If there was a hierarchy of racism in the Labour Party, Jews were at the bottom.

A few years ago I was having drinks in an MP’s office and chatting to a member of their team. It was all pleasant enough, there was free wine and we made small talk about what it is like to work for a politician. During a lull in our conversation, they turned to me and abruptly asked, “what do you think about Israel and Palestine?”.

My eyes widened with surprise and I had a little chuckle to myself and thought, ‘jeez, they must have found my conversation pretty dry’. I wasn’t bothered, I presumed this staffer was ‘sizing me up’ and trying to work out my politics, albeit in a rather cack-handed way. I’m not afraid to have a heavy conversation, nor am I afraid of being upfront about my political beliefs. So, I answered the question as directly and as sensitively as I could.

My answer was exactly what you’d expect from a centre-Left Fabian-type. I briefly outlined my support for a two-state solution and my belief that the views of both sides in the conflict are legitimate and both sides have legitimate grievances etc. My answer was probably a little milquetoast for them, as they barely responded to it. Instead, they pivoted again, and this time there was an edge to their voice. “So what’s your views on antisemitism in the Labour Party?” they pushed.

At this point I started to feel a little uncomfortable. I felt like I was being grilled. Maybe even intimidated. Again I was honest, “I do think the Labour Party has a serious issue with antisemitism.”

At this point they cut me off, they were visibly angry. Their manner sharpened. They spoke faster, in a whisper that cuts through a room. I was anxious that others might start paying attention to us, that we were causing a scene. They started saying, “but what about other forms of racism?” and quizzing me on why I felt Labour had a unique issue with antisemitism.

By this point I was riled. I said that in 2015, the history of Jeremy Corbyn’s associations, dalliances and support for groups and individuals who expressed overt antisemitic beliefs, in the most grotesque terms, became widely known. I said that if he had associated with individuals or groups, who were that vile and hateful to any other minority group, his political career would have been dead in the water. There is no way he would have become Labour Leader.

I could tell the staffer was now incredibly agitated. But I was angry too and I looked them back in the eye. I wanted them to see my anguish.

I said that Jeremy Corbyn toasted a cleric, Raed Salah, and offered him tea on the House of Commons terrace, after his conviction for spouting the blood libel that Jews kill children to put their blood in their matzah bread. Just… just imagine, if he done anything like that to any other group or minority..

“But Jews do kill children. Jews. Kill. Children.”

My draw dropped and I lost my words. I can’t remember exactly what I said after this. I think I muttered my shock and said I was leaving there and then. I don’t know whether the staffer’s words were overheard or people can just caught site of me, visibly upset.

On my way out a colleague grabbed and asked me what had happened. As I gathered myself, they told me to sit down in another room. The MP joined me and I retold the story. My colleague and this MP were great that night, reassuring me and letting me speak. I remember retelling them what had happened, verbatim. I remember looking at the MP and saying that if Jeremy Corbyn had associated himself with figures that hateful about any other minority group, he’d have never ever even gotten close to becoming leader. My voice trembling with anger. This MP looked down at the floor, solemnly nodded, and said “I know”.

Me and my colleague left soon after. A few days later the MP had told me that this member of their staff was no longer working for them and had moved on.*

…

Section C of the Forde Report makes for difficult reading. The report is damning, suggesting the ‘Party was in effect operating a hierarchy of racism or of discrimination with other forms of racism and discrimination being ignored.’

The report says that in 2016, there were 5,000 unresolved complaints, almost a third of which related to antisemitism. The report leans heavily into the fact that many staff held a perceived hierarchy of discrimination. This has been a common line among Corbynites for several years now, once they moved on from outright denial; “yeh yeh antisemitism is an issue, but what about Islamophobia and anti-Black racism in the Party?”.

One third of all complaints related to antisemitism. And there was a particular surge in reported antisemitism complaints from 2015 onwards. Putting myself in the shoes of a staffer in Labour’s complaints department, witnessing the sheer scale of antisemitism complaints and their dramatic rise, I can understand why they might focus their concern in that area.

When I say ‘focus their concern in that area’, I mean it is understandable for them to express their concerns over a political culture that is making these individuals, quite suddenly, feel like the Labour Party is their home and discuss how that can change. I do not mean to suggest that they should act with more leniency to other forms of racism when investigating complaints — and the report doesn’t suggest the GLU conducted themselves in that manner. One person is quoted as saying they believed that complaints regarding Islamophobia, Racism and Sexual harassment were dealt with less urgency.

The clearest examples of supposed institutional racism offered up by the report are from the Senior Management Team’s Whatsapp Groups and their discussions about Diane Abbott.

Forde acknowledges the majority of criticisms of Diane Abbott in the SMT WhatsApp transcripts would be considered ‘acceptable expressions of the authors’ opinions’. But it claims that there was some criticism that drew on racist tropes. The examples he uses were comments that Diane Abbott “literally makes me sick”, is “truly repulsive” and is a “very angry woman”. I agree with Forde that these comments are ‘unprofessional, unkind, and entirely inappropriate’. However, is unclear whether Abbott’s ‘repulsiveness’ is due to her politics, character, or her race. Calling any black woman angry is a classic micro-aggression.

Now, I agree with Forde that Diane Abbott as a black woman has ‘been vilified on that basis over several decades, (a) might have impacted on their instinctive responses to her, even if unconsciously, and (b) meant that they should take particular caution with their language when discussing her.’ It is hard to tie these reasonable comments by Forde with his other claim that staff had drawn on racist tropes (apart from calling her angry). Forde rightly points out that while criticism of Diane Abbott doesn’t have to be because of her race to be racist, and that singling her out for criticism while not offering up some language to her white counterparts, may be signs of a racist culture within the group.

Without seeing the full Whatsapp transcripts, only selective leaks, it is difficult to be definitive on whether only Abbott was singled out for harsh criticism and whether the likes of John McDonnell and Chris Williamson were never rudely and unprofessionally commented on by the SMT.

The report also says that there was a deeper issue of racism in Party saying,

Racism in the party is not experienced by individuals solely through acts of aggression or micro-aggression towards them personally — it is experienced through seeing colleagues being passed over for promotion; being the only person from an ethnic minority background around a meeting table; being managed by a near-exclusively white senior team; and hearing the particular disdain which colleagues reserve for (for example) ethnic minority MPs, councillors and CLP (constituency Labour party) members.

As Forde points out, Labour’s internal staff survey is flawed, but it still gives us some guidance on the backup of Party HQ. 82% of staff identified as “British”, “English”, “Other White Background”, “Scottish” or “Irish” (and we note that that would include individuals from Gypsy, Roma or Traveller backgrounds). Only 3% identified as “Black, Middle Eastern or North Africa”, 2% “Indian”, 2% “Other Asian”, 5% “Mixed Heritage” and 5% as “other / prefer not to say.

This is very similar to the make-up of the UK where 84% are white, 2.5% are Indian, 2.2% are of mixed heritage and 3.3% are of black heritage. I’d suggest but the Labour Party should strive to be move diverse than the UK population but the reason why someone may be the ‘only person from an ethnic minority background around a meeting table’ is because Labour reflects the ethnic make-up of the population as a whole.

However, it is clear that Labour has a serious issue in failing to diversify its top team. This is an issue I’ve witnessed in several organisations I have worked for and the causes are often structural, and can be perpetuated by subconscious biases. As Forde says, there are many large organisations in the UK which do have work to do when it comes to diversity and inclusion.

I do not deny Forde’s conclusion that Labour has a huge amount of work to do to make their workplace more inclusive and welcoming to all minorities. Irregular recruitment practices need to be stopped, and decent facilities such as prayer rooms are essential.

However, what struck me about the report is how covert the racism seems to have been. Examples include Labour staff going to a pub called ‘The Colonies in Victoria’ (yep, really). Moreover, the rest of the complaints are about black and Muslim staff being treated differently — a perception that they receive harsher criticisms, or were scrutinised more closer and often overlooked when having done good work.

I agree that these are serious allegations and suggest an unhealthy and racist culture. Unconscious biases within the Party needs to be thoroughly examined and work needs to be done within the organisation to overcome structural racism.

I opened this blog with one example of antisemitism I’ve witnessed in the Labour Party. I have more. I’ve had to tell someone to leave a canvassing session after they said “the Rothchilds and the City of London” rule the world. I’ve been on the ‘Labour Party Forum’ on Facebook and seen neo-Nazi style material shared widely. Moreover, there is a litany of reports of people posting antisemitic material getting let off the hook by the Party.

There are no examples of senior Labour staffer’s associating with the BNP, or offering Tommy Robinson tea on the terraces… and then those Labour staffers being cheered by thousands and handsomely elected, or placed in roles in the Leader’s Office. I believe I am very unlikely to hear a Labour member, let alone a Labour staffer, say something along the lines of “Pakistanis rape children”. But I heard similar about Jews and that was the difference.

Fundamentally, the antisemitism I’ve heard in the Labour Party has often been overt and direct. Not only that, but having close associations with antisemites was not toxic in the party until Starmer’s leadership and did not harm your political career. You could be close to antisemites, you could apologise for them, and you could reach the very top of the Party. That says everything you need to know about hierarchy of racism in Labour.

Fundamentally, there is a difference between poor HR and diversity & inclusion practices and the perpetuation of unconscious biases — and overt, direct racism and the celebrated acceptance of those who are sympathetic to those who express overt and direct racism. The first is a serious issue no doubt, and it rightly damages Labour. Hard work must be undertaken to tackle it. It is an issue across organisations all over this land and one facet of deep structural racism across employment in our country. The second issue is something… that explains why we wholeheartedly lost the confidence of one particular minority group in this country.

The Forde report highlights that Labour has work to do to improve diversity and inclusion practices and improve BAME representation, particularly in senior roles. Many of recommendations are important and I hope are taken on board. However, the report’s conclusion that there was a ‘hierarchy of racism’ within the Party, with antisemitism taken more seriously, is simply galling. The evidence over four years, 2015–2019, was clear. #JewsDontCount.

***

A final note, I will almost certainly be accused of perpetuating Forde’s hierarchy of racism with this blog. I am very much aware at that the damage those accusations could have for me. But I think someone needs to be brave enough to challenge his report’s conclusion.

I do believe that in attempting to tackle antisemitism on the Left — which is particularly culturally deep rooted — people like myself have to be careful not to give one form of discrimination more focus than another. However, to readdress the balance and remove any hierarchy of racism, we do need to think about how and why calling Dianne Abbott repulsive may be equally as damaging to someone’s career in Labour as defending an overtly antisemitic mural or defending holocaust deniers.

The only advice I can offer is that we should understand that factionalism, politics and point-scoring needs to be left out of the fight against racism. On occasions, my own side has been complicit in taking people’s words in bad faith, removing them out of context, or blowing up ‘micro-aggressions’ in an attempt to tarnish an opponent. Doing this harms the fight against discrimination.*

Genuine difficulty can come when two individuals (often differently aligned politically) hold sincere differences of what constitutes bigotry and severity of any comment - as these things are not clearly defined. When this happens, it can be very difficult to find a way through. But the best place to start is in a position of good faith and mutual understanding. This blog is charged and may upset some people. However, I have tried to be fair to Forde’s report and praise sections I believe deserve praise, while pointing out what I see as discrepancies in what we view as serious examples of antisemitism and what is viewed as serious examples of other forms of racism and how we respond to those examples alike.

*It should be noted that after this incident, another colleague in Labour argued that the staffer had been a bit too harshly treated. After all, they were young, and everyone makes ‘mistakes’ when they’ve ‘had a bit too much to drink’.

*Please, before you comment and say I’ve done this with allegations against Jeremy Corbyn. I know the context behind his most controversial remarks and the context often just makes them worse.

*This blog doesn’t deny that there have been some awful cases of overt, direct or extreme islamophobia or anti-Black racism carried out by Labour Party members, but it argues that such equally awful examples of antisemitism were more widespread; that there was a longstanding denial of the scale of the issue, and those who carried out such denial or even associated with antisemites were not politically damaged in the same way as they would have rightly been damaged for associating with other racists.