May 01, 2008
LONDON — In different ways the matter of race appears to be airing its ugly head in a prominent way on elections on both sides of the Atlantic. Not only is the matter of racial prejudice emerging as an unspoken issue in the American Democratic presidential primaries, but it is very much an underlying issue in the London mayoral election.
Londoners are going to the polls on Thursday to elect a mayor for the next four years. Incumbent Ken Livingstone of the Labor Party is fighting hard for a third term against Conservative candidate Boris Johnson and Liberal-Democrat challenger Brian Paddrick. Despite the fact that there have been major racial issues during Livingstone’s two terms as mayor — especially suggestions of anti-Semitism — the English and even Anglo Jewry seem far more engaged in following the Clinton-Obama struggle and the question of race in the U.S. primaries.
On the one hand, part of the difference in British electoral politics is based on the general restrictions on campaign advertisements and general expenditures. The level of campaign spending and electronic media noise is fractional compared to U.S. elections. Debates are formal and structured into the entire campaign schedule.
On the other hand local elections are seen as a far more critical barometer of national attitudes and leanings than, say, Cory Booker’s election in Newark or Michael Bloomberg’s in New York City. National party leaders view gains and losses in local parliamentary by-elections as well as local elections as serious indices of national satisfaction with the policies of the government in Whitehall.
National elections must occur next in England no later than June 2010. Gordon Brown, who only succeeded Tony Blair — mid-term — as head of the Labor Party and prime minister in June, needs to closely watch the local voting. Similarly, Conservative Party head David Cameron is actively seeking wins in Thursday’s local elections to validate his claim that the Tories are rallying to succeed Labor in the next election.
London has only had an elected mayor since 2000, and Livingstone has held the position the entire time. His defeat would not only signal personal disaffection with Livingstone, but would also definitely be seen as repudiation of the Brown leadership. British pollsters are engaged in a debate as to how large or small a margin of defeat would signify problems for either Brown or Cameron. Some have even suggested that should Livingstone win big, it could force Cameron to give up leadership of the Conservative Party.
And yet the English seem far more laid-back about their politics than Americans. Londoners know there is an election, but only appear to get energized during the final days of the campaign.
So quietly, at least, some London Jews have suggested that should Livingstone lose he may well blame his defeat on the efforts of the “Jewish lobby.”
For his part, Livingstone has sought to woo the sizable population of London Jews (approximately 200,000), which he has repeatedly riled during the past eight years with indiscreet remarks and insensitive behavior. This winter he lit the largest hanukkia in Europe, and he has begun upgrading mass transportation serving Jewish areas. Livingstone claims credit for a reduction in anti-Semitic incidents (claims many Jews reject). And he seems intent on deflecting voters’ attention from himself and his own “indiscretions” to the possible resurgence of the neofascist British National Party.
And it may be working: Given his record, it would have been reasonable to assume that there would have been much more public discussion of his anti-Israel remarks and blatant courtship of dubious Muslim leaders.
Since local elections have national implications in Great Britain, Jews have a further dilemma. Many Jews view the Labor Party as being more sympathetic than the Tories toward the Palestinians. Their predisposition, therefore, should be to vote against Livingstone, but at present they prefer that Labor continue to run the government.
Preelection polls suggest an exceedingly close race in London. What they don’t show are Jewish fears concerning rising Muslim radicalism and politicians who pander toward them — perhaps because the Jewish respondents don’t want to seem themselves intolerant. But no one will be surprised if such attitudes on race will only show up in the election results.
Thus while separated by 3,000 of miles of water, the votes of Jews in both the United States as well as in London seem increasingly to be influenced by racial concerns and anxieties over Israel — matters which are likely to grow even more intense in the months and years ahead.
Dr. Gilbert N. Kahn is a professor of political science at Kean University in Union.
- Comment: comments@njjewishnews.com