Ken Livingstone’s comments on Hitler and Zionism created a justified outrage. His comments divorce the realities of Hitler’s antisemtism and Nazi violence.

Hitler opposed the creation of a Jewish state in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf. Hitler’s antisemitic outlook owes in part to the writings of Henry Ford and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. His commitment to the conspiracy of a Jewish plot to rule the world prevented him from entertaining the idea of a single Jewish state. This became a meaningful way for the Nazis to dehumanize Jewish communities.

Hitler obsession with the racist conspiracy of global Jewish influence germinated in Vienna. This grew in the 1920s when party ideologue Alfred Rosenberg introduced him to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The Nazi Party had already published copies of the text in 1919. And by 1939, the party had published at least 23 versions of the text.

So Livingstone’s point that Hitler “was supporting Zionism” is wrong. Nor did Israel exist in 1932. The conflation between Zionism, Israel and Hitler only serves to cause deep upset. Livingstone’s comment also divorces the complexities of Jewish thought in this era. Removed from the historical context of growing antisemitic violence and discrimination, he caricatures Zionism. This caricature suggests that it shares similar genocidal and racist proclivities. And it also infers that Jews were complicit in their own destruction. Not only are the statements antisemitic but devoid of empathy.

It’s possible that Livingstone alluded to The Haavara (Ha’avarah) Agreement of 1933. This plan would allow German Jews to emigrate to Palestine and keep some of the value of their property in Germany. Negotiations proved controversial in many Jewish circles. The Nazis saw this as a means to undermine the solidarity of Jewish boycotts of German goods. It had little to do with a desire to resettle German Jews.

Researching this agreement also brings up a number of racist conspiracy theories. It also, rather bizarrely trended on Twitter for a short time yesterday. Proclivities towards this thinking in some confirms Barkun’s theory of ‘stigmatized knowledge‘. In short, stigmatized knowledge presents information that mainstream institutions have not validated.

The agreement did allow some wealthy German Jews to emigrate. But as Y’faat Weiss noted:

“The  agreement  did  not  improve  the  living  conditions  of  the  Jews  left  behind,  and  the  number  of  such  Jews  who  actually  emigrated  to  Israel  indirectly  because  of  the  agreement  is  in  doubt. In  view of the peculiar demographic structure of Polish Jewry, such an agreement could not have met the needs of the Jewish rank and file in this country.”

Nor was the agreement signed until August 25, 1933. Hitler’s rise to power made antisemitic violence a state-sanctioned policy. On March 11, 1933, the SA (Sturm Abteilung) militia attacked Jewish-owned shops. Antisemitic violence erupted nationwide. In that same month, the Nazis had erected Dachau concentration camp. Within its first year alone, the Nazis had incarcerated almost five thousand political enemies.

Nor was Hitler a benign force in this period. He signed the order to murder Fritz Gerlich, editor of the anti-Nazi newspaper, Der Gerade Weg, in Dachau in 1934.

The Enabling Act allowed Hitler to rule by decree. He then called for national boycott of Jewish businesses. When not met with SA violence, Jewish shop owners found their shop windows painted with the Star of David and other slogans.

On April 7, 1933, the Nazis purged German Jews from the civil service. Jewish doctors and dentists could no longer work in public health schemes. Teachers were fired. Lawyers could no longer work for the state. A few weeks later and the Nazis had banned kosher traditions.

The Nazis introduced quota systems to limit education for Jewish children in state schools.

In May of 1933, the Nazis held a series of public book burnings. This included texts written by Jewish authors and political enemies. Months later and Jewish academics were purged from teaching positions at universities.

All this violence and discrimination came before the signing of the Ha’avara agreement on August 25, 1933. The antisemitic climate in Nazi Germany increased with each passing month and year.

The Nazis made clear in in 1937 that a single Jewish state would prove detrimental. A memo from German General Consulate in Palestine said:

“The formation of a Jewish state… is not in Germany’s interest because a (Jewish) Palestinian state would create additional national power bases for international Jewry such as for example the Vatican State for political Catholicism or Moscow for the Communists. Therefore, there is a German interest in strengthening the Arabs as a counter weight against such possible power growth of the Jews.”

 

It’s true that some in the Nazi party did seek to deport Jews out of Europe in 1940. But crucially, as Ken Livingstone forgot to mention, was never adopted as policy. The idea went against the fundamental tenets of Hitler’s antisemitism.

Hitler wanted a genocidal response to what he saw as a global Jewish pursuit of power. He wrote that Jews were “a pestilence, a spiritual pestilence, worse than the Black Death.”

It’s why the Nazis and their collaborators had murdered nearly two out of every three European Jews by 1945.

In his magnum opus Life and Fate, the writer Vasily Grossman understood the varieties of antisemitism:

“Anti-Semitism is also an expression of a lack of talent, an inability to win a contest on equal terms – in science or in commerce, in craftsmanship or painting. States look to the imaginary intrigue of world Jewry for explanations of their own failure.

At the same time anti-Semitism is an expression of the lack of consciousness of the masses, of their inability to understand the true reasons for their sufferings. Ignorant people blame the Jews for their troubles when they should blame the social structure or the State itself. Anti-Semitism is also, of course, a measure of the religious prejudices smouldering in the lower levels of society.”

Ken Livingstone would do well to read Grossman, learn his history and not attack historical memory through the lens of antisemitic falsehoods.

The post Why Ken Livingstone is wrong about Hitler and Zionism appeared first on Religious Reader.

Nick Cohen highlights some of the issues that colleagues within Tell MAMA have been grappling with for some time. Apart from being the target of far right campaigns, Tell MAMA has also become the target of groups purporting to tackle Islamophobia, solely because Tell MAMA believes that equality means equality for all. Cohen mentions the following statement which was made by MEND’s Chief Executive, Sufyan Ismail in late 2014. He stated the following to a mainly Muslim audience:

“We don’t want the government to fob us off with some phony thing called Tell MAMA, which has got a pro-Zionist pretty much heading it, or in a very senior capacity, and is making all sorts of comments we might not agree with when it comes to homosexuality, to be recording Islamophobia.”

Not only are we independent of ‘the Government’, we have been running Tell MAMA to serve the needs of Muslims since 2012, without any form of ‘Government’ interference. Our independent service has assisted over 4,500 people and led to hundreds of arrests in order to ensure access to justice for victims of hate crimes who happen to be Muslim. Yet, our results, it seems, does not shield us from such statements or spin pieces that are thrown out into audiences.

Furthermore, when we set up Tell MAMA, it was on the basis of ensuring that anti-Muslim hatred was seen as one strand in the mainstream campaign against racism, prejudice and bigotry. Muslims are not a special case and nor should they be. British Muslims simply want equality and equality laws, policies and practices need to be applied evenly across the board. This is why we have been vocal when Muslims have been attacked because of their faith identity. This is why we have been vocal when some sections have tried to abuse Ahmaddiya Muslims. This is also why we have been vocal when some groups have tried to abuse gay or trans-Muslims. Equality needs to remain consistent and any group which picks and chooses when it wants to campaign against prejudice and when it chooses to keep quiet – (because the victims are from LGBT communities), is a group that has no moral courage, nor any ethical basis to it. Let’s be clear about that – they need to leave the campaigning space and reflect more clearly what they are about.

Coming onto the issue of ‘pro-Zionists’, this is a charge that is the most corrosive of all within Muslim audiences. We have worked with the Community Security Trust in setting up Tell MAMA and we are both independent organisations. We are proud of our ability to work with our Jewish brothers and sisters in the fight against prejudice and bigotry and that relationship remains unshakeable. When a Jew is attacked, we will stand with the community, as we will with others. With this in mind, we will stand with the CST in order to ensure that people are not targeted because they are Jews. When appropriate, we will also collectively campaign together against far right and other groups who target Jews or Muslims.

Over the last 12 months, we have had the great fortune of having Richard Benson act as a guide in advising us in Tell MAMA and in providing the moral courage and support when far right groups and others have targeted us. As the former CEO of the CST, Richard Benson built the organisation and placed antisemitism at the core of hate crime work within successive governments. His courage, as well as that of former Minister and Dewsbury MP Shahid Malik, have ensured that we have been led by the best in the field of tackling hate, prejudice and intolerance. These co-Chairs represent the best of a Muslim and Jewish working relationship and together with the Director of Tell MAMA, Fiyaz Mughal OBE, they have ensured that Tell MAMA has become the leader in the field of countering anti-Muslim hatred and which is making a direct and real difference to the lives of victims.

More recently, at a ministerial meeting, Richard Benson advocated that anti-Muslim hatred should receive the same attention that other hate crime strands do and has forcefully spoken out for Muslim women who suffer street based incidents. He has spent his time and effort standing up for what is right and has never in any meeting mentioned the Middle East. A consummate professional, he is an asset to any organisation and we are extremely lucky to have our co-Chairs at the helm of Tell MAMA. The statement from the CEO of MEND is therefore tiresome, inaccurate and an affront to those willing to do the right thing in countering prejudice, in this case, anti-Muslim hatred.

Lastly, on the issue of homosexuality, it is extremely depressing to hear the comments made by the CEO of MEND. Simply put, if any individual or organisation cannot stand up and openly challenge homophobia within some sections of Muslim communities, then what are they doing challenging other forms of prejudice, hate and bigotry? Whilst we also acknowledge that homophobia is also present in other faith groups and communities, we will never relent in challenging any bigotry and prejudice where we come across it. Only by doing so, do we know that our moral compass is still pointing in the right direction to tackle anti-Muslim prejudice.

The post Equality Means Equality for All. Organisations are Either In or Out of this Sphere appeared first on TELL MAMA.