One Long Lie – An Open Letter from Barnet’s Young and Privileged Labour Racists supporting the IHRA

One Long Lie – An Open Letter from Barnet’s Young and Privileged Labour Racists supporting the IHRA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Post-Blog

If those who complain of ‘anti-Semitism’ could spend
a day in Gaza as guests of the ‘Jewish State’ they would then understand what
oppression means
Rachel Barker is filmed on Newsnight describing Corbyn as a ‘monster’
Izzy Lenga and Ella Rose, signatories to the Zionist Open Letter complaining that Labour isn’t prepared to allow antisemitism to be used as a weapon against the Palestinians – the slogan on their shirt was ‘Shitlord’ – I decided that the time is gone when Zionists lord it over people

There
has been a campaign in the Tory press and the Guardian against Labour’s new Anti-Semitism
Code of Conduct
. [Nick Cohen, Why
has Labour run the risk of alienating progressive Jews?
] Their objection to
the Code is that it does not embrace all of the bogus International
Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism
. [IHRA] The real
problem however is that the Code embraces any of it. [Labour’s
Anti-Semitism Code of Conduct – Be careful of what you wish for
]
As
part of this campaign there was an open
letter
from
18 members of Young Labour in Barnet, many of whom are also members of the
Jewish Labour Movement [JLM].  They
complained bitterly about the new Anti-Semitism Code.  In their letter they say that We are socialists, and
will always standing with our oppressed comrades in solidarity.’
For a moment I was genuinely
perplexed.  How can these 18 signatories reconcile
support for the JLM, which describes itself as the ‘sister party’ of the Israeli Labour Party with solidarity for ‘oppressed comrades.’ Surely they don’t mean
the 40,000 Black refugees in Israel whom Netanyahu is trying to deport because
they are neither Jewish nor white?  Are
they unaware that the Israeli Labour Party supports
Netanyahu’s efforts to deport them? [Labor
Party’s Support of Deportation, Imprisonment of Asylum Seekers
]
Barnet Young Labour is fully signed up to Progress Labour – it must have stuck in their craw to even used the term ‘comrades’ in their open letter
Nor is this simply because
of the new right wing leader of the ILP, Avi
Gabbay
.  Previous leader Isaac Herzog
was also hostile
to the refugees arguing that “The
infiltrators took Israeli Arab jobs.”
which was of course the racist lie historically
used to oppose Jewish immigration into Britain (note he also called them ‘infiltrators’ which is what Palestinian
refugees who had been expelled in 1948 were called when they tried to return.
Thousands of these ‘infiltrators’
were shot on sight by Israeli Labour governments when trying to return to
Israel in the 1950’s.  This is the same
ILP which expelled ¾ million Palestinians in 1948.
Herzog was also no slouch
when it came to racism.  He declared that his nightmare was to wake up to find
that Israel had a Palestinian Prime Minister and 61 Palestinian Members of
Israel’s Knesset. [Who needs the Right when we have Isaac Herzog?] Herzog also emphasised that he wanted to dispel the
false impression that the ILP were ‘Arab Lovers’ [Herzog slammed for remark about ‘Arab lovers’] It is little wonder that Naftali Bennett, leader of the
semi-fascist Jewish Home party nonetheless welcomed
Herzog’s appointment as Chair of the Jewish Agency, one of the main instruments
of apartheid in Israel.
If our 18 ‘socialists’
who claim they are in solidarity with the oppressed don’t understand the import
of this remark, then let me remind them. It was not so long ago when British fascists
accused people of being ‘Jew lovers’. That
these 18 signatories can be associated with the racist ILP throws their claims
of solidarity with the oppressed into doubt.
Josh Newmark – one of the signatories
The collected wisdom of another signatory Josh Newmark (son of Jeremy?)  – the idiot fails to understand that most Jews in the 30’s were part of the left unlike today but to be fair most British Jews are far more liberal on Israel than the signatories to this letter
The
18 signatories call themselves ‘a group of young, grassroots, enthusiastic activists in
Barnet’.
It would be truer to say that
they are drawn, without exception, from the anti-Corbyn Right of the Labour
Party.
Their primary complaint is that the Labour Party hasn’t adopted
the IHRA, whose sole purpose is to conflate anti-Semitism and
anti-Zionism.  Anti-Semitism is not a
mystery.  You can look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary – ‘Hostility to or prejudice against Jews’.
 
If you ask most people what anti-Semitism is they will answer that
it is someone who doesn’t like Jews and they would be right.  Anti-Semitism has nothing to do with
opposition to Zionism or Israel.

It is strange how those papers which employed Katie Hopkins are so concerned about ‘antisemitism’ – Katie Hopkins was a guest at the annual dinner of Britain’s Zionist Federation
These young Labour racists aren’t genuinely concerned with
anti-Semitism. You are unlikely to find them on the demonstrations against
Donald Trump today, still less protesting about the demolition of Palestinian
villages by the ‘Jewish’ state or any of the other atrocities carried out by
the world’s only Apartheid state (in the name of Jews). This is the same Trump who
leads the most anti-Semitic Administration in 
US history, which employed an open
neo-Nazi
Sebastian Gorka as his ‘anti-terrorism’ adviser to say nothing of other
white supremacists. Dana Millbank and others noted that Anti-Semitism
is no longer an undertone of Trump’s campaign. It’s the melody
which didn’t
stop Israeli Labor leader Herzog effusively welcoming
Trump’s election.
Now if these 18 young racists were genuinely concerned about
anti-Semitism then they would want to keep as wide a berth as possible from
Israel since most anti-Semitism in this country occurs because some people take
Israel’s claims that it is a Jewish state at face value and then unfortunately blame
Jews for its actions. The IHRA itself consists of 38 words,
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as
hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are
directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward
Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Having proudly fought against the admission of Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany the Daily Mail is well placed to oppose ‘anti-semitism’
It is also backed up by 11 illustrations of ‘anti-Semitism’.  It is these 11 illustrations that most
concern our Young Labour racists. The above definition is clear as mud. What is
a certain perception? Is anti-Semitism just a perception? If it may be
expressed as hatred towards Jews what else may it be expressed as?  Why mention of non-Jews? Why include Jewish
community institutions?  What are
rhetorical manifestations?
Sir Stephen Sedley, a former Court of Appeal judge
who is also Jewish wrote that the IHRA definition ‘fails the first test of any
definition: it is indefinite.’
The reactionary editor of the Jewish
Chronicle, Stephen Pollard, also attacked the Labour Party’s Anti-Semitism Guidelines but he was at least
more honest than these ‘progressive’ young racists.  His complaint was that  ‘Labour has excised the parts which relate
to Israel and how criticism of Israel can be antisemitic.’
That is the
problem.  These privileged young racists
aren’t in the slightest concerned about things like the demonstrations against
Donald Trump. After all Trump is more popular
in Israel than anywhere
on Earth. [JPost
Poll: Skyrocketing support for Trump among Israelis
] However he is not
popular amongst American Jews.[Poll:
77% of American Jews have unfavorable view of Trump
]
Can you
imagine?  The man who refused
to condemn the neo-Nazis and white supremacists at Charlottesville, who
separates children from their parents at the border with Mexico, who intends to
appoint a Supreme Court Judge who will make abortion illegal is wildly popular
in Israel?
The Times of Israel
informs
us that ‘Of the 134
countries surveyed about approval of the US president, only four showed an
uptick of 10 percentage points or more: Israel, Belarus, Macedonia and
Liberia.’
. Trump had a 67% approval rating among Israelis. And why
not?  Israel can kill unarmed
Palestinians, demolish their homes and imprison their children without a word
of criticism.
The Sun is always a willing partner in the fight against ‘antisemitism’
And what about ‘the issue of antisemitism’ that these 18 Young Racists are concerned about? Is that
the same ‘anti-Semitism’ that the Sun and the Mail also oppose? The same papers
that employed Katie Hopkins and Richard Littlejohn are apparently concerned
about anti-Semitism!
The Daily
Mail
reported on 18th April 2018 about ‘Women MPs who shamed Corbyn with
devastating accounts of Labour anti-Semitism are accused of ‘betrayal’ and LIES
by his supporters’.
Is this the same Daily Mail, which on August 20, 1938 reported that ‘The way stateless Jews from Germany are
pouring in from every port of this country is becoming an outrage . . . (it is)
a problem to which the Daily Mail has repeatedly pointed.”
Or we can go
back to the beginning of the 19th century to the Jews fleeing from
Russian pogroms:
‘The
rest were Jews. . .They fought and jostled for the foremost places at the
gangways. . .When the Relief Committee passed by they hid their gold and fawned
and whined, and, in broken English, asked for money for their train fare.”
Daily Mail, February 3, 1900
The
‘liberal’ Observer, which today is the Guardian’s sister paper, has also run
with the bogus ‘anti-Semitism’ narrative. On 31st July 1938 it
reported, a few months before Kristallnacht:
‘“A typically baffling
illustration of the difficulty is the fact that Britain now has more Jews than
Germany ever had. If a further accretion of, say, 100,000 of them come into the
country, how could the danger be averted of an anti-Jewish feeling here?”  July 31, 1938 [See Anna Karpf’s excellent We’ve been here before]
The
Observer dressed up its anti immigrant prejudices in a fake concern for the
growth in anti-Semitism.  Not too
dissimilar from Labour’s 18 Young Racists. But let us concentrate on the
arguments, such as they are from these young racists:  They are apparently:
‘horrified
at the victim-blaming, bigotry, and incompetence that has been all too
characteristic of the approach towards dealing with antisemitism. This has been
most recently expressed through the NEC’s incomprehensible decision to abandon
the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which is in use throughout thousands of
British institutions and across 31 countries, in favour of a watered-down
definition. Under the NEC definition, the antisemitic trope of alleging that
Jews, by virtue of their identity, have their loyalties primarily to the State
of Israel, is being deemed acceptable.  Furthermore, the assertion that the intent of
the perpetrator is most important gives a get-out-of-jail-free card to
antisemites, and disregards the Macpherson principle, which Labour uses to
arbitrate on allegations of prejudice towards every other group within our
movement.

Let us take these points in order:
The IHRA has been approved by 31 governments not countries
including the anti-Semitic governments of Poland and Hungary and the far-Right
governments of Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and now Austria and Italy. Today’s
European far- Right is like Trump. It loves Israel and Zionism even if it
doesn’t care for Jews. That is why neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, the founder of the
Alt-Right, declares that he is a White Zionist. After all, if you are a racist,
what is there not to like about Israel? The
fact that racist states endorse a definition of anti-Semitism is hardly an
argument in favour of the IHRA. In America this quandary has caused heartache
amongst liberal Zionists and the Jewish Forward.
See for example Naomi Zeveloff’s How
Steve Bannon and Breitbart News Can Be Pro-Israel — and Anti-Semitic at the
Same Time
The second
argument of these 18 racists is that they are concerned that
‘Under the NEC definition the
antisemitic trope of alleging that Jews, by virtue of their identity, have
their loyalties primarily to the State of Israel, is being deemed acceptable.’
This isn’t true. In any event the OED definition of
anti-Semitism would cope quite adequately with this ‘trope’ (Zionists love this
word, possibly because it rhymes with ‘dope’). 
The JLM returning favours to Peter Kyle, Labour’s Tory MP for Hove – Jeremy Newmark, who later left the JLM under a cloud is on the far left with current Chair of the JLM war criminal Ivor Caplin and Ella Rose, Director of JLM and a free transfer from the Israeli Embassy is 4th from the left
This is also their most dishonest and disingenuous argument.
Jews are being accused of loyalty to Israel. At this very moment the Jewish
Nation State Bill
is going through the Knesset which will officially make
Israel the nation state of the Jewish people and officially an apartheid state.
Although Israel has always called itself a Jewish State the current bill will
make all that was previously implicit explicit. 
See e.g. article by Mordechai Kremnitzer
in Ha’aretz ‘Nation-state
Bill Heralds the End of Israel as a Jewish, Democratic State’
Kremnitzer
is wrong. Israel has never been Jewish and democratic. The term is an oxymoron.
It’s like being half pregnant. But now there is no doubt. Israel will officially
be a state, not of its citizens but all
Jews, wherever they live. This Bill will remove Arabic as Israel’s second
language (this was only ever theoretical). It will allow Jewish only towns and
communities to be explicitly allowed (previously they existed in a legal grey
zone). That is why Abed Azab writes in Ha’aretz to welcome this Act which will do away with Zionist hypocrisy. [As
an Arab, I Support Israel’s Jewish Nation-state Bill
]
Many
of the signatories of the open
letter
are members of the JLM. The JLM is affiliated to the World
Zionist Organisation [WZO], whose official platform is the Jerusalem Programme which
speaks of ‘The unity of the Jewish
people, its bond to its historic homeland
Eretz Yisrael, and the centrality of the State of Israel and Jerusalem, its capital,
in the life of the nation’
In
other words it claims that every
Jewish person is equally a part of the same nation of which Israel is the
national embodiment.  In other words
British Jews are members of the same nation as Indian and French Jews and thus
loyal to Israel. 

Luisa Attfield and other signatories campaign for the notoriously corrupt Joan Ryan MP
Clearly
it’s not anti-Semites in the Labour Party but the WZO which claims that British
Jews are responsible for the actions of Israel. You can’t be a member of 2
nations simultaneously. What it is really saying is that Jews are not members
of the nations amongst whom they live. That is why historically Zionism and anti-Semitism
had so much in common. It is why the Zionists in Germany welcomed the 1935 Nuremburg
Laws which stripped German Jews of their citizenship. German Zionists had never
accepted that Jews were part of the German nation.
In
Israel there is no Israeli nationality. There is a Jewish nationality, which is
the nationality of the oppressor and then there are about 130 other
nationalities. It isn’t Labour anti-Semites who are questioning Jewish loyalty
to Britain but the very organisation, the JLM, of which most of them are
members.
That
is why one of the most common forms of abuse that I and other Jewish
anti-Zionists receive is being called a ‘traitor’
because by rejecting Zionism and Israel we are not being loyal. It is
Zionism not the Labour Party which demands a dual loyalty of British Jews.  Indeed it is worse than that.
Less
than 5 years ago, representatives of Israel’s government distributed a survey
to American Jews asking where their loyalties would lie in the event of a
crisis in relations between the United States and Israel! Israel Asks U.S. Jews, Israelis:
Where Do Your Loyalties Lie?
If these 18 young racists
are seriously worried that their loyalty to Britain is being questioned, I
suggest that they resign from the JLM!
Luise Attfield – one of the signatories
In fact is even worse
than that. One of the examples of the IHRA which the authors of the open
letter
want adopted
in full states:
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by
claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour
Even
if we ignore that this statement is a non sequitur, because you can support the
right to self-determination and still believe Israel is a racist state, what
the right of the Jewish people to self-determination means is that they have a
right to form a state. If Israel is the nation state of all Jews, as it claims,
then of course all Jews have to take responsibility for it just as British people
bear responsibility for the actions of the British state unless they disavow
it.
So
we have the irony that the IHRA is anti-Semitic according to its own
definition, viz. ‘Holding Jews
collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel’
!
These
young bigots take exception to the need to demonstrate intent.  They want to use a bastardised version of the
MacPherson principle.  At the last Labour
Party Conference the JLM tried to hoodwink people into supporting a motion
which would allow ‘victims’ of racial incidents to determine the guilt of their
supposed attackers.  In other words racism
would be entirely subjective. Given that Zionists, as a matter of course accuse
supporters of the Palestinians of ‘anti-Semitism’, including
Jews
,  then every time the JLM
accuses someone of ‘anti-Semitism’ they would have to be expelled.  And Jewish anti-Zionists?  Well they are the ‘wrong sort of Jews’ so they too would have to go.

Rachel Barker
The
Chakrabarti Report was very clear about this but the JLM and these young
racists are determined to distort the recommendations of the MacPherson Report,
which was about state racism.  It is outrageous
that the death of Stephen Lawrence and the Police racism that prevented the
conviction of his killers for many years is being used by the supporters of
Israeli Apartheid in order to defend
racism.

Before
these young racists talk about the ‘McPherson
principle’
(which principle?) I suggest that they actually read what
Chakrabarti had to say on the matter. Her Report states:
Submissions to my Inquiry reveal
a level of concern and confusion (in some quarters) about the “Macpherson
definition of a racist incident. This is of course a reference to the famous
Report of 1999 into the Metropolitan Police after its appalling mishandling of
Stephen Lawrence’s murder. The principle that an incident should be recorded as
racist” when perceived that way by a victim may indeed have
some useful application outside the policing context, and even here in the
world of Labour Party discipline. However the purpose of the approach is to
ensure that investigators handle a complaint with particular sensitivity
towards the victim. It is to suggest the seriousness with which a complaint
must be handled, but in no way to determine its outcome. If I complain to the
police that I have been the victim of a racist attack on the street, I should
expect my complaint to be so recorded. However investigation and due process
must of course then follow and it is perfectly possible that an investigator,
prosecutor or magistrate will subsequently find either that no attack took
place at all, or that its motivation was something other than racism. In the
present context, my complaint that I have been subject to racist or other
personal abuse by a fellow Party Member should be so recorded, taken seriously
and handled sensitively. However it will be for the investigation and any
subsequent process to determine whether my complaint was ultimately
well-founded.
Liron Velleman – a dedicated Zionist and signatory of open letter and failed council candidate
What these 18 young racists really want is for any accusation of
‘anti-Semitism’ by Zionists to automatically result in the expulsion of whoever
is so accused.  My response to that is the
same as that of Corporal Jones in Dad’s Army! (Who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler…’)
These young racists complain that requiring intent is a ‘get out of jail free card’. Intent or ‘mens rea’ is part of British criminal
law. Except for certain offences which are called strict liability (health and
safety, motoring etc.) then intent is integral to the offence. There is no
reason why that should not be equally applicable to racism. Obviously if
someone shouts ‘dirty Jew’ then the
intent will be presumed from the act itself. Equally if someone directly discriminates
against someone who is Jewish then the very act of discrimination will be evidence
as to the mental element involved. All this is trite law but these young
racists are engaged in an act of deception.
Another signatory to the Open Letter
The intent of these young racists is clear.  It is to use ‘anti-Semitism’ as a weapon to
ward off criticism of Israel. That is why they want to adopt the IRHA in its
entirety. I think it is a mistake for Labour to have used it at all. As Hugh
Tomlinson QC stated in an Opinion the IHRA will have a potential chilling
effect on public bodies’
and thus curtail
freedom of speech.
In
Israel the law is indeed used to curtail the freedom of speech of Arabs. Dareen
Tatour, a poet, has been charged and convicted
of inciting violence for publishing a poem calling for resistance. Given that
Israeli Jews who call for the death of Arabs are never charged, still less convicted this is an example of the
extreme racism of Israeli society. 
We
should reject the accusations of these young racists. Israel calls itself a
Jewish State. It claims it is a state of all Jews and Netanyahu claims
to be the representative of world Jewry. It is therefore incumbent upon Jews in
the diaspora to say ‘not in my name’.
I have yet to hear any of these young racists, most of whom are Jewish, speak
out. In the West Bank they are about to demolish the village of Khan
al-Ahmar
to make way for Jewish
settlements.  It is what Apartheid South
Africa did. We imposed sanctions on South Africa do these young racists support
us doing the same? In Israeli hospitals there are segregated wards
for Jewish and Arab women.  Do our young
racists condemn this and similar practices in universities?
For reasons unknown I have been blocked by Izzy – you can’t win them all
I
have referred to the signatories of the Open Letter as racists, not as a term
of abuse but because that is what they are. Jewish people in this society are
White and are privileged. Jews do not suffer from fascist violence . We are not
subject to Police racism, deaths in custody, deportation back to ‘where we came
from’ as per the Windrush scandal nor do Jews suffer from economic
discrimination. In short Jews are not victims and therefore they have no right
to ‘define their oppression’ because
they are not oppressed. What they really mean is that the oppressor should be allowed to define themselves as oppressed. Their
Open Letter is an exercise in sophistry aimed at supporting the Apartheid State
of Israel.
These
young racists are not the innocents abroad that they claim.  They have a Facebook page
from where their racist bile is distributed. They are heavily involved in the
Labour Right.
Rachel Megan Barker
Rachel Barker, the LGBT Officer of Barnet Young Labour and Hendon CLP and former council
candidate is a vicious anti-Corbyn right-winger as the video
of her distributing ‘Saving Labour’ leaflets demonstrates. Ms Barker
helped in processing information leading to the suspension of Labour members
with Joanna Baxter, when she was on Labour’s NEC.  This was when Owen Smith was challenging Corbyn
for the leadership. She let people know that the horrifically right-wing Baxter
was too soft on people.  She would have had
suspended anyone with even a trace of a suspicion that they were voting for Corbyn.

Barker
calls Jeremy Corbyn ‘horrendous’
‘appalling’
and says of removing Corbyn ‘it’s
like chopping the head off a monster’ 
She
is known locally as Miss Eyebrows, because they are tattooed on. Her brother is
Tom Barker an E.C officer on Barnet Young Labour.  Her Dad is Hendon CLP Secretary and her mother
is also very active.
Dora
Hirsh is the daughter of David Hirsh, a sociologist from Goldsmith College, who
formed Engage in order to unsuccessfully fight the Boycott of Israeli
Universities.
It is hard to disagree with this assessment of Izzy Lenga
Another
signatory is Izzy
Lenga
who was very active as part of UJS in
NUS and was Vice President from April 2017. 
Fortunately she was defeated
this year!
Nesil Caliskan
Information about Viljo Wilding the Secretary of Barnet Young
Labour can be found here
Eda Caz
Another person associated with this group is Eda Cazimoğlu who is
standing for Labour’s NEC. Cazimoglu is the younger sister of
the leader of Enfield council Nesil Caliskan. An article Report
reveals Enfield selection fiasco
details the scandal around the selection
of council candidates in Enfield. Joan Ryan who is Chair of Labour Friends of
Israel and the local MP plays one ethnic group against another e.g. Turks
against Kurds etc. The whole Cazimoglu family seem to work for Joan Ryan, I understand
one of them is her PA or Secretary.
According
to Guido Fawkes
Alev Cazimoglu, ‘close ally of expenses piggy candidate hopeful Joan Ryan, was suspended from the party’s
candidates panel. Tim Leaver accusing Cazimoglu of “financial inducements or
inducements in kind offered to attempt to secure support”
and “interfering
with or putting under duress a member in regard to how they vote.”
The allegations involved Cazimoglu and Ryan plotting to ferry an elderly
resident to a selection meeting and telling her which way to vote. See  also the Morning Star’s Labour
right seeking to take over in Enfield, left councillors say
on further skullduggery involving Nesil Caliskan née Cazimoglu who was
seeking to becoming the new Leader of the Council through various underhand
means, fair or foul (mostly the latter). Needless to say the hopelessly corrupt
Joan Ryan, MP for Enfield South and Tel Aviv South was up to her neck in all of
this.
Velleman with Ella Rose, Barker and others in their efforts to retain Langleben’s Council seat – he came bottom of the 3 Labour candidates and lost, having convinced sufficient Jewish electors that he stood for an anti-semitic party they refused to vote for him!

Velleman with Mark Regev, Israeli Ambassador to Britain and a war criminal in his own right – Israel’s Lord Haw Haw
Liron Velleman is another signatory and a former activist with
the Israeli funded Union of Jewish Students. His Twitter page has a photo of his involvement in the election campaign
for Peter Kyle, MP for Hove, an active member of Progress, a racist opponent of
all things Palestinian and supporter of Labour Friends of Israel and all round
reactionary.
Tony Greenstein
Alex Richardson, former aide to Joan Ryan MP, Chair of Labour Friends of Israel

Alex Richardson, as captured in Al Jazeera’s The Lobby when Joan Ryan MP (right) discussed with Israeli agent Shai Masot that she was being given a £1 million slush fund to finance dirty tricks in the Labour Party

Barnet Young Labour is affiliated to the racist Zionist JLM – hence their letter

An Open Letter from Young Labour members in Barnet

Posted on 11th July 2018
Dear Jeremy Corbyn, Jennie Formby and members of the NEC,
We are a group of young, grassroots, enthusiastic activists in
Barnet who are committed to the Labour Movement.  We first joined the Labour Party because we
were, and remain, horrified at the dam​​age that the Conservative Government
has wreaked on communities up and down the country with their programme of
austerity. We wanted an end to the ideological and ruinous privatisations
perpetrated by the Tory run Barnet Council, which has long prioritised profit
over people. We know that Labour’s vision of a better world is radical and
transformative, and we got involved to help bring that day about.  We want to help Labour be the best it can.
Unfortunately, this task is being made impossible by the Labour
Leadership’s repeated inability to get to grips with the issue of antisemitism.
 We are socialists, and will always
standing with our oppressed comrades in solidarity. We joined Labour for this
reason, because we know how good its record in Government is on bringing about
legislative equality. But we are horrified at the victim-blaming, bigotry, and
incompetence that has been all too characteristic of the approach towards
dealing with antisemitism. This has been most recently expressed through the
NEC’s incomprehensible decision to abandon the IHRA definition of antisemitism,
which is in use throughout thousands of British institutions and across 31
countries, in favour of a watered-down definition.  Under the NEC definition, the antisemitic trope
of alleging that Jews, by virtue of their identity, have their loyalties
primarily to the State of Israel, is being deemed acceptable.  Furthermore, the assertion that the intent of
the perpetrator is most important gives a get-out-of-jail-free card to antisemites,
and disregards the Macpherson principle, which Labour uses to arbitrate on
allegations of prejudice towards every other group within our movement.
We live and campaign in Barnet, a borough that has the highest
concentration of Jewish residents in the country.  While we have always opposed antisemitism for
the same reason that we and our comrades have opposed all prejudice – because
it’s the right thing to do; the impact it is having on our election prospects
in Barnet is undeniable.  Throughout the
recent local elections campaign, we canvassed hundreds of households to try and
convince them of the future we wanted to see, a Labour Council.  Our policies were incredibly popular on the
doorstep, and indeed until the story about the antisemitic mural surfaced, our
numbers predicted an unprecedented Labour majority of 4-7 seats.  Yet, as the depth of Labour’s antisemitism
problem unfolded, we came across more and more voters – Labour voters – who
refused to give us their support.  We met
left wing Jewish residents, many of whom had been lifelong Labour voters, yet
they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Labour this time, even though they
agreed with our policies.  We encountered
Jewish voters crying because they agreed with our vision for Barnet, but
because of the national failure to deal with antisemitism, they felt
politically homeless.  We were told of
Jewish members who joined in 2016 to vote for Corbyn, yet no longer felt they
could remain a part of the party they loved.
Labour must regain the support of the Jewish community, not
because it will win us votes, but because it would be morally abhorrent to do
anything else.  We desperately want to
help Labour to do that, but because of a national consistency in ignoring
Jewish voices within and outside of the party, our task becomes harder and the
damage becomes deeper.
We ask you, in the spirit of the solidarity, tolerance and
respect that our party was founded on, to adopt the IHRA definition of
antisemitism as the first of many steps in tackling this evil. To do anything
else would be unforgivable.
We look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
Benjamin Lorie – Chair of Barnet Young Labour
Viljo Wilding – Secretary of Barnet Young Labour, Youth Officer
of Hendon CLP
Jack Lubner – Campaigns & Membership Officer of Barnet Young
Labour,​ ​Diversity Officer of Finchley and Golders Green CLP
Dominic Breen – Vice Chair Treasurer of Barnet Young Labou​r
Sadiyah Akther – Vice Chair Women’s Officer of Barnet Young
Labour
Luisa Attfield – Disabilities Officer of Barnet Young Labour,
Women’s Officer of Finchley and Golders Green CLP
Rachel Barker – LGBT Officer of Barnet Young Labour, LGBT
Officer of Hendon CLP, former Barnet council candidate
Alex Luxford – Under 19s Officer of Barnet Young Labour
Tom Barker – Hendon Officer for Barnet Young Labour
Dominic Norcliffe-Brown – Trade Union Liaison Officer of Barnet
Young Labour
Liron Velleman – Youth and Students Officer at the Jewish Labour
Movement, former Barnet council candidate
Dora Hirsch
Noam Solomons-Wise
Izzy Lenga
Alex Richardson
Harry Jacobs
Noa Gendler
Josh Newmark

 

 

 

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share This