My Mum grew up in London, and when she was seven she changed schools. They had different routines at her new school and she was a little confused. When the bell rang girls were lining up in two places and she didn’t know where she belonged. So she asked another student where she should go:
“Are you Jewish or Christian?” The girl replied.
My Mum said that she didn’t know.
“If you don’t know you’re probably Christian” She pointed my Mum to the line for Christian assembly.
I bring this up as a way of saying that I’m not Jewish. A fact that I suspect that most regular readers of this blog would guess, because if I was Jewish I would have mentioned it.*
I have been following the debate about anti-semitism over at feministe (here and here) and Mandolin’s post about the discussion. I may write a post about how and why I disagree with David Schraub’s model, which he calls anti-subordination school (and therefore most of his argument). But there was something else I wanted to say first.
David Schraub started his argument by talking about Gaza, and he’s conceded that’s a mistake so I won’t respond to what he said. But in the thread itself a lot of people did respond, and some said some variation of “now is not the time to be talking of anti-semitism.”
I don’t think this is true. I think now is as good a time as any to talk about anti-semitism. To say otherwise is to play into the idea that the middle east is a zero-sum game between ‘Jews’ and ‘Palestinians’ and I don’t believe that. I don’t think that opposing anti-semitism diminishes our ability to stand in solidarity with the people with Gaza. I think opposing anti-semitism strengthens the movement in solidarity with the people of Gaza.
I think this because I do not conflate the Israeli state with Jewish people. I believe that it is always important to draw distinctions between people and states that claim to represent them. I think it is particularly important that those of us who oppose the actions of the Israeli state don’t conflate those actions with Jewish people (or Israelis).
I’ve seen it happen, of course I have. Often it comes out of the blue. Once I was walking home from a Palestinian solidarity demo with a couple of acquaintances. When we walked past a synagogue one of them ranted at the (empty and deserted) building, as if standing in solidarity with Palestine was standing against a synagogue.
I don’t want to make the moral argument for opposing anti-semitism. I would assume that no-one needs me to explain to them what anti-semitism can do. Instead I want to make explicit the practical, or solidarity based argument about why it’s vital for those of us who oppose the actions of the Israeli state to fight anti-semitism.**
I feel almost superflous writing any of this down, since so much of my thinking is influenced by Naomi Klein. Anti-semitism doesn’t strengthen the Palestinians; it strengthens the Israeli state:
Why bother with such subtleties while bodies are still being pulled out of the rubble in Jenin? Because anyone interested in fighting Le Pen-style fascism or Sharon-style brutality has to deal with the reality of anti-Semitism head-on. The hatred of Jews is a potent political tool in the hands of both the right in Europe and in Israel. For Le Pen, anti-Semitism is a windfall, helping spike his support from 10 percent to 17 percent in a week.
For Ariel Sharon, it is the fear of anti-Semitism, both real and imagined, that is the weapon. Sharon likes to say that he stands up to terrorists to show he is not afraid. In fact, his policies are driven by fear. His great talent is that he fully understands the depths of Jewish fear of another Holocaust. He knows how to draw parallels between Jewish anxieties about anti-Semitism and American fears of terrorism. And he is an expert at harnessing all of it for his political ends.
But more importantly than the fact that anti-semitism strengthens Sharon, is the fact that it weakens us. All that most of us can offer those in Gaza right now is our solidarity. Allowing any form of anti-semitism as part of that solidarity is a big “NOT WELCOME” sign for Jews, and those who oppose anti-semitism. Mandolin said:
I don’t know about other Jews, but in my case, it often means I just shut down when I see conversation about Israel and Palestine. I am not wanted there. Either my voice is too progressive, or too Jewish. Such conversations will just make me sad and upset. So I pass.
If there’s no space for her exactly how many other people are being excluded? That doesn’t help the people of Gaza.
So what would it look like, to oppose anti-semitism within the movement to oppose the Israeli state? Like I’ve said an important starting point is not conflating Jewish people and the Israeli state, and the implications of this run reasonably deep. For instance the idea that now is not the time to talk about anti-semitism, relies on some level of conflation between Jewish people and the Israeli state.
But I don’t think that’s all there is, hell I’ve heard versions of the blood libel myth and the grand Jewish conspiracy in the last eighteen months. I think in order to fight anti-semitism, people have to listen to Jewish people about what anti-semitism is. I don’t think that’s an obligation to agree with any individual Jewish person (after all the idea of a Jewish hive mind is a tenant of anti-semitism). But I know I’ve learned a lot from talking about Jewish people who are involved in solidarity work against the Israeli state about what they see as anti-semitic.
And I think all of this work can make our solidarity with the people of Gaza stronger.
I don’t know what to do with the comment section of this post. I have clearly addressed most of my arguments towards non-Jewish people who oppose the Israeli state’s actions (in my experience Jewish people who oppose the Israeli state’s actions don’t conflate Judaism and the Israeli state). But I want Mandolin and those who identified with her post to feel comfortable commenting here (if they want). I also don’t want this to get completely derailed into an argument about the Israeli/Palestine conflict in general, and I really don’t want the meta arguments about David Schraub’s series to be rehashed. And maybe this is a little premature, because maybe no-one will want to comment at all, so that vague statement of what and what I don’t want will have to do.
* You don’t have to be reading long to figure that I am a white, without significant physical impairment, and from a middle-class background precisely because of the absence of markers to the contrary.
** I think many people see this as the weaker argument. I see it as the stronger one, and if I do ever manage to explain the different between my framework and David Schraub’s I’ll explain wy.
Can I link my post about those threads?
Getting hugely pissed that my points are BEING IGNORED since it doesn’t fit the boilerplate.
(But hey, let’s just overlook where all that money really comes from, shall we?)
So what would it look like, to oppose anti-semitism within the movement to oppose the Israeli state?
You mean the actions of the Israeli state, and not the existence of the Israeli state, right? Because I don’t think you’re going to get very far trying to make a pro-Jewish case that Israel shouldn’t exist.
For instance the idea that now is not the time to talk about anti-semitism, relies on some level of conflation between Jewish people and the Israeli state.
Er, no, it could stem from a belief that the link doesn’t matter that much. On reflection I suspect it does matter, and that talking about antisemitism may have good results. But at first glance I kept wanting to respond, “We don’t need to talk about racism to explain why we shouldn’t tie the funding for the civil rights division of Justice to Bernie Madoff’s profits.”
Pingback: links for 2009-01-17 « Laura M
I appreciate this post. I really do. And I think it raises a lot of good issues. I have to ask: My understanding of your position on Israel is that it should not be there as a Jewish state there — you support a bi-national one state solution (insofar as you’re willing to entertain the existence of states period). Am I correct?
Assuming I am, do you take your obligation to hear and engage with what the Jewish community says about anti-Semitism to include the vast majority of the Jewish population which — though supporting a two-state solution — views a Jewish state in Israel as not just “correct” but essential to their liberation as Jews?
There are Jews who don’t believe this, and they ought to have their say. But they’re a tiny minority of the Jewish population. It’s not to say they have no role in the discussion, but they’re clearly not sufficient: it’d be like engaging the Black community on racism through a panel of Condi Rice, Ward Connerly, and Clarence Thomas. Engaging with Jews means being truly open (not necessarily agreeing at the end, but coming in with a truly open mind and a willingness to listen) to what the consensus majority of Jews say that they need for liberation. At the moment, this includes Israel as a Jewish state.
You’re right that fear is a big motivator in this conflict, and that Israeli policies are motivated a lot by Jewish fear. Jews looked out into the world and said “what do these people have that we don’t that lets them protect themselves and stay alive?” and took as their answer: Big fucking tanks. Misguided? To some extent: There has been plenty of devastation visited upon (and by) tank wielding populations. But Jews had also tried the tank-less existence, and found it didn’t work out so well either. People retreat to very primal, defensive, militaristic instincts when they are afraid and don’t see other salient options in front of them (this is why the 2000 Lebanon war was so devastating, coming after the UN had certified Israel had completely and totally withdrawn from Lebanese territory. It really discredited the idea amongst many Jews and Israelis that ending occupation would necessarily bring them safety). As far as Jews are concerned, “tanks” is beating “no tanks” 0-1 in terms of avoiding Jew-killing genocide, and so long as they see avoiding extermination as the game, tanks are going to be appealing. Step one of changing the equation so that tanks aren’t the big player, is making it so that Jews don’t feel like their primary political goal is mere survival.
So I agree that simply digging in deeper with more tanks and guns and airplanes and military outposts is no solution. Ehud Olmert gets it, albeit in a statement that can only be given by someone who knew his political career was over:
I agree with you that removing Jewish fear is an essential pre-requisite to actually seeing justice for Palestinians. But there are two ways we can frame that. The first is getting rid of enough anti-Semitism so that Jews aren’t afraid to go to left-wing solidarity rallies and express their outrage at the way Palestinians are treated. The second is to getting rid of anti-Semitism so that fear (of violence, of anti-Semitism, of genocide) ceases to be a salient political motivator in Israeli politics. I think the second option is much, much harder; but I think it’s also the only one that can work.
Daisy, did you ask Jill or Lauren to re-post your post to Feministe? I was impressed with both that one, and “All the Children Are Insane” and think you should post them to Feministe if they give you the opportunity. There is a call out for submissions, so let them know you are willing!
Donna, thank you. No, I didn’t think of doing that, but I’ll go ahead and link the last one here:
More on Israel, Gaza, antisemitism and Armageddon
I wouldn’t have time to moderate HUNDREDS of posts, is the thing, since I’m working this weekend. (I can’t believe how huge those threads are, every time I look, 20-30 more posts!)
I can really understand this. I’m not even Jewish, but just the fact that I’m not willing to dehumanise either side* makes participating in any conversation on the subject useless. I’m either a terrorist-supporting degenerate or a racist supporter of imperialism. Fuck it.
*because of course there are only 2 possible points of view in this matter, both Palestinians (and by extension all Muslims) and Israelis (and by extension all Jews) being of the Hive Mind
Daisy – Thanks for posting the link. I think it has some interesting implications for studying the effect of Gentiles associating Jews and Israel. Although I’m not sure I have enough brain power to tease it out right this second. Because it seems to me that there is much more talk about the role of Jewish Americans in upholding the political power of the AIPC (is that what it’s called I’m not America so the domestic American politics aspect of all this are a bit over my hold) is much more front and centre than the evangelical Christian role, and that that fits in with the meme that Jews are all powerful. (I don’t think I’m articulating what I’m trying to say very clearly, but I hope it’s discernable)
hf – I read some of the comments on feministe thread to cross from “We don’t have to talk about anti-semitism just because bombs are falling on Gaza” to “We shouldn’t talk about anti-semtisim because bombs are falling on Gaza” And I think the second does take a stand that conflates Jewish people and the Israeli state. But I agree with the rest of what you say.
Mizdarwin – I did mean the actions of the Israeli state. Although I think it’s important not to dismiss Jewish support for the abolition of the Israeli state. Firstly because Jewish people are over-represented in the radical left and the radical left tend to be anti-state. But also because there are debates about the nature of the Israeli state as a Jewish state and of the right of return (as well as people I know, I’m thinking of parts of the Israeli anti-occupation movement and the public resnouncing of right to return of British Jews). I’d agree it isn’t a majority view, but I think it’s also important not to dismiss it out of hand and imply that there isn’t a pro-Jewish case for dismantling or significantly altering the Israeli state.
David Schraub – You’re round about correct on my position (although my actual position is that I believe in the abolition of all states, and what happens in the meantime in places like Israel is for those who live there to decide, but I will support the powerless against the powerful. So if there was a two state solution that people in Israel and people in Palestine were OK with then I wouldn’t be hanging out for my position).
I think we’re working from very different understandings of how the world works (Your definition of concensus is very very different from my definition of concensus). I don’t think standing in solidarity means standing with the majority of any oppressed group, and I don’t think the obligation to engage exists on a community level (I don’t think it’s possible for an individual to engage with a community, given that a community is a network of informal relationships, but then I find the formulation ‘the X community’ pretty problematic in general). So do I think I have an obligation to listen and engage and try and hear what you see about anti-semitism, sure if we’re going to discuss these issues. But as a person, not as a representative of some larger group.
But I’m unsure how useful that engagement can be, given the differences of our analysis. When you say: “Jews looked out into the world and said “what do these people have that we don’t that lets them protect themselves and stay alive?” and took as their answer: Big fucking tanks. ”
My response is: No Jews did not do that. Jews do not have a great big hive mind where they collectively decided on tanks. Jewish people who actively opposed the tanks exist and have always existed. As do Jewish people who remain agnostic towards the tanks, who do not identify with the tanks to keep them safe.
I think the issues of Jewish supporters of Israel conflating Jews with the Israeli state are very different from Gentiles who oppose the actions of Israel doing the same. I don’t feel I’m a useful person to talk about what it means when Jewish supporters of Israel conflate Jews people with the Israeli state. But I can’t respond to anything you say that conflates Jews with the Israeli state, except to oppose that conflation.
Finally I don’t agree that the frames you’ve set up at the end of your comment are different. I concentrated on fighting anti-semitism within movements against the Israeli state, because that’s the context where I see most anti-semitism. I was speaking to people who share that opposition but dismiss discussions of anti-semitism. But I don’t think that’s a different frame from opposing anti-semitism that creates the fear among Israelis that plays such a role in Israeli politics, or the fear among diaspora Jews who have misgivings about the actions of the Israeli that leads them to ignore those misgivings (which is a lot of what Naomi Klein was talking about). I think it’s just a more particular project.
David, I don’t want to digress Maia’s thread, but I hope that at some point — perhaps later in the series on Feministe? — you actually provide some evidence to support this claim. The idea that “a Jewish sate in Israel is essential to our liberation as Jews” is a very specific formulation, and unless someone’s done a comprehensive survey of Jews worldwide on that question, how would you know?
This is probably a stupid question, but I’ll ask it anyway: Is anti-semitism different in some way from other racial and/or religious prejudices? If so, how or why?
Dianne – I’d give the short answer as yes, but in the sense that all forms of racial/religious descrimination are different. In particular the tropes and ideas which are used to maintain prejudice and discrimination and division are often very specifc. I hope David Schraub’s series is going to be useful in people who haven’t engaged with anti-semitism understanding those tropes and the second part examines one of those tropes. I also found the past didn’t go anywhere and this review useful (I should have linked to them in the article itself,b ut it was getting late and I couldn’t find them.
Dianne–the Shoah.
Dianne,
I think what is different is that the length and breadth of the hate. Jews have been hated across centuries, countries, and even continents, and not just as as a generalized attitude but as state-supported (and often mandated) discrimination and actual physical harm.
I was once told this “joke” (which is, of course, factually inaccurate):
Q: Why is Ireland the only country that hasn’t thrown out the Jews?
A: Because they never let them in.
The person who told it meant the joke both to be cruel and to explain why Jews weren’t admitted to the big swim club in our city* — no matter who it is or where it is or what it is, to be around us is to hate us. And sadly there is plenty of historical data providing evidence for this assertion.
* This was in the 60s. Jews were later allowed to join on a quota. None did.
Maia;
Thanks for this post. I completely agree, and hope I wasnt initially unclear in my emphasis on the importance of talking about the rights and lives of Palestinians in this moment of crisis. I am relieved to see your post, given they way this entire discussion has been thusfar framed.
Just a quick comment re: AIPAC. AIPAC presents itself as the voice of American Jews, but that is mostly bluster and bullshit. I don’t know where exactly AIPAC’s money comes from, and I don’t doubt that it comes mostly from American Jews, but I personally do not know any American Jew who has given money to AIPAC. I don’t know if they get money from JFED, and JFED does a lot of charity work, etc that is not political in nature, so if AIPAC is getting money from local JFEDs it is possible that some American Jews are unwittingly giving money to AIPAC. Anyway, I think it would be very interesting to read an analysis of AIPAC, but the idea that it represents a large majority of American Jews is, based on my personal experience, incredibly suspect, at least and especially among the Reform Jewish American community.
I think it’s interesting how Reform organizations get into this dance of not exactly denouncing Israeli actions, though talking about it with a lot of reservations. I was frankly disappointed with the statements of Reform officialdom about the most recent incursion into Gaza. I would have liked to have seen a real denunciation, such as that of the more explicitly pro-peace Jewish organizations. However, I know that they are walking a tightrope within the community where even if you don’t really agree with the AIPAC set, it can make your life difficult to vocally oppose them, cause rifts in congregations, etc.
I’ll also put in a plug for the Naomi Klein article which doesn’t seem to have its own comments.
I don’t know if non-Jews in America realize the pull that the Holocaust still has. As an American Reform Jew, it was seared into my consciousness growing up that the Holocaust could happen again, that the Holocaust could happen here, in America, and that among the reasons that some European Jews perished in the Holocaust was the fact that they believed, having achieved social acceptance and upper-middle class social status (especially in Germany), that they were safe; that their friends and neighbors would not allow this to happen to them. And boy were they wrong.
Dianne:
Jewish responsibility for the death of Jesus Christ is enshrined in the holy books of one of the worlds’ dominant religions (Matthew 27:25, usually translated as “His blood be on us and on our children”). This has often been an excuse and justification for both corporate (governmental and religious) and individual antisemitism.
I totally agree with Emily. I know lots of Jews who disagree with the actions of the Israeli government, but do not want to criticize too strongly or harshly because they are afraid of destabilizing Israel too much, and they want some place to run to if things go badly for Jews in their countries.
This is particularly true for people who have “survivors guilt” for not being in Europe (or for their parents not being in Europe while the extended family suffered and died) during the war. In my experience, actual survivors seem to feel much freer to call a spade a spade when they are disgusted with the Israeli government.
There is always an excuse not to talk about the elephant in the room. Now is as good a time as any.
A lot comes from Evangelical and fundamentalist Christians.
Ever since John Nelson Darby, the End Times have dominated much of fundamentalist discourse. The game has changed. The Rapture is the thing, and Israel must exist for the Rapture to happen.
As I said in my post, making sure the conditions are right for the Second Coming has taken precedent for these Christians. Thus, Israel’s security is paramount FOR CHRISTIANS at this point.
THAT is also a big, giant elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about.
“Thus, Israel’s security is paramount FOR CHRISTIANS at this point.”
Israel’s security is paramount for fundamentalist evangelicals who believe in the Rapture. Not for me. There are people I am ashamed to call brother, and those who would gladly see thousands die unsaved to hasten their own reward are among them.
Pingback: What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel « It’s All Connected…
Pingback: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel
AndiF: Random book geekdom– that joke comes from chapter 2 of “Ulysses” (though I don’t know if Joyce made it up or if it was current when he was writing) and it is clearly told to illustrate the incredible ignorance and bigotry of the character who says it. So, whatever that says about the person who told it to you, it can’t be good…
End derailment.
Love, Kira, who is avoiding the Gaza issue by retreating into Irish literature
Pingback: feminist blogs » » What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel - 1
Pingback: Richard Jeffrey Newman - What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel — 1