Another guest post from Brother G.
It can’t be easy being Ed Miliband. Having won the leadership election (hurrah!) by the narrowest of margins, he has within days been maligned by the press as a secret commie and overshadowed by his brothers resignation from frontline politics.
It now seems that he has managed to unnerve some pro-Israel supporters by speaking at a Labour Friends of Palestine event. Ed had the audacity to voice such shockingly anti-semitic intentions as an ‘interest in visiting the region and espousing British values in order to bring about peace in the region’. As a lobby group containing individuals such as Andy Burnham MP and Richard Howitt MEP, the organisation itself isn’t exactly Hamas.
It is disappointing that the mere act of displaying solidarity with a people currently living under occupation in increasingly desperate conditions is enough to send vested interests into a self-righteous hissy fit. Such reactions are particularly stupid given Ed Miliband’s background as the son of Jewish refugees.
In a conflict where the line between nationalist, religious and cultural concerns have become intertwined, Ed Miliband’s measured approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict, along with his brother's objections to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon during his time in the cabinet, should be welcomed as evidence that people of Jewish heritage, and indeed anyone with a concern for international affairs, can and should defend Israel’s right to exist without acting as apologists for its worst offenses. In a week which has seen Israel’s actions against the Gaza Aid flotilla deemed illegal by the UN and the resumption of settlement building on occupied land, this issue remains as pertinent as ever.
In his speech on Tuesday, Ed Miliband called for a foreign policy dictated by our values and not our allies. Nowhere is this more important that in the region of the Middle East.
8 comments:
Hi Phil
Labour Friends of Palestine is chaired by a former Labour MP who has talked about "long tentacles of Israel" with regard to the General Election, and hosted an event where a Labour MP talked about "Jewish millionaires" controlling the Tory party. An organisation that hosted a meeting last week at conference sponosred by Friends of Al Aqsa whose leader has indulged in holocaust denial.
I know you oibviously disgaree with such language but it's worth bearing in mind.
@Anonymous: I wouldn't disagree that there are some elements on the pro-palestinian left who stray from the legitimate issues of the conflict towards what could be perceived as dangerously anti-semitic sentiment.
However, I daresay that there are a minority within Labour Friends of Israel and other pro-Israel organisations who also hold views which go far beyond a reasonable defence of that state and into the ream of zionist cheerleading.
The important thing is that those negative minorities on both sides should not be used as a weapon against people trying to level legitimate criticism against the Israeli military action. It seems to me that Ed Milibands presence at the event was to display a genuine and reasonable concern for the palestinian people, who we must remember are in fact living under occupation, and not a declaration of support for the murkier elements of Islamic extremism.
"Ed had the audacity to voice such shockingly anti-semitic intentions as an ‘interest in visiting the region and espousing British values in order to bring about peace in the region’. "
Is this sneering really necessary?
Would you use such language when referring to another form of racism?
'Would you use such language when referring to another form of racism?'
Yes. That is to say, I would use such language to ridicule the pointed (if not overt) suggestion of racism that isn't actually there.
e.g. Mr Smith had the audacity to voice such anti-Islamic sentiment as 'maybe honour killings are a bad thing'.
"Yes. That is to say, I would use such language to ridicule the pointed (if not overt) suggestion of racism that isn't actually there."
Brother G,
That surely is the point?
No one but no one has suggested that Miliband was being antisemitic.
That is your invention.
That is your strawman, and completely unnecessary.
Mod: While there have not been direct accusations of anti-Semitism, many of those who have picked up the story have sought to do so in a way that implies shady undertones to Ed Milibands decision. Take, for example, this quote from the Harry's Place article linked in this post:
'A Harry’s Place post in February 2009 said:
“Only idiots and fellow racists would promote Ismail Patel and campaign alongside him.”
I’m not sure which conclusion we should draw from this.'
This post, along with several others, seem to be attempting to make hay of the fact that the Friends of Al-Aqsa organisation has had a presence in Labour Friends of Palestine, and that people who address one organisation are somehow validating the views of the other.
To be perfectly honest my original wording was never intended to come across as 'sneering', and if the feeling is that my choice of words serves to lower the tone then I apologise. But I do see in these stories an attempt to paint Ed Miliband's appearance in tones that suggest a malevolent sympathy to the negative elements of anti-Israeli sentiment, and it was that which I was seeking to critique.
"and it was that which I was seeking to critique."
Brother G,
Surely if you're going to critique something then you have to critique the valid argument?
That is, you have to take the most substantive point and deal with that, not the weakest point (or any inferred meaning).
As far as I can see no one at HP accused Ed Miliband of being antisemitic, thus to imply that they did is creating a straw man and is not a critique.
Well Brother G, have you managed to reflect on these issues and our discussions?
Has it changed your thinking in any way?
Post a Comment