Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumBritain adopts broader anti-Semitism definition to fight hate crimes against Jews
Britain will be among the first countries worldwide to adopt an international definition of anti-Semitism in efforts to fight hate crimes and incitement targeting Jews which have been on the rise this past year. On Monday, in pre-released excerpts of a speech she is set to give, British Prime Minister Theresa May said “it means there will be one definition of anti-Semitism – in essence, language or behaviour that displays hatred towards Jews because they are Jews – and anyone guilty of that will be called out on it,” according to Reuters.
“It is unacceptable that there is anti-Semitism in this country. It is even worse that incidents are reportedly on the rise. As a government we are making a real difference and adopting this measure is a groundbreaking step,” her speech reads. It was not yet clear when she would give the address.
The definition adopted by Britain was formulated earlier this year by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and is designed to make it harder to evade repercussions for discriminatory or prejudiced behavior because of a lack of clarity or differing opinions on what constitutes anti-Semitism. The intention was to “ensure that culprits will not be able to get away with being anti-Semitic because the term is ill-defined, or because different organizations or bodies have different interpretations of it,” read a statement by Downing Street, cited by the Guardian..
The IHRA definition reads: “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” According to the definition, “manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.”
more...
http://www.timesofisrael.com/britain-to-adopt-expanded-definition-of-anti-semitism-to-fight-hate-crime/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
msongs
(70,178 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)I think that is what they are trying to address here.
aranthus
(3,386 posts)or HAJ for short. Or you could stop playing stupid semantic games.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)does the dictionary definition of anti-semitism have to be posted here before we can stop getting this idiotic meme repeated over and over again?
aranthus
(3,386 posts)they only look like fools who are trying to deflect. But whatever.
Response to shira (Original post)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)....then in essence you're accusing the vast majority of Jews of being racists.
What other nations in the world do you criticize for being racist endeavors?
If you believe the lie that Israel is a racist endeavor then you are an antisemite.
Response to aranthus (Reply #14)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Amnesty and HRW don't call Israel apartheid, unlike other fringe racist groups which support Hamas & call for Israel's destruction.
And let's face it, any person or group supporting Hamas and calling for Israel's destruction is flat-out antisemitic, as those are traits of neo-naziism.
Response to shira (Reply #21)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)It's because the charge is a lie. You know it and they know it.
And it's the lies, slander, and defamation of the Jewish people that exposes bigots for who they are. Antizionist BDS is all lies & incitement, and therefore is 100% racist.
aranthus
(3,386 posts)The former is acceptable. The latter is an attack on the legitimacy of the nation, and if it is against he Jewish nation, then it is antisemitism.
Response to aranthus (Reply #37)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
aranthus
(3,386 posts)It is absolutely antisemitism to lie about the Jewish state in order to delegitimize it. Same with calling it a racist state. It just isn't true.
Response to aranthus (Reply #45)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
aranthus
(3,386 posts)Where do they call Israel apartheid?
Response to aranthus (Reply #47)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Why?
What's your goal here?
Response to shira (Reply #49)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)....and yet you constantly cite articles from that movement.
Explain?
aranthus
(3,386 posts)You wanted to find some way to make my position and the new definition of antisemitism look foolish and dishonest, but the only way that you could do that was by being dishonest yourself. Man, you sure showed me.
shira
(30,109 posts)Characterising something as antisemitic is a political judgment. It requires knowledge about how antisemitism works, an understanding of context, some thought about intentions, but also analysis of unintended consequences. The working definition, which has now been adopted by the UK Government, offers helpful guidance on the making of such political judgments.
How would you decide whether a joke was antisemitic, or sexist for that matter? You could not invent a machine to do this for you. In part it would depend on whether the joke was funny, on who told it, how and why; on who laughed at it and why they laughed. It is a matter of judgment, and there is room for legitimate disagreement and debate over judgments.
In our time, people who do and think antisemitic things frequently believe themselves to be opponents of antisemitism. Those who single out Israelis and their supporters for boycott angrily deny that they are antisemitic; some who conflate Zionism and Nazism consider themselves to be antiracists; those who say Jews were among the chief financiers of the slave trade or who want to address the ‘Jewish question’ complain they are targets of Zionist smears.
On the level of words, prohibitions and taboos against racism and antisemitism remain firmly in place; but this does not prevent antisemitic and racist ways of thinking becoming ever more significant and influential in public discourse. Because the veneer of respectability is still important, denial and counter-accusations of bad faith tend to drown out rational and democratic discussion.
Antisemitism lurks under the surface; we are reluctant to see it in our allies and we are eager to see it in those we fear or hate. The left sniffs the antisemitism on the right and the right sniffs the antisemitism on the left.
The working definition does not seek to see a person’s essence to find out whether they are antisemitic. What it does instead is to help in the recognition of antisemitic actions and ways of thinking. It is concerned with what people do, what they say and what they tolerate; not what they are.
Many in the movement to boycott and to de-legitimize Israel are afraid of the working definition. They say that it defines criticism of Israel as antisemitic. It actually does the opposite. It helps us to make the distinction between what kinds of criticism may be legitimate and what kinds of hostility or demonization may either lead towards, or result from, antisemitism.
Some on the left will continue to say that the working definition is part of a Zionist and Tory conspiracy to smear left wing politics. This itself is an antisemitic claim.
The left needs to understand antisemitism and to come to terms with the history of antisemitism within its own movement. It needs to educate young people to recognize and oppose antisemitism, not to accuse those who do recognize it of being the problem. The working definition can help us to mobilize against antisemitism. It is not a threat to the left or to those who are for Palestinian freedom, it is a threat to antisemitism.
David Hirsh is a lecturer in sociology at Goldsmiths College, University of London
https://www.thejc.com/comment/analysis/david-hirsh-this-new-definition-of-antisemitism-is-only-a-threat-to-antisemites-1.429184
Response to shira (Reply #5)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Obama & Kerry criticize Israel and the settlements minus the racist, hateful discourse. They're not accused of being antisemites. How can they criticize Israel and not be accused of antisemitism? Amos Oz and Peter Beinart call for boycotting settlements but they're not antisemites either.
How do they pull that off? Tell me. Be honest.
Response to shira (Reply #9)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Response to shira (Reply #20)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)I also want to know where you or your BDS buddies have ever called any other nation a racist endeavor.
Show me, or fold.
Response to shira (Reply #24)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)The majority of nations on this planet are far more racist than Israel, and yet you can't or won't name one.
Proving the point.
Response to shira (Reply #30)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Same shit, different century.
Oh yeah...you want a more racist democracy so let's start with the biggest one in India. Caste system and millions of slaves. When does BDS of India begin?
Response to shira (Reply #34)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)How pathetic, but to play by your rules there's always Australia. Tell me, is Australia developed enough?
Israel, the un-apartheid state – a comparison with Australia
http://www.jpost.com/printarticle.aspx?id=323822
And it is by this measure that Israel puts Australia and much of the western world to shame.
The practical reality in Israel is that minorities achieve prominent positions at a far higher rate than in Australia. This is true in all areas of society:
• Politics: In Israel, 10 percent of Israel’s Knesset are from Arab minority groups (Christian, Muslim and Druse). This includes over 4% from parties with racially mixed composition. This large representation of minorities has been a consistent feature since the early days of the state. Three members of religious and racial minorities, Nawaf Massalha (Muslim Arab), Salah Tarif and Raleb Majadele (both Druse) have served at ministerial level in the Israeli government, including the later two as Cabinet ministers.
By contrast, only 1.3% of Australia’s current federal Parliament are from religious minorities (one Muslim and two Jews) and this itself is a huge increase from previous Parliaments that often featured less than 0.5% non-Christian representation. While there have been a similar number of Australian Jews who have served as ministers, no other religious minority has been so represented.
But success of minorities in areas of soft power is an equally important measure, and here, too, Israel outclasses Australia.
• Socio-Economic Statistics: In Israel the life expectancy, educational attainment and earnings of the Arab minority are on par with, if not better than, that of Arab minorities in virtually all Western European countries, and far above that of other Arabs in the Middle East. In Australia the life expectancy, educational attainment (including basic literacy) and earnings of indigenous Australians is nothing short of appalling, worse than many third world countries.
• Popular Culture: An Israeli Christian Arab, Lina Makhoul, won The Voice Israel this year. In contrast, not a single person from a minority religion has won the equivalent Australian Idol. Salma Fiomy-Farij, a hijab-wearing Israeli Muslim Arab, came second in this year’s Israeli Master Chef (the winner was a German convert to Judaism). In Australia Master Chef has not had a single winner from a religious or racial minority.
THUS BY both legal and practical measures Israel is a less racist country than Australia and as far from apartheid South Africa as any country could possibly be. Israel truly is an un-apartheid state, one of the freest, most open and non-racist societies in the world.
The false accusations and Israeli Jew-targeting protests of the Australian BDS movement are not only racist and anti- Semitic, they are also completely hypocritical when Australia has so far to go to overcome its own racist past.
And now let's test your Leftist credentials....
Americans have voted & put Trump & alt-Right nazis in charge. America wins as most racist, developed democracy. Right or wrong?
Response to shira (Reply #40)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)...but only Israel merits BDS.
Until you find something factually inaccurate WRT the article comparing Israel to Australia, the point stands. Here's another article on Australian Apartheid, by John Pilger who is part of the BDS movement (one of your folks)....
Apartheid alive and well in Australia
http://www.herald.co.zw/apartheid-alive-and-well-in-australia/
I've now given you 2 democracies which are clearly worse than Israel and yet you pretend Israel is uniquely racist, similar to old antisemitic tropes that cast Jews as uniquely racist - and you seriously wonder why antizionism is considered antisemitic? You're kidding. You're actually doing a great job proving why. Your excuses that provide a BDS "get out of jail free card" for Australia & India (clearly because they're not Jewish states) are pathetic. I could've mentioned democratic Turkey, but Turkey isn't a Jewish state, is it? Oh well, no BDS for them either. They can literally get away with murder, along with their occupation & settler movement in Cyprus.
Your opponents only ask that you criticize Israel on par with other nations, but you clearly can't. You give non-democracies a totally free pass as if that helps the 100's of millions oppressed there, and you find excuses to let non-Israeli democracies off. Once again, criticism of Israel isn't antisemitic unless that criticism is unlike that of other nations. If you had a consistent standard & didn't single out Israel there wouldn't be a problem. I'll remind you there are other occupations worldwide, other settlements across the globe, real Apartheid vs. Palestinians in Lebanon (a democracy), and non-citizens of liberal western nations who don't enjoy the same rights as citizens in those democracies. Where's the BDS movement? They have their heads up their asses, obsessed with Jews, that's where they are.
You bring up Adalah (among others) every other post but Adalah, like those other organizations, is part of the loathsome BDS movement you deplore for some reason known only to you. You haven't explained yet, so please tell us why you have a problem with the BDS movement. I know why. It's obviously a racist movement, but I want you to say it. I want you to be honest. I also want to know why you keep posting from sources that are part of a racist, antisemitic movement. Please answer what your problem with BDS is. Is it racist?
Or punt.
Response to shira (Reply #42)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)....with criticism of any other country is antisemitic when it's not. As to your question, that's just more racist BDS movement incitement.
Using Bedouin issue as an anti-Israel propaganda tool
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4656018,00.html
Seriously, find some sources not connected to the racist BDS movement & we'll have something to intelligently discuss.
shira
(30,109 posts)....like Obama & Kerry or like Uri Avnery & Peter Beinart (who support boycotts) are not considered antisemitic. It's because unlike antizionist racists within the BDS movement, their rhetoric is not hateful. And yet they they criticize freely without being accused of bigotry.
Answer why that is.
Be honest.
Response to shira (Reply #25)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Their rhetoric is not the same as the slander coming from antizionist, fringe, racist organizations.
That's why.
Response to shira (Reply #31)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Here's where you need to explain why it is you do not want to be considered part of the BDS movement.
What's wrong with the BDS movement?
Do tell, please.
Response to shira (Original post)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Tue Dec 13, 2016, 08:00 AM - Edit history (1)
Ben White understands/justifies antisemitism, supports the Hamas cause, and calls for the destruction of Israel. Ben White is part of the odious BDS movement you claim to have such a low opinion of. This is the best you can do?
David Hirsh is right. This is only a threat to antisemites, like Ben White and his ilk.
Response to shira (Reply #10)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)From a CounterPunch article White wrote...
He later tweeted this...
"Understanding is the beginning of justification that ends with acceptance, and is the root of all evil" http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/they-are-not-masters-of-the-land-1.405175 …
Response to shira (Reply #23)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
aranthus
(3,386 posts)You claim to be against all racism yet you cite to an obvious antisemite like Ben White, after a number of people have pointed out his antisemitism to you. You claim to not be an antisemite, yet you often cite to Mondoweiss, which is a known hate site. Do you see how your actions (citing to antisemites to support your positions) undercuts your fine sounding words and undermines your credibility? Do you care? Is this all a game of "spoof the Jews" to you?
shira
(30,109 posts)So long as criticism of Israel is similar to that against other countries, it is legitimate. What part of that do you not understand? Why is it not fair to expect critics of Israel to judge Israel by the same standards they judge other nations? Why this insistence on a double standard?