‘Unchosen’ by Julie Burchill is one of those delightful books that you devour like an addictive guilty pleasure. Like a whole pint tub of Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Therapy, I picked it up intending to read a chapter before going to sleep, and before I knew where I was it was 2:30 am and I’d scarfed down the lot.
Critics may sneer that no commercial publisher would touch ‘Unchosen’ because it reads like a magazine article self-indulgently over-loaded until it topples over. They can fuck right off.
In language that is often intemperate but never half-arsed, Julie chronicles her abiding love of the Jewish people and everything about us, a love to which she has stayed faithful for over 40 years.
What I like about Julie’s approach is that she doesn’t go a bundle on the Jewish clichés – humour, chicken soup, family warmth etc. As she says: “The things I love about the Jews are the REAL things about them, the things that make lots of people uncomfortable and uncomprehending – their religion, their language and their ancient, re-claimed country.” To a large extent, the book is not so much the memoirs of a philosemite as of an anti-antsemite. Never dull, the book becomes absolutely turbocharged when ripping a new one for antisemites, mealy-mouthed antisemites masquerading as anti-Zionists, and – a species which puzzles and disturbs her as much as it does me – the self-hating Jews so memorably rubbished as ‘ASHamed Jews’ in Howard Jacobson’s ‘The Finkler Question’.
There is so much with which I feel an instinctive kinship here. Like me, Julie despises the way that people of our generation and older paint themselves as ‘young’ and positively revels at having been born in the middle years of the last century. And I thought I was the only one who wanted to say to Muslim couples on Edgware Road: “Your wife is dressed so modestly – why are you got up like a little whore?” I also have a Bristol connection. In Chapter 2 Julie gives a well-researched history of the Jews in Bristol, including a fascinating glimpse into the tiny 16th-century community – the only one outside London between 1290 and 1660. What she doesn’t mention is my maternal grandmother’s family – Millet(t) – who, after a couple of years struggling, first in London and then in Dublin, found their feet in Bristol and from 1891 expanded from there to found the nationwide chains of Millet(t)s clothing & camping shops. Within three generations they’d managed to churn out several captains of industry – and a Law Lord.
I can also see why conversion – especially to Liberal Judaism – wouldn’t be for her. People brought up in Christian (and Muslim) traditions, where all the drive is to convert unbelievers, can’t grasp why we Jews make it so damn difficult. That’s because so many prospective converts to Judaism are just fucking Walts.
Let me explain. In the British Army, some of the greatest contempt is reserved for men who have never served their country but try to pass themselves off in the pub as veterans who served in 2 Para in the Falklands. This is how so many converts come across to us born Jews. They haven’t earned their chops. Even people like me who’ve led easy, comfortable middle-class lives have encountered ingrained, unthinking low-level casual antisemitism from early childhood. You’ve been spared that. The idea that anyone could try out being Jewish for a bit and then jack it in when they get tired of it is sickening. That’s why most Jews only really respect Orthodox Jewish converts. In Orthodoxy it is held that, when somebody genuinely converts to Judaism, they actually become a new person, and their previous persona is no more. It takes at least two years to get started, and carries on for a lifetime.
For me – and I suspect for Julie – Liberal & Progressive Judaism embodies the worst of both worlds. You have to turn the other cheek and be exaggeratedly right-on like a trendy C of E vicar, but you’re still part of the minority called Jew that has to know its place as only 0.5% of the population. You don’t even get the feeling of specialness that comes with learning Hebrew, because all the prayers are in anodyne New Revised English. What would suit Julie best would be ‘Jews on Bikes’ Judaism – eat & drink what you like, but if anyone has a go at Israel, clean their clock for them.
I only have one caveat – yes, I know, there’s always bloody something, isn’t there? We Jews are always a little nervous of gentiles who loudly proclaim their philosemitism. We’ve had too much experience of people like Tony Benn who were passionate Zionists when Israel looked like being strangled in its cradle, but as soon as it showed it could stick up for itself went over to the other side on the morally bankrupt principle that the underdog must always be right. At first I thought Hadley Freeman’s article in ‘The Guardian’ expressing her worries about Julie Burchill’s philosemitism was risibly masochistic; but, after reading ‘Unchosen’, reluctantly I have to concede she may have the faintest whisper of a point. Listen to Julie Burchill in Chapter 7: “If the man in the street can often become anti-Semitic because he fails to shine in comparison with this endlessly persecuted yet ceaselessly achieving group, how much more must the man on campus get even more paranoid as he sees the Jews do effortlessly what he must burn the midnight oil to do…”; and in Chapter 3: “It’s weird when you meet your first dumb Jew – like meeting a gay man who can’t dance –and I’ve never gotten used to it, right to this day.” Personally I bridle at the expectation of being homo superior. Well I do now that I’m old and tired. But it did get me laid once or twice when I was young, so on balance it was worth it.
Julie Burchill has a visceral understanding of Jews that many people, including many sympathetic to Jews, Judaism & Israel, just don’t get. There are insights and perspectives on la condition Anglo-Juive in this book that you will not find elsewhere. Read it.
Politics
Nous Sommes Tous Charlie Hebdo
It Was Alright In The 1970s
Cecil Rhodes said: “To be born English is to win first prize in the lottery of life.” This is often seen as an expression of gloating triumphalism: but I would rather view it as a precursor of a well-known arachnid-related character’s catchphrase: “With great power comes great responsibility”.
So I was very depressed to see the harmless telly of the 1970s disembowelled by the sneers and exaggerated shock of a bunch of young whippersnappers in ‘It Was Alright In The 1970s’ (Ch4, 16th & 23rd Nov). They even managed to parade a couple of chaps who had actually been in the 1970s progs to shamefacedly condemn them, like Western hostages of the IS about to be beheaded.
The 1970s was the time of my teens and young adulthood. It was a golden era of galloping progress: we looked back at the war and the 1950s and saw how far we had come in terms of free speech, mod cons and technological development in every sphere. Everything seemed possible. I was looking forward to a life where I didn’t have to do anything I didn’t want to and might actually have a rich and enjoyable sex life, rather than the pre-60s norm of one fumbling and awkward shag leading to a couple with nothing in common being chained together for a lifetime for the sake of the child.
Didn’t quite work out like that, did it? Today the universe of public discourse seems to be hurtling back to a pre-Enlightenment mindset, where the rational separation between words and actions is being erased. We seem to have lost all psychological robustness.
I was much happier in a world where I could be unthinkingly happy to be male, heterosexual, British and white(-ish). I shall check my privilege when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
House of Commons Debate on Recognition of Palestinian Statehood
I’m watching this with a sense of utter despair. My own shul’s MP (Mike Hancock) made egregious, mendacious, mischievous and borderline antisemitic comments (in that he denies the facts surrounding the birth of the State of Israel) about Israel’s War of Independence.
The same buzzwords keep coming up: disproportionate, settlements.
The most powerful proponent of the motion, it soon became apparent, was no MP but the BBC: speaker after speaker prayed in favour of the motion the film ‘The Gatekeepers’ and subsequent debate, screened on BBC2 48 hours previously.
The division was not across party lines, but something both older and newer, and far more visceral. The voices in favour were mainly regional, with a preponderance from Scotland; those opposed were uniformly (with the honourable exception of Louise Ellman) received pronunciation from the shires.
As I listened, I was reminded inescapably of Yeats’ famous lines: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are filled with passionate intensity.” The pro voices were clear and forceful: the antis were factually correct, but dull, dull, dull, in some cases obviously reading briefs.
Much was made of the second part of the Balfour Declaration, that “nothing should be done which might prejudice the rights of the non-Jewish communities”, and Britain’s historic responsibility and importance as the holder of the Mandate from 1920 to 1947.
So: the motion was amended to read: “That this House believes that the Government should recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel as a contribution to securing a negotiated two state solution.” It was passed 247 to 12.
Not one word was spoken about the White Paper of 1939 which shut the doors of Palestine forever to the millions of doomed Jews of Hitler’s Europe. By that act, the people of Britain, whether they know it or not, forfeited their right to dare to pass judgment on Israel.
Archive on 4: Media and the Middle East
I thought this heavily-trailed BBC Radio 4 programme crossed the line from anti-Zionism into antisemitism. Listen to it and judge for yourself:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gnhnv
This is what I wrote to the BBC:
John Lloyd so slanted this programme against not just Israel, but Jews in general, and so made excuses for Arab violence, that I consider it slips from anti-Zionism into anti-Semitism. The Holocaust is belittled; the biblical origins of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel are sneered at, and the Jewish connection to that land from which they were expelled against their will, and to which they wanted to return but were prevented for nearly 1,900 years, is never mentioned. Instead Mr. Lloyd damns all the Jews of Israel as European colonial occupiers. The 800,000 Israeli Jews from Arab lands are airbrushed out of existence. 23 minutes in he quotes Tim Llewellyn approvingly: “Israel is an occupier and the Palestinians are victims”. He damns Irgun as wantonly murderous terrorists while soft-pedalling the murder of the Munich athletes, implying that the very establishment of Israel as a Jewish state in 1948 was a crime against humanity. This fits the EUMC definition of anti-Semitism.
The Liars of Saudi Arabia
Sometimes you just have to call out a liar. The fact is that for more than 20 years the al-Saud ruling family of Arabia have organised a devil’s pact, first with al-Qaeda and now with ‘Islamic State’, whereby they fund the terrorists to the hilt in return for them refraining from overthrowing the House of Saud and taking their fundamentalist mass-murdering ways out to wherever they choose around the world. The only word of truth in this ‘Guardian’ article is the date. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/17/saudi-arabia-not-support-islamic-state-terrorists
Israel & Gaza – a Cymru Perspective
Imagine, if you will, that Plaid Cymru decided to adopt an extremist militant policy. Mindful that the whole of the island of Britain had once been their land, they decided to declare war on the United Kingdom. Not having access to any heavy weaponry, they resorted to such small arms, mortars and missiles as they could smuggle in or manufacture, and a campaign of suicide bombing, in an effort to demoralise and terrorise the British into dismantling the United Kingdom and re-instating the rule of the Romano-British Welsh over the whole island.
Now imagine another scenario. After the Anglo-Saxon invasion of the 5th to 7th centuries, a remnant of the Romano-British Welsh are driven to the Welsh and Cornish fastnesses, but the majority spread across the world, particularly to Patagonia and Pennsylvania, where they flourish and make enormous contributions to the nations in which they settle, most of all by bringing the incalculable blessing of Welsh (or ‘Bourbon’) whiskey to the USA. However, in the late 19th century, an international Plaid Cymru movement springs up with the aim of returning the worldwide Welsh to a re-established State of Britannia Superior. Since they have by now become Americans, they have the will-power and the weaponry – and they overthrow the rudderless and divided United Kingdom.
The first paragraph is how Israel sees Hamas. The second is how Arabs see Israel.
Israel and Gaza
Hamas can’t lose, because Hamas can’t win.
Furthermore, Israel can’t win – because Israel can’t lose.
Let me explain.
Hamas’s objective is clearly set out in their Charter, and nothing they’ve said or done contradicts it. Their goal is the overthrow of the State of Israel (or ‘Zionist Entity’, as they call it) and its replacement with a unitary State of Palestine, governed according to Sharia law, in which non-Muslims are dhimmis – second-class citizens, with the same level of rights as non-whites in South Africa or Mississippi in the 1960s.
Obviously Israel will never acquiesce to this, so Hamas will continue its ‘resistance’ in perpetuity. It is this interminable state of conflict which is Hamas’s true and achievable goal. If in this conflict children and other vulnerable Palestinian Arabs are killed, so much the better: each death makes Hamas look like the underdogs and Israel like murderers, thus encouraging the rest of the world to side with Hamas against Israel.
For the same reason, Israel can never give in to any of Hamas’s demands, since they are all about giving Hamas access to better weaponry, sited where it can attack Israel’s heartland with impunity. Israel can only survive by maintaining overwhelming military superiority: with equality of arms, Hamas (and indeed Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Uncle Tom Tanzim and all) would inflict on Israel the same level of massacre that the Little Giraffe is visiting on his own subjects in Syria. But this is a story that the outside world just doesn’t want to hear: for them, Israel is fatally condemned by its willingness and ability to defend its own citizens of all races and creeds.
Rally For Israel In Kensington
I went to the rally in support of Israel outside the Israeli Embassy in Kensington this afternoon. I reckon between 3,000 and 4,000 attended, mainly British Jews but also a lot of Israelis, Christian Friends of Israel, and some Spaniards, Brazilians and Irish. There was a massive police presence, but it was all good-humoured, with songs and level-headed, encouraging speeches from Vivian Wineman and Louise Ellman, MP amongst others. The most notable part was that all the chants and placards were positive. As you can see, they supported Israel and condemned Hamas with wry humour, but did not call for harm to come to Muslims, Arabs or the Palestinian people. The best part was the mighty rolling thunder of Jews on Bikes!

Operation Protective Edge
Here are some sensible comments on the latest developments in the Arab-Israeli conflict:
http://www.thejc.com/news/world-news/120481/i-begged-hamas-a-ceasefire-they-said-no-bring-it






















