Britain’s Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has made an unprecedented move and intervened in the upcoming general election. He penned an article for The Times, which highlighted the anxiety felt by Jewish communities over the Labour party’s widespread failure to eradicate internal anti-Semitism. In light of the Chief Rabbi’s intervention, I was reminded of a moment in last week’s head-to-head debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn, which went mostly unnoticed. Johnson spent only 15 seconds challenging Corbyn over the issue of anti-Semitism before seguing to, “even worse”, his opponent’s refusal to identify his Brexit position. How could Brexit indecision possibly be worse than anti-Semitism? Corbyn should have been pushed on the issue, yet Brexit was deemed more important.
Johnson had clearly made a – callous – political calculation that the issue of anti-Semitism did not resonate with voters on the doorstep and simply wasn’t going to move the needle. Moreover, the Jewish vote itself wasn’t enough to flip any seats. However, in this election period, Johnson is not the only one who appears unconcerned with pushing back against Labour’s failure to deal with anti-Semitism. Many of my fellow liberals, who under normal circumstances would be out in force condemning bigotry and discrimination, appear to have more important priorities.
Since Corbyn took charge of the Labour party in 2015 – anti-Semitism has been a protracted issue; accusations levelled at the leader himself and the wider party have been unrelenting. Is Corbyn an anti-Semite? Renowned Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt, in her recent book Antisemitism Here and Now, notes this was the wrong question to ask. The correct questions she posited are: “Has he facilitated and amplified expressions of antisemitism? Has he been consistently reluctant to acknowledge expressions of antisemitism unless they come from white supremacists or neo-Nazis? Will his actions facilitate the instrumentalization of antisemitism among other progressives?” Lipstadt asserted it was an unequivocal yes to each of these questions. I would agree.
Under Corbyn’s leadership, Labour have the ignominious distinction of being only the second political party – the first was the BNP – to be investigated for institutional racism by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. An environment has been created in which anti-Semites feel emboldened to spill their egregious bile. When complaints have been made, the party’s prevarication has demonstrated a woeful disregard for this insidious form of racism. This sorry situation has ultimately led to Jewish MPs – Luciana Berger and Louise Elman –feeling forced out of the party.
Understandably, this is an issue of grave importance for a significant percentage of Britain’s Jewish communities. A poll taken earlier this month discovered 87% of British Jews believe that Corbyn is an anti-Semite. Discussing this matter with a friend who lives and works within the Jewish community, she explained how unsettling this election campaign has been – it seems to her that few people in the broader public care about the issue of anti-Semitism. This is a sad indictment. Most damningly, she feels forced to consider whether it would be safe for her family to stay in the UK following a Labour victory. The idea that anyone in this country should feel the need to make such a calculation is truly abhorrent. While this is only a single anecdote, one person’s lived experience, it echoes the sentiments expressed by the Chief Rabbi.
Corbyn’s lack of enthusiasm for winning the hearts and minds of British Jews was demonstrated by his appearance with Andrew Neil. At this juncture only a full-throated mea culpa would suffice. One was not forthcoming. Pushed by Neil to apologise on four occasions, he choose instead to deliver his stock “I am an anti-racist” soundbite. Corbyn as a politician is authentic to a fault – ideologically blinkered, but authentic – his unwillingness to say sorry is a clear indication he feels he has done no wrong. This refusal to apologise reinforces the thrust of the Chief Rabbi’s article: the poison emanates from the top of the Labour party.
In spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary there are good-natured people, ostensibly anti-racist, claiming that anti-Semitism is simply not an issue. It is a red herring, a vicious campaign concocted by the right-wing press to smear Corbyn and the Labour party. Labour’s radical programme of social justice has resonated with many progressives; yet, it leads one to question: how could you follow a party that promises social justice, but fails to eradicate anti-Semitism? Wilful blindness or intellectual dishonesty, pick your poison.
Tellingly, some of these are the same people that are willing to castigate Johnson as an Islamophobe and a misogynist. This isn’t to say that these accusations are unfounded; nevertheless, they belie a gross attempt to morally equivocate between different forms of bigotry. It goes without saying that politicians should be held to the same moral and ethical standards. One should be equally appalled by Labour’s failure to effectively deal with its anti-Semitic elements as they are about the Conservative’s continued reluctance to investigate anti-Muslim bigotry.
The allure of the Labour party for progressive liberals is completely understandable; their recently released manifesto makes promises that could solve a number of important social issues – whether they are achievable is another question. Yet, the idea of holding my nose and voting for a party that has sent ructions of fear through a historically persecuted minority community and done nothing to assuage their concerns is morally repugnant. In this general election campaign, what could possibly be more important than antisemitism? Nothing.
Andrew Morris is a freelance journalist and PhD candidate in political communication.
