Antisemitism is alive and
well these days. In Europe and America, the number of antisemitic incidents are
increasing every
year, according to those who try to keep track.
News about antisemitism has
recently wandered from the streets and the internet into the halls of Congress.
The presence of two newly elected young Muslim women in the House, who openly
advocate for Palestinians against Israel, has upset the strongly pro-Israel
consensus that has dominated American politics for decades. Accusations of
antisemitism are especially directed at Ilhan Omar from Minneapolis, who has
used language that is reminiscent of traditional
antisemitic themes in her criticism of Israeli policies. Her case demonstrates
that it can be difficult to distinguish between unacceptable antisemitism and
political criticism of the Jewish government of Israel and its supporters.
Some incidents seem to be
easy to label as antisemitic. For example, when a large
group of young people physically attacked Jewish women while they were
praying. Many women were injured, including the female rabbi leading the
prayers. The attackers carried signs assailing the women’s religious beliefs,
and the
press reported that the women “were shoved, scratched, spit on and verbally
abused”.
An obvious case of
antisemitism? No, because the attackers were ultra-Orthodox Jewish girls and
boys, bussed to the Western Wall in Jerusalem in order to attack the
non-Orthodox Women of the Wall, who were violating misogynist Orthodox
traditions about who can pray at the Wall. This incident fulfills every
possible definition of antisemitism. For example, the International Holocaust
Remembrance Alliance offers the following description of public acts
that are antisemitic: “Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or
harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of
religion.” The ultra-Orthodox leaders who encouraged the assault would argue
that they were protecting, not attacking Judaism, and that the Women of the
Wall were not
really Jewish anyway.
Acts of antisemitism are
political acts. Accusations of antisemitism are likewise political acts,
deployed in the service of the political interests of the accusers. Many,
perhaps most accusations of antisemitism are made in good faith for the purpose
of calling attention to real religious prejudice. But such accusations are
often made for less honest political purposes.
The Republicans in Congress
who demand that Democrats denounce Ilhan Omar are cynically using the
accusation of antisemitism for political gain. Many Republicans have themselves
made
statements or employed political advertisements that are clearly
antisemitic. The rest have stood by in silence while their colleagues and their
President made antisemitic statements. But they saw political advantage in
attacking a Democrat as antisemitic.
Supporters of the Israeli
government’s policies against Palestinians routinely accuse their critics of
antisemitism as a means of drawing attention away from Israeli policies and
diverting it to the accusers’ motives. Sometimes critics of Israel are at least
partially motivated by antisemitism. But the use of this rhetorical tactic also
often leads to absurdity: Jews who do not approve of the continued occupation
of land in the West Bank or the discrimination against Palestinians in Israel
are accused of being “self-hating
Jews”.
This linking of antisemitism
and criticism of Israeli policy has worked well to shield the Israeli
government from reasonable scrutiny of its policies. In fact, there is no
necessary connection between the two. Criticism of current Israeli policy is
voiced by many Jews and Jewish organizations, both religious
and secular.
Supporters of the idea of
boycotting Israeli businesses as protest against Israeli treatment of
Palestinians, the so-called BDS movement, are sometimes assumed to be
antisemitic and thus worthy of attack
by extremists. But the pro-Israel but also pro-peace Washington Jewish
organization J-Street
argues that “Efforts to exclude BDS Movement supporters from public forums and
to ban them from conversations are misguided and doomed to fail.” I don’t
remember that any of the supporters of boycotting and divesting from South
Africa because of its racial policies were called anti-white.
Those who advocate a “one-state
solution” to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians are sometimes
accused by conservatives of being antisemitic, with the argument that this one
state will inevitably eventually have a majority of Muslims. The Washington
Examiner calls this equivalent to the “gradual genocide of the Jewish
people”.
The absurdity of equating
anti-Zionism with antisemitism is personified by the denunciations
of Zionism and the existence of Israel by the Orthodox Satmar, one of the
largest Hasidic groups in the world.
On the other side, the most
vociferous American supporters of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government have
been evangelical Christians. Although they claim to be the best friends of
Israel, the religious basis of right-wing evangelical Christianity is the antisemitic
assertion that Jews will burn in hell forever, if we do not give up our
religion. Robert
Jeffress, the pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, who spoke at
President Trump’s private inaugural prayer service, has frequently said that
Jews, and all other non-Christians, will go to hell. The San Antonio
televangelist John C. Hagee,
who was invited by Trump to give the closing benediction at the opening of the
new American Embassy in Jerusalem, has preached that the Holocaust was divine
providence, because God sent Hitler to help Jews get to the promised land. Eastern
European nationalists, who often employ antisemitic tropes to appeal to
voters, are also among the most vociferous supporters of Netanyahu and Israel.
Political calculations have
muddied our understanding of antisemitism. Supporters of the most right-wing
Israeli policies include many people who don’t like Jews. Hatreds which
belonged together in the days of the KKK may now be separated among right-wing
white supremacists.
But no matter what they say,
purveyors of racial prejudice and defenders of white privilege are in fact
enemies of the long-term interests of Jews all over the world, who can only
find a safe haven in democratic equality.
Steve Hochstadt
Berlin
March 19, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment