As anyone who has ever perused the diaries about the Israel/Palestinian conflict at the Great Orange Satan is all too sadly aware, criticism of Israeli policy towards the Palestinians in the Occupied territories often leads to claims by some posters in the comments section that one is expressing antisemitic sentiments and attitudes. In short, in the minds of many, if you express any opinion stating opposition to the state of Israel, its policies or its political leaders, that mere statement is considered de facto evidence that you are an antisemite. I’ve see further proof of this in the reaction to Bibi Netanyahu’s speech to the US Congress. I find such attitudes and behavior by the individuals throwing these slurs around highly toxic and counter-productive.
Here’s two definitions of antisemitism from Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary, which is brief and too the point:
[H]atred of Jewish people
and one from the Free Dictionary:
[D]iscrimination against or prejudice or hostility toward Jews.
Please note that neither definition defines opposition to policies of the Israeli Government or its leaders as antisemitism.
The problem with personal attacks on those who express grievances, condemnation or disagreement with the actions of the government of Israel and its current political leaders is that it conflates legitimate anger and frustration with the actions of Israel’s government into hatred for all Jews. And being a Jew is no protection from accusations that one is a “self-hating Jew”, as David Harris Gershon is all too aware. Pointing out that many Israelis and Jews in America have real issues with the policies of Israel’s government also does not ensure that one will be not labeled a bigot.
This is what is known in logic as a generalization fallacy. That is, if one disagrees with, or opposes, the actions of Israel one must also hate Jews, and thus must be an antisemite. Even a prominent former Soviet dissident and Israeli politician, Natan Sharansky, recognized that not all criticism of Israel equates with an antisemitic attitude on the part of the critic. He developed his own “3D test” (which I neither endorse or refute) for identifying when criticism of Israel crosses the line into prejudice against all Jews everywhere:
The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz – this is anti-Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.
The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross – this is anti-Semitism.
The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism.
Even under Sharanky’s test, it is difficult to see how opposition to Bibi Netanyahu’s efforts to interfere with the diplomatic efforts by the United States President to negotiate a treaty with Iran to prevent the development of nuclear weapons qualifies as per se antisemitism by those outraged by Mr. Netanyahu. Regardless of how one views the threat of Iran, it’s pretty obvious that any foreign leader, especially the Prime Minister of a putative ally and the beneficiary of massive amounts of US government aid over the last several decades, would be criticized by many people if that leader acted as Mr. Netanyahu did when he addressed the US Congress and advocated that the current negotiations by the Obama administration with Iran over its nuclear program should end and more sanctions against Iran should be added. Even the New York Times considers this an unprecedented action by a foreign leader inserting himself into an American foreign policy debate in such a public manner:
Mr. Netanyahu’s hotly disputed address constituted a remarkable moment in Washington: a foreign leader taking the podium before members of the House and Senate to argue strenuously against the policies of the sitting American president. In doing so, the Israeli leader was essentially urging lawmakers to trust him — not Mr. Obama — when it comes to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
However, opposition to Mr. Netanyahu’s speech before Congress to bolster Republican opposition to any deal reached by the Obama administration with Iran is not the only area of concern. Any number of people are accused of antisemitism for objecting to the Israeli government’s settlement policy in the occupied territories, even though many Israelis themselves either object to further settlements or have doubts about the benefit of the continued development of such settlements. People who object to the Israeli government’s harsh treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, including the allegations by a UN task force of excessive fatalities of civilians in Gaza caused by Israel’s Defense forces during its last armed conflict with HAMAS, have also seen the slur of antisemitism all too quickly thrown their way.
We criticize those who blame all Muslims for the actions of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and other terrorist organizations. The charge of antisemitism against anyone, Jew, Christian, atheist, etc. for objecting to the actions of Israel’s government and its leaders is in much the same vein. The use of this charge to intimidate and silence those who speak up against such actions is reprehensible.
I have no problem condemning those who openly express hatred and bigotry directed toward any group, whether based on race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, religion or the absence of religious faith. I do have an issue with those that use the highly charged terms “antisemite” and “antisemitism” as ad hominem attacks against anyone who disagrees with them on the politics, policies and actions of the State of Israel, its government and/or its leaders.
I hope you agree.
