The Social Maxim: March 2019

There’s no smoke without fire. Repeat something often enough and people will come to believe it. These are the great friends of Propaganda, even if we know they play into our natural human biases we are all still susceptible. A skillful lie always has a grain of truth. If you want to falsely accuse somebody of something to build a big lie, it’s best that they can’t deny the accusation in totality.

Anti-semitism exists in all areas of society, because racist individuals exist in all areas of society. Claims that anti-semitism does not exist in any large group of people, including the 550,000 Labour membership would be absurd. An accurate statement to make, based on available evidence, would be that Labour has less anti-semitism among its members than in general society. To claim that anti-semitism is 'institutionalised' and 'rampant' in the Labour Party is also absurd, because it is a baseless smear. Under the leadership of life-long anti-racist Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party has put tremendous efforts into combating anti-semitism. The success of these steps is borne out in the statistics and experiences of many Jewish members:

Image from https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/blog/in-summary-the-truth-behind-the-stats/

This reduction is something to be proud of, and yet the headlines still scream that anti-semitism is 'rampant' in the Labour Party. Politicians who have fought against change in the party since the election of a democratic socialist leader, cite anti-semitism as a reason for leaving the party, joining a group of ‘independents’ who will support the Conservatives, thereby doing all they can to try to prevent a general election and Labour Government. Their loyalties are clear, but their motives are destructively and duplicitously offered to a public brainwashed by a largely and persistently biased mainstream media, that fuels the 'rampant' anti-semitism smear.

Meanwhile, many Jewish people (including my own family) consider Labour under Jeremy Corbyn an ally in their fight against Anti-semitism. Support for Corbyn's position is growing globally and the full open letter from the Jewish Voice for Peace can be read here. Many Jews do not feel represented by the Jewish organisations who claim to be representing them, and Rabbis who represent many congregations and educational establishments in Greater London make this clear in their letter of support.

So what is going on in that two very different narratives are happening at the same time? Is anti-semitism so rampant in Labour that it's driving out MP's because it's not being dealt with? Or is Labour considered an ally in the fight towards it, doing everything in its power to fight for the Jewish community?

Many Labour members have been caught in a trap. Democratic socialists are brought together because of a desire for a society based on equality, fairness and justice. Racism of any form is repulsive and violates those values, it has no place in an anti-racist party. It can be unanimously agreed that there must be processes to deal with any incidences of anti-semitism, and with many leaders and members having stood on the streets fighting racism all their lives, the Party is very well placed to devise any necessary strategies required.

That desire for justice means that as a collective there are strong expectations that all reports of abuse will be taken seriously and effectively acted upon. Member's will not tolerate policies that could be considered to deliver racism, nor will they be satisfied only with being 'seen' to tackle racism, or accept the lack of accountability demonstrated in the Conservative Party. These values are not claimed only to win votes, they are principled to the core. Those values sadly leaves members vulnerable to manipulation due to their contentiousness. In striving to respond openly to allegations members will not be quick to dismiss concerns, and that can mean that initially, responsibility is taken for exaggerated or false allegations.

If you want to manipulate a person or group, keep them off balance.

Once it is realised justice is being subverted those values come to the fore again, and defences rise alongside an attempt to restore accuracy and protect those who have been wronged by unjust allegations. This kind of situation is resolved swiftly when there is clarity about what has transpired. Problems arise when an issue is deniable and motives are concealed, and those who wish to manipulate a situation for their own ends are rarely forthcoming with the truth. When a group is kept off balance through lack of clarity, they are unable to navigate between what is the right or wrong thing to do to resolve a situation. It's a technique used in abusive and controlling romantic relationships, if a person is unsure of what the reality is, if they are being gaslighted, they are unable to set clear boundaries. Where does justice reside? Who is and who is not being harmed? Is the group being manipulated and causing harm to the person or people being wrongly accused, or are they further victimising genuine victims?

The way out is through open discussion. And if there is nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear in that.

Transparency and discussion that may lead to accountability are the enemies of those trying to exert control and power over others, and the friends of those trying to seek truth and justice. Where people are prevented from defending themselves against what they consider inaccurate, false or exaggerated accusations, our suspicions must be aroused.

Actively oppose any defence or discussion that may bring clarity.

The oldest propaganda tricks in the book are being used to prevent even the questioning of, let alone the discussion of, the favoured narrative of those claiming baselessly that there is 'institutionalised' and 'rampant' anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Ignore the facts, rely on the public's desire for quick soundbites, and attack any justified opposing statement as an aggression. Further to this de-contextualise and inflate reasoned comments as equalling the blatant denial and absurd suggestion that anti-semitism doesn't exist in the party at all. The aggressor making false accusations is seen as the victim, and the actual victim of false allegations is seen to repeatedly be the aggressor. The binds are tied tightly, question the 'rampant' narrative at all and be accused of denying a victim of racism their rights and even of being anti-semitic yourself. Questioning our representatives is most definitely not allowed.

It's a wonderfully effective spin. It's also an aggressive lie and mind-bending manipulation of the truth. Anti-semitism exists and we will do all we can to root it out. Propaganda also exists where damaging false allegations are being made and the party is being brought into disrepute. These two things exist for anybody who has a genuine desire to seek the truth informed by facts.

Deny acknowledgement for successes and escalate accusations

One of the main arguments by some MP's has been that the disciplinary procedure was not effective or quick enough in dealing with reported cases of anti-semitism. Deputy Leader Tom Watson now claims that he will have to oversee complaints because not enough is being done, even if he has to break the law and trample over member’s privacy rights to do so. And yet, the process has improved dramatically since the new secretary Jennie Formby took over and the majority of the complaints received between April 2018 and January 2019 have now been effectively processed to completion.

The data

The data in fact makes very interesting reading. It demonstrated that out of 1,100 complaints lodged between April 2018 and January 2019, 433 were made about non-Labour Party members.

It was also found that MP Margaret Hodge had submitted 200 complaints about 111 people, 91 of those people were not members of the Labour Party. Hodge has been one of the most outspoken critics of the failure of the Labour Party to deal with anti-semitism. In anger and publicly to his face Hodge once branded Jeremy Corbyn "a f***ing racist and anti-semite" and likened receiving a disciplinary hearing letter for this aggression to Nazi persecution. She was it seems, responsible for a very large proportion of the false or exaggerated claims against the Labour Party.

Of the remaining 673, there was no evidence of a case to answer in 220 of the complaints. So of 1,100 complaints only 453 required further investigation and/or disciplinary action. This is a tiny 0.08 percentage of the membership. At the most serious end of the scale 12 members were expelled from the party, this is 0.002% 0f members. Action has been taken including education, warnings, suspension and expulsions. This suggests a thorough and effective process that rightly identifies and roots out anti-semitic members. We can certainly conclude that the Labour party is not a safe or welcoming environment for anti-semites.

Questions then remain. Why would anybody concerned with how anti-semitism was being dealt with want to clog up a disciplinary process that had demands placed on it to speed up? Why were so many complaints from people outside of the party submitted, by people who undoubtedly understand that the Labour Party disciplinary process is only for Labour Party Members? Why were so many complaints about members, over half, found to have no case to answer? Due to privacy laws it's unlikely it will ever be known who exactly made all of these complaints. What can be expected is that the person complaining about the speed and effectiveness of the process, deputy leader Tom Watson, would be loudly criticising those slowing things down and making the job of his colleagues more difficult?

Tom Watson and other's silence on this, speaks volumes.

Deliberately twist and misinterpret what has been said.

Some would also argue that the disciplinary procedure is indeed far too harsh on some who are being accused of anti-semitism, when the accusations are considered by many to be baseless. Life-long anti-racists Jackie Walker and Marc Wadsworth among them. Most recently Chris Williamson's suspension was confirmed following his wish to show a film, hosted by the Jewish Voice for Labour group, in Parliament, that gives a voice to members who have been affected by accusations of anti-semitism, and for comments made at a Momentum meeting:

“We’ve done more to actually address the scourge of antisemitism than any other political party, and yet we are being traduced,”

“The party that has done more to stand up to racism is now being demonised as a racist, bigoted party.”

“I’ve got to say I think our party’s response has been partly responsible for that. Because in my opinion we’ve backed off far too much, we’ve given too much ground, we’ve been too apologetic.”

Chris Williamson has received a great deal of support as the clarity around what can and can not be said in the face of anti-semitism allegations becomes increasingly and dangerously muddy. Jewish Voice for Labour have made it clear that they deplore his suspension. His comments were deliberately misrepresented to suggest that he had said the Labour Party had been too apologetic about anti-semitism. He is clearly stating that the Party has been too apologetic in the face of inaccurate claims and false allegations.

Calling out and questioning unclear, false or exaggerated allegations of anti-semitism is crucially important, they not only risk damage to a person's reputation and career, but also serve to dilute the meaning of true anti-semitism. Those who value justice, fairness and equality for all, recognise instinctively the importance of this. How serious complaints are taken, how effective a disciplinary process is in dealing with racist individuals, and how the rights of every person can be respected during any investigation, depends on honesty, accuracy and transparency.

Questions again remain. With a genuine desire to combat anti-semitism, why would anybody want or need to deliberately misrepresent statements to make their case? The identification of genuine incidences of hateful racism would hold importance surely? This can only be achieved if allegations stand up without alteration of the facts. Also, to reduce anti-semitism among people who are simply unaware that what they are saying is anti-semitic, the solution is education. So why are anti-racists like Jackie Walker who want to discuss and clarify what is and what is not anti-semitic in order to educate others, being prevented from doing this? Where a twisting or misrepresentation of the truth is clear and being called out as anti-semitic, this reduces clarity, so why are so many people repeating the accusations and failing to call out this dangerous muddying of the waters? In the fight against racism of all forms, what is not being said is often as informative as what is.

Education, clarity, right of reply and defense against allegations are all tools that serve the anti-racist cause. Those who wish to block these just measures stray into perilous territory.

Set an impossible goal and demand it is met.

It’s clear that nothing but a total eradication of anti-semitism, in fact a total eradication of what a specific minority demand must be viewed as anti-semitic, will be good enough for a select group in or having recently left the Labour Party. This is unquestionably an impossibility for any organisation that has a large membership group. And the impossibility of complete eradication is the gift that keeps on giving. Criticism can continue unabated and seen to be justified by the self-proclaimed victims of a ‘rampant’ and extensive assault within the party, that simply isn’t happening according to any objective factual data source. Crucially, these data sources are also backed up by the lived experience of many Jewish Labour Members.

Abusers in personal relationships use these techniques all of the time. Psychologists study them, therapists have to navigate them. Setting an impossible task and demanding a person (group or organisation) completes it, is an abusive and emotionally violent action. It's also a technique used to remove employee's from their jobs, insist they complete an ever increasing workload until it becomes impossible, then suggest they leave if they are not up to the task. An impossible task is also set when an abuser refuses to set clear and reasonable criteria for achievement.

Questions that must then be asked of those who make claims of ‘rampant’ and ‘institutional’ anti-semitism in the Labour Party are:

What is the reasonable and possible criteria to be met for you to conclude that Labour doesn’t have a 'rampant' problem with 'institutionalised' anti-semitism?

With 2-5% of the population considered to be anti-semitic is a 0.08% incidence among Labour members an indication that anti-semitism is not ‘rampant’ and ‘instituional’?

Is this data in fact evidence that there is less anti-semitism in the Labour Party than in society in general?

What specific and reasonable criteria do you require to conclude that Labour is combating anti-semitism effectively compared to any other group or organisation?

Accusations of failure to achieve a goal must be specific and accurate, and be accompanied by achievable guidelines that will satisfactorily demonstrate effective action is being achieved. This allows for clarity and progression, and ensures a harmonious working relationship as much as possible. Any person or organisation with a genuine interest in combating any form of racism would welcome a practice such as this. That is unless a person is using an accusation in an abusive manner where the accused is not really required to achieve an outcome, because the accusation and self proclaimed victim status of the accuser, serves that very person or group, and the main aim is not about reducing anti-semitism at all.

Racism cannot be combated without honesty, clarity, education and accountability. False allegations are damaging to any cause. We must have an atmosphere of transparency, where people are actively encouraged to share their views and most crucially are allowed to defend themselves. We cannot have justice if we oppose any of these actions, and those that wish to, their motives should be extremely suspect indeed. The weaponisation of anti-semitism to damage a political party is not unique to the UK and poses a threat to democracy wherever it occurs. Every time you are lied to by or about a political party your democratic right to clear and accurate information, from which you can make an informed choice, is taken away. Ultimately, if we want to beat the smear campaigns we have to be able to call them out for what they are.