The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and free expression
Published
by
Richard Kuper
JVL Introduction
Free Speech on Israel is publishing a series of commentaries on the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism. This one by Rob Ferguson is its third.
The previous ones have been The JDA is to be welcomed but also debated by Mike Cushman and Turning the Tables by David Rosenberg.
This article was originally published by Free Speech on Israel on Wed 14 Apr 2021. Read the original here.
The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and free expression
Rob Ferguson presents the third of our series of posts on the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) He demonstrates its importance in the fight for free expression on Palestine and Israel and defending the left and opposing the use of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism.
Loading article text…
Thank you for striving for clarity,best wishes
HOW and WHEN is it best to publicise the JDA definition and persuade other bodies to adopt it in place of the IHRA definition?
Organisations and individuals weaponising allegations of antisemitism will of course prefer the IHRA definition (it’s a useful tool) – BUT there are many others who don’t feel strongly attached to any particular definition. These others may opt for the definition that seems more fair, easier to apply and with fewer unintended consequences.
I think a (limited) window of opportunity might open up if Labour’s election results are very bad and there’s enough (non-party) comment in the media showing rejections of Starmer, centrism and ill-treatment of ordinary people (individual Labour members) by Labour HQ.
However, those of us wanting such changes and yearning for party unity and relationships to be restored would need to be very clear about the contribution adopting JDA would make to wider party goals and to rebuilding our electoral chances.
For example, “the much tighter, better written JDA definition means that the ONLY cases that go forward for party disciplinary action are those where objective, unarguable evidence of wrongdoing is obtainable. It stops us harming loyal party members without good cause. It means we don’t start unwinnable cases. It safeguards us from destroying party morale in instances where nobody will ever work out what was really said and meant by the different parties on both sides of the dispute …”.
The JDA seems to have clarity, fairness and legitimacy. Thank you JVL. This Free Speech on Israel article is well argued. There will need to be a long hard campaign to persuade the establishment media, the undemocratically self-perpetuating rightward establishment biased Parliamentary Labour Party and Keir Stalin’s rightward-relocated new top-down ‘Labour Party’ (a respected old name being misused by unscrupulous new management).
I agree with the central thrust of Rob Ferguson’s article, viz. that we should welcome the JDA as a weapon to be used against the IHRA and also its significance as representing a broad spectrum of Jewish opinion.
However I don’t believe that we should be uncritical of the definition.
Firstly because the question of Zionism and anti-Semitism is treated as a wholly Jewish affair. Palestinians are an integral part of the debate since it is their struggle which is defined by the IHRA as anti-Semitic.
Secondly, examples 6, 8, 9 and 10 in section B ‘Israel and Palestine: examples that, on the face of it, are antisemitic’ are problematic, in particular example 6 ‘Applying the symbols, images and negative stereotypes of classical antisemitism’.
This example is too close to its IHRA equivalent. Put simply if we criticise Israel for poisoning Palestinian water supplies (which they consistently do) then that is compared to the medieval myth of Jewish poisoning of wells.
Unfortunately, as is often the case with the SWP, Rob Ferguson is too uncritical of the JDA. The JDA is a welcome counter weight to the IHRA as can be judged by the dishonest article by Dave Rich in the JC and Algemeiner which complains that the JDA would not have anything to say about the Hungarian Goverment’s attack on George Soros (Viktor Orban, Hungarian PM supports the IHRA!). See my
Why We Should Critically Welcome The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism [JDA]
https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2021/03/why-we-should-critically-welcome.html