Tanya Gold Explains Jewish Voice for Labour
JVL Introduction
In an article in the Jewish Chronicle last week, under the title Of course! The Corbynites are the real victims of Labour antisemitism, Tanya Gold provides an account of who Jewish Voice for Labour are and what we stand for…
Jonathan Rosenhead responds
4th October 2022
Tanya Gold is an award-winning journalist, having been named Feature Writer of the Year at the British Press Awards twelve years ago. But it seems that she is now switching career. With her article in the Jewish Chronicle on Sept 29th she has made a promising start as a writer of fiction. It takes as its basis Jewish Voice for Labour’s presence at the recent Labour Party conference in Liverpool, but uses her writing talent to transform it almost out of recognition.
Entering into the spirit of things, I will for now treat the article as if it were in fact the work of political reportage it is pretending to be. In this parallel universe, JVL’s Jewish members take a Manichean view of what she calls the ‘Israel-Palestine conflict’; see Israel as a ‘demonic enterprise’; believe that accusations of antisemitism against Labour supporters are based on hatred of the Palestinians; are ashamed of who we are; and so on.
I struggle to see this as a very skilled piece of fiction, because it is surely unbelievable that a bunch of many hundreds of experienced people, not young and naive it must be said, some of whom have been achievers in their lives and work, could be so deluded. But that’s no problem for a gifted fiction-writer. “They [she means we] are not clever.” And we simply don’t have access to our own motivations the way that she does. We don’t realise that “millennia of persecution can make you [she means us] ashamed of what you [we] are”.
Then again there are things, she tells us that JVL members believe but don’t say. We believe that Israel is ‘a demonic enterprise’ but ‘they (we) don’t say it outright’. And we have never managed to say that “JVL is anti-Zionist”. But in her desire to simplify her plot line she ignores the possibility (which happens to be the case) that we do have members who are non-Zionist but not anti-Zionist. We even have some who call themselves Zionists. It’s this sort of simplification, ignoring the richness of human life, that limits her achievements as a writer of fiction.
The problem for the fiction writer who simplifies her task by stringing together a farrago of nonsense is how to make it even barely credible. The best answer of course is half-truths, or reliance on untruths that have been told sufficiently often that a gullible reader might just trip past them uncritically.
For example JVL, it seems, has denied that Ken Livingstone was an antisemite “when he called Hitler a Zionist”. But there is a problem with this bit of supporting evidence – because of course Ken never said that, and repeating it still more times doesn’t make it true. What he said was that for a time before both the war and the holocaust Hitler “was supporting Zionism”. I guess subtlety is not Tanya’s shtick, but there is a non-subtle difference between ‘supporting Zionism’ and being an actual Zionist. It’s a historical fact that the German Zionist movement and the Nazi regime did for quite a time share the ambition of getting Jews out of Germany and into Palestine, and worked together to achieve it. How would Tanya Gold describe that?
In the dream world that Tanya moodily summons up there are quite a few other things that members of JVL don’t understand about themselves. (We are so lucky to have Tanya to explain our motivations to us.) We have, she says, a ‘hunger for approval by non-Jews’; and we also have the crazy idea that Jeremy Corbyn was attacked for his socialism – whereas everyone else can see plainly (after all it is in all the papers and TV talkshows) that all those allegations of antisemitism against him, Ken Loach, Jackie Walker, Marc Wadsworth and Uncle Tom Cobley have them bang to rights.
Perhaps I have gone on too long about this very slight work. But no, wait a minute.
Stop the presses! I have just googled Tanya Gold and found an earlier article of hers on the same theme! It was in Harpers Magazine 4 years back. Its seven times longer, and is utterly lacking in the somewhat fey humour I thought I had detected in the Jewish Chronicle piece I have been discussing. Its straight up, no ifs no buts, character assassination. Its title is Among Britain’s Anti-Semites. Don’t read it on an empty stomach. Or on a full stomach. But above all: Cancel the Booker Prize nomination.
In dealing with Naomi and also Jackie Walker in that horrendous Harper’s article we see patronising language of the first order. “I am fascinated by Jackie Walker,” she writes. It’s cod-psychological rubbish about misguided Jews and racism…
Besides calling out Gold’s article for what it is, an attempt to justify the evil actions of Zionist Israel, by mocking those who dare to criticise its apartheid policies, Jonathan Rosenhead’s reply has answered why some of my comments criticising Zionism here have not been published. It’s obviously so as not to offend Zionist members of JVL.
🤪👏🏾Thank you Jonathan, I needed a bit of light relief today.
I wonder what sort of upbringing enables someone to engage in such appalling character assessination.
When Tanya Gold says ‘Jewish Voice for Labour say they are being purged but their dangerous rhetoric leaks out into the wider culture and is absorbed by people more willing to use their fists’, as she does in the sub-headline and at the end of her article, she does so knowing full well that JVL members ARE being purged, and she knows that just about everyone on the left has known for years that anti-semitism is/was being weaponised against the left so as to bring Jeremy Corbyn down.
She is, in effect, accusing JVL of inciting violence against Jews and, as such, she is deliberately perpetuating and reawakening concern and consternation and fear amongst the Jewish population. And THAT tells you all you need to know about how much she cares about fellow Jews!
But she doesn’t stop THERE, oh No, and goes on to say that ‘… it is impossible to listen to non-Jewish JVL supporters without hearing dreams of new pogroms.’
Needless to say she doesn’t give any examples, and for the obvious reason that it’s an outrageous and malignant falsehood. Yes, well. I mean, it would of course be just what such people would do, isn’t it – ie sign up and become members of a Jewish organisation, JVL.
Yet AGAIN we have somebody playing on the historical fears of Jewish people….. AND, being well paid for it, no doubt!
I haven’t got round to reading her Harper’s article yet, but I see from Dave’s post that Tanya Gold mentions Jackie Walker. Is that the same Jackie Walker that Ella Rose said she could take out?
Hmm, now what was that she was saying (in the JC article) about people ‘willing to use their fists’.
Ken Livingstone was supporting his position by citing the academic text ‘Zionism in the age of Dictators’ (1983) by Lenni Brenner.
Recently when writing an article citing Owen Jones pro-Israel smears, I reused a piece of 1933 Zionist correspondence that appears in this text to which Max Blumenthal was drawing people’s attention. It’s interesting on the theme of Zionist ‘racial purity’ and supports Ken’s position
“May we therefore be permitted to present our views, which, in our opinion, make possible a solution in keeping with the principles of the new German State of National Awakening…. because we, too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group….
For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally hostile to Jews…. Boycott propaganda – such as is currently being carried on against Germany in many ways – is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build.”
Some critics also draw attention to the attempts at collaboration by Isaac Stern – of the Stern Gang. This also mentioned by Brenner.
Brenner offered a summary of his research online with Counterpunch in 2014 – see link below. Hope this is useful. All the best Gavin
https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/24/zionism-in-the-age-of-the-dictators/
Why is the right wing bothering to attack JVL: they have got rid of the socialist Jeremy Corbyn. That was the key purpose of smearing him as an antisemite.
I’m Irish, I expected him to be smeared as a supporter of terrorism and the IRA in Ireland.
Instead, they went for the antisemitic smear. It’s all so transparent!
Because they just lurve smearing and demonising the left Cormac – ie dreaming up stuff to amuse those who are in the know, and creating hostility and anger towards whoever in those who are not.
And just because they can!
Bullies/sadists are addicted to bullying and getting a sadistic high.
‘Millenia of persecution’: this is a curiously Lamarkian take on human psychology. Even the older among us cannot claim to have lived long enough to have suffered from thousands of years of ill treatment. The notion that the experiences of one’s ancestors have somehow found their way to expression in the DNA of the current generation is science fiction, and not even credible science fiction.
I just finally got round to watching The Lobby – USA Pt1 (with Pt2 lined up for later), and it’s brilliant. The Israel lobby is first and foremost a black propaganda smear machine, and they really don’t give a flyer about the mental and emotional damage they do to people – ie their designated targets, that is.
No wonder Al Jazeera was leaned on Big Time not to air the series. The following is from the wikipedia entry:
In March 2018, a bipartisan group of US lawmakers including Democratic Congressman Josh Gottheimer, Republican Congressman Lee Zeldin, and Ted Cruz penned a letter urging United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate whether Al Jazeera should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. They also urged the Justice Department to investigate reports that the network had infiltrated non-profit organisations and accused Al Jazeera of broadcasting antisemitic, anti-Israel, and anti-American content.
Here’s a link to Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lSjXhMUVKE
I just did a search to ascertain if any of the US MSM covered the ‘claims’ made by the ‘bipartisan group of US lawmakers’, and came across the following from the 29th September in the JC:
Al Jazeera documentary met with outrage and threats of legal action
Luke Stanger, 26, claimed that allegations made against him in the programme by a former party official were so serious that they prompted threats against his family
A prominent Labour party activist has contacted the police after his family allegedly received threats sparked by an Al Jazeera documentary, which accused him of working to undermine Jeremy Corbyn.
Luke Stanger, 26, claimed that allegations made against him in the programme by former party official Damian McCarthy were so serious that they prompted threats against his family, who contacted the police over concerns for their safety….
So I just did a search to see if the MSM covered the story (and looked through five pages of results), and there’s absolutely nothing whatsoever, and surely they would have done so by now if they were going to….. Just this second checked the Jewish News website, and there doesn’t appear to be anything about it on there either, which is VERY odd, to say the least!
It’s also rather odd that it doesn’t mention (in the JC article) how the alleged threat was made – ie in a letter, email, or whatever. Personally I find it hard to believe that anyone on the left would do such a thing and, if it happened at all, then it was an enemy of the left, and they did it for the obvious reasons.
We’ll have to wait and see, but the police so rarely track down these people – in these days of mass surveillance – for some strange reason.
https://www.thejc.com/news/news/al-jazeera-documentary-met-with-outrage-and-threats-of-legal-action-16n4dLCpWascy2QbbcepAn
Do check out the article, as there’s lots more in it.
I agree there’s nothing of real substance in Ms Gold’s article. Perhaps not surprisingly, she appears to suffer from a serious identity crisis (https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/all/i-was-priced-out-of-london-and-became-the-only-jew-in-the-village-2fjTg7dFXCFc9jjAsePWDF) although, since she appears to be half as clever as she think she is, I doubt that she’s capable of consciously understanding her own situation!
But, that apart, isn’t it time to be realistic about what Ken Livingstone really said? What he said was: “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.” He claims his statement was simply one of fact. But:
• “Jews should be moved to Israel” did not mean supporting Zionism – it meant persecution, ethnic cleansing and plundering of property on a monumental scale.
• “Before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews” is a gratuitous and appalling way to describe the Nazi genocide of European Jewry. It also confuses the Jews of Germany with the Jews of the rest of Europe. I’m not aware that until the Wansee Conference in 1942 (or even 1940) Hitler’s policy was to make the Jews of Europe move to Israel (sic!). I wish it had been.
• Hitler didn’t win an election in 1932. In the 1st election in July the Nazis, although they were the largest party, secured 37.8% of the votes (and the same proportion of seats). At the 2nd election, in November, they lost 2m votes and had 32.2% of seats. The elections reflected a continuing economic and political crisis in Germany which was not resolved by Hitler “winning” an election.
Ken Livingstone had the opportunity to clarify himself but chose to double-down as indicated by eg. when he said (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36177333) “How can I have hurt and offended the Jewish community when the prime minister of Israel said exactly the same thing?” In other words, he thinks Netanyahu spoke for British Jews. Wow!
I entirely defend his right to make a fool of himself. But I deeply regret that he failed to correct what he said. Sorry to say, but there was a fair degree of hubris involved. It doesn’t of course make him antisemitic. But he did cause unnecessary and avoidable harm to the Labour Party and gave ammunition to those who wanted to undermine Jeremy Corbyn and Labour.
The part of Tanya Gold’s latest article which most intrigued me was the reference to Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi’s “hunger for approval beyond the Jewish community” The suggestion is that Naomi, and presumably JVL generally, criticise Israel because they think this will ingratiate them with non-Jews. The belief that everyone who is not Jewish hates Israel is a classic piece of victim mythology, easily refuted by the most superficial examination. The idea that JVL hungers for anyone’s approval is equally far-fetched. What first attracted me to the oganisation was that it was unpopular with everyone, mainly because it kept saying things which were true but which nobody wanted to hear.
As a non-Jewish supporter of JVL I was also rather taken aback by Ms Gold’s casual remark ” it is impossible to listen to non-Jewish JVL supporters without hearing dreams of new pogroms”. She really needs to ask herself how it has happened that in the circles in which she moves such an extravagant level of abuse has become routine.
Harold, the following is from Ken’s resignation statement:
At 8.50am on 28th April 2016 I was asked by Vanessa Feltz on BBC Radio London to respond to a social media post by the Labour MP, Naz Shah, quoting Martin Luther King, that ‘what Hitler did was legal’. King’s point, obviously, having been that just because something is legal (talking in the context of racist segregation laws in the US in the 1960s) does not mean it is right. I saw no relevance between Hitler and Labour so I responded in under 40 words pointing out that in the 1930s Hitler had supported Jews leaving Germany – including moving to Israel and he had arrived at a practical agreement with Zionist organisations on this.
Ken was NOT saying that Hitler supported Zionism per se, what he was saying is that he was agreeable to an agreement being reached that would allow Jews to emigrate to Palestine (as it was then). And that led to The Haavara Agreement. When Ken said that Hitler was supporting Zionism, all he meant was that Hitler supported the agreement, and that is obvious from what Ken said and the way he said it.
As for the date. So he got it wrong at the time, but realised his mistake shortly after. I mean as if it’s a big deal. And no it’s NOT gratuitous to say what Ken said, he was merely making the point that it changed later on and, as such, ended in the Holocaust.
I repeat: When Ken said Hitler was supporting Zionism, he was directly referring to the Haavara Agreement, which he had just alluded to, and that is all.
But in the smearing and vilification of Ken that followed later that day, the smearers threw in the Big Falsehood that Ken had said Hitler was a Zionist, and THAT says it ALL. Yep. black propagandists at work!
Getting the scalp of a prominent supporter of the Palestinians was obviously a motivation for the lobby in smearing Ken in this way.
It was probably likely that they also wanted to shut down a particular avenue of debate and research, relating to who Zionists have been willing to get into bed with, and what it means about their own political characteristics.
Earlier in this thread I posted an example of Zionist correspondence with the Nazis, where they talk about “collaboration” and emphasise that they too have racial purity concerns and are “against mixed marriage”.
There was also the example of Isaac Stern’s attempted collaboration.
And some readers will be aware too of the infamous Rezső Kasztner case.
Coming further up to date Chris McGreal wrote a very well researched piece on the links between South African Fascist Hitler supporters and Israel entitled, ‘Brothers in Arms – Israel’s secret pact with Pretoria’ (I’ll post the link here at the end).
More recently JvL has condemned Israel’s ambassador Tzipi Hotovely for her racist opposition to mixed-marriages. While, Israeli Knesset lawmaker Yitzhak Pindrus has called for the murder of mixed marriage couples (Middeeasteye, Middleeastmonitor, Palestine Chronicle).
Clearly there is a racist Fascist element in Israel. Getting Ken Livingstone smeared helped shut down reference to this in the same way, Zionists have attempted to ban the phrase ‘racist endeavour’ being applied to Israel’s colonialism
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/feb/07/southafrica.israel