The Green Party’s motion to equate Zionism with racism has, after its initial impact, lingered in the air of British politics in the way things tend to; miles away from the horrific war crimes it applies to, these theoretical discussions have unfolded with little sense of their true gravity. The step was a bold and necessary step to take. Many would agree, the crucial distinction between Judaism and Zionism has been blurred for far too long. To dig a trench between these terms is to surely give the former the opportunity to continue to flourish, without being poisoned by the latter. Nonetheless, from politicians and officials, reading responses feel strangely like hearing echoes.
Take the most recent development. Andy Burnham recently announced Labour’s intentions to break off power-sharing agreements with the Greens in local councils unless the councils disavow the motion. Of the Greens’ recent motion, he said “it is wrong, it is antisemitic.” The stance itself is obviously flawed, given the horrific mass of evidence that Zionism in practice does in fact take genocide in its maintenance of an ethnonationalist state. What’s so gratingly angering about this whole discussion in particular is the mass inability of public officials to speak with any nuance. Save Zack Polanski, no other political leader is willing to engage in any real way with the meaning of the statement, nor what surrounds it. No one is willing to give a detailed explanation of their own perspective on Zionism, nor argue why they don’t consider it racist. No one is willing to grapple with the history of the term, nor with the shades of grey in the discussion. The repetition over and over of the blandly repetitive (and incorrect) statement – “it is antisemitic” – is striking when talking about such an urgent situation.
To anyone capable of basic reasoning, it’s evident that the move to define Zionism as racism offers a chance to reduce antisemitism by separating the extreme racist views of Zionism from Judaism. It’s a motion that credits the intelligence of the average person, trusting them to be capable of understanding the difference. This level of intelligence seems beyond many politicians who continue to conflate anti-Zionist sentiments with antisemitism, that phrase with which they’re so astoundingly trigger happy.
These clockwork-like reactions, which ignore so much, seem to reveal something else. The reactions must be triggered by one of three things; poor intelligence, fear of the power of Israel, or active support for that power. Even if you assume benefit of the doubt, politicians’ overattachment to the most generic, heard-before words and phrasing is deplorable. In avoiding words of any note that can be pinned down and held to their name, their empty words expose a reluctance to engage with the actual discussion at a time when it would be most useful.
“Checkpoint near Abu Dis” by Picture taken by Justin McIntosh, is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
