Anti-Semitism at US Universities and elsewhere

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

A friend tagged me with this article from the NYT yesterday:
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/opinion/sunday/anti-semitism-at-my-university-hidden-in-plain-sight.html?_r=0

From the article:
 

Quote

My fellow activists tend to dismiss the anti-Semitism that students like me experience regularly on campus. They don’t acknowledge the swastikas that I see carved into bathroom stalls, scrawled across walls or left on chalkboards. They don’t hear students accusing me of killing Jesus. They don’t notice professors glorifying anti-Semitic figures such as Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt or the leadership of Hezbollah, as mine have.

Nor do they speak against the anti-Semitism in American culture. Even as they rightfully protest hate crimes against Muslim Americans and discrimination against black people, they wrongfully dismiss attacks on Jews (who are the most frequent targets of religiously motivated hate crimes in the United States) and increasing anti-Semitism in the American political arena, as can be seen in Donald Trump’s flirtations with the “alt-right.” They don’t take issue with calls for the destruction of the world’s only Jewish state.

Many of my fellow activists also perpetuate anti-Semitism by dismissing Jews of color, especially the Mizrahi and Sephardi majority of Israel’s Jewish population, descendants of refugees from Southwest Asia and North Africa. Ignoring the expulsion of 850,000 Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews from Arab and Muslim countries from 1948 to the early 1970s allows students to portray all Israelis as white and European and get away with making a “progressive” case for dismantling the Jewish state.

Quote

 

 

I believe in free speech and want to see people be able to debate and discuss difficult issues openly, that said, why are some among progressives ignoring anti-semitism as a form of oppression?  The friend who sent me a link to this article did so with a blurb from a blogger by the name of "Harold Feld".  Mr. Feld attempted an expanation for the tolerance of anti-semitism:

Quote

 

Fun as always.

What folks need to recognize is that marginalization of Jewish social justice organizations is a strategic necessity for BDS. To allow Jewish participation would be to create bonds and alliances between Jewish and non-Jewish social justice organizations. As anyone familiar with social dynamics knows, familiarity makes it difficult to maintain stereotypes and demonetization. For example, if groups become familiar with Hillel over refugee issues, they will be less likely to believe that the conflict with Palestinians is part of a broader hatred of "brown people."

Hence the need not merely to isolate Israel, but organizations that may provide any positive perspectives on Israel -- even when these organizations are not particularly engaged in any pro-Israel activity. As Jews are inevitably associated with organizations that provide a pro-Israel perspective, isolation from Jewish organizations of any kind -- unless they explicitly embrace BDS -- is the safest course.
 

Is anyone else surprised by the tolerance and apology offered for pretty blatent anti-semitic rhetoric?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

God I hate the quote function now. 

The second quote I'm trying to offer is this:

Fun as always.

What folks need to recognize is that marginalization of Jewish social justice organizations is a strategic necessity for BDS. To allow Jewish participation would be to create bonds and alliances between Jewish and non-Jewish social justice organizations. As anyone familiar with social dynamics knows, familiarity makes it difficult to maintain stereotypes and demonetization. For example, if groups become familiar with Hillel over refugee issues, they will be less likely to believe that the conflict with Palestinians is part of a broader hatred of "brown people."

Hence the need not merely to isolate Israel, but organizations that may provide any positive perspectives on Israel -- even when these organizations are not particularly engaged in any pro-Israel activity. As Jews are inevitably associated with organizations that provide a pro-Israel perspective, isolation from Jewish organizations of any kind -- unless they explicitly embrace BDS -- is the safest course.

[BloodRider]

This seems to completely ignore the fact that Israel, as a country, has at times pretty deplorable politics.  Politics that stem from an assassination of a leftward leader who was moving toward peace, but then the populace embraced the politics of the assassin.  Furthermore, it has been known to do these sketchy things then hide behind the US's (or the UN's) skirts when it comes time to pay the piper.  People don't like that shit, and have every right to object.

This is a common tactic of the right.  They use rhetoric to attempt to expand the definition of tolerance (speaking out against Israel's politics gets lumped in with the alt-right; BLM protesters are tantamount to the cop-killing sniper in Dallas) then try to shame people from pointing out obvious issues.  So, for example - I would wager that what this guy calls "the destruction of the world’s only Jewish state"; other people would call stopping the expansion of settlements. Fuck that noise.  

So, yes, antisemitism is a problem.  A huge problem.  But it is really fucking shameful for anyone to use it to give Israel a blank check on foreign policy.  There are no good guys in this conflict, but too many people seem to be using antisemitism as a way to excuse how the state of Israel is behaving.  That is just bullshit.  Pure unadulterated, self-serving, deluded bullshit.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

BR,

The author of the article I link and the statement from Mr. Feld are not about defending Israel but about the way some progressives who oppose Israel are linking Jewish organizations to Israel because they are Jewish organizations without any link to that organization supporting Israel or its policies.  How is that proper?

[BloodRider]

11 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

BR,

The author of the article I link and the statement from Mr. Feld are not about defending Israel but about the way some progressives who oppose Israel are linking Jewish organizations to Israel because they are Jewish organizations without any link to that organization supporting Israel or its policies.  How is that proper?

So, yes, antisemitism is a problem.  A huge problem.  But it is really fucking shameful for anyone to use it to give Israel a blank check on foreign policy.  

Benjamin Gladstone is an admitted hardcore Zionist.  That's his choice, but my point is he ties far too much in his bundle there.  I am not sure where the line is, but he is IMO certainly trying to pack opposing Zionism with antisemitism, and I think that's bullshit.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

 

 

Bloodrider,

Neither the article nor the Statement I quote in any way advocate giving Israel a blank check in foreign policy.  Why are you raising that issue here when that's not what the discussion is about?

[TerraPrime]

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Bloodrider,

Neither the article nor the Statement I quote in any way advocate giving Israel a blank check in foreign policy.  Why are you raising that issue here when that's not what the discussion is about?

Maybe because in the article you cited they mentioned a campus professor glorifying two political organizations, Nasser's Egypt and the Hezbollah?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

TP,

18 minutes ago, TerraPrime said:

Maybe because in the article you cited they mentioned a campus professor glorifying two political organizations, Nasser's Egypt and the Hezbollah?

He cites them as being anti-jewish generally, not merely, anti-Israel:

My fellow activists tend to dismiss the anti-Semitism that students like me experience regularly on campus. They don’t acknowledge the swastikas that I see carved into bathroom stalls, scrawled across walls or left on chalkboards. They don’t hear students accusing me of killing Jesus. They don’t notice professors glorifying anti-Semitic figures such as Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt or the leadership of Hezbollah, as mine have.

Is it not true that both Nasser (was) and Hezbollah are generally hostile towards Jews generally and (didn't) doesn't limit their antipathy to Israeli Jews?

[BloodRider]

33 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Bloodrider,

Neither the article nor the Statement I quote in any way advocate giving Israel a blank check in foreign policy.  Why are you raising that issue here when that's not what the discussion is about?

That is the political sea we swim in right now.  It is the elephant in the room.  Israel, for better or worse, effectively has a blank check with our foreign policy.  Congress' obsequience to Netanyahu in the face of Obama's slightests of slights - BTW in dealing with our foreign policy with a completely different country - should double underscore this. To not acknowledge that is to ignore a major prior, like refusing to acknowledge police shootings or people of color, and then pondering the "real" purpose of BLM.

The hardest of the hardcore Zionists are getting all they could want, and are taking more every day, and the US and Europe for their support are facing outsized repercussions.  The right in Israel have killed or marginalized those who would bring about peace or even a decrease in violence in that area.  You can say that your version of Zionism means a two state solution, and no more settlements, but that IS NOT REALITY.  Reality right now is such that support of Zionist organizations will serve to consolidate the right's political power in Israel and take us farther away from a solution.  You can't just brush that under the rug.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

5 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

That is the political sea we swim in right now.  It is the elephant in the room.  Israel, for better or worse, effectively has a blank check with our foreign policy.  Congress' obsequience to Netanyahu in the face of Obama's slightests of slights - BTW in dealing with our foreign policy with a completely different country - should double underscore this. To not acknowledge that is to ignore a major prior, like refusing to acknowledge police shootings or people of color, and then pondering the "real" purpose of BLM.

The hardest of the hardcore Zionists are getting all they could want, and are taking more every day, and the US and Europe for their support are facing outsized repercussions.  They have killed or marginalized those who would bring about peace or even a decrease in violence in that area.  You can say that your version of Zionism means a two state solution, and no more settlements, but that IS NOT REALITY.  Reality right now is such that support of Zionist organizations will serve to consolidate the right's political power in Israel and take us farther away from a solution.  You can't just brush that under the rug.

Why are all Jewish organization being painted as "Zionist" organizations whether they exist to support Israel or not?  That's a false dichotomy at the worst.  Being Jewish, or being in a Jewish organization does not automatically make a person or the organization Zionist.  If it did there would be, by definition, no need for the term "Zionist".

[BloodRider]

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Why are all Jewish organization being painted as "Zionist" organizations whether they exist to support Israel or not.  That's a false dichotomy at the worst.  Being Jewish, or being in a Jewish organization does not automatically make a person or the organization Zionist.  If it did there would be, by definition, no need for the term "Zionist".

God dammit, Scott.  I am not saying that.  If you can't stop putting words in my mouth, then I am outta this.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

BR,

I'm talking about what the article talked about.  The way "Jewish" organizations are shunned and barred for being Jewish without any reference to them being "Zionist".  One does not equate to the other. 

You, keep bringing up support for Israel and, in my perspective, seem to be justifying the behavior of some toward Jewish organizations that have no ties to Israel.  The entire point of the thread is the way being Jewish is being conflated with being "Zionist".  The two are simply not the same.

[BloodRider]

5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

BR,

I'm talking about what the article talked about.  The way "Jewish" organizations are shunned and barred for being Jewish without any reference to them being "Zionist".  One does not equate to the other. 

You, keep brining up support for Israel and, in my perspective, seem to be justifying the behavior of some toward Jewish organizations that have no ties to Israel.  The entire point of the thread is the way being Jewish is being conflated with being "Zionist".  The two are simply not the same.

So why are you so readily accepting that the claims in this opinion piece are true.  Do you really think all Jewish organizations are really being banned from campus?  If they are that's fucking deplorable - as I have said many times already in this thread.  Do you know that they do not actually have ties to Netanyahu or hard core Zionists?  From my perspective, you just seemed to swallow what he has told you without any sort of parsing.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

34 minutes ago, TerraPrime said:

Maybe because in the article you cited they mentioned a campus professor glorifying two political organizations, Nasser's Egypt and the Hezbollah?

 clearing quote

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

So why are you so readily accepting that the claims in this opinion piece are true.  Do you really think all Jewish organizations are really being banned from campus?  Do you know that they do not actually have ties to Netanyahu or hard core Zionists?  From my perspective, you just seemed to swallow what he has told you without any sort of parsing.

I don't assume, and the article doesn't claim, all Jewish organizations are being banned.  Nevertheless some are for being Jewish.

Another individual in the same discussion mentioned being shouted down on a listserve discussion for attacking someone denying the Holocaust.  There is tolerance for anti-jewish sentiment that I, and others find troubling.

[TheKitttenGuard]

2 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

BR,

I'm talking about what the article talked about.  The way "Jewish" organizations are shunned and barred for being Jewish without any reference to them being "Zionist".  One does not equate to the other. 

You, keep brining up support for Israel and, in my perspective, seem to be justifying the behavior of some toward Jewish organizations that have no ties to Israel.  The entire point of the thread is the way being Jewish is being conflated with being "Zionist".  The two are simply not the same.

There is a lot of pressure within the Jewish Community to not distinguish your Jewish identity with support of Israel.

Hilleh have done many activities that are to create a tie with Israel though the organization may not have official positions of Israel policy. 

The author does no favors by making everything Anti-Israel as Anti-Semitism.  He does nothing to make a distinction.

There maybe something very important but the article does nothing to make a separation itself.

 

 

[BloodRider]

7 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I don't assume, and the article doesn't claim, all Jewish organizations are being banned.  Nevertheless some are for being Jewish.

Another individual in the same discussion mentioned being shouted down on a listserve discussion for attacking someone denying the Holocaust.  There is tolerance for anti-jewish sentiment that I, and others find troubling.

Are you saying that I and other do not?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, BloodRider said:

Are you saying that I and other do not?

Not at all.  But you, with your statements above, appear to my eye, rate anti-Jewish sentiment as less important than anti-Israeli positions.  I say that because you immediately shifted the discussion to Israeli foreign policy and away from rising anti-Jewish sentiment.

[BloodRider]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Not at all.  But you, with your statements above, appear to my eye, rate anti-Jewish sentiment as less important than anti-Israeli positions.  I say that because you immediately shifted the discussion to Israeli foreign policy and away from rising anti-Jewish sentiment.

Quote

Sabra is an American company partially owned by the Israeli Strauss Group, which has been a target of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement over its ties to the Israel Defense Forces. The group has contributed food and care packages to the IDF’s Golani and Givati Brigades, several sources said.

Quote

http://www.hillel.org/jewish/hillel-israel/hillel-israel-guidelines

Standards of Partnership

Hillel welcomes, partners with, and aids the efforts of organizations, groups, and speakers from diverse perspectives in support of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. Hillel will not partner with, house, or host organizations, groups, or speakers that as a matter of policy or practice:

• Deny the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish and democratic state with secure and recognized borders;
• Delegitimize, demonize, or apply a double standard to Israel;
• Support boycott of, divestment from, or sanctions against the State of Israel;
• Exhibit a pattern of disruptive behavior towards campus events or guest speakers or foster an atmosphere of incivility.

 

So - my point is that the original article is trying to lump the alt-right in with those who boycott companies supporting what many people feel are the brigades occupying the Gaza strip, or an organization that itself refuses to associate or speak with groups that have a differing point of view on Israel.  And I think its a bullshit move.

Your response is to then call me a denier of the current wave of antisemitism.  Nice fuckin' job.  

If he wanted to highlight antisemitism, he didn't have to tie it to his pro-Israel political policies.  He could have just pointed out the nasty antisemitism on campus.  But right out of the gate he calls out legit anti-Israel activities; refuses to acknowledge their anti-Zionist reasons reasons for opposing a given organization (he just assures us they are total apolitical organizations - which you bought, but as you can see from above is not true at all); and then fucking compares circulating a petition to carving a swastika.  Again - fuck that bullshit.

Frankly, I am a little bit embarrassed for you Scott that you can't see through his faulty comparison.  Shouldn't you be a bit better at analyzing rhetoric. 

 

[TerraPrime]

29 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Not at all.  But you, with your statements above, appear to my eye, rate anti-Jewish sentiment as less important than anti-Israeli positions.  I say that because you immediately shifted the discussion to Israeli foreign policy and away from rising anti-Jewish sentiment.

Maybe because the former is the root cause for the latter?

 

It is not true that all Jewish organizations support Israel's current foreign policy. Therefore, using the government's foreign policy as justification to condemn a Jewish organization is not legitimate, unless we can show a tie that a specific organization does specifically endorse the state of Israel.

 

But then, it'd be difficult to establish that identity, as a pro-Jewish organization but not explicitly endorsing the state of Israel, given that Israel is the nominal home to all Jewish people.

 

I think it's worth pointing out that regardless of the atrocities in foreign policy of the Israeli state, anti-Semitism is never justified. Whether it's Nazi symbols or racist stereotypes, we shouldn't tolerate it even if we disagree with the state of Israel's foreign policy.