anti-Semitism: a primer

The left-wing Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz has written a “practical guide” for identifying anti-Semitism. I will reprint the whole thing, because I think this is important:

“Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collective. Anti-Semitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, in visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.Contemporary examples of anti-Semitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

 

b Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion

b Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or about the power of Jews as a collective - including, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a global Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions

b Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoings committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews

b Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters during World War II (Holocaust denial)

b Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust

b Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. Examples of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel include:

b Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavor

b Applying double standards by requiring Israel to behave in a manner not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation

b Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis

b Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis

b Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.

Anti-Semitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of anti-Semitic materials in some countries). Criminal acts are anti-Semitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property - such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries - are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews. Anti-Semitic discrimination means denying Jews the opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

 

Ha’aretz doesn’t say this, but I will: the “new” anti-Semitism is worse (much, much worse) than the “old” anti-Semitism, for the simple reason that it is taking place after the planned and systematic slaughter of 6 million European Jews—aka the Holocaust.

Being oblivious to the existence of the “new” anti-Semitism is understandable—most people don’t follow the news. Denying it in the face of five years’ worth of published evidence to the contrary is foolish. Abetting anti-Semitism is immoral.

And to save this post from being a total downer, I will add that it sounds like Judith Regan, far from being anti-Semitic, as she was accused of being, rather admires the Jews:

We had to make our own group, [Regan] said, like the Jews.

Of course, she’s singling them out. So maybe she is an anti-Semite? Never mind…

 

 

colorful propaganda alert

In case you happen to be in Iran and catch wind of this news,

Israel Massacres Lebanese by Poisonous Balloons

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Genocide by poisonous balloons is the new method employed by the Israeli army for killing people in southern Lebanon

 

It’s not true.

Just thought you’d like to know.

too big for their britches

Gawker’s got the scoop on a recent hire—sorta— by the New York Times:

So what’s behind the mystery of [the New York Observer's] Rebecca Dana’s employment status? Dana, you’ll remember, was plucked from the Observer to join the Times. … The following rumor is making the rounds:

Rebecca was overheard saying something like, “I’m going to kick [Times TV reporter]Bill Carter’s ass.” She was just joking around with her friends, but somehow word got back to the NYT. They called her this weekend and essentially said, “We had concerns, because of your age, about your maturity, and this kind of behavior unfortunately confirms our suspicions.” And then they RESCINDED THE OFFER. Rebecca argued her case and they relented, but offered her basic trial status.

off the reservation

Chirac:

PARIS, Jan. 31 — President Jacques Chirac said this week that if Iran had one or two nuclear weapons, it would not pose a big danger, and that if Iran were to launch a nuclear weapon against a country like Israel, it would lead to the immediate destruction of Tehran.

The remarks, made in an interview on Monday with The New York Times, The International Herald Tribune and Le Nouvel Observateur, a weekly magazine, were vastly different from stated French policy and what Mr. Chirac has often said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Chirac summoned the same journalists back to Élysée Palace to retract many of his remarks.

I wrote the other day that the world has turned upside down. This is what I meant.

No amount of spin is going to convince the population of the West that their leaders have any idea of what to do to preserve our way of life.

NYT snakepit exposed

Get your front-row tickets now:

Defense lawyers said Wednesday they had subpoenaed Jill Abramson, the managing editor of The Times, to appear as a witness. Ms. Miller testified Tuesday that she had a conversation with Ms. Abramson in July 2003 in which she suggested assigning someone to report on the issue of Mr. Wilson’s report and what role, if any, Ms. Wilson played in sending him on the assignment to Africa.

Ms. Abramson has denied that account in an article published in The Times.

(NYT)

Redemption 101

After Michael Richards had made the rounds saying he was sorry for his racist outburst, David Letterman once joked in his monologue: “And apologizing tonight, we have …”

He was definitely onto on to something. Today, Adam Nagourney writes in the New York Times:

The day ended, appropriately enough for the way politics is practiced now, with Mr. Biden explaining himself to Jon Stewart on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show.”

Not exactly the consciousness-raising truth-and-reconciliation process that TAPPED’s Garance Franke-Ruta had in mind, eh?