Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[HVC]

She's not bigoted, she's a strategist, donchha know..

[Josquius]

... all that said, I think Josq's desire to focus on Israel as part of "understanding" antisemites is wrong and sterile and should be discarded.

You really think anti semitism on the left would take the same shape were it not for Israel being a thing?
The politics in that part of the world are pretty core to the problem..

If it wasn't for antisemitism many people wouldn't care.  We don't see mass marches about Syria, we are for the most part, okay with that.  There were plenty of protests when the US intervened to destroy ISIS, but massacres committed by Syrians against Syrians aren't worthy of mass protest.

Think about this for a minute.
Why do you think westerners might protest a bit more about western democracies killing civilians than when disconnected autocracies do?
There's a much more sensible answer than anti-semitism.
Though I am curious why you think protesting the US' actions is anti-semitism.

I think the Israel existing is a contributor to anti-semitism on the left, yes. Israel's excesses also contributes, on top of the fact that Israel merely exists.

However, "Israel existing" is a different category than "lack of employment", "lack of positive male role models", "no opportunities to interact positively with members of the [target group of the hate]", "overabundance of people preaching hate within the community", "lack of truthful information to counter the hate narratives", "lack of authority figures engaging in a positive, supportive way in the community", "lack of alternative outlets", "lack of vision of a positive future and path towards it", "underdeveloped sense of empathy" etc that typically are what allow hate and bigotry to flourish and violent radical groups to recruit.

All of those things I listed are things that a country or community can take action to alleviate, and which are effective.

This is getting towards the point though about anti-semitism on the left tending to be rather different to conventional racism.
The people with these beliefs tend not to be the left school at 16 young working class men with zero opportunities lashing out and blaming immigrants for all their problems...
Rather its more educated people who very often aren't doing so terribly in life and have latched onto Palestine as a cause to believe in. Its not their suffering they're stupidly lashing out about, its other people's.

Attempting to stop Israel from existing to counter anti-semitism is simply inane. Taking a national stance against any perceived Israeli excess may be the morally correct thing to do, but it is not going to lessen anti-semitism either (and may in fact increase it). Those are completely different categories of causes.

I'm not so sure there.
I think it would depend how its done.
If its just the shouty morons on the street getting into power and shouting Jews bad from a position of authority.... then yes. That absolutely would make things worse.
But I do think key to chilling out on the anti-semitism is getting a deeper understanding of the situation- grasping that a large chunk of Israelis are decent people who want peace too but due to the broken political setup they're often held hostage by the crazies who are the ones truly deserving the hate.
Not to mention empathising the "Yes Israel are doing bad, but why the fuck are you hating British Jews for this? They have nothing to do with it."
More people in power who are sane non anti-semitic critics of Israel would be a good thing. Both in itself and for tackling anti-semitism.

Flipping the scenario - there is a lot of anti-Muslim sentiment on the right. Some of it is most definitely driven by the excesses of radical Muslims. Nonetheless, when a local Mosque is vandalized or when someone drives a car into a local Muslim family out for an evening stroll killing grandparents and children the proper response is not "well it's understandable because Hamas killed some babies / Iran executes homosexuals / whatever else even if it's true." That's just asinine. And the line of reasoning is just as asinine when discussing anti-semitism and Israel.

Yes. That's a big part of the problem to deal with.

... all that said, I think Josq's desire to focus on Israel as part of "understanding" antisemites is wrong and sterile and should be discarded.

You really think anti semitism on the left would take the same shape were it not for Israel being a thing?
The politics in that part of the world are pretty core to the problem..

 I balme anti-semites for their antim-semitism. You appear to blame the Jews.

 

[Josquius]

Is she a super strategist?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/nov/08/tory-insiders-suggest-suella-braverman-trying-to-get-sacked

Is Braverman trying to get sacked? Some Tory insiders think so

Suella Braverman has been accused of daring No 10 to sack her with provocative comments designed to cement her position as the rightwing frontrunner to succeed Rishi Sunak as Conservative leader.

Former ministers and Tory insiders claim that the home secretary is deliberately making unauthorised statements on homelessness, demonstrations and multiculturalism to woo the party's hard-right base.

The prime minister has refused to endorse Braverman's claims that rough sleeping is sometimes a "lifestyle choice" and the flagship criminal justice bill has been delayed amid resistance from some cabinet ministers over her measures to stop tents being given to homeless people. Ministers have also refused to repeat Braverman's description of pro-Palestinian demonstrations as "hate marches".



Braverman's supporters say she is not undermining Sunak, but is instead speaking her mind, and is not pursuing a high-risk strategy that could easily backfire.

One MP said: "If she was sacked it would not be the end of Suella Braverman, but why do so? If you are sacked, people assume that it is for all sorts of reasons. It would make much more sense if she resigned on principle over an issue such as leaving the ECHR – and that scenario might arise in a few weeks."

...

Surely she can't  be stupid enough to think the Tories lurching even harder to the right would somehow work out for them?
I wonder whether there's some big 3D chess at play here where she hopes getting to be the leader of the Tories for a few horrible years in the wilderness might endear her to the hard right and setup a successful post-politics career.
At least that's the only remotely sane answer that comes to mind for me.

[Tamas]

... all that said, I think Josq's desire to focus on Israel as part of "understanding" antisemites is wrong and sterile and should be discarded.

You really think anti semitism on the left would take the same shape were it not for Israel being a thing?
The politics in that part of the world are pretty core to the problem..

I still don't get what that matters. Terrorism and islamist extremism contribute to hate against Muslims, and seeing black/gypsy perpetrators on TV contributes as excuse for hate on blacks/gypsies. So what?

[Tamas]

Is she a super strategist?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/nov/08/tory-insiders-suggest-suella-braverman-trying-to-get-sacked

Is Braverman trying to get sacked? Some Tory insiders think so

Suella Braverman has been accused of daring No 10 to sack her with provocative comments designed to cement her position as the rightwing frontrunner to succeed Rishi Sunak as Conservative leader.

Former ministers and Tory insiders claim that the home secretary is deliberately making unauthorised statements on homelessness, demonstrations and multiculturalism to woo the party's hard-right base.

The prime minister has refused to endorse Braverman's claims that rough sleeping is sometimes a "lifestyle choice" and the flagship criminal justice bill has been delayed amid resistance from some cabinet ministers over her measures to stop tents being given to homeless people. Ministers have also refused to repeat Braverman's description of pro-Palestinian demonstrations as "hate marches".



Braverman's supporters say she is not undermining Sunak, but is instead speaking her mind, and is not pursuing a high-risk strategy that could easily backfire.

One MP said: "If she was sacked it would not be the end of Suella Braverman, but why do so? If you are sacked, people assume that it is for all sorts of reasons. It would make much more sense if she resigned on principle over an issue such as leaving the ECHR – and that scenario might arise in a few weeks."

...

Surely she can't  be stupid enough to think the Tories lurching even harder to the right would somehow work out for them?
I wonder whether there's some big 3D chess at play here where she hopes getting to be the leader of the Tories for a few horrible years in the wilderness might endear her to the hard right and setup a successful post-politics career.
At least that's the only remotely sane answer that comes to mind for me.

She may be just really this nasty and convinced that's what people want. I mean, look at Truss. She was and argue still is, more prominent in Tory ranks and is incredibly delusional in her politics. Why not Braverman?

[Admiral Yi]

I absolutely think anti semitism would take a different form if Israel weren't a thing.  It would be three cranks bitching about the Rothschilds.

[Josquius]

... all that said, I think Josq's desire to focus on Israel as part of "understanding" antisemites is wrong and sterile and should be discarded.

You really think anti semitism on the left would take the same shape were it not for Israel being a thing?
The politics in that part of the world are pretty core to the problem..

I still don't get what that matters. Terrorism and islamist extremism contribute to hate against Muslims, and seeing black/gypsy perpetrators on TV contributes as excuse for hate on blacks/gypsies. So what?

If nutters believe Hungarian people are kidnapping children for sacrifices to the paprika god then their hate will develop in quite a different way to if they just think Hungarians speak funny and they're a soft target to pick on for fun.
How and where the attacks happen will differ and the way to tackle this hate and stop it from happening will differ significantly.

If we imagine some theoretical world where Israel just never happened, I honestly don't see anti-semitism on the left being such an issue. You'd still get some crazies with the old school Jews are the puppet masters of capitalism stuff, but from the left at least I can't see this being on anything like the same level, nor would it really show itself in the same way.

[Tamas]

I absolutely think anti semitism would take a different form if Israel weren't a thing.  It would be three cranks bitching about the Rothschilds.

Indeed. It was funny (in a sad way) realising during my readings on WW1 that during that period the excuse for widespread antisemitism (including in leadership of the various countries) was that the Jews had "no country of their own" therefore their loyalties could not be trusted. Now that they have had "their own country" they cannot be trusted for this specific reason. Ridiculous.

[Tamas]

... all that said, I think Josq's desire to focus on Israel as part of "understanding" antisemites is wrong and sterile and should be discarded.

You really think anti semitism on the left would take the same shape were it not for Israel being a thing?
The politics in that part of the world are pretty core to the problem..

I still don't get what that matters. Terrorism and islamist extremism contribute to hate against Muslims, and seeing black/gypsy perpetrators on TV contributes as excuse for hate on blacks/gypsies. So what?

If nutters believe Hungarian people are kidnapping children for sacrifices to the paprika god then their hate will develop in quite a different way to if they just think Hungarians speak funny and they're a soft target to pick on for fun.
How and where the attacks happen will differ and the way to tackle this hate and stop it from happening will differ significantly.

If we imagine some theoretical world where Israel just never happened, I honestly don't see anti-semitism on the left being such an issue. You'd still get some crazies with the old school Jews are the puppet masters of capitalism stuff, but from the left at least I can't see this being on anything like the same level, nor would it really show itself in the same way.

But there was society-wide antisemitism well before Israel was ever a thing, and I mean centuries of it. Remember, the East European Jews mostly eradicated during WW2 were descendants of Jews fleeing Western Europe due to persecution in the Middle Ages. But regardless of that, anti-semitism being in the social fabric up to and including the 20th century pretty much everywhere (and the UK especially) is quite well documented and understood.

Being a leftie does not automatically and promptly remove centuries worth of ingrained cultural patterns. Israel is an excuse, not a root cause.

[Josquius]

But there was society-wide antisemitism well before Israel was ever a thing, and I mean centuries of it. Remember, the East European Jews mostly eradicated during WW2 were descendants of Jews fleeing Western Europe due to persecution in the Middle Ages. But regardless of that, anti-semitism being in the social fabric up to and including the 20th century pretty much everywhere (and the UK especially) is quite well documented and understood.

Sure.
But the holocaust certainly did a lot to harden attitudes towards anti semitism, and casual hate in general as the 20th century has gone on is much reduced. Arguably except vs. Travellers (Which thinking about it make for quite an interesting ying-yang with Jewish people, both groups living alongside the mainstream, traditionally widely reviled and hated, but for opposite reasons).

Being a leftie does not automatically and promptly remove centuries worth of ingrained cultural patterns. Israel is an excuse, not a root cause.

Completely disagree.
I think you vastly over-estimate how baked in this stuff is in the UK.
It wasn't until I was a tween and saw South Park that I particularly became aware of Jews and anti-semitism.
Growing up with a lot of casual racism around me I can't recall ever hearing anything about Jewish people.
For left wing anti-Semites, anti-Zionism comes first, general hate vs. Jews grows from this.

[Sheilbh]

Strong piece on anti-semitism in Britain by Anthony Julius, who's written a history of anti-semitism in England and a fantastic book about anti-semitism and TS Eliot ("The rats are underneath the piles. The jew is underneath the lot./Money in furs." etc):

This is Britain's antisemitic moment — and our institutions are failing to respond
Anthony Julius
Sunday November 05 2023, 12.01am, The Sunday Times

At the university where I teach in London, the local branch of the lecturers' union has just passed a motion calling for "intifada until victory!" The university's Jewish studies department notifies students of lecture venues by text, for fear of disruption. Students at Jewish Society lunches are protected by security guards. Jewish students stay on campus for only as long as they need to, and then leave. The general sentiment is, better to conceal all signs of their Jewishness.

Since the October 7 massacres in southern Israel, there have been 988 antisemitic incidents in the UK. There were 47 assaults, 66 cases of damage and desecration to Jewish property, 106 cases of direct threats to Jews, 767 cases of abusive behaviour and two instances of mass-produced antisemitic material. These are the recorded incidents, as of last Friday; the actual number of incidents is higher.

Every Jewish person now has a story to tell. "Yid army" was shouted at Jewish schoolgirls on a London bus. A Jewish boy was chased down a road by youths saying: "Let's see you run, Jew boy." At a London train station, a Jewish girl was told: "I hope you and all your people die in the war." A Leeds Uber driver raged at a passenger: "Jews hate Palestinians, are all settlers and deserve everything they get."

A Jewish student organisation was sent a threat, accompanied by a video of beheaded babies, saying: "You must be killed, all of you." In London, a graffito depicted a Star of David hanging from a noose next to the word "Yids." Jewish schoolboys on an Underground platform were told: "I don't want to be in a carriage with you f***ing Jews." A man drove past a Leeds synagogue and shouted: "Allahu Akbar." Posters of Jewish hostages have been removed or defaced in London, Manchester and Leeds.

Much of this hateful behaviour is by people who vehemently deny that they are antisemitic. They insist that they are instead "anti-Zionist." What would it mean to take them at their word? Take the October 7 massacres in Israel, and their celebration in many of the world's cities, and ponder; what is the content of this "anti-Zionism"?

There have been a few anti-Zionisms in history. It is important not to muddle them. The first versions were internal to the Jewish world. The early Arab versions, opposing Jewish statehood in any part of what was then called Palestine, exhausted themselves when Israel was established.

Anti-Zionism then divided. In its positive, creative form, it became another name for the project to establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel. It rejected Israeli hegemony; it craved independence. Once established, who knew what associations, what partnerships, would emerge between the neighbouring states? There were Jewish and Arab Israelis, and Jews and Arabs the world over, who dreamt these dreams.

In its negative, destructive form, it continued to pursue opposition, but now to an actual state rather than merely the Jewish project of a state. It was driven by anger at injustices — real, exaggerated and imagined; it strove to keep alive the ambitions of the pre-1948 anti-Zionism, though in the face of an increasingly powerful Israel, it oscillated between dispirited resignation and fantasies of conquest.

The creative anti-Zionism then itself soured, while the negative anti-Zionism became ever more destructive. Hamas represents this negative anti-Zionism in its most degenerate, lethal iteration.

It is possible to be an anti-Zionist and oppose Hamas; indeed, such a position might describe most Palestinians.

What then is the Hamas-style anti-Zionism that was on display on October 7, and which has, bewilderingly, attracted support in this country? It is a programme of annihilation. In its poverty of imagination, and in its bloodlust, it is mere slogans, chants, and words of abuse. It wishes the state of Israel out of existence. It justifies the wish by insisting that it should never have come into existence. No measures for its removal are objectionable; no price in death and destruction is too high.

Since this state, like all others, is comprised of its citizens, for the state to disappear the citizens must disappear too. Every brutality against them is permitted; atrocity loses its opprobrium. "Resistance" is indivisible and is free to take any form. Torture, rape, murder are absolutely fine; no distinction is made between soldiers and civilians, citizens and visitors, men and women, adults and children. All can be hunted down and killed.

This anti-Zionism has no conception of what state structures might replace a destroyed Israel. In its nihilism, it holds that no state would be preferable to a Jewish state. Hamas calls for victory, and plans a wasteland — from the river to the sea.

Their principal slogan, "settler colonial state", is historical nonsense: the founding generations of Jews were agents of no imperial power, and in their deepest religious and cultural longings were returning to the land that had once been their ancestors'. Many Israelis are from families expelled from Arab countries.

This "anti-Zionism" has nothing to do, then, with the hard, painstaking work of building peace, remedying injustices, reaching compromises. It is a programme of extermination. The world witnessed its first implementation on October 7.

With such "anti-Zionism" it hardly matters whether it is also antisemitic. Though of course it is, right to its heart.

Antisemitism threatens Jewish lives, Jewish security, and Jewish morale. It denies to Jews the rights others enjoy; it withholds from them equality of treatment and regard. It grants a general permission to engage in the otherwise impermissible — words of insult and blame, snubbing and bullying, deeds of violence, boycott, and exclusion. All the ordinary restraints may be put aside: it is impossible to behave disgracefully to a disgraced people.

It allows a phoney progressivism: antisemites make displays of compassion, while concealing their malice. It allows a phoney bravado: antisemites make displays of courage and fortitude, while facing no actual threat.

One way in which today's antisemitism differs from previous antisemitisms is that no one now admits to it. It is pursued under the banner of "antiracism". The Jews are the racists; to be anti-racist is to be anti-Jewish. We should not be misled. Antisemitism has survived the discrediting of its name.

Britain is now passing through an antisemitic "moment". That is, a period of intensified hostility towards Jews. The last moment was during the Corbyn period.

What are the characteristics of the present one? First, a widespread incitement of violence against Jews. The "Zionists and Zionist apologists" are promoting "genocide in Palestine", tweets an inciter. By "Zionist apologists", of course, he means the generality of British Jews. What, we may wonder, is the proper response to promoters of genocide? Surely, anything and everything is justified. Cast as enemies of humanity, violence against Jews is excused in advance.

Second, intimidatory, mob behaviour. Last week, a man was arrested on a march, chanting "God's curse be upon the Jews" and "God's curse be on Israel". At another rally, two women led a chant about a 7th-century battle when Jews were killed by an Islamic army. Look at the videos of the rallies: what is most striking is the joy of the marchers. There is something akin to a carnival atmosphere, rich in fellow-feeling and camaraderie. "From London to Gaza we'll have an intifada" is a chant. The implication: London's Jews, beware.

Third, a partial failure by state institutions — the BBC, the police, the universities, the Crown Prosecution Service — to meet the challenge of this antisemitic moment. The BBC? The unforgivable misreporting of the al-Ahli hospital incident, in which Gaza's ministry of health, which is run by Hamas, deliberately told the world a false story and grossly exaggerated the number of deaths. The police? The wilful refusal to hear calls for "jihad" as calls for Jewish deaths. The universities? Consider the opening paragraph of this piece. The CPS? The lethargic prosecution of crimes of incitement.

The lethargy was already apparent two years ago, when the men who drove through London's Jewish suburbs, shouting "F*** the Jews, rape their daughters" were allowed to avoid trial.

The moment is further enabled by more general factors. Social media above all, of course. It puts antisemites in contact with each other, establishing online "communities" committed to Jew-hatred. It permits mob-like online attacks on Jews. It has enabled new technologies of belligerence. It is the first milieu where antisemitism can thrive without opposition or limitation.

And beyond this, a deeply tribalist politics in which utterly different standards are applied to political friends and political enemies. A ready credulity, a willingness to believe any story, even if patently false, if discreditable to one's enemies or creditable to one's friends. And the reverse, a ready incredulity, a refusal to believe any story, even if patently true, again determined by whether of friend or enemy.

Last, an unembarrassed embracing of the most absurd simplifications of any political dispute, which is then cast as melodrama, the wholly good confronting the wholly wicked, pure victims at the mercy of demonic aggressors.

Jews are demoralised and isolated. We know something about the people who wish us harm that we didn't know before — that there is no atrocity horrible enough to give them pause for thought. We know that we cannot fully rely upon the institutions in which we hitherto invested so much trust. This is knowledge that we never anticipated. But then, nor did we think that we would worry about the safety of our children at nurseries, schools and universities, or our fellow Jews in synagogues and in public places.

Demoralisation should not be confused with passivity, still less with weakness of resolve. The same resolve the Jewish community showed in the Corbyn period will be shown now. But it has not been long, this period of reprieve. The Jews have known peace for a mere four years.

Unless this current moment abates, the great Anglo-Jewish compact, which has endured for nearly 400 years, will fracture.

Anthony Julius is deputy chairman of Mishcon de Reya. He is chair of law and the arts at University College London

The fee for this article has been donated to the Community Security Trust, a charity that seeks to protect British Jews from antisemitism and anti-Jewish terrorism

Being a leftie does not automatically and promptly remove centuries worth of ingrained cultural patterns. Israel is an excuse, not a root cause.

Also I think there is an old and distinctive left anti-semitism. As I say part of it is just the simplistic socialism of fools stuff.

But you think of HG Wells - as well asn author he was a socialist, a Labour party candidate, with the Webbs a leader of the Fabians. Strongly internationalist and committed to the League of Nations and the ideas of international law including human rights law. He was an icon of the left in Britain and I think globally in the pre-war world - he's the author of War of the Worlds, so a huge cultural figure. I think he changed after the war, but in the 30s he viewed Nazism and fascism as awful and to be opposed aboslutely - but he also viewed it as "inverted Judaism".

For this strand of left critique which I think still exists in England, Jews are problematic because they insist on their specific, particular identity which is narrow minded, gets in the way of great universalist projects - and provokes other specific, particular identities in turn. He famously fell out with his friend, a Jewish playwright (and associate of Herzl), Israel Zangwill because he could not understand why Zangwill insisted on what he viewed as "special pleading" for Jews - and the reason is two thousand years of European anti-semitism.

Michael Coren records the anecdote of one Jewish acquaintance in the late 30s asking Wells what he thought was going to happen to the Jews of Europe. Wells responded that the question he should ask is "what is going to happen to mankind?" The man responded "but my people...", and Wells interrupted "that is exactly what's the matter with them."

As I say I can't help but hear echoes of that in Corbyn's "of course I condemn all forms of racism"/"I condemn all attacks against civilians".

I think it is impossible for there to be a couple of thousand years of history of a form of bigotry without that in some way shaping or influencing contemporary bigotry of the same type. In the same way as I don't think you can remove contemporary Islamophobia from 1500 years of the same and the Muslim as Europe's Other. Similarly anti-black racism with the racism of slavery and colonialism. When you have an embedded set of cultural norms for centuries - and then you have a re-occurrence of the same social pattern there is going to be a relationship (even if it is oppositional).

[Sheilbh]

One for Tamas

Glen O'Hara
@gsoh31
I sincerely believe that even after a huge asteroid hit the planet, there would even then be banner headlines shouting 'But British house prices are still surging!'
https://news.sky.com/story/good-news-for-homeowners-with-average-house-price-predicted-to-be-16345000-higher-by-2028-13003105?

Good news for homeowners with average house price predicted to be £45,000 higher by 2028

The research, released by property adviser Savills, predicts average property value will increase to £300,108 in 2028.

Separately - but not that separately - this. The Green Belt has been an astonishingly successful piece of policy at doing what it set out to do: stop sprawl around Britain's cities. The UK has a solid tech sector particularly in some areas and lots of ambitious targets around it. The UK is also determined to protect our historic views from motorway bridges over landfill sites:

John Burn-Murdoch
@jburnmurdoch
Britain's planning system is a monumental act of national self-sabotage, exhibit #4729.

A big new data centre (which the country really needs) right next to a huge motorway is refused permission because "the buildings would be visible from the bridges across the motorway"

Me, while crossing a bridge over a massive 8-lane motorway: "Man I would hate it if they spoiled this view"
The site in question:

Scrubland (the lake is a disused quarry and landfill site) framed by a huge motorway to the west, a huge electricity substation to the north, an industrial park to the east, and another road to the south
But this is cause for celebration, of course!

As noted elsewhere the M25 ("a relatively new piece of infrastructure") was opened in 1975 and completed in 1986

[Tamas]

Yes, it is crucial that new buildings built are not visible to the public.

[Valmy]

So do you have to build anything new underground? Maybe with some kind of reflecting mirror/invisibility technology?

[Sheilbh]

So do you have to build anything new underground? Maybe with some kind of reflecting mirror/invisibility technology?

Maybe. I think invisible/underground building would still qualify as sprawl, even if they wouldn't reduce the amenity value of *checks notes* the Woodlands Park Landfill Site.

It is, I think, the most promising thing about Starmer's agenda - in particular that he's called out the Green Belt as a problem. But also in the last few weeks he's also said the judicial review system (particularly around planning) needs reforming and has doubled down on his support for Sizewell C which he said needs to move forward at pace. His stuff on judicial review cited the Sizewell C one and that despite 40,000 pages of environmental impact assessments - it had not properly assessed the environmental impact, I think, of its permanent water supply so the government was wrong to give consent.