Andre Walker explains that forcing an ethnic group to move away from their neighbours isn’t Zionism it’s called apartheid.
Of all the questions in history you thought you’d never have to bother answering, whether Hitler was a Zionist must be high on the list. Most of us recognise the suggestion Hitler would do anything positive for the Jewish community is so ridiculous it is not even worth considering as a possibility.
And yet the question of what Hitler did do to support Jews in their desire to see the state of Israel realised was one put before the UK Labour Party’s disciplinary panel this week.
The hearing was convened after a bizarre rant by the former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, on BBC London last year. The veteran left-winger told shocked listeners: “Let’s remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.”
What Livingstone has failed to consider is why Hitler wanted to move Jews to the Middle East (or indeed anywhere else outside Europe). Hitler was motivated by a desire to see Europe’s Jewish population removed from the continent, permanently banned, or killed, whatever it took to eradicate Europe’s Jews.
I do not claim to be any expert on Zionism, but it seems to me it is the process by which Jews around the world are given the option to move to a Jewish state. Forcing an ethnic group to move away from their neighbours is not called Zionism it’s called apartheid.
If Hitler was a Zionism then you must conclude that the South African Prime Minister, PW Botha, was a black rights activist. After all he also believed in racial separation, he presided over a country where blacks and whites were separated… he was even rumoured to like Hitler.
Nelson Mandela on the other hand, believed in racial integration in South Africa, what a nasty man he must have been!
The truth is that the left in Britain are determined to portray Jews as fascists, even if the reasoning is so ridiculous it leaves most of us shocked. Livingstone is high profile only because he has the political equivalent of Tourette’s syndrome, for which he has received yet another one-year ban from Labour.
Do not delude yourself into believing he is the only one who would dearly love to expel Jewish students from university, boycott Israel and back sinister invasion plots by Arab countries.
Last time Ken Livingstone got into serious trouble for anti-Semitism when, in 2005, he accused a Jewish journalist of being “like a concentration camp guard”. At the time, I worked in City Hall for Conservative Assembly members, whose job it was to hold him to account as Mayor.
Instead of apologising, Livingstone fought a successful campaign against the standards watchdog. But at the same time, his supporters put around a rumour the whole thing was a “Zionist plot to ensure a Jew became Mayor of London”.
The basis for this claim was that Livingstone’s deputy was Nicky Gavron, who is Jewish. It was true that she would take over if he left prematurely, but her race was not a factor in our objection to Livingstone’s comments.
We were genuinely offended by his behaviour, but we had to accept that across London it went down well among Labour’s core vote. Many people shared Livingstone’s alleged concern about a Jew getting into office in their city, and they were keen to defend him to ensure it didn’t happen.
If that’s not proof of left-wing anti-Semitism, I don’t know what is.