…or why it’s still worth fighting for Labour
Now is not a great time to be a Labour Party member. Yes, we are ahead in the polls – though nowhere near as ahead as we should be given this shambolic government – but it is still a difficult time to be a Labour Member.
The Party now is markedly different from the party I joined almost 10 years ago (my 10th Anniversary is 8th September 2018). That Party was committed to fighting all forms of inequality and discrimination, of whatever kind, where it existed, as fully and as forcefully as it could. Recently that difference has shown itself clearly in the Anti-Semitism row, and the NEC’s decision not to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA’s) Working Definition and Examples of Anti-Semitism in full.
This is an abhorent decision! It is a decision that cannot be defended! It is a choice that flies in the face of how the Labour Party has handled every other kind of discrimination in the past.
The IHRA is an international body which has produced a definition of anti-semitism that hundreds of Governments (including the UK’s), organisations, political parties and even parts of the Labour Party have adopted in order to define anti-semitism and fight against it. The IHRA definition of Anti-Semitism is the chosen definition of the Jewish People – but not the Labour Party.
The Labour Party NEC decided to leave out or downgrade the seriousness of four of the IHRA’s examples of Anti-Semitism in its definition. These are:
- Accusing Jewish people of being more loyal to Israel than to the UK*.
- Claiming that Israel’s existence as a state in itself is a racist endeavour.
- Requiring higher standards of behaviour from Israel than other countries; and
- Comparing contemporary Israeli policies to those of the Nazis.
In no other circumstance would the Labour Party tell a discriminated people they aren’t really being discriminated against. We wouldn’t dismiss a women who speaks of her experiences of sexism. We wouldn’t tell a black person that their perceived discrimination wasn’t really racism. But yet, we have decided that Jews – and Jews alone – are not able to define what their discrimination is to us – and we shall tell them what it is.
The Labour Party should be ashamed. Ashamed because it is wrong. Ashamed because it is undermining its policies. But, most of all, ashamed because it is acting in a way which is anti-semitic.
Which leads – very understandably – to conclusions like this from Stephen Daisley (who is one voice among many):
https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/1019654259581874182
Now Stephen is not a Labour Supporter by any measure – but that cannot mean this very real concern can simply be dismissed. If I accept that the NEC is refusing to tackle Anti-Semitism in my Party as forcefully and as totally as it should – which I do – why am I still Campaigning for a Labour Government? Why am I even still a member? Does that not make me complicit?
No. It makes me (and people like me) more important than ever. Because we refuse to let the anti-semitic win and call it out for what it is – racism.
The charge Stephen makes is that by remaining in the party, we are part of the problem. I disagree. If everyone opposed to the NEC’s decision left the Labour Party – we concede a battle that’s still ongoing. We let the racists and anti-semites win. And I am not prepared to do that.
I am not prepared to do that because their prize would be the most successful vehicle for social and political change in Western Europe. Their prize would be the Party that created the Modern Welfare State and founded the NHS. Their prize would be the legacy of the National Minimum Wage and Tax Credits. Their prize would be the name of the Labour Party, its history and all that that story holds. It would be to cede over a century’s worth of progress to people who would misuse and abuse that legacy for their own ends – and that would not help Britain’s Jewish population.
I could understand Stephen’s charge if those disgusted by the NEC’s decision just held their nose and thought of Election Victory – but we are doing anything but. Margaret Hodge confronted Coryn face-to-face in Westminster not 24 hours after the NEC’s decision. Cate Vallis, NPF candidate in the elections starting this week, has made a forceful case why the NEC must adopt the IHRA definition and examples – and what we should expect of anyone who holds a role in our Party. Ben Procter (CLP Secretary in East Renfrewshire and Scottish Co-Operative Party Secretary) has written to the SEC to demand that it adopt the IHRA definition and examples – and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a fair few CLPs following suit.
So as appalled as I am at the NEC’s dereliction of duty to Jewish Labour members and UK citizens – I will be staying in the Labour Party for my 10th Anniversary. Doing so is not a capitulation to the NEC’s decision, but in defiance of it and kicking up hell until it changes it. Labour can change and do the right thing by the Jewish Community – but it must have the political will to do it. If it does not, Labour has betrayed the trust that the Jewish Community has placed in us over the years, not to try and earn that back would be the true capitulation to Anti-Semitism.
*It is worth noting, perhaps, that a similar charge was used to put down Catholics in the UK – that they were more loyal to the Pope than to their home.
Paul Cruikshank 