More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

Rolling Stone Confronts and Exposes Roger Waters’ Antisemitism and Hypocrisy

Hours after I posted how Rolling Stone published antisemitic comments by its writer EJ Dickson, I find myself posting again about something they published.

Only this time, it is praiseworthy in that it confronts and exposes Roger Waters.

In an interview with the aging rocker, journalist James Ball does not just accept his responses. He pushes back and judges Waters unfavorably.

Waters come out of the interview looking like an antisemitic, crackpot hypocrite. Which we know he is.

What he sees as his advocacy for Palestine has for some crossed the line from legitimate criticism into bigotry, whether deliberate or otherwise. Waters’ previous shows have had, for example, giant pigs emblazoned with the Star of David, alongside other symbols. Waters has repeatedly insisted his problem is Israel, not with Jews more broadly. However, as we discuss the subject during our interview, Waters argues that some Jewish people in the U.S. and U.K. bear responsibility for the actions of Israel, “particularly because they pay for everything.”

Waters says most of us are fed our narratives instead of being able to independently come to our own conclusions by the “completely controlled” media, which is “monopolized by the powers that be and by the government … oh, my God, Rolling Stone must be part of it.”

That compliant media, he continues, feeds us the idea that Russia and China are evil, and we by contrast are good. He sees things very differently.

“Of course, we — when I say we, I’m now speaking as a taxpayer in the United States — are not. We are the most evil of all by a factor of at least 10 times,” he says. “We kill more people. We interfere in more people’s elections. We, the American empire, is doing all this shit.”

This factor of 10 idea, I suggest, might not play all that well to any citizen of Ukraine right now — especially given the mounting evidence of war crimes we’ve seen, including mass graves, the use of rape as a weapon of war, targeting humanitarian convoys, and more.

“You’ve seen it on what I’ve just described to you as Western propaganda,” he retorts. “It’s exactly the obverse of saying Russian propaganda; Russians interfered with our election; Russians did that. It’s all lies, lies, lies, lies.”

I try to push gingerly through Waters’ brick wall. I haven’t just seen things via corporate media, I say — I’ve got friends in Ukraine, and friends who went to Ukraine as journalists. I’ve even got friends who are Ukrainian journalists. I’m relying on testimony of people I know who’ve seen things with their own eyes. And it’s not only Ukrainian officials and Western media reporting atrocities — there are war crimes investigations already underway.

The impressive visuals for Waters’ tour at one point flash up the message “You can’t have occupation and human rights.” “I want[ed] to put ‘Fuck the Israeli occupation,’ he says … and then, ‘Oh no, the words are too long.’” – Given that message, what is it that makes opposing Israel’s occupation of Palestine a worthy cause, but Ukrainian resistance against Russian invasion a bad one?

“Because it’s an unnecessary war,” he says. “And those people should not be dying. And Russia should not have been encouraged to invade the Ukraine [Waters insists he is not making a political point by saying “the Ukraine”] after they tried for 20 years to avoid it by suggesting diplomatic measures to Western governments.”

In other words, it’s NATO’s fault that Putin decided to invade Ukraine.

We’ve reached an impasse, and I’m left no more sure whether resisting Russia’s invasion is wrong because it risks nuclear escalation — suggesting human rights are only worth fighting for when it’s low-risk — or whether it’s wrong because Russia should be allowed its sphere of influence, which seems a return not just to imperialism but also to Great Game politics.

We need to move on, I suggest, because it’s important to talk about Syria too. Waters has repeatedly condemned U.S. intervention in Syria, which was initially based on not only tackling ISIS but also supporting secular resistance to Bashar al-Assad. I note that by 2017, the U.S. had carried out 11,235 strikes on Syria — but during the same period, Russia admitted to 71,000 strikes.

“There’s a slight difference, in that they were there at the invitation of the Syrian government,” Waters quickly notes. I wonder aloud whether the government of Bashar al-Assad, which was elected with 95.1 percent of the vote in the latest ‘election’ is really a legitimate one. Predictably, Waters has a counterpoint: “I mean, there’s no fair elections in the United States because it’s all bought and paid for because of Citizens United.”

Reminding myself that Waters professes that the core of his political philosophy is the U.N. declaration of human rights, I try again. “A friend of mine who lives here [in the U.K.] now was beaten and tortured, he was electrocuted in Assad’s cells,” I tell Waters. “And most of the opposition in Syria is nothing like ISIS. It’s driven by secular people who want freedom. And Assad and Russia have bombed them into oblivion and tortured them and forced them out of the country…”

Waters demurs to the possibility that this happens and agrees to take it on trust that my friend was indeed tortured. But we are quickly back to the suggestion that chemical attacks in Syria against the opposition were staged — partly because Waters claims Assad would have no motive to do so, as it would encourage the West to intervene, even though in reality it didn’t. Waters has “spent a great deal of time studying it” and is satisfied with his conclusions.

If Waters and I are in the “bar,” it’s a pretty fractious dive bar, at best. Waters is charming and courteous, but our conversation repeatedly generates into animated shouting and interruption — and that’s before we inevitably get to the issue of Israel.

“I’m absolutely not antisemitic, absolutely not,” Waters says. “That hasn’t stopped all the assholes trying to smear me with being an antisemite.”

What follows is a back-and-forth as we try to establish some basics. Waters doesn’t accept the standard IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism. Does the state of Israel have a right to exist? “Saying Israel does not have a right to exist as an apartheid state, any more than South Africa did or anywhere else would, is not antisemitic,” Waters counters.

Waters says what he criticizes is “the fact that they are a supremacist, settler colonialist project that operates a system of apartheid.” This quickly descends into ancient history — the Jewish people have a history in the region of Israel that goes back millennia, I say. Doesn’t that make “settler” quite an offensive term? “No, it’s not. Those people are not from there. They are not the descendants of indigenous people who’ve ever lived there.” This is not only untrue for many Israeli citizens, it also serves to minimize the horror and suffering that came before the founding of Israel, and the desire for a Jewish homeland that instilled.

I try to tackle one more question relating to Israel. In 2020, Waters sang the lyric “We’ll walk hand in hand and we’ll take back the land, from the Jordan river to the sea.” Was Waters aware that “from the river to the sea” is a term often used to describe either the destruction of Israel or the relocation of all of Israel’s Jewish population to somewhere else — and thus received with horror by many Israeli people and Jewish people alike?

“No, bollocks. It’s just a geographical description of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It has no connotation for me apart from that,” he says. “Nobody’s suggesting that they all have to leave, which is what they suggested to the indigenous people there in 1948.”

I wrap up the interview shortly afterwards — with neither of us having convinced the other of anything. Waters’ live show repeatedly flashes up one particular message that clearly compels him: “Control the narrative, rule the world.”

I leave the interview thinking it’s almost the opposite: Waters is an example of how we can construct our own narrative and twist the world to fit in, with no amount of mainstream media, propaganda, or even real-world facts and evidence able to let any light in. It leads us to a nihilistic place, where we are only able to feel compassion for victims that fit our personal narrative, minimising or even actively denying the suffering of others. It’s sufficiently bleak that I feel almost wistful for a world with a shared narrative, even if it’s one controlled by a oh-so-malign media.

Roger Waters and I have managed to avoid having a bar fight. But as I leave I know one thing for sure: I really need a drink.

And the cherry on top? On social media, they highlight the antisemitism of his comments:

Perhaps it is fitting they published this interview right before Yom Kippur. It almost serves as repentance for the antisemitism they published a few days ago.

About the author

Picture of David Lange

David Lange

A law school graduate, David Lange transitioned from work in the oil and hi-tech industries into fulltime Israel advocacy. He is a respected commentator and Middle East analyst who has often been cited by the mainstream media
Picture of David Lange

David Lange

A law school graduate, David Lange transitioned from work in the oil and hi-tech industries into fulltime Israel advocacy. He is a respected commentator and Middle East analyst who has often been cited by the mainstream media
Scroll to Top