UCU and the siren call of “my enemy’s enemy”

1st June, 2011 2:09 pm

UCUBy Rob Marchant / @rob_marchant

Hate figures and bogeymen are convenient for everyone. Up to a point, they can be harmless. I’m not averse to a bit of knockabout with the Tories or the Lib Dems: that’s the rough and tumble of tribal politics. But, in some less-travelled corners of party and movement, we have developed some hate figures over the years which we don’t need: at worst, they become pathological.

The most obvious example of this is the European left’s mixed feelings about the United States. At lowest common denominator level, we can perceive that the centre of gravity in America is politically to the right of us, and that puts us off. We might confuse the American President and American politicians with the American people: or talk about “the Americans” as if they were a race of identical people, at one with their politicians. But some of us feel uneasy about America; and a few of us actively despise it.

Although most of us thankfully avoid this trap, there is a more advanced symptom of the same syndrome: the old doctrine of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”. This doctrine, spelled out so brilliantly in Nick Cohen’s “What’s Left”, has come to represent a gently circling danger for the whole future of the left. It, and tolerance to it, saps our good judgement and, worse still, our credibility. It derives from that strange ability, prevalent in the far left, to compel one’s logical faculties to perform Houdini-like contortions and rationalise an argument in the face of all evidence to the contrary. We embark, if you like, on a game of Twister with logic, which ultimately results in our failure to see the reductio ad absurdum: far left meets far right.

An example argument starts like this: we dislike the American state and their works. So anyone who dislikes the American state, and can give them a poke in the eye on our behalf, is our friend, no matter how unpleasant. And, in small numbers, this thinking seduces activists in key positions in left politics; our unions; our community organisations. Hence the denial of Junaid Ahmed‘s terrorist links by the board of London Citizens. Or the TUC’s support for the nasty regime of Hugo Chávez. Or Ken Livingstone’s, George Galloway’s and Jeremy Corbyn’s support for Iran through presenting on its mouthpiece PressTV. The same PressTV which was recently sanctioned by Ofcom for its shocking transmission of an interview sympathetic to the Iranian regime, given under duress by a Newsweek journalist after being threatened with summary execution: and later calmly broadcast without mentioning the fact, as if it were just another interview.

Perhaps some of these activists are entryists; perhaps merely naïve. But these stances all derive, ultimately, from the same twisted argument of my enemy’s enemy. We are not allowed simply to say that some things America does are good and some of them not so good. We must choose either to be America’s lickspittle, or fully against it and its friends: it’s all or nothing. No grey areas are allowed, like, for example, exist in the Israeli-Palestine conflict: a conflict with a complexity and history far too involved for a single article. And in the last ten years, we might note that there have been reported rises on both Islamophobic and anti-Semitic attacks within the EU. Both are equally worrying: we do not need, of course, to take sides.

Unions are particularly susceptible to these kinds of strange stances, because they are not politically agile; the big ships take a lot of steering to change course. A poorly thought-out conference motion, proposed by a few fanatics, may haunt policy for years once passed, damaging the union and the wider movement. And so we come to UCU, the academics’ union.

UCU declared on Monday that the widely-accepted working defininition of anti-semitism, contained in the former European Monitoring Centre on Racism (EUMC) standard, is wrong, and have disowned it in all their work in tribunals, education or internal complaints:

“Congress believes that the EUMC definition confuses criticism of Israeli government policy and actions with genuine antisemitism, and is being used to silence debate about Israel and Palestine on campus”

Oh. So they don’t dispute any parts of the EUMC standard on other forms of racism, such as Islamophobia. Just anti-Semitism. But it sounds anodyne, doesn’t it?

It isn’t. Think about the following:

1. Why exactly would you want to unilaterally redefine anti-Semitism, if not to single out Jews? Why would you want to disassociate yourself from the standard position held by the Community Security Trust (monitors anti-Semitism in the UK); the National Union of Students and the Union of Jewish Students; the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency; the All-Party Parliamentary Enquiry into Anti-Semitism and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe?

2. How exactly would you then defend a Jewish member in a racial discrimination tribunal? Making up your own definition?

3. Finally, why is “debate about Israel and Palestine on campus” so important anyway, compared to the fundamental concerns of their members about racism?

And the subtext is crystal clear: anti-Semitism is often not genuine and raised merely to win arguments as matter of bad faith. The motion has already resulted in a number of Jewish members quietly leaving the union, as well as prompting some fine and reasoned articles from concerned academics (Eve Garrard at normblog, for one, points out the inanity of the Twister logic). As well as the depressing report of the Pythonesque debate from the UCU Congress, the arguments are laid out in, among other places, this excellent piece by UCU member Ben Gidley, which I highly recommend for its rationality and calmness, painstakingly detailing all the arguments in the case, as well as highlighting other troubling activity within the union.

In short, UCU, supposedly representing the cream of our intelligent people has, in its ignorance, rather shown itself deserving of our condemnation.

We must always be aware of the dangers of race-paranoia. But the reverse is also true: we are sometimes not aware of racism that really exists – like, for example, when institutional racism in the Met was highlighted by the MacPherson report – and that not everyone quite is as enlightened as we think.

UCU is just an example of a worrying wider trend. We spend a lot of time rightly criticising the white racists of the BNP and the EDL. But it’s high time we confronted those who condone those other kinds of racism around us. Before they really start to hurt the credibility, and the ethos, of the whole Labour movement.

And before the entryists really start moving in.

Rob Marchant is an activist and former Labour party manager who blogs at The Centre Left.

Comments are closed


  • Featured News Labour’s Syria tensions remain fraught despite free vote

    Labour’s Syria tensions remain fraught despite free vote

    Jeremy Corbyn has warned that “there is no hiding place” for Labour MPs who vote in favour of action against ISIS in Syria. The decision not to whip the vote has not made tensions over the issue in the Labour Party any less fraught, and tougher rhetoric on each side of the argument has seen stances toughen over the last 24 hours. Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn will tomorrow make the opposite argument to Corbyn from the despatch box. Benn, […]

    Read more →
  • News Weekly Survey: Oldham West and the EU referendum

    Weekly Survey: Oldham West and the EU referendum

    Thursday is polling day in the Oldham West and Royton by-election – the first proper electoral test Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party has faced. Labour currently has a majority of over 14,000 in the seat, but UKIP are expected to put up a tough challenge. How confident are you about Labour’s chances? This week Labour launches their official campaign to keep Britain in the EU. 213 Labour MPs have signed up to support it, including Jeremy Corbyn and the entire Shadow […]

    Read more →
  • News More free votes ahead? Labour MPs put pressure on Greenwood over Heathrow

    More free votes ahead? Labour MPs put pressure on Greenwood over Heathrow

    David Cameron is reportedly within days of making a decision on airport expansion, with many expecting him to support a a third runway at Heathrow. This could cause a headache for the Tories, with Boris Johnson, Zac Goldsmith and several Cabinet ministers all opposed to expanding Heathrow’s capacity. However, it could spell trouble for Labour too: Harriet Harman backed the Heathrow expansion recommended by the Davies Report in July, but the party are now committed to examining the evidence again. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured A free vote was always the best Corbyn could have hoped for

    A free vote was always the best Corbyn could have hoped for

    There’s a great Smiths track called ‘I Started Something I Couldn’t Finish’. Actually, I think all Smiths and Morrissey tracks are great, but that’s a column for another website. That phrase sums up the approach taken by Jeremy Corbyn to the Syria vote. Starting an unnecessary fight and then having to climb down. I don’t know if it is Jeremy himself strategising, or persons unidentified in his team, but they are progressively squandering the immense political capital that his big […]

    Read more →
  • Europe Featured News Alan Johnson to promise distinct Labour EU campaign

    Alan Johnson to promise distinct Labour EU campaign

    Alan Johnson will today launch the Labour Party’s official campaign to stay in the European Union, promising a distinct campaign that focuses on jobs, workers’ rights and national security. “The first duty of any government is to keep our country safe and I firmly believe that leaving the EU would fail that test,” the former Home Secretary will say at the launch in Birmingham. “From the European Arrest Warrant to cross-border data sharing on terrorists, the speed of our response […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends