So...as you see it, what proof is needed that a person is NOT an antisemite?

[Ken Burch]

Let's establish some clear standards here to establish, once and for all, what is needed to demonstrate bona fides on this issue. at least as far as posts on this site is concerned.

To my mind, being opposed to antisemitism means condemning antisemitic speech and antisemitic actions. It means not wishing anything bad towards Jewish people or any forms of Judaism, as a decent person should also be against all other forms of hatred or oppression. It's about being of good will towards all, and against the oppression of anyone, in short.

Is there anyone out there who doesn't think that is enough?

If so, what else, as you see it, is needed?

We all have a pretty clear understanding of what it is to be anti-racist, anti-sexist and anti-homophobic. But what antisemitism means here still seems to be somewhat fluid and inexact.

As an opponent of antisemitism, I'd just like to see if all of us could agree on a clear standard, at least as far as DU is concerned.

Let's have a real discussion about this and clear the air once and for all.

What is antisemitic and what is not?

And let's make it clear and precise.

[cali]

1. kind of hard to do Ken. There are dog whistles for all forms of bigotry.

[Ken Burch]

2. Agreed.

But what would you say are "dog-whistles" as far as antisemitism goes?

[cali]

4. oh, the usual. Jews control the media, etc.

and yes, some people use Israel and Zionism as a cover- you noted that yesterday on a thread in I/P. that's kind of tricky because the vast majority of people who criticize Israel and Zionism aren't anti-semitic in the least.

[Ken Burch]

6. It is tricky.

Thanks for accepting the fact that most criticism of Israeli "security" policies isn't antisemitic. It's always been unhealthy when some have made sweeping accusations to the contrary.

Good post.

[Bonobo]

3. Most people are clever enough to avoid being obvious.

Israel's actions has made it much easier to act out hatred of Jews with the cover of claiming that you are just anti-Israel.

In fact some people -maybe MANY- ARE just Anti-Israel government, not Anti-Semitic. Let's just say the real anti-Semites have lots of places to hide now.

So, no, it cannot be clear and precise.

But here is an example of VERY worrying behavior:

A few days ago, many people were talking about divided loyalty between the US and Israel. Well... that has a long history. Claiming that Jews are disloyal is a serious dog-whistle to me anyway.

[Ken Burch]

5. OK, the dual loyalty accusation is not acceptable. Fair enough. n/t.

Last edited Fri Mar 6, 2015, 07:03 AM - Edit history (1)

[Scuba]

10. Um, would that mean I can't question John Boehner's loyalty when he opens the Congress to Bibi?

I mean John's not even Jewish for crying out loud.

[Kalidurga]

7. I have no idea

I have been accused of being both a Zionist and an anti-Zionist and I am not even sure what that means. This was because of my opinion that there should be both an Israeli and a Palestinian state.

[treestar]

8. I don't think there is any way out of being accused of it

There are some people who will do that to win the argument. People are starting to oppose the amount of money we give them, when we have uses for that money here. That's going to get them accused of anti-Semitism. You just can't get away from it.

As an intellectual question, Israel's "right to exist" seems an issue, since it was created and propped up and apparently can't exist without us. A real nation exists because it was able to create itself and defend itself without outside assistance. But Israel's "right to exist" has become something you aren't "allowed" to oppose, or you feel uncomfortable discussing, knowing you are going to get called anti-semitic for it.

Opposing the settlements in the West Bank, and the obvious intent of taking it entirely from the Palestinians one day - Many Israelis themselves oppose that. Maybe you are allowed to oppose that without being accused, but there are some who are fanatic enough that they will do so.

Right wingers are annoying when they talk about "playing the card" because they complain about it being played against them when it's proper because they are indeed being racist or sexist. But there are people who will play it when they aren't really justified, just to use that, you know, to look like victims and "win" the debate point that way, and make the other person look bad.

[Helen Borg]

9. The word has been so abused for manipulative purposes

That it has lost its meaning.