Some loss of credibility for protesters against Israel's war on Hamas doesn't mean they're all anti-Semitic

[lees1975]

https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/05/drawing-line-where-protests-against.html

There have been arrests, clashes with school security and law enforcement, and some ugly racial incidents, that have marred the image of "peaceful protests." In some cases, pro-Israeli protesters are present, and that increases the possibility of violent clashes. The protests at Columbia, and at UCLA, which got a lot of media attention because they are in New York and Los Angeles, cities that are the focus of negative attention from conservative media sources, were criticized for damage to the building that was occupied, and for a massive amount of trash that was left behind. Reports of some protesters expecting food to be delivered to them helps create an image of the protest that distracts from its intentions.

The far right wing media is just looking for ways to discredit the protesters as a bunch of violent, spoiled liberal children, and to split the Democratic party on this particular issue. That's laughable in light of their defense of the Capitol building's attackers on January 6th, but it's not an excuse to be careless. A lot of the rhetoric starts out with accusations of violence and racism against protesters, so it is vitally important for protests to defy those accusations by keeping order and not letting their protests get to the point where they can be accused of violence or racism.

There have been multiple accusations of anti-Semitism associated with the protests. That comes largely from the influence of right wing Evangelicals who focus on a gross misinterpretation and misapplication of Genesis 12:3 by claiming that anyone who utters a critical word against the modern state of Israel, regardless of what they are doing, is subject to being cursed by God. Criticizing and protesting against a war being carried on by the modern state of Israel does not meet the definition of the term "curse" in Hebrew, written in Genesis, nor do those verses apply at all in any context to the modern political state known as Israel.

It's not hypocritical, or anti-Semitic, to protest against this particular war and the excessive civilian casualties it is producing, as opposed to not protesting the Sudan civil war that is also responsible for a large number of civilian deaths, because those who hear and see these protests have a lot more influence over the Israeli-Hamas war than they do over the others. It's not difficult for a news source looking to prove their point to find anti-Semitic protesters, including radical Muslims for whom the destruction of the Israeli state is a political and religious goal. But it's less difficult to find Islamophobic, racist, hateful agitators and bigots among the far right wing protesters who are taking Israel's side. I'm sure that those who take this seriously wouldn't appreciate being classified or characterized that way.

[comradebillyboy]

1. Are we supposed to ignore all the blatant antisemitism then

since not all of the protestors are antisemites? Or am I suppose to reject the evidence of my own eyes? How much over antisemitism is acceptable?

[lees1975]

4. Where is the anti-Semitism, specifically?

Just being critical of what Israel is doing, or even calling it genocide, is not anti-Semitic.

No doubt there are those among the protesters who are anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism is, by definition, hostility toward and discrimination against persons of the Jewish race, though Arabs are also Semitic, by racial definition, and many of them are also descendants of Abraham. Some protests have individuals who do express anti-Semitism by definition, but the vast majority of them are protesting what they see as a military over-reaction, extending into vengeance, of the IDF at the orders of the Israeli prime minister and its far right wing Likud party's majority government. I do not see protesting a violent war that has an inordinate number of civilian casualties and this large of a field of destruction of civilian property being waged by Israel as anti-Semitic.

I think that's roughly the same point you're making.

[Beastly Boy]

5. "Just" being critical of Israel is not antisemitic.

Being critical of Israel AND hating on "Zionists" (a well established code word for Jews) is antisemitic.

And repeatedly calling what is not genocide, genocide, in a coordinated effort to exclusively associate this term with the Jewish state, comes dangerously close to antisemitism.

[lees1975]

6. What's happening in Gaza is dangerously close to genocide.

Knowing that the weapons being used have caused over 30,000 civilian casualties, along with the restrictions and obstacles to humanitarian aid leave Israel open to criticism. Once it became clear that the way the attack was going was causing so many casualties, even though there is an awareness that Hamas embeds themselves among civilians for a reason, it's not anti-Semitic to protest that another way needs to be found to protect Israel from Hamas terrorists, besides continuing such an attack and civilian casualties.

"Zionists" isn't a code word for Jews. Zionists are Jews whose political aim has been the restoration of, and preservation of a political state in their ancient Palestinian homeland. That's a whole other subject, whether, after over a two-thousand year absence of any political presence in Palestine, as a result of the conquest of Jerusalem by the Romans and the scattering of Jews all over the Empire, in 70 CE, the Jews still have the right to settle Israel and establish a political state.

[Beastly Boy]

7. A telling dichotomy of inrerpretation.

Dangerously close to genocide is genocide, but dangerously close to antisemitism is not antisemitism.

Genocide is, first and foremost, a legal definition of a crime. Over 30,000 civilian casualties, in themselves, do not establish genocide; they do not establish genocide on Israel's part, and they do not establish Israel's intent to commit genocide. Referring to 30,000 civilian deaths out of the context of Hamas using them as human shields and hiding legitimate military targets among them, is ridiculous to begin with, even before you get to the subject of genocide.

Zionists are not quite the Jews whose political aim has been the restoration of, and preservation of a political state in their ancient Palestinian homeland. Zionism is non-political, even though it plays a role in politics. It's a social movement, and its adaptation to politics is manifested in its wide variety of flavors. But as with genocide, the term Zionist is rarely being used to define a movement, as you have done. When unaffiliated Jewish philanthropists are suddenly branded as Zionist, Jewish humanitarian institutions suddenly branded Zionist, Jewish financial institutions branded Zionist, Jewish college frat houses branded Zionist, and random Jews are branded Zionist, it is clear that the definition you provided does not apply to these targets. Their affiliation or non-affiliation with Zionism is not being taken into account at all. It is beyond obvious that the common denominator in such branding is not being Zionist, but being Jewish, and the hatred that follows these descriptions is not directed at Zionists, but at Jews. Claiming that this practice is not antisemitic is absurd.

[lees1975]

9. Where are the specifics of your assertion?

Which unaffiliated Jewish philanthropists are being branded as Zionists? Or humanitarian institutions, financial institutions, being branded Zionist?

And how is it clear that these people are not Zionist? Have you surveyed their opinion? Do you know they are not doing things indicating support for the maintenance of the Jewish state of Israel, which would make them Zionist by definition?

I know that the term sometimes gets used to be accusatory, and prejudicial. But that's equally applicable to the other side. The number of civilian casualties in Gaza has become unacceptably high as a cost to achieve Israel's stated goal, which is to rid Gaza of Hamas. What purpose is achieved by that kind of casualty level and destruction, if Hamas is somehow eliminated from Gaza? How long will it be before people, whose backs are up against the wall, who have lost families, wives, children, because the were simply in the way, will turn toward another terrorist organization that promises to rid them of the oppression? Or form one themselves?

The fact that there may be some embedded anti-semites among protesters doesn't make them all anti-semitic, nor does it make a legitimate protest against immoral violence anti=Semitic.

[Beastly Boy]

10. Looks like you don't need any convincing that random Jews are indeed branded Zionist

Or that "zionist" is being used as a synonym for Jews in antisemitic circles. If you are not convinced, here are some sources:

Its [Hamas] charter uses “Jews” and “Zionists” interchangeably; claims that Jews control “the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, [and] broadcasting stations”; and promises “struggle against the Jews” and the destruction of Israel. Last week, a spokesperson for the group vowed that “we will repeat the October 7 attack time and again until Israel is annihilated.” Not all anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, but the anti-Zionism of Hamas certainly is.

The same is true of Hamas’s far more powerful sponsor, Iran. Whether or not Tehran directly ordered the October massacre, no one disputes that the regime is the primary funder and supplier of Hamas, whose wanton violence it publicly celebrated. Iran’s theocratic rulers are similarly open about their genocidal ambitions. They have built a physical countdown clock to Israel’s destruction, have been accused of plotting terrorist attacks against Jews around the world, and even hosted cartoon contests for Holocaust deniers and other anti-Semites.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/11/anti-semitism-anti-zionism-activists-hamas-apologists/675937/

'Zionists not welcome:' Jewish Santa Barbara students face harassment at Multicultural Center in US
A group of Jewish students entered the MCC where there were signs on the door warning "Zionists not allowed." The students were confronted by a mob of their peers, who shouted at them.

https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-789669

On social media, you can find footage of crowds taunting Jewish students to “Go back to Poland!” and chanting, “We don’t want no Zionists here!”

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/columbia-protest-anti-semitism-campus-israel-jewish-students-justice-palestine.html

The list is actually about whether a popular author is a “Zionist.” I put that in quotes because the blacklisters mean “Jew.” And the descriptions of their transgressions can best be called “human.”

Let me give you an example. Pierce Brown is the bestselling author of the dystopian science-fiction series Red Rising. On the blacklist, he is listed as a Zionist and therefore to be avoided. The explanation is that he posted “pro-Israel” content to an Instagram story.

https://www.commentary.org/seth-mandel/the-insane-anti-jewish-literary-blacklist/

Mr James, who has acted as a spokesman for the protesters, posted the comments to Instagram in January. He also said: "Be grateful that I'm not just going out and murdering Zionists."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68909942

And, for good measure, here's a list of quotes by various Palestinian authorities:
https://www.memri.org/reports/virulently-antisemitic-article-jordanian-daily-al-dustour-jews-descendants-apes-and-pigs-are

I could go on ad nauseam, but this is plenty of evidence that "Zionist" and "Jew" are being used interchangeably by a variety of antisemites. The question, of course, is not "how is it clear that these people are not Zionist", but how it is clear that they are. Their affiliation with Zionism is ASSUMED to be Zionist based on their appearances, names, manners, etc., which cannot possibly denote their affiliation with Zionism. How does one discern between a Jew and a Zionist without surveying them? An antisemite doesn't.

Given these examples alone, it is clear that "zionist" is indeed a code word for "jew" in antisemitic circles, and it is immaterial whether I, having no academic in history, specifically address some manifestations of it or not while other specifically addressed instances are crystal clear.

And once again, the fact that there may be some embedded anti-semites among protesters doesn't in itself make them all anti-semitic, it makes them tolerant of the antisemites among them. All of them.

[lees1975]

8. How would you describe the civilian casualties in Gaza?

Frankly, as a pacifist, I find the idea of any violence abhorrent. But how does it benefit Israel to accept such high civilian death figures as casualties of war, or "collateral damage", especially among a group of people who, for the most part, are refugees displaced by Israel's settlement of land where they once lived? I don't see how that is justified, at all, regardless of the Hamas attack.

I'm not sure where your historical definition of Zionism comes from. Mine comes from an academic background in history, and the establishment of it as a political movement among Jewish populations, mostly in Europe, originally promoting the re-establishment of a Jewish nation in the ancient homeland in Palestine, and now, the development and protection of the Israeli state. It is political, Herzl and Weizmann, in their leadership, operated it that way. I don't see that the use of the term is an anti-Semitic slur, it's a means of defining the political position of Jewish people around the world regarding their support for the state of Israel. Most of the American Jews I've known in my life are not Zionists, by the way.

All of the background and history of the re-establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948 is open and known, and people have formed opinions about it based on where they sit in relation to it. We know how terrorist movements developed, we know the circumstances of the wars that have been fought, how peace treaties were negotiated, while some succeeded while others failed, that's all out there. What's not out there is a pathway to peace. We're at a point now where over 30,000 Gaza civilians are dead, but Hamas is still functioning. That's not justifiable any more than anti-Semitism and the racial hatred of Jews is justifiable. And it clearly is not going to fix the problem.

[Beastly Boy]

3. They are not all antisemitic.

They all tolerate antisemitism in their ranks.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

- Martin Niemöller