digest
Short Summary
Main recommendation: Lord Jonathan Sacks argues Britain lost a shared national identity through multiculturalism, and that anti-Semitism today takes the form of anti-Zionism, which he says should be met with zero tolerance like any other prejudice. He contends that criticism of the Israeli state is legitimate, but denying Israel's right to exist is anti-Semitic. He also says religion can intensify violence without being its root cause.
Key Points
- Sacks says religion does not inevitably cause war; human impulse and anger are the root cause, though religion can intensify violence or justify it.
- He argues multiculturalism was meant to foster tolerance but instead led to what Trevor Phillips called "sleepwalking into segregation." His metaphor: a collective identity makes society a home, while multiculturalism makes it a hotel.
- Sacks says anti-Semitism mutates like a virus to survive social unacceptability: hated for religion in the Middle Ages, for race in the 19th and 20th centuries, and for the nation-state today, which he calls "the new anti-Semitism."
- He reports that his youngest daughter encountered anti-Semitism at university, which he found deeply shocking, though he says he has personally not experienced it.
- On Israel, he distinguishes legitimate criticism of Israel's policies and settlements from denying Israel's right to exist, citing a school exercise in which students accepted criticism of the British government but rejected questioning Britain's right to exist.
Details Worth Noting
- Concrete instructions: The only actionable advice given is to "practise zero tolerance" toward anti-Semitism, "the way you would towards any other kind of unacceptable prejudice," which Sacks says would solve the Labour Party's problem.
- The school exercise used a simple test: ask students whether it is legitimate to criticize the British government (they agreed) and whether Britain has no right to exist (none agreed), to illustrate the difference between criticism and anti-Semitism.
- The interviewer raises Ken Livingstone and Labour's anti-Semitism controversies as context; Sacks responds only that zero tolerance would solve the problem.
- Sacks frames the "identity politics" and nationalism of the current era as driven by groups feeling their tribe is not recognized.
- He draws on Trevor Phillips for the "sleepwalking into segregation" phrase and presents the home-versus-hotel analogy as his own framing.
Bottom Line
Sacks presents anti-Semitism as a shape-shifting prejudice now expressed through hostility to Israel's existence, and he argues the remedy is consistent, zero-tolerance enforcement against prejudice combined with a restored shared national identity.