I previously noted the spike in British anti-Semitism in the wake of the Israel/Lebanon war. Now, new data suggests that the same trend occured throughout Western Europe. The report also says that Greece and Turkey experienced an uptick, while most of Eastern Europe (as well as Denmark) were relatively unaffected. Turkey is specficially noteworthy, not because it is Muslim, but because the Jewish population there has been notably free from anti-Semitism for a significant period of time.
Very unfortunate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The JTA data is really shoddy. For one, there is a poltiically indefensible manuever of equating a lack of support for Israel's military operation in Lebanon with anti-Semitism (which is akin to, although I would say probably less accurate than, equating opposition to the war in Iraq with anti-Americanism).
Near the beginning, the article comments on the rise of anti-Semitism in Western Europe but adds that can be understood as unique to that region "with the atmosphere remaining either neutral or pro-Israel in the former Eastern Bloc." This seems to suggest that anti-Semitism cannot be found in pro-Israel areas, or that opposition to Israel's offensive is somehow in itself an act of anti-Semitism.
“Greek public opinion is shocked by the undeclared war against Lebanon. After the Second World War, the world believed that the logic of collective punishment would have never returned.” This statement is given in the article as an example of something that is in itself anti-Semtic. But it is merely an objective statement of public opinion coupled with an argument about collective punishment that was frequently made during the conflict. What about it is anti-Semitic? Are we to believe that any allusion to World War II is itself anti-Semtiism? This comment could easily be a reference to something like the bombing of Dresden or Hiroshima, a military act that was viewed as unnaceptable due to the loss of civilian lives, as to anything committed by the Nazi regime.
What makes the article intellectually and academically worthless is the failure to actually classify the findings. We are told of attacks on synagogues, obviously horrible and criminal acts of bigotry. But we are also told of comments like the one above, and critical letters written to Jewish organizations for their support of Israel. Then they are both lumped together along with everything in between as "anti-Semitic incidents". Obviously a spike in violence towards Jews is terrifying and needs to be talked about. But a spike in criticism of Israel while they are at war? I would be worried if that DIDN'T happen. The article refuses to give concrete data, so it's easy to dismiss the claims as alarmist. If the JTA wants people to take it's allegations of anti-Semitism seriously it needs to show its empirical data and, once and for all, cease the childish and anti-democratic practice of labeling all critics of Israel as anti-Semitic.
I think you owe your readers a critical analysis of the article before you publivly echo its claims.
I think you're giving the piece a remarkably uncharitable reading (and recall, it is a news article, not a scholarly journal). You misread the main point, which is that anti-Semitic violence spiked precisely in the locations where anti-Israel rhetoric also rose. That's not an equivalency, that's a correllation, and one I think you're opposing because its very uncomfortable for you to admit that the trend is real and exists. In a couple places, they might be a bit too loose in that regard, but you're simply wrong to say that it's pervasive.
The article identifies (by my count) 11 specific acts tagged as anti-Semitic (e.g., not just a number, but something specifically identified--like "shooting a synagogue" or "rallies in support of Hezbollah"). Of those 11, I feel very comfortable calling 9 of them anti-Semitic. The remaining two are the Greek quote you cite, and the letters to the German Jewish federation. Of those, I think you're naive to think that its the Dresden bombing being referred to--especially given the cartoon at the top with its lovely Nazi symbolism (and even if it is Dresden--what did Israel do that was comparable to indiscriminate firebombing a major metropolitan area?). When making a generic WWII analogy with regards to the Jewish state, any speaker knows or should know that the audience will likely assume the Holocaust to be the point of reference. Don't be suckered by "plausible deniability" when you and I both know that's the cultural meaning of the reference. The Germany example also is arguably anti-Semitic when the letters accuse the citizens of "disloyalty" toward the German state (and, I'd argue, by tagging Israel as "fascist." Remember, I think disproportionate rhetoric applied to Israel is a form of anti-Semitism even if there are legitimate grounds for critique). But even if I grant you both, 9 out of 11 is a very strong ratio--enough to warrant the articles claim and give it credance.
I think you're laying both barrels on a simple news article because you don't want to admit what is a growing truth--that there are elements on the left (not all of them, but elements) who are participating in an anti-Semitic enterprise that is part and parcel of their anti-Semitic activities. The cry that all criticism is suppressed as "anti-Semitism" really rings hollow in my ears when there is virtually no effort by honest leftists to disassociate themselves from the anti-Semitic elements in their ranks, or make a genuine effort to respond to Jewish concerns about what makes a critique anti-Semitic.
Let me track that argument:
1) Anti-Semitic activity is not on the rise (is there any reason to dispute the data just released that says it is?).
2) But if it is, it's not important because Islamophobia is even more of a problem (I'm not sure where we get off justifying one type of racism by another--and just 60 years removed from the Shoah, I'm not sure whether we're at the stage where the Western world can so cavalierly dismiss anti-Semitism anyway)
3) It's all the Jews' fault anyway, as they're "fanning the flames" of the conflict (in a manner presumably worse than invoking a Holocaust comparison via "final solution", which in itself is anti-Semitic as it denies the particularity of Jewish experience, demeans the victims of actual genocides, and is so disproportionate to even the most anti-Israel plausible conception of the facts that it can only be chalked up to anti-Semitism. Not to mention you don't warrant the assertion, which would be tough given that a) there are plenty of more obvious sources of Islamophobia that don't rely on the Jews and b) there is no evidence that the Jewish community writ large has any systematic bias against Muslims [and a fair amount of evidence to the contrary--see local Jewish groups working for Keith Ellison and agitating to save Darfuri Muslims from genocide).
4) Denies that Jews are "indigenously Palestinian" (where do you think our roots are then, pray tell? In Dachau?), which denies our history and demeans the exile and oppression of the Jewish community in its diaspora.
Sickening. But instructive, in how anti-Israel and anti-Semitic ideologies can go hand in hand.
Post a Comment