Anyone opposed to this shameful collusion with the hardline anti-immigration right should write to the Labour Party figures in question, or to their constituency parties, and make their feelings clear.
The right-wing pundit Douglas Murray recently wrote:
“To study the results of the latest census is to stare at one unalterable conclusion: mass immigration has altered our country completely. It has become a radically different place, and London has become a foreign country. In 23 of London’s 33 boroughs ‘white Britons’ are now in a minority…
“We long ago reached the point where the only thing white Britons can do is to remain silent about the change in their country. Ignored for a generation, they are expected to get on, silently but happily, with abolishing themselves, accepting the knocks and respecting the loss of their country. ‘Get over it. It’s nothing new. You’re terrible. You’re nothing’.
For what it is worth, it seems to me that the vindictiveness with which the concerns of white British people, and the white working and middle class in particular, have been met by politicians and pundits alike is a phenomenon in need of serious and swift attention.”
Such words, one might expect, should place their author beyond the pale of respectable political opinion, in the sole company of UKIP and the rest of the fringe anti-immigration right.
Instead, he is at the heart of a political outfit that is itself at the heart of Westminster politics. Murray is associate director of the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), a ‘think-tank’ that, despite being extremely right-wing and predominantly Tory in its loyalties, nevertheless enjoys a following among all three principal British parliamentary parties.
The HJS’s ‘Advisory Council‘ includes not only 28 Tory MPs, but also two Liberal Democrat and eleven Labour MPs. The Labour MPS are:
Margaret Beckett MP, former secretary of state for foreign and commonwealth affairs
Hazel Blears MP, former secretary of state for communities and local government
Ben Bradshaw MP, former secretary of state for culture, media and sport
Chris Bryant MP, former parliamentary under secretary of state, foreign and commonwealth office
Dai Havard MP
Khalid Mahmood MP
Meg Munn MP, former parliamentary under secretary of state, foreign and commonwealth office
Jim Murphy MP, shadow secretary of state for defence
John Spellar MP, shadow minister for foreign and commonwealth office
Gisela Stuart MP
Derek Twigg MP, former parliamentary under secretary of state for the ministry of defence
Indeed, Labour’s shadow secretary for defence, Jim Murphy, in February of this year, gave a major speech on policy at an event organised by the HJS.
Murray did not write his article in a purely personal capacity; it appeared in the magazine Standpoint with an attached biography giving his HJS affiliation.
Murray’s views are scarcely uncharacteristic of the organisation’s. His boss, HJS executive director, Alan Mendoza, expressed similar views at a speech given around the same time (March 2013) at the conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Mendoza attacked the EU for what he considered to be its hostility to Israel, in the following terms (as reported by the Washington Jewish Week‘s Suzanne Pollak):
“Immigration is also a reason for rising anti-Israel feelings [in Europe]. In 1998, 3.2 percent of Spain was foreign-born. In 2007, that percent had jumped to 13.4 percent, Mendoza said. In cities such as London, Paris and Copenhagen, 10 percent of residents are Muslim.”
“The European Muslim population has doubled in the past 30 years and is predicted to double again by 2040.
“For all the benefits that immigration has brought, it has been difficult for European countries to absorb immigrants into their society given their failure to integrate newcomers. Regardless of their political views, Muslims in Europe will likely speak out against Israel whenever any Middle Eastern news breaks, just as they will against India in the Kashmir dispute. Their voices are heard well above the average Europeans, who tend not to speak out Mendoza said, adding that the Muslim immigrants do this with full knowledge that they would not be allowed to speak out like that in many Middle Eastern countries.’
In other words, the HJS’s leaders claim that London has become a “foreign country” because “white Britons” are in a minority in 23 of its 33 boroughs; that “white Britons” have “lost their country” and are in the process of “abolishing themselves” because of the increase in the size of the non-white and immigrant population; that the increasing European Muslim population is to blame for Europe’s “anti-Israel feelings”; and that the voices of Muslims “are heard well above the average Europeans”.
Yet instead of the HJS being ostracised by respectable political opinion, senior members of the shadow cabinet and Labour parliamentary party are endorsing and participating in it.
Anyone opposed to this shameful collusion with the hardline anti-immigration right should write to the Labour Party figures in question, or to their constituency parties, and make their feelings clear.
Marko Attila Hoare is a former senior member of the Henry Jackson Society (Greater Europe co-director, then European neighbourhood section director, 2005-2012)
74 Responses to “Labour’s shameful links with the anti-immigration right”
Marko Attila Hoare
All excellent points, Marijana.
Marijana
Thank you Marko. I’m sorry for derailing your post (which is about immigration and the HJS, not the former Yugoslavia), but I couldn’t resist after reading David Lindsay’s reprehensable views on the topic.
David S
I avoid internet debates, especially on comment sections, but occasionally, I’m annoyed enough at a series of posts to comment. This is one of those.
Alan Menodza, you have at no point adequately addressed Marko’s evidential designation as a ‘Senior Director’. (See: http://www.powerbase.info/images/d/d4/HJSStaff9Mar08.pdf). It’s time to make your mind up, was the website fibbing or are you fibbing now? You’re either a liar or your organisation gives senior titles to what you call contributors. Either way, it’s not good news for what’s left of yours or the HJS’ credibility.
Let’s take a look at your flawed response so far. You initially said that the ‘Senior Director’ title was (and I quote):
‘a fancy way of saying he was once a freelancer – which is what all such posts at HJS were in the days before HJS was a professional and fully-staffed think-tank.’
Now the image he has provided, where he was listed as a ‘Senior Director’, was dated in 2008. You, yourself state that:
“1. HJS was registered as an official charity in April 2006. It later became a limited company as well. These are established facts.”
So you’re saying that the title was merely window-dressing for his actual role before the HJS became professional, which you yourself state as occurring in 2006. Except that the title was given to him in 2008. Doesn’t quite add up does it?
Whatever the case, serious individuals do not spend their time writing vindictive responses on comment sections. Certainly not credible leaders of credible thinktanks. Your comments on here have been characterised by liberally playing with truth and then throwing around silly phrases (‘Come on Hoare…dig yourself into that hole a little deeper. We’re Waiting, Marko!’) to cynically confuse the reader into thinking you’ve addressed anything with any substance.
Also – ,’Our position on immigration has been laid out clearly in my article.’ – He was asking you specifically for your comments on Murray’s comments, which you have characteristically dodged.
Alan Mendoza
David S – Blatant nonsense cannot be allowed to go unchallenged on a website like this else might assume the currency of the truth.
I am afraid the link you posted takes you to a site that shows Hoare was a “Section Director” not a “Senior Director” as you state. I have addressed this point and all the others you have brought up and will not repeat these again as my answers are above. As you say, we all have better things to do.
I am also sorry that you are annoyed by my defence of my organisation – I would however be grateful if you addressed your complaint to the perpetrator of the vindictiveness. If he had not started this process with his bizarre claims and aggressive prose there would be no need to respond.
Marko Attila Hoare
No, Mendoza, you have not addressed David’s point. If I really was not a staff member (according to the secret definition of ‘staff’ you had in your head) then why did your website list me under ‘staff’ ? In that case, it would seem that the website was lying to its readers. It seems to me that it suited your purpose then to claim I was staff, and that it suits your purpose now to claim I wasn’t.
But this discussion about whether or not I was ‘staff’ is really just your way of diverting attention from the matter at hand – which is your and Murray’s extreme views on race, religion and immigration. For nearly a year, you felt no need to respond to my insider’s revelations about the HJS. It is only now, when I wrote an article highlighting these extreme views – an article that someone with no prior association with the HJS could just as easily have written – that you have suddenly felt the need to try to discredit me in this way.
Why won’t you comment on Murray’s views about ‘white Britons’ and about London becoming a ‘foreign country’ ?