Three reasons ...

The Greens chanting terrible slogans causes at lot of offence but it also provides three reasons as to why they are wrong - and hypocritical - about so many things.

We once again have Green Party leader, Chlöe Swarbrick, proudly screaming the ‘from the river to the sea …’ slogan from the steps of Parliament.  You can try and dance on the head of a pin about what this suggests, but it unambiguously means the removal of all Jews from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River.  She proudly screams it, repeatedly, despite being told it’s meaning and implications.

While I think an abhorrent chant and an insidious intention, I am also a proponent of free speech.  As terrible as these words are, she is allowed to say them partly as there is no immediate incitement to violence. But she is very close to crossing a line.  I say this for, as we look both here and overseas, we see the consequences of this chant or at least the thinking behind it - the harassment of Jews, attacking of synagogues, defacing of war memorials, and much more.

Such behaviours however, puts on full display the hypocrisy of the Greens and others.  So in a strange way, we can be grateful that they are exposing themselves so clearly. In particular, there are three aspects we should highlight:

Hate speech laws for some

The first is that the Greens are, of course, at the vanguard of calling for ‘hate speech’ laws.  Yet here we have the Green leader yelling what is to many a very ‘hateful’ statement.  Now, this is not an argument for hate speech laws.  As I noted earlier, I am a strong proponent of free speech and even the right of people to say awful and stupid things.  What is striking here however, is that despite being told that this ‘river to the sea’ slogan can be reasonably understood as a call for mass murder (just read the Hamas Charter) and something that many in the community find deeply disturbing, the Greens and other progressives remain happy to scream it while simultaneously calling for ‘hate speech’ laws.

Of course, those calling for hate speech regimes only want ‘your’ speech banned.  Not theirs.  

They can call for the forcible removal of an entire people and expect praise; you use the wrong pronoun and you should be arrested and put in prison for years.

Looking in the mirror

Secondly, we are all familiar with those on the left obsessed with those they deem far right, fascists, and so on.  The awful irony is they are the ones demonstrably aligning themselves with the terrible actions of these historical ideologies.  The targeting of the Jews is the clearest of indicators.  We should be under no illusion - the Green Party and others are fueling the growing antisemitism in New Zealand and around the world.  The harassment of Israelis, blocking access to their shops, targeting their homes, seeking to boycott and isolate them – all of this is familiar to us who have studied history. 

How someone can be crying out ‘from the river to the sea’ and then minutes later be accusing others of promoting genocide or apartheid is beyond me.  There must be some sort of strange psychology in play to accuse others of the very thing they are promoting.

A confused defence

The third point addresses a common defence used by those shouting these awful slogans.  They state that some of the community they are targeting actually support them.  This is of course true.  There are some within the Jewish/Israeli community who believe in the slogan and consequences. 

But akin to their hate speech arguments, this approach is only applied to causes that suit them.  Not to others.  They are ok with applying minority views to justify their position, but you cannot.

Consider during the Covid period, the various medical and health professionals who spoke out against various assumptions, rules, and requirements.  They were a minority and were not only shouted down but often completely ignored and derided.   This was done by many, but included the Greens.  The call at that time was that people should only follow what the majority said; the minority should have no influence.

Yet here we are with the ‘the river to the sea’ chant and the Greens are more than happy – in fact celebratory – to draw on the minority to justify themselves.  Ninety nine percent of people understand precisely what the slogan means but the Greens are happy to use the one percent view to justify it’s use. 

As I said the start, we should remain a country that values free speech and accept all the good, bad, and ugly that comes with it.  Part of the reason is illustrated above.  By allowing such awful speech, we can also clearly see the reasons – three in this case – of why they are wrong and why we should seek a better path.