Antisemitism is rearing its head around the world, including in countries that had been considered safe in that respect.
It is an open secret that antisemitism is not just prevalent among economically weak and poorly educated segments of the population, nor is it exclusive to conservative, religious, fascist and other groups; it also appears among groups and societies that define themselves as liberal, secular and democratic.
We are witnessing how, in the name of liberal values, quite a few of those who advocate human rights are willing to throw Israel under the wheels of radical Islamist butchery and support a final solution – as exemplified by the chant, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which means genocide.
The new antisemitism is thought to have been born with the spread of the Enlightenment movement in Europe and the Jewish emancipation that followed. Masses of Jews left their way of life and converted to Christianity, or at least assimilated into society without emphasizing their ethnic affiliation. They quickly integrated into the institutions of government, law, economics, and academia.
If the old antisemitism could be explained in terms of religious hatred, deicide and so on, as well as in social terms of seclusion, foreign customs and dress (hatred of the other), then the process of secularization and assimilation of European Jews was supposed to moderate and eradicate the phenomenon. This, however, is not what happened; as the Jews’ contribution to society grew greater, as they integrated into society and gave up distinctive external features, antisemitism increased.
For the most part, this phenomenon is explained in rational terms. Even the myths surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus and the accusations that the Jews were guilty of “murdering God” are a rational explanation for the phenomenon, as, if the Jews are guilty, they should be punished, especially in view of “the fact” that God too had punished them by dispersing the Jews around the world and humiliating them.
But how does antisemitism continue to rumble in the heart of secular Europe, which has freed itself from the shackles of religion, superstitions and other mystical matters?
One could say that Europe was born into these Christian myths. For the past 2,000 years, the most important myth in European culture and phenomenology has been the image of a crucified Jew. Even if for the masses this was the image of God, it reconstructs the central act of Christianity – the crucifixion of the King of Jews, the Messiah whom the Jews rejected – and thus projects onto European culture.
The educated Christian knew of Jesus’ Jewish roots; he was born under Jesus’ shadow, grew up under it and died before the cross. Even if he was not a religious man, he could not escape from the image of Jesus present on almost every street.
It is worth thinking again about the hidden meaning of the Christian myth: a crucified Jew! Wasn’t traditional antisemitism a “compulsive repetition” of the religious trauma Europeans were fed with their mother’s milk: In other words, to materialize the crucifixion in the here and now; a desire to be present in the traumatic and transcendent moment that is the essence of the Christian faith and the key to the believer’s personal salvation?
The story of modern antisemitism is even more fascinating as the Jews who left the ghettos for a new life as (almost) equal citizens no longer played the “role” that had been assigned them, at least from a Christian theological perspective – a dead-alive nation that through its worthless existence demonstrates the righteousness of Christianity and serves as a human resource to play out the myth of the crucifixion through the violence employed against the Jews throughout history
At that stage of history (emancipation and the receipt of at least some civil rights), the Jews sought to descend from the cross and live among those who saw them only through the prism of religion: crucified on the cross and living separately from them.
Nevertheless, in the moments of national crisis experienced by European nations – each in its own way – antisemitism raised its head, returned to the heart of public discourse and sought to put the Jew back on the cross. If we dig deeper, we can identify a deep desire to restore the founding myth of European culture.
But the Jews who had descended from the cross did not want to get back on it and this led to ever-worsening steps against them until the terminal eruption of the Holocaust during World War II. Even before that, in the 19th century with the disappointment with the Enlightenment and emancipation, which did not bear the hoped-for fruits and because of the European nationalism that awoke with the “Springtime of Nations,” a realization emerged that the solution to the Jewish problem would have to come outside of Europe.
While most of the waves of emigration from Europe headed to North America, Jewish destiny was changed by those who embraced Zionism. It completed the historical process of descending from the cross.
Moreover, its deeper meaning was to actively change Jewish destiny. The fact that the Jews were willing to fight for their freedom in the Land of Israel was a continuation of the process of de-mythification in which Jews were no longer willing to be crucified but stood and fought to prevent that.
In this respect, the establishment of the State of Israel had far-reaching psycho-theological significance: not only had Jesus descended from the cross, but he had also wrapped himself in a talit (a prayer shawl) and returned to his homeland. Now he holds a weapon to prevent himself from being crucified again.
The existence of a Jewish state smashes this ancient myth. Hence the automatic opposition of parts of the European intelligentsia not only to Israel’s actions but to its very existence, to the point of supporting movements that seek to destroy them as well. After all, Hamas and its ilk are continuing the historical task that was never ended.
Even if religion no longer holds authority in Europe, the myths that have fed European peoples for thousands of years have not gone away. They are firmly immersed in the collective (unconscious) memory and from there they float up and emerge, each time with a different catalyst.
It is, in a way, similar to the role Sigmund Freud allocated to dreaming where unresolved traumas that threaten to overwhelm consciousness are repressed into the unconscious, but over and again they resurface in consciousness through symbols in dreams.
If the United Nations represents the ancient term “family of nations” (“families of the earth” in the language of the Book of Genesis), then the permanent wholesale denunciation of Israel – and only Israel of all nations – in all UN institutions is a political expression of the old-new antisemitism.
Only once has the UN done something for the benefit of our people. About two years after the establishment of the UN, a majority of its member countries voted to divide the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state (today, the resolution would not pass). The Arabs did not accept partition and launched a war, but for us, it was the fulfillment of our generations-old dream: the establishment of an independent Jewish state in our ancient homeland.
It is hard to avoid the thought that we were “granted” this because, in the six years that preceded the founding of the UN, we fulfilled our “role” as victim and sacrificed in the most terrible and absolute way. Indeed, Israel was established not because of the Holocaust, but despite the Holocaust; however, the fact is that for a short moment in time, we received empathy from some states that since then have never supported us.
After October 7, after the unimaginable horrors that Hamas terrorists inflicted on our daughters, children and babies, the Jews returned for a moment to their traditional “role” as the “Lamb of God.” But the historic change in our fate is that we quickly pulled ourselves together and embarked on a war to eradicate evil from the world and for some that is hard to accept: Jews who defend themselves and refuse to be crucified again. How strange.
This op-ed first appeared on Israel Hayom and is republished with permission.