By Yehonatan Tommer & Tzvi Fleischer Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, May 6, 2007 The “New Antisemitism” is not about criticism of Israel but demonisation. The statistics are damning. Antisemitic incidents are up nearly 50% in one year. They have increased seven-fold since 1989. Moreover, racist assaults on Jewish individuals nearly doubled globally in a single year. Most of the increase came in Western Europe, but Australia was also a major part of this worrying trend – with incidents up 47% over the annual average and the number of violent attacks up more than three-fold. These are the findings of the most recent global study of antisemitism, Antisemitism Worldwide 2006, put out by Tel Aviv University’s Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism. (For the full report, see http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/ ). Many experts argue that this massive increase in anti-Jewish racism and violence is not simply part of a new wave of antisemitic incidents, but associated with a new kind of antisemitism. This “New Antisemitism”, combining an increasingly violent demonisation of Israel and Zionism by elements of the international left, and the growing presence in Western societies of radicalised Muslim minority elements, has been widely discussed in recent years. In view of both the frightening international statistical trend in antisemitism and the international controversy about the nature and origins of the “New Antisemitism”, AIR sought out three of the world’s top experts on the subject. Below are our exclusive interviews with Prof. Dina Porat, who heads the Stephen Roth Institute at Tel Aviv University responsible for the study noted above, Prof. Robert Wistrich, director of the Vidal Sassoon International Centre for the Study of Antisemitism at Hebrew University and author of the classic study Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred, and Prof. Yehuda Bauer, internationally renowned Holocaust scholar and authority on racism and totalitarianism. ***** (JTA) — A Romanian public broadcaster distanced itself from a Christmas carol celebrating the Holocaust that aired on the new channel. TVR3 Verde, a television channel for rural communities, presented the carol on Dec. 5 during its maiden transmission. Sung by the Dor Transilvan ensemble, it featured the lyrics: “The kikes, damn kikes, Holy God would not leave the kike alive, neither in heaven nor on earth, only in the chimney as smoke, this is what the kike is good for, to make kike smoke through the chimney on the street.” In a statement Tuesday, TVR3 said it did not select the carol but only broadcast songs that were chosen and compiled by the Center for Preservation and Promotion of Traditional Culture, which belongs to the western county of Cluj. TVR considers the selection “an uninspired choice and therefore notified the Cluj County Council of this,” the broadcaster’s statement read. MCA Romania, a local watchdog on anti-Semitism, has written to Romanian President Traian Basecu and to Prime Minister Victor Viorel Ponta, to complain about the broadcast. “We are shocked to see that the Romanian Public Television Channel 3 broadcast an anti-Semitic Christmas carol,” Maximillian Marco Katz and Marius Draghici of MCA Romania wrote in the letter. “It is outrageous that none in the audience took a stance against the anti-Semitic Christian carol that incites to burn the Jews.” They added it was “absolutely unacceptable that TVR 3 tried to deny responsibility” by claiming it was the responsibility of Cluj County. By Andreea Teoharescu, European Jewish Press, November 29, 2013 BRUSSELS (EJP)---Jewish groups have criticized the recent removal of the ‘’Working Definition of Anti-Semitism’’ from the website of the Vienna-based Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), the European Union agency tasked with providing advice to the member states on fundamental rights of people living in the EU. The ‘’Working Definition of Anti-Semitism’’was drafted in 2004 on the initiative of the European Union’s Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), the predecessor of the FRA, and was considered a major achievement for the EU in the struggle against anti-Semitism. The document was created in order to provide a practical guide for identifying incidents, collecting data and supporting the implementation of legislation dealing with anti-Semitism at a European level. It was disseminated on the FRA website and units of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) concerned with combating anti-Semitism also employ the definition. The US State Department’s yearly report, ‘Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism,’ makes use of this definition for the purpose of its analysis. Earlier this year, the EU’s ''Working Definition of anti-Semitism'' was used in Britain in a complaint relating to the BBC coverage of comments about Israel made by a British member of te Parliament, David Ward. The BBC Trust, the public broadcaster’s governing body, first upheld the definition in characterizing Ward’s comments as ‘anti-Semitic’ but later reversed its ruling following the removal of the Definition from FRA’s website. In a communication to BBC last month, a press officer at the FRA explained that the ‘’Working Definition of anti-Semitism’’ was a ‘’discussion paper’’ which ‘’was never adopted by the EU as a working definition, although it has been on the FRA website until recently when it was removed during a clear out of “non-official” documents. The removal is seen as ‘’wrongful’’ by the European Jewish organizations who are calling for the republication of the paper. The European Simon Wiesenthal Center, a global Jewish human rights organization that confronts anti-Semitism in the world, has called on the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton, to launch an investigation into the disappearance of the Working Definition. Arguing that the FRA carries responsibility for the documents of its predecessor, Shimon Samuels, the Centre’s Director for Internatonal Relations, also asked to return the Definition to the current FRA website and to ensure that the appropriate EU bodies endorse it in its entirety. Shimon Ohayon, a member of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, who chairs the Knesset Lobby for the Struggle against Anti-Semitism, told a visiting delegation of the European Parliament that Europe needs to deal more seriously with the rise in anti-Semitism and hatred. He highlighted that there are many anti-Semites who have been fighting against the ‘Working Definition of Anti-Semitism’ for many years so they can continue their attacks on Jews and Israel. ‘’Europe needs to deal more seriously with this rise in hate which is creating an untenable situation for the Jews of Europe. However, to really fight anti-Semitism, the European Union first needs a fundamental definition which law enforcement agencies and judicial bodies can use to prosecute those who target Jews and Jewish institutions,’’ Ohayon told the MEPs. The European Jewish Parliament (EJP) has joined other Jewish organizations in their efforts. “The Fundamental Rights Agency released a report about anti-Semitism two weeks ago, but there is a lack of coherence between the publication of this report and the deletion of the Definition of anti-Semitism. It is like identifying a disease and afterwards throwing the medication away”, said Joel Rubinfeld, Co-Chairman of the EJP. Contacted by the European Jewish Press about the issue, a FRA official in Vienna confirmed what the body told earlier to the BBC and said : ‘’We don’t foresee adding the working definition to our webpage. The FRA is not a standard-setting body and creating definitions is not part of our mandate. The EUMC working definition of antisemitism is not an official EU definition and has not been adopted by FRA.’’ Arutz Sheva, December 10, 2013 Interview with Robert Wistrich, Rector of Center for the Study of Antisemitism: "Antisemitism is by no means the sole province of the ignorant and uneducated." “Anti-Semitism among the intellectual elite of pagan antiquity began in Alexandria more than 2,000 years ago. This type of anti-Semitism – particularly among higher cultures, i.e., Egypt, Greece and Rome – focused on issues which seem to have a perennial resonance. In particular, the charge was made that Jews were anti-social. They did not eat and drink with their neighbors as was part of the Mediterranean ethos. This ancient accusation of exclusivism and isolationism of the Jews has provided an infrastructure upon which various more serious charges have been built over the millennia. “The anti-Semitic role of intellectuals continued throughout the centuries. The fathers of the church, particularly in the fourth century of the Christian era, laid the ideological infrastructure from which much of the demonizing of Jews, Judaism, and the Jewish people developed. They explicitly branded the Jews as Christ-killers, a deicidal people. This already has its beginnings in the gospels. The only intellectuals in Christian Europe during the Middle Ages were clergymen. For over a thousand years, many leading Christian theologians taught contempt toward the Jewish people. After World War II, French Jewish author Jules Isaac described this in detail.” Professor Robert Wistrich holds the Neuberger Chair for Modern European and Jewish History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Since 2002, he has been director of the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Anti-Semitism at that university. “The perception of the allegedly satanic character of the Jews continued throughout the Middle Ages. Later in that period, the Jews literally became a ‘demonic abstraction.’ Almost all their actions were interpreted as being of extraordinary malice and perversity. Church reformer Martin Luther, was a man of considerable intellectual power. His denunciations of Jews are among the most violent in the history of anti-Semitic defamation. “In the Catholic, Eastern Christian Orthodox and Protestant worlds, anti-Semitism became a widespread phenomenon. The Jews were defined by the churches as the ‘agents of the devil,’ and enemies of the faith. This demonization carried over into a rationalist, post-Christian ethos, acquiring a new secular vitality. For instance, the 18th century Enlightenment inscribed on its banners the revolt against the established church. It proclaimed the sovereignty of reason, humanity and universal ‘toleration.’ Yet it continued in the earlier anti-Semitic tradition. Its intellectual proponents turned their anti-Semitism against the Catholic Church itself. It was the Voltarian approach to the citadels of ‘superstition’ and in particular that of the Catholic Church and the Holy Scriptures. This included a total attack on the Hebrew Bible, the Jewish people, and Judaism as the source of everything that was wrong. He and other 18th century French philosophers proclaimed that the capital crime of the Jews was that they had invented God and monotheism, the worst thing that had ever happened to civilization. In other words, their sin was not having crucified Christ, but having given birth to him. “The great German idealist philosophers of the 18th century, from Kant through Fichte and Hegel, were all anti-Semitic. So were the outstanding intellectuals who followed or opposed them, such as Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and the young Karl Marx. Nietzsche and Kant were less anti-Semitic than others. This tradition climaxed with Martin Heidegger, who many people consider the 20th century’s leading philosopher. His commitment to Nazism ran deep and affected his attitude toward Jews. “Among the heirs of the Enlightenment traditions were the early French Socialists of the 19th century. With rare exceptions, they laid the groundwork for late 19th century French anti-Semitism. They included Charles Fourier, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon – founder of anarchism and a seminal figure in the French labor movement – and Alphonse Toussenel. The leading figure of French anti-Semitism at the time of the Dreyfus Affair was semi-intellectual Edouard Drumont, author of the best-selling work La France Juive (Jewish France). With approximately 100 editions, it out-sold all other books of the day in Fin-de-siècle France. “Proudhon’s great rival and antagonist Karl Marx penned a work that Marxists always include in the pantheon of his writings, "Zur Judenfrage" (On the Jewish Question). Among the many pearls of intellectual inspiration in this work, one finds phrases like, ‘Mammon is the worldly god of the Jews,’ or ‘the present Christian world in Europe and North America has reached the apex of this development and has become thoroughly Judaized.’ “Anti-Semitism is by no means the sole province of the ignorant and uneducated. Mass movements such as Nazism and many forms of fascism, nationalism, and some types of socialism do have major components of anti-intellectualism. Yet these movements which are both anti-intellectual and anti-Semitic also have an intellectual basis. Among the inspirers of European fascism were thinkers like George Sorel, Giovanni Gentile, Ernst Jünger, Oswald Spengler and many others. ‘Hitler's Professors’, to use Max Weinreich's phrase, helped prepare the ground for Nazi genocide of the Jews. “The intellectual demonization of Jews continues until the present despite sweeping changes which have taken place intellectually, socially and politically in European history. Anti-Semitism is by no means the sole province of the ignorant and uneducated. Many writers, artists, prominent journalists and academics are in the forefront of making odious comparisons of Zionism to Nazism and Israel to Hitler’s Germany. Portuguese Nobel Prize-winner Jose Saramago was just one of many. Yet they all fit into a lengthy tradition of intellectual Jew-hatred.” By Katie Engelhart, Macleans, November 30, 2013 Defying predictions, nationalist parties are tightening their networks and coalescing into dangerous alliances In August 2010, dozens of far-right politicians from across Europe flew to Tokyo for a week of plotting and scheming. They were invited by Japan’s right-wing Issuikai group, famous for its denial of Japanese war crimes during the Nanjing Massacre, in which hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians were murdered, and tens of thousands raped, by Japanese soldiers. The occasion was a conference: “The Future of Nationalist Movements.” By all accounts, it was a success. A who’s who of European nationalists showed up: delegates from the British Nationalist Party (BNP), Jobbik (Hungary), Tricolour Flame (Italy), Attack (Bulgaria), Freedom (Ukraine) and Flemish Interest (Belgium). Jean-Marie Le Pen—former president of France’s Muslim-bashing, European Union-trashing Front National—gave the keynote address. The congress, said an Issuikai spokesperson, was focused on “how we can protect the national identity in our respective countries and co-operate to win the battle against globalization.” The last few years have been good to Europe’s far right. In 2010, extreme parties in the Netherlands, Hungary and Sweden gave powerful electoral showings. Soon after, Austria’s Freedom Party raked in over 25 per cent of state election votes and doubled its parliamentary seats. That momentum has not waned. “I would never have imagined that demons long believed to have been banished would return,” wrote European Parliament President Martin Schulz in 2012. “But simple-minded populism is once again gaining ground.” This year in Norway—just two years after a far-right militant named Anders Behring Breivik massacred 69 people on the island of Utøya—the Progress Party that once inspired him won almost a quarter of the national vote. But this is not, as some observers claim, the 1930s redux—for these are not the same far-right parties. Rather, much of Europe’s radical right has broken with its bellicose past. Today’s far-right parties are more polished and articulate, more welcoming of mainstream agenda points (like same-sex marriage and welfare assistance) and more committed to playing by democratic rules. In some cases, their goals have changed too; many far-right parties have sidelined the fight for electoral seats in favour of projects meant to push mainstream parties rightward. In places like Britain, conservative parties have taken the bait. Earlier this year, the U.K. Home Office dispatched government vans to drive around London, emblazoned with the message, “In the U.K. illegally? Go home or face arrest”—in what many say was a nasty concession to far-right forces. For this reason, the new far right appears all the more insidious. Experts speak of a continental “contagion from the right.” In Hungary and Switzerland, they worry about democratic collapse. By Allan Arkush Jewish Review of Books Winter 2014 Anti-Semitism had to go underground in many of its previous haunts after 1945, but it never disappeared, and in recent years has been on the upswing. It's hard to tell how much of a menace it now constitutes because so much of it remains submerged and so much of it is disguised. From the vantage point of the United States, where anti-Semitism is but a weak force, the danger may not appear very great at all-especially now that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has vanished from the international scene and his successor is tweeting Rosh Hashanah greetings to the Jewish people. It would be a mistake, however, to make light of the very substantial evidence that anti-Semitism is on the rise. We need to know who our enemies are and to think about how to deal with them. Anti-Semitism manifests itself in words and deeds. Some of the words come unsolicited from the mouths and pens of Jew-haters, and others appear on questionnaires designed to elicit and sort the expression of sentiments people may otherwise have kept to themselves or shared only with their like-minded friends. Actions range from violent attacks on individuals to political scheming against the Jewish people. Analysts of contemporary anti-Semitism monitor and examine some or all of these things and situate them against the backdrop of history in an effort to assess the dimensions of the problems we now face. Monika Schwarz-Friesel and Jehuda Reinharz's new book on the language of "Judenfeinschaft" (hostility toward Jews) in the 21st century has a restricted focus, but it pursues a broad program. This unusual collaborative venture on the part of a German linguist and a modern Jewish historian (who was formerly the president of Brandeis University) is based mainly on the minute and meticulous study of around 14,000 emails, letters, and faxes sent to the Central Council of Jews in Germany and the Israeli embassy in Germany between 2002 and 2012. Schwarz-Friesel and Reinharz painstakingly analyze some very discomfiting reading material in search of an up-to-date and "comprehensive understanding of the culturally, socially, cognitively and emotionally charged phenomenon of hostility toward Jews" in the land where anti-Semitism not so long ago reached its apogee. The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights has a new report presenting the first comparable figures on Jewish people’s experiences of antisemitic harassment, discrimination and hate crime in the EU. "On 8 November, the eve of the anniversary of the anti-Jewish pogroms that took place 75 years ago, it needs to be acknowledged that while Member States have made sustained efforts to combat antisemitism, the phenomenon is still widespread." Click here to access the full report The Inquisitr, October 18, 2013 Recently, a new book, Demonizing Israel and the Jews by Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, sent shock waves across Europe by revealing the frightening levels of anti-Semitism and vicious condemnation of Israel taking place in the European Union. Not since 1938 has Europe witnessed such a virulent outbreak of open hatred for the Jewish people. Jews are leaving Europe in record numbers, and in city after city, where Jewish communities once thrived, people have packed their bags and fled to Israel, Canada or the United States. From Paris to Malmo, old Jewish homes are standing empty, as family after family leaves the land of their birth to escape the memories of 1800 years of persecution and death. For those who remain behind, daily life is constant burden and an awful reminder of a time, only 85 years ago, when Jews were forced to wear yellow stars and herded into cattle cars by the millions to be gassed and burned. Now, in the year 2013, Jews are once again spat on and kicked for daring to wear a Kippah on a European street, “Dirty Jew, Hitler should have finished the job” echoes in their ears as they run for cover. Ancient Jewish gravestones are covered with Swastikas and Israeli flags are torn to shreds by ravening crowds of protesters screaming their hatred for the Jewish state. Rather than dwell in despair on the horrors of Jewish life in Modern Europe, we invited Dr. Gerstenfeld here today to explain how and why this is happening and to gain an understanding of what can be done about it. Does hope still remain for the Jews of Europe or are we on the verge of a second Holocaust? Is Israel facing nuclear annihilation or can the Jewish state finally take its place as an equal partner among the nations of the world. After all the horrors of World War Two and the extermination of half of the world’s Jews, we are witnessing a re-birth of the same ugly hatred. What does this tell us about the human soul and the future of our species? Wolff Bachner: Dr. Gerstenfeld, welcome to The Inquisitr once again. Today, we are here to discuss one of the most disturbing and least discussed phenomenons of the 21st century, the re-birth of virulent Jew hate and anti-Israelism that has become prevalent throughout Europe. In your new book, Demonizing Israel and the Jews, you make the astonishing and frightening claim that 150 million adults out of 400 million in the European Union believe that Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians. They accuse the Jewish state of apartheid and ethnic cleansing while referring to Jews as the new Nazis. How did you arrive at this alarming statistic and what proof do you have? |
CISA Blog
This blog provides selective critical analysis on developments in contemporary culture related to the subjects of antisemitism, racism, the Holocaust, genocide, and human rights.
|