DAVID SAKS
That an unreconstructed neo-Stalinist throwback had been entrusted with leading Her Majesty’s Opposition is seen as yet more evidence of how badly “The Left” has lost its way, to the point of betraying outright the fundamental human rights and democratic values that its adherents (rather presumptuously) consider themselves to be the primary guardians of.
What has long been seen as the natural ideological home for adherents of secular democratic humanism is being hijacked by vindictive anti-Western hardliners whose deeds routinely contradict the human rights-flavoured rhetoric they purport to espouse.
Corbyn typifies this new – or, perhaps, not so new – breed of leftist. His previous record includes lauding radical Islamists as “friends” and defending Vladimir Putin’s land grab in the Ukraine.
His attitude towards his own country is demonstrated by his conspicuous refusal to sing its national anthem. Naturally, he is viscerally anti-Israel, so much so that even when addressing an understandably worried Labour Friends of Israel group after his election, he could not once bring himself to mention Israel by name.
Naturally, he is a full-blown BDS advocate, even as he presses for closer ties with Hamas and Hezbollah. What exemplifies the ‘Corbynistas’ of this world is their regarding Western democracies as the primary source of evil on this planet while elevating genuinely tyrannical regimes to the status of victims of the former’s supposed depredations.
Islamist movements are the primary beneficiaries of their largesse although non-Islamist dictatorships (such as Russia and North Korea) also get a clean bill of health.
The latter cases hark back to the Cold War days, when it was de rigueur in trendy leftist circles (certainly in the academic and NGO arena) to demonise “Amerika” and root for the Viet Cong and Mao tse Tung.
It is mostly mainstream Labour supporters who are dismayed by Corbyn’s unexpected ascent. Tories, already on a high following their comprehensive victory in last year’s general elections, are delighted that their traditional rivals, in apparent over-reaction to having lost so badly an election they were widely expected to win, have in choosing an unreconstructed Marxist extremist for their leader, effectively made themselves unelectable.
As the saying goes, those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. One hopes this is true so far as the loony left is concerned. That being said, in view of the bizarre course that the upcoming US elections are taking, it would appear that collective insanity is not an exclusively left-wing phenomenon. Right now, Bill Clinton must be looking forward to living in the White House again, albeit under somewhat different conditions.
For decades prior to this, it was largely taken as a given that British Jewry overwhelmingly voted Labour. This in part harked back to the early years of Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe, when Jews substantially formed part of the struggling working classes.
A second, even more compelling reason was that originally, the worst manifestations of anti-Semitism emanated from right-leaning conservatives.
In the years leading up to the Second World War, leading members of the Tory aristocracy emerged as overt supporters of Nazi Germany (among them the weak, selfish and ultimately treacherous King Edward VIII).
It took a long time for Jews in the UK to realise that the epicentre of anti-Semitism, now directed against Jews as a national political entity rather than as a religious or ethnic group, had gradually but unmistakably shifted from the right to the left wing of the political spectrum. The penny now, however, has definitely dropped, with most Jews having supported David Cameron in both of the last two elections.
I wish one could say the same for the American Jewish community, nearly 70 per cent of whom voted for Barack Obama the second time round, despite his distinctly cool attitude towards Israel by then having become more than apparent.
If Donald Trump does indeed capture the Republican nomination, the Democrats are likely to capture even more than the 86 per cent of the Jewish vote received by Bill Clinton in 1992.
In South Africa, by contrast, the terms “left” and “right” appear to have become meaningless in view of all the other dynamics at play.
Prior to 1994, Jews in the main voted for the liberal opposition – not altogether unexpectedly, given that by then they mostly lived among upper middle-class English-speaking progressives.
It is rather interesting to note that, taking into account the inevitable splits, amalgamations and name changes that have taken place over the years, the origins of today’s Democratic Alliance can be traced all the way back to the unification of South Africa in 1910.
It began with the South African Party, which later merged with the Nationalists to form the United Party. Then followed the breakaway of a number of UP parliamentarians to form the Progressive Party, which successively became the Progressive Federal Party after amalgamating with further UP breakaway groups, the Democratic Party after joining up with disaffected Nationalist MPs and finally, following further amalgamations, today’s DA.
In the main, it is the abovementioned parties that have captured the Jewish vote over the years (with the UP and Progressives sharing it in the 1959-1974 period).
