From Dictionary.com
Semitism:
Semitic traits, attributes, or customs
Semitic:
Of, relating to, or constituting a subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic language group that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and Aramaic.
Semite:
A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
anti-Semitism:
Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism.
The Jews seemed to have hi-jacked the word “Semitism” and kept it for themselves. By definition, Jews are anti-Semitic too, towards the Arabs.
Not confused at all. If I thought you were serious about a discussion, I’d happily contribute. However, your last two sentences indicate you have an agenda.
I noticed in a political cartoon, (Telnaes IIRC), where the artists had associated the word anit-semitism with Saudi Arabia. This struck me as peculiar as Arabs are semitic people as well, IIRC.
Rather than come up with a new word, wouldn’t it just be better and easier to educate people about the meaning of the current functional word. No matter how many new words ones decides to start using, at some point it’s necessary to promote the awareness of the words actual meaning.
Rather than invent a new term and then promote the awareness of the new term’s meaning, it would be simpler, more effective, more aesthetically pleasing, and more efficient to promote awareness of what the current term, anti-semitic, means.
Your proposal to create a new term rather than just properly use the current term smacks of Big-Brother newspeak and mind control through language control.
In addition to that your proposal is needlessly complicated, linguistically ugly, and dreadfully inefficient.
It’s Humane, because when the Jews are credited with starting WW I “The War to End All Wars”… the Arabs get blamed for it because they are Semites also.
So as a Human Rights gesture and to speed up the thought process. Jews should be named Judeosemites. To stop the confusion that may be Arabs.
Easier is TV. Intellect is defining entities.
Twisting the meanings of words as you proscribe is what the Judeosemites are often accused of.
“Anti-semitism” was a term created by the Jew-hater Wilhelm Marr in 1879 to replace the German word “Judenhass” - “Jew-hatred.” It was created as a word to hide behind. He felt that it sounded less vulgar and perhaps even somewhat scientific. It was never meant as a word to apply to all Semitic people or to Arabs, and never has. It means Jew-hater, nothing else, and always has.
Other than that … sigh. These malignant clowns still exist. To those who did not understand why some of us Jews get a little hypersensitive sometimes, it is sad how many of these pitiful people ares till out there.
The jews are credited with starting WW I?
where did you get that from?
If you were talking about WW II you might have a point - the nazis called it the jewish war in a perverted twist of their insane minds.
Just accept the word for what it means: ideologically motivated hostility toward Jews.
It’s true that the term Semite has taken on a different meaning from the original one. I don’t know of anybody who’s actually confused by this. It’s not like the subject is complicated. Anti-Semite means people who hate Jews. Comprendez vous?
Ya wanna try a counter cite or something there, Franklin? Something to support your point? Generally people seem perfectly capable to distinguish between Arabs and Jews. Arabs and Jews make it pretty clear who’s who these days, I think.
This thread is not really about your hatred of Jews - it’s about semantics. What you’re actually asking here is “Should we accept a prescriptive or a descriptive usage of words?”
I see you fall into the prescriptive camp.
Are there any other words that began meaning one thing, but now have a more specific meaning, to which you object?
No. When somebody says something to a Jew that the Jew doesn’t like to hear, the Jew doesn’t say “oh vey–that’s Anti-Judeosemitic” now do they, no. They say it’s “Anti-Semitic” which means against all the Arab world.
It’s like saying “oh you said against the Jew. No you are anti-world!”
See what I mean. They, the Jews, are small, but claim any attack on them is not an attack on them but the whole world or the whol half world or the whole middle east.
You see they never take RESPONSIBILITY. That’s why they have no country.
Nevermind, we’re getting sidetracked. Considering how hard it is to find a track in the first place here…
In a technical sense, yes. But I’d be amazed if anyone has ever misunderstood the term in this way. As has been previous noted, the term was coined by an anti-Jewish bigot, so I fail to see how you can blame the Jews for using it to try and hide. Sounds like the opposite was the case. Do you want to deal with that, or will you just say you won’t accept it?
But who on earth ever takes this particular usage to mean the Arab world? Clearly you do, but I must say, you’re in a teeny tiny little minority. As are your apparent political views, thankfully.
So, do you dislike the phrase “copper bottomed” too? It’s not about how good a deal is - it’s about ships! How dare people go around accusing deals of being like ships!