AFAICT, you still have not established that criticism, even outright hatred, of the state of Israel equates to antisemitism.
But 35% of what? You’re talking about 54 votes in an anonymous, self selecting poll on a site that has hundreds of thousands of users (at that time I believe it was about 200k). What percentage of the site is that?
I would be very happy if that was an accurate portrayal of the percentage of antisemitism anywhere and in any group. And so would you (other than the part about being wrong, of course).
But it’s not accurate, and it cannot be determined with any kind of accuracy. And you know that.
You welcomed counter-examples. You got them.
You’re confusing me with someone else.
I’ve said all along it can’t be determined in absolute numbers. Do you disagree with that?
Yes, I did. With foolsguinea. Apologies.
Not precisely. But they are definitely significant.
Well, shucks, Terr, help us out, here. What about the message boards you hang out, when you’re not here annoying us. Bunch of clean cut folks, spanning the whole spectrum between Otto von Bismarck and Calvin Coolidge, I’ve no doubt. Let us in on it, we’d be happy to share our viewpoints, and would not hesitate to give credit where credit is due! Yessir, Terr sent us!
Might be refreshing to hang out with a bunch of people with clear eyed conservative views and innocent of bias and prejudice! Yes, please!
This again becomes a picayune matter of language. I, for one, reject out of hand that criticizing the official actions of Israel is the same thing as anti-semitism. Anti-semitism is “kike” or “sheeny”, etc, or ranting about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or those damn Jewish Bankers. Whatever depicts Jews as a problem.
Israel is a non-simple issue, and many of us find it confounding. I, for one, cannot see that nation being run fairly by either Hebrews, Muslims or Xtians, its government ought to be run by a neutral party that can treat everyone like shit. China, maybe. If you think that is anti-semitic, sorry, but I disagree.
I understand this is also very effective at keeping the tide from coming in.
YMMV but IME when left-wingers talk about “Wall Street banker parasites” it’s not a dog-whistle meaning “Jews”; it’s a straightforward class distinction. In that parlance the nastiest insult in that phrase is the word “banker”, and they hate them not because they’re Jewish (if they even are) but because they’re rich. It doesn’t matter whether they’re rich Jews, rich Christians, rich atheist or rich Pastafarians; it’s their wealth they focus on. (See also: “1%”)
Dunno. Just for myself, when I imagine the reptile rich, I see Episcopalians and Methodists.
In my opinion, that’s a big part of it…but there’s more. These are the guys who are the caretakers of the investment funds and retirement accounts for millions of us – and who still go out and do risky shit that causes those funds to collapse, leaving millions of people without means of support. These are the guys, looking to get rich quick, who caused the recession of '07 and put millions out of work.
It isn’t so much that they’re rich. It’s that they’re irresponsible with other people’s money.
The numbers say otherwise.
I’m actually surprised at the how* little* significant antisemitism there is at Daily Kos, which IMO has deteriorated to the level of DU as far as quality of posters.
I…don’t think that counts as anti-Semitism.
If Israel is a nation like other nations, it can take criticism like other nations. Do you think people don’t make cartoons like that about Myanmar, the USA, Turkey, Russia, and China?
Could have easily been published in Der Sturmer. But then you probably wouldn’t see those as antisemitic either.
I mean, I don’t know.
Is Oliphant generally unsympathetic toward Jews as an ethnicity, or was this just a Nast-y denunciation of the bombings in Gaza?
No, that was unquestionably anti-semitic. The mogen-david is a symbol of Judaism, not a symbol of Israel.
Wow. Just…wow.
I’m really sorry people aren’t all agreeing with you, Terr. But this bullshit seems like the last refuge of a broken argument.
I’m not going to agree that denouncing the state of Israel is “anti-Semitism” per se. I can understand why some Israelis see it as anti-Semitic in effect. I think they’re wrong, but I can see where they’re coming from.
But “anti-Semitism” implies the existence of Semites. You know who else are ethnically Semites? Significant numbers of Arabized Palestinians, whose ancestors apparently were Samaritans and Assyrians and such, and whose tribes largely converted to Islam in the Middle Ages. So, some of us bend over backwards not to favor “our” Europeanized Semites over the other Semites. But maybe that kind of “Semite” doesn’t count, because this is* really* about religion and culture.
So, then, is it anti-cultural-Semitism, or anti-Jewish, to say, “Hey, stop bombing people and making your friends and allies look bad”? I’m not convinced it is. I’m not convinced it’s even anti-Zionist.
Maybe the logic of Zionism forces us to choose; to say like Benny Morris that atrocities are good if it builds Israel, or that Israel is bad if it requires atrocity. That’s horribly bleak if true. But what if it isn’t true, what if logic doesn’t require that?
And even if logic does (and let’s hope not) require support for Israel to be support for the abuse of the Palestinians’ security and civil rights; not everyone who criticizes Israel has followed the logic that far. They may think that they can be for a Jewish homeland and against inhumanity to Palestinians, even if that’s not really possible.
Except for being, yanno, the symbol of Israel.
I’m not taking any position on whether or not the cartoon in question is antisemitic. As it’s the only one that sparked any such criticism against Oliphant over a 50+ year career, it certainly is extremey poor evidence that he is an antisemite. And even weaker evidence that “the left” is rife with hatred of Jews.
Ah the last refuge of the “no anti-semitism” argument. Look up the etymology of the word “anti-semitism”.
Well, the magen david is on the Israeli flag, too, so it’s a little fuzzy.
But I see your point.
But, let’s say it represents “the Jews.” Is that, “the evil reptilian Jewish race,” or “Jewish political power beyond the state organs of Israel itself”?
If the former, OK, that’s like Terr said.
If the latter, I think it’s a permissible use of imagery that reads as anti-Semitic. Sometimes people have legitimate grievances against certain factions, and those factions seem to map to an ethnic lobby. And it’s not entirely fair to the ethnicity as a whole, but it’s common. Maybe there should have been a mention of given politicians (in the USA, those are mostly Christians) who supported the Gaza bombings.
I read it as the Israeli state, and after all they call themselves “the Jews.” I could read it as “Jewish” politics generally. And in that case, I didn’t take it as anti-Semitic. (I don’t know Oliphant’s intent.)
But it’s a cartoon which will read as anti-Semitic to those predisposed to read it that way. And that *is *a problem, because some of those people are anti-Semites, and will be encouraged, and some are paranoid Zionists, who will feel ever more convinced that the nations all hate them.