Meeting held on Monday 16 May 2016
4 people were present and 9 gave their apologies
With only a small number of us present we decided it was best not to make any decisions about suggested developments in the way we hold our conversation.
It was suggested that perhaps we tend to discuss ‘safe’ subjects, about which we are inclined to agree. With this in mind, we turned our attention to the accusations of antisemitism that have recently been made in the media. We noted that this ‘news item’ has disappeared now that the May elections are over, confirming our suspicion that the issue had been raised largely as a stick to beat Corbyn prior to the elections. We guessed, however, that the issue of antisemitism had little influence on the election outcome as it did not appear to be of great interest to the average voter. Furthermore, we felt that the LP performance in these elections had been pretty good.
We were also struck by the fact that the question of antisemitism was addressed in the media without any critical or careful analysis. Distinctions between antisemitism, antizionism and criticism of Israel’s policies were most unclear. Indeed, even the definition of antisemitism seemed very vague. We wondered in what ways Israel gave special privileges to Jews (and thus discriminated against other faiths) and, if so, whether this amounted to racism. In what ways was Israel an exclusively Jewish State? What justification was there for anyone of Jewish decent to have a right to live in a particular country (Israel) regardless of their country of origin? We felt very ignorant of such matters as Israeli (Hebrew?) law might have helped us clarify some of these questions.
There was some support for the ‘single state’ solution to the Israel/Palestine problems: i.e. a state which is multi-faith and inclusive to both Palestinians and Jews. We noted, however, that such ideas – or indeed any views which radically critique the basis of Israeli policies – are readily condemned by the Israeli establishment as being anti-Semitic. In such a climate it becomes more difficult to give proper condemnation to racist antisemitism where it does occur.
We also returned to the debate on the EU and wondered what the implications for ‘remain’ or ‘leave’ outcomes to the referendum would be on the Labour and Tory parties. Either way, (unless ‘remain’ made a very clear victory) it seemed that the Tory party would experience difficulties after the referendum. Although Corbyn has identified with the Remain campaign, his commitment to it was still questioned by many. Good odds were given to Johnson leading the Tory party whoever wins, but some of us were not convinced.