‘New’ antisemitism blurs complicated and dangerous lines – Asia Times

There have been numerous reports that racism is on the rise around the world following the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 and the subsequent continuing conflict in Gaza. Attacks on Jewish churches and organizations, some of them uneasily close to home, bear this out.

In the United States, racist acts tripled the week after the Hamas problems, and the United Kingdom recorded a 1, 353 % increase in such situations. In Australia, 37 anti-Jewish occurrences were reported the week after the Hamas problems, compared to one the previous year.

Antisemitism has a story that goes back several decades. It occurs virtually everywhere Jews, against the rule of the majority, choose to cling to their religious and cultural personality. What is “new” nowadays is that racism debates have then veered into contentious ones regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Now, hatred takes both common and new forms of expression. The creator of the new book, The New Antisemitism, is speaker Shalom Lappin, a graduate of Queen Mary University in London. But the word “new hatred” does not relate to him alone: it has been used by a number of other poets.

We can simply understand the increase of racism in the larger perspective of growing injustice and anti-globalization movements, which” discuss a common focus on identity politics and a quickly anti-elitist rejection of organized political institutions,” according to Lappin’s book’s fundamental thesis. I am never fully convinced by this assertion.

At the same time, he argues that are currently three isolates of racism: belonging to the right, the left and radical Islam. A rise of hatred is undoubtedly linked to the rise of populist autocratic activities, particularly in Europe.

Heavy traditional roots

The New Antisemitism excels in tracing the antisemitism’s traditional origins in both Western and Islamic civilizations. The long history of the persecution of Jews in Christian Europe makes for dreadful, if comfortable, reading. However, it is crucial to dispel the myth that the Holocaust was apparently a singular event that only existed in Nazi Germany.

Antisemitism has also been expunged from almost all mainstream churches, despite the fact that it has since been disapproved of by practically all of its followers. In the US, Lappin writes, it has taken hold among light nationalists, who support their hatred by claiming the society is founded on Christian values. In Putin’s Russia, the close connections between the condition and the Orthodox Church have helped revive old strains of hatred, based on the story that the Jews killed Christ.

Immigrants were viewed as “people of the book,” even though their position was frequently constrained, despite Christianity’s condemnation of Jews as the murderers of Jesus. Antisemitism in Muslim societies is a complex synthesis of conventional notions of powerful and mysterious Jews as well as a deep hatred for Israel.

As has been true generally in much of Europe, the desire for a real national identity, whether defined by race or by religion, makes Jews a significant target – as indeed are additional minorities, such as the Hazaras in Afghanistan or Roma in many European countries.

It’s difficult to completely separate antisemitism from hostility toward Israel at this time. Right-wing Europeans like Viktor Orban in Hungary are vocal pro-Israel supporters while engaging in antisemitism at home.

Former US president Donald Trump tinkered with antisemitism while also, as he frequently states, supporting Israel in a greater way than any of his predecessors during his term in office. In fact, Donald Trump has made the claim that Harris ‘ election will cause Israel to be destroyed in two years.

Many of Israel’s staunchest defenders label their critics as antisemitic. It is crucial for those of us who criticize Israel’s position to distinguish between prejudice against Jews and opposition to Israel. The issue is best illustrated by the Star of David’s status as both an Israeli flag and a Jewish identity marker.

Hostility to Israel is clearly the main driving force in extreme left antisemitism, but here Lappin is at his least convincing. Rather like the Murdoch newspapers, he consistently argues that major elements of the left have embraced a new antisemitism. His evidence is less substantial in this context than it is for fundamentalist or right-wing antisemitism.

In the cases he cites, there is unquestionable evidence of Hamas ‘ uncritical viewpoints and a disinterested view of how hostility toward Israel might turn into antisemitism. His main sources of inspiration are the now-discredited Jeremy Corbyn wing of the British Labour Party ( Corbyn initially disputed Hamas ‘ designation as a terrorist organization ) and the Palestinian-supporting university camps that emerged following the Hamas attacks on October 7.

However, claims of” the alacrity with which much of the postmodernist left endorsed the Hamas terrorist attack as “anti-colonial resistance” give too much weight to left-wing marginal groups, where Israel’s opposition translates into clearly antisemitic language.

He contends that a number of rigid ideologies, which prioritize class issues over identity, are the foundation of contemporary progressive thought. He writes that this implies that Jews who want to take part in progressive movements must “declare their active hostility to Israel as a country, rather than simply oppose the policies of its government.”

His claims about a “rising tide of anti-Jewish racism” and “mass demonstrations featuring anti-Jewish sloganeering in British and European cities” make sense if one accepts that anti-Zionist language, and calls to free Palestine “from the river to the sea”, are inherently antisemitic.

This is a tenable argument if such proclamations refer to the denial of sovereignty to the seven million Jews who currently reside in Israel. It is less persuasive when one considers that the Israeli Knesset, the country’s legislature, has expressly opposed a two-state solution and that many members of the current administration have their own version of” the river to the sea,” which rejects any chance of Palestinian sovereignty being recognized.

Lappin himself acknowledges the necessity of recognizing Palestinians ‘ equal rights to sovereignty and recognition. He also criticizes the Netanyahu administration’s expansionist and autocratic views. He opposes Netanyahu’s efforts to enact judicial restraints, as do many Israelis, and is horrified by the West Bank’s rapid Jewish settlements, which frequently result in violent clashes with Palestinian residents.

He nowhere mentions Australia, but some here echo his argument that anti-Zionism and calls to free Palestine are antisemitic. Australia’s Envoy Against Antisemitism, Jillian Segal, has claimed:” Antisemitic behavior is not only present on many campuses but is an embedded part of the culture”.

This is a very serious charge that requires serious proof to back it up. Lampin points to the rise in complaints about hate crimes committed against Jews and the need for greater security in neighborhoods like synagogues, schools, and community centers. Where is the proof, however, that the left is to blame for the rising antisemitism rate?

Simplistic arguments

Lappin is more convincing when he criticizes claims that Israel is a settler-colonial state, equivalent to the US or Australia. He explains that for two millennia, there was a steady Jewish population in Palestine.

More importantly, the Jews who have made their way to Israel over the past century did not do so as agents of an imperial power, but as refugees from numerous persecutions in Europe and the Middle East.

I agree with the claim that many people, both on the left and right, either ignore antisemitism or use it for a reason. But this is true of other forms of prejudice, too. The sad truth is that the majority of us are largely unaware of oppression and discrimination when it is directed at individuals with whom we have no affinity.

Lappin provides a very useful summary of how modern Israel developed, how it has developed over the years, how it has fought its Arab neighbors, and how it has failed to settle disputes with the Palestinians. His claim that “both Islamists and Jewish messianists have seized control of the debate” is a necessary correction for the simplistic arguments made too frequently on both sides is one.

For Lappin, the need to find a two-state solution remains, even as support for it seems to have collapsed on both sides of the conflict. In an attempt to reconcile two apparently irreconcilable claims, he points to other examples where sovereignty has been shared: in particular, Cyprus. Given that&nbsp, the Turkish enclave of Cyprus&nbsp, is not recognized by any other state and only remains because of Turkish military prowess, it hardly seems an attractive model.

His argument is strongest when he makes the case that hostility toward Jews is pervasive and reappears under political and economic strain. Lippin is a traditional social democrat at heart. He draws the conclusion that” a new progressive politics that addresses the underlying causes of the current crisis in democracy” is the only way to combat antisemitism.

A chapter on “notes for a new progressive politics” follows. It is the least interesting chapter of a book that would otherwise be interesting. In 24 pages, trying to create a global program for progressive politics inevitably results in a level of generalization that hardly enhances an otherwise provocative and levelheaded introduction to a challenging subject.

He warns against authoritarian politics and the rise of ethnonationalism. I am deeply sympathetic to this argument, but I am not convinced it fully explains the resurgence of antisemitism.

Unfortunately, the passions that Israel’s rampant response to the Hamas attacks has rekindled centuries-old stereotypes of Jews as both aliens and allies, making the distinction between Jewish hatred and opposition to Israel seem contradictory.

Dennis Altman is vice chancellor’s fellow and professorial fellow, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.