Reading @promiseli_’s comments about the left must acknowledge how demonisation of China feeds anti-Asian racism whilst also refusing to moderate our own (democratic, internationalist) critique of the Chinese state, I’m struck by some similarities with antisemitism/Israel.
To me there’s a parallel in terms of how some on the left refuse to understand how irrational demonisation of Israel/Zionism feeds antisemitism, *and* how some on the right, including many Zionists, insist opposing antisemitism has to entail defence of the Israeli state.
The CCP apologists and (often vicarious) Chinese nationalists who claim *any* critique of the Chinese state feeds anti-Asian racism are clear analogues of the apologists for Israeli chauvinism who claim any critique of Israel is necessarily antisemitic.
At the same time, the sections of the left who claim that anti-Zionism/critiques of Israel *can’t be* antisemitic, and who think that demonising (i.e., elevating to the status of a unique, essential, even world-shaping evil) Israel and Zionism is legitimate, *are* feeding >
< antisemitism, in much the same way as right-wing US/UK (and other) nationalists who similarly demonise China are feeding anti-Asian racism.
Of course there are multiple differences - the relationship of Jews worldwide to Israel is different to the relationship of the Chinese diaspora to China; Israel and China have many differences as states/regimes, and in terms of their historical formation as nation-states...
...but I think the similarities are also evident. I’d be interested to hear from other comrades on this. @promiseli_
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
They’re both wrong. But FWIW, the fact that one of them is Jewish is only ultimately decisive if you believe someone’s ethnicity confers validity on an argument in a way that transcends what’s actually being said.
It’s a futile method of argument. The majority of British, and probably global, Jewish opinion is undoubtedly closer to Luke‘s argument than Rivkah‘s. But that doesn’t settle the matter! Engage critically, don’t rhetorically wield identities in abstraction from the argument.
And on the substance... until the left gets its head around the reality that Zionism is *both* a “settler colonial ideology” *and*, historically, a “national liberation movement of the Jewish people” that appeared to be, in Deutscher’s phrase, “a historical necessity”...
The SWP’s pandering to Islamism is a long and sorry tale, with the nadir either being the explicitly communalist Respect project or their support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, but I was still a bit shocked to see they’ve backed the Batley protests.
The Socialist Worker article supporting the protests quotes a Stand Up to Racism statement which says “insulting the Prophet Mohammed is [...] racist abuse”. What, regardless of context?! Anti-racism doesn’t imply support for the enforcement of religious taboos.
There is a long and rich tradition of anticlerical and antitheist propaganda and agitation from within revolutionary socialist and anarchist traditions, targeting all religions. Undoubtedly many adherents of those religions find it “insulting”.
There’s something grossly... I hesitate to say “racist”, but it’s hard to think of another word... about the fact that all these denialists focus on one white westerner researching the issue, as if his wider views somehow invalidate the voices of the actual victims.
Don’t like Zenz? Fine, ignore his research if you want. There’s abundant evidence in the Chinese state’s own official records and statements, both public and leaked, to show there’s a substantial infrastructure of mass surveillance and repression in Xinjiang/East Turkestan.
But it’s also just an inoperable attitude to knowledge; if the fact that someone has bigoted views, and might be saying something for their own, reactionary, reasons, does that automatically make the thing they’re saying necessarily factually untrue?
The “are Jews BAME?” chat flags up a lot of the problems with “BAME” as a category, which has always struck me as something of a sanitising concept which can flatten out experiences as much as, if not more than, it unites people around shared struggles.
Yes, Jews are an ethnic minority. No, that does not mean white Jews face systemic oppression of the type faced by black people, or anything approaching it.
Personally I don’t think white Jews should participate in self-organised BAME/BEM structures in the labour movement. We can experience racism, discrimination, and prejudice, but we’re not structurally oppressed. Those spaces should be for self-organisation against oppression.
I tend to stay out of IHRA debates, as its working definition of antisemitism has been turned into a shibboleth by both “sides” — claimed as essential protection against antisemitism by some advocates, and a nefarious plot to defend Israel by detractors; in fact it’s neither.
I think the WD has good intentions, and it’s a useful contribution to a discussion that can help broaden and deepen understanding of antisemitism. It’s not the document I’d write personally, but I think it has value. I supported the Labour Party endorsing it.
What I’m against is using something explicitly intended to be “non-legally binding” as a “statutory” document to police speech. Potential negative consequences of endorsement of the WD stem far more from attempts to do that than anything actually written in the WD itself, IMO.
Perfectly true. Statist social democracy is an inherently cross-class, and ultimately nationalist, project. This is the party Labour has been for the vast majority of its existence. Criticise rightwards lurches by all means, but they’re reversions to type, not aberrations.
This doesn’t mean Labour left should shrug and accept this stuff on a “well, what do you expect?” basis, but if we’re going to transform the labour movement we have to actually *contest* its dominant ideology, not just be despairingly outraged at the fact that it *is* dominant.
I am aware that I risk sounding like a smug know-it-all here - “*I* have an analysis of the cross-class nature of Labour, *you* are merely despairingly outraged” - and whilst that is, ultimately, what being a male leftist on Twitter is all about, that’s not actually my intent.