As the most left-wing candidate you should get my vote. But you won't. And here's why.
Congratulations!
By securing a place on the ballot to become the next Labour leader you have put a spring in the step of many party members and trade unionists who feel that you embody their values better than any other candidate. (You embody only some of mine, trampling on some others, but I will get to that.)
You represent a clear alternative to the suffocating consensus that says there is no alternative to neoliberalism: marketisation, deregulation, privatisation, financialisation, an assault on the bargaining power of labor, regressive tax regimes, and cuts to welfare.
You will not tell us to be ‘intensely relaxed’ about people getting ‘filthy rich’ and you will not sneer at the trade union movement.
You are acutely aware that the transformation of European social democracy into a political force pursuing only a slightly kinder and a slightly gentler neoliberalism has caused the erosion of the emotional connection between the party and the working-class.
And you know that neoliberalism has eroded local democracy and the public realm, pushing aside actors other than those at the center, and then micro-managing Britain through a grim and relentless bureaucratising cult of quasi-government bodies.
On that basis you will secure the votes of many party members and trade unionists.
But you won’t get my vote.
You won’t get it because Labour’s best traditions also include anti-fascism and internationalism while your support – to me, inexplicable and shameful – for the fascistic and antisemitic forces of Hezbollah and Hamas flies in the face of those traditions. In particular, your full-throated cheer-leading for the vicious antisemitic Islamist Raed Salah is a deal-breaker.
Why did you lend your support to Raed Salah? No, he is not a ‘critic of Israel’, but a straight-up Jew hater.
You said in 2012, ‘Salah is far from a dangerous man’, even though the left-wing, anti-Netanyahu Israeli newspaper of record, Ha’aretz, reported that Salah was first charged with inciting anti-Jewish racism and violence in January 2008.
You said ‘Salah is a very honoured citizen’, even though Salah was found guilty of spreading the blood libel – the classic antisemitic slander that Jews use the blood of gentile children to make their bread. He did so during a speech on 16 February 2007 in the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Wadi Joz.
I mean, just listen to Salah: ‘We have never allowed ourselves to knead [the dough for] the bread that breaks the fast in the holy month of Ramadan with children’s blood’, he said. ‘Whoever wants a more thorough explanation, let him ask what used to happen to some children in Europe, whose blood was mixed in with the dough of the holy bread.’ (The UK Appeal Court decided that ‘We do not find this comment could be taken to be anything other than a reference to the blood libel against Jews.’ It also decided that this would ‘offend and distress Israeli Jews and the wider Jewish community.’)
You said: ‘Salah represents his people extremely well’, even though after the 9/11 terrorist attacks Salah wrote this in the October 5, 2001 issue of the weekly Sawt al-Haq w’al-Huriyya (Voice of Justice and Freedom): ‘A suitable way was found to warn the 4,000 Jews who work every day at the Twin Towers to be absent from their work on September 11, 2001, and this is really what happened! Were 4,000 Jewish clerks absent [from their jobs] by chance, or was there another reason? At the same time, no such warning reached the 2,000 Muslims who worked every day in the Twin Towers, and therefore there were hundreds of Muslim victims.’
You said ‘Salah’s is a voice that must be heard’ even though he has called homosexuality a ‘great crime’ and recently [preached that ‘Jerusalem will soon become the capital of the global caliphate’ which will ‘spread justice throughout the land after it was filled with injustice by America, the Zionist enterprise, the Batiniyya, reactionism, Paganism and the Crusaders.’ i.e. everyone who does not follow his brand of Sunni Islam.
You said ‘I look forward to giving you tea on the terrace because you deserve it!’, even though the Islamic Movement [the northern branch of which Salah heads] has eulogised Osama bin Laden and Salah has incited Muslims against Jews by writing incendiary lies such as this: ‘The unique mover wanted to carry out the bombings in Washington and New York in order to provide the Israeli establishment with a way out of its entanglements.’ Who do you think he meant by ‘the unique mover’?
Why is that kind of conspiratorial antisemitism, dripping with threat and menace, worthy of tea on the terrace?
And it isn’t just a problem with Salah, is it? You said it was ‘my pleasure and my honour’ to host ‘our friends from Hezbollah and our friends from Hamas’ in the Commons.
Really?
Why do you not care that the Hamas Charter states that ‘Islam will obliterate Israel’ and enjoins all good Muslims to kill Jews, whom it blames for all the wars and revolutions in classic antisemitic fashion?
Why don’t you challenge your ‘friends in Hamas’ about the inclusion in their Charter of this canonical Hadith: ‘The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’
And why are Hezbollah your friends? They are an antisemitic Islamist goose-stepping ‘Party of God’ who persecute (and assassinate) liberals and democrats in Lebanon whenever they can. The Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said ‘If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.’ (NY Times, May 23, 2004, p. 15, section 2, column 1.) Your ‘friends’ were enthusiastically slaughtering Syrian civilians on behalf of the Assad regime long before ISIS or Jabhat Al-Nusra joined the fray.
Yes, you will say I am part of the Israel lobby and people should pay no heed. Yes, I work at the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre. But here’s the thing. I have the same views now about the Israel-Palestine conflict as I did when I was a member of the Socialist Organiser Editorial Board and you were with Labour Briefing back in the 1980s. (I think our two organisations may have even ‘fused’ at some point, though those days are a bit hazy now.)
My views have not changed since I was a member of the editorial board of Historical Materialism. They are the same views I had when we debated each other at Birmingham University some years ago: I believe in two states for two people, a secure Israel and a viable Palestine, a democratic solution to an unresolved national question based on mutual recognition and support for the right to national self-determination of both peoples.
I edit a journal, Fathom, which publishes many voices critical of the current Israeli government, from the Israeli left, from Israel’s Arab citizens, and from Palestinians.
I just do not understand how you can support so unthinkingly those political forces which oppose to their dying breath everything – literally, everything – the labour movement has ever stood for: trade union rights, freedom of speech and organisation, women’s equality, gay and lesbian rights, anti-racism, the enlightenment, and reason.
But as long as you do support those forces you will not get my vote. As long as you do, I will just have to remain politically homeless. Which is a pity, because there you are on the TV screen, talking with élan like a proper social democrat about full employment.
I want to cheer you on. Can you respond in such a way that I can?
Alan Johnson is the editor of Fathom – For a deeper understanding of Israel and the region, and works for the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM)
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
497 Responses to “An open letter to Jeremy Corbyn”
tamimisledus
“…. Muslims [sic] … are humans ….”.
So many fallacies involved in this suggestion.
First:
It is not up to you to determine how I, or anyone else, should decide how to find out the truth about muslims and islam, the evil doctrine they follow.
If you want to try to show islam in a good light, you are obviously not going to suggest I contact a selection from the members of ISIS or their supporters. A source which actually best represents the beliefs within islam.
Second:
No-one can tell from what a muslim is saying or doing at any one time, what they believe at that time.
No-one can tell from what a muslim is saying or doing at any one time, what they intend to do in the future.
No-one can tell from what any muslim is saying or doing at any one time what any other muslim will do.
The word of muslims who are all enemies of non-muslims whose destruction is ordered by *allah*, cannot be trusted.
The word of muslims who are ordered by *allah* not to be friends with non-muslims cannot be trusted,
Overall:
If I want to find out what a muslim believes I will not seek out his word which cannot be relied upon.
If I want to find out what a muslim believes he should do, I will take him at his word that he follows the evil doctrine of islam, which is opposed to every decent character trait that humans can have.
And I will judge him (or her) accordingly.
tamimisledus
I can use any criteria I like on which to base my judgements. That applies to just as much as judgements on people who lived in other times or places, whatever the norms of those times, as to people who are now living on any part of this earth.
Others can use criteria on which to base their judgement, as they see fit. If I think it worthwhile, I will call into question their judgements and we can debate as to which is the best judgement.
You, on the other hand, as is taught by islam to muslims, seem to believe that only you (and those who make the same judgements) have a right to make judgements, and that any judgement with which you disagree is not worth attention (farcical, as you call it in this case).
And, if you are talking about mohammad’s marriage to Aisha, we know that, according to islam, mohammad is the perfect muslim following islam which has to be followed by all muslims for all time. That is for all time, including now,
Why did you not choose to bring that key fact to the attention of the readers of your comment?
The answer is obvious. This fact doesn’t allow you to argue that this is only historical. Which in turn hides the true evil nature of islam, as it was then, as it is now, and always will be.
tamimisledus
“… the media has taught you well … ”
That applies very well to those who read the guardian (and LFF) who have absolutely no understanding of true nature of islam and are blithely ignorant of the threat that it poses to the future of humanity.
But I get my facts about islam from the texts of islam. Facts which not only left leaning media such as the Guardian and the BBC do not publish, but also which many other organisations, even on the right, seem to be ignorant of. [and I include in that category many of those organisations which claim to be, or might be seen as, anti-islam]
Based on those facts, and the interpretations/implementation by muslims of those facts, it is abundantly clear that islam is a doctrine of evil, with absolutely no redeeming features.
Barry Stephenson
Most scholars do not, on the whole think that. More to the point, Middle Eastern Muslims do not. The only ones who try to deny it are Western Muslims who know it is an embarrassment. The Haditha certainly say it – what a pile of revisionary rubbish to say otherwise.
Barry Stephenson
Oh. To have a different view is to not know Islam? Why have the police just identified another 300 pedophile Muslims in Rotherham? Because their prophet was the perfect man who should be emulated. He showed them it is okay to have sex with children.
It is not just about history. It impacts us NOW.