WE are hugely concerned – though sadly not surprised – to read that both the GMB Union and the Labour Party are taking action against activist Pete Gregson for his principled stance defying and protesting the IHRA definition examples of antisemitism (Union punish Labour activist over anti-Semitism dispute, November 9).
We are worried for democracy and free speech, for the future of progressive politics in the UK – and we are also worried as Jews.
The definition examples are expressly worded to take criticism of Zionism off the political agenda by equating this with antisemitism. Zionism is a political project. Not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. In fact it is those who equate criticism of Zionism with criticism of Jewishness who are actually demonstrating a racist position, because this assumes that all Jews have the same political stance. We believe that any state that promotes one religious or ethnic group above others is inherently racist; and if we are to campaign for a better world, it is very important to be able to recognise this publicly.
READ MORE: Labour activist faces union action over anti-Semitism row
Progressive Labour Party members and trade unionists have demonstrated a growing understanding of, and support for, the Palestinian cause. This has made them targets of a deliberate smear campaign by supporters of Zionism, who use the IHRA definition of antisemitism to brand them as antisemites. Meanwhile, for the first time in decades, we can see the possibility of a UK Government that could take a more socialist path. To undermine this, the political establishment have been able to join with the Zionists and embrace this smear campaign as a ready-made weapon with which to delegitimise their opponents.
Ironically, all this only makes the fight against real racism, including antisemitism, harder. With so many people calling out “wolf”, real antisemitism can be overlooked or dismissed: those who insist on the pretence that Zionism is an integral part of Jewishness encourage others to blame Jews for Israel’s sins; those who crush the left crush the one force that can counter right-wing populism and the racism it promotes.
The Labour Party and trade unions – and all the other organisations who have allowed themselves to be persuaded into adopting this definition and its examples – must wake up and realise that they are being manipulated to help destroy the very things that they purport to stand for.
Sarah Glynn, Catherine Lyons, Jola Litwitz, Liz Elkind and Naomi Junnor for Scottish Jews Against Zionism (scottishjaz.org)
CONGRATULATIONS to Martin Hannan for his article in yesterday’s National (Remembering the fallen is a part of the Celtic story, November 12). It’s for such enlightened and informative entries that I continue to buy the paper.
I sometimes think there is too big a focus on sectarianism and it is largely not appreciated that outside small areas in west-central Scotland there is little or no interest and only trepidation and disappointment when yet again another “Old Firm derby” dominates the headlines for the wrong reasons.
Sadly in recent times this heightened, poisonous atmosphere has become more noticeable in Edinburgh. I sincerely believe that if it is not properly addressed and warring parties do not come into the 21st century the SNP party will struggle, because there are vested interests, both financial and political, who benefit from the status quo.
RG Clark
Gorebridge
READ MORE: Remembering the fallen is a part of the Celtic FC story
A MAJOR flaw with the current planning policy is centralisation. Too many decisions, even at local government level, are taken at a distance from the community affected. This can lead to homogeneous domestic development, especially in the domestic sphere, and inappropriate siting of commercial development.
It has been ever thus. In 1964 my father decided to extend our three-roomed family home by adding a second storey and specified a “flat” roof as he “did not wish to heat empty air”. This plan was rejected by the Town Planner as “it would not fit in on the High Street where pitched roofs of similar style were the norm”.
Dad visited the Town Office and spoke to the Town Planner, who agreed to take a walk down the High Street. After giving the man a tour of the local area, not 200 yards from his office, the flat roof was agreed because the High Street had such a variety of roof lines there was no reason to reject the design.
The key to this event is the word town. Town Council, Town Office, Town Planner, all ultra local and accessible with the gumption to be flexible. Perhaps this is the way forward to a more flexible bureaucracy and an antidote to centralisation perceived as remote and inaccessible.
David Neilson
Dumfries
WAS the omission of the oaks in Chatelherhault Country Park in the feature “Trunk Calls” (Sunday National, November 11) just an oversight, or am I barking up the wrong tree? They have after all existed since the 15th century, making some of them 700 to 800 years old.
Iain Lyall
Hamilton
READ MORE: Scotland's 25 best-loved trees
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel