Internal colonialism

When I was growing up in England and went to University in London and
Cambridge, I experienced three basic attitudes towards being Jewish. There
was the antagonistic anti-Semitic attitude, sometimes bordering on hatred,
and there was the more general polite dislike. This manifested itself as
what I call "internal colonialism." The English weren't quite sure how to
react to us, so they treated us like the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish,
namely conquered peoples who were expected to be loyal, even though we were
way below their own levels of class and importance. There were also many
English who were very friendly towards Jews, and I was treated very fairly
by many whom I met in an academic capacity.
The Jews (in those days) were generally harder working, more intelligent and
greater achievers than the English. Our boy's school was about 30% Jewish
overall, but in the Sixth Form (boys taking higher education) there were ca.
70% Jews, and all the best ones were Jewish. Jews were characterized as
being "pushy", and in addition the English dubbed us "clever." They didn't
like us being too competitive and treating them as equals. But, that was in
the days when the Jews were the only minority group, except for the Irish,
who were hated, and the Welsh and Scots who were tolerated. Then the blacks
and the Indians of various types arrived, and then the whole of Europe came
and now England is a huge multi-ethnic mixture, and the Jews are one of the
more well integrated minorities, and the Irish, Scots and Welsh all have a
degree of local autonomy. But, still the Jews are different.
How is it that one generation after Margaret Thatcher, who blew away the
notion that the Conservative Party should be controlled by the landed
gentry, there are now (heaven help us) Jews running it. And this is because
after trying three failed upstarts as leaders (including the likes of the
pathetic Ian Duncan-Smith) they finally found someone with some talent,
Michael Howard.
This makes the self-righteous, doctrinaire socialist leftist liberals very
nervous. Since the Palestinians are the darlings of this set, they are happy
to find a scapegoat in the same Jews, although this time transposed into
racist oppressors. Knowing nothing of the history and culture of Zionism
suits them well, since they can transpose their native anti-Semitism into a
strong anti-Zionism. Together with their facile anti-Americanism, they have
a natural coherent so-called "anti-war" ideology. Except that they gloss
over the fact that supporting the Palestinians is, until now, actually
supporting the more war-like, more aggressive, pro-terrorist side.
"Palestine" comes from the name "Philistine," that the Romans used to
describe this land even though the Philistines then no longer existed, in
order to de-legitimize the Jewish connection. Most people are not aware
that the name Palestine has nothing whatsoever to do with the Arabs. The
Philistines were here in Biblical times, the Romans in just post-biblical
(when the New Testament was being worked out) and the Arab/Muslims only
arrived around 700 AD, quite a gap. But, since the British Empire for its
own reasons also preferred not to attribute a Jewish connection to the land,
they also used the designation "Palestine." Ever since then the British
left have been following the same road opened by the British colonialists.
So the British subjected the Jews to colonialism in Palestine and internal
colonialism within England. Miraculously we managed to break away from them
and to defeat them and to establish ourselves as a sovereign independent
people.