Left wing antisemitism

According to the original report (PDF), the question asked is:

I don’t know how much more direct you can get than that. Obviously the definition of favorable/unfavorable is left up to the respondent. If someone you knew told you they had “an unfavorable view of blacks”, would you not consider them a racist?

Let’s not poison the well with statements of the “If you don’t agree with me, you’re obviously an idiot” variety, eh?

Ah yes, the taboo that won’t shut up. Look, I don’t deny that sometimes defenders of Israel use non-sequitur allegations of anti-semitism to respond to criticisms of Israeli policy, but IME, I have seen in online discussion forums way more accusations that “you can’t criticize Israeli policy without being accused of anti-semitism” than actual incidences of someone responding to a criticism of Israel or Israeli policy with such an accusation (sorry the verbiage on that sentence is kind of repetitive, but I think it’s clear what I mean). Anyway, my post cited a study demonstrating anti-semitism outside of the context of Israel so I don’t see how your response isn’t a hijack.

Now, as for the article referred to in the OP, here it is. It also mentions the study I cited, then goes on to say:

I couldn’t find the original study, but here is a Google translation of a (not necessarily unbiased, but you are welcome to find others) article about it:

In fairness, these two numbers are about even, so it doesn’t show that anti-Semitism is correlated to “leftwingness”. However, it does show that bigotry is spread out among all quarters of the Spanish polity, and the left is not immune to these kind of beliefs. It is strange that they compare the extreme-right to the center-left, but the point still stands.

Could you be more specific with what you mean by that? I hear people saying it a lot but the implications behind it are unclear to me.

I wouldn’t say ‘everybody all of the sudden’. It’s more like ‘typical reaction of some’ that has ‘caught on by everybody who can’t look at in context’.

That’s why being a moron is inherently dangerous. :o

In some kind of misguided attempt to continue to be heroes of the people, I’m sure.

We don’t support the PLO? :whaa:

Yeah, but when said agreement failed, the blame was put on Israelis. There’s been a shift in Israel sentiment over the last ten or fifteen years…they don’t criticize Palestinian politics. :dubious:

The PLO gets to play off terrorist attacks as “oh, we had nothing to do with it” :rolleyes: and when Israel retaliates, the PLO can keep its “innocence” while fanning the flames of anti-Israel rhetoric to the media. So it starts to look like Israel v. the Little Guy.

It was two “leftist” Presidents who rejected refugees and…you know, two leftist Presidents who tried to stop Jews from declaring statehood. :wink: That’s three Presidents in a row who really weren’t concerned about the welfare of the Jewish people so much as political expediency.

Next you’re going to tell me that Lincoln was fighting against slavery the whole time. :stuck_out_tongue:

yup. and that’s the danger. defamation and antisemtisim spreads like a disease.

It’s like…there are people who sincerely believe that blacks are inherently more violent than whites. :dubious: It may not be a hatred of blacks as a group, but rather an extremely dangerous ignorance. You can be a racist dick and be a *sincere *racist dick.

imho, all racist, homophobic, ethnocentric, anti-liberty movements are founded on ignorance. it just turns into something a little less “innocent”.

The Pew study you gave actually gives the opposite result. It finds somewhat more anti-Jewish sentiment on the Right (and also, less surprisingly, much more anti-Muslim sentiment on the right). It also shows something of a surge in anti-Jewish responses in Spain ~2005, not really sure what the reason is.

Let’s hope he defines and cites for a definition of apartheid first…

I mean that Israel is a state which systematically disenfranchises the rights and liberties of much of its population based solely on race. The specific examples are endl;ess, and I’m sure you’re aware of them. For example the denial of citizenship to natural born residents based on race is an example of apartheid.

q: which way are you guys characterizing ‘left’ and ‘right’?

France has been anti-Israel, anti-Muslim, and (in regards to citizens), anti-Jew and Muslim…but the government is seen here as ‘left’.

So anitsemiticism is all about Israel then..

But that does not mean that others are unentitiled to critcize Israel.

Yes it would not be unfair to call Ahmadinejad antisemitic, but it’s also putting the cart before the horse to say he uses Israel as an excuse.I’m sorry like or not but trying to divorce the creation of Israel and antisemtisim in the middle east is trying to explain things the way you’d like them to be expalined rather than the way they are.

How do you think Israel came in to creation? How do you think the minority which controlled only 6% of the land at the end of Mandate Palestine overnight took total control over the land that is now Israel proper? Because they asked nicely? Not believing the view of history espoused by Israeli nationalists as opposed to the one that finds general acceptance elsewhere in the World is antisemtic?

One broad ethnic group ruling over another sizeable disenfranchsied ethnic group? You don’t see why parallels might be drawn? Of course no-one is saying it’s exactly the same situation, you always distingusih different situations (otherwise they wouldn’t be different!)

Strawman. I seem to remember reading a thread that you wrote a while ago that suggets to me strongly that YOU didn’t live through WWII the 60s or 70s.

But on the other hand when you have a figure such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu saying the situations are exactly the same (like I said they’re not exactly the same, but I believe he did use the word ‘exactly’ when he said this) you should probably take a bit of notice.

Except that Jews aren’t a race. Nor are Arabs. Or Druze. Or whatever. “Ethnicity” can be your argument, fine, but let’s not go to the race category. Druze are Arabs, too, and so are Bedouin.

And not all Israeli Jews are “European” or “non-Arab” or whatever you want to call it. Arab is based on geography and self-identification.

(I should also apologize for insinuating I thought that Persians were Arab in an earlier post. I don’t think that, but I may have not been clear.)

‘Disenfranchisement’ is a lack of voting power. I’m sorry you feel that way - there are Arab mayors, councilors, judges, and members of government.

Israeli Arabs vote. (:

(they also own more private land in Israel than Jews)

:confused: But that’s not what Israel does. You’re mistaking Israel with apartheid South Africa.

Bad example, unless you want to claim that much of Europe operates under an apartheid system.

Claims about Israel being an apartheid state usually focus on its actions in the Occupied Territories, not within Israel proper. But comparing the actions of an occupying power to those of state towards its own citizens is misplaced.

I’m not, I’m just repeating the Pew survey linked above. I imagine they characterized “left” and “right” by asking survey participants how they’d characterize themselves.

Also, looking at the report a little more, in European countries and the US anti-Muslim feelings were pretty much always higher then anti-Jewish feelings, but the two were also almost always correlated, countries and subgroups that don’t like Muslims also don’t like Jews.

So my guess that the reason isn’t anti-zionism (since it seems weird to hate muslims and also be against Israel), but rather simple xenophobia. Spanish people dislike Jews because they don’t seem Spanish, and they really don’t like Muslims because they seem even less Spanish.

This would also explain the upswing in recent years, crappy economies tend to make people more xenophobic.

The antipathy of the left towards Jews goes back a long way - from the time when they were seen as money merchants and were often more wealthy than the people around them, to their siding with the U.S. in the cold war and building up arms when the left was shouting for disarmament, to their struggle with the Palestinians. I do think that among some people on the left there is just a natural antipathy towards at least the Jewish cause, if not towards individual Jews.

The Soviet Union helped play this up during the cold war, as it was generally on the side of the Arabs and helped to build the Palestinian conflict into a major issue for the international socialist movement. The U.N. has been systematically used by anti-semitic nations as a weapon against Israel under the banner of ‘stopping racism’, disgustingly enough. And the extreme left supports this nonsense wholeheartedly, cheering every new U.N. Resolution condemning Israel for one thing or another while its (much worse) neighbors get a pass.

The plight of Palestinians became a major issue on the left, while much larger human rights abuses were ignored in other countries that did not have the same political impact. This happened in part because the Palestinian cause dovetails so nicely with other left-wing issues - antipathy to U.S. imperialism, the capitalism vs socialism struggle, etc. While the far left has universally condemned Israel for the plight of the Palestinians, other Arab countries persecuted or ethnically cleansed Palestinians from their own countries without a peep.

It may not be anti-semitism in the sense of hating Jewish people for their ethnicity, but then, a lot of anti-black racism isn’t strictly about ethnicity either - it’s the assumption that black people in the community will bring gangs and crimes and drugs, or that schools that admit too many black children will lower educational standards and become dangerous for their children, or whatever. Most racists have some kind of justification for their racism, and most don’t think they’re racist. Sometimes their racism has some shred of fact behind it, grotesquely twisted out of proportion.

Finally, you cannot call yourself a friend of Jewish people while calling for Israeli policies that would have the effect of obliterating the Jewish state. The fact is, Israel is surrounded by racist countries that actually do want to destroy the Israeli state and kill a lot of Jewish people and put the rest back ‘in their place’. Israel, on the other hand, is a modern democracy with human rights standards that has been pushed into its current situation by the hostility of its neighbors. It’s an island of modernity in a sea of ancient hatred and irrationality.

There’s a good analogy with the U.S.'s war on terror. Americans are good people who respect human rights, but terrorism has put them in a position where it is very hard to walk the line between morality and security. America has Guantanamo Bay, is firing missiles from drones into civilian areas, and just recently sent an assassination squad into a sovereign nation to kill an enemy leader. Had Israel done any of these things, the world community, including most of the people here, would be screaming for them to be stopped. Yet Israel faces threats much greater than what America has, and lives with the reality of rockets being launched into its towns and cities on a regular basis. It has been attacked by its neighbors multiple times since its founding.

I can’t imagine what America would do to Mexico if Mexicans were launching rockets into Texas, sneaking suicide bombers across the border to blow up American shopping malls and restaurants, and occasionally mustering armies to invade while maintaining an official policy of the destruction of the United States. My guess is that the U.S. would simply flatten it. As would most other sovereign countries facing that much external aggression from a neighbor. But Israel is supposed to be different somehow. And in fact, its responses to constant attacks and provocation have been far more muted than I would expect from most countries, but that hasn’t stopped its enemies from constantly criticizing every measure of self-defense it takes.

Israel is not expansionist. It has no designs on its neighbors. It does not export terror. If every country in the Middle East became like Israel overnight, it would be an area of peace and prosperity. So for Israel to be constantly painted as the bad boy of the Middle East is bizarre and inexplicable unless there are other motivations.

Racism is an insidious thing, and racists justify their beliefs in many ways. If you spend a lot of time feeling angry about Israel or you feel like marching to support the Palestinians, but you can’t give the time of day to the plight of the current victims in the Congo or muster similar outrage against what Syria is currently doing to its own people or what Iran and North Korea have been doing to their citizens for decades, then maybe you need to stop and do a little soul-searching about who the real enemies are in the world.

This is a fatuous argument. Blacks in South Africa weren’t a race either, if you want to be technical abouty it. That doesn’t alter that fact that Palestinian Arabs (however you want to categorize them to make yourself feel better) are systematically ghettoized and disenfranchised in their ownn ancestral terrotory on the basis of nothing but genetic heritage in the interest of promoting the supremacy of an ill-defined (but mostly racially defined) class of a ruling elite.

I hate getting involves in threads like this , jsut so much misinformation (my particualr bugbear is some of the claims made about mandate Palestine, a topic I’m very famlair with). And whilst we’re on the subject of racism what I hate most of all is that I can’t believe that anyone who sees Palestinians and Jewish Israelis as basically equals can agree with the situation in Israel and the OTs.

This is bullshit.

Israel effectively rules the OTs and shows absolutely zero willingness to disenage (or alternatively offer full right sto those living there). In Israel the arabs could actually be quite a powerful group due to the voting system Israel uses, but whilst almost every segement of Jewish soceity has parties representing them, parties representing purely Arab issues are essentially banned as they are not ‘Zionist’. They are also subject to massive amounts of informal discrrimination.

That’s an opinion with which I disagree.

Can you elaborate? I’m especially interested in the distinction between parties being banned and being “essentially banned”. I smell weasel words.

Well fair enough I suppose

No, I said please don’t ignore the obvious.

Sorry it happens a lot. How do I know? I’ve seen plenty of it. try reading the comment pages on the JP or even Ha’aretz.

[QUOTE]

Don’t start. You know full well I was talking about Jews & Israel. Keep the context, please.

:dubious: I’m a huge critic of Israel. I don’t mind serious evaluation of policies (based on expediency or liberty) but I’m not anti-Israel statehood or pro-PLO.

…he uses it as a red herring. Is that a better term? :confused:

I don’t understand what you mean here.

aahhhhhhhhhhh, before we start this, we should play fair because then I’m going to get overloaded trying to do your homework for you and then correcting it.

citashuns, plz.

Again, you’re going to need to expand, cite, and tell me what the view is.

Israel doesn’t rule over Gaza and the West Bank. If they did, things would be a lot different. Instead, it uses military force to curtail what it sees as threats.

There are many in Israel (and around the world) who HATE IT that the Israeli government could exert occupational force if it wanted to but doesn’t because 1) Israel doesn’t want the responsibility and 2) they see it as a precursor to war.

Ironically, Israel ends up taking the responsibility for the mess anyway. :rolleyes:

It’s a total joke to think that Israel controls Palestine…ah…funny.

How is that ‘strawman’? I was pointing out the differences in which generations view history.

Of course I take notice. I think of his “Zionism as racism” campaign as misguided. :o He also equates the security around Israel’s boarder as the same as white policemen prohibiting free movement of blacks in South Africa.

Israel has a right to say who can and cannot enter her country, just like the U.S. has a right to determine its own immigration laws, treaties, practices, etc., regarding borders. :dubious:

Kind of like requiring a passport to enter Canada is not anti-American.

How so? What other European countries practice racial disenfranchisement, racial ghettoization (of natural born residents, not immigrants) and ethnic cleansing?

This is a phony objection based on a phony criterion. It’s actually laugably tautological. The fact that it denies citzenship based on race is IN ITSELF a form of apartheid, and so is doing stuff like herding them into ghettos behind barbed wire fences.

I don’t want to hijack this thread into yet another Israeli-Palestinian debate, but it’s disngenuous to act like the apartheid analogy is confusing or unjustified.