Observations on the left in Britain
In Britain, hundreds of thousands have been taking to the streets for weeks to protest peacefully, as they themselves have repeatedly and excitedly confirmed, against Israel. It goes without saying that they are calling for the extermination of Israel and the genocide of Jews. It is now confirmed how Jeremy Corbyn was unexpectedly elected as Labour leader in 2015. It has been repeatedly claimed that this happened because there was so much support for his “socialism”. However, this ignores the fact that the left in this country has long since replaced the content of socialism with antisemitism. Corbyn was elected because of his antisemitism, as a friend of Hamas and hater of Israel. The British left sees its leftism as antisemitism, the more radical left, the more radically antisemitic. Thus, within hours or days of the Hamas massacres, the overwhelming majority of the left naturally denounced not Hamas, but only Israel. For radical leftists in particular, it is logical to demand peace now. For antisemites, peace means that Jews can be massacred without resistance. There is no empathy for the victims of Hamas or understanding for Israeli resistance. As radically antisemitic as they are, they are as soft as butter on all other issues. It is no coincidence that Britain is one of the western countries with the lowest levels of prosperity for average workers. If Jews were harmed by higher wages, Britain would surely have one of the highest wage levels in the world. But most leftists are not really interested in this, except as a mobilisation factor to introduce new recruits to antisemitism. But antisemitism goes far beyond the left. The BBC has been reporting most Hamas press releases as fact since 7th of October, but regularly prefaces the little information from Israel that makes it into its coverage with the caveat that the content couldn’t be independently verified. Even among the Tories, who officially support Israel, the then Home Secretary Braverman, after many months of unchallenged and vile incitement against immigrants, environmental activists and the homeless, was rapidly removed from office because she told the truth for once during her time in office, when she described the anti-Israel demonstrations as antisemitic.
To understand the success of antisemitism in Britain, it is also worth taking a look at history. In the Middle Ages, there were a series of pogroms against Jews, similar to those in Germany, which culminated in the expulsion of all Jews from England in the 13th century. It was not until the 17th century that they were allowed to return. After that it was the political left in particular that created a modern antisemitism out of the medieval hatred of Jews, in which all the evils of the world, including capitalism and imperialism, were blamed on the Jews, but which provided an exoneration ritual for leftists, where any leftist could, by opposing Jews, clear their conscience and gain recognition, even if that leftist had nothing else of significance to show for. The British left didn’t even need to get their own hands dirty, as murdering Jews may risk being hit by Jewish self-defence. They preferred to leave that to others, according to the traditional imperial division of labour. In the process, the left developed a romantic longing for the supposed authenticity of those who actually murder. The eliminatory antisemitism developed in parallel in Germany was thus peacefully complemented in Britain by an exonerative antisemitism. Therefore, these anti-Israeli demonstrations are both an expression of hatred and a willingness to use violence against Jews as well as an exoneration ritual with regard to their own social insignificance. Moreover, these demonstrations are an expression of a strengthened political cooperation of leftists, trade unionists and Islamists, who have nothing in common except antisemitism.
Of course, plausible-sounding arguments are needed to achieve the desired psycho-social relief for the left. Whether they are true or not is irrelevant. Popular arguments include that Israel was a colonial settler state and that it was therefore right to murder Jews. Or it is claimed that Israel was an apartheid state where only Jews were allowed to live in freedom, and therefore it was right to murder Jews. Or it is argued that the Zionist movement collaborated with the British Empire and therefore it was right to murder Jews. Even arguments that Israel was a Jewish state or existed because of the Holocaust and that it was therefore right to murder Jews have sometimes been put forward. Every single argument could be refuted or exposed as absurd. However, in each case it is only a sham argument whose refutation or exposure makes no difference, because every refuted sham argument is immediately replaced by the antisemite with a new sham argument. Every sham argument consists of two parts. The first part, which asserts an alleged cause, is interchangeable, arbitrary and ultimately insignificant. The second part, which states the resulting consequence, always says that it was right to murder Jews. The only significant part of the sham argument is the second part, which cannot be refuted by argument. Because the second part is the creed of the antisemite. Of course, depending on the level of education and linguistic abilities of the antisemite, a sham argument can also be far more complex. However, the basic structure always remains the same. If the ritual can be carried out successfully, many otherwise unreligious left-wing antisemites experience religious euphoria. But if their hatred of Jews is called into question, their gaze clouds over and their eyes turn to the distance, as if they want to look through the veil of reality, into another world where their ritual can be repeated peacefully, without contradiction or resistance. But this rapture of the left is also their weakness. For they willingly sacrifice their own organizations and political movements again and again. This self-regulating process has so far ensured that their social insignificance is accompanied by political powerlessness. May it stay that way!
CM, section in Britain
Cafe Morgenland 