Another argument against the London mayoral candidate, from the left
Earlier this week, Slate’s Dave Weigel wrote about the “Even the [liberal/conservative]” phenomenon (originally: “Even the liberal New Republic“), in which an opinion is given extra credibility by its being advocated by someone or something that would be expected to endorse its antithesis. A conservative supports President Obama; a liberal supports a flat tax. Etc.
James Kirchick’s brief against Labour’s London mayoral candidate, Ken Livingstone, has all you could possibly need to understand why this charismatic anti-Semite (and Chávez-coddler, and terrorist-sympathizer) should not be voted for today—even if you’re otherwise a Labour supporter who might wish that your party, currently in the opposition, would receive the boost of winning back the mayoralty of Britain’s capital city.
It’s still worth noting that even the left-wing, Labour-supporting, formerly-Livingstone-loving Jewish Londoner D.D. Guttenplan has unequivocally endorsed not voting for Livingstone:
Whether Livingstone has truly made the transit from anti-Zionism to anti-Semitism, or has simply calculated that any perceived deference to Jewish opinion would count against him among London’s far more numerous Muslim voters, I can’t say. But neither can I ignore my own sense that he seems willing to dismiss and diminish Jewish concerns in a way that doesn’t seem true for other minority groups. …
the argument that a progressive stand on social issues excuses callousness toward Jewish pain is no better than the claim, frequently heard among American and British conservatives, that support for Israel trumps any concern for social justice at home.
Jews in Britain have turned the other cheek far too long. If Livingstone’s defeat is the price to be paid for self-respect, so be it.
It looks like both Kirchick and Guttenplan will get their wishes.
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.