It is somewhat surreal that I find myself writing an article ostensibly in support of Jeremy Corbyn, a man who is a self-confessed Marxist, a committed multiracialist, no friend of British nationalism, and the current leader of the Labour Party. We do live in interesting times, as they say.
Most of the British public will have been somewhat bemused of late by the constant barrage of reports in the media of rampant antisemitism in the Labour Party and of accusations aimed at Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn personally, accusing him of antisemitism.
We have recently seen Jewish Labour MP Margaret Hodge accusing Jeremy Corbyn of being a racist and anti-Semite; we have seen a letter signed by more than sixty of the most senior rabbis in the country criticising the Labour party for not obediently accepting the so-called ‘International Definition of Antisemitism’; and just when we thought the melodrama could not get any more hysterical and vexatious, there were headlines in major newspapers last week quoting the three main Jewish community newspapers — the Jewish Chronicle, Jewish News and the Jewish Telegraph — all three of which published the same front page and the same editorial asserting that a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn would pose an “existential threat to Jewish life in this country”, a quite remarkable and hysterical claim given the immense efforts that have been made by Jeremy Corbyn to placate and reassure Jews that he is a committed opponent of antisemitism and all other forms of racism.
On his own website Jeremy Corbyn has posted a statement reiterating as he so often has his position regarding racism and antisemitism, as follows:
“Labour is an anti-racist party to its core and has a long and proud history of standing against racism, including antisemitism. I have campaigned against racism all my life and the Jewish community has been at the heart of the Labour party and progressive politics in Britain for more than a hundred years.
“We have taken decisive action over allegations of anti-semitism since I became leader, suspending all those involved from membership, and have set up an inquiry under Baroness Royall into reports of anti-semitism in the Oxford University Labour Club and elsewhere.
“I am now proposing to Labour’s national executive committee that it adopts a code of conduct on anti-semitism and other forms of racism, and establishing an inquiry into tackling anti-semitism and other forms of racism under the former director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti.
“There is no place for anti-semitism or any form of racism in the Labour Party, or anywhere in society, and we will make sure that our party is a welcoming home to members of all communities.”
So Jeremy Corbyn’s position on racism and antisemitism would appear to be clear and unequivocal and one in which the Jewish community in Britain ought to feel entirely satisfied and reassured. However, they appear not to be reassured by his words if the outpourings of the organs of organised Jewry are to be believed and the point has now been reached where it appears that organised Jewry do not want to be reassured, and are it would seem, wilfully anxious and agitated for no good reason, and we must wonder why?
Jewish groups are insisting that the Labour Party must formally adopt the so-called ‘International Definition of Antisemitism’, a definition that is currently being promoted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, but which is in reality a resurrected version of what was originally called the ‘Working Definition of Antisemitism’, a product from 2005 of a European Union based NGO, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). This definition was heavily criticised at the time for conflating criticism of the actions of the state of Israel and/or the Israeli government with antisemitism.
The EUMC grew out of the Commission on Racism and Xenophobia (CRX), which was established in 1994, and which was also known as the ‘Kahn Commission’ after its first Chairman, Jean Salomon Kahn, a French Jewish community leader, human rights activist, and lawyer, President of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in France and later President of the European Jewish Congress and Vice President of the World Jewish Congress.
Kahn, who was described in many quarters as the personification of the CRX and so dominant was his role, he remained chairman until the early 2000s having gained agreement from European leaders in 1998 to morph the CRX into the EUMC.
According to various sources the ‘working definition of antisemitism’ appears to have been primarily the work of three individuals:
Kenneth Stern, author and attorney in the US and until recently, director of the division on antisemitism and extremism at the American Jewish Committee. He is currently Executive Director of the Justus & Karin Rosenberg Foundation, which campaigns against antisemitism;
Rabbi Andrew “Andy” Baker of the American Jewish Committee; and
Israeli Professor, Dina Porat.
The so-called ‘International Definition of Antisemitism’ would therefore appear to be more accurately described as a ‘Jewish definition of antisemitism’ given that it appears to have been conceived by three Jewish individuals working in conjunction with an organisation that was itself created and directed by a very high ranking leader of the Jewish community in France, and given that it has in more recent times been taken up by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, a largely Jewish interest group.
The EUMC/FRA’s definition of antisemitism begins:
“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”.
The wording as we can all see is identical to the wording of the ‘International Definition of Antisemitism’, currently promoted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), and this provides us with a direct link going back not to ‘the international community’, as Jewish group would like us to believe, but to an NGO within the EU overwhelmingly influenced by Zionist Jews.
The supplementary provisions that follow go beyond merely conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism, their effect is to:
Conflate opposition to the policies of the Israeli government with antisemitism;
Conflate anti-Zionism with opposition to the existence of the state of Israel;
Conflate sympathy with the cause of the Palestinian people with antisemitism; and
Conflate so-called ‘Holocaust denial’ with antisemitism.
These multiple conflations create the potential to stifle any criticism of Israeli government policy or any aspect of Jewish life by conflating any form of criticism of Jews or of Israel with antisemitism and therefore assumed criminality. This definition therefore accords Jews a privileged status above all the rest of mankind — one in which they are regarded as beyond criticism and beyond reproach unless one is prepared to risk being called antisemitic and as a consequence risk being smeared as a race hate ‘criminal’.
If we look at the passages relating to antisemitism adopted into their disciplinary code by the Labour Party National Executive Committee (NEC), we find that the Labour Party have actually adopted within their disciplinary code the main definition and most of the tenets of the so called ‘International Definition of Antisemitism’. The main definition within their disciplinary code states:
“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.”
As we can see, this definition is identical to the one devised by the EUMC/FRA above. It is however with regard to the supplementary passages and examples of antisemitism that a significant discrepancy arises.
While the disciplinary code condemns antisemitism utterly, it maintains that criticism of the state of Israel in connection with the mistreatment of Palestinians is a legitimate form of political discourse and it maintains that the use of the terms ‘Zionist’ and ‘Zionism’ are also legitimate in discussions relating to the ideology underlying the creation of the state of Israel and ultimately responsible for the the Arab/Israeli conflict.
Clearly the election of Palestinian sympathiser Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party was an unintended consequence of the failure of Ed Miliband his predecessor, and despite the Labour NEC under Corbyn accepting most of the tenets of the sweepingly worded and one-sided ‘International definition of Antisemitism’, the fact that Corbyn and the Labour NEC have reserved the right to voice legitimate criticism of Israel is still regarded by organised Jewry as intolerable.
Clearly the wording of the so-called ‘International Definition of Antisemitism creates a ‘grey area’ in which any criticism of the state of Israel or the actions of the Israeli government can potentially be cynically and systematically discredited by being disingenuously labelled ‘antisemitic’. We only have to observe what is going on today – this campaign of vilification against Jeremy Corbyn – to see that this is so, despite Jeremy Corbyn’s evident credentials as an implacable opponent of racism and antisemitism. Furthermore, it is probable that this state of affairs is deliberate, although whether this was the intention of the original authors or the result of subsequent modifications, we cannot know.
The following interview was recorded in 2002 for ‘Democracy Now’ in which former Israeli parliament member Shulamit Aloni makes some remarkable admissions to Amy Goodman regarding the constant cries of ‘antisemitism’ and the constant references to the Holocaust whenever there is criticism of Israel.
One has to marvel at the hubris of Jewish organisations and Jewish leaders in this country that they should present themselves as a united community under the hashtag ‘United We Stand’ , ‘speaking with one voice’, as a collective, in condemnation of the Labour Party, when that condemnation is intended to bully the Labour Party into accepting a definition of antisemitism that vilifies those who criticise Jewish groups for the ‘power’ they exercise and the actions they take ‘as a collective’.
Similarly, one must marvel at the hubris of Jewish organisations representing merely a proportion of their 250,000 co-religionists in Britain, seeking to ‘wag the dog’ of a Labour Party of more than 500,000 members, which routinely has the electoral support of some 15 million electors.
Jewish spokespeople have sneered at the Labour Party for allegedly daring to assume that they have a clearer appreciation of what constitutes antisemitism than the Jewish community, while failing to appreciate that there are always two sides to any issue. Can they not see that Gentiles also have an interest in determining what is and what is not considered to be antisemitism, and that the interests of this country’s 60 million Gentiles trumps the partisan views of their tiny ethnic/religious minority.
That there is a barrage of criticism of Labour and Jeremy Corbyn within the mass media is not an indication that the majority of the people of this country support the assertions of organised Jewry, it is simply a reflection of the disproportionate influence that organised Jewry exercises over our media – and the truth of this is something else that the International Definition of Antisemitism seeks to designate as ‘antisemitism’.
Why should we not be allowed to criticise Israel for the mistreatment of the Palestinians?
Why should we not be allowed to discuss the influence that the Jewish community exercises as a collective?
Why should we not be allowed to discuss the influence that organised Jewry exercises within our mass media?
Why should we not be allowed to critically examine and discuss the events that took place during World War Two in the so-called Jewish Holocaust?
Furthermore, when so many Jews are fervent Zionists, i.e. enthusiasts for the state of Israel, why should we not discuss whether their allegiance to Israel is stronger or weaker than their allegiance to Britain?
These are not issues that concern only Jews. These are issues that impact upon our nation as a whole, and at a time when clearly the actions of organised Jewry can dramatically undermine the electoral prospects of one of this country’s two main political parties, why should we not discuss whether it is healthy that such a state of affairs should be allowed to exist – in which the partisan interests of a tiny minority can influence so dramatically the outcome of a general election?
It is evident if one visits Jeremy Corbyn’s Facebook page, or if one visits one of the many websites that have sprung up recently as a result of the current witch-hunt of Corbyn supporters taking place with the Labour Party that an unprecedented number of expulsions and suspensions of formerly dedicated Labour Party members is taking place. Despite Jeremy Corbyn’s seemingly implacable response to the pressure being directed at him from Jewish sources, and the seemingly endless patience that he has for those who attack him as an antisemite, a desperate ‘civil war’ is taking place within the Labour Party in an attempt to bring an end to the anti-Labour vitriol currently being spewed out from our television screens and across the pages of our news media.
What Jewish organisations seem to fail to appreciate is that their continued actions, which are severely prejudicing the electoral prospects of the Labour Party, are creating more resentment towards Israel and the Jewish community than all of the finely worded definitions of antisemitism in the world could hope to quell.
The leaders of the Jewish community seem blind to the counter-productive nature of their current campaign. They are through their own actions causing massive resentment and rising antisemitism among Labour Party supporters particularly, and among the British public, who are dismayed and astonished by their hubris. They are having entirely the opposite effect to that which they desire.
They are awakening a whole generation of former liberal/Marxists to the reality that however much one might wish it were not so, race, religion and ethnicity do matter in this world — that these factors are pivotal to the affairs of men — and that the apparent power and influence of organised Jewry is an outstanding example of what can be achieved by a tiny minority when they are highly motivated in the promotion of their own particular racial, religious or ethnic interests.
Let us hope this lesson is learned quickly by those of our people among the ranks of the Labour Party and that it is one they never forget!
By Max Musson © 2018
# # # #
JOIN WESTERN SPRING
Western Spring is not just a website. We are a community of people dedicated to achieving the Six Prerequisites and thereby acquiring the wherewithal needed to win political power and through that secure the future survival, proliferation and advancement of the British people and other White peoples of European descent, wherever they may live. Please join us:
# # # #
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
We must thank Max Musson for his well balanced and comprehensive expose’ of the Jewish problem. One might add the observation that the ordinary Jewish people have become equal victims of the hysterical and lying propaganda perpetuated by a globalist clique. Many Jews, who probably number less than 16 million world wide, would be perfectly happy to live in peace and harmony with the rest of humanity. However, their spokesmen in alliance with international big business, have created a myth of the eternal victim which is in turn used as a powerful propaganda weapon to instil a sense of guilt against those of European stock who champion their racial heritage.
John Stephens
- Edit
Jews should do what they did in N.S. Germany, before the war broke out due to Churchill’s treachery. Jews who were not particularly in awe of Zionist power, wrote to various newpapers, and indeed, protested, against the sanctions organised by Zionist bankers and Jewish big business, in 1933.
One particular Rabbi, stated that” :This war is a war for Jewish interests”. Ten thousand Jewish soldiers, fought for Hitler’s Germany. However, in 2018, we see no such integrity by Jewish groups or brave individuals
Not one single Jew, with the exception of Brother Nathanael Kapner, of “Real Jew News”, anywhere on Earth, is opposing outwardly, the current powerful Jewish lobby, and it’s agents, like George Soros.
Does this mean, that all Jews are so happy, comfortable, and wealthy enough not to “rock the boat”? Are we seeing the dictatorship of an elite, that is in essence, a pyramid scheme of might, never seen in all of human history?
Max Musson
- Edit
Interestingly John, the Momentum Group, which was to a great extent responsible for promoting Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party , was founded by four individuals, three of which are Jewish: Jon Lansman; James Schneider; and Adam Klug. Furthermore, another leading Jewish member of Momentum, Rhea Wolfson, is also on Labour’s NEC. It is wrong therefore to see this as a Jewish verses Gentile issue, it is more a ‘right-wing’ Jewish verses ‘left-wing’ Jewish issue.
.
Clearly the Jewish right, with support from the ruling Israeli Likud Party has greater resources and more influence than the Jewish left, and for obvious reasons the Jewish right is intent on doing everything possible to prevent pro-Palestinian Jeremy Corbyn from being elected prime minister.
.
This only becomes a Jew verses Gentile issue in so far as the attacks upon Jeremy Corbyn are wrecking Labour’s chances of winning the next general election, and quite naturally Labour activists resent all of their hard work being wrecked merely to serve the particular ethnic interests of what ought in purely numerical terms to be an insignificant minority group. This is the clearest example imaginable of the actions of Jewish groups being revealed as the primary source of antisemitism among people who would otherwise not normally give Jews a moments thought one way or the other.
.
Outside of the Labour movement there are a number of Jews who bravely oppose the destructive hyper-ethnocentricity of most Jewish leaders, these include: pianist Gerard Menuhin, the son of Yehudi Menuhin; journalist Israel Shamir; and author Norman Finkelstein. These Jews and others like them are routinely and scurrilously described as ‘rabid antisemites’ by Jewish community leaders, despite the fact that they are indeed Jews themselves.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
Well written article Max in which you draw attention to to the difficulties the Labour Party is currently experiencing under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn as regards allegations of “antisemitism”.
It is clear that the Labour Party is no longer the party of the traditional white working class but has become an organisation to further the interests of immigrants.Accusations of this type were even made in the 1960’s and 1970’s , while large swathes of the working class still voted for Labour. But as each year passes, Labour is loosing more of its traditional vote while becoming more reliant on the support of immigrants. Within this context Labour is becoming more dependent on the Muslim vote and thus cannot be seen to be giving unqualified support for Israel. Mr Corbyn has traditionally supported the Palestinian cause and by extension has been critical of Israel., however this situation has displeased Jewish groups who conveniently conflate a criticism of Israel with “antisemitism”.
Hence Labour’s difficulties stem from its reliance on the Muslim vote and that a proportion of its membership would be Muslim, and that traditionally a proportion of the party have supported the Palestinian cause and by extension have been critical of Israel.
Many nationalists are critical of Israel and many support the Palestinian Cause, but some have unwisely forged relations with Islamists on the basis that my enemy’s enemy is my friend.However it would be prudent not to become too closely involved with the various protagonists, although the strategic importance of the Middle East should always be noted.It is important we are not distracted by by extraneous factors as we raise the importance of our race, identity, heritage, tradition and customs.
Frederick Dixon
- Edit
An informative and nicely argued piece, Max. But, while I believe that Jewry has much to teach us about how to live in our coming status as an ethnic minority, I do wonder if we as British nationalists should even have an opinion about these squabbles between Jews, Israel, Palestinians and the Labour party. What are any of them to us?
The only faint interest that I have in these matters is the hope that Labour’s electoral prospects will be damaged, and only then because of Corbyn’s expressed intention to relax controls on immigration from the Third World – I couldn’t care less about Labour’s proposals to renationalise the railways etc.
Max Musson
- Edit
Frederick, my view is that the fate of Jeremy Corbyn should be of little interest to us other than in-so-far as it prompts Labour Party members and the wider public to begin thinking in terms of race, religion and ethnicity. We should not overlook the fact that there is just one concept that separates an international socialist from a national socialist, and that is an appreciation of the pivotal importance of race, religion and ethnicity in the affairs of men.
.
Marxists maintain that such things are unimportant, illusory or ‘social constructs’ and yet here we have the Jewish community proving them wrong and proving the immense power that can be derived from an intense ethnocentricity. If Labour lose the next general election and Jeremy Corbyn is replaced as Labour leader by David Miliband, for example, my belief is that we will reap a massive harvest in terms of disillusioned former Labour Party members and activists joining us, who will have been ‘red-pilled’ by what they are witnessing at this time. Remember that 300,000 people joined the Labour Party as a consequence of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Labour Leader, and they will be left feeling mightily frustrated.
.
My Belief is that entryism will be the mechanism by which we gain political power in future and I suspect that a Labour Party antagonised by the actions of Jewish leaders and composed of many disillusioned militants will be the easiest of the establishment parties to penetrate.
Albert
- Edit
Corbyn is a supporter of various Terrorist Groups especially the IRA to me he is a Traitor, But I do find it hilarious listening to Jews on the Radio and TV hysterically calling Corbyn anti semitic, which I don’t think he is, He just supports every militant group that hates the West in the World, and Capitalist which most Jews are, and the occupiers of Palestine.
John Stephens
- Edit
It is indeed, a very humorous bit of political theatre. On one hand, Jews wrought Communism and Socialist/Progressive, hand-cuff democracy to our shores, but also, the diaspora, is loudly pro-mass immigration.
It is therefore, funny and entertaining to listen to Jews, harping on about elements of their own ideas, being used against them.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
Arabs and Jews are both semitic people and therefore being insulting to an Arab could reasonably be construed as “antisemitic” in the sense that it is being deployed today.But “antisemitism” is a term deployed exclusively to describe what may be construed as hostile or insulting behaviour towards Jews. But if this is the case and in view of the fact that Arabs are also semitic people, then hostility towards Jews should be referred specifically if this is considered important. Hence what is understood as antisemitism should be described as anti-Jewish sentiments or hostility towards Jews.
This point is further reinforced by the fact that a majority of Jews are not semitic Jews whose origins lie in Palestine, but are Ashkenazi Jews whose origins are thought to be of European origin.
The above shows how language is corrupted for political purposes and antisemitism is just one such example. Other instances include Islamophobia, whereby even a balanced assessment of the religion can cause hysteria. Other distortions include diversity, multiculturalism, tolerance, racism and xenophobia, far-right.
It is important that we maximise our influence by challenging the mendacious application of terms which further the degenerate progressive cause, and instead steer the agendas towardss traditional values.
Jock Lewes
- Edit
It would be mischievous to ask the leading Jewish voices opposing Mr Corbyn on this issue if they identify as Semitic. And it would be enlightening to hear their answers.
Fyrdman
- Edit
A very interesting and timely article that explains the current furor in the Labour Party. In the shtetls of Eastern Europe in the 1880s, where the intense pipulism and debates happened; where the frum, or pious Jews, clashed with those advocating Marxism (left), and those of Zionism (right), appears again to resonate today; though the Zionists have the much greater political and financial clout. The Zionists want a ‘catch all’ definition, so that all criticism, no matter how minor, is stifled and curtailed.
Jock Lewes
- Edit
Max, this article is a credit to you. It’s far and away the clearest analysis I have come across of this complex and controversial issue. No one else has imposed clear order on all significant aspect of this debate and so rendered it comprehensible. All other attempts have – I now see, thanks to you – been pussy footing around some aspect or other of the full picture. I have not seen anywhere else the description you provided of the antecedents and provenance of the so-called “international definition”.
Stephen Ambartzakis
- Edit
I think, Max, that you ought to differentiate between Zionism and Jewishness (is there such a word?). Most of the trouble making Jews are Zionists and just like the Israelis do not really self identify as Jews. They are the authors of internationalism and all that is wrong with that. The Zionists have been responsible for over twenty million deaths since the Korean war through their minions in the USA and they are mainly responsible for the looming genocidal war in South Africa via their captured press and arch propogandists like Joe Slovo, a Jewish colonel in the KGB.
Valerian
- Edit
Excellent article Max, but their is too much emphasis on the attempts of the Jewish lobby to control discourse on all things related to Jews in order to further their ethnic interests as well as to protect Jews from potential threats. In reality the examples of so called ‘antisemitism’ in the Labour Party are few in number and mainly trivial in character, and should be considered normal for a party with half a million members. The real issue is Corbyn’s long standing membership of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign which the Jewish lobby consider to be intolerable for a potential Prime Minister. Therefore nothing that Corbyn and the Labour Party can do to will appease them except Corbyn’s resignation. Corbyn has tried to reassure the Jewish community with an article in the Guardian on 3rd August titled ‘I will root antisemites out of Labour – they do not speak for me’, with the subtitle ‘Yes, there is a continuing problem. But the party will do whatever it takes to safeguard the Jewish community’. Then on the 5th August he released a video on Facebook in which he said “I’m sorry for the hurt that’s been caused to many Jewish people”. Yet no matter how much he grovels it is not enough for the Jewish lobby who just demand more expulsions and compliance with their definition of antisemitism that puts Israel beyond criticism. For instance, after Corbyn released his apologetic video Gideon Falter, chairman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, said: “It is just another contradictory, hypocritical, insincere attempt to whitewash his own role as the author of this nightmare.”
.
Even if Corbyn backs down and agrees to the Party adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism in it’s entirety the Jewish lobby will continue to ramp up the pressure on him with more unreasonable demands that will lead to a split between him and the NEC and force his resignation.
Max Musson
- Edit
It is ironic that organised Jewry are acting as a collective and demonstrating immense political power in an attempt to impose upon the Labour Party a definition of antisemitism, which asserts that it is antisemitic to claim that Jews act as a collective and exercise too much political power.
rerevisionist
- Edit
In my view, the ‘Labour Party’ from the time it was founded was a Jewish-directed organisation. ‘Labour’ supported both world wars, US genocides round the world, and numerous US frauds. It also supported Stalin. It had nothing to do with labour, either organised or not. In fact Unions were Jewish-controlled. It had virtually no important working class members; it was famous for the fact the ‘Labour’ MPs all sent their children to public schools. And of course ‘Labour’ never drew attention to Jewish finances – the (((Bank of England))), the Fed, and worldwide control of central banks as a Jewish policy.
Bob
- Edit
Very good article Max. I also found your comment that Nationalists should pursue entryism by joining the Labour Party of particular interest. Perhaps an organisation could be launched such as the British Workers Association to promote such policies as British Jobs for British Workers, nationalisation of gas, electricity, water, public transport, post office etc and opposing Zionist control of British affairs to attract Labour supporters.
Bizarrely, the Trotskyist group Socialist Fight and its leader Gerry Downing was expelled from the Labour Against The Witchhunt campaign and suspended from Labour Party membership for alleged “anti-Semitism”!