I'm sure you know you can read 2 articles a week for free but here is the Syed article anyway published yesterday in The Times. What is so very interesting is the response he gets from the wider crowd compared to those who carry antisemitic and pro Hamas placards or chant the chants on marches. Have we ever heard of them being rounded on by the marchers or turfed out of the marches? I don't think so. Because they are central to them. Here is the article:
I approach a group of three women — perhaps in their fifties, brown-skinned, British accents — and one of them recognises me: “You are that journalist Matthew Syed.” Yes, can you talk? They assent so I ask what I take to be a fair-minded question to elicit their position and why they are here. “Who do you blame for what is unfolding in Gaza? Do you think Hamas bears any responsibility?”
For the avoidance of doubt, this was the extent of my question. I didn’t say anything else about Hamas: that their founding charter is committed to the killing of Jews; that they have consistently said that they wish to commit October 7-style atrocities again and again; that they are funded by Iran, which wishes to expunge Israel from the pages of history; that the mullahs have sometimes insinuated that Muslims have a duty to kill Jews wherever they are found — perhaps, who knows, the inspiration for a man called Jihad, born to a Syrian father who described the Hamas attackers as “men of God on Earth”, attempting mass murder in Manchester.
No, all I asked was: “Is Hamas partly responsible?” Here’s what happened next, as their friendly faces turned to, well, something else. “Go away,” one said. “Go away. You are a bad faith actor. We don’t want to talk to you. Just f* off. It’s a really boring old line. You are disgusting.” “I am disgusting?” “Yes, you are disgusting. You are not a journalist. It’s very clear what your position is here.” Now, their voices were getting louder: “Piss off.” “Thanks for your time, I appreciate it,” I said retreating, but they were not finished. “What are you doing here anyway? You are prejudiced. Hopefully nobody will ever buy a book you write. You are a charlatan. You are a fucking racist.”
Those surrounding us started to join in. “Well said, sister.” “Yeah, well said!” Others in the enclosure began to applaud. I noticed a tall man with a Palestinian flag a few metres away and he pointed at me, although I wasn’t sure why. A younger woman approached and said: “I have seen you all afternoon trying to get a rise from people.” “I only asked if Hamas is partly responsible. Is that so very provocative?” “You are here to cause trouble and you are going to get trouble,” she said.
I wish I could tell you that this was a one-off but I spoke to at least two dozen people and, with two exceptions (including a lovely black guy from north London who conversed intelligently and politely), the motivation for being here was obvious, potent and implacable. The hatred of Jews. I heard conspiracy theories (October 7 was a false flag operation), blood libels, and the pervasive view that the Manchester atrocity was not a heinous attack but righteous comeuppance for an evil people. My sense is that many felt liberated to say what they really thought by the proximity of like-minded others; the classic symptom of mob mentality.
What perhaps struck me the most was the vivid contrast between the ostensibly peaceful nature of the protest — holding flags, going limp when arrested so they had to be lifted by four officers at a time — and the latent violence of the views. As police carried off an elderly protester who I’d talked to a little earlier (and who was convinced of the virtue of his hateful opinions), protesters started shouting at the young officers: “Shame on you! Shame on you!” “But are they not following the instruction of a democratically elected government — even if you disagree with it — and upholding the rule of law?” “F democracy. F the police.”
Few would tell me their names, except for Julia and Ian, Musa from north London, Ahmed from Oxford and Jeremy from Lyme Regis; all the rest wished to spout their hate anonymously. Perhaps you will say that these people are not representative of the UK, but with protests in London and Manchester in the aftermath of Thursday’s attack on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, and the dozens of other marches that have taken place since October 7, it is difficult to overestimate the potent and increasingly assertive nature of antisemitism.
You perhaps won’t be surprised to hear that most were virulently left wing. I almost felt like crying as another anonymous hater — perhaps 22, white, middle-class accent — started to lecture me about intersectionality and colonialist oppression. It was like woke bingo. I couldn’t help asking about the oppression of women in Gaza but her face went blank. “How the f* do you know women are treated badly?” Er, Amnesty International. This momentarily fazed her since she couldn’t quite place Amnesty in the institutional framework of the Jew-funded global conspiracy. But she recovered quickly: “Well, I haven’t read about that, but I have read about Jewish occupation and genocide.”
Another striking thing in this age of free-flowing digital information was the incuriosity of this supposedly politically motivated group. Trump announced a potential end to the Gaza conflict in a diplomatic coup last Monday when almost a dozen Muslim nations signing up to a proposed peace deal, alongside Israel. I am no Trump fan, and the proposal may yet fall apart, but there is no chance that this could have been achieved by Joe Biden, let alone Kamala Harris. Coming on top of the seminal Abraham Accords, it testifies to the diplomatic tenacity of the American president.
But how did they feel about this breakthrough here? How did protesters who “weep” for Gazans feel about the prospect the killing might end? I can assert that almost nobody I spoke to showed the slightest interest. “I haven’t kept up with that one.” “I haven’t read about it.” “If Netanyahu signed up, it must be awful.” But surely it is a good thing if it brings to an end the slaughter? Hesitation. “But it won’t be a just peace.” I didn’t need to ask the follow-up question because the answer was obvious. No peace can be just if it involves the LITTLE satan particularly when in concert with the Big Satan.
Joseph Henrich, the Harvard anthropologist, has said that ideology “doesn’t just blind; it binds”. Nowhere is this more true than with antisemitism. Many of these people do not just hate Jewish people, they have an ideology to justify and legitimise their hatred; one conveniently protected from doubt by the unwillingness to engage with anything that challenges it. In this sense, it is not so very different from the myopic fundamentalism of the group so many here admire. Hamas.
I left Trafalgar Square even more convinced that the government has demonstrated criminal complacency about the rise in antisemitism over recent years. Now is the time for robust action. Otherwise we will see more atrocities like Manchester, and ever greater fear among a group that has made a huge contribution to this nation and regarded it once as a place of refuge.