Democracy in the UK may well be a sham

What the fuck?

Seriously? What the fucking fuck!? What the fucking hell is this bullshit I have heard this morning!? It’s hard for me to be charitable in describing the profound anger that coursed through me on hearing this news.

Apparently, the British High Court has decided that Prime Minister Theresa May cannot invoke Article 50 and officially leave the European Union without a vote from MPs in Parliament. We already had a democratic vote, a democratic referendum, and Leave won. This was our vote, and it’s being taken away from us right from under our feet!

What part of “we won, you lost” doesn’t the establishment understand? What part of democracy don’t they understand? What is even the point of having a democracy if the people can vote for an outcome and then that outcome can be effectively blocked by some elites who had no say in the matter?

The imbeciles that swarm our government want you to believe that it’s not clear what a Brexit means, even when it should be obvious what a Brexit means: leaving the European Union. That means no longer being part of its trading bloc, which no longer being subject to its regulations or to its centralization of power or to the rule of super-rich bureaucrats who cannot be accounted for in any democratic process. What part of that was lost on people? Oh that’s right! They didn’t care about democracy at all! People only cared about economic benefits and immigration. And their precious cult of diversity in the case of the Remainers. When I voted Leave I did so without a care in the world for any of that because all that mattered to me was liberty, freedom and sovereignty. To me, therefore, there is no confusion. And I don’t care if you feel misled or misinformed during your vote. You made your bed, now you can either lie in that bad or get fucked!

What’s worse is that the politicians also kept pushing the lie that people have changed their minds, when in reality only a small segment of the population changed their minds. There is not a doubt in my mind that when Parliament gets to vote on this, the outcome will be Remain because of the anti-Brexit sentiment that pervades much of the government based on what I have seen of them both before and after the Brexit vote.

If the government betrays the people by refusing to accept their collective democratic will, then they will have undermined democracy whilst keeping their own country beholden to an anti-democratic economic bloc headed by delusional elites who don’t give a fuck about the man on the street and can’t be voted out of their jobs. They will have rejected liberty, and chosen tyranny. And if that happens, I will have a burning hatred of this country, or at least just this country’s government, for a long time. And then, one day after I graduate from university and am fully financially prepared, I will be happy to set foot on the United States of America.

National suicide in the name of Jesus Christ

The migration crisis in Europe is no better than it was before, except now we in the UK are apparently faced with reports of migrants being entered into the country and recognized as children when in fact they were adult men in their 20s. In fact, the Home Office has revealed that two thirds of so-called child refugees are in fact over the age of 18. There was even a story that came out recently of a women who adopted a young migrant who turned to be a 21-one year old jihadi and child abuse porn enthusiast. Meanwhile, I have no reason to believe that countries like Germany, Sweden, France, Denmark and the rest of the European Union are faring much better than they were before – still experiencing an increasing burden on their economy and an increase in crime, accompanied by the slow rise of radical changes to the culture, demographics and cohesion of the country.

And yet I have a feeling that nothing’s going to change. Lily Allen will still bleat for us to show some blind compassion to everyone being allowed into the country in the way that they are, even as it looks like a lot of them actually don’t deserve our compassion – particularly economic migrants from countries other than Syria, as well as young Syrian men who appear to be in fighting shape and for all we know left their families to suffer or die in their own war-torn country just to get a slice of the pie that awaits them in Europe. She’ll probably do it from a very privileged position too, being a celebrity after all, and without taking in any refugees herself. We’ll probably see more people like Gary Lineker virtue signal in support of an agenda that the people of the UK and Europe didn’t ask for. John Oliver is probably going to grandstand about this issue again, probably using disabled children as an emotional appeal like the disgusting shill he has proven himself to be in recent months. The European Union will probably continue its bullheaded stance of maintaining its open borders regardless of the mounting cost (thank gods we voted to Leave).

Let me ask you this question regarding the European migration crisis: how is the pathological altruism that leads to the mentality of “we must accept all the refugees” not drawn from a desire to be more Christ-like? I think Mark Steel in The Belfast Telegraph put it best:

When you see the rage and fury from politicians and newspapers about whether the child refugees we’re allowing in are actually children, it makes you proud we’re a Christian nation. Because we all remember the sermon of Jesus, in which he said: “Let the suffering children come, for the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as these – but not him, he’s 19 if he’s a day. Look at his stubble, he can clear off and get crucified by the Romans.”

And if you go into the article and scroll down to the comments section you will quickly find him being dismissed and/or mocked as the ideologue he seems to be. But, bizarrely enough, I think he illustrates where part of the pressure to take in refugees is coming from. “What’s wrong with you? Aren’t you good Christians? What would Jesus do?”. I know it doesn’t seem that way, due to religion being by and large absent from the rhetoric and Europe being largely secular. But if most of the people shouting their false virtue from on high are secular or atheistic, they came across to me as nothing more than what Anton LaVey called the Christian Atheists – people who may have left the Christian religion and do not believe in or worship a God, but still retain at least parts of Christian morality and ultimately preserve Christian mentality. Or maybe they’re the typical “liberal” (I prefer the term progressive to describe them, honestly) Christians you might see on social media using Christianity as a prop for their own progressive politics (presumably while complaining about those evil right-wingers doing the same for their politics). Just look at what you find on Google Images if you want to find a good illustration of their ideas. Personally I suspect a lot of it comes from America. For you see, in America, even people who believe America wasn’t a Christian nation to begin with are willing enough to fight over whether or not Jesus was more suited to liberalism or conservatism. I, meanwhile, am not in the least bit concerned about whether American liberals or conservatives faithfully observe the teachings of a dead Nazarene. I don’t doubt too much that many of the people who bleat on about the pathological altruism they espouse having the teachings of Jesus Christ or Christianity somewhere in the back of their minds, subtly influenced by the useless altruism of both.

As a Satanist, and as a Luciferian and outside both realms, I reject Jesus Christ. I reject Christianity. I reject the inane and anti-pragmatic altruism that would otherwise please the sight of the lamb of Jehovah. I believe that individuals are naturally oriented towards their own needs, and the select others that they care about through whom they may fulfill certain needs. And I don’t think there is anything wrong with nations looking about for their own interests, mainly by nations putting the interests of the nation and its people first. That is nothing less than a Satanic principle. To me, a nation choosing to go the opposite route in the face of domestic political reality smacks of suicide. And it shall be suicide in the name of Jesus Christ.

The Crucifixion of Jesus

Of course, that may not be absolutely true for a lot of these progressive figureheads. They could simply be seeking the cheap high that they attain through showing their false sense of virtue. In which case, I can only hope they enjoy such a foolish high while they are still able to do so.

Haram Month #15 – The rise of the prison terror cult

According to the Telegraph, a disturbing new report reveals that there is a culture of cultural sensitivity towards Muslim prisoners in British prisons, which is leading to a rise in extremism in those prisons. In other words, the police are looking the other way when people are doing something wrong because they happen to be Muslims.

This is exactly how the Rotherham grooming gangs were allowed to continue abusing children for 16 years. This is the kind of thing Tommy Robinson talks about and has warned people about.

And since Anjem Choudary is in prison I have no doubt that, unless he spends his time in solitary confinement, he may yet be one of the self-styled emirs that act like basically cult leaders. Imagine it: a man like Choudary, with a proven history of radicalizing and indoctrinating people in order to get them to commit terrorist acts, prison staff not being able to stop them because of religious sensitivity and then one day the terrorists he radicalizes get released from jail only to commit atrocities guided by the influence of their self-styled emir.

Unless the culture of police being bound to the irrational fear of being labelled a racist simply for exercising their duty changes, we may look forward to significant loss of innocent life. One of these days, we will be unable to escape the price we pay for political correctness.

Haram Month #9 – The convicting of Anjem Choudary

When I heard that Anjem Choudary had been convicted yesterday (or rather it was revealed that he had been convicted last month, it struck me at first as an issue that I have actually had to wrestle with and needed some clarification on.

For those who don’t know who Anjem Choudarey is, he is a notorious British Salafist Muslim preacher and activist known for his advocacy of the implementation of sharia law in the UK and his demonstrations against Western civilization. He, along with Islamist cleric Omar Bakri Muhammad, founded such radical Islamic organizations as Al-Muhajiroun, Al Ghurabaa and Islam4UK, and was a prominent and divisive figure in the Islamic world who made many TV appearances. He was known to have spoken out in support of jihad as an obligation for Muslims to fulfill, and in 2014 he went so far as to pledge allegiance to ISIL and encourage others to do so – the latter of which to lead to him being arrested. He is seen as a hate preacher, and I don’t doubt that many people (especially people who are of a socially conservative disposition) wanted him banned. I also have no doubt there were and still are a lot of Muslims who distance themselves from Choudary and claim this man is an enemy of Islam – to which Choudary would probably respond by saying that it is in fact they who are the enemies of Islam.

What annoyed me was how the much of the mainstream media and Ella Whelan from Spiked looked at Choudary’s conviction and seemed to paint this as a free speech issue – that the man was arrested solely because of inciting and preaching “hate”. Him being a hate preacher, one who spews “bile and hate”, and the prospect of him being “gagged” and “shut up” is the primary focus of it for much of the media, to the point that is makes me think that the man was being convicted solely for hate speech. Don’t get me started on The Independent, which their “free speech has its limits” shit. That mantra almost had me defending Choudary. Ella Whelan from Spiked was just as bad, because on the day Choudary was convicted she talked about how censoring Choudary’s views was a bad thing, and the next day she appeared on a Sky News debate to talk about this from a pro-free speech lens.

But let me tell you what I have come to understand: this is not a free speech issue. Both the people who support freedom of speech and the people who thinking it should be curtailed are looking at the issue the wrong way. From what I have read, Choudary actually has a history of recruiting people and indoctrinating them. He recruited people to fight for Osama bin Laden. Al-Muhajiroun, one of his organizations, had been known to actually radicalize individuals who would then go out to commit, or attempt to commit, terrorist attacks. Examples include the shoe bomber Richard Reid, the dirty bomber Dhiren Barot, the 7/7 bombers, the Transatlantic Bomb plotter and the men who murdered Lee Rigby. Choudary also taught six of the nine men who planned to send mail bombs to various targets, radicalized a young man named Brustroth Ziamani  and he had been in contact with a teenager in Australia who was planning to carry out an attack on Anzac Day last year. To my mind, him protesting and talking about Islamism wasn’t the only thing he was doing. He had indeed been in contact with individuals who would then go on to carry out attacks, and he had been recruiting and helping to radicalize individuals so that they can carry out terrorist attacks and murders in the name of Allah. There isn’t a doubt in my mind that when he contacts potential radicals he is teaching, instructing and radicalizing them giving that he actually supports the spread of Islamism by force. Really, the term “hate preacher” simply doesn’t do him justice, for he was more than that – he was a recruiter. I wish the media would use the term “terror recruiter” or “jihad recruiter” more often than they use the term “hate preacher”.

Put simply, this is not a free speech issue. It’s a terrorism issue. If all Choudary had been doing was organizing protests and appearing on TV to preach his views, I would have no major issue other than with his views. But it’s not as simple as that. He was actively recruiting, radicalizing and training people to fight and wage jihad. So anyone who thinks this is about freedom of speech, whether from a pro or anti perspective, is simply in the wrong. While I do feel that Choudary’s conviction should not be used to justify an increase in censorship no matter how abhorrent your views are, there can be no doubt that Choudary crossed the line by directing people to commit violence let alone encourage support for ISIL. Not to mention the fact that the organization he founded is a jihadist organization with the intent of spreading sharia law through, well, encouraging jihad.

Shut up, my generation – the world doesn’t revolve only around us

I didn’t intend to go about writing another post-Brexit post (at least for now), but I have been thinking about the attitudes of the younger generation vs the political will of the older generation.

Now, before I begin to rant proper, let me show you some facts. First, here is a breakdown of the voter turnout based on age demographics, courtesy of Lord Ashcroft Polls.

As you can see, the majority of young people voted to Remain in the European Union. But as we get to the older portions of the demography of the UK, you find more people willing to leave until you get to the middle-aged and senior populations, the vast majority of whom voted to Leave.

Now, let’s take a look at the population “pyramid”, courtesy of Index Mundi.

It can be inferred that the 18-24-year-olds in this country (the youngest demographic eligible to vote) collectively make up a rather small portion of the overall demography of the United Kingdom. By contrast, the older generation (in this case the parents of the younger generation, who are likely to be in their 40’s or their 50’s) make up a larger portion of the demographic.

What’s more, according to a Sky Data survey, only 36% of 18-24’s actually turned up to vote. 58% of 25-34’s turned out to vote, while a comparatively whopping 72% of 35-44’s turned out to vote, and 75% of 45-54’s turned out to vote. 81% of 55-64’s turned out to vote, and 83% over-65’s turned out to vote. This makes people aged 65 and over the largest voting demographic in this referendum.

Given that most of the adults and old people voted to leave, I think that means something important. The people of my generation who so blindly support the EU and its apparent “benefits” simply don’t know what was like for their parents, and their grandparents for that matter, to live and work in the UK at a time when the EU was growing more and more powerful and having a real impact on their lives. The United Kingdom has been a member of the European Union since 1973. By then, my grandparents were in their 40’s and my parents were children. My grandparents will have lived to see Britain join the EU and to see it become what it is. They would likely have had on-the-ground experience of what this meant for their daily working lives and the communities in which they lived. My parents became adults in the mid or late 1980’s, and they too will have lived to see the EU have a notable effect on the EU, and they may have heard of how the EU has affected other countries that were a part of it. They would have looked at the problems of the EU, and decided that they didn’t want their country to be a part of it, and nor did they want their children to be a part of it. My mother told me that she didn’t want to see her granddaughter wearing a hijab. Now, I know what you might be thinking: she seems bigoted towards Muslims. But I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. I think it has more to do with the prospect of an increased number of Muslim migrants that might enter the country if we remained in the EU, and that’s not an entirely illegitimate or even bigoted concern. We have witnessed Europe take in a massive influx of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa, and in Germany’s case without proper processing, and we have come to find that a number of them have not integrated very well with the communities they became a part of. This means that the regressive attitudes towards women in particular that have been held within members of communities where such attitudes are considered normal are also imported into Europe unchecked, which has led to incidents of sexual harassment and even violence in European countries such as Germany and Sweden. The fact that some German politicians openly embrace the supplanting of its native population with the imported migrant population does not help matter. In my view, the adults and senior citizens who voted Leave did not like the European Union that much and were very concerned about the future that the next generation would inherit – a future they don’t realize they are heading towards.

So when I see young people complain that “their future” was “stolen” from them, I think “tough shit”. How self-centered do you have to be to think that the future being voted on belongs to your demographic alone? I’m not even sure how many of my generation have even had to work, yet they dare to presume that they know their parents worked hard to get to the point where they were born to begin with and could live the way they do now. To claim that their future has been stolen from them by people who actually give a damn about their future is fucking ludicrous. Especially when a lot of these young people probably went to Glastonbury 2016, which started the day before the referendum. And by the way, there were no polling stations at the Glastonbury festival. I mean sure, they could probably have sent postal votes before attending Glastonbury, but I’m not sure how many of them even bothered considering, again, so few of the festival’s likely audience bothered to vote in the first place. Can I just say that it figures that Glastonbury attendees, not to mention the festival organizers themselves, seem to be in favor of Remain? I always wondered why that fits so well with the modern day hippie ethos embraced by the festival and its attendants.

What is even worse is the way my generation decided to condemn their grandparents as bigots solely because they voted to leave the EU, and then claim that they should be barred from voting because they’re too old to know what’s going on. Which is, of course, both shameful and idiotic. There are people alive today who have fought in the Second World War, and they are now in their 80’s or their 90’s. They fought to protect their country from a power that threatened to consume Europe, and ultimately the world, and granted its subjects a horrible existence under an actual fascist dictatorship, and they were no doubt very concerned about the way their country was going in. Not to mention, they probably know more about fascism than most of the Remain camp think they. And yet the young Remainers are so ungrateful for what they’ve done to help secure their future and their country, so blind to it and so convinced that they are woefully out of touch with the world in which they live that they actually believe they should be barred from voting because they deem them to be bigots. They can’t prove that they are racist, sexist, homophobic, or fascist. They can’t prove any of that. They only believe this to be the case because they are old, and by rule this means you’re out of touch with the modern world. Or, in other words, they disagree with you. The sheer irony of their belief that the pro-Brexit voters, particularly the old, aren’t clever enough for politics is quite palpable. What do they know? They don’t know what the EU is like, and are incapable of registering the reasons why people like me, and people way older than me, don’t like it. They don’t know any better, but they’re arrogant enough to presume that they are the smart ones just because they’re in college or university – or because they are young. And I suspect they may well have been propagandized by their peers, through the culture they have absorbed, or through various other forces.

They honestly believe that the world centers around them, and the world must answer to their mostly malformed opinions and their blatant narcissism. They will reject the will of the majority because they don’t like it. They slander their elders, they bitch and cry about how their future has been “stolen” from them and they will fight tooth and nail to condemn and slander their elders and fight an outcome which cannot be fought, they will be hostile to anyone who disagrees with them, and they will reject democracy itself. And why? Because they’ve decided “we prefer it this way”. Well I reject their will. Their attitude is disgraceful; not just immature, but also perverted and immoral. And it is in no way good enough to convince to abandon the principles, convictions and values that I hold dear. The values of independence and sovereignty are what I treasure, and I am prepared to die with them even if they aren’t.

All you entitled young Remainers should realize that you have been weighed in the balance, and have been found wanting. Do you want to see the Carrousel? Because this is how you get the Carrousel!

The day we won

This morning I received some wonderful news: we, the British people, have voted to reject the will of the European Union. Brexit has been a spectacular success. And it surprised me that this might be the case. At first, it was starting to look like we might remain in the EU after all. Nigel Farage was ready to concede defeat. But when I woke up this morning, my brother told me that Brexit had been a success. 51.9% of people voted to leave the EU, while 48.1% voted to Remain. I’m happy to say that I was one of the people who voted to Leave. Even more surprisingly, while Scotland and Northern Ireland were predominantly in favor of Remaining, the vast majority of Wales (where I live) was in favor of leaving (though the capital city, Cardiff, was pro-Remain). This vote has been an exciting one, and it was interesting to find out that my brother and I, by pure coincidence, happened to be voting the same way as my mother, my father and my grandmother. As an admittedly as first-time voter, I feel like I have stood up and been counted in a decision that will effect the British and European political landscape and possibly even the global order, and that I have grown to appreciate participating in democracy since last year. I kind of expected us to be very different people. Not long after I found out we have left the EU, our Prime Minister David Cameron announced that he would resign in October, which frankly came as even better news – not only have we voted to leave the European Union, but David Cameron’s career as PM is also finished.

I’m going to be honest, I think that David Cameron took the result better than I expected him to. He has congratulated the Leave campaign for its passion and its spirit, and even though he is resigning over this vote, he respectfully admitted defeat like a man of virtue. That is something I never thought I would say about David Cameron. He handled it better than Tim Farron of the Liberal Democrats, that’s for damn sure. Farron accused Jeremy Corbyn of being spineless in the Remain campaign, and is now still thinking the Liberal Democrats ought to make the case for a pro-EU Britain. What a joke. He handled it better than The Guardian, which quickly burst into depression after having defended the establishment so enthusiastically while slandering ordinary people. He handled it better than Scotland, who aren’t going to take Brexit lying down – not to mention, SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon has condemned Brexit as “democratically unacceptable”, which is obviously just some nonsensical way of saying that she doesn’t like the way the British majority voted. And he handled it better than fucking Jerry Barnett of Sex and Censorship who remarked that Brexit was “good timing for his new book on fascism”. What a piece of scum. He insinuated that the Leave camp was nothing more than a collective outcry of hatred, xenophobia, and fascism. I personally, have met few to no Brexiters who exhibited such traits, and can find no evidence of fascism in the Leave campaign. I would have thought Jerry Barnett would have been above this. This is a man who, three days before the referendum, wrote a post condemning the identity politics that has taken over the left wing, and he himself noted that it was the horrible evil through which anyone who disagreed with a narrative was dismissed as a bigot. How is tarring Brexit voters as fascists any different, you brazen hypocrite! It’s also worth noting that Barnett claims that the EU is on the side that against censorship, when in fact this is a proven lie. In fact, if you think a giant bastion of authoritarian corporate power that we the people can never control or hold to account is our ally on the matter of censorship and freedom of speech, you are very uninformed.

Speaking of handling Brexit, it is very telling that a number of people on the Remain camp are saying that they will leave the UK because Britain left the EU. They are considering leaving the country over a result they didn’t like, after condemning Leave-voters as “quitters”! This is textbook brazen hypocrisy. What’s more, some have decided to sign a petition calling for a second EU referendum. Are you people kidding me? This is pathetic. But, ultimately, it is perfectly consistent with their support of the European Union – an antidemocratic institution that has, in the past, either ignored the will of the demos in its member states or tried to alter it. What’s even worse that they took to slandering the generations that raised them and secured their future for them simply because the majority of them decided that staying in the European Union. The young pro-Remain people are shocked, SHOCKED, that the will of the British people doesn’t necessarily revolve around them. They can’t bear to think that anyone else knows better than them, so they decide to slander their elders, perhaps even their own family members, as xenophobes, as bigots, racists, and out of touch. All because they, quite frankly, have their heads full of bullshit. They believe the EU represents inclusion, friendship, tolerance, diversity, togetherness and all that progressive stuff, but that is not the EU that I and everyone else who voted Leave understands it to be – put simply, they chosen to reduce the issue to love vs hate, and not as a matter of principle but as a matter of blind group-think. And to that end they will slander their elders and the working class, they will sign a petition, they will moan about how shameful it is to be British and to be concerned about national identity, and as I write this post they are planning on protesting the will of the demos just as the leftists did last year in order to try and get the Conservative Party out of government. As I said earlier, we have stood up and have been counted. Those who voted Leave are celebrating what it is to be British and the principle they fought for, while many of those who voted Remain are now openly rejecting the will of the demos and acting like fucking children. And the thing is, it strikes me as rich that they accuse us Leavers of being bigots and fascists and of poisoning British politics, when they are among the most hateful people in the country. They talk of Leave encouraging “divide and rule”, why they have divided the people and stirred the pot for ages!

The irony of all this is that it seems that re-electing the Conservative Party may, in the long run, have been a good idea after all. Think about it: David Cameron promised the British people an EU membership referendum last year, and now we had it and we’re going to leave the EU. If they didn’t win the general election, I don’t think we would have had that referendum at all. Believe me, out of all the other parties you may have voted for last year, only the Tories and UKIP wanted a referendum. If we voted for Labour, the Lib Dems or the Greens, we might not be at this historic point. And all you people who may have voted Remain in order to oppose the Tories? You people should be happy because, yes, while we will still have a Tory government, the PM you wanted to get rid of is now resigning his leadership of the Conservative Party! Is that not a plus side for you guys?

But out of all this, I feel like I have grown a lot from this. And even though I might feel a little more attached to America, I can honestly say I feel proud to be British, and happy to be a citizen of this country, or at least for now. And if America loses its way with no going back, I’d rather not live anywhere but here in Britain unless I had a damned good reason not to. I have gone from doubting democracy on my blog to embracing it wholeheartedly as an important cornerstone of the Western tradition of liberty, and I think I have some newfound respect for the old working class in my country. But there is more to be done. The Tories need a new leader, and there’s word that Labour might get rid of Jeremy Corbyn. All the while, both the British and the European political landscape is set to change and there is no going back. Scotland, as I said, won’t take this lying down and there’s talk of another Scottish referendum. All the while, EU referendums are being talked about for European countries like France, the Netherlands, Italy, Austria, the Czech Republic and even Germany, and I have a feeling that the tensions between the European establishment and the people will continue. Not to mention, I believe the American political establishment still has their eyes on post-Brexit Britain and are looking for a stake in it. But this shift we are seeing in the political landscape of the UK, Europe and possibly all of the Western world will is palpable, the chaos that awaits it and the establishment shall be interesting to follow. All the while, I promise to be as mindful as possible and do whatever part I can. And if Brussels rejects the will of the British demos, I will make my voice heard.

But for now, I am happy take up Nigel Farage’s suggestion that June 23rd be celebrated as Britain’s Independence Day, and I would celebrate it just as I would celebrate July 4th as America’s independence day and the birth of the American ideal. Stay awesome Britannia!

Let the Union Jack fly on.

Zionism, anti-Semitism, and the Labour debacle

Remember in one of my posts where I mentioned the Labour Party in the UK has a lot of crazy people in it, including a woman who claimed Hitler was the “greatest man in history”? Well it turns out Labour has had a very public controversy over apparently anti-Semitic remarks, with a lot of talk of Jeremy Corbyn taking action regarding MPs like Naz Shah and Ken Livingstone over their remarks. That a big deal has been made over comments that really are nothing more than dumb assumptions that can be debated just seems silly to me, and our response to it speaks more about how we handle people’s ideas than any problem of anti-Semitism in Labour.

But perhaps the most ridiculous part is how apparently being anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic are somehow mixed up. This of course, refers to comments made by Ken Livingstone, which read as follows:

Let’s remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.

The simple fact in all of this is that Naz made these comments at a time when there was another brutal Israeli attack on the Palestinians.

As I’ve said, I’ve never heard anybody say anything anti-Semitic, but there’s been a very well-orchestrated campaign by the Israel lobby to smear anybody who criticizes Israeli policy as anti-Semitic. I had to put up with 35 years of this.

Clearly this is a claim that can be debated, but I think people make much more of that remark than needed to be made. Besides, he raised one good point – that point about how the Israel Lobby tends to denounce critics of the state of Israel as being blatantly anti-Semitic. I’ve read about that happening before and it’s much the same as how in the UK the BBC tends to lump the EU and Europe together, thereby painting Eurosceptics as being against Europe and Europeans rather than just the EU.

Today, I spotted an article on the Telegraph on how a rabbi (Britain’s chief rabbi apparently) named Ephraim Mirvis claimed that Labour has a “severe” anti-Semitism, and just look at what he says later in the article:

Zionism is a movement celebrated by people right across the political spectrum, all over the world, and requires no endorsement or otherwise of the particular policies of any Israeli Government at any time.

 But to those people who have nevertheless sought to redefine Zionism, who vilify and delegitimise it, be under no illusions – you are deeply insulting not only the Jewish community but countless others who instinctively reject the politics of distortion and demonisation.

First off, I don’t understand Zionism as something celebrated by people all over the world (including countries where Judaism isn’t a thing), but hated as the subject of lurid anti-Semitic conspiracy theories left and right. But secondly, criticizing Zionism is the same as insulting the Jewish community? That’s identity politics, plain and simple. Zionism is an ideology, an idea. To criticize an idea is not the same as insulting or being xenophobic towards an entire community or individual. The problem of identity politics stems from exactly the misunderstanding shown by Ephraim Mirvis.

To clarify: Zionism is an ideology that specifically advocates the repatriation of all the Jewish people to the historical (read: Biblical) “Holy Land”, and that this “Holy Land” consists not only of the territory we call Israel, but all of the land that was once ruled by the Isrealites (which, crucially, includes Palestine). It’s a nationalistic ideology mixed with heavy religious fervor, based on the idea of reclaiming the land that, supposedly, was given to them by “God” – in other words, “God gave us this land therefore it’s ours”. It doesn’t take a genius to see that there are entirely legitimate reasons to criticize the Zionist ideology, and none of it exclusively predicated on hatred of the Jewish people. In fact, there are critics who denounce Zionism because they think it is inherently racist. Not to mention, you don’t hear it in the media, but there are critics of Zionism who are Jewish. Those critics recognize Zionism as an ideology, one that need not be intertwined with any ethnic identity, and thus they understand that criticizing Zionism need not have anything to do with xenophobia towards Jews.

With the Labour debacle, I can’t help but think that the MPs who talk about Zionism and the MPs who have made apparently anti-Semitic remarks are being treated the same way – as anti-Semites. And that’s what you get with a political crowd that doesn’t bother to examine the remarks let alone debate them and prove that they’re demonstrably wrong. People don’t want to look behind the curtain, so to speak. That’s exactly how and why Stephen Fry was vilified by the Twitter mobs and the British press.