What Is Anti-Semitism? The Israel Angle

I am cross-posting an article from the New York-based Jewish news outlet Algemeiner by Eric Fusfield of B’nai B’rith that deals with competing versions of the definition of anti-Semitism. First of all, there is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, which is used by several international entities including the US State Department. Here is Mr Fusfield’s article in defense of the IHRA definition. 

Because the IHRA version contains several examples of anti-Semitism that relate to Israel, enemies of the Jewish state, particularly the pro-Palestinian lobby, are opposed to it. Now two different groups have recently come up with their own versions, the Jerusalem Declaration on anti-Semitism, as well as that of the Nexus Task Force (described in a JNS article by Lea Speyer), something that was spawned at the University of Southern California. The main point of difference between these 3 definitions is when it comes to the question of Israel and its conflict with the Palestinians. 

Now we have a recent article written by Professor Neve Gordon (a pro-Palestinian Israeli) at the Queen Mary University in London and Mark LeVine, a professor of history at the University of California at Irvine (where I also taught part-time from 1998-2016). These two gentlemen make the case for the Jerusalem-Nexus versions since they “legitimize” or shield the attacks against Israel from charges of anti-Semitism.

Clearly, the intent of the two recent versions (Jerusalem-Nexus) is to chip away at the connections between attacks against the Jewish state of Israel and anti-Semitism itself. Even Israel’s defenders concede that mere criticism of Israel’s policies does not, in itself, constitute anti-Semitism. But when you resort to age-old tropes to claim that Jews control the banks, governments, and other worldwide institutions to make your case for the Palestinians, that is anti-Semitic. When you hold Israel to certain standards when it comes to human rights while ignoring the human rights abuses of its Arab neighbors, red flags are raised. Those are just two examples contained in the IHRA version.

I am not familiar with Professor Gordon, but I am familiar with his co-author, Mark LeVine, since he and I have both taught at UC Irvine-including the years of conflict when UCI earned a reputation as an unfriendly place for Jewish students-thanks-not to the KKK or Neo-Nazis- but thanks to the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and Students for Justice in Palestine, both of whom have sponsored numerous events over the years that have condemned Israel as a violator of Palestinian human rights. Several speakers for these groups have attacked Jews as people-aside from their opposition to Israel. I have personally witnessed it.

It is not my point here to attack LeVine though we are on opposite sides of the issue. But I would like to point out to him just one example of Jew-hatred that I personally witnessed in 2008 during the annual May week of events attacking Israel and organized by the MSU. As part of their annual exhibit, there is a so-called Apartheid Wall, representing the wall Israel has constructed to protect its citizens from Palestinian terrorist attacks. This is a caricature of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that I witnessed and photographed in May 2008 on that Apartheid Wall.

In fairness, I should add that I have never seen Professor LeVine at the Apartheid Wall, neither in 2008 or any other time. I have never seen him present when Oakland imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali was attacking various and sundry individuals as “Zionist JEWS!” in his numerous appearances at UCI. It is entirely possible that LeVine was and still is unaware of that image of Ariel Sharon that appeared on our campus in 2008. He may not be aware that a Washington DC imam named Mohamed al-Asi spoke at UCI in February 2001 and said, that, “you can take the Jew out of the ghetto, but you cannot take the ghetto out of the Jew”. Al-Asi was not speaking before the UCI-KKK chapter (there is none, never has been). He was speaking before the MSU and attacking Israel.

I have numerous other anecdotes, too many to list here, but my point is this: These two new “definitions” of anti-Semitism, drawn up by leftist academics opposed to Israel (Jewish or not) are a false argument that would merely legitimize Jew-hatred masquerading as a human rights campaign on behalf of the “downtrodden” Palestinian people. Because in the final analysis, this entire anti-Zionist campaign (including the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement against Israel) is part of the ultimate goal of eliminating the Jewish state of Israel and replacing it with something called Palestine. The fact is that anti-Semitism is deeply embedded in the anti-Israel movement, and sooner or later, it comes out, whether it is the form of remarks about Jewish ghettoes, “Zionist JEWS”, bullying of Jewish students, swastikas on Jewish dorm rooms, or caricatures of Jewish leaders drawn in the style of the old Nazi weekly, Der Stuermer. 

You cannot eliminate Israel from the discussion when discussing today’s newest reincarnation of Jew-hatred. It is front and center. For a bunch of leftist academics who are opposed to Israel to try and invent a new definition of anti-Semitism that would legitimize the examples I have given above is just plain cynical and absurd.