What’s behind the ‘new anti-Semitism’?

[Elok]

Yes, as bigotry is at least spelled correctly. Unless you actually mean "hypocracy," which if I remember my roots correctly would signify "insufficient leadership." Actually, even then I'd say prejudice is preferable to anarchy. Even a prejudiced state only denies civil rights to a certain portion of the populace.

[Spiffor]

[GePap]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


At a time when the values and identity of the West are in a state of flux and confusion, the one solid moral baseline we have is the Holocaust. This can partly be seen in the regularity with which Godwin's law is asserted.

Well, the problem is that the Holocaust cast into some independent universe separate from the global conflagration that enabled it is a fiction.

This great moral example of course has also been a massive and pathetic failure if we examine the utter unwillingness of the West to do anything about other cases of genocide around the world post the Holocaust.

The final problem is that the Holocaust only has relevance then in "the West", which account for only at most 20% of humanity. The way the "Holocaust" has been cast as some moral example seems rather weak if it has failed utterly to capture the minds of the 80% of humanity that does not seem to particularly care about that memory.

Despite the steps made towards establishing Israel prior to WW2, and whatever one thnks of that cause personally, the Holocaust enhanced the case for a place for Jewish people to live in safety from the existential threat of extermination.

It also seems to have made a great case for better treatment of the Roma, but no one cares, or an argument against homophobia, but no one cares, and the fact that millions of Soviet citizens were also murdered could be seen as a valid argument for Soviet control of Eastern Europe. And last time I looked, the people of Israel live in constant existential fear of extermination.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by GePap
Well, the problem is that the Holocaust cast into some independent universe separate from the global conflagration that enabled it is a fiction.

The Nazi state was a vast bundle of horrors, all of which came together in an orgy of war and extermination. I'm not sure who is trying to cast anything into a seperate universe - except perhaps Ned for whom WW2 was the fault of Britain, AIUI.

This great moral example of course has also been a massive and pathetic failure if we examine the utter unwillingness of the West to do anything about other cases of genocide around the world post the Holocaust.

Nothing has come close to the Holocaust, which was unique in history. However, attempts are made to liken other genocides and alleged genocides to the Holocaust, precisely because of the moral imperative that surrounds it. I for one am not making the case for waging war in response to every civil war or bloody atrocity.

The final problem is that the Holocaust only has relevance then in "the West", which account for only at most 20% of humanity. The way the "Holocaust" has been cast as some moral example seems rather weak if it has failed utterly to capture the minds of the 80% of humanity that does not seem to particularly care about that memory.

We are talking about the West in the first place - and the point is that the Holocaust forms a moral baseline for western thought.

Despite the steps made towards establishing Israel prior to WW2, and whatever one thnks of that cause personally, the Holocaust enhanced the case for a place for Jewish people to live in safety from the existential threat of extermination.

It also seems to have made a great case for better treatment of the Roma, but no one cares, or an argument against homophobia, but no one cares, and the fact that millions of Soviet citizens were also murdered could be seen as a valid argument for Soviet control of Eastern Europe. And last time I looked, the people of Israel live in constant existential fear of extermination.

Gay rights have surely advanced since WW2, as have the rights of the disabled. I'm not aware of a piece of land that is the centre of a long-sought-after aspiration for the creation of a Roma state. It may be true that the Roma have not benefited from any post WW2 moral authority, but then nor have the Serbs, whose experience and suffering in WW2 has been virtually airbrushed from history, to their great cost in the 90's propaganda war. The losses suffered by the Soviet Union and the major role of the USSR in defeating Nazism did influence the West's acceptance of a Soviet 'defensive' block for 50 years.

Perhaps Israelis have benefitted the most from the moral fallout from WW2, insofar as they got a state, and a certain amount of sympathy. The fact that, as you point out, they are still threatened might suggest that long-term success was limited, but perhaps that threat remains because of those who successfully portray Israel as the most evil state in the world, or of constantly and cynically 'playing the holocaust card'. This portrayal of Israel as evil is precisely the reversal of moral authority that the article was talking about.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by GePap


The final problem is that the Holocaust only has relevance then in "the West",

Only if one considers Jews or other visible/invisible minorities to live solely in the West.

Jews for example have lived in China and Africa and India for quite some time, and in the Americas since the expulsion from Spain.

The Holocaust is relevant as an example of the way a minority in a country is progressively targeted, with all the resources of a modern industrial 20th Century state, so that incrementally, civil rights which are taken for granted to other inhabitants of the state and are common elsewhere, are lost by that minority.

After that, a comprehensive programme of propaganda informs people that this minority, which is no longer even seen as being of the same nationality as the other inhabitants of the country who are the 'real' citizens, is not just responsible for spreading diseases, but is actually a disease in and of themselves.

Any further programme of abuse is therefore justified on spurious grounds of 'public health' or necessity, or possible unspecified injury to the state. Eventually expulsion or coerced emigration having reduced numbers, eradication of the remainder 'logically' follows.

The language used against gay men and lesbians in the 1980s and 1990s was certainly reminiscent of the Nazi period and the general anti-semitic diatribes in Europe of the period between WWI and WWII.

I recall particularly a Conservative local councillor in the Midlands who suggested that gas chambers would be a good place for us.

[MOBIUS]

I've always found it to totally illustrate the point of the overbearing nature of 'Jewish/Israeli' interests that when even the slightest criticism is directed at them, the term 'antisemite/anti-semite' is aggressively used like some blunt object to shut up those who dare criticise them about anything... The fact that a term that should also refer to arabs has been co-opted by radical Jews to solely mean an attack on Jews is merely a form of ironic proof that this word is so hideous misused as much as it is overused...

Obviously we should use the manner in which some members of the Jewish faith have taken over the logical and true meaning of this word, as a metaphor for the way they have so successfully taken away control from the arabs of the land they call 'Greater Israel' - surely another thing which was supposed to be available to both peoples...

So to me the only idiots round here are those that insist on using this stolen term of 'antisemitism' created by a people who are hell-bent on also stealing the land from its true owners, the semites as a whole...

[MOBIUS]

BTW, here's one...

Anti-Semitic forces out to get Levy

Just because he happens to be Jewish, now it seems it is some kind of 'anti-semitic' attack, and absolutely nothing to do with the fact that be might be guilty of peddling peerages for cash - no it's all been made up, this is all an attack on a JEW!

Interesting to see that all the usual pro-Israel apologists here in the UK are coming out of the woodwork to issue this attack...

Maybe that's why a number of British Jews felt they had to launch their own organisation to distance themselves from the 'official' Jewish line here in the UK: Independent Jewish Voices

Check them out, they should be commended for their courage in the face of vitriolic attacks by pro-Israel members, as speaking out for the silent majority of the Jewish community here in the UK...