PDA

View Full Version : The "new" European anti-Semitism


labmonkey
01-11-2004, 12:12 AM
From NPR, a recent EU poll found that nearly 60% of Europeans percieve Israel as the greatest threat to world peace and stability. I would most certainly have guessed the US, Korea, or China. So how real is the "new" European anti-Semitism? There are sporadic reports of violence,some from The Gaurdian, here. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,11981,1092466,00.html)

However, is there any demonstrable evidence that these represent a genuine increase in anti-Semitism amongst the general Euro population? Or does it just represent business as usual from the fringe that has always existed, only now under closer scrutiny? Even if the poll results are correct, is this necessarily anti-Semitism or are Europeans with genuine concerns about world security being unfairly painted with the label for past offenses?



*note*please don't tell me how anti-Semitic Americans are, this thread is in regard to Europe, the US need not be the yardstick for all discussions, thanks

Eva Luna
01-11-2004, 12:35 AM
Why, oh why does criticism of Israel's behavior as a nation have anything whatsoever to do with anti-Semitism? Plenty of Jews crriticise Israel's behavior; does that make anyone who disagrees with Israel an anti-Semite?

Attacks on individual Jews are, of course, another story. Or they may be, if motivated by the victim's real or perceived Jewishness.

Duck Duck Goose
01-11-2004, 12:35 AM
Er, one can believe that Israel is a problem child without necessarily being "anti-Semitic", the same way one can believe that Islamic Fundamentalists are a problem without necessarily being "anti-Moslem".

Or that Mike Tyson is a problem child, without necessarily being "anti-black".

I Love Me, Vol. I
01-11-2004, 12:44 AM
I am so sick and tired of people (not necessarily the OP) who automatically consider anti-israel policy the same thing as anti-semitism. that is so beat-- give it up please.

labmonkey
01-11-2004, 01:04 AM
Originally posted by Eva Luna
Why, oh why does criticism of Israel's behavior as a nation have anything whatsoever to do with anti-Semitism?

I never asserted it does. Israel's policies can be criticized in the same manner as any other nation's. I am asking if the mistrust/antipathy towards Israel has become so pervasive and fervent in European society as to spill over into an upsurge in violence against jewish targets. Or, is this coincidental and completely unrelated? Another possibilty I raised is that there has been no reemergence, merely more attention. So because I did not immediately assume complete innocent concern on the part of Europeans, I am assumed Israel's sycophant?

sleeping
01-11-2004, 01:16 AM
Is disagreeing with Israel's policy necessarily a sign of anti-Semitism? Of course not. But the point is this:


But it is the "new" anti-semitism that most disturbs some Jewish leaders because they say it emanates from influential groups such as academics, politicians and the media and is dressed up as criticism of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land.


[emphasis mine]

London_Calling
01-11-2004, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by labmonkey
From NPR, a recent EU poll found that nearly 60% of Europeans percieve Israel as the greatest threat to world peace and stability. I would most certainly have guessed the US, Korea, or China.

I'd certainly agree on the US. But does that make me "anti-Christian" or "anti-Capitalist" or "anti-Whitey", maybe anti-democratic ?

Maybe it would help if you explained what you meant by "Anti-Semitic" because, in this modern much spun era, the phrase seems to have a high emotive content and . . I'm not entirely sure what else any more ?

Isn't it just a devalued, crying-wolf-too-often, political cliché and substitute term for 'straw man' - please explain ?

DSeid
01-11-2004, 01:45 AM
I know that there is a thread on this somewhere but I'm too lazy to link it. The poll, I think, was just a bad poll. Easy to place the MidEast as a more dangerous situation to the rest of the world than North Korea or China, and Israel as a single country that could be a trigger of a conflagration (if attacked or if it felt an attack was imminent). It isn't even a judgement as to right or wrong; there was no checkbox for Islamic fundamentalist extremism.

The "new" antisemitism isn't so new. It is just recycled. The Old European crap (eg "The Protocols" and other hateful bile) has just been passed into Arab hands and back to Europe via poor Arab immigrants. Sure some Israel bashing is Jew hating with a thin veneer, and some is condesencion by intellectuals who inaccurately percieve the Arab world as some sort of noble savages to be protected from Western colonialism as personified by Israel, and some is arguably well deserved. But Europe is respectful of traditions, and the tradition of antisemitism has a long history there; it would be very naive to think it ever went away just because it wasn't fashionable to express it for a while.

labmonkey
01-11-2004, 01:57 AM
Originally posted by London_Calling
Maybe it would help if you explained what you meant by "Anti-Semitic" ...

Isn't it just a devalued, crying-wolf-too-often, political clich$B!&(Band substitute term for 'straw man' - please explain ?


Ugh, did I anywhere state, that disagreeing with Israeli policy in anyway constitutes anti-semitism? Sure, I'll explain it for you, hostility, violence, intimidation, and hatred toward people or institutions which are jewish, belief in the worldwide jewish cabal, you know, that type of thing. I suppose we'll have to throw out all the other oft-tossed around, worn thin, cliched antis as well then, sexism, racism, homophobia, oh yeah, almost forgot one close to your own heart, hatred of the Great Satan...aren't these just further examples of overused, devalued "strawmen," too? Explained?:) Now could you throw me a bone and address the OP?

adaher
01-11-2004, 02:04 AM
Anti-semetic incidents are on the rise in Europe, so either the fringe is growing, or it's just busier.

As for criticism of Israel, it CAN be anti-semetic. Some anti-Israel rhetoric has anti-semetic undertones, just as some criticism of say, affirmative action has racist undertones.

For example, all the people who believe in the myriad Jewish conspiracy theories, such as Jews control the media and governments of the world. That's pretty anti-semetic. If you think Israel is the worst nation in the world, that's pretty anti-semetic. What else is one to think, when Israel's neighbors are all far greater human rights abusers, yet someone singles out Israel?

That being said, I think the 60% of Europeans considering ISrael the greatest threat is just the European sickness of blaming the victim. If someone's house is invaded and you shoot the invader, you are considered the aggressor in Europe. Apparently that attitude of criminals as victims and victims as aggressors extends to thinking in foreign affairs over there.

Eva Luna
01-11-2004, 02:12 AM
labmonkey, maybe the reason you feel some of us are misunderstanding your OP is that you are lumping together 2 issues: Israel as a threat to world stability (and does this mean anything taking place in Israel, or does this mean the behavior of the Israeli government? Your phrasing isn't clear to me), and attacks against Jews in Europe.

If you're trying to make a case that these items are related, I think some further development of your argument is in order. How was the darn poll worded, for starters? I can't even figure out what question was being asked, so it's awfully difficult to evaluate the responses in context, much less relate them to a bigger picture.

ruadh
01-11-2004, 05:38 AM
Originally posted by adaher
Anti-semetic incidents are on the rise in Europe

Cites are your friend.

London_Calling
01-11-2004, 05:52 AM
From NPR, a recent EU poll found that nearly 60% of Europeans percieve Israel as the greatest threat to world peace and stability. I would most certainly have guessed the US, Korea, or China. So how real is the "new" European anti-Semitism?

It's not. Except in so far it serves the purpose of the Sharon administration (as linking Saadam with, say, 9/11 also did for the Bush administration). From your cite:


Many on the Israeli left are sceptical.

"We should bear in mind that during the time of the peace process, when Rabin and Peres were leading, Israel was the favourite of the west," said Yaron Ezrahi, an Israeli political scientist.

"There was so much support from Europe and its public. Why was anti-semitism so limited during the time Rabin and Peres led the peace process and gave the world the message that Israel was prepared to abandon the occupied territories?

"Sharon has a long record of calling Israeli critics of his policies traitors, and foreign critics anti-semites. The left is concerned that Sharon's policies are endangering Israel's future by fuelling virulent and violent anti-semitism."

Noone Special
01-11-2004, 06:00 AM
London_Calling, while I agree with most of what you have to say above, remember - some paranoids do have enemies...

No cite, but it seems to me that whenever Anti-Israel sentiment abounds (and I won't debate right now whether it's with good, or any, reason - that isn't the point), the "classic" Anti-semites tend to crawl out of the wood-work and join the bandwagon. Maybe because it is now un-PC to be openly Anti-Jewish.

You might say that - in your mind - these are bad apples ruining your good cause. Like I said, I won't even debate that point right now. But please do acknowledge that this unfortunately-less-than-fringe element of "classis anti-semites" does exist and is riding the Anti-Israeli bandwagon. Separate them out of your camp, and I will find actually debating the (often valid!) points you make to be much easier

Dani

adaher
01-11-2004, 06:34 AM
http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/05/europe0510.htm

Cite for increase in anti-semetic incidents.

ruadh
01-11-2004, 06:48 AM
Cheers, adaher.

I think it would be important to find out who is behind these attacks. Is it mostly the usual (neo-nazi skinhead) subjects, or others?

ruadh
01-11-2004, 06:50 AM
"subjects" = "suspects" :smack:

adaher
01-11-2004, 07:11 AM
The EU did a report on that just recently and determined it was a combination of the usual suspects right wing groups, left wing groups, and Muslim youths.

Rune
01-11-2004, 07:16 AM
Originally posted by ruadh
Cheers, adaher.

I think it would be important to find out who is behind these attacks. Is it mostly the usual (neo-nazi skinhead) subjects, or others? Nazism as a viable ideology is a farce in Europe. Its followers, that consist mainly of mental institution getaways, could barely fill an average sized Munich beer-hall, let alone muster any kind of political clout to do anything. But it is as always an easy scapegoat for all kind of unpleasant facts and occurrences as well as a convenient scarecrow and political branding to marginalize unwanted political opinions.

Recently there was an EU report that showed a marked increase of anti-Semitic attack. And that the perpetrators to a very high degree were first or second generation middle eastern immigrants. Actually the report itself was never released, but some of it was leaked. The report was withheld ostensible because some thought it of low quality. Perhaps so, but since it wasn’t released we’ll never know, and are left to speculate.

Looking for cites…

adaher
01-11-2004, 07:16 AM
From the EU report:

In the public domain in Spain, France, Italy and Sweden, sections of the political left and Arab-Muslim groups unified to stage pro-Palestinian demonstrations. While the right to demonstrate is of course a civil right, and these demonstrations are not intrinsically anti-Semitic, at some of these anti-Semitic slogans could be heard and placards seen; and some demonstrations resulted in attacks upon Jews or Jewish institutions. In the Netherlands pro-Palestine demonstrators of Moroccan origin used anti-Semitic symbols and slogans. In Finland however, pro-Palestinian demonstrations passed without any anti-Semitic incidents. In Germany, and less so in Austria, public political discourse was dominated by a debate on the link between Israeli policy in the Middle East conflict and anti-Semitism, a debate in which the cultural and political elite were involved. In Germany and the United Kingdom the critical reporting of the media was also a topic for controversy. In other countries such as Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Finland there was no such heated public discussion on the theme of criticism of Israel/anti-Semitism (see country reports).

Here's the whole report if you have a lot of time:

http://emperors-clothes.com/eu.rtf

Desmostylus
01-11-2004, 07:22 AM
From adaher's link:The recent increase in anti-Semitic attacks has unfolded in the wake of the Middle East crisis. They follow a general rise in racist and xenophobic violence in Western Europe, particularly against Arabs and certain ethnic and religious minorities, which spiked sharply in the aftermath of the 11 September attacks in the United States.

In France, hostility toward Jews has led to a particularly serious wave of attacks. The French police recorded 395 anti-Semitic incidents between 29 March and 17 April, 63 percent of which involved anti-Semitic graffiti.Doesn't sound like Jews are being singled out, more like a general escalation in tensions. And if the majority of a "serious wave of attacks" consists of graffiti, it really does sound like wolf crying.

Rune
01-11-2004, 07:40 AM
Cites:
EU Body Shelves Report on Anti-Semitism (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=199410&attrib_id=7587)
(Know nothing of the site beyond what’s on this page.)

(From same site:
EU suspends anti-Semitism seminar (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=202698&attrib_id=7587)
Europe's Moral Treachery Over Anti-Semitism (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=202732&attrib_id=7587) )

Also Financial Times:
EU racism group shelves anti-Semitism study By Bertrand Benoit in Berlin (http://search.ft.com/search/article.html?id=031122001339&query=muslims&vsc_appId=totalSearch&state=Form)

Requires registration (15-days free)

“The European Union's racism watchdog has shelved a report on anti-Semitism in Europe because the study concluded Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups were behind many of the incidents in the period covered.“

- Rune

adaher
01-11-2004, 07:44 AM
Doesn't sound like Jews are being singled out, more like a general escalation in tensions. And if the majority of a "serious wave of attacks" consists of graffiti, it really does sound like wolf crying.

True, but actual attacks are also up, and my general point is that anti-Semetism is rearing its ugly head in Europe for the 1553rd time.

London_Calling
01-11-2004, 07:58 AM
The irony, of course, is that it's Sharon who's keen to blur the line between opposition to the policies of his administration and 'Anti-Semitism' - and it's these knucklehead with their spray cans who believe him!

It's like tea-time with Alice and the Mad Hatter.

mipsman
01-11-2004, 09:02 AM
Could the reason be that Israel does not buy politicians in Europe with the same enthusiam that they buy them in the US?

sirtonyh
01-11-2004, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by labmonkey
From NPR, a recent EU poll found that nearly 60% of Europeans percieve Israel as the greatest threat to world peace and stability. I would most certainly have guessed the US, Korea, or China. So how real is the "new" European anti-Semitism?


I'm a little confused by the structure of this question. Are you suggesting the the perception of Israel as the greatest threat to world peace is anti-semetic?

If you are just asking how real the "new" European anti-semetism is then I don't understand the logic in referring to this poll but will try to answer anyway. I don't really see or hear about a new type of anti-semetism or even a noticable increase. There have always been anti-semites in Europe, just as everywhere else in the world, but I don't really see or hear of them gaining ground.

I think a lot of what comes out in that poll is that many Europeans can understand the point of view of the Palestinians and see Israel as equally to blame for the lack of progress on peace.

laigle
01-11-2004, 10:50 AM
As I recall the poll actually asked people to list nations they felt were a threat to world peace, not in any particular ranking. A guy who puts Israel as 20th on his list gets the same weighting as a guy who puts it first. So there was no result showing Israel was seen as the biggest threat, just that they were cited the most consistently. No doubt due to the fact that aside from anti-semites and radicals, quite a few people see Israel as a destabilizing force in some capacity.

Aldebaran
01-11-2004, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by DSeid
The "new" antisemitism isn't so new. It is just recycled. The Old European crap (eg "The Protocols" and other hateful bile) has just been passed into Arab hands and back to Europe via poor Arab immigrants.

Note that first of all those "Arab immigrants" aren't all "poor" and those who eventually participate in a demonstration come from different levels of society.
Next: Those who participate in Pro-Palestinian demonstrations or other actions do this because of their frustration and anger with Israeli policies and because and in addition because of the same sentiments towards the long term hypocrisy of the USA regarding the Israeli policies whiwh didn't became any better with the US invasion of Iraq.
And those demonstrations aren't only populated by "Arabs" or "ME immigrants". Lots of people in EU countries share these sentiments and lots of them participate in such demonstrations.

All of this has very little to do with direct "anti semitism". But Zionists have a long record in abusing the term. Their "statements make me always reflect on the victims of the Holocaust and how they must turn themselves in their graves whenever their suffering is so scandalously abused by Zionists. Zionists are extremely good in playing the victim while without any shame using Nazi tactics to oppress and murder themselves.

I don't see any "uprising" of "anti semitism" at all.
I see an uprising of anti Israel/anti US sentiments that isn't limited to "Arabs" and is gaining more and more general support. Both in the EU and outside.

Of course this situation adds to the anti-Jew sentiment of some people who were already Jew haters. But to lump such tiny minority in societies together wit all those who protest against Israel is a cheap and easy policy that serves the goals of Sharon and which he of course tries to exploit.
He can do that rather easily with the US. But I'm afraid Europe is a bit too close on the issue to buy this cheap propaganda.

some is condesencion by intellectuals who inaccurately percieve the Arab world as some sort of noble savages to be protected from Western colonialism as personified by Israel, and some is arguably well deserved.

Sorry? Where do you get this idea?
I never heard anyone discussing "the noble Arab savages"... in need to be "protected from Western colonialism" and I never heard this being reported as "personified by Israel".
Can you try to be even a bit more insulting to both my roots and my intellect? Thank you.

But Europe is respectful of traditions, and the tradition of antisemitism has a long history there; it would be very naive to think it ever went away just because it wasn't fashionable to express it for a while.

That doesn't mean that every single protest against Israel is a demonstration of anti semitism. It has nothing to do with anti semitism. It has to do with Israel and how it can continue to operate under the hypocritical US umbrella.

As I said above: Of course this situation has its influence on the little groups of Jew haters that have always existed. Yet it doesn't mean that those group by some miracle show a spectacular growt.

Salaam. A

labmonkey
01-11-2004, 11:08 AM
Ok, clarification, then, but I think it's all in OP:

1)I was asking if the charges of "new" anti-semitism which werebeing raised by groups like the ADL (http://www.adl.org/presrele/Islme_62/4040_62.asp) are real or baseless.

2)If in fact true, is there convincing evidence to back this up, there seems to be some, but watchdog organizations do tend to exagerate. However, why was a study commisioned then not released but leaked?(See the NPR report)

3)I can't find a good link to the damned poll, but the NPR disscussion is on their webpage, (Realplayer or Mediaplayer)here. (http://www.adl.org/presrele/Islme_62/4040_62.asp)

4)Could anti-Israeli sentiment by so fervent among the general population Europe that it becomes a place for Jew-baiters to feel comfortable again.

London Calling I assume you find it baseless(point#1), I see you also managed to weasel in a jab at King George(you are not hurting my feelings, trust me ) on topic please :) Apparently Chirac thought European anti-Semitism in France real enough;emergency cabinet meeting (http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/transcripts/2003/nov/031117.spicer.html). Or was this merely a dog and pony show for Sharon's benefit? This hardly seems correct, since it is common knowledge that only the US is at Israels beck and call, whilst the brave and stalwhart Europeans will stand up to the Jewish bullies.

One last thing, I've seen it stated here that all the events of violence have been tied to Muslim youth, but the perpetrators obvioulsly feel comfortable enough acting out. It could be argued that the pro-palestinian/anti-Israel slant of the far lefties in postitions of power and influence make this behavior more acceptable, or at least less distasteful to the average European.

Aldebaran
01-11-2004, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by labmonkey
4)Could anti-Israeli sentiment by so fervent among the general population Europe that it becomes a place for Jew-baiters to feel comfortable again.

Not in my view which is based in my experience.


One last thing, I've seen it stated here that all the events of violence have been tied to Muslim youth, but the perpetrators obvioulsly feel comfortable enough acting out. It could be argued that the pro-palestinian/anti-Israel slant of the far lefties in postitions of power and influence make this behavior more acceptable, or at least less distasteful to the average European.

I don't think it is correct to relate "very violence" to young Muslims only.
But apart from this, and to answer you question:
No, this behaviour is not "more acceptable" at all and not "less distastefull" at all. Not to the average EU'er and not to the average Muslim/EU'er. People in the EU tend to reason on a normal level.

Salaam. A

Wesley Clark
01-11-2004, 11:48 AM
i believe israel is the greatest threat to stability but i dont completely blame Israel for it. Theres a difference between agknowledging that one country is a pivot for alot of instability and laying all blame on that country and automatically siding with their enemies.

labmonkey
01-11-2004, 12:35 PM
Aldebaran, a cogent and reasoned response to my points, *golf clap*. I have never been to the EU so I wouldn't pretend to know the average European's stance on the subject, so for me at least, anecdotal evidence is somewhat helpful.

DSeid
01-11-2004, 12:36 PM
Alde,

You misunderstand or misinterpret.

Did I say all? Nope, no how no way. But there are a fair number of poor Arab immigrants in Europe, who are subjected to fair amount of discrimination, and whose members include those who are the instigators of much of what has been labelled as "the new antisemitism" with antisemitic bile that had originated in Europe.

Did I insult your roots or intellect? Not in this thread anyway. I'll save insulting your intellect for one of the many Pit threads devoted to that purpose! ;) No. And I think you know from other threads that I respect your roots. But Israel has been portrayed the personification of Western colonialism by segments of Western "intellectual" society. And many of those same people will not deign to look at, or critique, oppression by Arabs upon Arabs, and discount Arab violence because (IMHO) they harbor racist perceptions of the Arab world that play into Rosseau's naive but still influential view of the "noble savage". I do not share those views. Violence and oppression are not inherently Arab nor Islamic, they are the result of power structures attempting to maintain themselves and human flaws shared by us all.

Aldebaran
01-11-2004, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by DSeid
You misunderstand or misinterpret.

Probably the first leads to the second :)

But there are a fair number of poor Arab immigrants in Europe, who are subjected to fair amount of discrimination, and whose members include those who are the instigators of much of what has been labelled as "the new antisemitism" with antisemitic bile that had originated in Europe.

Which is not a correct interpretation, but to explain it I would need an other thread.

Did I insult your roots or intellect? Not in this thread anyway. I'll save insulting your intellect for one of the many Pit threads devoted to that purpose! ;)

These pit things are amusing, no? I almost come to feel sorry about it that these members abandoned that hobby.

And I think you know from other threads that I respect your roots.

Yes... I did make my reply in small font

But Israel has been portrayed the personification of Western colonialism by segments of Western "intellectual" society. And many of those same people will not deign to look at, or critique, oppression by Arabs upon Arabs, and discount Arab violence because (IMHO) they harbor racist perceptions of the Arab world that play into Rosseau's naive but still influential view of the "noble savage"

Well, consider underscribed who dwells on a rather unavoidable base among the whole scala of what can be refered to as "intellectuals" - be it at home or in Belgium or elswhere - as not informed about these "intellectuals" you refer to.
(Could be because I can't bring myself to pay attention to that type of sleep provoking nonsense which tends to make me one extremely lazy guy).
What I can understand in such people's reasoning is their naivity about the "noble savage". Westerners still have no clue about the rules in our society and tend to romanticize what they don't understand.

About Israel the last word is not said, but I wouldn't compare the behaviour (of the governments) there with "Western colonisation". You must be very ignorant about that issue and about the whole question Palestine/Israel both, in order to be able to do that.


Salaam. A

The Flying Dutchman
01-11-2004, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by I Love Me, Vol. I
I am so sick and tired of people (not necessarily the OP) who automatically consider anti-israel policy the same thing as anti-semitism. that is so beat-- give it up please.

I do not disagree, but why oh why is so much attention paid to the plight of Palistinians at the hands of Israelis when there are other ethnic groups and peoples who have been and are being persecuted and even brutalized in many other regimes to a much greater extent throughout the world ? What makes Israel so special? A special concern for Palistinians ?

edwino
01-11-2004, 04:51 PM
A couple of points. There was a reasonable (but kind of biased) cover article about "The New Anti-Semitism" by Mort Zuckerman in US News from November. It is not freely availible online, but some of his other essays are. Here is one in a similar vein:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/mort/zuckerman091101.asp

His criticism, which I think is reasonable, is that the UN, the European Left and the European press focuses on Israel's missteps more than on any others. That the EU, the Arab World, and the UN, go together in vilifying Israel more than it deserves in comparison to other nations of this world. This he equates with anti-Semitism. I don't know if I agree that this is all of it. Israel is a Western Democracy of an EU-style, and I think there is some transferance here: the EU nations want Israel to behave like an ideal Western Democracy. Needless to say, when EU countries have been placed in similar situations, they have handled it in a similar fasion to Israel. But criticizing Israel simply for being Israel can only, at heart, be anti-Semitic. Martin Luther King said as much 40 years ago; nothing has changed since then.

There are numerous examples of this: the UN Durban Conference on Racism and other actions by the Libya-headed UN Human Rights Commission, Israel barred from sitting on most major committees in the UN, the Guardian (UK) published an editorial saying that "Israel has no right to exist", the French Ambassador to Britain calling Israel a "shitty little country" that threatens world peace, ad nauseum. Even if you dispute a few of these, there are hundreds of others that can be listed. The gross picture which emerges is of a systematic overreactive bias against Israel.

I don't like Sharon. I don't like his policies (except that he is unilaterally withdrawing from the territories, an action which I think should have been taken 3 years ago at least). I don't think that military actions in the territories has accomplished as much as it has damaged. But having a poor leader is no excuse to libel the state, to violently target its civilians, or to publicly question the right of the state to exist.

sleeping
01-11-2004, 05:57 PM
Cites:

San Francisco Chronicle Examines European Anti-Semitism (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=37&x_article=603).

James Goldsborough Blames Israel for Anti-Semitism (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=37&x_article=602).

Compared to other nations, and the UN itself, Israel has been restrained (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=2&x_article=189)

EU pressed on anti-Semitism study (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3240482.stm)

The Controversial Anti-Semitism Report (http://www.crif.org/index.php?menu=5&dossier=33&PHPSESSID=355dd37ce0c02983e2cc4670bf79da8a)

UselessGit
01-11-2004, 08:11 PM
Like many Europeans I'm getting pretty tired of being called an anti-semite for not liking Israel's (read Sharon's) behaviour. I'm afraid that I don't have a cite at the moment but I seem to remember a french doper saying that almost all the "anti-semitic" crimes in France were in fact committed by young arab immigrants. The brackets are because I believe Arabs are semites too, no?

Many Israelis, as soon as the results of this pretty dubious poll came out, cried "Anti-Semitism" and pointed and accusatory finger at us, which to me is about as logical as Charles Taylot blaming the KKK for his predicament. Everyone I know is on the same side, as far as I know, and we don't hate Semites, Jews or Israelis. We just don't approve of her methods these days.

I could say more, but Aldebaran has said it all better than I can.

adaher
01-12-2004, 07:17 AM
Could the reason be that Israel does not buy politicians in Europe with the same enthusiam that they buy them in the US?

This is the kind of slur that crosses the line.

Eolbo
01-12-2004, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by UselessGit
Like many Europeans I'm getting pretty tired of being called an anti-semite for not liking Israel's (read Sharon's) behaviour. I'm afraid that I don't have a cite at the moment but I seem to remember a french doper saying that almost all the "anti-semitic" crimes in France were in fact committed by young arab immigrants.

This might be the thread you are remembering

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=220936

I thought this was an interesting item:

French Jews reject Cannes boycott (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1988124.stm)

That and similar items are inclining me to the view that the supposed new wave of anti-semitism by the French in particular is largely concocted from American histrionics and anti-European hate-mongering.

adaher
01-12-2004, 07:30 AM
Which the EU is obviously part of. I didn't know the EU was trying to make Europe look bad.

Desmostylus
01-12-2004, 07:35 AM
What are you talking about adaher? What is the EU so obviously part of? Europe? France? Israel? America? The boycott?

furt
01-12-2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by UselessGit
I could say more, but Aldebaran has said it all better than I can. Now there's a sig if ever I saw one ....

DSeid
01-12-2004, 07:57 AM
Eolbo,

Do you consider those who are Arab in France as not French? I remind you of this in that thread for some data that anti-semitic violence really is on the rise:
A source. Yes. It is from an Israeli University. But the facts are still the facts.

http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/...2-3/general.htm


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The year 2002 and the beginning of 2003 witnessed an alarmingly significant increase in the number of violent antisemitic acts and in other forms of antisemitic activity. A total of 311 serious incidents were recorded worldwide in 2002, 56 major attacks (i.e., attacks using violent means) and 255 major violent incidents (attacks without the use of a weapon), whereas in 2001 there were 228 violent incidents, 50 major attacks and 178 violent incidents. The 2002 figure even slightly surpassed the year 1994 which marked a peak in antisemitic activity in the 1990s.
<snip>
Most antisemitic violence in 2002 took place in western Europe, with 31 major attacks (out of the 56 recorded worldwide), and no fewer than 147 major violent incidents (out of 255 worldwide). Most of the major attacks in western Europe took place in Belgium and France (25 out of 31), while major violent incidents amounted to 96 cases in these two countries and the UK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The facts are straightforward:

There is an increase in violent acts targetting Jews especially in France and Belgium, mainly committed by disenfranchised poor Arab youth, who are exposed to things like documentaries presenting "The Protocols" as fact in Arab language media.

There is a long history of antisemitism in Europe from both the Right and the Left with often mutually conflicting charges; since WWII it has been very unfashionable to say those thoughts out loud. This does not mean they have become less popularly held view.

Israel is oft and incommensurately vilified in the European media.

Attacks on Israel are used by some as cover for antisemitic attacks. Attacking Israel is socially acceptable.

None of which means that that poll proves that "Europe is antisemitic" or even that vilfying Israel (as opposed to criticizing her) is an antisemitic act. Interpretation is interpretation. To me the last thousand or so years just doesn't disappear, it just gets displaced a little until it finds a way to be expressed.

UselessGit
01-12-2004, 08:07 AM
Give Aldebaran a break, furt, he does make many very good points. I'll have to check out those Pit threads on the guy , though...

Aldebaran
01-12-2004, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by DSeid
There is an increase in violent acts targetting Jews especially in France and Belgium, mainly committed by disenfranchised poor Arab youth, who are exposed to things like documentaries presenting "The Protocols" as fact in Arab language media.

Not in Belgium that I am aware of.
There were however some racial linked incidents but much more targetting Muslims, like the murder on a Moroccan family by a lunatical racist neighbour. Who is Belgian. And like the murder on a young Imam by a mentally disturbed neighbour. Who is also Belgian and only crazy, not racist.

There were a few incidents I know off and with rather large involvement of a new organisation " AEL" ( so called " Arabic European Liga") who gets far too much attention in the press and trives on that, but has no support among the general Muslim public in Belgium. At one of those occasions some of those demonstrators tried then to enter the Jewish quarter in Antwerp. But they didn't succeed because of course the police was prepared for the possibility of such an escalation.

There is a long history of antisemitism in Europe from both the Right and the Left with often mutually conflicting charges; since WWII it has been very unfashionable to say those thoughts out loud. This does not mean they have become less popularly held view.

There is no such popularity for antisemitsm in Europe that I am or was ever aware off in the 31 years that I walk around on this globe. From which quite a lot of time was spend in Europe. Neo- nazi's and related are marginal groups.

Israel is oft and incommensurately vilified in the European media.

Not at all. Istrael is pictured in its policies and actions like they are. Palestinian actions and policies are brought like they are. Both sides of the story are brought and given equal weight and attention. Which is how an independent and honest press coverage should be. This is indeed quite different then what one can see in US media.

But was is indeed visible the last months is that whenever Israeli soldiers kill a Palestinian or whenever the army bombs a house of a car, it is named "killed" a child or a Palestinion civilian and "assassination" of the people in that house or car. Which is only the truth.
Of course that doesn't land well in Israel and among the Israel defenders. It is a bit painful to see you called for what you actually do while you are used since so many decades to see that only done when the opposite side kills or murders, and your actions only vaguely described.

Attacks on Israel are used by some as cover for antisemitic attacks. Attacking Israel is socially acceptable.

Not in the least it is. I'm sorry, but this is rubbish.

None of which means that that poll proves that "Europe is antisemitic" or even that vilfying Israel (as opposed to criticizing her) is an antisemitic act. Interpretation is interpretation. To me the last thousand or so years just doesn't disappear, it just gets displaced a little until it finds a way to be expressed.

Sorry, but I don't believe in so called "polls" as I don't believe in "statistics" to be able to give a reliable because completely correct and independent report on whatever. Not to speak about the fact that you need to make it a separate issue in your study curriculum if you ever want to be able to interpret "statistics". Otherwise the door to misinterpretation is already open before you touch it.

And what have "the last thousands of years" to do with this?
Does this means to say that Europe was overall anti-semitic "the last thousands of years"? Which parts of Europe do you refer to then?

Salaam. A

Aldebaran
01-12-2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by UselessGit
Give Aldebaran a break, furt, he does make many very good points. I'll have to check out those Pit threads on the guy , though...

I think you should do that. Prepare for a laugh but also prepare for some vulgar language and the greatest sillyness one can imagine to take place on a message board with a standard and quality like this one. Have fun :)

Salaam. A

Eolbo
01-12-2004, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by DSeid
Eolbo,

Do you consider those who are Arab in France as not French?


Well to be honest, no I dont or perhaps to put it more accurately French Arabs arent who come to mind when I hear of the perfidious French, and I'm pretty sure that saying the "French" or the "Europeans" are anti-semitic is too broadbrush to have much meaning.

It seems to me on my reading that anti-semitic violence in Europe is almost exclusively perpetrated by young muslims in an extension of the broader Israeli-Arab conflict rather then a genuine upswell in general European anti-semitism. If you were to say that there is a deepening of anti-semitism amongst muslims I'd agree with you but I really havent seen any evidence that supports the notion of such a wave of hostility amongst the wider European community. This issue seems to get muddied into the water with questions of attitudes to Israel which are a different matter.

I am also curious as to why the alarmism seems to be coming from American Jewish organisations rather then from the French Jewish community who as the victims would presumably have the most cause to complain. Furthermore in a number of places such as my BBC cite and my 'Nation' cite from the earlier thread I have seen French Jews explictily reject the histrionic fearmongering put forth from the US and ask that American Jews mind their own business. And histrionic is the appropriate adjective imo for the comparison made by the American Jewish Congress of modern France with Vichy France which is not only historically ignorant but outright insulting. The cynic in me suspects a gigantic red herring and smear campaign.

Have you seen any more detailed statistics for violent incidents or a longer time series? Its difficult to draw any conclusion from the two years you quoted which suggest overall incidents (most of which are graffiti) are up but that major violent incidents are pretty much unchanged. What are the numbers of dead and wounded from attacks? How does it compare with attacks on muslims in Europe or blacks in the US? In short what is the context.

Originally posted by DSeid

Israel is oft and incommensurately vilified in the European media.

Attacks on Israel are used by some as cover for antisemitic attacks. Attacking Israel is socially acceptable.


Perhaps. Another way of looking at it though is that we have the world and its opinion of the Israeli-Arab conflict. And then isolated off to one side like lepers we have Israel which does, and the US which doesnt quite understand the degree of isolation from the majority of mankind that it holds on the issue. Its possible that the twin lepers are correct. And perhaps not.

edwino
01-12-2004, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by Eolbo
Well to be honest, no I dont or perhaps to put it more accurately French Arabs arent who come to mind when I hear of the perfidious French, and I'm pretty sure that saying the "French" or the "Europeans" are anti-semitic is too broadbrush to have much meaning. This is the reason we are talking about "new" anti-Semitism. The Arab population in Europe is growing in leaps and bounds. This is a new demographic to Europe, but what a lot of Jews are worried about is that this opinion shift will be permanent. Arabs outnumber Jews in Europe; many of them are new immigrants; the Holocaust ended 60 years ago. The popular view now can be that Israel is a racist apartheid state who is committing genocide on a minority population. None of these things are true. There are a lot of states in which the situation is much worse than in Israel. A lot of what Israel does is perfectly reasonable taken the violence they experience. But Israel gets criticized for being Israel.

Is this regular Jacques Europe's fault? No, and nobody is blaming him. But there is a "new" Europe here that a lot of people are concerned about. Most Muslim immigrants are people just like anybody else -- hard workers trying to make a new life for themselves. Some, though, carry some patently false anti-Semitic views which are prevalent in their home countries and the Arab press: Protocols of the Elders of Zion, blood libels, etc. Since there is a population of people with these views, they sometimes carry into the European press.

A good example of this would be the Jenin raid. Here was, in retrospect, a perfectly legitimate raid on legitimate targets performed in a fashion to limit civilian casualties. The immediate reporting was unclear; horrific war crimes accusations were made and quickly splashed over every front page. Europe was especially guilty of this: every ludicrous utterance by a PA representative was given press without confirmation despite Israeli denials. Over 500 had been killed, Israelis used children as human shields, Israelis carted off mounds of bodies to mask the death toll. The ubiquitous condemnations and UN resolutions followed. A UN fact finding mission found that the Palestinian death toll was around 50 (exactly what the Israelis had estimated -- the Israelis lost 33), there was far less damage than claimed (10% of the area versus claimed nearly 100%), etc. The hundreds of innocents buried under rubble were revised down to one. Retractions, if they were published, were put in the back of the newspapers. To this day you can go to pro-Palestinian websites and read about the Jenin "massacre" or "holocaust" and atrocities of that day.

You may think that none of this is anti-Semitic. It isn't on the surface. But when it represents a trend, when it is ordinary and mundane to accuse Israel of these kind of actions without confirmation and then never offer retractions, then I start to complain. There is no legitimate reason to criticize Israel to this level while letting every other country in a similar situation off scot-free. There is no reason to spend so many resources on the plight of the Palestinian when worse situations in some parts of Europe, not to mention Africa and Asia, go completely without mention.

MC Master of Ceremonies
01-13-2004, 12:55 PM
edwino you must recognise your own bias tho', for example, if you cared to read the reports on the Jenin raid by AI, HRW or B'Tselem you'd see that not neraly enough was done to protect Palestinian civilians and Palestinian civilians WERE used as human shields by the IDF, as for the justifaction for the raid, it was a punitive raid carried out as the latest suicide bomber came from the town.

The Assesemnt that Israel is a racist or appartheid stae may seem unfair to you, but you must also recognise that it does not come out of thin air and that there is a lot of racism in Israel's policies (and I'm not saying I agree with the assemnt that Israel is a racist or appartehid state). One of the most active proponents I know of this view is a Jewish citizen of Israel who spent most of his childhood in Israel (at the moment he is studying for his PhD in Maths in the US).

Malthus
01-13-2004, 03:17 PM
Like many Europeans I'm getting pretty tired of being called an anti-semite for not liking Israel's (read Sharon's) behaviour. I'm afraid that I don't have a cite at the moment but I seem to remember a french doper saying that almost all the "anti-semitic" crimes in France were in fact committed by young arab immigrants. The brackets are because I believe Arabs are semites too, no?

Many Israelis, as soon as the results of this pretty dubious poll came out, cried "Anti-Semitism" and pointed and accusatory finger at us, which to me is about as logical as Charles Taylot blaming the KKK for his predicament. Everyone I know is on the same side, as far as I know, and we don't hate Semites, Jews or Israelis. We just don't approve of her methods these days.

I could say more, but Aldebaran has said it all better than I can.

This post pretty much sums up the difference between the reflexive viewpoints of Europeans and North Americans - as a generalization.

If people in Canada were attacking Jews, that would be a "Canadian" problem - irrespective of the ethnicity of the attackers. If Arabs in France are attacking Jews (and I have no idea if they are or not, I just assume that your facts are accurate), then it is not a "French" problem - the obvious inference being that people of Arabic background are not really "French", whether they are citizens or not.

It is little snippets like this that convinces me that race is still a big issue in Europe, and adds a gloss of legitimacy on accusations of anti-semitism (remembering, as is stated above, that 'both Jews and Arabs are semites', and so if Arabs are not "French", then presumably Jews aren't, either).

Rune
01-13-2004, 04:54 PM
I may be wrong but I think UselessGit merely brought the Arab ethnicity of the attackers to point out that anti-Semitism is a wrong term because both attacker and victim are Semitics. Why he felt a need to make this point I have no idea, since, even if correct, it does nothing to address the wrongdoings (call it Judeophobic then if you will). Neither do I think Jews are normally seen as another race in the way that perhaps Arab immigrants are seen, since they over the centuries have been so assimilated into the general public as to be today quite indistinguishable (unlike Arabs). Heck! Useless is just scared git-less because the Icelandic national prophetess (vølven) has just prophesised major tension in Israel for 2004 (as if this should be something new. She also prophesised that Arafat becomes gravely ill and will be replaced by a very compromise seeking person. We can hope.).

Of course it’s legitimate to be even severely critical of Israel without being anti-Semitic, and I do not believe the vast majority of those criticising Israel do so because of anti-Semitic views. However it’s also clear for me, that criticism of Israel has moved from the rational to the irrational; that the criticism is not proportional to her wrongdoings especially compared to that of other, less criticized, nations, and that certain elements of the left wing, wherefrom most of the political based critique originates, have crossed the line (as when Swedish demonstrators threatening stops people on the street and demand to know whether they’re Jewish. Or British journalist (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1094420,00.html) refuse to read letters from Jews. How about that for the SDMB? A little yellow star to mark our Jewism. I sadly have no Jewish genes, but as a disgraceful Jew-lover I’m of course very beautiful)

The “new” European (which I believe is shared equally by America and Canada) anti-Semitism is new in the sense that those guilty of hatred are not the same old crackpots, but new crackpots. It is somewhat interesting to note that most of what is of anti-Semitism in Europe has largely moved from whackoes on the extreme right wing to the left wing and certain Muslim groups. It’s even more interesting to note how the very same left wing is always the first to brand political opponents with accusations of Nazism. I wonder when they’ll get around to shine that highly developed critical light on their navel and expulse those disgusting elements from among themselves. As for the Muslim elements. I find it must disturbing that apparently the anti-Semitism is not lessened in second or third generation immigrants. On the contrary it’s often found that second generation immigrants are more radicalized than first. A result of catastrophic failed integration or too successful integration one may wonder.

I think the EU made a major screw up withholding that report. The public is not babies that should spoon-fed information. Release it and let people debate and decide for themselves if they find it trustworthy.

DSeid
01-13-2004, 09:03 PM
First off, "antisemitism" never referred to Arabs. It means and has always meant Jew-hating. No need to invent more words or change meanings.

Alde, you may not be aware of the antisemitic acts but they are there. Just because I don't see racism against Blacks in America (and I do not) does not mean that I do not know that it exists.

Also Alde, I will not overburden this board with a history of European antisemitism. Read "Constantine's Sword" or other texts if you want an education. Suffice it to say that Hitler merely brought industrial efficiency to already extant mindsets of more than a millenium. History doesn't just stop. It morphs.

MC, I have no issue with harsh criticism of Israeli policies. I readily acknowledge that some points are even valid. I have problems with things that are so unfair and one-sided that they seem as if they must be willfully ignorant of reality. The Far Right Jew-hater is indeed marginalized in the main; the Left side is more insidious and is hinted at by comments that imply that Arab violence against Jews is just an extension of the Arab-Israeli conflict and not really antisemitism....

edwino
01-13-2004, 11:56 PM
MC
I humbly submit that you missed the point of my post.

You may dispute some of my points about the Jenin raid -- yes I have bias as does everyone, and yes I will acknowledge that it was a brutal raid carried out in a dense area and some rules of war were shoved aside -- but the fact still remains that it has widely been reported as a massacre or a holocaust, when it was not. There were many lies reported -- call them misinformation, call it bad reporting. The point of my post was that these facts were reported mostly because it was an Israeli raid. A Russian raid on an urban concentration of Checnyan insurgents wouldn't have merited the international outcry of Jenin.

I like Malthus's post. There is a subtle European racism at foot here -- the militant French Arab's viewpoints are as French as Chirac's. Just because European antisemitism is of an Arab nature makes it no less antisemitism or no less European. That is why it is "new."

Those who have anti-Zionist views wish to have their viewpoints confirmed by the press. In the free market, they find press that will pander to their viewpoints, and thus reinforce them. There is a positive feedback of sorts here. The basis of this positive feedback doesn't lie in the old European antisemitism that has been around forever -- the Holocaust has largely IMHO made that unpalatable. The basis does lie in antisemitism, however, and it would serve Europe well to recognize it, because the outcome looks similar.

It is fine to criticize the occupation and wish for its end. But if you find yourself denying Israelis the simple rights we wish upon the rest of humanity -- the right to live in peace and security and the right to self-determine their government -- you have been caught in the cycle of the new European antisemitism.

Aldebaran
01-14-2004, 11:41 AM
DSeid,

I happen to be on a constant base in contact with Europe and with what "lives" there, even when I'm not there myself. I have relatives there from my mother's side and I am also in contact with EU muslims. And I think EU'ers posting here confirm my observations.

I asked you to give examples of "thousand years of anti-semitism" in Europe = to which nations or societies do you refer when making this claim.
(Everyone is informed about the Nazis. That is not what we are talking about.)

Salaam. A

RickJay
01-14-2004, 11:52 AM
DSeid,

I happen to be on a constant base in contact with Europe and with what "lives" there, even when I'm not there myself. I have relatives there from my mother's side and I am also in contact with EU muslims. And I think EU'ers posting here confirm my observations.

I asked you to give examples of "thousand years of anti-semitism" in Europe = to which nations or societies do you refer when making this claim.
(Everyone is informed about the Nazis. That is not what we are talking about.)
http://www.remember.org/History.root.classical.html

A primer for you in the history of Jew-hating.

Malthus
01-14-2004, 12:21 PM
I may be wrong but I think UselessGit merely brought the Arab ethnicity of the attackers to point out that anti-Semitism is a wrong term because both attacker and victim are Semitics. Why he felt a need to make this point I have no idea, since, even if correct, it does nothing to address the wrongdoings (call it Judeophobic then if you will). Neither do I think Jews are normally seen as another race in the way that perhaps Arab immigrants are seen, since they over the centuries have been so assimilated into the general public as to be today quite indistinguishable (unlike Arabs).

I agree with everything you wrote, with the exception of this. I got the impression the UselessGit brought up the Arab ethnicity of the attackers to make the point that it was absurd to blame the "French" for anti-Semitism. The old non-sequitur about "anti-Semitism" being the wrong term for Jew hatred (why this matters has never been explained to me, and anyway, it is of course quite wrong) was just an aside.

Certainly, Jews are quite assimilated and, reasoning logically, could assume that this assimilation would make a difference - that they would be considered "French" or "German", having deep family roots in those countries. Unfortunately, the history of the last century indicates that such assumptions should not be made lightly. The Jews of many parts of Europe (particularly, I might point out, Germany) were just as assimilated in 1939 as they are today, and yet that fact helped them not at all.

I am willing to believe that all this has changed, and that Europeans are radically different now than they were then on this question. I am also willing to believe that a centuries-old history of Jew hatred has been artificially marginalized and discredited by the exposure of the Holocaust, and that, given an issue on which Europeans can feel righteous about (thather than ashamed), it will come bubbling out of the background to colour their interpretation of events - all the more powerfully because of the suppressed shame over a Nazi past. Hence, the wildly exaggerated "Sharon equals Hitler" comparisons. The thinking is perhaps that the existence of evil, Hitler-esque Jews (read: Sharon) lessens the annoying residual guilt that Europeans feel, or are told they are supposed to feel, over the past (speaking, of course, as a gross generalization).

Which to believe changes depending on who is arguing. I think the latter has some truth in it; I also think that some Israeli apologists use this argument to deflect criticism. It is not an either-or solution; both could be true at the same time.

Certainly, I know what most Jews in NA think on the issue, rightly or wrongly - even those harshly critical of Israel. It could best be summed up by the vague apprehension that "the leopard doesn't change its spots".

MC Master of Ceremonies
01-14-2004, 01:10 PM
edwino, you must apply the same standards both ways, if denying the right to security and self-detrimnation to the Israelis (which is something I do not object to, though this cannot simply be used as a catch-all to justify any action) is racist, you must relaize thaty anybody supporting the occupation is racist as they deny the right of security and self-detimrnation to the Palestinians.

The problem is by throwing arounf 'anti-semitic' as a political term it's meaning is diluted until it carries no weight. The hypocrisy of somone like Ariel Sharon accusing Europeans of racsim does not aid Israel's cause at all.

Stoneburg
01-14-2004, 02:32 PM
edwino
This is the reason we are talking about "new" anti-Semitism. The Arab population in Europe is growing in leaps and bounds.

What do you mean with leap and bounds? There has been a steady flow of arabs to Europe for a long time, due to colonisation by France and England and due to that many arab countries have problem leading to refugees, as well as more 'normal' immigration. As far as I know this isn't a 'problem', like your use of words seem to imply, and it hasn't afaik increased significantly recently. This seems to me to be a standard racist cath phrase, we're beeing 'invaded', immigration is out of control, they will take your jobs and women... well, you know what I mean.

edwino
what a lot of Jews are worried about is that this opinion shift will be permanent.

From what I have read, the jews that are worried mainly seem to be the ones in North America. Not French jews or Swedish jews, who would not only be the ones affected, but would also be in a better position to know if this was actually happening. I don't think Sharon will be unbiased on this subject, and frankly I have no respect for the mans opinion anyway since I consider him a right-wing extremist. If the moderate jews, living in Europe, would express concerns about this I would pay attention. When Sharon or some zionist extremists in North America does, I won't.

edwino
The popular view now can be that Israel is a racist apartheid state who is committing genocide on a minority population. None of these things are true. There are a lot of states in which the situation is much worse than in Israel. A lot of what Israel does is perfectly reasonable taken the violence they experience. But Israel gets criticized for being Israel.

That is not the popular view, that is a silly straw man. A popular view would be "Israel are committing human rights violations, defying UN resolutions and killing Palestinian civilians in their hunt for terrorists". That view is pretty accurate in my opinion. Yes, Israel gets critisised for being Israel in a sense, we tend to hold them to a higher standard since they are a democratic and wealthy nation. We don't expect a poverty-ridden dictatorship to live up to the same standards. It would be fair to, but unrealistic.

edwino
But there is a "new" Europe here that a lot of people are concerned about. Most Muslim immigrants are people just like anybody else -- hard workers trying to make a new life for themselves. Some, though, carry some patently false anti-Semitic views which are prevalent in their home countries and the Arab press: Protocols of the Elders of Zion, blood libels, etc. Since there is a population of people with these views, they sometimes carry into the European press.

Yes some Muslim (not Arab anymore? I thought we were talking about arabs..) carry patently false views. Just as some Americans, some Swedes and probably a couple of people from Lichtenstein. And I agree that we should put a lot more money into education and integration, even if it means raising taxes, I am sure that was your point... By the way, I regard the crazy idea that there is a 'God' to be patently false, hopefully we can cure this delusion which seems widespread.

edwino
You may think that none of this is anti-Semitic. It isn't on the surface. But when it represents a trend, when it is ordinary and mundane to accuse Israel of these kind of actions without confirmation and then never offer retractions, then I start to complain.

When people increasingly critisise Israel politics, there is no chance that it is because they don't agree with Israel policy? When people critisise Bushs policy it's *really* because they hate America... right? ;) Sure, people who hate jews are probably going to critisise Israel, people who hate Americans are going to critisise the US, that doesn't mean that because you critisise US or Israel you hate Americans or Jews.

edwino
There is no legitimate reason to criticize Israel to this level while letting every other country in a similar situation off scot-free.

You are not empowered to decide what people care about. Is it unfair to hold Israel to a higher standard, I don't think so. They have more power, more knowledge and more freedom then many other countries, they should be held to a higher standard. Of course I would critisise a democracy more for human rights violations then I would a fascist state or dictatorship.

edwino
There is no reason to spend so many resources on the plight of the Palestinian when worse situations in some parts of Europe, not to mention Africa and Asia, go completely without mention.

I'm sorry, but you aren't empowered to decide what people or nations spend their resources on either. I can't think of a people that are worse off in Europe then the palestinians at the moment, maybe you could give some examples? As far as I am concerned, way too little is being done about ALL the peoples that are suffering and I agree that way too little money is being spent on it and would support tax raises to increase it. Once again this is what you are suggesting, right? ;)


I have a personal perspective on this though. My mother is politically on the extreme left, she is a member of both the UN organisation here as well as the Palestine Group. She participates in all the demonstrations, protests, debates, seminars etc etc and is extremely active. Half of her friends are arabs, mainly palestinians. I argue with her about Israel/Palestine a lot because she has a very un-nuansced opinion of it, pretty much the anti-thesis of Sharons. When she talks about Israels unprovoked aggressions, I defend them and say that Palestinians are as much to blame for the problems. However, never have I heard her or any of her political friends say anything that could by a sane person be construed as anti-semitic. The critisism is directed at the policy of the Israel government and Sharon, not the Israeli people and their situation, who they have quite a lot of empathy for.

Now this is not the first thread about this alleged anti-semitism in Europe I have read here, but hopefully it will be the last.

gum
01-14-2004, 03:53 PM
Stoneburg You are not empowered to hope for this to be the last thread on this subject.

You and I both know there's a growing of anti-semitism in Europe. In your and in mine country too. Yes, mainly by muslims.

Teachers in the Netherlands are afraid to talk about the holocaust. Why? Because they are threatened by their muslim students. [and we all know what threats can do. A Dutch teacher was shot in the head by a [muslim] student yesterday]

An example of anti-semitism in another part of Europe, you'll find here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3388105.stm

Malthus
01-14-2004, 03:54 PM
I have a personal perspective on this though. My mother is politically on the extreme left, she is a member of both the UN organisation here as well as the Palestine Group. She participates in all the demonstrations, protests, debates, seminars etc etc and is extremely active. Half of her friends are arabs, mainly palestinians. I argue with her about Israel/Palestine a lot because she has a very un-nuansced opinion of it, pretty much the anti-thesis of Sharons. When she talks about Israels unprovoked aggressions, I defend them and say that Palestinians are as much to blame for the problems. However, never have I heard her or any of her political friends say anything that could by a sane person be construed as anti-semitic. The critisism is directed at the policy of the Israel government and Sharon, not the Israeli people and their situation, who they have quite a lot of empathy for.

Now this is not the first thread about this alleged anti-semitism in Europe I have read here, but hopefully it will be the last.

You do not seen to see that this is kind of the problem.

Thousands of well-meaning, dedicated people work on or support organizations critical of Israel. Yet it all seems so ... focussed. One quite small country is singled out for lots of attention; other committing far worse abuses rate no mention at all.

The pattern of the HGOs is repeated by the UN. Israel breaks more UN resolutions than any other country - in part, because more are passed concerning Israel than any other country; and yet, Israel is a rather small nation, not (objectively) the worst on the planet.

I hear your points; no-one is in a position to tell others what they must care about ... but surely, you must acknowledge that by the same token, if *all* they care about is *this one country*, it raises the question as to "why".

Moreover, while these well-meaning people seem to be holding a higher standard for Israel, they seem to be positively lacking in any standard whatsoever for their antagonists.

Is it mere coincidence that this country is so very much disliked and singled out? Is the fact that this country is made up of Jews - a people who, a couple of generations ago, faced a grim fate on the continent that is now the origins of this critisism - a mere coincidence, having no impact whatsoever on the current situation?

Maybe. But it is surely not an issue likely to go away by ignoring it or ridiculing it away.

Rune
01-14-2004, 05:44 PM
Urgh! My superb and eloquent post was eaten by SD! This is but a poor and hurried rehash.

. . . . .

You know a Swede by his willingness to increase taxes. ;j


What do you mean with leap and bounds? There has been a steady flow of arabs to Europe for a long time, due to colonisation by France and England and due to that many arab countries have problem leading to refugees, as well as more 'normal' immigration. As far as I know this isn't a 'problem', like your use of words seem to imply, and it hasn't afaik increased significantly recently. This seems to me to be a standard racist cath phrase, we're beeing 'invaded', immigration is out of control, they will take your jobs and women... well, you know what I mean.It is a problem if it means a higher level of anti-Semitism, which some seem to think. Well that’s what we’re here to debate, waving it away as a no-issue is hardly helpful. Whether it has increased significantly recently, depends on your definition of recently. Significantly in the last decade, probably not. Significantly in the last half century, probably yes. The rest of the paragraph is entirely of your own invention.

From what I have read, the jews that are worried mainly seem to be the ones in North America. Not French jews or Swedish jews, who would not only be the ones affected, but would also be in a better position to know if this was actually happening.I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that Jewish organizations throughout Europe has been trying to warn of a rising anti-Semitism. That’s certainly the case in Denmark I’m ashamed to admit. Where the Jewish community, after having started to keep count on the number of assaults and threats, has registered a rise of several hundred percentage in just a few years. There are so many examples. Today Jews enter certain Muslim dominated neighbourhoods at this risk of their lives. “If you insist, as a Jew, to walk around Nørrebro [large area in central Copenhagen], it will very likely mean trouble.” Chief inspector Per Larsen Nov 2003 Recently some Jewish children were forced by a school principle to quit the school because it caused too much unrest with the immigrant children. Jewish schools, neighbourhoods and synagogues are under constant police surveillance because of regular bomb threats. Young Jews are in greater number starting to move to Israel because they see no future in Denmark. Etc. etc. One can hope the situation is better in Sweden, I doubt it – likely you’re just not taking the problem serious. Certainly France, with the largest Jewish population in Europe, has started to take it serious.

That is not the popular view, that is a silly straw man.No strawman. This is indeed a popular view in large part of society, and especially on the left wing. Also what was almost agreed to in Durban. Try putting “Israel and apartheid” into google.

Yes, Israel gets critisised for being Israel in a sense, we tend to hold them to a higher standard since they are a democratic and wealthy nation. We don't expect a poverty-ridden dictatorship to live up to the same standards. It would be fair to, but unrealistic.Nobody is saying all critique of Israel is anti-Semitism. Still it baffles me why they think so much time and energy should be spend on this particular (minuscule even, considering the number of people directly involved) problem. By your reason Switzerland or Sweden should be the most criticised nations on earth – since they have the best democracies and we should expect better. By all reason the dictatorship should get more of the critique since their faults are that much worse. Also I think a very large part of the critique is quite unproductive. Taking to the streets with Jews=Nazis banners aren’t going to change anyone’s mind.

- Rune

Aldebaran
01-14-2004, 05:50 PM
student yesterday]

Amazing how you can twist facts, gum. I am really stunned.
So you say there was a Muslim boy of 17 who shot a teacher in the head because he (the boy) is an anti-semite?

Really? I didn't see or hear anything that referred to neither of this.
I saw however references to the fact that this particular school seems to be known for having a lot of problems with many students.

Now I know why, since you made it clear: they must be all Muslims threatening their teachers because the teach them about the holocaust.

I'm sorry to say so, but I think your fantasy runs a bit too hard away with you.

Salaam. A



An example of anti-semitism in another part of Europe, you'll find here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3388105.stm[/QUOTE]

Aldebaran
01-14-2004, 05:58 PM
Forgot to say: the article you came up with and that by miracle shows up under my last posts (must be the new features) refers to Hungarian situations.

Hungary is not part of the EU yet.

Salaam. A

Aldebaran
01-14-2004, 06:14 PM
Can someone tell me why I feel so tempted to start a thread about the worldwide anti-Muslim anti-Arab wave in non Muslim nations who are considered to be part of or largely influenced by "the West"?

I have a question:
Why does it seems that there is such a commotion in the USA about so called "anti semetism in Europe" while it has less to do with anti-semitism then with Sharon PR?
Why all these efforts by non-EU'ers here to sell the Sharon/Israel/Zionist lobby-message while clearly EU'ers posting here tell them that they have a completely misinformed view on it?

One member even dragged a completely unreal and false idea in it that somehow Europe in its whole would feel "responsible for the Nazi past".
I'm sorry, but maybe some part of the German population can generate such feelings, but Germany isn't Europe.

Salaam. A

labmonkey
01-14-2004, 06:31 PM
Can someone tell me why I feel so tempted to start a thread about the worldwide anti-Muslim anti-Arab wave in non Muslim nations who are considered to be part of or largely influenced by "the West"?


Because that's the point of every thread you ever get involved in, isn't it? Please see my note in the OP, the Us need not be the yardstick for all discussion, we are talking about the EU, you've managed to drag Bush or the US into almost every post, does the dyslexia cause you to stray from the topic, too?

Stoneburg
01-14-2004, 06:58 PM
Malthus
You do not seen to see that this is kind of the problem.

Thousands of well-meaning, dedicated people work on or support organizations critical of Israel. Yet it all seems so ... focussed. One quite small country is singled out for lots of attention; other committing far worse abuses rate no mention at all.


You are right. I do noth think that this is a problem at all. I don't think it is a problem that a small group of well meaning people chose to focus on one particular cause, I think it is a problem that an incredibly large group of people don't care about the problems at all. If someone says "I donated 100 euros for food for Eritrea" I'm not going to say "I can't believe you would waste money on Eritrea when the people of Angola are much worse off". They are working for a good cause and it would be incredibly presumptious and arrogant of me to claim that.

It can not possibly be "the problem" that some people are working to improve the living conditions for a specific group of people instead of another group. The reasoning is absurd.

I hear your points; no-one is in a position to tell others what they must care about ... but surely, you must acknowledge that by the same token, if *all* they care about is *this one country*, it raises the question as to "why".
In my experience, and as is the case with my mother, this isn't how it works. Yes, one of the organisations she is a member of (and I might be too, she probably signed me up), is dedicated mainly to Palestine, but the sort of people that are active here are also usually active in other causes. They are interested in international politics and helping epople in general, not just this specific case. Caring about Palestine doesn't preclude you from caring for Angola or Eritrea. Once again, to me, the problem is the vast amount of people who don't care about either.


Is it mere coincidence that this country is so very much disliked and singled out? Is the fact that this country is made up of Jews - a people who, a couple of generations ago, faced a grim fate on the continent that is now the origins of this critisism - a mere coincidence, having no impact whatsoever on the current situation?
Ad hoc ergo propter hoc?

As I said, I acknowledge that there are people that hate jews. I don't know any, and if I meet any I won't like them, but they exist. However, being something of a, I dunno, jew-liker* myself, I don't have any problems finding reasons to worry about and dislike Israel and its policy.

By your reason Switzerland or Sweden should be the most criticised nations on earth – since they have the best democracies and we should expect better.
Indeed. If Sweden and say Libya were both found committing the same human rights violations, I would be so much more critical of Sweden that it would be off the chart. The more you have, the higher the standards are that I will hold you to. Makes total sense to me. I'm not going to praise a policeman in Sweden for just beating up a suspect a little, just because whatever-goes-for-police in Afghanistan would have beaten him up much worse.

Maybe. But it is surely not an issue likely to go away by ignoring it or ridiculing it away.
True, the issue will only go away once the extremists finally stfu, which is never going to happen. Obviously I am not ignoring it (even though I should), and I haven't ridiculed it yet (even though I want to).


* I like jewish culture and many of my favorite authors/artists/people are jewish

Stoneburg
01-14-2004, 07:08 PM
Because that's the point of every thread you ever get involved in, isn't it? Please see my note in the OP, the Us need not be the yardstick for all discussion, we are talking about the EU, you've managed to drag Bush or the US into almost every post, does the dyslexia cause you to stray from the topic, too?
Aldebaraan has posted 9 times in this thread and only in two of those does he mention the US. 2 out of 9 is hardly "almost every post".

Also, the US is quite relevant because:
- We need a yardstick for the EU
- US policy is extremely connected to Israel policy
- The allegations of anti-semitism are mainly from Americans

Making unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks is bad. You may not like Aldebaraan but that's not very interesting to the debate, so please just open another Pit Thread for that ;)

labmonkey
01-14-2004, 07:26 PM
Aldebaraan has posted 9 times in this thread and only in two of those does he mention the US. 2 out of 9 is hardly "almost every post".

Also, the US is quite relevant because:
- We need a yardstick for the EU
- US policy is extremely connected to Israel policy
- The allegations of anti-semitism are mainly from Americans

Making unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks is bad. You may not like Aldebaraan but that's not very interesting to the debate, so please just open another Pit Thread for that ;)
Point 1, I disagree, I don't see how the US could possibly compare to individual European countries in a loose federation.
Point 2, I disagree, the US does not decide its foreign policy based on Israel's, as much as Europeans would like to believe.
Ponit 3, No they're not, please listen to the NPR piece if possible and finally,

Point about Alde taken, but I think the whole "Pit Aldebaran" thing is just so passe :D

Stoneburg
01-14-2004, 08:21 PM
Point 1, I disagree, I don't see how the US could possibly compare to individual European countries in a loose federation.
Point 2, I disagree, the US does not decide its foreign policy based on Israel's, as much as Europeans would like to believe.
Ponit 3, No they're not, please listen to the NPR piece if possible and finally,

Point about Alde taken, but I think the whole "Pit Aldebaran" thing is just so passe :D

It's a debate about relative sucjects. The EU has a lot of anti-semitism compared to... what? That's where we need a non-European yardstick and the US is a good candidate for several reasons.

US is the #1 ally of Israel and of immense importance. The Isarael economy, military and very existance depends on the US. That's what I am saying. I don't think that US decides ints policy based on Israel to a vast extent, but the reverse is probably true.

And all the threads about EU anti-semitism have been started by people located in the US, most of the people on this board that chime in and say that anti-semitism is on teh rise in EU are located in the US, that is what I ment.

Stoneburg
01-14-2004, 08:24 PM
It's 2:30am here, sorry for the typos.

Beagle
01-14-2004, 09:52 PM
There is no doubt that anti-Semitic attacks are on the rise in Europe. In France, for example, the reported numbers only tell part of the story. Many victims have alleged that the police discourage reporting incidents at all.

In France, and other nations in Europe, they are undergoing a demographic overhaul. The rising, but mostly poor and undereducated, Muslim population is responsible for most of the anti-Semitic incidents in question. The French, inter alia, have unwisely thought that a policy of appeasement over the years would buy them some currency with their new citizens.

Recently, the face-covering controversy in France showed how all that support could evaporate in one big "VOILA!" Chirac has angered the Muslim Brotherhood and Martyr's Brigade, among others. They don't much care if an infidel was once helpful.

There is a hardening in the European intellectual culture to Isreali deaths. The depictions of Sharon as a blood drinking Jew with Palestinian babies as snacks (http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/01/Independent_temp.html) -- an award winning British cartoon -- is one symptom of the overall climate. There is a "redefinition" of anti-Semitism going on, one which allows a mother of two to blow herself up around civilians without some people getting particularly upset about it. Then, it allows one to view overall Israeli policy out of the context of this assault by human bomb. Supporting the "liberation of the Palestinians" sounds great, especially if you only listen to half the story. That "liberation of Palestine" means "end of Israel" to most of the radical Islamists matters.

The idea that Sharon's policies have made peace impossible is refuted by the mere fact that Sharon replaced earlier leaders more willing to make concessions who failed to reach an accomodation as well. The level of hatred for Sharon, perhaps justified if one lived in certain Palestinian refugee camps about 20 years ago, is all out of proportion to his actual role in preventing a peace deal. Um, news flash, the bombers are preventing a peace deal -- intentionally. They issue statements to that effect when deals near conclusion. Moving Israeli settlers, or tearing down a wall, makes stopping the Islamist religious nutjobs look easy.

They blew up a mother of two to make a point, and she went willingly to her death. That is crazy, totally insane. Moreover, the strategy doesn't work. Finally, I'll wager it doesn't get you to heaven.

DSeid
01-14-2004, 10:57 PM
Alde,

Your ignorance of the history and severity of European antisemitism is telling. I presume that such has been very lacking from any class in history that you have taken at any level of education in Arab institutions or since. I doubt that you have been as well protected from information on libelous charges against Jews since they are well broadcast in Arab media and part of curriculum in some parts.

I've already pointed to a wonderful book tracing the roots of European antisemitism and you have also been directed to an online primer. Here is another: http://www.humanitas-international.org/holocaust/antisem.htm

Massacres. Forced conversions or death. Or both if you were not believed sincere. More massacres. Forbidden from working in any guild. Confiscation of resources. Declared property. Expulsions. More massacres. More expulsions. Read some Martin Luther tracts on the Jews (after they failed to flock to his new religion). England expelled the Jews. So did Portugal. So did Spain. Italy invented the ghetto as a place to wall the Jews in.

Treatment in the Islamic world was tolerant by comparison, and given the treatment often imposed upon the dhimmis, that is saying something.

So yes, when the focus upon Israel is one sided and disproportionate, one wonders if it is merely because Israel is held up as a Western democracy and one can't expect the same standards from those savage Arabs (I am sarcastic here Alde, but you see in this thread that implicit POV being expressed) or if some other factor is at play ...

gum
01-15-2004, 01:54 AM
Aldebaran: That is so intelligent of you; No, Hungary doesn't belong to the EU. However; we were talking about Europe.....

http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=1&story_id=3590

The 'misconduct' of which the article writes, was the student's threats to his teachers to tell 'no more stories about killed jews'.

You might as well know: I've spend years on teaching muslim women to speak Dutch and get them out of their isolation. Lately I find it very hard to feel any compassion for a people, who's leaders teach you how to beat your wife without leaving marks.

Mustafa is an imam at the mosque in the southern Spanish town of Fuengirola:

In his book, Mustafa wrote that in disciplining a disobedient wife: "The blows should be concentrated on the hands and feet using a rod that is thin and light so that it does not leave scars or bruises on the body."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3396597.stm

There's no muslim hate here, yet. So don't invade a thread about anti-semitism with your hate for anything non-muslim.

London_Calling
01-15-2004, 01:55 AM
Short on time, I’m afriad, but came across this earlier and thought it might be useful for lighthearted comparative purposes. Seems “Europe” is a little ahead of the US, or is it . . .


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,106094,00.html

"Some 43 percent of Americans believe Israel is a threat to world peace, according to a poll presented Wednesday by a Jewish group, but many more are concerned about North Korea, Iraq and Iran."


- presented by a Jewish group and it’s on Fox. Must be accurate!

Beagle
01-15-2004, 02:19 AM
I did a search. This was the best recent article I found. Analysis:

TIME Europe (http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901031201-549088,00.html)...Sharon promotes immigration to counter the demographic threat that Jews will become a minority in Israel and the occupied territories. In doing so, he points to the link Chirac avoids: just as Jews are connected to Israel, some attacks on Jews are linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That link is of special importance in France, which has the E.U.'s largest population of both Jews (600,000) and Muslims (5 million). Chirac, the political survivor, doesn't talk about the agents of anti-Semitism in France. "France is supposed to be one big happy family," says Emmanuel Weintraub, spokesman for the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF). "When Chirac beat Le Pen, there were lots of Algerian and Moroccan flags flying in the crowd at Place de la République. That's his constituency and he doesn't want to hurt their feelings." In a televised debate last week, French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy rejected any link between Israel and anti-Semitic attacks in France. "Anyone who explains the resurgence of anti-Semitism by the Middle East conflict is saying something wrong," he said. "Anti-Semitism existed before the existence of Israel."

That's true, but what does it prove? As haunted as they are by the Continent's traditional anti-Semitism, European Jews say what they experience now is something else. "Everyone knows that today's anti-Semitism in France is coming from young Muslims," says Bebe. Natan Sharansky, the former Soviet dissident who is now an Israeli minister, sees a "new anti-Semitism" as a cocktail of the traditional hatred, anti-Israeli feeling among Muslims, and anti-Americanism. "We used to keep out of commenting on these attacks," says an Israeli diplomat in Europe. "But our approach has changed because of the link between anti-Semitism and Israel."...

edwino
01-15-2004, 02:30 AM
edwino, you must apply the same standards both ways, if denying the right to security and self-detrimnation to the Israelis (which is something I do not object to, though this cannot simply be used as a catch-all to justify any action) is racist, you must relaize thaty anybody supporting the occupation is racist as they deny the right of security and self-detimrnation to the Palestinians.I have never accused anyone of this. I fully support the right of Palestinians to live in peace and security and the right to self-determine their government. Just not at the expense of Israelis. I have been calling for Israeli unilateral withdrawal for the better part of two years.

My problem is exactly the same as yours, at heart. Antisemitism is when any action becomes justified just because it is against the Israelis. I am not accusing anyone posting in this thread of doing that. But when the UN and the European press accepts that it is the right of Palestinians to march themselves into pizza parlors and blow themselves up amidst women and children, that becomes antisemitism. When it becomes a legitimate debate point to harp on the illegitimacy of the existence of Israel, when the PA sits on a moderate Arab media outlet (http://slate.msn.com//id/2093894/) (al-Arabiyah) to describe any Palestinian killed by the IDF as "martyred", then I start to consider the roots of European anti-Zionistm. There is a near monolithic block of thought about Israel through the Arab World. For 35 years, they have done their damndest to spread that thought around the world. This has now been facilitated by a sympathetic population influx into Europe.

My personal view is that it has become more frenzied over the past two years. Palestinians knew what they had to do to get the media's attention -- blow shit up and incur Israeli wrath. They did and it worked. A funny thing has happened, though. It has suddenly become immensely distasteful to claim suicide bombing as a form of legitimate uprising, ever since September 2001. In the past year, another funny thing has happened -- Sharon has pretty much started to set the border for a Palestinian state, and the border as it happens goes closer to the Green Line (http://www.btselem.org/english/Separation_Barrier/Map.asp) than one would expect out of a unilateral action. This has led to quite a grasping at straws (like Qorei's call for a binational state), and more virulent antisemitic-type attacks out of the Arab World. They (the Palestinian leadership and the Arab leaders who support them) are losing any grasp they had at legitimacy -- Israel is settling the situation by itself without any of their input whatsoever.

edwino
01-15-2004, 02:54 AM
Stoneburg, I believe you took a lot of my post in the wrong fashion. Malthus kindly covered a lot of this, but let me add some stuff.

What do you mean with leap and bounds? There has been a steady flow of arabs to Europe for a long time, due to colonisation by France and England and due to that many arab countries have problem leading to refugees, as well as more 'normal' immigration. As far as I know this isn't a 'problem', like your use of words seem to imply, and it hasn't afaik increased significantly recently. This seems to me to be a standard racist cath phrase, we're beeing 'invaded', immigration is out of control, they will take your jobs and women... well, you know what I mean.The rate is irrelevant. I take back "leaps and bounds" if indeed it is a steady flow. I have no cite that says otherwise right now. I never used the word "problem" and my exact point was that Europe was changing. I never said if this was a overall good or bad thing; the antisemitism that I think is fomented in certain young Arab populations is certainly a bad thing but I hope that it is just temporary. My point is exactly opposite what you accuse me of -- pointing out a demographic shift is not racist. Denying that the new population influx is "European" is, though. (i.e. Antisemism in Europe is from Muslims, not Europeans.)

From what I have read, the jews that are worried mainly seem to be the ones in North America. Not French jews or Swedish jews, who would not only be the ones affected, but would also be in a better position to know if this was actually happening.From here (http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901031201-549088,00.html):"People felt there was no response from the government, and even stopped reporting attacks because it led nowhere," says Pauline Bebe, a rabbi in Paris' 18th arrondissement.I can give you many other quotes from European Jews concerned about the rise of antisemitism in Europe.

That is not the popular view, that is a silly straw man. Note what I said:
The popular view now can be that Israel is a racist apartheid state who is committing genocide on a minority population. As Malthus said, it is a view adopted by a UN conference. It is routinely reported as such. But I didn't mean say it is the most common view, I just said that it can be a popular view.

When people increasingly critisise Israel politics, there is no chance that it is because they don't agree with Israel policy? When people critisise Bushs policy it's *really* because they hate America... right? ;) Sure, people who hate jews are probably going to critisise Israel, people who hate Americans are going to critisise the US, that doesn't mean that because you critisise US or Israel you hate Americans or Jews.You really haven't understood a single thing I've posted. I've said again and again that legitimate criticism of Israel is appreciated. It is when Israel becomes an idee fixe, it becomes the issue above all else. It is when every raid and every statement is met with waves of disapproval, when there are much worse problems many other places in the world.

I can't think of a people that are worse off in Europe then the palestinians at the moment, maybe you could give some examples?Mmmm I dunno, from reports that I have seen, parts of the Balkans are still pretty rotten. When they were worse off than Palestine, it took a long while before NATO under prodding from the US decided to intervene. The Cyprus situation is finally coming to an end, but I didn't see mass rallies in Europe to end Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus. Do you consider Checnya Europe?


I have a personal perspective on this though. My mother is politically on the extreme left, she is a member of both the UN organisation here as well as the Palestine Group. She participates in all the demonstrations, protests, debates, seminars etc etc and is extremely active. Half of her friends are arabs, mainly palestinians. I argue with her about Israel/Palestine a lot because she has a very un-nuansced opinion of it, pretty much the anti-thesis of Sharons. When she talks about Israels unprovoked aggressions, I defend them and say that Palestinians are as much to blame for the problems. However, never have I heard her or any of her political friends say anything that could by a sane person be construed as anti-semitic. The critisism is directed at the policy of the Israel government and Sharon, not the Israeli people and their situation, who they have quite a lot of empathy for.Good for you. Good for your mother. I have never implied that people with your (or her) kind of views are antisemitic. It is the people on one hand decrying Israeli actions in the territories while on the other praising Palestinian suicide bombing, it is calling for an end to the State of Israel, etc. etc. Get it?

edwino
01-15-2004, 03:02 AM
Holy crap, I can't believe I cited the same article as Beagle. Here's another one -- http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.11.21/news8.europeans.html
"Over the past two-and-a-half years, we have heard many declarations against antisemitism but very little action," said Cwajgenbaum, in a phone interview from Geneva, where he was preparing for a meeting with the Swiss foreign minister. "The authorities need to face their responsibilities."

Malthus
01-15-2004, 10:48 AM
You are right. I do noth think that this is a problem at all. I don't think it is a problem that a small group of well meaning people chose to focus on one particular cause, I think it is a problem that an incredibly large group of people don't care about the problems at all. If someone says "I donated 100 euros for food for Eritrea" I'm not going to say "I can't believe you would waste money on Eritrea when the people of Angola are much worse off". They are working for a good cause and it would be incredibly presumptious and arrogant of me to claim that.

It can not possibly be "the problem" that some people are working to improve the living conditions for a specific group of people instead of another group. The reasoning is absurd.


In my experience, and as is the case with my mother, this isn't how it works. Yes, one of the organisations she is a member of (and I might be too, she probably signed me up), is dedicated mainly to Palestine, but the sort of people that are active here are also usually active in other causes. They are interested in international politics and helping epople in general, not just this specific case. Caring about Palestine doesn't preclude you from caring for Angola or Eritrea. Once again, to me, the problem is the vast amount of people who don't care about either.


Ad hoc ergo propter hoc?

As I said, I acknowledge that there are people that hate jews. I don't know any, and if I meet any I won't like them, but they exist. However, being something of a, I dunno, jew-liker* myself, I don't have any problems finding reasons to worry about and dislike Israel and its policy.


Indeed. If Sweden and say Libya were both found committing the same human rights violations, I would be so much more critical of Sweden that it would be off the chart. The more you have, the higher the standards are that I will hold you to. Makes total sense to me. I'm not going to praise a policeman in Sweden for just beating up a suspect a little, just because whatever-goes-for-police in Afghanistan would have beaten him up much worse.


True, the issue will only go away once the extremists finally stfu, which is never going to happen. Obviously I am not ignoring it (even though I should), and I haven't ridiculed it yet (even though I want to).


* I like jewish culture and many of my favorite authors/artists/people are jewish

I think you are missing my point, or perhaps you hear it and don't agree with it. Maybe an analogy will help.

Imagine if you will that you are a gay male. Imagine as well that the "hot button" topic of the day was pedophilia. Imagine as well that, for some reason, every single news item, organization, NGO, and socially-aware person was up in arms over this one topic, but with a twist - they all, for some reason, are only concerned with homosexual pedophilia. Not one ever so much as mentions that non-homosexual pedophilia exists, much less that, in fact, the abuse of girls is just as big a problem (if not bigger) than abuse of boys.

Now, further imagine that the countries in which these organizations and persons live have a legacy of centuries of anti-homosexual prejudice. Would you, or would you not, consider that the rather single-minded focus of all of these well-meaning people on a legitimate problem just *may* have something to do with that legacy? Just possibly? Even though, if pressed on the point, those do-gooders could well respond that they *like* homosexuals just fine, thank you; that homosexual pedophilia is a terrible thing, scarring the lives of many young boys; that anti-gay prejudice is, really, a thing of the past, particularly in the enlightened, intellectual circles in which they move ... that many gay thinkers are equally concerned about the problem of pedophilia.

But still, it is a bit nagging that *everyone* cares so much about homosexual pedophilia, and for some strange reason cannot find any time to worry about the abuse of girls. I would imagine, if you were gay, you might find that circumstance somewhat suspicious - which is not the same as saying that pedophilia, hetero or homo, is not a problem deserving of concern! But where this "concern" appears to be totally one-sided, it starts to look as if it is, perhaps indirectly, more of a weapon in an on-going and quite unplesant cause than a genuine, legitimate expression of compassion. Particularly if it is clear and obvious that *some* at least are using this "cause" as a mere excuse to go gay-bashing -- and the do-gooders who are adimant in their denials of anti-gay prejudice refuse to acknowledge that this problem even exists.

Wouldn't that worry you - if you happened to be gay yourself?

Now, admittedly the analogy is by no means perfect. However, the differences are all to the *dis*advantage of the nati-Zionists. For one thing, although I have no idea of the numbers involved, certainly the purportion of homosexual pedophiles to hetero is by no means as outrageously skewed as the purportion of human rights violations carried out in the rest of the world to those carried out in Israel. Secondly, it would be beyond the bounds of reason that some anti-homosexual pedophilia crusaders would actually make excuses for heterosexual pedophiles, or even find their actions admirable. Moreover, it is hard to imagine the UN barring homosexuals from participating in the Human Rights Committee, on suspicion of pedophilia, while at the same time electing a known heterosexual pedophile as Chairman of that committee; and yet, Israel is barred and Lybia sits as Chair!

So you see, as you are fond of Latin maxims, Res Ipsa Loquitur.

DSeid
01-15-2004, 11:21 AM
Alde,

Over the last two days I have just become increasingly flabbergasted by the significance of your question. You really don't know anything about the depth, length, and severity of antisemitism in Europe. You really thought that The Holocaust arose de novo and while severe and evil was just a one time bad episode in the tide of history. And I think that it is fair to say that you have a broader experience and education than the average Arab today. And you really didn't know any of this. Wow. Had you heard of "The Protocols of Zion"? If so, in what context did you first hear of it? Had heard about Jews killing non-Jews for purposes of religious ritual ("the blood libel")? If so, in what context did you first hear of it? Both are antisemitic stories that have had long lifetimes, that have been used to justify the murders/massacres of Jews in Christian lands, and later imported into Islamic lands where they were used for the same purposes. As recently as the 1970's King Faisal of Saudi Arabia repeated stated in newspaper interviews that Jews drink the blood of non-Jews to celebrate Pesach. Television shows about "The Protocols" have been rebroadcast repeatedly in Arab media over just the past year, both in Egypt and in Europe. I have a difficult time believing that you haven't heard of them, and suspect that only your international exposure keeps you from believing their truth. But you've had no exposure to the history of the world's mistreatment of Jews. Again: wow. It explains a lot.

You repeatedly bemoan how ignorant we in the West are of Arab culture. Certainly we are undereducated, and certainly there are large segments of Western society that harbor racist views of Arabs. I cringe at the way Arabs are usually portrayed and at the ignorance displayed by many. I personally have tried to reduce my ignorance some and greatly respect your cultural heritage. I humbly ask that you reciprocate: please try to educate yourself about the history of Jew hating in both the Christian and Islamic worlds. You may come out with a better understanding of why many of us Jews are cynical of the motivations of others and why we are wont to trust ourselves to the good graces of the majority in this world. Even if we still disagree on the nature of today's reality.

Stoneburg
01-15-2004, 01:52 PM
I'm going to make this short and sweet since I am pressed for time and energy, sorry for not responding directly to quotes.


As I have stated, I am aware that some of the critisism of Israel is extremely one-sided. I pointed out that my mother was one of the people guilty of it, and how I would always come to the defense of Israel in our discussions. This is a problem. I don't like it.

However, it seems like some of the posters here represent the corresponding view while blissfully unaware of it. My mother says it's Israels fault, Sharon is a reactionary and evil man and Israels unprovoked attacks on Palestine ensures there will be no peace. The other side says Palestinians are crazy suicide bombers, and their anti-semitism and fanaticism is the problem.

Me, I'm in the middle thinking both sides are whackjobs. Or at least have leaders that fuel the situation, I'm sure the majority of people would just like to live in peace and get on with their lives. This debate is just completely worthless to me because it doesn't bring anyone closer to understanding anything, it just fans the flames in both camps and makes people in the middle, like me, think that everyone involved is a partisan idiot and maybe blowing up the whole area and turning it into a praking lot is the best way to go.

It is the people on one hand decrying Israeli actions in the territories while on the other praising Palestinian suicide bombing, it is calling for an end to the State of Israel, etc. etc. Get it?
Yes, and these people we like to call "absolutely nuts". Pretty much the same classification I give the orthodox jewish extremists in the occupied territories. Both sides have their share of extremists and fundamentalists, and they are indeed a big problem, that the population in general in EU may be critisising Israel more and more isn't.

Some of the posts here also happen to be good indications of anti-muslim and anti-arab trends, something that is definetely growing a lot quicker here then anti-semite ones. Pointing toward how some muslims teaches people to beat their wifes is just sad partisan rethorics. If it was unbiased it would point out that both christianity and judaism has a simmilar tradition, the only difference is that the practise of it at this point in time is (probably) more widespread in muslim nations. Demonizing the opponent is the order of the day, but still very counter-productive. I prefer understanding them.

To summarise my opinions, as clearly as possible, to avoid talking past eachother:

- I don't think there is a significant rise in anti-semitism in EU. A rise in anti-Isreal sentiment, yes. I actually think there is a much bigger rise in anti-muslim/arab tendencies. I think this is wolf crying from the partisan pro-Israel side.

- The conflict between Israel and Palestine isn't served by trying to blame one side. To me it is obvious that both sides are to blame, and without both sides will have to start working towards a solution. The wall being built and military attacks on Palestinians aren't helping, neither is suicide bombers.

- Religion is fucked up, I would be happy if every muslim, christian and jew woke up tomorrow and thought "How the hell could I believe this stupid crap? What was I thinking!". Well I can dream... (not saying that religion is the cause of this conflict, but it sure isn't helping)

- It would be better if people could acknowledge both sides of the issue and become enlightened and right, like me! :p

Tusculan
01-15-2004, 02:22 PM
Just popping in that as far as I can see I'm in complete agreement with Stoneburg. I think you phrased a careful and nuanced standpoint on this issue.

Malthus
01-15-2004, 02:26 PM
The problem, Stoneburg, is that admirable as all of those sentiments may be, they are none of them particularly responsive to the issue at hand.

For example, it is perfectly possible for there to be *both* a rise in anti-Semitism *and* a rise in anti-Arab or Muslim prejudice - they are by no means mutually exclusive; so pointing out that some people, indeed some posters, demonstrate the latter does nothing to indicate whether the former exists.

Moreover, who is at fault in the Israel-Palistine situation, vital as the question no doubt is in general, is irrelevant to the issue under discussion.

The role of religion is another important, yet irrelevant, issue.

The general question is whether there is a resurgance of anti-Semitism in Europe; these other issues are drawn in because some (like myself) have stated that the one-sided fixation, particularly evident in Europe, on Israeli misdeeds is evidence for the thesis. Ultimately, the existence of Israeli misdeeds, and a moral analysis of the conflict there, is a secondary issue. It is a matter of whether the *attention* focussed on these misdeeds is evidence of anything (which I attempted to address with my analogy above) which is the matter for debate.

Aldebaran
01-15-2004, 06:49 PM
Over the last two days I have just become increasingly flabbergasted by the significance of your question. You really don't know anything about the depth, length, and severity of antisemitism in Europe. You really thought that The Holocaust arose de novo and while severe and evil was just a one time bad episode in the tide of history.

I asked you make the list because you failed to reflect on it that while persecution of all kinds was present elswhere, there was freedom of religion in Islamic empires during most of its history (broad-brushed).
When you thus come to talk about "Europe" you completely overlooked the fact that the Ottoman Empire became in fact a save haven for not only Jews, but also for Christians who were persecuted by their "brothers".
I studied European history - in Europe at a Catholic University - and be it that my field is for the greatest part the period linked to Islamic History pre-WWII, I am of course informed about persecutions and racism of all kinds.
You just failed to see where I wanted to go with my question. I think you rather should have thought about my question instead of wondering about it.

And I think that it is fair to say that you have a broader experience and education than the average Arab today.

No I don't think that is "fair to say" at all. You sound extremely paternalistic and condenscending here.

And you really didn't know any of this. Wow. Had you heard of "The Protocols of Zion"? If so, in what context did you first hear of it? Had heard about Jews killing non-Jews for purposes of religious ritual ("the blood libel")? If so, in what context did you first hear of it? Both are antisemitic stories that have had long lifetimes, that have been used to justify the murders/massacres of Jews in Christian lands, and later imported into Islamic lands where they were used for the same purposes.

I have the text in German. It was of course seen and used as a gift of heaven for Hitler also, who refers to it in among others "Mein Kamp". (From which I have also the German edition.)
As for the "blood sacrifices", that is something you even hear these days now and then told as if it is the plain truth by some lunatic who thinks he can play "religious" or other "scholar". And that isn't limited to the Arabic World and the USA isn't free of having this fairy tale spread.
As for you claim about King Faisal, I think you must be confused about that. If I recall well - but it is some time ago wo I can be wrong - there seems to be something published on this by someone who works at the King Faisal University. I'm not particularly interested in what goes on in the Wahabbi sand pitch, if I don't need it to get or stayed informed. Which I tend to avoid as much as possible.
And sorry but no, I didn't watch or hear any "repeatedly broadcasting" on those issues on any channel I watch. If there were any I don't tend to waste my time on idiocies or want to be held informed about such.

I don't see what all of this has to do with the OP though.

I have a difficult time believing that you haven't heard of them, and suspect that only your international exposure keeps you from believing their truth. But you've had no exposure to the history of the world's mistreatment of Jews. Again: wow. It explains a lot.

Thank you for insulting my dignity and my intellect and my late parents and those who raised me and those who educated me.

You may come out with a better understanding of why many of us Jews are cynical of the motivations of others and why we are wont to trust ourselves to the good graces of the majority in this world.

I can come into that quite easily. But that doesn't mean that there is indeed a "rise of anti semitism" in Europe and certainly not in the dramatical way it is claimed by The Sharon PR.
What I so much dislike in all of this is the continued abuse of the suffering of those who actually died and/or suffered in the Holocaust. I'm not the only one who wonders when this is finally going to come to an end and that is my EU part speaking, as it is in fact most of the time the case when I post on message boards as this one. Many people are sick and tired of this "we are always your victim" blame game of the Zionists.

Salaam. A

DSeid
01-16-2004, 08:33 AM
Alde,
I am sorry that I failed to divne your meaning when you asked me to provide examples of European antisemitism for the last thousand years. Maybe you would be misunderstood less if you stated you thought rather than hinted at it. Anyway, don't let your defensiveness get in the way. We have had intelligent converstations about the state of education in Arab lands today; a statement that your education seems broader and deeper than that afforded to the average Arabb today has no paternalism in it. It a reasonable supposition.


For a historian you seem awfully quick to ignore the past.

A millenium plus of Jew hating doesn't just disappear because of one especially violent spasm of it. It still exists in more passively held beliefs by many and to my eyes that comes out in the eagerness to judge Israel by standards harsher than the rest of the world. It is recycled and reimported via some hailing from Arab lands. But most of all you get it wrong here:this "we are always your victim" blame game of the Zionists.Nope. Not playing the victim. Declaring that we will be victims no more. We do not have any reason to trust the good graces and intents of the rest of the world. History has given the world lots of chances to prove itself. We will not be for ourselves alone but we will be for ourselves. Now is the time.

DSeid
01-16-2004, 09:31 AM
Alde,

I'm still curious. When did you first hear of things like The Blood Libel and The Protocols and in what context? When did you first hear of the history of antisemitism other than The Holocaust? Where do these things rate in exposure to the average Arab today?

And please understand, no one here is saying that criticizing Israel is out of bounds. I personally object to teaching Jewish history as a series of victimizations, there is much more to our heritage that gets lost in that over-emphasis. But neither can it be ignored. I take my lessons from history. It informs for the present and future.

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 10:08 AM
The only "contact" I have had with "The Protocols" is when they have been brought up as examples of vicious propaganda, in school. Outside the marginalised group of noe-nazis, not many people know about them and those who do will recall it as "nazi propaganda".

If you bring them up as a historical fact to show how anti-semitism was furthered 60 years ago, fine, but if you use them to try and show some kind of current trend you're not coming across as serious, nobody except the fringe extremists take the documents seriously and peoples main contact with them is through education about nazi propaganda.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 10:19 AM
Hey Stoneburg,

still wondering if you have any comment on my analogy.

As for the "Protocols", they are indeed dead as doornails - in the West, officially. This is not true in some other countries, however.

The following is from the MEMRI site:

"On November 6th, 2002, some Arab television channels aired the first segment of a 41-part serial called "A Knight Without a Horse," which is based on 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.'
The series was slated for broadcast on Egyptian state television, the Egyptian "Dream" channel, Iraqi state television and Hizbullah's Al-Manar channel.[1][2]

The series, which was produced by Muhammad Subhi (who also plays the lead role), was slated for broadcast last Ramadan but was not completed in time, and is therefore being aired this year. The series sparked protests in the West, with the U.S. State Department calling on the Egyptian government to prevent the broadcast - a demand that was rejected out of hand by Egyptian Information Minister Safwat Al-Sharif. Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported that the minister reached his decision after viewing all the episodes having to do with the Protocols[3].

The series aroused much debate in the Egyptian and Arab press. Most writers supported the airing of the series, but a few criticized Egypt's obsession with antisemitic writings.

The series was viewed and approved for broadcast by a committee appointed by the Egyptian Censor. A committee from the Egyptian Radio and Television Association declared the series "a landmark in the history of Arab drama." The Egyptian Information Minister stated that "the dramatic views expressed by the series contain nothing that can be considered antisemitic."

So they do indeed have current relevance - though, it should be added, in some places and not in others.

I do believe they are relevant to current European anti-Semitism, because as has been established above, many anti-Semitic incidents can be traced to Europeans who are recent immigrants from countries where the "Protocols" are widely and officially cited. So it is incorrect to assert that they are a relic of the past.

DSeid
01-16-2004, 10:23 AM
Stoneburg,

The question was addressed to Alde, who I am under the impression was raised within an Arab education and media system. Were you? I am honestly curious as to what exposure the typical Arab gets to the history of the world's treatments of Jews as opposed to exposure to antisemitic bile.

And if only think of them as Nazi propaganda, then you entirely miss the point, and in fact illustrate it. The Nazis did not create them. Jewish paranoia* about the intents of others is not based on the Holocaust alone.

*Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

UselessGit
01-16-2004, 10:49 AM
I'm sorry, Malthus and WinstonSmith if I sounded like I don't think French Arabic immigrants are French. My point was that these crimes seem to me to be committed mostly by small groups, usually of Arabic origin. I don't think its fair to say Europeans are back to their Jew-hating ways because isolated instances of small groups, justly enraged (but not justified, mind you), are acting out.

My ass may be dumb, but I'm no dumbass; I have noticed growing anti-semitism, but not aimed towards Jews. Unfortunately I haven't met many Israelis but the few I have met I have gotten very well along with and when Sharon will be replaced and the "situation" gets less severe I plan to visit Israel and celebrate with my man Eyal. However, I must admit that in my family there are many Palestinian immigrants so obviously I am a bit biased - but aren't we all? Except my friend Aldebaran?

I do my best to keep my personal feelings out of any debate regarding Israel and her actions (and, indeed, most debates) but sometimes I fail. In retrospect I understand how my post may have caused you to think I don't consider immigrants to be "proper citizens" but this is far from being the case. I think my problem may lie with my grasp of the English language (sound familiar? :p ) and I will do my best to make my posts clearer from now on.

Rune
01-16-2004, 10:49 AM
I don't know why you come down so hard on poor Alde. I don't think he has tried to claim there is no anti-Semitism.

I'm not Arabic so I can't answer for Aldebaran, but I agree with Stoneburg. Few European people know of the protocols and Blood Libel. And those only as examples of anti-Semetic propaganda.

I am convinced it's there, but am at loss to explain the rising anti-Semitism among non-immigrant left wing Europeans. I'm far from convinced that this anti-Semitism has any deep historic roots. I don't think current anti-Semitism has much to do with Christian crusaders or Russian prognoms under the Zars and even less with the Nazis. While Jews may have sufferd worse, they are far from unique in having been persecuted or singled out in European history, much everybody has at one time or anther felt the steel boot of his neighboors. If you want to draw these long historic lines you'd have to explain why the Jews apparently are the only ones who still feel it. Also, as European history is American history, you'd have to explain why Europe seem to differ from Canada and the US in this aspect. I think it has more to do with general anti-American attitudes and antiquated Marxist inspired blood lust and adoration for the (Palestenian) rebel and revolution. The same people who are most vocal in decrying Israel, are often found to rail against the facist US, and support all kind of obscure revolutionaries all over the globe.


(Please forgive the spelling errors. I have no spell checker here. I tried to put in revolutionaries in dictionary.com and it gave me revirgination. I didn't know there was such a thing! ;j )

- Rune

Malthus
01-16-2004, 11:17 AM
I'm sorry, Malthus and WinstonSmith if I sounded like I don't think French Arabic immigrants are French. My point was that these crimes seem to me to be committed mostly by small groups, usually of Arabic origin. I don't think its fair to say Europeans are back to their Jew-hating ways because isolated instances of small groups, justly enraged (but not justified, mind you), are acting out.

My ass may be dumb, but I'm no dumbass; I have noticed growing anti-semitism, but not aimed towards Jews. Unfortunately I haven't met many Israelis but the few I have met I have gotten very well along with and when Sharon will be replaced and the "situation" gets less severe I plan to visit Israel and celebrate with my man Eyal. However, I must admit that in my family there are many Palestinian immigrants so obviously I am a bit biased - but aren't we all? Except my friend Aldebaran?

I do my best to keep my personal feelings out of any debate regarding Israel and her actions (and, indeed, most debates) but sometimes I fail. In retrospect I understand how my post may have caused you to think I don't consider immigrants to be "proper citizens" but this is far from being the case. I think my problem may lie with my grasp of the English language (sound familiar? :p ) and I will do my best to make my posts clearer from now on.

I have no intention of pointing fingers or laying blame; I simply point out the Europe has (as a generalization) a fundamentally different way of viewing its citizens, which is in fact based on ethnicity and not on citizenship.

Your post is simply evidence of this. You say: "My point was that these crimes seem to me to be committed mostly by small groups, usually of Arabic origin. I don't think its fair to say Europeans are back to their Jew-hating ways...".

And then you say: "In retrospect I understand how my post may have caused you to think I don't consider immigrants to be "proper citizens" but this is far from being the case."

Yet, you clearly in your mind differentiate "groups of Arabic origin" from "Europeans", and this distinction plainly matters to you.

My take is that Europeans consider people of "Arabic origin" to be citizens in the legal sense (assuming of course that they have achieved citizenship), and eligible to all the rights and privileges thereof; but not "fellow Europeans" in the emotional sense. If a European of "Arabic origin" commits a crime, that crime is not committed by a "European" in such a manner as to have an emotional resonance. That is why it is "not fair" to blame Europeans if some of their citizens attack Jews. They may be citizens by law, but they are not "Europeans".

Of course, this points out one of the problems which is ongoing. It is not as if Europeans secretly hanker after Hitler. It is more that they do not feel an emotional attachment to those who are not "Europeans" in the emotional sense. Arab immigrants fall into this category. Jews often feel that they do, as well, despite long residence in Europe, and it makes them nervous.

Why? Because in a pinch, people look out for "their own" in an emotional sense. When times get tough, it is easier to abandon those who are not "like you". This has happened to the Jews of Europe in living memory.

DSeid
01-16-2004, 11:31 AM
Winston,

I am not trying to come down hard on Alde. We misunderstood each other and have gone at cross purposes. That's all.

Do you really want the thousand word treatise on antisemitism? Short version. Jew hating has been different that what most other groups have occassionally endured. Not per se worse, but different (no competition here). The comparable group is Gypsies perhaps. The key factor being a group amidst many others that percieves itself as a nation among the nations and that fails to comletely assimilate into its host cultures. Jews lasted longer at it than the Gypsies who were of more recent origin, smaller, and were more completely eliminated in the Holocaust.

Less so in Canada and America (but not nonexistant) because these nations are made up of the varied to a greater degree both historically and currently. America is made of many groups that fail to totally assimilate; we stand out less here.

And UselessGit! Get this right. Antisemitism was invented as a replacement word for Judenhass (Jew hating) by a Jew hater who never had any problem with Arabs. It means Jew hating. It does not mean being against all "semitic" peoples. Continuing the word twist/distortion is offensive. Cut it out. Yes there is prejudice among some segments of Israelis - European origin Jews against Arab origin Jews - Arab origin Jews against Arab Moslems - and more. That is not antisemitism. Come up with your own word.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 11:36 AM
I don't know why you come down so hard on poor Alde. I don't think he has tried to claim there is no anti-Semitism.

I'm not Arabic so I can't answer for Aldebaran, but I agree with Stoneburg. Few European people know of the protocols and Blood Libel. And those only as examples of anti-Semetic propaganda.

I am convinced it's there, but am at loss to explain the rising anti-Semitism among non-immigrant left wing Europeans. I'm far from convinced that this anti-Semitism has any deep historic roots. I don't think current anti-Semitism has much to do with Christian crusaders or Russian prognoms under the Zars and even less with the Nazis. While Jews may have sufferd worse, they are far from unique in having been persecuted or singled out in European history, much everybody has at one time or anther felt the steel boot of his neighboors. If you want to draw these long historic lines you'd have to explain why the Jews apparently are the only ones who still feel it. Also, as European history is American history, you'd have to explain why Europe seem to differ from Canada and the US in this aspect. I think it has more to do with general anti-American attitudes and antiquated Marxist inspired blood lust and adoration for the (Palestenian) rebel and revolution. The same people who are most vocal in decrying Israel, are often found to rail against the facist US, and support all kind of obscure revolutionaries all over the globe.


(Please forgive the spelling errors. I have no spell checker here. I tried to put in revolutionaries in dictionary.com and it gave me revirgination. I didn't know there was such a thing! ;j )

- Rune

I take it you either did not read my preceding post, or do not agree that European citizens of recent Arabic origin are "European people".

As for anti-Semitism among the non immigrant community, I agree with what you say - though I disagree in part about the importance of the legacy of historic European anti-Semitism.

As I said in my post above, what I think is that in Europe, people are more emotionally tied to ethnicity that they are in (say) Canada. The true legacy is not "Jew-hating", but indifference towards fellow-citizens who are not, ethnically, alike; they are not "real Frenchmen" or whatever; those who are may not hate them at all, but do not necessarily feel kinship with them.

On the other hand, they are recognizably "European" in every other way - in appearance; in behaviour and education.

So, for those who are emotionally committed to hatred towards the legacy of Europe - call 'em anti-colonialists, or whatever - they make very handy scapegoats, when in Israel. After all, the misdeeds of Israel are the same misdeeds which Europe used to be proud of -- colonialism, etc.

The difficulty comes when dealing with Jews who are not in Israel, but who are neighbours. The anti-colonial crowd tends to identify with the oppressed. Unfortunately, the oppressed in this case have absorbed such things as the "Protocols" and other anti-Jewish writings, and often do not differentiate Jews from Israelis - thus, anti-semitic attacks.

Those who are not themselves of Arabic origin thus may not hate Jews themselves, as individuals, but are likely exposed to a conflation of anti-colonialist thinking (from Marxism and elsewhere) which in its modern form targets Israelis as "pseudo-Europeans" above all others and anti-semitic conspiracy thinking (from identification with the oppressed).

Ironically, the latter is second-hand or recycled anti-Semitism. As is pointed out, few non-immigrant Europeans are familiar with such works as the "Protocols". Many immigrants no doubt are; and the European non-immigrants (the ones who are busy identifying with the oppressed) to an extent absorb their attitudes.

UselessGit
01-16-2004, 11:49 AM
"These are isolated instances of Anti-Judaism committed by small groups, often of Arabic origin" Should not be read "It's the filthy Arabs who are doing this, not us Europeans!"

There is a history of Anti-Judaism (Sorry, we don't have a word for anti-semitism in my language so Anti-Judaism just sounds more apt) in Europe, yes. And Anti-Christian..ism. What I mean to say is that these instances of anti-Judaic are not, in my opinion, a sign of (or derived from) "'New' European Anti-Semitism"

Wait a minute ..."New"... :smack: ... I think I get it.

I've had the feeling all along that this was about the "old" anti-Judaism and how it was resurfacing (sp?)... I know what the OP is but still..

:o ...stupid foreigners...

Yes, there has been an increase in European Anti-Judaism recently. I do, however, think that this is only due to the "situation" with Israel and will subside after Sharon goes to wherever he belongs. I just hope Hell has a corner hot enough for him.

On a brighter note, I find myself continually amazed that a poll as irresponsible, pointless and basically stupid as the one in question could have caused all this upset.

I'm very confuzed now so I'll stop now, have a coffee and read this whole thread through again...

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 12:17 PM
As I said in my post above, what I think is that in Europe, people are more emotionally tied to ethnicity that they are in (say) Canada. The true legacy is not "Jew-hating", but indifference towards fellow-citizens who are not, ethnically, alike; they are not "real Frenchmen" or whatever; those who are may not hate them at all, but do not necessarily feel kinship with them.
You need to realise that the "European" identity is not very strong. It is not like Americans. Someone from Ohio will probably consider themself American first and "Ohioian" or whatever second. Europe isn't a federation. A frenchman and a bulgarian probably have about the same feeling of kinship as an American and a Mexican.

Dseid
And if only think of them as Nazi propaganda, then you entirely miss the point, and in fact illustrate it. The Nazis did not create them. Jewish paranoia* about the intents of others is not based on the Holocaust alone.

I didn't say I only think of them as nazi propaganda, I said they are generally identified (when people know about them at all) as nazi propaganda. This is because the only time they will be exposed to them usually is in school, where they are covered under the history of the nazis. As I recall, it was also explained that anti-semitism wasn't a new nazi concept but rather an old part of western history, since AD 0 jews had often been persecuted and/or discriminated against. But what will stick in peoples mind is: "anti-semitism = nazi propaganda". Which is ok by me.

Malthus
still wondering if you have any comment on my analogy.

I thought I did comment on it indirectly. The pro-palestine people feel like the world only focus on bad things palestinians do, and support Israel. The pro-Israel people feel like the world only focuses on the bad things Israel does, and supports Palestine. What else is new? I feel like both sides are stupid and not really helping.


Anti-semitism on the rise in Europe

Let me explain to you why most European will argue that this statement isn't true. As we have said, an anti-semitic minority exists in Europe. Except for the fringe extremists known as neo-nazis it is pretty much made up of arab and muslim immigrants that bring their anti-semitism here from countries where it is more common. The statement that anti-semitism is on the rise here implies that it is growing inside Europe, as far as I can tell, it is not. People aren't being 'converted' to disliking or hating jews here. Europeans aren't becoming anti-semitic, anti-semites are becoming European. Therefore, someone who is already European will take offence at the statement.

Is it a problem? Yes, all intolerance is a problem, and we should do more about it. And what we should do about it is spend more energy on educating people, more energy on integrating people that move here into our society and culture, and more energy on solving the problems that foster anti-semitism in the first place. Such problems include Israels occupation of Palestine, the spreading of fundamentalism and the huge class-difference in the global economy. It just so happens that the left that is being accused of anti-semitism is the side that is doing the most to stop it.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 01:42 PM
You need to realise that the "European" identity is not very strong. It is not like Americans. Someone from Ohio will probably consider themself American first and "Ohioian" or whatever second. Europe isn't a federation. A frenchman and a bulgarian probably have about the same feeling of kinship as an American and a Mexican.

I apologize for not being clear. I never intended to state that people had a strong, pan-European identity, but was using "European" as a catch-all for individual European countries -- as opposed to singling out, say, France or Germany.

From now on, I am using "European" in this general sense, unless I indicate otherwise.

I thought I did comment on it indirectly. The pro-palestine people feel like the world only focus on bad things palestinians do, and support Israel. The pro-Israel people feel like the world only focuses on the bad things Israel does, and supports Palestine. What else is new? I feel like both sides are stupid and not really helping.

May I be excused for thinking that this answer is not really responsive to the analogy? ;)


Anti-semitism on the rise in Europe

Let me explain to you why most European will argue that this statement isn't true. As we have said, an anti-semitic minority exists in Europe. Except for the fringe extremists known as neo-nazis it is pretty much made up of arab and muslim immigrants that bring their anti-semitism here from countries where it is more common. The statement that anti-semitism is on the rise here implies that it is growing inside Europe, as far as I can tell, it is not. People aren't being 'converted' to disliking or hating jews here. Europeans aren't becoming anti-semitic, anti-semites are becoming European. Therefore, someone who is already European will take offence at the statement.

Is it a problem? Yes, all intolerance is a problem, and we should do more about it. And what we should do about it is spend more energy on educating people, more energy on integrating people that move here into our society and culture, and more energy on solving the problems that foster anti-semitism in the first place. Such problems include Israels occupation of Palestine, the spreading of fundamentalism and the huge class-difference in the global economy. It just so happens that the left that is being accused of anti-semitism is the side that is doing the most to stop it.

Once again, I point out that, from an outsider's perspective, the insistance that anti-Jewish attacks do not occur "inside Europe" [emphasis yours] is quite revealing. In what way are they not "inside"? Why should people who are "already European" take offence when someone says, "Europeans are committing more and more anti-Jewish attacks"?

Is it not, in fact, literally true?

I suggest I have identified the answer - that people in Europe do not emotionally identify these new Europeans as being "them" in a meaningful way. They are not ethnically European.

I further suggest that, for all of the good intentions of leftist European world problem-solvers, this "at home" problem remains unaknowledged and indeed unrecognized.

Indeed, I will go further. Suggesting that there is one standard of behaviour appropriate for "pseudo-Europeans" like Israelis, and another (far lower) for non-Europeans like Arabs, does the latter no favours. Once again, they are not like "us", which (in the face of all good intentions to the contrary) robs them of their humanity. This is damaging enough when it is applied to people who live in countries far away. When it is applied to people who actually live in Europe itself, it re-inforces the notion that they are "not as we are" - and inferior in a moral sense.

And that feeling, in various forms, is at the root of all of the troubles under discussion.

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 02:53 PM
Once again, I point out that, from an outsider's perspective, the insistance that anti-Jewish attacks do not occur "inside Europe" [emphasis yours] is quite revealing. In what way are they not "inside"? Why should people who are "already European" take offence when someone says, "Europeans are committing more and more anti-Jewish attacks"?

This one's easy. Try it with this emphasis then: "Not growing inside Europe". What I am trying to say is that these people in Europe aren't learning to hate jews, some people that hate jews are moving to Europe. Do you understand the distinction? Anti-semitism isn't on the rise here, it's just being relocated here to some extent (and not even to a very great extent either afaik). They aren't learning to hate jews here, they hate jews and then they come here.

I bet some of them change when they come here, so I wonder if in fact the total amount of anti-semitism isn't actually decreasing as a result of people moving to a more secular, open and wealthy place.

Anyway, hope that explains what I was trying to say, your whole post was based on the misunderstanding of my sentiment so I won't bother replying to it other then to apologise for my lack of communication skills.

Aldebaran
01-16-2004, 03:03 PM
I apologize for not being clear. I never intended to state that people had a strong, pan-European identity, but was using "European" as a catch-all for individual European countries -- as opposed to singling out, say, France or Germany.

Well that is wrong to begin with. There is no such thing as EU identity --> you need to distinct between the individual countries in about everything you want to come up with --> Germany is as different from France as the US is from the EU when talking about "identity" or habits or culture or language or religion... whatever.

From now on, I am using "European" in this general sense, unless I indicate otherwise.

You can't without being completely wrong.
There is no "general" Europe to begin with when you start talking about the individual countries and their population, culture, history.
The EU is not One Big Melting Pot like for example the USA. There is no comparison possible.

[Once again, I point out that, from an outsider's perspective, the insistance that anti-Jewish attacks do not occur "inside Europe" [emphasis yours] is quite revealing.

I think most EU'ers posting here do hope it is indeed.

In what way are they not "inside"? Why should people who are "already European" take offence when someone says, "Europeans are committing more and more anti-Jewish attacks"? Is it not, in fact, literally true?

No, it is not. The simple fact that there are a lot of immigrants involved in this while there are many immigrants who don't even have the nationality of the country they live in, or have a double nationality, makes this claim already completely invalid.

I suggest I have identified the answer - that people in Europe do not emotionally identify these new Europeans as being "them" in a meaningful way. They are not ethnically European.

It is quite the opposite you need to take in account.

I further suggest that, for all of the good intentions of leftist European world problem-solvers, this "at home" problem remains unaknowledged and indeed unrecognized.

Not at all.

Indeed, I will go further. Suggesting that there is one standard of behaviour appropriate for "pseudo-Europeans" like Israelis, and another (far lower) for non-Europeans like Arabs, does the latter no favours. Once again, they are not like "us", which (in the face of all good intentions to the contrary) robs them of their humanity. This is damaging enough when it is applied to people who live in countries far away. When it is applied to people who actually live in Europe itself, it re-inforces the notion that they are "not as we are" - and inferior in a moral sense.

I don't know what you mean with "pseudo-Israelis".
The fact is that the presence of Jews in EU countries has a very long history and that they are seen as full (born)members of those countries societies. My Jewish friends are Belgian citizens and nothing else. Not in the least they would ever consider themselves as being "part" of the Israeli nation let be that they want to be seen as "pseudo-Israelis". I don' t know where you even get the idea.

That is however not the same for immigrants of countries who don't have such a longterm history of being present in EU societies. They have religious, cultural and family ties with their country of origin since they are indeed immigrants. (And I repeat: this is in no way the case with EU citizens who happen to be Jewish since they are there since centuries and are indeed EU citizens like Catholics, or whatever you may think off.)
There are a lot among those "new immigrants" who indeed "feel" as any other citizen born in their country of residence" = they speak, act and live like other citizens in the respective country. Yet there is even within this majority of non EU immigrants a strong identification with the country of origin and still ties with the country of origin, even if they are third generation and rather would like to cut off all of this. (There is also a very strong social control within those societies).
There was for example in Belgium a young woman of Turkish background on a list of a political party. When it came to election, propaganda was made on Turkish media destinated for the Turkish immigrant in Belgium and urging them to vote for her.
I'm sorry, but that is reality and that is why you can't talk about such immigrants as being nothing else but "EU'ers", even when they are that assimilated in society that they are a candidate on a voting list (if I remember well, it was for parliamental elections).
This influence from the homeland (innocent on first sight in this case but nevertheless very striking and one can argue about the significance) can not be excluded when you want to discuss the problem "anti semitism" in a EU context.
And take it from me that in the cases we are talking about here, the influence of "scholars" and "imams" indoctrinated with the Wahabbi doctrine encouraged and payed and send by the Saudis (and we all know under which umbrella those lunatics operate) is to blame for a great part of the problem. I applaud and encourage propositions to organise courses at academic level in order to educate home-born Imams in EU nations. This is in my view an absolute necessity to get rid of the Wahabbi influence (and take that for being a necessity worldwide).

Salaam. A

Malthus
01-16-2004, 03:11 PM
This one's easy. Try it with this emphasis then: "Not growing inside Europe". What I am trying to say is that these people in Europe aren't learning to hate jews, some people that hate jews are moving to Europe. Do you understand the distinction? Anti-semitism isn't on the rise here, it's just being relocated here to some extent (and not even to a very great extent either afaik). They aren't learning to hate jews here, they hate jews and then they come here.

I bet some of them change when they come here, so I wonder if in fact the total amount of anti-semitism isn't actually decreasing as a result of people moving to a more secular, open and wealthy place.

Anyway, hope that explains what I was trying to say, your whole post was based on the misunderstanding of my sentiment so I won't bother replying to it other then to apologise for my lack of communication skills.

I think the various points I made are quite valid, wherever you bold that sentence.

"Anti-semitism is on the rise in Europe" - still literally a true statement; whether because more people have moved there from elsewhere, bringing their anti-Semitism with them or not. Why is such a statement (assuming it is true, which you seem to acknowledge) irritating to Europeans? For, I submit, the reasons I cite - lack of emotional identification with persons of non-European ethnic origins.

Whether by so doing they decrease the overall amount of anti-semitism or not is interesting, but irrelevant.

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 03:30 PM
I further suggest that, for all of the good intentions of leftist European world problem-solvers, this "at home" problem remains unaknowledged and indeed unrecognized.
I actually feel like I need to get back to this...

Education about nazism, racism and anti-semitism is compulsory in the (also compulsory) basic school (9 years). They are all topic for debates in the media from time to time. A few years ago the government also sent out a book about the holocaust to every household in the country. How is that "unacknowledged and indeed unrecognised"?

I explained what was wrong with the "on the rise in EU" statement. Twice. I can accept that I didn't communicate it well the first time, but for you to not understand it the second time you must have been actively refusing to understand.

If you're going to ignore what I am saying and make up whatever explanation suits you best, I don't see a real need for me in the debate.

Aldebaran
01-16-2004, 03:42 PM
Education about nazism, racism and anti-semitism is compulsory in the (also compulsory) basic school (9 years). They are all topic for debates in the media from time to time.

In my experience that counts also for other EU nations then yours.

I explained what was wrong with the "on the rise in EU" statement.

As I did. I think debating is futile if the opponents refuse to even make an attemtp to understand what you try to bring across. So I am out of this debate unless someone can offer something interesting to me whihc makes it worth to continue.

Salaam.A

Aldebaran
01-16-2004, 03:53 PM
One more thing though

lack of emotional identification with persons of non-European ethnic origins.

As I said: it is rather the opposite when talking about Muslim immigrants causing such type of trouble in EU countries.
Thank you for at least noticing me saying it. I am part of both cultures. I am raised and educated in both worlds/cultures. I travel between and live in both = I am very well placed by this fact alone to be able to privide you with first hand insight and information on both.

Salaam. A

Rune
01-16-2004, 03:58 PM
I do very much feel there is a pan-European identity / history / culture etc. and feel myself a member of a pan-European community, and I would label myself European before Danish but perhaps after Scandinavian. I think Europe is the best thing since sliced bread. I’m proud to be European and a member of European history and culture.

Clearly immigration in Europe and Canada/USA are two different things. European nations are not normally immigrant nations, and have not your long tradition on how to handle it. Danish nationality does not Danish make. I think perhaps you accept immigrants as American when they can show the right passport, while I’d expect a Dane to show some common cultural traits. It’s not about the ethnic background, but the cultural ideas. Also I do not call immigrants into Europe Europeans before they themselves do so, this is a first. If a Somali immigrant consider himself Somalia why should I consider him European? Perhaps I have other qualifications as well (though religion is not one; Muslim or Judaism) but this is the most important.

I make a distinction between the anti-Semitic tendencies among left wing “old” Europeans and anti-Semitism among immigrants because I believe they have wildly different causes. In some ways I consider the left wing the worse, for, having been raised in an educated society, they should know better. However there really are no excuses for second generation immigrants either. I believe a lot of second generation immigrants habour anti-Semitic views, so in that sense it’s not true what Stoneburg says: that it’s not growing inside Europe. It clearly is. And we should examine this, bring it out into the open and deal with it. Not ignore it, or sweep it under the rug. The anti-Semitism among immigrants and their descendants should be confronted by unwavering determinism. Not humored, belittled or excused as understandable cultural baggage (this is often the case).

Aldebara:
“I applaud and encourage propositions to organise courses at academic level in order to educate home-born Imams in EU nations. This is in my view an absolute necessity to get rid of the Wahabbi influence “
Interesting Aldebaran. Completely agree. Such a thing was suggested in Denmark, but wasn’t shown much interest from Muslim groups – perhaps the timing was immature. When you lay off the “Americans are evil” rhetoric, you’re quite a reasonable fellow (meaning someone who thinks like me naturally), I wonder how you view the concept of the “Euro-Muslim”?

Stoneburg I remember a survey few years back. Wherein a catastrophical percentage of Swedes didn’t know what the holocaust was. Perhaps you remember. Also I have read in Danish newspapers, don’t know if it’s true, that history lessons in Sweden is not compulsory, and, as a result historic knowledge among Swedish students is miserable. (Not to say Danes are any better. . . . . . Well ok then. We are.)

- Rune

Malthus
01-16-2004, 04:00 PM
I actually feel like I need to get back to this...

Education about nazism, racism and anti-semitism is compulsory in the (also compulsory) basic school (9 years). They are all topic for debates in the media from time to time. A few years ago the government also sent out a book about the holocaust to every household in the country. How is that "unacknowledged and indeed unrecognised"?

I explained what was wrong with the "on the rise in EU" statement. Twice. I can accept that I didn't communicate it well the first time, but for you to not understand it the second time you must have been actively refusing to understand.

If you're going to ignore what I am saying and make up whatever explanation suits you best, I don't see a real need for me in the debate.

Funny you should accuse me of this.

I think you simply don't understand the point I was making. Which, as a matter of fact, had nothing whatsoever to do with the Holocaust. :confused:

Your debate tactic is puzzling to me. You seem to make lots of quite irrelevant statements, which, while no doubt admirable and interesting, have nothing to do with the argument at hand; and then get upset at being misunderstood.

I am sorry at giving offence. I have not tried to.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 04:03 PM
In my experience that counts also for other EU nations then yours.



As I did. I think debating is futile if the opponents refuse to even make an attemtp to understand what you try to bring across. So I am out of this debate unless someone can offer something interesting to me whihc makes it worth to continue.

Salaam.A

Aldebaran,

How can you conclude that debating with me is "futile" when I have not yet responded, as far as I know, to any of your posts? :confused:

Aldebaran
01-16-2004, 04:14 PM
How can you conclude that debating with me is "futile" when I have not yet responded, as far as I know, to any of your posts? :confused:

I'm sorry, but not taking in to account my explanations when replying to an other poster who tried to explain you about the same I tried to explain, gives the impression that whatever I write wont be taken in to account anyway = you seem to have come to your conclusions no matter what we bring into the discussion.

If I'm wrong about that I'm most ready to be corrected.

Salaam. A

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 04:18 PM
Stoneburg I remember a survey few years back. Wherein a catastrophical percentage of Swedes didn’t know what the holocaust was. Perhaps you remember. Also I have read in Danish newspapers, don’t know if it’s true, that history lessons in Sweden is not compulsory, and, as a result historic knowledge among Swedish students is miserable. (Not to say Danes are any better. . . . . . Well ok then. We are.)

Errr... I have never heard of such a thing. I've never met anyone that didn't know about the holocaust. Actually, if someone said "holocaust" most people probably wouldn't know what it ment, but if you asked if they knew that millions of jews were executed by the nazis during WWII they would be aware of that.

And history lessons are very much compulsory. I don't know how good the swedish historic knowledge is compared to other nations, but if that info comes from the same place that claims history isn't compulsory and thay people don't know that the holocaust occured, I won't give it any merit.


Malthus: Since you find my arguments irrelevant, then don't argue them. Problem solved.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 04:26 PM
I'm sorry, but not taking in to account my explanations when replying to an other poster who tried to explain you about the same I tried to explain, gives the impression that whatever I write wont be taken in to account anyway = you seem to have come to your conclusions no matter what we bring into the discussion.

If I'm wrong about that I'm most ready to be corrected.

Salaam. A

I didn't even see your post, before replying to his. Probably because I was busy replying.

Given that you have already made up your mind about how close-minded I am without bothering to debate with me first, I'm not sure I'm going to bother to reply to you.

Malthus
01-16-2004, 04:33 PM
Malthus: Since you find my arguments irrelevant, then don't argue them. Problem solved.

Well, you *could* [for the sake of argument] point out that I am wrong, that your comments are relevant, and point out *why*.

Since you won't, I am forced to conclude it is because you cannot.

This isn't a "problem" to me; it is simply an interesting phenominon, one I have seen before. To someone of convinced views, being out-argued is simply an irritation, rather than fun. So they put an end to it.

Aldebaran
01-16-2004, 04:39 PM
When you lay off the “Americans are evil” rhetoric...

I never use the words "US'ers are evil". But I presume that you speak of my attacks on the US policies and on some slightly blindfolded and/or misinformed/bigoted/whatever US'ers.
Well, I'm not the only one who tends to refer to that on this message board.
I agree that probably I'm seen as the most provocative in style and wording, yet somebody needs to be the "most bad", no? I'm always ready to volunteer for the lowest place in the popularity ranking

Speaking of "rethoric... I don't think I can do this in this rather "cold"(not meant to sound derogating) language, but you should hear me in Arabic when I'm challenged to give in to that part of my roots :)

It must be said however that when looking at the US propaganda and the speeches of US officials - president surely included - I must say they almost beat any genuine Arab in this. Yet they don't have quite the "feeling" or the right timing, nor do they have the right vocabulary in the language, nor do they have the right sound in the language. So their attempts sound unnatural-Hollywood-style to my innocent ears.

I wonder how you view the concept of the “Euro-Muslim”?

That is an interesting question, but not a simple one to answer. It is good food for an other thread in my opinion, if it was only because of the fact that several EU'ers are also posting here.

Salaam. A

Beagle
01-16-2004, 05:53 PM
Despite the handicap of being a non-EUer, I'll just keep trudging along with more articles. Sorry if there are any duplicates.

Policy Review (http://www.policyreview.org/oct03/rosenthal.html)Far from reflecting some deep-rooted and organic hatred of Jews and Israel amidst France’s populations of North African extraction, it would seem, then, that the anti-Semitic attacks are just the pursuit by other means of the latest cause célèbre of Parisian intellectuals and students, with disaffected and déclassé North African teenagers happily assuming the role of “shock troops” for their more privileged comrades au centre ville. One should not underestimate the quotient of sheer delinquency among the motivations of the perpetrators of the French attacks. The youth who set fire to Jewish monuments in Strasbourg are not likely very different from the youth who for years now have every weekend also been setting fire to parked cars in Strasbourg, apparently for the pure pleasure of it. On April 10, 2002, in one of the most widely reported incidents, some 30 masked assailants armed with baseball bats and crying “Death to the Jews!” broke up the soccer practice of a Jewish youth club in a Parisian suburb. As the soccer players scattered, the assailants took a moment to steal their sport sacks and portable telephones — the latter being the most coveted prize of France’s juvenile gangsterdom — before taking flight themselves.

All of this is not to deny that anti-Jewish stereotypes and prejudices have currency in certain North African immigrant milieus in France. But it is to say that they do not necessarily have more currency there than in other social milieus and, in any case, that the responses of the French left and the French media to the Palestinian intifada have served to make Jews and Jewish institutions seem like socially acceptable targets of hatred and contempt in France. After all, it was before synagogues began to burn in France that protesters could be seen at pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Paris carrying banners juxtaposing Sharon and Hitler or featuring a swastika and a Star of David connected by an equal sign.

The responsibility of self-styled leftists in fostering an atmosphere of fevered suspicion toward “Israelite” institutions can be further gauged by the famous remarks of José Bové, spokesman for the Confederation of French Farmers and darling of anti-globalization activists worldwide, made upon his return to France in early April 2002 from a “solidarity mission” to Ramallah. Asked to comment on the recent string of anti-Semitic attacks, Bové suggested that one ask in turn “who profits from the crime?” About six months earlier, the French academic Marie-José Mondzain had used the same phrase in a delirious article in Le Monde in order to insinuate (“Bush, Putin and Sharon!” was the author’s emphatic answer) joint Israeli and American responsibility for the September 11 attacks. Horst Mahler, the German neo-Nazi and former raf member, had likewise responded to the September 11 attacks by asking “cui bono?” In his April remarks, Bové went on to explain that “the Israeli government and its secret services have an interest in creating a certain psychosis, to make one believe that an anti-Semitic atmosphere has developed in France, in order better to divert attention.” In the meantime, Daniel Lindenberg, in a bestselling pamphlet denouncing those he has baptized France’s “new reactionaries” — including under this heading the philosopher Pierre-André Taguieff, who was one of the first to call attention to the recrudescence of anti-Semitism in France — has flatly declared “the reality” of France’s problems with anti-Semitism to be “open to doubt.” This is what I was trying to say before. Pinning it all on imported Arab juvenille delinquents is one part, but only part, of the story. The overall intellectual climate is borderline at best.
Time Europe (same issue and section, different article) (http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2002/0617/antisemitism/story.html)
History News Network (http://hnn.us/articles/1839.html) EU report that wasn't published.
US Holocaust Memorial Museum (http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/persecution/after.html) European anti-Semitism after 1800.
Philly Inquirer (http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/7511964.htm) On Greece. Very interesting. Greece is an interesting case study of the nexus between rabid opposition to Israel and old-fashioned European anti-Semitism. Its socialist leaders have a long history of close ties to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, and the Greek public is deeply mistrustful of the United States, in part because of U.S. support for the repressive junta that was deposed in 1974. A full 90 percent of Greeks opposed the war in Iraq, polls showed.

Greece is also an extremely homogenous country that only recently began allowing significant numbers of immigrants. About 97 percent of the native-born population is baptized into the Greek Orthodox Church, whose clerics have sometimes been accused of preaching anti-Semitism. There is little mention of the Holocaust or the fate of Greek Jews in the country's school textbooks, according to an analysis by a professor at the University of Athens.

More than 90 percent of Greek Jews - about 70,000 - were deported to death camps by the Nazis during World War II.

Those who remain pick their battles carefully, and they express ambivalence about Greek anti-Semitism.

"Jews have never had it better here," said Jean Cohen, a Greek-born Jewish correspondent for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. But then Cohen, a Greek citizen, recounted how, when he was debating the Theodorakis remarks with a television commentator on the air, the man retorted: "You should respect the country that's hosting you."

"In my opinion, the Greek news media is anti-Semitic," Cohen said later. He said newspapers frequently run stereotypical cartoons and make irrelevant references to someone's Jewishness.

Too many Greeks blame Greek Jews for the policies of the state of Israel, said Constantinis, who hid with his family in a one-room flat during the German occupation.

Jews are often described in the Greek language as Israelites, and that word is often used interchangeably with Israeli.

"This is caused by anti-Semitism," he said.

An even more aggressive critic is Panayotis Dimitras, a non-Jew who runs the Greek Helsinki Monitor, a human rights organization.

"We don't have much violence here," he said. "What we have much more of is anti-Semitic hate speech in mainstream media and in mainstream politics. And, most importantly, an absence of reaction. There is a tolerance of intolerance, because we have not been taught otherwise. There is no anti-racist education in Greece."

In October, an internationally known Greek artist, Alexandros Psychoulis, began displaying a work featuring a Palestinian woman blowing herself up in a crowded Israeli supermarket.

In an interview, he professed to be mystified as to why Jewish activists had expressed revulsion over the piece.

"They've actually built this atmosphere without any real basis," he said.

Last month, though, Psychoulis had a decidedly harsher take in remarks to Ta Nea, Greece's largest daily newspaper.

"I personally feel that the experiment of Israel has failed," he was quoted as saying, "and I understand the desperation of a girl who carries out a suicide bombing having nothing to lose."
Israpundit (http://israpundit.com/archives/004321.html#more) A list of recent incidents throughout Europe.
Guardian UK (http://www.guardian.co.uk/farright/story/0,11981,1092466,00.html) [b]"What we are facing in Europe is an anti-semitism that has always existed and it really is not a new phenomenon," the prime minister said in an interview with EUpolitix.com, an online newswire dedicated to EU affairs.

"This anti-semitism is fundamental, and today, in order to incite it and to undermine the Jews' rights for self-defence, it is re-aroused.

"These days to conduct an anti-semite policy is not a popular thing, so the anti-semites bundle their policies in with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." [bolding mine]
National Review (http://www.nationalreview.com/stuttaford/stuttaford200312090830.asp)
US House of Representatives resolution condemning European anti-Semitism (http://www.house.gov/international_relations/democratic/press_europe_020709.html)
BACKGROUNDLong PDF on anti-Semitism throughout history. (http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/jewish_civilisation/yehuda_bauer_talk_islam.pdf)

Long PDF on EU anti-Semitism (http://www.cohn-bendit.de/depot/standpunkte/Manifestations%20of%20anti-Semitism%20in%20the%20European%20Union_EN.pdf)

Stoneburg
01-16-2004, 08:05 PM
Well, you *could* [for the sake of argument] point out that I am wrong, that your comments are relevant, and point out *why*.

Since you won't, I am forced to conclude it is because you cannot.

This isn't a "problem" to me; it is simply an interesting phenominon, one I have seen before. To someone of convinced views, being out-argued is simply an irritation, rather than fun. So they put an end to it.

You said, twice, that my arguments were irrelevant without clarifying why. Now I need to explain why they are relevant? Considering that I am still not sure if I have even managed to communicate what my arguemtns are, I don't think I want to try that. Especially since I have no idea which of my arguments are irrelevant to you, or why.

Other people have posted and seem to have understod, so I have been able to communicate it at least to some, I'll settle for that.

If you like to think of it is being "out argued", fine, I think of it as a fruitless debate where the involved parties fail to communicate and nothing is achieved. I already knew your opinions (well, not that you had them, but the opinions) so I didn't learn anything new, you didn't understand mine/find them relevant, so you didn't take anything away from the debate either. If that is your idea of "winning" then congratulations, you won. To me it seems we both lost.

Rune
01-17-2004, 05:28 AM
Stoneburg

This was the survey I had in mind.
http://www.codoh.com/newsdesk/000122.html
http://www.nordstjernan.com/arkiv/980323.html#08
“Three years ago, the government was stunned to learn that nearly a third of Swedish youths did not believe the Holocaust took place.”

However another survey:
http://www.charitywire.com/charity11/00548.html
"Sweden stands apart from other countries we have surveyed on knowledge about the Holocaust, and that is, in part, due to the Swedish government's own commitment to preserving memory," said David A. Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee.

And:
http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/antiholo/holocausts.html
“On the other hand, the percentage of respondents who felt that there was the possibility that the Holocaust never occurred was extremely low in all the AJC surveys. In the U.S., Switzerland, Sweden and Poland respectively, only 1 percent of the respondents gave an affirmative answer (that is, they considered it possible that there never was a Holocaust). In Sweden, Switzerland, the U.S. and France respectively, most of the respondents knew that the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust was 6 million. In Germany, 36 percent of the respondents cited the correct figure. “
“Little opposition to the idea of Jewish neighbors was found among the respondents in Sweden (2 percent), the U.S. (5 percent) and Switzerland (8 percent).”
“[The lowest percentages of respondents who believed that Jews exerted too much influence were] in Sweden (2 percent) and the Czech Republic (8 percent).”

(while http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/01/1566578.php)
“34 percent of Americans agree that "Jews have too much influence on Wall Street," and 37 percent believe that the Jews were responsible for killing Jesus Christ”.
As well as “The survey found higher anti-Semitism among Democrats than Republicans. Twenty percent of Democrats and Independents tend to "view Jews as caring only about themselves," compared to only 12 percent among Republicans”. Seems it’s not only in Europe the left wing has taken to carry the flame of anti-Semitism

And:
http://www.cjnews.com/pastissues/00/feb03-00/international/int6.htm
At the suggestion of Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize laureate Elie Wiesel, there will be an annual conference on "Conscience and Humanism" in Stockholm.
"I don't know what your role will be in Swedish history, but I know what it will be in Jewish history, Wiesel told Persson in his opening remarks at the conference. "It will be glorious."

Etc. I think the first survey is at odds with the large number of other surveys, and I’ll conclude I was mistaken on Swedish ignorance on the holocaust. You do indeed seem to be admirable educated – however only because of a continued focus on the issue. A thing, things likes this thread help further. So instead of hoping it to be the last, lets hope we have we have many like it. Also despite the knowledge, Sweden has not miraculously escaped the rising anti-Semitism, as the link already posted by sleeping clearly document.
http://www.crif.org/index.php?menu=5&dossier=33&id_doss=2003&PHPSESSID=355dd37ce0c02983e2cc4670bf79da8a

Beagle. I know labmonkey wanted to discuss Europe. But I think it has been used to imply this is something exclusively to Europe. I’m sure the current disturbing trends are mirrored in Canada and the US. And a cursory search will unearth many likewise American articles.

- Rune

DSeid
01-17-2004, 09:30 AM
Let’s review.

Is there an increase in overt antisemitic incidents in Europe?

Yes. Despite Alde’s distate for statistics and our EU’ers lack of personal witnessing of them, we have hard numbers on this. Evidence has been amply provided. They are mainly committed by Arab immigrants. The Far Right hate groups are attacking Arab immigrants more than they are Jews nowadays. We disagree on whether these attacks are exclusively the result of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict or secondary to reimported and sanctioned anti-Semitic bile in Arab media.

Is there an increase in antisemitism in Europe outside of that immigrant population? Is there significant antisemitism in Europe outside of that population?

I would say that there is no significant increase, but that historically antisemitic viewpoints have continued in Europe and have found socially acceptable means of expression. In my view vilification of Israel is part of that. (the particular poll of the op is not, IMHO, good evidence of such) There are critiques of Israeli policies and actions and there are things that cross the line. Comparing Israeli actions to genocide and the Nazis for example cross the line. Others believe that there is a rise. In these regards it is scary that countries that scored BEST for having little antisemitism had 8% of respondents not wanting to have Jewish neighbors and feeling that Jews have too much influence.

Others on this board dispute both these contentions. They believe that any criticism of Israel is fair game and that if someone attacks Israel alone it is just because …., well it doesn’t matter why because the rest of us “aren’t empowered” to question their motivations. To them the millennium plus of European Jew hating and mistreatment is ancient history and is now gone, irrelevant to today’s enlightened world; expressed concern that it had only gone under the surface and is coming out of its hole blinking as it gets used to the light again, now clothed in righteous concern over the plight of the Palestinians, is Zionist propaganda designed to deflect attention from Israeli actions, is Jews whining that they “are always your victims.” Afterall, they don’t know anyone who says anything explicitly antisemitic. They even have Jewish friends.

Are Europeans alone in this?

No, of course not. But it has played out differently there than in the US. Europe as a whole was more directly involved in the events of the Holocaust. Beyond Germany and Poland, many Italians, French, and others collaborated with deportation of Jews to death camps. This made overt anti-Semitism among the intellectual crowd anathema. In the US this never occurred. Charges of Jews as Communist, Jews as the controllers of capitalism, Jews controlling the media, Jews controlling foreign policy, and so on, never were quite as verboten in America. Jew-haters haven’t needed to hide too deep. There are also the facts there are more Jews in America (a result of the Holocaust) who have been vocal advocates of Israel, the historic alignment of Israel as an ally when the world was divided between those with us against the Communist hordes or against us, and that Jews are just part of the mix of different groups hated by others. In America there is overall less stigma for not subscribing to mainstream culture (as in Winston's: “I think perhaps you accept immigrants as American when they can show the right passport, while I’d expect a Dane to show some common cultural traits. It’s not about the ethnic background, but the cultural ideas.”) In America Jews are mostly secularized members of society; in a society that mostly tolerates cultural differences, we are less different than many others. The Left does harbor some who go for Jewish capitalist globalization conspiracy theories and idealize the Palestinians as a Star Wars Rebel Alliance against the Israeli Death Star, but they mainly run rallies at college campuses and anti-globalization shindings.

A fair recap?

gum
01-17-2004, 12:59 PM
DSeid Absolutely a fair recap. Anti-semitism is on the rise in Europe. Caused both by the 'new' as by the old Europeans.

I don't understand why it is so hard to admit. It's wrong, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

btw: Before I get sneered at as being a right-wing, xenophobe, anti-Islamist: I'm not. Everyone who knows me, will find that hilarious. I've tried [heck, I'm still trying] to understand other peoples and their beliefs. As a volunteer I still teach Dutch to Marrocan, Turkish and Iraqi women.
The more I get to know those women, the more I notice their hatred towards Jewish people.
A husband of one of the woman said: We have only one goal in mind: Kill all Jews.

And there are ofcourse the 'old' anti-semists. I have to say; I don't encounter them often, but they must be there.

Please don't say: There's none in [I]my country. That's hypocrite.

Rune
01-18-2004, 06:45 AM
Continuing on my Sweden rant:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_18-1-2004_pg4_7
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/17/1073878075064.html
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=industryNews&storyID=4152404
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/01/17/sweden.israel/

It seems now that Israel is threatening to boycott the Swedish holocaust conference created in the vake of the survey that showed a very large part of Swedish youth didn’t believe the holocaust ever took part. They do so after a Swedish art museum in conjunction with the coming conference has taken the doubtful decision to exhibit a so called installation art-work depicting the Palestinian suicide bomber Hanadi Jaradat who murdered 21 Israeli in a restaurant. The piece indeed sounds in very poor taste; wallowing in a glorification of bloody murder. And this is not only a matter of freedom of speech since art museums are public funded in Sweden and more so since the exhibition was meant to be directly linked to the anti-genocide conference (which Sweden had promised would have no connection to the current middle-east situation). Can’t believe the artist insist the artwork is a “[…]message of openness, discussion, understanding and conciliation”. I think this is another example of the one sidedness of European critique. Who could imagine the other side: Idealised Israeli soldiers gloriously blasting Palestinian youths to bloody pulp (even would it have been based on truthful events)? And exhibited in a public funded museum? The Israelite ambassador shows no remorse after his one man berserk. Good for him.

Looking for links for this I fell across this little tidbit. It seems the (now late) Swedish foreign minister Anna Lindh, expressed deep regrets about the result of the free Israeli election. I can’t recall a single other instance wherein a western country has public criticized the outcome of another country’s free election. Actually isn’t it pretty much standard diplomatic form to abstain from that. (though I think a few European countries will twitch if you reelect Bush :) )

DSeid: I think you make a number of statements I can’t support. “In America there is overall less stigma for not subscribing to mainstream culture” In some areas, perhaps. Overall, I don’t think so, e.g. see the gay / lesbian situation or atheists etc. And if you read my sentence as a stigma you misunderstood my intention. I was trying to convey that I don’t really feel much moral responsibility or think it a blot on European society if an Arab immigrant, not raised in or formed by European civilization, expresses anti-Semitic sentiments; as it’s basically Arab anti-Semitism and not European anti-Semitism. As for second generation immigrants it’s another story. If America has less Arab anti-Semitism is perhaps a result of having overall fewer Arab immigrants and being geographical further removed. Also I’d point out that Europe was an ally of Israel before the US, and Israel’s survival in her first years owes a lot to French goodwill and weapons supplies.

I have no answer to the rising anti-Semitism among the left wing as it basically puzzles me. But my guess is an unholy mix of Marxists dinosaurs, glorification of the revolutionary, anti-Globalization (have you read some of the things spewed from their icon: Jose Bove) rooting for the (perceived) underdog, anti-Americanism (seeing Israel as America ally, and the Arabs as the ally of Soviet), and a basic fascination for blood and violence. I can’t see it rooted in history to a very large extend.

BTW DSeid I have personally witnessed an anti-Semitic attack. An (Iranian atheist) friend I have was wearing an (Egyptian Muslim) cap. He was attacked outside the central station in Copenhagen by a second generation Arab immigrant who though it was a Jewish cap. However before I could react the attacked was fortunately in turn attacked by a number of other Arab or middle-east immigrants, who, they explained, had nothing against Jews. They beat him up pretty badly before the police came around. So there, no Jews involved. The day saved by Arab immigrants.

- Rune

gum
01-18-2004, 08:05 AM
Thank you, WinstonSmith, for explaining in much better English than me. [I?]

The "work of art" is called 'Snow White And The Madness Of Truth', features a photo of Hanadi Jaradat, - the mother of two young children, who's dream was to become a martyr for allah and have her bodyparts flew all over - a 29-year-old trainee lawyer who blew up herself and 19 Israelis in a Haifa restaurant in October.

Indeed: If it was the other way around, no-one would even have dared to call it 'art'.

Yes, the anti-semitism among the so called 'left-wing' puzzles me too.
I can only assume -since I'm a notorious left-winger myself - that - again- some left-wingers are a bit out of date.
Give them time. :)

DSeid
01-18-2004, 09:55 AM
Winston,

Stigma was perhaps a poor word choice. I apologize if it caused any offence. I'll try again. Substitute the following:

As Winston points out, absorbing the "host" country's culture and assimilating as fully as possible is of greater importance to many in Europe than in America where maintaining a large degree of "other" cultural/national identity is, in the main, tolerated. (This is also seen in the French interpretation of secularism. In America it means minimal State imposition of religious symbols with preservation of individual freedom to express; in France it means limitation of individual expression of religious symbols since they differentiate the indivdual from the majority group.). In America Jews are mostly secularized members of society; in a society that mostly tolerates cultural differences, we are less different than many others.

Better?

I can see your position vis a vis gays and atheists but do not really consider those issues of preserving cultural heritage/values. Intolerance certainly is in no short supply in America; I do not mean to idealize. But the concept of being an American who also has a peoplehood identity other than American is more acceptable here. The concept of Jews feeling that they are part of a Jewish people, a nation, as an important part of who they are is just part of the normative American process, in the mix with bumper stickers decaring "Italian Stallion" and "Polish Pride", and parades on St. Patrick's Day. All of which I think would stand out in your country. I don't even mean to say that there is less antisemitism in the US. There may or may not be. But it has different manifestations. In Europe old line stereotypes have too much Nazi baggage now and discomfort with "Jewish nationhood" has moved into the frontline since Israel was concieved; in America the antisemites still focus on the stereotypes of Jews with undue power ... conspiring to impose liberalism or neoconservatism; behind capitalist globalization or behind communism. An identity with a Jewish people is less of the issue.

We disgree on the historical rootedness of the problem and that's okay. My recap was intended to bring this thread back from a contentious cusp to some level of respectful understanding of each others different POVs. Posters (Stoney, Malthus, Alde) each were feeling that their points weren't being heard. I was wanting to make it clear that we have each heard each others positions even if we disagree, and give an opportunity to clarify if I still didn't quite get the point that someone else was trying to make. I can, in good faith, occasionally be quite dense.

Your information on the situation in Sweden is informative and has parallel with Beagle's post about the situation in Greece. (and they are different artists.) I suspect that the Museum director doesn't think of him or herself as antisemitic for placing that work in an exhibit linked to The Holocaust, nor does the Greek artist. They likely think that this is just oversensitivity on the part of Jews.

An aside: I do believe that you are mistaken about Europe's "goodwill" in Israel's early days. Israel's early days were marked by a worldwide arms embargo (in which America participated) ... ironically enough only the vicious antisemite Stalin would sell to Israel (via the Czech Republic) ... and only America and the USSR initially diplomatically recognized Israel, quickly followed by Guatemala, Byelorussia, the Ukraine, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Uruguay, and Yugoslavia. (Britian followed in January of 1949. Despite its creation by UN mandate, the Un declined its initial application for membership. It acceded a year later.) You are correct that France sold arms to Israel before the US did. This was in 1955, I believe, in response to Egyptian support of Algerian rebels. America didn't sell arms to Israel until 1962.

Stoneburg
01-18-2004, 11:55 AM
WinstonSmith: There was a controversial exhibition that was wrecked by an Israeli ambassador, and this is proof of anti-semitism? I never saw it, but here's been plenty of controversial exhibitions in this country. You don't like it? The Israeli ambassador doesn't like it? Tough shit, it's called freedom of speech and freedom of expression, that means you don't have to like everything. The piece was named "Snow White and the Maddness of Truth", which seems to indicate to me that the creater didn't intend it as a glorification of anything but rather a statement about how crazy things have become. If it was a picture of an Israeli soldier I doubt the "outrage" would have been very different. So stop with the suffering act please.

First you claim that a "catastrophical" amount of swedes don't believe in the holocaust, then you post links that claim that sweden is the least anti-semitic country in the world. You seem to have some sort of problem with the left in Europe, considering your invectives, so far I have yet to see one rational point. In fact, it would seem like this thread has started to evolve into a bash-the-left and pro-Israel festival. Partisan bitching and whining doesn't really get you anything, other then an opportunity to feel connected to people already sharing your view.

I'm not going to take the opposing side, as stupid as I find the extreme pro-Israel side, the other one is just as dumb. Let me know if anything new or unexpected happens.

DSeid
01-18-2004, 12:39 PM
Sigh.

So much for my effort, eh?

Stoneberg, please read my last few posts. There is really no cause for anger here. Chill dude. Winston has been very clear that he was presenting some conflicting data and trying to be fair in his assessment of it. That's why he said "however ..." and statedI think the first survey is at odds with the large number of other surveys, and I’ll conclude I was mistaken on Swedish ignorance on the holocaust. You do indeed seem to be admirable educated – however only because of a continued focus on the issue. A thing, things likes this thread help further. And continued in another post with an incident that to Jewish ears seems like they really don't quite get it afterall. You are welcome to not understand why placing that work in a show linked to The Holocaust is considered highly offensive to many Jews. Or to believe that it shouldn't be and that the Israeli ambassador was out of line. I really am just wanting to make sure that the differing POVs understand each other here. Is there something about your position that I have missed in my recap? Some significant arguments that I failed to include? If so then please clarify. If you still really think that my concern over antisemitism in Europe is just an "extreme pro-Israel" stance then so be it.

Beagle
01-18-2004, 02:47 PM
Beagle. I know labmonkey wanted to discuss Europe. But I think it has been used to imply this is something exclusively to Europe. I’m sure the current disturbing trends are mirrored in Canada and the US. And a cursory search will unearth many likewise American articles. As my articles noted, the problem must be analyzed country-by-country, incident-by-incident, and most importantly political climate-by-political climate.

If you want to compare the United States and the anti-Semitism here to Europe, feel free to do so. For one thing, not counting major terrorist incidents like September 11, 2001, attacks on Jews are fairly uncommon, per capita let's say, in the United States.

Unlike many nations in Europe, the United States allows the pro-Israeli position to be heard. This is often spun as a Jewish conspiracy to control the media. That's Exhibit One in anti-Semitism -- IMO.

Blood libel, already documented, is another. That would probably not make it into a US cartoon whether it depicted Ariel Sharon or Yassir Arafat. Surprising, as the Brits are noted for, ahem, good taste.

The French model of government-housing a huge immigrant population has been tried in the US. It doesn't work. Without getting sidetracked on a welfare issue: the key point is that the new Islamic population feels unassimilated into French culture. This is due in part, but only in part, to Islamic "standoffishness." In many cases the young Muslims claim is that French employers will not hire young Muslims.

In the United States there are many self-employed, or just employed Muslims. There is no major Muslim unemployment problem that vastly outstrips the overall numbers.

I hate to mention it, but as noted, the US does not have a longterm history of killing Jews. I know that the traditional hatred for Jews is everywhere, and we imported much of the European version wholecloth when we moved here, but we have a Holocaust Museum -- sans holocaust.

Moreover, importantly, the US has always done a passable job with waves of immigrants for over one hundred years. As the article on Greece highlited, a homogeneous culture is far more likely to have problems with new immigration than somewhere like, say, my neighborhood.

I would not be kidding when I say that if only my neighborhood survived the next global catastrophe would have every significant human genetic grouping -- save north-of-the-Arctic-Circle-people -- in existence today. We have Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Prots, Cats, "Euro, Slavic, Germanic," (me, for example) Asian, Arab, Indian, Native American, Hispanic mostly, but you name it.

That's America in many parts of the US. Europe is also like that in some urban areas. The overall mix, IMO, is more heterogeneous in the US. Again, most importantly, the mix has been heterogeneous for a long time. Black and white have been not getting along successfully for, what, four hundred years? Sure, my ancestors were sipping a mint julep -- no, wait, boarding a boat to leave the Continent -- but somehow we built the New World together, along with the Chinese who built the railroads, the Irish who "need not apply" but finally made it big, etc.

Rune
01-18-2004, 04:19 PM
Stoneburg:
I did in fact not make any claim that the exhibit, by itself, was proof of any anti-Semitism just that I though it in very bad taste. And perhaps it’s, as has already been argued in this thread, another example of the one-sidedness of the critique; which may indicate anti-Semitism.

I already did address the issue of free speech. If you find my arguments unconvincing, you should try to say why, not just restate it’s a free-speech thing. By the way, do you remember any controversial pro-Israel exhibits?

I waver on the Swedish thing because clearly this is not a black or white problem and because I’m personally unsure of what really is going on. This is how I see my Swedish comments progress:

1. You wrote anti-Semitism was all but impossible in Sweden since awareness of Nazism and anti-Semitism was very high.
2. I said I faintly remembered a survey a few years back, which stated otherwise.
3. You said such a thing was ridiculous and you at least remembered no such thing. My source must be bollocks.
4. So convinced I was wrong (being a Swede you should know better than me) I hit the net to see what it was I couldn’t quite remember. And I found the survey which if not quite what I wrote (not ignorance but something worse: denial), was near enough to it so I think you ought to have made the connection. Especially since the survey was a pretty big thing, prompting your Premier to a number of initiatives to combat the trend, including this conference. In the same search I also read a number of other surveys and articles that seemed to give the opposite image of Sweden, and, magnanimously that I am, I tentatively conclude that while the first survey must surly mean something it did seem to stand a bit alone and certainly it’s not a clear cut issue. Perhaps as a Swede it would have behooved you better to address the first negative survey, rather than ignore it.
5. The next day I read the news about the art exhibition, which forced me to the rethink the conclusion. I, unlike you apparently, have not fixed my mind in stone on this subject. Maybe there are no big problems in Europe or Sweden. Maybe there are. Nothing you have written has done anything to convince me either way.

I personally am not left wing on most issues, but have much respect for an honest left wing position, except for a subset that that seem bogged down in the cold war – and naturally if they show anti-Semitic sentiments.

Can you show me precisely wherein this thread you find this extreme pro-Israel slant you talk about. I thought the consensus is pretty much that it’s valid to be even very critical of Israel. The debate is whether the critique is in any way proportional to her wrongs and if not whether this indicative of anything anti-Semitism.

Beagle: I did and do not want to turn it into a Europe vers. America debate and will not reply to your post since that will make it so. Just that I, as a European, did not like to be singled out as the evil continent.

- Rune

Rune
01-19-2004, 07:06 AM
The Nation says No. (http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040202&s=klug) No New anti-Semitism.

And I must say I find such argument as Chesler’s "In my opinion, anyone who denies that this is so or who blames the Jews for provoking the attacks is an anti-Semite.", if not taken out of context beneath contempt – especially the first part.

- Rune