Guardian

Guardian characterizes terror group sympathizer Jeremy Corbyn MP as a “leftwinger”


In the context of the Guardian’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the word “rightwinger” is essentially meaningless, as it is often merely a pejorative meant to signify views their contributors personally find distasteful.  Interestingly, even Nick Watt, Guardian chief political correspondent acknowledged that “quite often on the left the term rightwing is just used to mean ‘bad’”.

Of course, most Guardian editors and correspondents characterize Israeli politicians such as Binyamin Netanyahu, Naftali Bennet and Avigdor Lieberman as “right-wing” – or even, in the case of Bennet and Lieberman, “far-right“.

However, even self-identified left-wing journalist Ben-Dror Yemini was recently described by the Guardian’s Jerusalem correspondent as “rightwing”. Yemini’s “rightwing” sin seems to be that he takes the delegitimization campaign against Israel – an industry which the Guardian is heavily invested in – very seriously.

Yet, tellingly, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas – and other leaders within the Fatah movement who praise suicide bombers – are sometimes described as “moderate”, and rarely if ever characterized as “rightwing”.

Terrorists from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah are typically described in the Guardian as “militants“.

So, how then should they characterize supporters of these two “militant” groups? 

Enter Jeremy Corbyn MP, who was the focus of this June 15th Guardian article:

guardian headline

Corbyn is a Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) Patron and an obsessively anti-Israel campaigner who participated in a meeting organized by the openly pro-Hamas group MEMO, and has actually spoken out (at a Stop the War Coalition meeting) in defense of Hamas.

“The idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people, and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region, should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government, is really a big, big historical mistake.”

Here’s a short video clip of Corbyn speaking at the Stop the War Coalition meeting in 2009 cited above. (Corbyn is Chair of the organisation.)

There’s more:

  • Corbyn hosted an event organized by PSC in the British House of Commons with Mousa Abu Maria, an activist with ties to the terror group Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ).

As Sam Westrop has argued, though Corbyn fancies himself a human rights activist, his support for reactionary terror groups reveals that his “putative commitment to human rights is nothing more than a façade – one that hides a far more sinister support for ideological forces with a sworn aversion to peace”.

Labeling Corbyn a ‘leftwinger’ represents a rhetorical obfuscation – an ideological inversion which serves to hide his well-documented record of supporting extremists.

20 replies »

  1. As a Labour member I will not be voting for Corbyn, and if he were to win I would resign from the party immediately.

    • He is clearly insane. Anyone voting for him is voting for the Labour party’s self-immolation (although it’s already quite some way down that road).
      Anyone voting for him in Hamastan N1 over the years is a schmuck, at the very least.

  2. I await the the day that someone or a group with deep pockets can support some top notch investigative journalists and prior law enforcement investigators to run an in depth background check and income source on these so called bastions of self-determination fighting the oppression. I’m certain money is involved, either in cash gifts trips use of assets. I suggest for the Galloways Jeremy’s, and “news people” start investigating.

  3. As far as opposing Israel is concerned, the rest of Labour is not far behind …. so why the fuss about Corbyn …

  4. Does the Israeli government tell women what to do with their bodies? Do corporations control all health care costs and treatments in Israel? Are the police using military equipment to make sure the streets are clean? Is the Israeli nation One Nation Under One Party?

    No. No. No.

    It’s safe to say that Israel is the most Left Wing country in the Middle East. It’s safe to say that Israel may very well be more Left Wing than the United States, British Royalty, and all of Gay Paris. Sheesh, I’m gonna go so far and say it: the Guardian hates Israel.

    Ergo, the Guardian hates Middle East Liberals.

    Weird. That must make the Guardian a right wing piece of shit.

    Oh well.

    • Very true. In the eyes of the Guardianistas someone who hates Israel, the US, democracy and worships murderous terrorists must be a leftist. According to this logic all members of any Nazi-party must be leftist too.

  5. I’m very sorry Adam, but this is easily the worst contribution to the site that I’ve seen. Corbyn is well-known as a hardline leftwinger, as has been reported across every newspaper (i.e. not just the Guardian) on the subject. He is a member of a small group of older Labour MPs (with John McDonnell, Dennis Skinner and others) who stick to the big-state socialism and trade unionism of the 1970s. Even his Wikipedia article starts out with “He is considered one of the most left-wing of Labour MPs.” There is no debating that point whatsoever, it is fact.

    And by leftwing, I mean in the accepted political sense (supports greater state involvement in the economy, as opposed to rightwingers who don’t), not some childish “left good, right bad” as used by CiF commenters below the line.

    Lastly, your quotation from Chris Elliot is a poor example of quote mining. If you read the article you link, you will see that the quote you took actually comes from Andrew Sparrow, who is criticising the misapplication of the term. It is not, as you appear to portray, a justification for “left good, right bad”.

    • When you analyze the extreme Left & extreme Right rather then visualizing the two at opposite ends on the same tangent that continues on for infinitude think of those two competing political spectrum on polar ends of ends of one elongated line that intersects at a point. The intersection point is where there is little difference between the two extremes of Left & Right.

    • Thanks Arnie. I see now that it wasn’t Elliott. I’ll revise the text accordingly. But, I disagree about your broader point. How is someone who supports violent, reactionary movements a “leftwinger”?

        • No – Communists sometimes support violent, progressive movements. Admittedly the definition of progressive can be debatable

      • Because that’s only a small part of his political beliefs (an important one for people in Israel/Palestine, but relatively small in the scheme of British politics). And you can support a group for one reason without having to subscribe to all of its beliefs.

        For example, plenty of governments and politicians in the UK, US and elsewhere have supported vicious and outright fascist dictatorships for a variety of reasons (profit, pragmatism, or anti-Communism). Yet we don’t call these politicians fascists by association, because they aren’t. Richard Nixon established friendly relations with China, and he was no Maoist. David Cameron supports friendly relations with the medieval, head-chopping monarchy of Saudi Arabia and frequently whitewashes the regime, because he doesn’t want them to stop buying British aircraft or selling oil. But that doesn’t mean that he supports bringing in the death penalty for apostasy in Britain.

        In the case of the British Left, among whom Palestine is a popular (one might almost say fashionable) cause, I think they see the nature of its leaders to be secondary to the state’s right to exist. After all, any independence of Palestine would necessarily have to involve a peace treaty and mutual recognition between the Palestinian government (including Hamas) and Israel. Refusing to recognise the Palestinians’ leaders on the basis that this hasn’t happened yet is seen as putting the cart before the horse.

        • According to your political theory all terrorist organisations are states, at least in nuce..
          Are you a bit out of mind? Or is this the new standard at universities, to teach four fingers are five?

          • The idea of Palestine as a state has had currency since at least1948 and cannot be simply dismissed out of hand, however much you would like to. But this dispute is irrelevant to the point I was getting at.

          • To add to my other post, de facto Hamas is a state, as is for example ISIS. It has a defined territory (the Gaza strip) – what more does a state need?

            A lot of people think that to be a state, UN recognition is needed, but I think this is only a question of law and not fact. There are various places like Somaliland, South Ossetia and so on, that while they are not recognised as such in law, very much do exist as state entities that control a piece of territory.

            • A failed state before coming into being, something you like to ignore. In your defintion every armeed terror goup already is a state, hmm, well, for a barbarian you are quite developed.