Letters: Pro-Zionists, not ‘anti-Semites’, endanger Labour

The following letters appear in the 23rd March edition of the Independent

Britain and anti-Semitism: they don't belong together (Getty)

Given the daily dose of hysteria in the mainstream media about “anti-Semitism” in the Labour Party, Labour campaigners for Palestinian rights need to know where they stand. Are they all to be kicked out? That’s the conclusion I am forced to draw from the clamouring of people like Lord Levy. For what else can Jeremy Corbyn do than what he keeps on doing: publicly denouncing racism and anti-Semitism?

I am Jewish by birth; several relatives died in the Holocaust. I am not and never have been anti-Semitic. The only people who call me that are the ones I regularly criticise for their tolerance of Israeli crimes against the Palestinians. If I look around me and see that others who do the same are being kicked out, I fear that my days in the Party may be numbered too.

I joined the Labour Party after Mr Corbyn was elected leader because I share his ambition towards social justice and peace-not-war among the nations. No, the people to watch in the Labour Party are not the Palestine campaigners. The ones to watch are those who, with a few honourable exceptions, sit on the Labour Front Bench staring daggers at Mr Corbyn’s back whenever he rises to speak. They will do their utmost to see to it that Britain does not elect a socialist government in 2020. But of course, they are the Zionists’ pets.

Elizabeth Morley

Trisant, Aberystwyth

Rachel Shabi’s article “Anti-Semitism should never be used as a political tool” (15 March) is right. Anyone who castigates, insults or discriminates because someone is a Jew should be roundly condemned. Where I think the position gets blurred is when people such as me criticise Israel and campaign for the other half of the Semitic race, namely the Palestinians.

A few weeks ago, I flew to Tel Aviv. As luck would have it a man with the large black hat, an Orthodox Jew, sat next to me. Expecting to hear the “other side”, I was delighted with his response to the Israeli-Palestinian question: “Equal rights for all in one country.”

In my opinion the sooner the better, otherwise the frustrations will boil over and Daesh [Isis] will get under the oppressed skins of the Palestinians, particularly the unemployed young.

But in one country with equal rights and complete freedom of religion, they would be a powerhouse and beacon to the rest of the Middle East.

Peter Downey

Bath

Cameron’s one-nation pose fails to convince

It was good of David Cameron to remind us that he is still a PR man at heart, better skilled at spin-doctoring and misrepresentation than he is as a Prime Minister. But to say that this Conservative government is a caring and one-nation government is so nonsensical as to be laughable – and there are two years of Tory policies to show how misleading his statement is.

His millionaire colleagues on the Front Bench, those on the benches behind him, and in his party, show no signs of the effects of austerity on their opulent lifestyles, while the food-banks, evictions, and cuts to benefit payments, social care and local authority budgets bear witness to the fact that the burden of austerity has been unfairly placed on those least able to afford it – the poor, the disabled, and the sick.

Austerity, we should remind ourselves, was devised to make up for the catastrophic losses inflicted on the economy by greedy financiers and inept politicians in 2008. But to try to sell this government as a one-nation, caring government is too much even for the PR skills of Cameron. It is the government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.

Tony Cheney

Ipswich, Suffolk

If would-be thieves hear the police approaching, saying, “Hello, hello, what have we here?”, they may wisely desist from robbery, but ought not to claim credit for “having listened”. They simply did not want to be caught.

Thus the Prime Minister, Chancellor and other government ministers, in withdrawing the policies of benefit cuts, are disingenuous in proclaiming the virtue of “having listened”. They simply did not want to be caught by Parliament voting them down.

Peter Cave

London W1

There is a distinct congruence between the letters of Debbie Stamper, Neil Kobish and Dr Nigel Price (16 March).

In the name of putting the economy right, the Tories slash public expenditure and thereby, public services, while at the same time reducing taxation for the well-off and doing sweetheart deals with multinationals.

When eventually the electorate gets fed up with these austerity measures, which largely affect the less well-off, the Tories are replaced by Labour, which then has to vastly increase public expenditure to put things right again.

Labour are then accused by the Tories of profligacy, and by constantly bombarding the public with this message via a largely right-wing media, the Tories are re-elected under the guise of “putting the economy right again after Labour mismanagement”.

Patrick Cleary

Honiton, Devon

Men put in more hours on the tennis court

You are wrong to condemn Novak Djokovic out of hand (editorial 22 March) for saying that it is right that men should be paid more than women for taking part in tennis tournaments.

By and large the male game is commercially more lucrative than the female game, but what he apparently didn’t mention is far more important. The supposed equality at tournaments like Wimbledon is a mirage. As long as men have to play up to five sets instead of the three that is the maximum for women then equal pay is matched by a very much unequal workload, with the men having to play on average twice as many games in order to get to their final, not to mention playing against tougher opposition.

If Wimbledon was a truly open tournament it would be unlikely that there would be any women seeds and absolutely no chance of a women winning.

Roger Chapman

Keighley, West Yorkshire

Cameron’s mandate is as good as any

I am getting rather tired of reading letters in your newspaper suggesting that the present government lacks a mandate to govern because “only” 25 per cent of the electorate voted for it in last year’s general election.

No government in recent times has won a majority of the votes cast in an election, let alone the votes of a majority of the electorate. To do so is impossible under our current multi-party democracy. Even Tony Blair at the high tide of his electoral success in 1997 received 43.2 per cent of the votes cast or 30.8 per cent of the electorate.

That is the way the system works. Campaign for a change to the voting system if you will, but neither of the main parties is likely to support a change which would deny it the chance of an overall majority.

Another recurring complaint is that by arranging for redistribution of parliamentary seats the Tories are seeking an unfair electoral advantage.

In fact the system as it stands is biased in favour of Labour. In 1992 John Major received over 14 million votes and won a majority of 21. Five years later Tony Blair obtained just over 13.5 million votes and won a majority of 179.

In any event the new constituency boundaries will be drawn up by an independent commission, not by Conservative Central Office.

Gordon Elliot

Burford, Oxfordshire

A foretaste of the TTIP trade deal

Soft drinks manufacturers including Coca-Cola intend to sue the Government for loss of potential earnings caused by the sugar tax.

Of course, greater use of the Investor State Dispute mechanism by large corporations is what we can all look forward to should TTIP gain EU and US approval.

In the light of this development, I wonder if Government will remain as keen on TTIP as it has been.

Patrick Cosgrove

Chapel Lawn, Shropshire

No fat people on public transport?

There is no mention of evidence of causality in losing weight when one takes public transport (“Want to lose weight? Don’t drive, take public transport” 17 March). Could it not be the case that heavier people prefer their own car seats?

David Hasell

Thames Ditton, Surrey

That’s it then; off to the pub

As one who has had dozens of letters published in your fine journal over the decades, I tried to come up with a witty anagram of The Independent for a farewell note, to reflect my morose feelings to share with your team there, but all I could come up with was ... “The end? Need pint!”

Colin Burke

Manchester

The customer is always ‘all right’

My riposte to the ubiquitous “Are you all right there?” (letter, 21 March) is “I hope to be when I’ve been served.”

Gerard Barnes

Ilford, Greater London