Antisemitism, fake antisemitism, antiZionism, blood libel’s, global Jewish conspiracy and conflating Israel with Judaism: A ‘cry wolf’ syndrome?

 Anti-Jewish hatred exists and persists, so does fake antisemitism accusations to protect Israel. 

Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism, but obviously there is anti-Jewish hatred amongst its adherent’s, which should always be condemned. 

Let’s be very clear, Israel has no ‘right’ to exist. This is the anti-Zionist position opposing the Zionist position that ‘the Jews have a right to self-determination’ through a ‘Jewish State’ in Palestine. The ‘self-determination’ of one group cannot be achieved by disallowing ‘self-determination’ to the indigenous population. Under the British Mandate only 8% of Palestinians were Jews, the Zionists were from Europe and influenced by Colonialist ideology and European ‘supremacism’.  

When the PLO recognised Israel in the 90’s, that was a huge compromise, it was not a statement giving legitimacy to a Colonial land grab that stole Palestinian land and ethnically cleansed 750,000 Palestinian people to become refugees in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Gaza and Egypt. That the British former Colonial rulers and the UN accepted the creation of Israel on that stolen land, also does not give it legitimacy. I’m afraid also, the suffering of the Jewish people in Europe under Nazism and holocaust, still does not give legitimacy to forming a ‘Jewish State’ on Palestinian land. It gives a powerful emotional argument as mitigation, but does not absolve the crime. Palestine was not the only land the early Zionists proposed for a State, it could have been bought in South America or Africa, they chose Palestine for the emotional pull of the holy land(despite Zionism being overwhelmingly secular in nature).  

Denying Israel’s right to exist does not mean desiring the mass displacement or elimination of the Israeli people. Amongst many anti-Zionists and Pro-Palestinian’s currently, there is a third way being proposed. The first is a continuation of occupation and denial of a Palestinian State. The second and still the most popular, is the PLO compromise, a two-State solution. The third is a ‘bi-national’ State which would not be called Israel but would be home to the roughly 7 million Israeli Jews and 7 million Palestinian Arabs all with rights to citizenship and settlement. It might contain regional autonomy or be federal. This proposal is for one State for all between the ‘river and the sea’ and protections for all-Christians, Jews and Muslims. Zionist propagandists mischievously label this as ‘genocidal’ or the ‘extermination of Jews’ and a ‘2nd holocaust’.  

This is the context for all discussion on Israel and Palestine. 

Yet another report into rising antisemitism is being highlighted by the media. Recent  examinations have found similar rising levels of Islamophobia, however this doesn’t appear to provoke any mention in that same media. Anti-Arab hatred is something virtually no one is talking about, and yet it is behind the dehumanisation of Palestinians that has led to a genocide that the West ignores. 

Refreshingly, and ironically, this new report is into ‘anti-Jewish hatred’(not using the word antisemitism) and highlights cases of Jewish people in the workplace being blamed for the actions of Israel. If someone is being scapegoated, abused or shunned at work, purely for being Jewish(because of Gaza)-that is a clear example of antisemitism and racist bullying. It conflates Judaism or Jewishness, with the State of Israel and its actions. If however, an individual or group were expressly showing support for the actions of the Israeli regime, with a backdrop of horrific civilian slaughter and war crimes, then they lose their claim of ‘unprovoked’ abuse and that they were targeted for ‘only being Jewish’. 

It is  quite staggering, that the board of deputies, who are responsible for the report or John Mann who is highlighting it, are talking of the conflation of Israel and Judaism/Jewishness. Because this is exactly what THEY do consistently, Politicians do the same, media commentators, talk radio jocks, tv anchors, all follow the Israel lobby’s lead and conflate Israel’s actions with diaspora Jews. By doing this, by consistently attacking critics of Israel and labelling them ‘antisemitic’ they are ‘conflating’, they are being antisemitic themselves. This is so widespread amongst supporters of Israel and the Israeli government, that unfortunately the word ‘antisemitism’ has become devalued. A ‘cry wolf’ scenario has occurred, which becomes very dangerous for the Jewish diaspora, because anti-Jewish hatred is frighteningly real and is on the rise. It is clear that Israel’s genocide in Gaza and other crimes, are both fuelling that hatred and causing accusations of antisemitism to be not taken seriously.  

That is why I said it was ‘refreshing’ that the report was looking into ‘anti-Jewish hatred’. *The definition of antisemitism needs to return to what it always was-‘hatred of Jews for being Jewish or of the Judaic religion’. The IHRA definition(now rejected by its author and only ever a working definition) is responsible for conflating Israel and diasporic Jews. Also responsible, Israel’s propaganda war and Zionists involvement in that war. This definition, has led to an explosion of weaponising ‘antisemitism’ as a tool to suppress criticism of Israel, to induce fear of being labelled racist and fostering self-censorship.*

Recently in a landmark ruling, Justice Angus Stewart of the Federal Court of Australia rejected the adoption of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, which “conflates anti-Zionist or anti-Israel expression with anti-Jewish sentiment.”

His ruling went on to say:

“Political criticism of Israel, however inflammatory or adversarial, is not by its nature criticism of Jews in general or based on Jewish racial or ethnic identity… The conclusion that it is not antisemitic to criticise Israel is the corollary of the conclusion that to blame Jews for the actions of Israel is antisemitic; the one flows from the other.”

Ancient antisemitic tropes have been manipulated by Israel and its supporters to deflect criticism from themselves onto their critics. Hence, when Israel is accused of war crimes for targeting civilians and especially for the disproportionately high numbers of children- very often the ‘blood libel’ trope is used as a counter-attack. This refers to the antisemitic trope from the middle ages, where Jews were accused  of murdering Christians for their blood, to be used in religious rituals. Another widely used trope, is the longstanding conspiracy theory that ‘Jews are planning to take over the world’. A trope that very much exists and was used by the Nazis, but one that can be stretched to include almost all incidents of Zionists trying to influence policy towards Israel. Even the acknowledgement of the Pro-Israel lobby in the West, is enough to be labelled as antisemitic. Despite these Pro-Israel groups openly advocating and transparently donating to politicians to promote support for the State of Israel, the mentioning of it, the criticism of how that might be influencing policy, is frequently listed as an example of antisemitism. 

One infamous incident involving Labour MP Ruth Smeeth occurred in June 2016, at the launch of-

“the Chakrabarti Report, Marc Wadsworth, a Labour Party activist, described Smeeth as working "hand-in-hand" with Kate McCann of The Daily Telegraph, after McCann passed Smeeth his press release. Smeeth later issued a statement that Wadsworth was using "traditional antisemitic slurs to attack me for being part of a 'media conspiracy'" ‘However, according to a recording of the event Marc Wadsworth does not mention a ‘media conspiracy’ and he later said he ‘had no idea she was Jewish’. 

Despite a very tenuous link to an ancient trope, Smeeth demanded Wadsworth’s expulsion from the Party, which did happen. 

Now context is needed here. The Labour Party, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, was in a factional war with MP’s such as Smeeth backing a challenge to his leadership. Accusations of antisemitism were being used to discredit Corbyn, his consistent support for the struggle of the Palestinian people against Israeli occupation, made him an enemy of the Pro-Israel lobby, expressed especially by members of the ‘Labour friends of Israel’ grouping. Smeeth was a member and joined by many non-Jews who supported Israel, many of them being from the ‘Blairite’ faction in Labour who adamantly opposed Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. 

In this febrile context, at a press conference attempting to tackle antisemitism, Corbyn’s supporters were on the defensive. When Wadsworth witnessed an anti-Corbyn MP interacting with a journalist from the staunchly Pro-Conservative Party newspaper(a paper regularly attacking Corbyn) he saw a factional attack in collusion with the opposition Party’s mouthpiece ‘the daily telegraph’. Looking back, it seems a hell of a stretch to accuse Wadsworth of using an antisemitic trope. If you look at the wider context, it very much appears to be a manipulation of a trope, used in a factional war. Smeeth later received death threats(obviously unacceptable and clear antisemitic abuse) however that doesn’t have any bearing on the original incident. 

People who believe in conflating Israel with world Jewry, often claim that attacks on ‘the only Jewish State’ is ‘inherently’ antisemitic. But thats it, its a State, a world actor with a powerful military, an illegal occupier of other people’s land, its not an individual or a minority group which have a right to protection under the law. Its not Islamophobic to heavily attack Saudi Arabia or Iran for their theocratic oppression. It wasn’t ‘Colonial racism’ to attack Mugabe in Zimbabwe for his human rights record. 

Secondly, Israel has about two million ‘Israeli-Arabs’ in its population, by definition, calling out Israel is not an attack on all Jews and nor is it that, because many, many Jews worldwide disassociate themselves from Israel and many oppose it. It doesn’t matter how much Israel says it ‘represents the Jewish people’, or for that matter the board of deputies, the fact remains that they don’t. Just as the Saudis can’t claim they represent all Sunni Muslim’s.      

Yet again, antisemitism as a weapon, is likely to be turned on Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters. A new Socialist Party will be a serious threat to Labour and especially the Blairite faction that controls it. The weaponisation is already in full-time operation attempting to smear accusers of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. It will be important to forensically examine all allegations of antisemitism in this context, so authentic claims can be properly pursued and action taken. At the same time, fake accusations need to be exposed, something that should be easier now after the ‘cry wolf’ syndrome has been unveiled in relation to the overuse of the term ‘antisemitism’.  

Finally, I patiently wait for a report to be highlighted by the media, into ‘anti-Arab racism’. Whether by Pro-Israel supporters or through ‘unconscious bias’ that habitually presents the Israeli narrative above that of the Palestinian and the disproportionate focus on Israeli ‘victims’ over Palestinians in the UK media.