What about antisemitism before 1947? If the present rise in antisemitism is rooted in Israeli governmental policy, then before there was an Israeli government, by that logic there should be no cause for antisemitism. Yet, we all know too well how untrue that statement is.
If the present rise in antisemitism is rooted in Israeli governmental policy, then before there was an Israeli government, by that logic there should be no cause for antisemitism.
I don’t think the premise you opened with there holds water.
Historically it’s not unusual for there to be rises in something everpresent, that are triggered by events.
@philo I don’t think I did. You’re conflating the existance of antisemitism with the rise (increase) in antisemitism.
What is “it” in this sentence: the existence or the rise:
blaming Israel for it now
I don’t think there’s anything in @andrewrgross’s post to suggest they think that antisemitism is a modern phenomenon created by Israel. That would be a very peculiar position.
One last try before I write you off. Antisemitism exists regardless of the existence of Israel. there have been many rises in antisemitism throughout history ALL BEFORE 1947 so Israel’s governmental policy can’t be blamed. They all had differing causes though. If the cause can be random, how can you blame a government when it is obvious the cause is something much deeper.
There’s a lake in my town which exists (antisemitism).
The reason it exists is it is fed by a stream (deep-rooted cultural antisemitist sentiment as a cultural practice that uses desire to scapegoat, etc).
However, events such as storms, droughts, human water use (crusades, nazism, nakba) have caused this lake to rise higher or lower over the years.
To acknowledge that events contribute to the rise or the fall of the water level is not the same as claiming that the events are the cause of it existing per se.
The reason it exists is it is fed by a stream (deep-rooted cultural antisemitist sentiment as a cultural practice that uses desire to scapegoat, etc).
Wait, what part of this seems flippant? That seems to me like a succinct and accurate characterization of the enduring presence of antisemitism since antiquity. I don’t see anything dismissive about this.
Von den Juden und ihren Lügen {On The Jews And Their Lies) is a little 65K word book that will show you how trite that statement is. BTW, if you didn’t know. that little tome was written by the father of the protestant reformation Martin Luther and it was used as a major means of justification for the holocaust. So cultural, no, that doesn’t cut it. Nice try though but it falls way short of the mark.
If the present rise in antisemitism is rooted in Israeli governmental policy, then before there was an Israeli government, by that logic there should be no cause for antisemitism.
I’m not sure if I should take these seriously. I don’t think observing that Israeli policy has implications for how people view and behave towards Jews suggests that antisemitism was created several years after the Holocaust happened.
Would the inverse be true? Does the existence of antisemitism in prechristian times suggest that the blood libel conspiracies couldn’t have any influence on antisemitism in medieval Europe?
I want to point out for context that in 2019, the American Jewish Electorate survey found that a quarter of American Jews considered Israel to be an apartheid state, and 22% of American Jews thought that the treatment of Palestinians constituted a genocide. That was where American Jews were half a decade ago.
That should have been a huge canary in the coal mine. When the survey results came out, the established Zionist institutions insisted it was some sort of error in the way the data was collected. What that was telling us is now clear: the Likud party’s leadership was able to maintain support among political leaders, but they’d already overdrawn our store of goodwill YEARS ago. Oct. 7 just brought this all back into the news, and now we’re dealing with a loss of reputation that had been building slowly for years.
That doesn’t account for the rise in antisemitism we’ve seen in the last four months, but I think it contributes heavily to the loss of allies who previously served as a crucial bulwark against antisemitism.
I’m not sure if I should take these seriously. I don’t think observing that Israeli policy has implications for how people view and behave towards Jews suggests that antisemitism was created several years after the Holocaust happened.
You missed the point Andrew. I’m saying antisemitism existed prior to 1947. Therefore its existence (and also its rise) can’t be squarely placed on Israel
Would the inverse be true? Does the existence of antisemitism in prechristian times suggest that the blood libel conspiracies couldn’t have any influence on antisemitism in medieval Europe?
Show me an example of any actual acts of pre-Christian antisemitism.
I think this is taking us way off topic, but I’ll answer.
First, I think you’re making a key logical misstep. This isn’t actually relevant, but it’s bugging me:
If antisemitism existed prior to Israel, than Israel cannot be responsible for its invention. Logically sound.
If antisemitism existed prior to Israel, than Israel cannot be responsible for its rise. Logically unsound.
This is separate from the fact that I don’t actually think Israeli policy fosters antisemitism. My working theory is that most antisemitism exists for other awful reasons, but is held at bay by the high cultural standing of Jews, the strength of our social ties to allies, and the protections afforded to us by democratic, multi ethnic societies. Israel’s actions damage all three, which erode the foundations of our defenses.
Second: The story of Esther; The story of Hanukkah; the destruction of the first temple; the destruction of the second temple. And on and on and on.
Like… I’m sorry but what? Did you think we were just having a good time for thousands of years and then people started persecuting Jews in the common era? That makes no sense dude. What does your Sedar look like?
I think part of the problem is that for the longest time antisemites had to rely on complete lies to push their propaganda, which mostly worked best when there was a crisis that could be blamed on “the Jews”. The current actions of the Israeli government does two things: firstly it causes valid criticism of these actions and secondly it allows antisemites to use this valid criticism to push their antisemitic views but this time having to lie less (note that there are still lies involved and blaming the entirety of the Jews for anything the Israeli government does is obviously bullshit).
So I agree with you: The actual reason for a rise in antisemitism is not the Israeli government. But the current actions of the Israeli government help antisemites push their views. These two things often get conflated into the statement “Israel is causing antisemitism”.
What about antisemitism before 1947? If the present rise in antisemitism is rooted in Israeli governmental policy, then before there was an Israeli government, by that logic there should be no cause for antisemitism. Yet, we all know too well how untrue that statement is.
I don’t think the premise you opened with there holds water.
Historically it’s not unusual for there to be rises in something everpresent, that are triggered by events.
I think you missed the point. If there was always antisemitism WITHOUT Israel, then blaming Israel for it now is wrong.
@philo I don’t think I did. You’re conflating the existance of antisemitism with the rise (increase) in antisemitism.
What is “it” in this sentence: the existence or the rise:
I don’t think there’s anything in @andrewrgross’s post to suggest they think that antisemitism is a modern phenomenon created by Israel. That would be a very peculiar position.
One last try before I write you off. Antisemitism exists regardless of the existence of Israel. there have been many rises in antisemitism throughout history ALL BEFORE 1947 so Israel’s governmental policy can’t be blamed. They all had differing causes though. If the cause can be random, how can you blame a government when it is obvious the cause is something much deeper.
There’s a lake in my town which exists (antisemitism).
The reason it exists is it is fed by a stream (deep-rooted cultural antisemitist sentiment as a cultural practice that uses desire to scapegoat, etc).
However, events such as storms, droughts, human water use (crusades, nazism, nakba) have caused this lake to rise higher or lower over the years.
To acknowledge that events contribute to the rise or the fall of the water level is not the same as claiming that the events are the cause of it existing per se.
line 1 and line 3 are fine. Line 2 is where you and most likely tons of others make light of the problem. Bye.
@philo thanks. If line 3 is fine then I’ve sucessfully made my point, since line 3 is the part you had a problem with above.
Wait, what part of this seems flippant? That seems to me like a succinct and accurate characterization of the enduring presence of antisemitism since antiquity. I don’t see anything dismissive about this.
Von den Juden und ihren Lügen {On The Jews And Their Lies) is a little 65K word book that will show you how trite that statement is. BTW, if you didn’t know. that little tome was written by the father of the protestant reformation Martin Luther and it was used as a major means of justification for the holocaust. So cultural, no, that doesn’t cut it. Nice try though but it falls way short of the mark.
You are being ridiculous and I have a hard time believing that you are making this argument earnestly.
Your argument: there were sometimes fires before there was home electricity, therefore how can we blame electricity for causing fires?
I’m not sure if I should take these seriously. I don’t think observing that Israeli policy has implications for how people view and behave towards Jews suggests that antisemitism was created several years after the Holocaust happened.
Would the inverse be true? Does the existence of antisemitism in prechristian times suggest that the blood libel conspiracies couldn’t have any influence on antisemitism in medieval Europe?
I want to point out for context that in 2019, the American Jewish Electorate survey found that a quarter of American Jews considered Israel to be an apartheid state, and 22% of American Jews thought that the treatment of Palestinians constituted a genocide. That was where American Jews were half a decade ago.
That should have been a huge canary in the coal mine. When the survey results came out, the established Zionist institutions insisted it was some sort of error in the way the data was collected. What that was telling us is now clear: the Likud party’s leadership was able to maintain support among political leaders, but they’d already overdrawn our store of goodwill YEARS ago. Oct. 7 just brought this all back into the news, and now we’re dealing with a loss of reputation that had been building slowly for years.
That doesn’t account for the rise in antisemitism we’ve seen in the last four months, but I think it contributes heavily to the loss of allies who previously served as a crucial bulwark against antisemitism.
You missed the point Andrew. I’m saying antisemitism existed prior to 1947. Therefore its existence (and also its rise) can’t be squarely placed on Israel
Show me an example of any actual acts of pre-Christian antisemitism.
I think this is taking us way off topic, but I’ll answer.
First, I think you’re making a key logical misstep. This isn’t actually relevant, but it’s bugging me:
If antisemitism existed prior to Israel, than Israel cannot be responsible for its invention. Logically sound.
If antisemitism existed prior to Israel, than Israel cannot be responsible for its rise. Logically unsound.
This is separate from the fact that I don’t actually think Israeli policy fosters antisemitism. My working theory is that most antisemitism exists for other awful reasons, but is held at bay by the high cultural standing of Jews, the strength of our social ties to allies, and the protections afforded to us by democratic, multi ethnic societies. Israel’s actions damage all three, which erode the foundations of our defenses.
Second: The story of Esther; The story of Hanukkah; the destruction of the first temple; the destruction of the second temple. And on and on and on.
Like… I’m sorry but what? Did you think we were just having a good time for thousands of years and then people started persecuting Jews in the common era? That makes no sense dude. What does your Sedar look like?
I think part of the problem is that for the longest time antisemites had to rely on complete lies to push their propaganda, which mostly worked best when there was a crisis that could be blamed on “the Jews”. The current actions of the Israeli government does two things: firstly it causes valid criticism of these actions and secondly it allows antisemites to use this valid criticism to push their antisemitic views but this time having to lie less (note that there are still lies involved and blaming the entirety of the Jews for anything the Israeli government does is obviously bullshit).
So I agree with you: The actual reason for a rise in antisemitism is not the Israeli government. But the current actions of the Israeli government help antisemites push their views. These two things often get conflated into the statement “Israel is causing antisemitism”.
You want 1917 and yes, at least in the Middle East anti-Semitism soared after that.