government. Power corrupts whether you’re on the Right or the Left. It’s the way of the world.

    Teresa May is still unproven and no great crisis handled in a statesman-like manner has yet established her as a long-term leader. There’s Brexit. But oddly enough, nothing much seems to be happening on that front, does it? Lots of talk, but no action. If the rest of her premiership follows the same pattern, she’ll start to look like John Major rather than Margaret Thatcher, and we all know how creeping sleaze destroyed his hold on power and led directly to the era of Tony Blair.

    If May turns out to be a strong and popular leader, Corbyn will struggle to make any real impact. But if she can’t keep the big personalities in her cabinet under control and doesn’t crack down on their tendency to treat government as theirs by divine right, you could be in for a nasty shock.

    The times are a’changing, and change is a volatile thing. Hillary Clinton has an uphill struggle to persuade an electorate hungry for change after 8 years of Democrat rule. May may face exactly the same problem when she calls her next election. Trump is the proof that you can put a donkey with crackpot policies up as a candidate against an unpopular government and still be well-placed to win. So don’t write Corbyn off just yet. If May doesn’t perform, he could well be your next prime minister.

    • Anton

      All that you say about the Labour and Tory parties is correct, but you are honest enough to throw a few “could”s and “might”s around, in view of the many other relevant facts which you don’t mention. The Blairites are not going to give up so easily and the Labour party could split. Labour faces losing its Scottish MPs, and the constituency boundaries which Blair and Brown redrew to their advantage will be reverted so that the average Tory vote translates to the same amount of MP as the average Labour vote. Teresa May appears to have been a closet Brexiteer, based on her recently publicised reluctance to campaign for Remain. The conclusion is that politics is overwhelmingly contingent.

      • Maxine Schell

        Perhaps Teresa May simply wants to keep her promise to honor the refererandem outcome.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Suppose that the people being subjected to harassment were gays and lesbians, not Jews. Would you have responded in the same way?

      • Linus

        I don’t think I made any comment at all about my opinion of anti-Semitic harassment in the Labour Party.

        Of course it’s unacceptable. The people who do it are driven by dogmatic hatred. If the Labour Party is making a choice to side with those people at the expense of its Jewish membership, it is, in my view, making a big mistake. When dogmatists triumph, freedom suffers. But will this make the party unelectable? I highly doubt it.

        Just like homophobia, anti-Jewish sentiment is a sad fact of life. Being a homophobe didn’t damage Thatcher’s political career. Being an anti-Semite, or at least turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism, probably won’t harm Corbyn’s.

        Anti-Semitism and homophobia are only major electoral priorities for Jewish and gay voters, and to a greater or lesser degree, their friends and close supporters. If it doesn’t affect them, most people couldn’t care less.

        If Labour anti-Semitism crosses a line from the incidental into the active with definite anti-Semitic policies, then the average voter may sit up and take notice of it as heralding a possible threat to his own rights on the principle that if first they come for the Jews, then it may be their turn next. But while Labour anti-Semitism remains in its current informal form, it will remain a side issue and therefore unlikely to affect the outcome of any election.

        A similar situation happened during Thatcher’s long reign. Members of my own extended family who’ve always been very supportive of me and LGBT issues in general voted for Thatcher despite her homophobia. Their reasoning was that liked her policies and her homophobia didn’t extend to making laws that actively discriminated against gays, so they didn’t think she would make life any more difficult for us than it already was.

        They certainly looked foolish when Section 28 was passed. Voting for a government that enshrined homophobia in law was something they regret having done to this day. But they were convinced that Thatcher would never violate the basic respect for freedom of conscience that characterised their Conservative values, but as it turned out, not hers. Les esprits crédules, the lot of them. But so many voters are.

        Millions of Labour voters will place their trust in Corbyn despite his clear indifference to (or some might say contempt for) Jewish concerns. Because the Holocaust could never happen again, could it? That’s what they think in their credulous little minds. I hope they’re right. I fear they are not.

    • The Explorer

      Linus, old frogladyte,

      “If you’re not in charge, all Britons will be living in gulags within 6 months, eh?” Why do you feel the need to constantly overstate the case? You set absurd timescales that nobody has suggested, and then use those timescales as a basis for discrediting arguments.

      • Linus

        Six months, a year, 5 years, the principle is the same no matter what the timescale.

        The rabid Right’s position is that if Corbyn is elected, Britain will become a soviet socialist republic with Islam as the state religion.

        Maybe some think he’s planning to make that happen in the first six months of his premiership. Maybe others think it will take him longer. The timescale is immaterial. It’s the ludicrous nature of the proposition that marks you out as mad.

        • The Explorer

          The timescale is particularly relevant with what you term Islamophobic nonsense. Currently, Muslims are around 10% of the French population. Talk of imminent takeover is a nonsense. But Muslims are 25% of current French youth. When that youth breeds the proportion will become higher. So what is not a threat in five years IS a threat in twenty-five years. So timescale, whatever the case with Corbyn, is not immaterial with regard to Islam. Even id Islamic breeding slows down, it is still faster than for indigenous Europeans.

        • Inspector General

          A current Pink News topic. “Christopher Biggins investigated over biphobic comments”.

          As it happens, this sinister sounding investigation is to be conducted by OfCom. However, this is the kind of thing socialism excels at. Closing in on people who dare express an opinion contrary to the ruling protocols the socialists will provide us with. If they can do this to Biggins, a household name, beloved entertainer and homosexual, for airing his view on bisexuality, then absolutely no one will be safe from them on anything…

          http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/09/26/christopher-biggins-investigated-over-biphobic-comments/

      • len

        Same old linus who shoots his own arguments down without any outside help.Seems to have broken cover now (unless he couldn’t think of an appropriate non de plume….There are probably a few on this blog who could though?)

    • dannybhoy

      Linus old pal,
      You do realise that you’re starting to sound as stereotypical as you claim we – your sworn enemies, are?
      fantasist/dystopian/scorn and hatred/Gulags of all shapes and sizes…

      C’mon, lighten up…
      We like you.

      • CliveM

        Speak for yourself.

        • dannybhoy

          I always do Clive. I always do.
          But anyway as a fellow Christian, what really makes Linus so objectionable (apart from being a sinner like us), that you cant extend Agape love to him?

          • CliveM

            You said like!

            Anyway you also said “we”.

          • dannybhoy

            Ummmmm..
            Like and we and agape are all acceptable in my world…

          • CliveM

            Like -to find pleasant or enjoy.

          • dannybhoy

            In my world, ‘like’ as look past the cyber-facade and like for the Gospel’s sake..

          • CliveM

            You’re a good man DB.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Corbyn actually got less than half the available votes. Not quite the mandate you are trying to make it. And, as someone who is by my antecedents Jewish, I find him and his buddies terrifying.

      • Linus

        Just about every elected official gets less than half the available votes. In countries where voting is not compulsory, an absolute majority of all possible votes is virtually impossible to achieve because there’s always a high abstention rate.

        Corbyn received a convincing majority of the votes cast. In our political system, that gives him a convincing mandate. Airy-fairy suppositions about how abstentionists might have voted had they taken the trouble to are meaningless. They didn’t vote. They chose not to participate in the democratic process.

        I remember similar gripes from the losers in the Irish equal marriage referendum, who said that because the abstention rate was relatively high and the winning side had less than 50% of the total possible vote, the result was invalid. It smacked of sour grapes then, and those contesting Corbyn’s legitimacy have the same stench about them now. Sore losers and hypocrites who would have claimed complete legitimacy had they won with less than 50% of the total possible vote, but who say that an opponent’s victory in similar circumstances is unfair and invalid.

        I see that your own result at the last general election was estimated at 0.3% of the votes cast. What was it if all the possible votes were taken into account? Less? Certainly not more. So what figure do you quote when asked?

        I doubt you quote any figure at all. Some defeats are too complete to split hairs over fractions of percentage points.

        • Dominic Stockford

          60% of Labour members DIDN’T vote for Corbyn. Live with it.

          As for how many voted for me, so what? I was delighted that so many voted for an unabashed, unashamed Christian.

          • Linus

            Corbyn will live quite happily with the knowledge that 60% of Labour members didn’t vote for him. It doesn’t affect his legitimacy at all. A majority of those who voted, voted for him. Those who didn’t vote clearly don’t care who their leader is and must therefore accept the will of those who took the trouble to express it. That is how our democratic system works. Live with it.

            If you can’t, stand again as a parliamentary candidate and try to persuade the voters in your constituency that your policies are worth voting for. You’ve already got 174 voters convinced that yours is the voice of truth. Only 40,000 more to go, because of course with an electoral roll of around 80,000, if your vote doesn’t top the 50% mark you won’t be legitimate as an MP, will you? If you just win a simple majority of the votes cast, taking your seat in parliament would be hypocritical given that you’ve criticised Corbyn so bitterly for winning the Labour leadership without an absolute majority of all possible Labour voters.

            It’s a good thing you’ll never have to face such a dilemma. Unelectable crackpots like you are safe to indulge your fantasies of what constitutes real democratic legitimacy precisely because of your complete inability to command any. When you live in a religious la-la-land, all things are possible, and probability is dismissed as a complete irrelevancy. Such is the world of the Christian whack-job.

            Pray for electoral victory next time. Ask and ye shall receive. Only you didn’t…

            Oops! What went wrong there then?

  • len

    Cannot think why Jewish people(or anyone else for that matter ) would want to be part of the Labour Party.
    If Corbyn and co ever got elected(pretty big’ if’ I know) it could only be a judgement on the UK for turning once Christian Great Britain into a secularist ‘anything goes’ shambles.

  • LoveMeIamALiberal

    Where is Chakrabati? Probably doing a Clinton and deleting all email evidence of discussions of her peerage (http://order-order.com/2016/09/27/shami-chakrabarti-squirms-peerage-questions/#disqus_thread)