The New York Times: Anti-Zionism versus Anti-Semitism?

Mark commented December 11

17000 dead. Probably more dead under the rubble. This question, does anti-Zionism mean anti-semitism (no!), is a distraction from a US-backed genocide. Can we please start having honest, brass tacks conversations about what is happening? It is certainly in the best interest of Israel, which is losing global support by the minute. And for goodness sake, my Jewish friends are all anti-Zionist. And no, they are not anti-Semitic. They are brilliant, funny, humane, proud Jewish people. Stop the conflation! It is obscene.98 RecommendShareFlag

Mark

Reasonable person commented December 11

The term Zionism has been hijacked to mean whatever fits the speakers narrative when it has a precise definition. Zionism is an indigenous liberation movement, and the only successful one in the lands occupied by the Arab invasions. You can see Kurds waving Israeli flags as they are inspired to achieve their own liberation.15 RecommendShareFlag

Reasonable person

Wisconsin Dec. 11

No government has the right to elevate one demographic group over another — that is apartheid. Do Jews deserve refuge from the persecution they suffered for centuries? Emphatically, yes. But most forms of Zionism requires an indigenous people (Palestinians) be relegated to second class citizenship or evicted in the land they’ve lived in for centuries. Labeling me antisemetic for this antizionist belief is nothing more than a disingenuous, manipulative attempt to silence me. 88 Recommend

Ellis6 commented December 11

Ellis6

Sequim, WA Dec. 11

“Is Anti-Zionism Always Antisemitic?’ That depends on the definition of Zionism. “The following night, lighting the national menorah behind the White House, Vice President Kamala Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff, who is Jewish, warned, ‘When Jews are targeted because of their beliefs or identity, and when Israel is singled out because of anti-Jewish hatred, that is antisemitism.’” When Israel is criticized for its policies and behavior that is not anti-semitic. I have no problem with Israel existing. I have huge problems with their 100 eyes for an eye policy of retribution in which they kill and maim countless innocent people including children. Israel has a right to exist, but it has no right to deny justice for Palestinians. Current Israeli policies create terrorists and are not intended to lead to a peaceful future unless that future is determined by Israeli domination and subjugation of Palestinians. Israel will never end terrorism by killing Palestinians unless they kill all of them, which would qualify as genocide. Does that mean that all Palestinians are terrorists? No, but terrorism is the tool of the weak and powerless and Israeli policies create more terrorists. I see no way for Israel to avoid the future murder of Israelis. A measured response to terrorism and sincere efforts to help Palestinians acquire justice in their own state seems to me the only hopeful policy for the future. It can not include killing hundreds of Palestinians for every Jewish death. 55 Recommend

JC commented December 11

Camden, Maine Dec. 11

Nadler and company are intentionally conflating “criticism of Israel” with anti-Zionism. I am a proud Zionist. I’m proud of my grandparents, who made their way to Israel in the late 30s with nothing but agricultural training. They didn’t have wads of cash in their pockets and they didn’t have rifles. They weren’t particularly religious either. They just wanted to have a chance to LIVE… and build a family… free from persecution and in the only land that has ever been our ancestral home… and I’m not sure that they even had anywhere else to go at the time — it was go to Israel or stay in Poland and die. They chose life. One thing I assure you, they were the most kind and sweet people you’d ever meet… not the villains so many confused people are making Zionists out to be. With that said, I’m a Zionist who is very critical of the Israeli government – especially this one. Most Israelis are. 80 percent do not approve of Bibi. I hope they will find a way in their whacky parliamentary system to get rid of him. Zionism is not about the Israeli government or its policies at any given time though. Being against the Israeli government and calling out Bibi is an exercise in Democracy. But calling my grandparents, my family, or me genocidal fascist colonial settlers, just because we are Jews who made a home in Israel (with generation upon generation just wanting to live in peace) is not okay. That is why anti-Zionism is antisemitism. 25 Recommend

Peter in NC commented December 11

Peter in NC

NC Dec. 11

Seeing that no one has a satisfactory definition of Zionism, saying a person is anti-Zionism is meaningless. And to equate opposition to certain Israeli government actions with antisemitism is one of the most asinine notions I have every heard. It is analogous to some people working for racial justice flinging the epithets “racist” and “white supremacist” at people they disagree with. It is a way of saying “I am unwilling to really listen to you, so I will assign this nasty label to you so that I can ignore you.”23 RecommendShareFlag

Mark Thiel commented December 11

Mark Thiel

East Coast, USA Dec. 11

Are all Israelis Jews? No. Are all Jews Israelis? No. Ipso facto, religion and state are not synonymous. “Judaism had always contained elements of religion and nationhood, and that Jewish identity had toggled between the two over the millenniums. It is unsurprising that the two strains can seem baffling, he said.” Recognizing a religion as a state, or vice versa, is not a good idea. (The current Speaker of the US House of Representatives would like to turn the US into a church-state. Yes, like Iran. That is certainly anti-American. The Speaker himself does not see — or claims not to see — that it is unconstitutional. The fact that it is unconstitutional is self-evident. Nonetheless…) You can’t criticize the Israeli government, because that would be antisemetic? What about Jewish Israelis who criticize the Netanyahu administration? Are they “self-hating” Jews? Are they traitors to the Israeli state? traitors to the Jewish faith? I guess you can’t criticize the governments of Nigeria or Ghana — because that would be racist. Can’t criticize the governments of Saudi Arabia or Syria, because that’s both anti-Arab and anti-Moslem. Can’t criticize the Vatican. Anti-Catholic, obviously. Can’t criticize the governments of Mexico or Venezuela or Brazil, because that’s anti-Latino. 33 Recommend

J.I.M. commented December 11

J.I.M.

Los Alamos NMDec. 11

Russian Zionist Ahad Ha’am’s criticism of early Zionist settlers: “We must surely learn, from both our past and present history, how careful we must be not to provoke the anger of the native people by doing them wrong, how we should be cautious in our dealings with a foreign people among whom we returned to live, to handle these people with love and respect and, needless to say, with justice and good judgment. And what do our brothers do? Exactly the opposite! They were slaves in their Diasporas, and suddenly they find themselves with unlimited freedom, wild freedom that only a country like Turkey [the Ottoman Empire] can offer. This sudden change has planted despotic tendencies in their hearts, as always happens to former slaves [‘eved ki yimlokh — when a slave becomes king — Proverbs 30:22]. They deal with the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly, beat them shamefully for no sufficient reason, and even boast about their actions. There is no one to stop the flood and put an end to this despicable and dangerous tendency.”28 RecommendShareFlag

Prodemocracy commented December 11

Prodemocracy

Washington DCDec. 11

Anit-Zionism is a favorite cause of antisemitic movements and has been built into hateful ideology by antisemtic movements. Signing on and supporting “anti-Zionism,” repeating the talking points, donating to “anti-Zionist” organizations has an antisemitic effect, even if there is no hateful intent. So the people who are caught up in these movements are not all themselves antisemites, despite the harm they do to Jewish people worldwide.6 RecommendShareFlag

Upper West Sider commented December 11

Upper West Sider

Nadav commented December 11

Let’s get something straight. Zionism was the movement for the establishment of a Jewish state. That state exists. Her name is Israel. Half of what remains of the world’s Jewish population (15 Million) live in Israel.(7 Million). Zionism has nothing to do with criticism of a government. Most American Jews support the existence and security of Israel and are not Right Wing, but are liberal Democrats. To promote the eradication of the world’s only Jewish state – is antisemitic.18 RecommendShareFlag

Nadav

IsraelDec. 11

One could argue endlessly about the definition of Zionism. Ultimately, it is a political movement aimed at securing a safe homeland for the Jewish people. Left-wing political parties in Israel are just as Zionist as those on the right. If you oppose nationalism in all its forms, then being anti-Zionist does not make you antisemitic. If you have no problem with people’s right to self-determination, until it comes to the Jews, then you are essentially promoting an antisemitic view, plain and simple.16 RecommendShareFlag

Kara commented December 11

Kara

Daniel commented December 11

The answer to the question is no. If it were yes, half of Israeli Jews would be considered antisemitic.22 RecommendShareFlag

Daniel

BowDec. 11

The concept of Zionism is abhorrent. It has nothing to do with being a Jew. Zionism calls for the extermination of those who are not Jews to make way for their homeland. When you say you are going to make a homeland for a “people” in a given location, it means that those who are not of that “people” and who live in that homeland must leave and if they refuse to leave they must be exterminated.28 RecommendShareFlag

Person commented December 11

Person

New YorkDec. 11

I know this is not a popular opinion and I didn’t arrive at it easily but: 1) white Europeans committed the genocide of 6 million Jews 2) white powers had colonized large parts of the world and carved them up as it suited their political ends (cf. the Partition of India where 12 MILLION people were displaced and at least a million died) 3) when they had to make some reparations for their actions, they decided that kicking a bunch of relatively poor Arabs who had lived on land they controlled for centuries was an acceptable option so the Jewish people could have a country to call their own (and those European countries could absolve themselves somewhat of their guilt for acts of both commission and omission – while also making it not their problem to deal with in the future) 4) not surprisingly, those who were displaced and dispossessed have never taken kindly to this – they live largely as second class citizens in what used to be their home 5) there are no excuses for what Hamas did to Israeli civilians. There is no justification for what Israel is doing in retaliation to Palestinian civilians 6) but Zionism is part of the problem, not the solution 7) this is NOT antisemitism. I and thousands of others have nothing against Jews, while still feeling that Israel’s existence as it is today was the product of colonialism and should not have been done this way 8) can we undo this history? Probably not. But a 2-state solution might be the only option52 RecommendShareFlag

zaylyn commented December 11

zaylyn

CaliforniaDec. 11

When does criticism of Israel cross the line as antisemitic? 1. Denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination in their homeland by claiming that Israel should not exist or that the existence of the State of Israel is a colonialist endeavor. Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people should be able to establish a national homeland in the ancestral territory of Zion, what is now Israel. Anti-Zionism is antisemitism. 2. Casts Jews as insidious influencers in world events, such as an all-powerful Zionist conspiracy or “Zionist entity” responsible for the world’s ills. 3. Denies Jewish history, such as the Holocaust never happened or is exaggerated, or today’s Jews are not connected to Jews who lived in Israel thousands of years ago. 4. Assumes that the government of Israel speaks for all Jews. If you’re conflating Jews with Israel and assuming that all Jews are supporters of right-wing Israeli policies, you’re antisemitic. 5. Applies a double standard by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.11 RecommendShareFlag

Richard commented December 11

Richard

SeattleDec. 11

Are we to take the claim that “god” granted someone the deed to a particular piece of ground seriously? Talk about a slippery slope.78 RecommendShareFlag

Bill McGrath commented December 11

Bill McGrath

Chimacum, WADec. 11

I’m no fan of Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right religious allies, and I’m furious at what they are wreaking in Gaza. The prime minister stepped right into the trap set by Hamas, and now Israel is losing its reputation as a decent nation. Granted, Hamas is horrible, but Bibi’s decision to kill ten times as many (or more) Palestinian civilians for every Israeli killed in the initial raid will now cost him any hope of realigning his relations with the Arab world and just about everyone else, too. And there is zero hope of ever having a relationship with any Palestinians, Hamas or not. That door is now permanently closed. This is not a scenario that can be laid at the feet of all Israelis, and it certainly is not something that can be blamed on the Jewish people, but all will be tainted with the brush that paints the current government. Netanyahu’s response to the attack is exactly what Hamas wanted, and it might lead to the destruction of Israel, their primary goal. Incredibly stupid move on the PM’s part.55 RecommendShareFlag

David commented December 11

David

Sam commented December 11

I am Jewish but I am decidedly not a Zionist – that is, I do not believe that the Jewish people should have or needed to establish a nation state of our own for protection – G-d is ultimately the one who protects the Jewish people and He doesn’t need a state to do it. That said, Israel exists and is home to the vast majority of the world’s Jews. While there are perfectly intelligent academic discussions to be had about its founding and important debates to be had about how it conducts itself as a government, fact is that most of the extreme anger pointed at Israel indeed seems to stem from a hatred of the Jewish people and their success. To me, that is most evident in the double standard applied to the state of Israel and the almost religious denial of the basic facts on the ground surrounding its enemies. Hamas, like many radical Islamic groups, is an antisemitism organization. They hate Jews. They strive to murder innocent Jews. They don’t play fair and are a real consistent threat to Jewish lives for decades. So all the praise of Hamas and its attacks on innocent people (glory to the martyrs!) or the repetition of its inherently antisemitic slogans (from the river to the sea!) are rightly seen as western acceptance of real antisemitism. The same could be said for those who are so quick to criticize an Israeli response to attacks on its people, without offering any valid alternatives or recognizing the extremely difficult position that Israel is in militarily.19 RecommendShareFlag

BF commented December 11

Ulster CountyDec. 11

After reading this article I’ve concluded that “antisemitism” is on a spectrum between bigotry and, let’s say, skepticism and most of us are on it. I’ve begun pondering where the Israeli government, itself, lands on that scale.10 RecommendShareFlag

Sam

CaliforniaDec. 11

No, anti-Zionism is not always antisemitism. Equating the two is often used to shut down criticism of Israel. It is not antisemitic to point out well-supported facts. Here are some that come to mind: the 1948 establishment of Israel involved displacing 700K Palestinians from their land. Currently there are about 7 million Palestinian refugees, the world’s largest refugee population. Israel has built settlements on Palestinian land of which 10% of Israel’s population or 700 K settlers live. Israel’s settlements are illegal according to international law. It is not anti-semitic to point out well-supported facts.65 RecommendShareFlag

One World commented December 11

One World

Giancarlo Centeno commented December 11

Name another country that gets the same privilege of equating criticism of the domination by one identity group with religious discrimination. It doesn’t stand up to reason nor is an accepted international standard. It shuts down legitimate criticism of Israel’s actions. Zionism is the nationalistic project to create a state that favors the immigration, occupation, and domination by one group of people over others who live there (and have lived there thousands of years). Many Israelis are secular Jews. Some deeply-religious Jews oppose Zionism. It is a philosophy that is not supported when enacted by other peoples in the world. Consider: There are 24 million Sikhs who have no homeland. There are 45 million Kurds with no homeland. There are 16 million Jews. Do we support Native Americans reclaiming all of the US? They should by the same logic. Is questioning US actions (domestic and foreign) considered hate against Christians? We would do well to stop using this as a hammer to defend violence, injustice, and discrimination by the Israeli nation. Defending Jews, Muslims, or people of any other faith are different.49 RecommendShareFlag

Giancarlo Centeno

San FranciscoDec. 11

It is a gross misrepresentation to say Zionism as a concept was only the belief that Jews needed their own land for refuge from persecution. In 1917, more than a decade before the rise of nazism in Germany, the Zionist movement convinced the British govt to issue the Balfour declaration, to consider Palestine a national home for the Jewish people. Meaning that the Zionist movement began the colonization of Palestine before the prosecution of European Jews. Before this, Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in harmony in Palestine and aspired to independence. There was sympathy for Jews among Palestinians. But with the mandate came the rapid aggressive colonization of Palestine by Zionists. Their only goal? The ethnic cleansing of all of Palestine which the movement coveted for its new state. 30 years after the Oslo Peace Accords of 1993 (for which Palestine accepted all US and Israeli conditions) the Palestinians have regained NOTHING, while Israel has only expanded their illegal settlements, increased their military occupations and have subjected Palestinians to a perpetual state of vanquish and suffering. The Zionist movement is inextricably tied to the ethnic cleansing of “dispensable natives” in Palestine and is racist to its core. It’s so racist the UN determined that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination against Palestinians. Only to redact it under future pressure by Israel. Money and power can rewrite history, but those who research know better.48 RecommendShareFlag

B. Satva commented December 11

B. Satva

Danny Bee commented December 11

If making anti-Israel comments are antisemitic, then making statements against Iran is Islamophobic. So, if Israel and others making statement against Iran are willing to acknowledge that their statements are Islamophobic, then I will accept their claims that statements against Israel are antisemitic. Until then, I will interpret that position as pure sophistry.39 RecommendShareFlag

Danny Bee

Los AngelesDec. 11

Of course it is. What other group could be told “you have no right to exist in your historic homeland” without an accusation of bias against that group? Telling Jews they have no right to their own country is antisemitic. Especially when that country exists and they live there! How could it not be?11 RecommendShareFlag

RJL commented December 11

RJL

Observer commented December 11

It is offensive to me as a Jewish person to be “told” that anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism. I am allowed to have my own belief system. I am allowed to have my feelings. I am allowed to be Jewish without being a supporter of Israel.39 RecommendShareFlag

Ed commented December 11

Austin, TXDec. 11

Settlers in the West Bank are abusing Palestinians who were there long before the settlers arrived. I am against that. Netanyahu, apparently, is for it since his soldiers seem to punish the Palestinians but not the Jewish settlers. I am against that. Israel has taken a wrong turn under Netanyahu. It’s become harder to defend Israel as a beacon of civilization and democracy in the MIddle East when they are so harsh to the non-Jewish people they control.41 RecommendShareFlag

Observer

ChicagoDec. 11

The ADL which has monitored antisemitism for over 100 years says “yes.” I think that is a pretty strong indicator. The ADL actively distinguishes between criticism of Israel and anti Zionism. Criticism is not antisemitic. The question depends on the definition of Zionism. Jewish prayers involve Zion and the land of Israel. But partisans don’t value definitions. I recommend reviewing the ADL’s definition or the IHRC since they have taken this mantle for a very long time and are well respected institutions.6 RecommendShareFlag

Dr If commented December 11

Dr If

BkDec. 11

Such a ridiculous argument. I generally detest the Iranian state, but I generally love Iranian people. Does that make me anti-Iranian? So how could disliking, or even detesting the Israeli state make me anti-semitic?!35 RecommendShareFlag

Side Eye commented December 11

Side Eye

FloridaDec. 11

It is no more antisemitic to criticize the policies of the government of Israel than it is anti-American to criticize the policies of the government of the United States. In fact, the very foundation of a democracy is to be able to speak out against government policies without fear of retribution.35 RecommendShareFlag

John commented December 11

John

AustraliaDec. 11

There are some parallels between the resistance of indigenous peoples against invaders displacing them off their land, held for generations but taken in the name of manifest destiny or similar. There is no doubt that atrocities were committed by First Nations people of The USA and Canada and, to a lesser extent, perhaps, in Australia and New Zealand; those atrocities do not mitigate against the genocides committed in the Indian wars, the Canadian residential schools or the stolen generation of Australia. Similarly, the Zionist takeover of Palestine lands, justified in the name of the Bible and the holocaust committed by non-Palestinians should always have been expected to meet a violent and atrocious backlash. Hamas was wrong, but after the war crimes committed over and over again on every side, is anyone really surprised? There is no way out of this but Truth and reconciliation. Nothing else will end the bloodshed It’s going to be a long time coming.24 RecommendShareFlag

Chris C commented December 11

Chris C

Chicago, ILDec. 11

The NYT’s hysterical coverage of these outrageous McCarthy-esque accusations and their predictable fallout has been the most depressing thing in media coverage I’ve seen in years. Have we learned *nothing* from history?48 RecommendShareFlag

SB commented December 11

MNDec. 11

Is this really the question? Does it even matter? Israel is here to stay It seems to me, at this point, the question is how can we get to a peaceful future? If 2 states is not the answer, and if we all agree no group has the right subjugate another group, the what will the future look like? Endless conflict and subjugation was embraced Netanyahu to a predictable end. Imagine if he had funded and supported the PA with the goal of finding peace in the manner he had supported Hamas with the goal of undermining the 2-state solution. Should Hamas be destroyed? Sure, but at what cost? A million children with no comprehension of the evil Hamas committed has now been entrenched in the reality (from their perspective) of indiscriminate bombing by the IDF. How are we to expect this generation to grow up with an alternate paradigm that supports peace?61 RecommendShareFlag

Jan commented December 11

Jan

EuropeDec. 11

This is another round of McCarthyism. The sad or funny side of this story is that academics who used to defend progressive values against other conservativr minority opinions inside universities (conservative opinions are minorities inside academic institutions and they used to be condemned.) cannot defend themselves because now it involves money from outside conservative parties. It will be the pivoting moment for the progressive ideals if they bend in front of money. If that happens, from now on, all the academic progressive ideas will be laughed at.21 RecommendShareFlag

Paul s commented December 11

Paul s

miamiDec. 11

I think we can agree that if the people of Israel — using the recognized legal process — change their constitution and their state to a secular state named Ourland, that would the people’s right. If Israel’s Supreme Court overturned that decision because “Israel has a right to exist” I would hope all Americans would think that is not democratic.12 RecommendShareFlag

Scott commented December 11

Scott

MissouriDec. 11

It is startling that an expert on constitutional law is unlcear in the extent of free speech or committed to misrepresenting it. There are limits to free speech. The classic example is you are not protected by free speech when you falsely cry “fire” in a crowded theater. You can not use the protection of free speech to incite or threaten harm to people even if you are not directly responsible for the conduct of the physical harm itself.13 RecommendShareFlag

Bjarte Rundereim commented December 11

Bjarte Rundereim

NorwayDec. 11

Zionism is, and has been, since the beginning around the beginning of last century, a secular movement with the express goal of creating a “Greater Israel”, consisting of not only the full Palestine mandate of 1922, but also Jordan. This goal does not seem to have diminished. This is what I mean by anti zionism. I am against Greater Israel, and the brutal means to that end.49 RecommendShareFlag

JD. commented December 11

JD.

LondonDec. 11

Anti Zionism has a long and respectable history in Judaism. It was thought that just as God has scattered the Jews, only God – through the Messiah – could lead them back. And indeed a constant thread in the post-Exodus books of the Old Testament is how the Israelites were unworthy of their promised land, broke their covenant and were punished by exile – first the ten tribes in Israel (who were permanently scattered) then the two in Judah (who were allowed back, but only temporarily). And equally Zionism has a long and unrespectable history of antisemitism. From those who saw it as a way of getting rid of their own Jewish populations to modern day evangelicals who see the gathering of the Jews in Israel as a precursor to their conversion to Christianity with the second coming. The real point is not Zionism or anti Zionism, but human decency and compassion – which is generally lacking among zealots of whatever camp.62 RecommendShareFlag

Alex S. commented December 11

Alex S.

United StatesDec. 11

It seems to this reader that a discussion of anti-zionism at this time, after the massacre of 1,200 innocents, is the same as kicking someone when they are down. That is why there are allegations of anti-semitism. Because there is victim blaming. However, it is not anti-semitic to criticize the government’s response, which has been to make Israel’s loss into Gaza’s loss. Then comes the question, how to support the people of Gaza in light of the government’s response? Those who adopt slogans equated with anti-semitism and war (“from the river to the sea”) do themselves no favors. The morally correct approach is, as always, self-evident. Condemn violence in all its forms, and call for a peace process that supports two people’s right to live side by side. That this perennial approach has been unsuccessful does not require resorting to anti-semitism, victim blaming, or slogans of war.22 RecommendShareFlag

horace commented December 11

horace

oregonDec. 11

They have weaponized the term antisemitism to silence not only critics of Israel but of the American government as well, since that is who is supporting and powering the Israeli government to act so extremist. The Washington Post just published an article saying that they found the Israelis to have used white phosphorus, a banned chemical, in Lebanon at least 60 times in the last 2 months and that it was supplied to them by the Americans. So much of Israel and America’s actions are an counter to Jewish values, and what we are told are American values of respecting human rights and freedom. That is why they need to silence critics with largely false claims of bigotry when they cannot shut down valid criticism with logic and fact. Israel’s actions against the Palastanians are an abomination, but so are their actions against the Lebanese, the Syrians, and their contempt for the Middle East as a whole. We must be honest here with ourselves about the war likeness of Israeli society, which is a military society that demands military conscription. According to recent polls, most Israelis think the IDF has not used too much firepower in Gaza, but too little! So much of what we are told about Israel being a stabling force in the region is not true. And that is not singling out Jews here; that is just straight up being honest about the conduct of the Israeli government. And the American government that uses Israel as a proxy against non allied US nations.32 RecommendShareFlag

David H. commented December 11

David H.

Rockville, MDDec. 11

“The Nexus definition agrees that holding Jews around the world responsible for Israeli government actions … is Jew hatred.” There’s a flip side to that, when Israel tries to don the mantle of all Jews, saying that it acts on behalf of Jews. Israel follows that conflation by demanding unconditional support from Jews outside of Israel. Israel thus reinforces the proposition quoted above from the article.21 RecommendShareFlag

MuzikJunky commented December 11

MuzikJunky

New York, NYDec. 11

Yes. If there can be Islamic states and Christian states, there can most certainly be a Jewish state. Jewish people have every right to have a country in which they are the majority. The question is, however, if Israel was on Antarctica and the Western Wall was moved piece by piece to the new location—a double standard in itself—would so many still be up in arms against the most threatened country in the world? Imagine the uproar if the Kaaba had to be moved by a yoctometer, a distance so small that it requires a microscope to see! Peace.8 RecommendShareFlag

Ex-pat commented December 11

Ex-pat

Paris, FranceDec. 11

All of these discussions and debates — like that sham “hearing” of the university presidents last week — are disgraceful red herrings designed to distract American and global attention from the real issue: the massacre of over 16,000 Palestinians in Gaza (and some in the West Bank), and the starvation and displacement of millions of others in Gaza. Israel is committing war crimes of unprecedented violence, even relative to its own short and repugnant history. Stop wasting our time with this pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo about language and abstract thought. These silly debates are a hallmark of American politics and campuses, but red herrings date to at least the ancient Greeks. Ceasefire and limitless humanitarian aid for Gaza immediately! Lexical and semantic debates much much later, after Gaza has been rebuilt and the long road to healing begins…39 RecommendShareFlag

M commented December 11

CaliforniaDec. 11

All slaughter of innocents is wrong, criminal and heartbreaking. When people start attaching labels that are national, racial, religious, gender before, during and after the slaughter of innocents, that’s making excuses. It’s not the labels. It’s the slaughter.23 RecommendShareFlag

BA commented December 11

Milwaukee, WIDec. 11

Thank you for this article. I have been so confused by my Jewish friends (we’re all old) stating that the Palestinians have no rights to their own state and expressing such hatred for them. Surely Hamas is evil but it certainly isn’t representative of all Palestinians who have been on that land just like the Jews. To be on the West Bank and watch Israel flagrantly move settlers there is , of course, unfair and unsettling. Wanting to see the 2 state promise become reality does not make anyone antisemitic. We all want the kidnapped Israelies returned safely and we all want Hamas punished. We also want the seemingly flagrant disregard for thousands of helpless women and children in Gaza stopped.28 RecommendShareFlag

AB commented December 11

CaliforniaDec. 11

There is an awful lot of energy expended, especially here in the US, to determine when and if someone “is” something or not. Are you, a critic of Israel’s actions, really a secret antisemite? The only reason people feel that question is important is because they care about what someone calls them or whether they can be seen as harboring secret hate. But, as of today, there are 20,000 dead people in the last nine weeks whose families and communities don’t care about what college students are saying, or whichever phantom bogeyman Jonathan Greenblatt is shrieking about most recently. Perhaps our focus should be with those folks who are grieving and preventing from expanding their numbers, rather than trying to win a political gotcha game.17 RecommendShareFlag

Julian commented December 11

Julian

AustraliaDec. 11

“Jonathan Jacoby, the director of the Nexus Task Force … warned that shouting down any political action directed against Israel as antisemitic made it harder for Jews to call out actual antisemitism…” This. The idea that criticising Israel is *necessarily* anti-Semitic is deeply offensive. I criticise Israel’s actions in the West Bank. I criticise defenders of Israel when their comments are dominated by tedious whataboutery and blame-shifting (“they should have accepted the 1947 partition” etc etc) and have nothing humane or constructive to say about, what do we do now? My views have nothing to do with the religion of the people involved. I dislike all religious extremists equally, whatever the faith.26 RecommendShareFlag

HEC commented December 11

HEC

Tucson AzDec. 11

Thanks for writing this. I wish opinion pieces would just stop using the term ‘antisemitic’, because in the current context, it means different things to different people. Being labeled ‘antisemitic’ for being opposed to the expansion of Israel is a lazy cheap shot.15 RecommendShareFlag

RSM To commented December 11

GymMom

PA, USADec. 11

There is an enormous difference between criticism of a particular Israeli leader, or party, policy, or action, and anti-Zionism, which states that the Jewish people should be robbed of their right to self-determination and self-defense! Many of those quoted in the article cross that line, usually far over it. They claim that they are “not allowed to criticize Israel”, which is utter nonsense – criticism of Israel is rampant, including an awful lot of criticism based on a fictionalized version of the facts. But arguing for yet another Arab nation where Israel now stands, while denying Jews the right to self-determination – that is indeed Antisemitic. Why should an existing nation be dismantled – with the inevitable genocide and ethnic cleansing that such an action would inevitably entail – so that people who never owned that land in the national sense can take over? Note: For those who oppose ALL ethno-states, I don’t think that the term “anti-Zionist” applies; anti-Zionism means specifically opposing Jewish self-rule in the Jewish ancestral homeland. Of course, one of the great ironies in people’s views of the conflict is how successfully a Russian propaganda campaign started in the 1960’s has been in convincing “progressives” that Arabs are “indigenous” to a land that their ancestors colonized 1400 years ago, and that the indigenous Jewish people who can trace their ethnogenesis to Israel over 3000 years ago are “colonizers”.5 RecommendShareFlag

RSM To

Philadelphia PADec. 11

There should be a close similarity between being a Jew and being Black, but it’s always looking back that the similarities exist.RecommendShareFlag

Vincent commented December 11

Vincent

CtDec. 11

What is Zionism? Go to Wikipedia and read about “types of Zionism “. Not even early Zionists could agree on what the term meant. What won out was Theodor Herzl and political Zionism vs Ahad ha’am and cultural Zionism. Zionism it turns out is a complex philosophy. One can be agreeable to one type but be in opposition to another.11 RecommendShareFlag

Jason commented December 11

Jason

New YorkDec. 11

Is cross burning always anti-Black? No. Is it almost always anti-Black? Yes. The same is true of anti-Zionism. The hatred directed at Israel is grossly disproportionate, especially given the relative silence towards similar actions elsewhere. Clearly 90% of the hate is actually antisemitic in nature. Should we ignore the 90% of the hate that is antisemitic because a handful of individuals oppose Israel for other reasons? You can argue that. You can also argue that we should not assume that all cross burners are White supremacists, and that we should carefully examine each incident before accusing them of racism. Given the history in both cases, I will not join in such deference. The vast majority of anti-zionism is genuinely antisemitic, and it needs to be called out.7 RecommendShareFlag

RS Wilson commented December 11

RS Wilson

ConnecticutDec. 11

You folks have your prayers. I have mine. I pray that some trivial change we’ve made passing through the asteroid belt has altered the course of a few very large space rocks which soon land one after the other on Jerusalem, Mecca, and the Vatican. And that from now until the sun burns out, we never hear another word about Jesus, Moses, or Mohamed.10 RecommendShareFlag

Justin M commented December 11

Justin M

OhioDec. 11

A nuanced examination of a complex subject. Can you ask Bret Stephens to read this one? I understand he’s busy writing his next article justifying the carpet bombing of Gaza due to liberals protesting, you know, all those deaths. It’s nice of him to put in the effort but we had that article last week.8 RecommendShareFlag

Edward commented December 11

Edward

New OrleansDec. 11

Now, can we have a discussion of all the nuances and biases inherent in the use of a term like ‘terrorist’ ? Thank you, kindly!7 RecommendShareFlag

Doug Scott commented December 11

Doug Scott

MarylandDec. 11

I struggle with “Zionism” as a movement it did not have any following until the 1880’s, even then important historic sects within Judaism did not “sign-on” until around 1948 and the Hasidic’s still have not. I go back to where I landed with my kids on their behavior, you have “rights” up until the point they encroach on the same “right” for another person. That is your expression of your “right” cannot come at the expense of a fellow humans expression of the same “right” We live in a big diverse world that does not handle this stuff well, I am reluctant to accept that the rights of Zionists (a new group relatively) have to come as the expense of others. The best person on these topics is Tharman Shagmunarantham now President of Singapore. Sadly, his speeches are long, but the one called “Radical Inclusiveness” from the LSE is really good.5 RecommendShareFlag

horace commented December 11

horace

oregonDec. 11

I’m sorry, but saying you are pro-Israel and not in favor of the right-wing Israeli government does not mean you do not support the occupation and the attacks on Gaza. It is this line of thinking that has underpinned 75 years of a brutal occupation of Palestine. Israel was founded under the inherently selfish and bigoted ideology of Zionism, and it is that ideology that maintains the state as it is currently. Even the most left-wing wing of Israeli society supports the occupation. A recent poll shows a strong majority of Israelis think the IDF has not used too much firepower in Gaza, but too little! To be pro-Israel is basically to be anti-Palestinian in practice. It is to support the policies that will guarantee another 75 years of occupation and violence. We have to be anti-Zionist, like we must be actively anti-racist, to fight back against the institutionalized racism that permeates across our society. There was no daylight between the West’s liberal and Enlightenment thinkers and the conservatives when it came to colonizing the world for centuries. Paying lip service to saying you respect Israel for being a “tolerant” and liberal democracy” as it occupies and degrades millions of people is anathema to tolerance and freedom. Our support for Israel must be cut off because the government, whether right-wing or left-wing, will not cease to be Zionist.14 RecommendShareFlag

Luc commented December 11

Luc

MontrealDec. 11

Clearly, Israel would like to protect itself from all critics, including legitimate ones, probably because more and more of Israel’s actions are/will become reprehensible. Is this a race to gain immunity from political criticism? I find it deeply troubling that some find words more agressive and anxiety-inducing than actions, such as shelling 2000-pound bombs on civilians. It seems like Words Matter, but Actions Do Not. On the use of the term anti-semitism, I refer to Shulamit Aloni (Israel Prize for Human Rights), leader of the Opposition from 1988 to 1990, and Israel Minister of Education from 1992 to 1993. In a 2002 interview with American journalist Amy Goodman, Aloni said that accusations of antisemitism are “a trick we use” to suppress criticism of Israel coming from within the United States, while for criticism coming from Europe “we bring up the Holocaust.” Have a listen : the interview starts at time = 48:30 her comment is at time = 50:52 https://www.democracynow.org/2002/8/14/israels_first_lady_of_human_rights13 RecommendShareFlag

JJ commented December 11

Bozeman MTDec. 11

MAGA playbook – find a potentially divisive issue and exploit it as much as possible. In this case they get a twofer – show support for Israel and attack higher education. In both cases they rock progressives on their heels. Unfortunately, and as usual, liberals have a weak reply.8 RecommendShareFlag

SN commented December 11

NYC UESDec. 11

No it’s not and being anti Israel government and its policies is not anti Israel and or anti Jew. Liz Macgill of UPenn was ambushed by this false narrative and theatrics that were used by MAGA politicians.13 RecommendShareFlag

Mark commented December 11

Mark

Paul commented December 11

The immense ignorance shown in the comments, about the meaning of the word, the history of the region, and the current situation explains very clearly why this is a ‘debate’. The obsessive focus on Israel is by itself a clear sign of the antisemitic motivation for it. No other aboriginal liberation movement is dismissed and attacked at the level Zionism is.7 RecommendShareFlag

Paul

New ZealandDec. 11

No. Obviously not Why would you write that as your headline? Is this a difficult question you really need to examine? I would have thought that would have happened long ago or never been necessary I think reporters should educate their readers, not engage with them below their level10 RecommendShareFlag

Eray commented December 11

Eray

AZDec. 11

I think this question has been the very heart of legitimate pro- vs. anti-Israel discussion and sentiment in the western hemisphere for over a century. Many of us do not believe that theocratic policy and decision making has any room in democracy, bar for some very personal and limited spaces. In the US, we’re not hard-line secular (like France, historically), even though the First Amendment is very clear that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”. Perhaps it is because freedom of, and freedom from religion is so boldly and clearly enshrined in our Bill of Rights that we as Americans have had a relaxed nature with regard to secularism.., historically. We, as Americans, decided to jump into and fight a war on behalf of an ethnic diaspora of disenfranchised people, trapped in a European genocidal crusade movement by the Nazi Regime, as well as against the antisemitic European culture that existed well before WWII. Post-war America supports Jews and their right to exist. Post-war America supports a Jewish homeland. Much of post-war America, however, does not equate support for the Jewish diaspora with Zionism, which is a religious doctrine. I think there is major divide in the West between these two largest groups: those who believe in helping this disenfranchised diaspora on a human rights basis, and those who believe in helping the Jews return to the holy land for other, religious reasons such as Zionism and Christian Zionism.RecommendShareFlag

Stefan Moore commented December 11

Stefan Moore

Sydney, AustraliaDec. 11

There is no discussion here of any alternative to the Zionist project – namely the creation of one secular state for Jews and Palestinians to live side by side with some semblance of democracy and equality.7 RecommendShareFlag

Kelbo commented December 11

Kelbo

San FranciscoDec. 11

““I was born after the Oslo accords had fallen apart,” Ms. Borgwardt said. “I’ve never known any kind of actual hope for a Zionism that does not demand occupation, apartheid and the oppression of Palestinians to fulfill the identity of the Jewish state.” And she wanted to be a rabbi? It’s so frustrating to read the half-baked comments of people with such a superficial and incomplete understand of history. And you don’t need to go back to the rebellion against Rome in 66 AD. If Ms. Borwardt hasn’t studied the pre-1948 writings of leading Zionists or Israel’s first several decades as a fledgling state trying to build a just society in an incredibly bad neighborhood with homicidal lunatics threatening her at every stage, then I give up. Once the guns go silent, the Israeli public will have its say. I hope they decided that they’ve had enough of Netanyahu and his dreadful politics. If Israel again reaches out for a Palestinian partner to reach a two-state solution, will the foaming mobs screaming at the top of their lungs stop and give peace a chance? I’m unconvinced. We live in a post-truth world where social media is a reality for way too many. Still, one can hope.2 RecommendShareFlag

Mary Sweeney commented December 11

Mary Sweeney

Trumansburg, NYDec. 11

The hungry and homeless masses, the dehumanizing of each side by the other, the dead and wounded on both sides, the heated arguments among confused and divided allies–this is the sort of toxic mess that results all too easily when government is entangled with religion. America beware.48 RecommendShareFlag

Diego commented December 11

Diego

South AmericaDec. 11

So, is any criticism of the actions of the Israeli State anti-zionist, and so anti-semitic? Are Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International (both critics of Israeli policies) antisemitic? Or is criticism of the Israeli State valid as long as it respects Israel’s right to exist? And when Israeli politicians (like the ones currently in power) declare that they don’t want any Palestinians living between the River Jordan and the sea (that is, denying Palestinians any right to a homeland), can we call them anti-Palestinians? And is being anti-Palestinian somehow more acceptable than being antisemitic?81 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Lynne Lehmer commented December 11

Lynne Lehmer

Shipshewana, INDec. 11

@Diego. Good question.6 RecommendShareFlag

Scott Smith commented December 11

Scott Smith

IndianapolisDec. 11

The Netanyahu government is supported by people who believe the Jews are entitled to rule over the entire “promised land” delineated in the Book of Numbers, and possibly more, depending on which biblical passages they want to cite. They have zero interest in a two-state solution. And that government has supported Hamas, to ensure the Palestinians in Gaza wouldn’t support a two-state solution. So of course they’ll defend their actions with ad hominem attacks, because it’s an indefensible position.46 RecommendShareFlag

Thinking Matters commented December 11

Thinking Matters

FloridaDec. 11

Thank you, Mr. Weisman. This is one of the best “think pieces” I’ve seen on the conundrum we Jews (I am one) are facing now. Thank you for considering not only the terms “antiZionist” and “antisemitic,” but also “Jew hatred”–a phrase I heard first from Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt several weeks ago and then read in a Roger Cohen essay. Mr Weisman’s essay is, in its own touching way, “very Jewish.” Jewish thinking is typified by the form: “one the one hand. . .; on the other hand. . . .” One of our most expansive treatises on belief, the Talmud, presents one sentence at a time from sacred text. The sentence sits in the middle of a huge page, with commentary surrounding it: no two comments expressing the same view. Why? In part, because we Jews are not a monolith. We are raised in a delightful variety of traditions. That includes “progressive” Jews who deeply desire both a safe place for Jews to live and a safe place for Palestinians to live. Also, as Mr. Weisman’s essay suggests, any observation about life depends on its context. Is it being shouted by a Hamas terrorist or a US college student who cares about those who are economically and politically oppressed? I don’t know where we draw a “bright line” between acceptable and unacceptable speech. It depends. I’m a Jew. I desperately need this conversation to continue, in a whole variety of places. Again, thank you, Mr Weisman.27 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Bob commented December 11

Bob

WADec. 11

“On the one hand . . . on the other hand. . . ” That kind of talk drives Republicans in the House crazy. That and the word “context.”RecommendShareFlag

TC commented December 11

SacramentoDec. 11

@Thinking Matters Thank you for this equally thoughtful response.RecommendShareFlag

CP commented December 11

New JerseyDec. 11

The luxury of debating semantics, politically convenient or not, is obscene and surreal, considering what the people in Gaza are experiencing.40 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Ew commented December 11

New YorkDec. 11

@CP And what about the hostages? What are they experiencing. There could have been an immediate ceasefire if Hamas had surrendered the hostages.4 RecommendShareFlag

Dave commented December 11

Dave

QueensDec. 11

I think the whole framing of the question by the reporter and in general in current American political discourse is disingenuous. Is any other national liberation movement of any other People from the XIX and XX centuries shamed and vilified and placed on trial so often as Zionism? Because that is what Zionism is, no more and no less. With its mistakes, and successes. We just gave a name to it. This is not a “new” moment in history. Ever since the 1950s, intellectually lead by Soviet Union political labs, there has been a delegitimization of the national liberation movement of Jews, because it wasn’t going to be aligned in the Soviet sphere of influence. As the 1956 Suez campaign showed. Of course, the narrative served well Arab nations who hated the idea of a non-Arab and non-Muslim nation state among them.6 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

DRB commented December 11

DRB

Montclair NJDec. 11

@Dave there is a distinct Marxist-Leninist influence reflected when people talked about Israelis as colonizers.RecommendShareFlag

AT commented December 11

New YorkDec. 11

@Dave I’d agree with you, and was recoiling at the attempts a not-so-sly chastising of the older Jewish population (after one says it is not complicated, the opening of the next paragraph is far from journalistic in tone: “…it is complicated”). The author “imagines” what those on the progressive left would say at the end of the article. Journalism should be reported, not “imagined.”RecommendShareFlag

Arizona Jim commented December 11

Arizona Jim

ArizonaDec. 11

Trying to wipe out an international terrorist organization by bombing heavily populated residential neighborhoods is not likely to be successful. Lots of children are being slaughtered, and much of the leadership of Hamas are in Qatar. It’s hard not to be critical of this open-ended campaign. It’s hard to see how it helps Israel, and it’s creating enormous sympathy for the enemies of Israel, and killing thousands of kids. I’m not an Israeli or a Palestinian and I can’t pretend to offer any solutions, but the situation at the moment is dire, and benefits no-one.33 RecommendShareFlag

john clagett commented December 11

john clagett

Englewood, NJDec. 11

To be a follower of Zionism is not a sacred act, but a political action. That this mischaracterization is prevalent should be a lesson for Americans of all religious faiths: maintaining a void between politics and religion is correct, and ethical, for when the mantel of civic power rests on the shoulders of persons of faith, then piety will fall to wealth and power.15 RecommendShareFlag

David commented December 11

David

SeattleDec. 11

You write, “Tibetans pressing for freedom from the Chinese are considered unserious or even repugnant in Beijing, just as Native American activists demanding to reclaim parts of the United States might be to the owners of that land. But are they bigoted?” I’m not sure I get your point. Even if you are using these comparisons as analogies to debate whether someone demanding their land back is considered “bigoted,” I’m not sure the comparisons are justified by history. Did the Chinese have an ancient history in Tibet? Did the European invaders have one in North America? Was there a prior mandate in Tibet or North America? Not sure I’m getting you.4 RecommendShareFlag

Abe commented December 11

Abe

MontrealDec. 11

These words from young Ms. Borgwardt: “the issue is protecting the rights of a minority from a state determined to eliminate them. What could be more Jewish than that?” These beautiful, wise young people would make a peaceful world if we just got out of their way.13 RecommendShareFlag

Morgan commented December 11

Morgan

Alberta, CanadaDec. 11

This is all about silencing the voices of the Palestinians. Like the climate change issue, money talks the loudest and oftentimes tries to ensure that they were only ones talking but today’s technology makes it very difficult for only money to be heard. At some point in time, the side advocating oppression – interestingly – the usual the side with all the money will wind up in the wrong side of history.9 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

DRB commented December 11

DRB

Montclair NJDec. 11

@Morgan except the “money side” is Qatar and Iran.1 RecommendShareFlag

Kevin commented December 11

Kevin

DenverDec. 11

It’s not an academic issue: it was widely discussed for decades and decades.3 RecommendShareFlag

SG1 commented December 11

SG1

DRB commented December 11

Having read many of the comments, it is important to point out yet one more distinction covered up in the language. Judaism is a religion. You could be born within the borders of any nation and be a Jew. You do not have to be born in Israel to be a Jew. In fact, if Israel did not exist there would still be Jewish populations throughout the world as there are today. I think this is an important distinction because regardless of the past, present and future of Israel, persecution and discrimination of any person based on their religion anywhere in the world is wrong and must be strongly opposed.7 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

DRB

Montclair NJDec. 11

@SG1 it’s not only a religion it’s an identifiable ethnic group derived from the 12 tribes of…Israel.1 RecommendShareFlag

Vic commented December 11

Vic

ChicagoDec. 11

Thank you so much for addressing this complex issue!3 RecommendShareFlag

Theo Baker commented December 11

Theo Baker

Catskill NyDec. 11

We seek to be having this debate without defining our terms. If one presumes that anti-Zionism is an explicit call for Israel not to exist—then that I believe strays into antisemitism. Israel exists. There are millions of people there. It’s founding was no more and no less legit than that of nearly every nation state on earth. Do we question the borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria etc as illegitimate? Moreover, Israel was a haven for the hundreds of thousands middle eastern Jews that were violently expelled from every surrounding Arab state in the run-up to 1948 and afterwards, and today middle eastern Jews make up half the population of Israeli Jews. On top of that Palestine had every option to form their own state in 1948, but did not and chose war, which Israel won, and if we go by how nations were historically founded, this victory solidified Israel’s right to exist as a state. Now if we define anti-Zionism as a rejection of Israeli settlerism and expansionism as typified by Likud’s repulsive policies of occupation and blockade, then anti-Zionism is surely a legit and needed critique. But all too often, anti-Zionism activism is riddled with selective outrage, double standards, collective guilt, dehumanizing language, conspiracy, historical amnesia, atrocity denial, and other tropes that single out Jews as somehow all powerful and nefarious—and those are indeed antisemitic. So perhaps a less binary and inflammatory term is needed.21 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Cassius commented December 11

Cassius

SeoulDec. 11

@Theo Baker Thank you for this comment. It often feels that so many people – and other commenters here – miss the point entirely, which is, of course, what Zionism means, and how the term can mean different things to different people. It feels like people are just talking past one another. Meanwhile there certainly are anti-Semites who call themselves “anti-Zionist” in order to dress up their bigotry. How can a meaningful conversation take place when so many key terms lack agreed-upon definitions?2 RecommendShareFlag

Maj. Upset commented December 11

Maj. Upset

CADec. 11

How ironic that these students would be in such dire need of an education.1 RecommendShareFlag

Jeffrey Cumpston commented December 11

Jeffrey Cumpston

Wesley, ArkansasDec. 11

If Zionism is inherently a call for Jewish self-determination, it is simultaneously a call for the denial of the same to those that occupied the land prior – the Palestinians. Zionism is a political movement. Anti-Zionism is opposition in whatever form to that movement. Antisemitism is racism. The conflation of the two has been a goal of AIPAC and other elements of the pro-Israel lobby for decades. That conflation is now being normalized by them and their allies – Evangelical Christians and their Republican supporters, who are themselves the heirs (and allies) of virulent antisemitism. Reasonable people understand the aspirations of Jews following centuries of persecution, mainly by Christians, as well as the aspirations of Palestinians who were off-handedly considered collateral damage in the creation of Israel and seek self-determination on their historical land. As complicated as the issue of Israel/Palestine is, the distinction between anti-Zionism and antisemitism is simple. That it has become not so serves no one but the Israeli right and their supporters in the US.22 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Ew commented December 11

New YorkDec. 11

@Jeffrey Cumpston The Jews also occupied this land “prior” Anyway, prior to what? There was the Ottoman Empire up to WWI. Then Britain and France carved up the middle east into countries that hadn’t existed before (although cultures existed). Jews were in the entire area, and continuously in what is now Israel. The UN 1947 founding of Israel also founded a Palestinian state. That offer was rejected by the Palestinians (It was more than half the land, considering Trans-Jordan PLUS Jerusalem as an international city). Then all the surrounding arab countries attacked Israel on the first day that the British left. Israel won that war. And the Palestinians have never accepted any other offer AND they have never accepted the existence of Israel.1 RecommendShareFlag

Brian Dell commented December 11

Brian Dell

Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaDec. 11

The context here is that there are proposals out there to annex the West Bank but deny non-Jews voting and civil rights because otherwise the Jewish majority would be threatened and with it the existence of Israel as a Jewish homeland. So this is what you are signing on to if you say Israel has a right to exist without definition or qualification: measures to disenfranchise and/or expel Palestinians on the grounds that their enfranchisement or presence would destroy Israel if there are too many of them.16 RecommendShareFlag

Eudoxus commented December 11

Eudoxus

WestchesterDec. 11

Originally, the Zionist movement was a plan to settle Jews in areas native to the ancient Hebrews. The idea that when that area became independent from the Ottoman Empire, a majority Jewish state would emerge, came later. From the start, there were Zionists who thought that the best future was Jews, Muslims, Druze and Christians living side by side. I urge everyone to look up the remarkably prescient article, “A question that outweighs all others” by Yitzhak Epstein, originally presented at a 1905 Zionist conference. If other Zionists had followed Epstein’s advice, the world would be very different now.11 RecommendShareFlag

P.S. commented December 11

P.S.

MikeN commented December 11

Zionism is a historical term about a Jewish-led international movement to create a Jewish state in their ancestral homeland in Palestine. After the creation of the state of Israel there should be no such term outside of historical context. Zionism has unfortunately morphed into “do you support Israel or not?” Therefore equating the two terms basically is asking if Israel is above criticism.13 RecommendShareFlag

MikeN

New YorkDec. 11

So what do you call it when there are now 25,000 Palestine children who are orphans? 25,000 children. Come on. Wake up. There will never be peace in that region for generations to come – the American taxpayer will have to fund this for generations – without any say – and it put all our kids at risk for a massive war or terrorist attract someday due to all this. Oh and our freedom of speech and education institutions are being attacked as well. This not the way to handle this war or handle other Americans.16 RecommendShareFlag

Wade commented December 11

Wade

OregonDec. 11

The problem, ultimately, is the difference between Zionism as an idea and Zionism as an actual project, and that project was one that was (and is) imposed upon non-Jews who were (and are) given no say in the matter. “A land without a people for a people without a land” genuinely did echo the colonial mentality led to European control of the Americas and Australia, amongst others. Certainly, antisemites can be anti-Zionist as well because their anti-Zionism is centered around an anti-Jewish animus, but objection to the conduct of the Israeli state and its existence as an “ethnostate” that denies equality to its own non-Jewish citizens while simultaneously undermining the nationalist aspirations of Palestinians needs no such animus.9 RecommendShareFlag

kintrob 75230 commented December 11

kintrob 75230

TX.Dec. 11

Political States are engines of oppression for their working class occupants, the vast majority are wage workers no matter the geography. Socialists are opposed to political states and those who defend the concept are not socialists. (www.slp.org)3 RecommendShareFlag

JH commented December 11

MKEDec. 11

Anti-Zionism is not the question raised by the just plain disastrous appearance by the “elite” college presidents. As Bret Stephens has written better than I can, it’s a question of double standards and hypocrisy fed by the bitter waters of wokeism (as the French would say). And I have never voted for a Republican. Perhaps, this is yet another reason why Nikki Haley is getting lots of second looks by independents like me.5 RecommendShareFlag

Danny Swarzman commented December 11

Danny Swarzman

South San FranciscoDec. 11

There is a parallel between the US and Israel. The US was carved out of land in which other people already existed and was a place of refuge for those who came. The US has transformed itself into a liberal democracy. Almost. It’s time for Israel to become a democracy, not an ethnic state, particularly not a theocracy. The United States should condition its relationship with Israel on Israel’s progress in that direction. Do these statements mean me antisemitic? Anti-zionist? Pro Palestinian? Or just correct?16 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Ew commented December 11

New YorkDec. 11

@Danny Swarzman Israel is not a theocracy. It is a democracy. You are not correct. It is no more a theocracy than the US which has all national Christian holidays, Sundays off, etc. Israel is a Parliamentary democracy. The only difference is that Jews from all over the world can automatically become citizens of Israel.1 RecommendShareFlag

JammieGirl commented December 11

JammieGirl

CTDec. 11

“Zionism as a concept was once clearly understood: the belief that Jews, who have endured persecution for millenniums, needed refuge and self-determination in the land of their ancestors.” Some once clearly understood definitions: – Zion refers to a particular geographic location within Palestine. It is considered a holy place by both Jews and Palestinians (Arabs & Christians). – Jews are an ethnicity, religion (Judaism) and community (culture) unto themselves. – The Palestinians are Arabs, most of whom adhere to a form of Islam or Christianity. – Semitic denotes a family of languages that includes Hebrew and Arabic, in particular. Using the above definitions, antizionism and antisemitism can also refer to the Palestinian people and their right to the same refuge and self-determination in the land of their ancestors. And while the Palestinians may not have been persecuted per se, they have certainly been oppressed and they deserve no less than the Jews. In the words of Rodney King: Can’t we all just get along? Look, the whole of Palestine will probably be under water before long. What are you going to fight over then?1 RecommendShareFlag

GHutch commented December 11

GHutch

BranfordDec. 11

You can disagree with the actions of the Israeli government and even be against its founding (anti-Zionist) without being antisemitic. The theocratic democracy of Israel simply makes the differentiation more difficult.8 RecommendShareFlag

John commented December 11

John

WADec. 11

No, anti-Zionism isn’t necessarily antisemitism, just like anti-China isn’t necessarily racist. Both countries use this misconception to their advantage. In America the topic of antisemitism has taken center stage, occupying column inches and broadcast minutes that had been covering Israel’s war against Gaza. Somehow, as if by magic, it has been possible to shift Americans’ focus away from the continuing slaughter in Gaza to antisemitism in the US. This tends to cast Israel as the victim. That isn’t right, but it continues while the death toll of innocent civilians, 40% of whom are women and children, rises and the percentage destruction of Gaza that already exceeds that of WWII Dresden also continues to grow.6 RecommendShareFlag

JammieGirl commented December 11

JammieGirl

CTDec. 11

“Zionism as a concept was once clearly understood: the belief that Jews, who have endured persecution for millenniums, needed refuge and self-determination in the land of their ancestors.” – Zion refers to a geographic location within Palestine, another geographic location. It is considered a holy place by both Jews and Palestinians. – Jews are an ethnicity, religion (Judaism) and community (culture) unto themselves. – The Palestinians are Arabs, most of whom adhere to a form of Islam or are Christian. – Semitic denotes a family of languages that includes Hebrew and Arabic, in particular. Using the above definitions, antizionism and antisemitism can also refer to the Palestinian people and their right to the same refuge and self-determination in the land of their ancestors. And while the Palestinians may not have been persecuted, they have certainly been oppressed and they deserve no less than the Jews.RecommendShareFlag

Noah commented December 11

Noah

AtlantaDec. 11

The answer to your question is Yes.3 RecommendShareFlag

Javad commented December 11

Javad

MinneapolisDec. 11

I appreciate the article and the argument that it brings up. I think it is political statement to say that Israel needs to change the policies it has towards the Palestinians, not an antisemitic one. But what is the end-point of the anti-Zionist argument? How much of Israel should exist? Which boarders should be enforced—ones from the 1948, 1967 or some other time? I definitely think that being against government policies is different than being against the people of that country. I think you can be against Zionism while not being against the Jewish people. But what is the final aim of the anti-Zionist philosophy is a fair question.2 RecommendShareFlag

Alan Singer commented December 11

Alan Singer

HI USADec. 11

Much of this argument is about the proper meaning of words. For example, stating some of the reasons why an event happened is not “justifying” that event. Israel’s right to exist was established in international law and they should stay within those borders and defend them militarily and diplomatically. This seems very obvious to me, a Jew who stayed on kibbutz in 1974, although what I’ve done or who I am is 100% irrelevant to all the above statements. Same applies to that cancelled Palestinian literature conference, which reminded me of book burning. What a lot of emotion driven confusion these days.1 RecommendShareFlag

VR commented December 11

EnglandDec. 11

The idea that every group has to have its own country is fallacious. The Flemish live as part of Belgium or Holland. The Tamils have no country of their own, living in Sri Lanka or one state in South India. The Kurds are split across multiple countries. Antisemitism is hatred of Jews and is evil. The legitimacy of Israel is a completely separate issue and people could make reasonable arguments either way, although with 4-5 generations of Jews in the land that is now Israel, people simply have to accept the fact that it is not going anywhere and learn to live with it. But that is separate from antisemitism.1 RecommendShareFlag

flw commented December 11

flw

Stowe VTDec. 11

“The Nexus definition agrees that holding Jews around the world responsible for Israeli government actions, as pro-Palestinian protesters did last week outside an Israeli restaurant in Philadelphia, is Jew hatred.” The above Nexus ‘definition’ is misleading and false as it applies to the Philadelphia restaurant case. The facts show the restaurant was NOT targeted just because the owners were Jews. The restaurant was a target for demonstration because of the restaurant’s public fund raising specifically to raise money to support Israeli soldiers participating in the military’s Gaza invasion. The demonstrators claim the Israeli military is committing war crimes against the residents of Gaza by indiscriminately bombing to death thousands of Gaza women and children and fund raising to support Israeli soldiers under these circumstances is wrong. Whether an observer agrees or disagrees with the demonstrators, for the article to claim Jews were being targeted simply for being Jews and is an act of “Jew hatred” is simply false.3 RecommendShareFlag

Mel Kaufman commented December 11

Mel Kaufman

Huntington Woods, MIDec. 11

Mr. Greenblatt reacts angrily to any and all criticism of the State of Israel. He sees himself as the official spokesperson for the Jewish People, but an election for that office has yet to be scheduled.5 RecommendShareFlag

Mr. T commented December 11

Mr. T

RaleighDec. 11

One can be against Hamas and for Palestinian. This is a clear difference. For example “from the river to the sea – let Palestinians be free” that phrase by itself does not mean that the Jews or Israelis are to be destroyed. It just means between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – Palestinians should be free to live in harmony with the other residents. The Zionists are the militant form of the Israelis, I would not support them, I would support all peace loving Israelis. In the end the only answer is PEACE, all parties have to make peace – if they want to have to live without blood shed.6 RecommendShareFlag

John K. commented December 11

John K.

Gainesville, VADec. 11

This is an easy question. Anti-Zionism is almost always anti-Semitic with the exception of a very small number of exceptions and they are entirely based on a small number of Israeli policies.3 RecommendShareFlag

George T. commented December 11

George T.

Portland, OregonDec. 11

My litmus test for antisemitism is this: are you holding Israel to a different standard than you would another country? Here’s the reality: Zionism won 75 years ago. There *is* a Jewish nation. This isn’t a hypothetical debate anymore. It’s a fact made possible by the blood of tens of thousands of Israelis who have had to defend their right to exist as a nation in multiple wars. To be an “anti-Zionist” in 2023 is to support the end of Israel as a Jewish-majority country – the sole Jewish-majority country in the world. That is treating one country, one people, differently than the rest.4 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

raix commented December 11

raix

seattleDec. 11

@George T. No. To be anti Zionist is to say “Stop taking over sections of the West Bank and calling them “settlements”. Stop marginalizing everyone else. Stop slaugtering tens of thousands of innocent women and children. Stop blockading resources.” Israel has a right to exist and to defend itself. It does not have a right to swallow up other’s land, or slaughter innocents, or level residential neighborhoods to rubble.8 RecommendShareFlag

David commented December 11

David

Spain- EuropeDec. 11

As a European who has always admired and considered the United States, I am truly disappointed, because in the UN Security Council, the United States has stood alongside Israel: Arab countries, the so-called Global South (Brazil, India, China), Turkey, Asia and the European Union through of its representative Josep Borrell, as well as a vehement Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, have requested a ceasefire so as not to continue seeing this genocide. Josep Borrell has described the massacres caused by the Hebrew army as comparable to those of World War II. One thing is Judaism, which had a very notable influence on European culture, and on Western civilization, just to mention Zweig, Wittgenstein, Noble Prize winner Isaac Bashevis Singer, Freud, and Einstein among others, and a very different thing is to have the right and the moral duty to criticize a corrupt ruler and possible war criminal like Netanyahu. I have had Jewish friends and associates, from NY and Israel. But that does not prevent me from seeing what is happening: You cannot violate international humanitarian law, It is neither morally acceptable nor legal to attack civilians, kill journalists wearing the press badge (of the Reuters agency), to destroy buildings and hospitals and to force civilians to abandon their houses and move to Southern Gaza to kill them there. This has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, it is just not allowing a State that acts in violation of the Law of War to act with impunity.8 RecommendShareFlag

R Krueger commented December 11

R Krueger

DallasDec. 11

Of course not. It is correct and just to criticize Netanyahu’s criminal actions in league with his extreme right wing coalition as he tries to stay out of prison for corruption. They are a disaster for Israel and democracy and must be stopped from stealing more land and oppressing people. Now, their sickening war must end. It is not antisemitism or hate to see these leaders and their actions clearly.9 RecommendShareFlag

Mary Rose commented December 11

Mary Rose

Alexandria, VADec. 11

College students are learning a very valuable lesson: the high career cost of maintaining one’s dignity and speaking up for one’s values.33 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Paul s commented December 11

Paul s

miamiDec. 11

@Mary Rose Actually, I think we are all learning that what is written in a school newspaper on campus can now follow you for the rest of your life, and you could lose your entire livelihood and your children’s security for something stupid drunken email you sent (or maybe somebody sent in your name) decades ago. That is not American freedom. Regardless of whether or not the government is involved, it is not freedom as I understand it.6 RecommendShareFlag

Pat commented December 11

Pat

Sonia commented December 11

The Land cannot be shared. That’s clear. History says so. One side must prevail. Regardless, this will never end. This is just one battle in a never ending war.10 RecommendShareFlag

6 REPLIES

Sonia

New York CityDec. 11

@Pat Why can’t the land be shared? Who says that? History NEVER makes categorical statements like that.4 RecommendShareFlag

William Lazarus commented December 11

William Lazarus

OaklandDec. 11

@Pat That’s why a two-state solution makes sense.5 RecommendShareFlag

Rhporter commented December 11

Rhporter

VirginiaDec. 11

@Pat if it’s never ending then in the meantime it’s being shared.2 RecommendShareFlagVIEW ALL REPLIES

UpstateNYObserver commented December 11

UpstateNYObserver

Upstate NYDec. 11

Does Israel have a right to exist..yes. Does Israel have a right to undertake national policies with the express purpose of driving out generational Palestinian residents..no. The background issue of the notion of Eretz Israel, a return to biblical borders, coupled with Netanyahu’s current coalition and the history of settlement building in disputed territory (not unlike China’s actions in the South China Sea) make it increasingly difficult to establish enough trust with Palestinians to get a two state treaty in place. Hamas’ unspeakably vicious and sadistic attack achieve exactly what it wanted too. An enraged Israel that will now as it defends itself further isolate itself. Criticizing policies that likely hurt rather than help Israel’s legitimacy is not anti-semitism.39 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

horace commented December 11

horace

oregonDec. 11

@UpstateNYObserver It becomes increasingly diametrically opposed to say Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state, and than say that it cannot continue to push out the Palestinian natives from their land. Zionism is the nationalistic ideology that created Israel, and that also maintains it. And Zionism has no place for Muslims, or Christians. We cannot continue to support Israel as it is, because they will never share land or power with the Palestinians. That much is as clear as day. 75 years of history shows us no less4 RecommendShareFlag

Ruth commented December 11

Ruth

New YorkDec. 11

@UpstateNYObserver Criticizing the current (or any) Israeli government or politicizes is not antisemitism. Being anti-Zionist (questioning Israel’s right to exist IS antisemitism.RecommendShareFlag

William Case commented December 11

William Case

United StatesDec. 11

The people we referred to as indigenous today are seldom if ever the original settlers of territory they now occupy. The essential question is whether a cultural group is justified in opposing encroachment by another cultural groups. As far as we know, Canaanites were the indigenous population of the territory that came to be none as Palestine. The Canaanites were displaced by the Egyptians; who were displaced the Israelites, who were replaced by the Assyrian, who were displaced by the Babylonians, who were displaced by the Persians, who were displaced by the Greeks, who were displaced by the Romans, who were displaced by Arabic Muslims, who arrived as colonizers in the 6th Century.19 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Bach commented December 11

Bach

Grand Rapids, MIDec. 11

@William Case I’ve always wondered why Tunisians hate Italians. What, you say. I hadn’t heard than Well certainly says I. After the third war, Romans sacked Carthage so that no two stones stood upon another and then sowed the earth with salt so nothing would grow. Who decides when animosity’s end?RecommendShareFlag

Mortimer commented December 11

Mortimer

North carolinaDec. 11

@William Case and 65k years before the Canaanites were foragers from east Africa who were there for 3x the amount of tome than all the groups you mentioned. So Tanzania , Eritrea , Kenya and Ethiopia have first dibs. Once they take over their rightful land they can have ceremonys honoring the Neanderthals they extincted to get the land in the first place.1 RecommendShareFlag

One World commented December 11

One World

Robert commented December 11

@William Case This is partially true. Many inhabitants of the Levant are native people who changed faiths. DNA evidence supports this. Many Jews from Europe and America are people who also converted to Judaism over the centuries. Abraham himself came from modern-day Iraq. Moses came from modern-day Egypt. They were not from the land. Settling who has a right to the land is difficult. But we can stand for equal rights and freedom for all people (v. some claimants) now and into the future.RecommendShareFlagVIEW ALL REPLIES

Robert

TribecaDec. 11

In the eye of the beholder. And people are so easily offended these days! If one believes people are attacking them see a therapist first. Could be paranoia or guilt…many things. But let’s say if one were to kill tens of thousands of innocent people…some people might not be happy with that one. Are those people wrong to feel that way? Should one not confuse feelings about a situation by personalizing those feelings. Perhaps. But then again, we haven’t seemed to have evolved beyond settling disputes with war.8 RecommendShareFlag

Dr B commented December 11

Dr B

SpringfieldDec. 11

Of course not. You can be pro Israel and against the right wing antidemocratic Israeli government. The whole debate seems to forget that antidemocratic, authoritarian governments tend to lead to popular unrest.32 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Mortimer commented December 11

Mortimer

North carolinaDec. 11

@Dr B sure, but left wing insanity is no less damagibg than right wing insanity. But you are correct.1 RecommendShareFlag

BobbieGWhiz commented December 11

BobbieGWhiz

ConnecticutDec. 11

In theory it doesn’t have to be. In practice, it mostly is.5 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Diane commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@BobbieGWhiz WRONG! Most Americans, yes most, have had it with Israel and are not the least anti-semitic. As my son, who heads a robust and active Jewish household, says: “Israel stinks is a reasonable position.”5 RecommendShareFlag

Diane

BostonDec. 11

All I know is semantics and trickery were used to oust one of the few female presidents of an outstanding American university, and it’s being used to split the Democratic vote. The MAGA Republicans are winning this game. It’s extraordinarily dangerous.45 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Ruth commented December 11

Ruth

New YorkDec. 11

@Diane It wasn’t trickery, it was the university presidents fear of saying the wrong thing and, perhaps it was also them being so over-coached by their lawyers that they didn’t even know what they were saying. I certainly didn’t know what they were saying. I’m not a fan of Elise Stefanik. I live in her district and supported and voted for the people running against her. But she was correct – her questions were easy. The Presidents couldn’t say that antisemitic speech and actions weren’t allowed at their institutions. Anti-Black, anti-LGBTQ, anti-Islamic speech isn’t allowed and it shouldn’t be. Jewish students have the same right to feel safe at school. Period. These Presidents failed!2 RecommendShareFlag

L osservatore commented December 11

L osservatore

In fair Verona, where we lay our sceneDec. 11

@Diane Last week’s issue was whether students and professors at (dozens of?) American colleges could promote the murder of millions of Jews. Not where people live or who could work where, but millions of murders, and whether such people refusing to criticize such hatred should be at the top of college administrations. Those who wish to applaud the Oct. 7th atrocities by Hamas – or allow others to applaud Hamas – have the right to say so, even today. But should they LEAD colleges that reflect on the U.S. – and with tens of billions in their bank accounts?RecommendShareFlag

Joe commented December 11

Joe

s a commented December 11

The DEI boomerang has certainly come back with force. Certainly, watching the academic elites – who always tell us they know better – get hit with it is fun. I mean all we see is someone’s “lived experience” and their “truth”. Facts have been irrelevant for years. I6 RecommendShareFlag

s a

philadelphiaDec. 11

Not exactly the same thing, but is it racist against Chinese to criticize the Chinese government or state? Further, based on the Torah or Old Testament, wasn’t the territory that became Israel conquered by the tribe on its return from Egypt using actions that would be defined today as genocide? For that matter, weren’t many if not most of the planet’s current countries arguably founded via actions that included genocide? If so, and if we aspire for that horrific aspect of our collective behavior to stop, isn’t it imperative to be able to criticize any state, and any government, without being accused of racism against the group currently ruling that territory or state or government? Maybe not, and maybe that is why wars and massacre’s of “biblical” proportions remain depressingly common in our “modern” world.19 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Anonymous commented December 11

Anonymous

Should Have Been Done Long Ago commented December 11

@s a Israelis turned out by the hundreds of thousands to protest against Netanyahu. Try protesting Hamas or the PA. Try protesting in Iran or Syria. Saudia Arabia or Lebanon or China or Russia.2 RecommendShareFlag

Should Have Been Done Long Ago

OhioDec. 11

Regardless, the concept of a religiously defined state is absolutely Unamerican.24 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Ruth commented December 11

Ruth

New YorkDec. 11

@Should Have Been Done Long Ago Really? Tell that to all the Muslim countries that expelled their Jewish citizens after 1948.2 RecommendShareFlag

Abby commented December 11

Abby

Brett O. commented December 11

Unamerican? What about the Evangelical religious right’s outsized influence on the American judiciary? Why is Christmas a federal holiday? In the abstract America is secular but in practice? One nation under (Christian) god.3 RecommendShareFlag

Brett O.

Queens, NYDec. 11

The author uncritically uses language that by design makes I/P difficult to discuss. “Right to exist”–where does this right come from? Does every country have a right to exist forever? The problem for many anti-zionists is the latter, often unspoken part, the right to exist as a Jewish state as opposed to a secular or binational state. Not wanting the state to exist in its present form is not the same as not wanting the people to exist. White South Africans didn’t stop existing when the apartheid government ended. Likewise, the author uses the phrase “self-determination”–in what legal framework does a group have a right to self determination in a place they don’t live? Imagine the chaos and mass displacement if such an understanding of the right to self determination were applied globally.26 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Mortimer commented December 11

Mortimer

North carolinaDec. 11

@Brett O. You are overanalyzing. ” right to exist” means in the moment. Canada has a right to exist until it doesnt.1 RecommendShareFlag

Hannah commented December 11

Hannah

Wayne commented December 11

@Brett O. You just blew my mind. I’m gonna be sitting on this one for a while.1 RecommendShareFlag

Wayne

CaliforniaDec. 11

The world is full of nations with an official religion. When people don’t claim that those countries shouldn’t exist but they do for Israel, you have to ask whether they would have the same attitude if Israel were just another Islamic country in the region. If not, then it’s because Jews are there. As for expanding, I’m against the notion of Israeli settlements. But I also have to ask whether a “no Jews allowed” policy makes sense for any region. Israel’s neighbors all had substantial Jewish populations prior to 1948. In many of them, it’s down to the single digits. You can find 100 synagogues in Iran, but not a single rabbi. In any other case in that time frame where a country was taken over in a war, we recognize that captured territory becomes part of the country that captured it. The only difference in this case is that Israel’s wars were defensive ones.11 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Hannah commented December 11

Hannah

@Wayne well no, plenty people denounce theocracy. It’s just harder to denounce a theocracy that’s been established more than 200 years ago, rather than one no older 80 years.1 RecommendShareFlag

Jim commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@Wayne Tanks against children is not defensive. PERIOD.3 RecommendShareFlag

Jim

UtahDec. 11

It all depends on the context.7 RecommendShareFlag

Trilby22 commented December 11

Trilby22

VADec. 11

Of course not. Those who say different have an agenda.6 RecommendShareFlag

Livingston commented December 11

Livingston

Saugerties, NYDec. 11

It’s disheartening, as a half Jewish and Black person, to see the strength of discussion this question evokes compared with the glossing over of the possibility of racism suddenly being a 2-way street in the 21st century in so-called reverse-racism. This was an energetic academic debate that seemed to take place without involvement of Black America. Zionism is a very American ideological approach much like Marcus Garvey’s pan-Africanism, unfortunately for reasons beyond Balck America it could not receive political support and flourish.2 RecommendShareFlag

Barry Schreibman commented December 11

Barry Schreibman

Cazenovia, New YorkDec. 11

It’s not a simple question, but there are some simple rules which can produce at least a first sort — a threshold way of differentiating between criticism of Zionist policy and Jew hatred. To be legitimate, criticism of Zionist policy must at least recognize that: 1) There is a Jewish people. The best definition I’ve ever read of a “people” is this: a people is a people who think they are. Jews have thought they are for two millennia. 2) Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people — no better, and certainly no worse, than any other national liberation movement. 3) Israel has a right to exist. Where the criticism is coming from people who won’t recognize any of these fundamental principles, the criticism is a cover for Jew hatred.9 RecommendShareFlag

Joseph commented December 11

Joseph

Scottsdale AZDec. 11

Most non-Jews fail to understand that Judaism is conceptually different than religions like Catholicism or Lutheranism. Judaism is uniquely based on the concept of nationhood thereby defining its adherents as a distinct group of people. You can only understand this concept once you study Jewish text and the history of Zionism. Once that is understood, the need for Israel becomes clear. Secular Israelis are still Jewish although they may not observantly practice the Jewish religion. Until this complexity is understood, those opposing Israel will be unable to understand how anti-Zionism equates with anti-Semitism.7 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Konstanze Streese, PhD commented December 11

Konstanze Streese, PhD

Frankfurt/GermanyDec. 11

@Joseph …and Zionism didn’t come into existence out of the blue. Had Jewish people in Europe not suffered through centuries of pogroms and exclusion from the “normal” life of the towns they lived in, often if not mostly in ghettos , Theodor Herzl might not have had a reason to promote Zionism and the return to the ‘Holy Land’. As horrendous as I find Israel’s current strategy, as sure I am that increasing antisemitism around the world is just one more proof for the need for a Jewish state. So there is a dialectical relation between Zionism and Antisemitism.1 RecommendShareFlag

rcongdon commented December 11

rcongdon

MassachusettsDec. 11

It irks me that people think they can say I’m antisemitic because I know hatred for the current government of Israel. Some seem to believe that I deny Israel’s right to exist; that is not in my heart at all.7 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

Josh commented December 11

Josh

Maryland – DC Metro AreaDec. 11

@rcongdon opposition to the government of Israel is not opposition to Zionism. I am an ardent Zionist and an American Jew. I despise Bibi Netanhayu and his government but I am unwavering in my support for Israel as a nation and as a concept. Being opposed to a government and its policies is very different than being opposed to Zionism and the philosophy of Zionism, which is that Israel has a right to exist and the Jews have the right to a Jewish State in the ancient lands that comprised the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel.RecommendShareFlag

Edward Goodwin commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@rcongdon There’s nothing wrong with denying Israel’s right to exist; It’s just polemics, and it doesn’t imply antiseptics at all. After all don’t Palestinians have whatever right there is … to have Palestine exist as a nation?; Huh?1 RecommendShareFlag

Edward Goodwin

Christian Haesemeyer commented December 11

I used to accept claims of antisemitism at face value, but when the basis of such claims were stated, often they were legitimate criticism of the Israeli government. I don’t remember how long ago, but therefore, I’ve learned to ignore claims of antisemitism. ‘New Historians,’ such as Ilan Pappe or others, have linked Zionism with the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That reveals that the reality of Zionism, based on actual evidence, is not benign, and the killings of thousands of innocent people, including children, are historical events confirming similar views explaining Zionism. A bipartisan majority of the House decreeing that anti-Zionism = antisemitism will probably, over time, teach people to reject claims of antisemitism at face value. By contrast, the author of this article uses a fantasy view of benign Zionism contrary to what historians and the current news stories reveal of its morally questionable reality. The use of fantasy to defend the morally indefensible is not unusual. For instance, some say that the U.S. government stands for human rights, citing “life, liberty” in the D of I, but when we look in the history books, it’s revealed that the U.S. government slaughtered millions and millions of innocent human beings. I decree the word ‘fantasyology’ as the study of political fantacism. Politicians trying to decree false claims isn’t new. One state legislator allegedly tried to decree that the mathematical pi = 3. His name was, not coincidentally, Edward Goodwin.15 RecommendShareFlag

Christian Haesemeyer

MelbourneDec. 11

No. This was another edition of easy answers to easy questions, thanks for playing.2 RecommendShareFlag

Harry commented December 11

Harry

San FranciscoDec. 11

The racist question at the core of this debate is to take Israel’s existence as somehow conditional. 75 years after its founding the United States was about to enter a civil war. 75 years after its founding the Soviet Union collapsed. Israel has avoided both these catastrophes, and yet her existence as a home for the Jewish people remains a fraught subject for Islamic supremacists, who cannot permit Moslem land to fall to the infidel, and the coffee house radicals who support them.4 RecommendShareFlag

NLG commented December 11

NLG

Stamford, CTDec. 11

Any argument that anti-Zionism is anti-semitism relies on the faulty, fatuous premise that “religion” can attach to primarily secular rights, as Dr. Neel argues in his lawsuit against NYU. Believing that God hands out (magic, invisible) real estate deeds does not qualify as a religious belief protected by the First Amendment. Neither does, eg., even the most sincere belief that God appointed Aryans masters of the Earth, entitled in perpetuity to authority over other humans & control over all their property. There are good reasons to support the existence of the State of Israel, chief among them that any nation, the citizens of which have lived there for three continuous generations, gets to stay. It’s a basic human right not to be thrown out of your home, and where three generations have lived continuously constitutes a home. This also means tthe “Right of Return” to Ancient Israel is theocratic bunk – 2,000 years away means others have now met the three-continuous-generations rule. So Israel stays, but all Palestinians who live in the territory Israel now controls need to be full citizens of Israel, in accord with international law and specifically the Geneva Conventions. We need to shut down forcefully (though peacefully) anyone who claims that such discussion is anti-Semitic. That claim is a dishonest rhetorical trick intended to confuse, not clarify, and to justify otherwise unjustifiable actions, up to and including mass infanticide, as we see in Gaza today.18 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Shadi Mir commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@NLG I use 50 years. If land governance and ownership has been stable for 50 years, that’s it. Claims are erased. There is no “Right to Return.” If there were, Palestinians have a much strong Right to Return. Duh.RecommendShareFlag

Shadi Mir

Sharon commented December 11

The problem with Anti-Zionism being equated with Anti-Semitism is that it lumps all Jews into one group, a stereotype. This isn’t limited to Jews. Many tend to stereotype other groups such as Muslims, homosexuals, women, etc. There is no such thing as a homogenous group. Not every Jews or or even Israel supports Netanyahu. Not every muslim wants the state of Israel gone. It’s difficult but we have to judge every individual as just that. We must be defined by our humanity first and our individual beings second. All the rest is hooy. That is why it is so important to say one doesn’t agree with what Hamas did. Not every Palestinian is a Hamas member or works with the group. Not every Jew is part of Netanyahu’s government murdering Palestinians. Judge a person’s mind not what defines them from the outside. Labels change words and deeds don’t.5 RecommendShareFlag

Sharon

Charles Barrick commented December 11

Israel was founded, for good reason and after long deliberations and tragedies, under international law. Israel should now be required, just like any other state, to adhere to international law.15 RecommendShareFlag

Charles Barrick

Washington DC.Dec. 11

I have always been bothered by the term “antisemitic” for two reason. First, semantics — not all Semitic people are Jewish. (My family background is Lebanese — also Semites — and I am not anti-me.). Second, and far more importantly, it conflates and makes no distinction between being anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish. In 1948, I would have labeled myself as anti-Zionist, as I believe there was no God-given right for Jews to claim a homeland in Palestine when they had not lived there for thousands of years, and Palestinians had indeed been there for thousands of years. But I would but then, and do not now consider myself anti-Jewish. Given where we are today, I recognize that Israel is a reality and it is not going anywhere. Fine. It doesn’t mean that they can continue to deny Palestinians their legitimate claims to a homeland — which early Israelis pushed them out of, and continue to steal more and more land. If I were Palestinian, I would want Israelis to admit they took my land with no real right to do so (except for British colonials allowing the creation of land they had no right to either) and apologize for doing so. Then I would want to figure out how Israelis and Palestinians could live side-by-side in some peaceful co-existence. Israelis have to stop thinking that Jewish people are the only aggrieved people in the world. Israel is a powerful country with the strongest and most brutal army in the Middle East. Its existence is not in question anymore.25 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

BobM commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@Charles Barrick Apologies and admissions are a waste of time. There needs to be action. It seems to me obvious that there should be a functional Palestinian state carved out of Israel; a connected state with viable agriculture, water sources, a harbor, and an airport. I’d say that the international community has to define it and enforce it. No sense trying to work with Israel. It’s a rogue state.3 RecommendShareFlag

BobM

Mill & Paine commented December 11

The answer to the headline is NO. A resounding NO. I have Jewish family members. I’m far from anti-semitic. But Israel is engaging in terrorism and war crimes, intentionally targeting and inflicting maximum pain and suffering on Palestinian civilians. Israel is no better than Putin’s Russia at this point, and both Putin and Netanyahu are war criminals. Aside from that, whatever happened to the concept of freedom of speech. Democrats and Republicans have trampled on the first amendment in their rush to appease AIPAC and pander for Jewish votes.23 RecommendShareFlag

Mill & Paine

TolerationDec. 11

Why is it okay for Israel to target civilian Palestinians as combatants? I mean this is no different than Hamas attacking civilians. You cannot claim on one side it is okay and not on the other. As Israel continues this butchery they are literally saying all their own civilians are legitimate targets. Just saying. Swamp Israel for Germany. Swap the words Palestinian for the Jews. Read the news again. What do you see? Now go back 100 years to the Balfour and work forward. Seems like the Jews and Palestinians have a lot in common in suffering. And make no mistake the only reason Israel in my opinion has not simply murdered all the Palestinians isn’t because they are a decent nation state. It’s because they need American support so have to constantly push it to the edge of credulity while maintaining some deniability. Look at the history and it is obvious Israel wants violence. You do not remove people from their homes. Send them to military courts, jail them without charges and deny them rights if you want peace. That choice every time is a declaration of war and saying clearly they want violence.13 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

John Davis commented December 11

Publicus

SeattleDec. 11

@Mill & Paine The difference is that Hamas is a terrorist group; and Israel claims it is a principled democracy. So, it’s easy to condemn Hamas (correctly); but it takes some moral clarity to realize that Israel is worse; a brutal, genocidal STATE for Heaven’s sake…. using American weapons. I’m appalled.1 RecommendShareFlag

John Davis

Austin TXDec. 11

One would like to think that the Voice of Reason still exists among Jewish people everywhere. The Hamas attack was murder and kidnapping. To attach all the more extreme motives about elimination of a Jewish homeland, erasing the holocaust, hatred of Jews – all cheapen both Jewish culture and the real inhumanity of antisemitism. Let’s stay on topic, everyone: a homeland is a reasonable request for all of us. Israel is wrong to blindly murder innocents in any name, just as is Hamas. Jewish honor and respectability depends on our keeping antisemitism separate from political affinity.4 RecommendShareFlag

penney albany commented December 11

penney albany

berkeley CADec. 11

Many people seem to believe that the Netenyahu government is very different form past governments. in Israel. Herzl himself said, “When we occupy the land …we shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border.” Chaim Wiezmann said “the Arabs will be our problem for a long time…One day they may have to leave and let us have the country.” Jabotinsky said, Colonisation can have only one aim, and Palestine Arabs cannot accept this aim…which means it can only proceed and develop under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall…” Yitzhak Shamir, “Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat”8 RecommendShareFlag

Michelle commented December 11

Michelle

VariousDec. 11

As a Jew, I would say it’s extremely obvious that anti-zionism is not necessarily anti-semitic.17 RecommendShareFlag

75 year old retiree commented December 11

75 year old retiree

Washington stateDec. 11

Clearly no. Throughout history, people and societies have carved out places to call home through war (by force) or by decisions made by people in power. Jews are no exception, and should not be singled out. At the same time, Jewish thinkers don’t all agree on the best way to achieve peace, security, and prosperity for the Jewish people. Some believe that Zionism has been the cause of great suffering, fear and much death of both Jews and Palestinians. But believing such does not make them antisemitic.6 RecommendShareFlag

Emerald World ET commented December 11

Emerald World ET

Los AngelesDec. 11

Israelli GOVERNMENT. Judgements and critiscisms should be directed there. Not at the religion, not at the citizens, and not at the worshippers. It was the GOVERNMENT of Israel who decided to let it’s citizens settle “illegally”, and the GOVERNMENT of Israel who has been take take take, been inflexible, and not ‘giving’ much to speak of.6 RecommendShareFlag

Doug commented December 11

Doug

SeattleDec. 11

Somehow criticizing Israeli policies has been shut down for the fear of being labeled anti Semitic. There is no good and evil in this war, Hamas and Netanyahu’s right wing government are both evil. Over 17,000 Palestinians have been slaughtered, most women and children Insuring several more generations of hate and more terrorists. That’s not anti Semitic, that’s a cold hard truth.6 RecommendShareFlag

Jo commented December 11

ChicagoDec. 11

guys if Zionim = Judaism, say goodbye to Judaism.. as for whether Israel has a right to exist? as a so called Jewish state ? holy mud, it hasn’t acted in the principles of Judaism since before it’s founding Make your Faustian bargains guys, but you can’t have it all. I’m Jewish but sad to see Israel claim it. If i can’t have it independent of Israel/Zionism and all that that implies , i’ll walk . I can . It’s also not a race.11 RecommendShareFlag

Bruce Olson commented December 11

Bruce Olson

HoustonDec. 11

It seems to me the “Duck” test is perhaps the easiest, most realistic way to determine the applicability of how terms like “antizionist” “antisemetic” and others to any specific demographic/religious population are used. “If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and flies like a duck, it’s probably a duck.” The attacks by HAMAS clearly passed the Duck Test for terrorism. Likewise, the type and magnitude of response to those attacks by Netanyahu’s Israeli leadership appears to be passing the Duck Test for acts generally classified as Crimes Against Humanity, not the least of which is the authorized mass killing of at least 10,000 innocent Palestinians in the name of seeking to destroy the terrorists. Calling out Israel’s leadership for acts that may well be crimes against humanity is not by definition antisemitic or antizionist because the acts themselves do seem to pass the Duck Test for reasons similar to Hitler’s Nazi version of condoned mass murder. It may not be the Holocaust the Jewish People suffered but the unnecessary mass murder and forced removal of thousands of Palestinians conducted under a conscious state policy is not much different, except in magnitude. And that appears to me to be what Netanyahu is doing, possibly for personal reasons regarding his ongoing political survival over other ongoing issues and scandals.8 RecommendShareFlag

Atle BjÃ¸rge commented December 11

Atle BjÃ¸rge

NorwayDec. 11

This is a silly question. Anti-Zionism is obviously not antisemitic per se. Just ask someone from the ultra orthodox population, who make up about 13% of Israel. They’re strongly opposed to Zionism.4 RecommendShareFlag

Mark commented December 11

Mark

American Akita Team commented December 11

Is criticizing the Israeli government for not being zionist enough considered anti-zionist?RecommendShareFlag

American Akita Team

Saint LouisDec. 11

Anyone with any doubts about whether “From the River to Sea” is a call for genocide against Jews in Israel need only read about Black September Organization ( Munaẓẓamat Aylūl al-Aswadin) Jordan from 1970 to the summer of 1971 and in Munich in 1972 and the role of the PLO in the Lebanese Civil War of 1975 to 1990. The violent mindset of secular Marxist violent groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and jihadist ideologues who dominate HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad have always shared common belief around the need to kill and terrorize civilians in order to drive the Jews out of Israel. They viewed their struggle as similar to the Viet Cong in South Vietnam and they sought to make Amann, Jordan the Hanoi of their cause which resulted in civil war in Jordan which drove the Palestinians out into Lebanon which then tipped the balance of power in Lebanon into disequilibrium and civil war. This is why Egypt blockades Gaza along with Israel. The Egyptians do not want radical violent extremists from Gaza infiltrating into the Sinai and tipping Egypt into another revolutionary civil war like happened in Jordan in June 1970 and Lebanon in 1975 to 1990. The violent streak in Palestinian factions is quite virulent and moderation and compromise in return for peace in a truncated Palestinian state has always been unacceptable to such movements which exist to fight against the existence of Israel.5 RecommendShareFlag

Jorge commented December 11

Jorge

San DiegoDec. 11

The simple logic that all Zionists are Jews but not all Jews are Zionists settles that issue. It is a broad ideology that has both left-wing and right-wing adherents, concerning mostly how it is implemented– the rightists all about nationalism, exclusion, power and conformity; the leftists about inclusion, justice, cooperation, socialism. A large portion of Israelis are not Zionist in the strict sense, particularly the radical belief in the Biblical right to settle the Occupied Territories. That being said, some Jews are Islamophobic and bigoted toward Palestinians. And some Arabs and their supporters are anti-Semitic and bigoted toward all Jews. Regardless of justifications, anyone who advocates for genocide is a supporter of terrorism– Jew, Arab, Persian, Turk, Armenian, Hindu, Muslim, European, etc.6 RecommendShareFlag

LIChef commented December 11

LIChef

East CoastDec. 11

The term “antisemitic” is thrown around so loosely these days that perhaps those of us horrified by Israeli carnage in Gaza might also be entitled to feel grossly offended or less safe when so accused. For decades, many Americans assented to seeing billions of our tax money go to Israel so that nation could survive and thrive. Now, for all of our support, we are suddenly deemed “antisemitic” for not agreeing with the violence perpetrated by the Netanyahu government. While we should absolutely condemn talk of genocide of Jews or any other group (while unfortunately upholding the rights of such vile people — even on campus — to say it), perhaps we should also be looking at TV screens as the bodies of innocent men, women and children pile up in Gaza or see how armed Israeli settlers in the West Bank try to wrest Palestinians from their own homes. In that vein, perhaps those who are so staunchly pro-Israel should be put on the spot and asked if they condemn what is happening to the innocents in the occupied territories. If they can’t answer affirmatively, perhaps their careers should be ended as well. No one group should be permitted to corner the market on outrage.10 RecommendShareFlag

Syed Hussaini commented December 11

Syed Hussaini

gene99 commented December 11

The way Zionists are behaving right now in the West Bank, it needs to be called out. Criticizing violent settler attacks is not being antisemitic. I do not believe that being anti-Zionist is the same as being antisemitic.10 RecommendShareFlag

JL commented December 11

CADec. 11

Is it always antisemitic? Technically there are some ultra Orthodox Jews that are anti-Zionist for religious reasons. But the Zionism vs. Jews dichotomy is in practice cover for the worst antisemites I know. I can’t count how many times over the past month I’ve heard someone clarify they were critical Of Zionism not Jews only to follow that up with a horrific slander about Jews… not Zionists, not even Israelis. Just Jews.3 RecommendShareFlag

gene99

Lido Beach NYDec. 11

Jonathan Greenblatt demonstrates the canard in labeling those who equate Zionism with colonialism as antismetic when he says, “Anti-Zionism is predicated on one concept, the denial of rights to one people.” I would remind him that modern Israel was not brought into being in a vacuum. There were other people living there, who were largely displaced by Israel’s creation. If opposing the continuing policies of Israel to oppress those people, based on Zionist principals is antisemetic, I must be a self-hating Jew.12 RecommendShareFlag

ML commented December 11

Washington, D.C.Dec. 11

Assuming Zionism is simply the desire for a Jewish homeland in the lands they’ve continuously occupied for thousands upon thousands of years … Being anti-Zionist absolutely is anti-Semitic as it is simply the final step in the ethnic cleansing of the region that happened when Israel was declared an independent state in the 1940s. Upon the creation of the state of Israel, Jewish people living throughout the middle east were forced from their homes – again, places their people and families had lived for millennia – to the only place in the region that would accept them. Don’t believe me? Look at the percentage of the population that is Jewish an every country that borders Israel. Extend that to Iraq, that historically had a Jewish subculture. What would fill the space “from the river to the sea” if Israel ceased to exist? We know it from what exists in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and the West Bank – a place where Jews are not allowed to live, or if they are, are not allowed to practice their religion. Contrast that to Israel – a multi-ethnic and multi religious enclave where more than a quarter of their population is non-Jewish. “From the River to the Sea” is a phrase promulgated by an organization explicitly committed to the death of all Jewish people. Even pretending it simply means a state other than Israel, we know from the neighborhood, it means the last step in the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish people from the lands THEY lived before Christianity and Islam4 RecommendShareFlag

Stefan Moore commented December 11

Stefan Moore

Sydney, AustraliaDec. 11

I think Ilan Pappe, professor emeritus of Haifa University, put it best, “I think that, basically, the project of Zionism has a problem…You cannot create a safe haven by creating a catastrophe for other people.”14 RecommendShareFlag

Subu TK commented December 11

Subu TK

Pleasanton CADec. 11

Good debate and public voting on the same, in US we should do similar efforts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VTt_THL4ARecommendShareFlag

Kom commented December 11

Kom

lily commented December 11

Zionism, at its root, was a movement from 1897 to form the Jewish state of Israel. So, if you’re going to declare yourself anti-Zionist, you have to have at least some statement about what you propose to do with the 7 million Jews now living between the Jordan river and the sea. Absent such a statement of some solution, one can reasonably assume your stance is similar to the Hamas-consensus, that the 7 million Jews must “go somewhere”, since you’re declaring opposition to the Zionist core concept that they should live where they are. This is where you should then exhibit at least some awareness that the desire to have the Jews “go somewhere” is the nutshell definition of 2000 years of anti-Semitism. And thus has lead to the ultimate conclusion, the logical pinnacle of antisemitism, e.g. by Russians and Germans and Hamas in searching for a solution to the same vexing problem: that since there is not and never has been for 2000 years a “somewhere” for Jews to go, a very convenient “somewhere” is to dispose of them where they are.2 RecommendShareFlag

lily

Los AngelesDec. 11

Well, geeze! So is higher education (at least in the Ivy League) really now going to be controlled by wealthy donors? Is tolerance for different opinions or values or beliefs, or engaging in dialog, or coming to consensus going out the door with democracy? Why is it so wrong for young people to question the status quo? As someone who long ago participated in any number of on-campus teach-ins and demonstrations regarding the Vietnam Warand civil rights, it seems only right to me for young people to use the campus platform to find their way in a complex, complicated world situation. If we don’t provide this space, how do they come to understand democratic principles, let alone value democracy?34 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

Robert Avant commented December 11

Robert Avant

Spokane, WADec. 11

@lily Differing opinions in academia have been under attack for decades. When an administrator asks a guest speaker, “Is the juice is worth the squeeze?” in support of a group of students looking to exercise a heckler veto, a pious meme about democracy and the dark evils of wealthy donors loses its edge. You cannot believe speech is violent or worry about microaggressions and condemn donors and performative congresspeople who raise concerns with speech on campus.1 RecommendShareFlag

Bryan commented December 11

Bryan

Kalamazoo, MIDec. 11

@lily When was higher education NOT controlled by wealthy donors?1 RecommendShareFlag

Ana commented December 11

Ana

Nick commented December 11

@lily that’s all well and good, but free speech, and in fact the constitution, limits the use of speech to commit violence against others. Calling for genocide would never hold up at the Supreme Court as free speech.1 RecommendShareFlag

Nick

AustinDec. 11

If you don’t think the United States has a right to exist, would you be called anti-Christian? Anti-white? No, you’d be called anti-American, which isn’t a crime.78 RecommendShareFlag

8 REPLIES

Ron A commented December 11

S.M. Stirling

Santa Fe, NMDec. 11

@Nick Actually, wanting a nation wiped out is generally thought to make you an enemy. And as the saying goes, the only good one is a dead one, and even then they stink.3 RecommendShareFlag

Ron A

BostonDec. 11

@Nick The US is not a Christian state. It is by the constitution a secular state. And if you think Israel doesn’t have a right to exist neither does the US as it too exists on stolen landRecommendShareFlag

Tania commented December 11

Tania

CaliforniaDec. 11

@Nick the US doesn’t comprise only Christians or white people. It’s one of the most diverse populations of any country which is why being anti American isn’t “anti white”. Israel on the other hand is a country explicitly created for Jews. Your comparison is erroneous.RecommendShareFlagVIEW ALL REPLIES

MC commented December 11

Fairfax VADec. 11

Why we have never seen the question formulated to the same standards we use with any other country? Is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia racist? you bet Are the UAE racists? Absolutely Are most Islamic nations racist? Yes they are to different extents. Just look at how they treat foreign national workers Is Zionism racist? If the answer is an unequivocal NO, then anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism But if the answer is yes, then my friends, the problem is much deeper than we thought and the US involvement should be revisited. (I don’t know the answer, to be honest)16 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

rungus commented December 11

S.M. Stirling

Santa Fe, NMDec. 11

@MC No, of course not. Nations are not “races”. Neither are ethnic groups. Serbs and Croats are physically identical, and speak dialects of the same language. But they’re not members of the same ethnic group. And in any case, Palestinians are largely white people. — not Western, but white to the extent the term has any meaning. No different in appearance, mostly, from Lebanese or Greeks or Turks or Sicilians.2 RecommendShareFlag

rungus

Annandale, VADec. 11

@MC While we buy their oil, Saudi Arabia and the UAE do not receive the extensive amount of aid from the US as does Israel. The Israelis are “our guys” in the Middle East, largely dependent on American taxpayers’ money. So we can fairly have something to say about how they conduct their policies.2 RecommendShareFlag

George commented December 11

George

CobourgDec. 11

I don’t see how anti-Zionism can be equated with antisemitism, because some Jews themselves acknowledge that Zionism was/is a mistake.68 RecommendShareFlag

1 REPLY

Gerald commented December 11

Gerald

CTDec. 11

There are numerous Jews who are opposed to Judaism; does that imply that antisemitism is not antisemitic?1 RecommendShareFlag

Poll commented December 11

Poll

PotDec. 11

A stance against a government, and what they do , has nothing to do with antisemitism . I’m still against Joe Biden for the way he exited Afghanistan. Does that make me anti-Semitic ? I’m against the United States, using its veto power against a cease fire. Does that make me anti-Semitic? I am the Prime Minister of Israel, BB Netanyahu, because I think he is one of the worst Jews to ever walk the sands of Israel. I think he has put in motion danger to the Jews around the world, including people like me who do not hide our Jewish heritage, regardless of the religion I currently engage in .41 RecommendShareFlag

Chris commented December 11

Chris

GeorgiaDec. 11

“Anti-Zionism is predicated on one concept, the denial of rights to one people.” This statement can easily be flipped to: “Pro-Zionism is predicated on one concept, the denial of rights to one people (Palestinians).”56 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

JJM commented December 11

S.M. Stirling

Santa Fe, NMDec. 11

@Chris No, it isn’t. Zionist Jews accepted the British partition plan for the Palestine mandate in the 1930’s (which would have given a Palestinian state 80% of the territory), and they accepted the UN partition plan in 1947. In both instances the Palestinians rejected the compromise, demanded 100%, and attacked and killed every Jew they could. When you reject compromise and chose war, the results are on you. Entirely on you, if you lose. And they did. Collectively speaking the Palestinians are the source of their own miseries.5 RecommendShareFlag

JJM

Brookine, MADec. 11

@Chris No. One can be a Zionist–to believe that Jews have a right to a homeland–and support the right of Palestinians to have a nation of their own. I know, because I am such a person.3 RecommendShareFlag

RO commented December 11

CaliforniaDec. 11

@Chris That makes no sense – Zionism is predicated on the concept of the right for Jews to self-determine. It says nothing about being “anti” Palestinian or anything else. The idea that Jews have the right to self-determine is all it is. So Anti-Zionism is being anti- Jews having the right to self-determine. None of it has anything to do with Palestinians. Zionism would still exist if Palestinians had agreed to the Oslo Accords.5 RecommendShareFlag

Jordy commented December 11

Jordy

SG1 commented December 11

Someone needs to define Zionism first. For many, Zionism just means: do you believe Israel has a right to exist? If that is the definition, then being anti Zionist is essentially saying the area needs to be ethnically cleansed of Jews, or that Jews should be subject to Muslim rule (and we have seen how that ends often enough that there are no spoilers anymore). I think folks are talking past each other, but this is essentially why to many Jews being against Zionism is being anti-Semitic.22 RecommendShareFlag

2 REPLIES

SG1

A M commented December 11

@Jordy You have to define Zionism carefully. I think most Jews would be horrified and would become “anti-Zionist” if the definition included the genocide of the Palestinian people. Unfortunately, the Israeli government seems to be heading towards that horrible course giving a lot of people pause and making them think they are anti-Zionists, but most certainly not anti-Semitic.2 RecommendShareFlag

A M

UKDec. 11

@Jordy The only reason Jews survived since the collapse of the second temple 2000 years ago is because the Islamic world harboured them, and provided them safety, where they thrived. They were persecuted in Europe and would have been wiped out otherwise. It is the Muslims who protected them, so you are dead wrong. This is over a thousand years of history you are choosing to ignore. Even today, there is a thriving Jewish community in Iran, of all places. My own family were Russian Jews who emigrated to Egypt, where they converted to Islam about 100 years ago. If you’re interested in this history of this, this short lecture is very instructive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVdEBLaAf1A3 RecommendShareFlag

Pam commented December 11

Pam

AlaskaDec. 11

Any honest discussion of Zionism has to include Israel’s denial of “the right of return” —the internationally recognized right of all people who fled war to return to their homes. All those people in the “refugee” camps are descendants of Palestinians who used to live in what is now Israel. Essentially, Europe (including Russia) and the US decided to make the Palestinians pay for the Christian antisemitism that resulted in the pogroms and the Holocaust. That is why the Palestinians hate the Zionists; they want their land back. In addition, Israelis continue to steal Palestinian land in the West Bank. There is no conceivable justification for this theft, and the UN has attempted to pass multiple resolutions condemning the “settlements”, all of which have been vetoed by the US. It is not antisemitic to recognize these realities. Nor are the acts of Israel, or even the fact of Israel, the fault of Jews living in the US or anywhere else. Judaism is one of the great religions and one of the great cultures of the world. American Jews who oppose Israel’s policies are shining examples of the beauty of Judaism.65 RecommendShareFlag

4 REPLIES

Judy Baumgarten commented December 11

Judy Baumgarten

New YorkDec. 11

@Pam Ok. So at the same time do I have the right to return to Europe, the home my grandparents and parents fled to avoid being exterminated?2 RecommendShareFlag

mo commented December 11

new yorkDec. 11

Thank you for bringing this back to Christian, European antisemitism. I feel this point is often lost when both sides are shouting at one another. Can they not see that their conflict is a direct result of a group completely unharmed by any of this? As far as I’m concerned, both groups are victims. I dont pretend to have an answer, but denying this does not seem productive to me.3 RecommendShareFlag

t bo commented December 11

t bo

new yorkDec. 11

@Pam Let us not forget the legacy of the Great British Empire. All over the globe, when they allowed former colonies to become independent, they often drew boundaries that guaranteed decades of conflicts. Some say this was an intentional tactic. Guess what, we are back to colonialism again! Colonialism DID occur and it has its consequences that we still live with today much as some would have us forget. May be when the kids call for de-colonialization – there is something there!1 RecommendShareFlagVIEW ALL REPLIES

FS commented December 11

If Anti-Zionism is antisemitism, then where it ends? One cannot criticize Israel for slaughter of thousands innocent civilians, babies, flattening school, and hospitals. Then Israel has the free license to do no matter how atrocious it is. Such attitude has already produced Netanyahu. By same logic one cannot criticize our President or Congress either for sending our hard-earned money and weapons to Israel while the slaughter of innocent children of Gaza is going on. It may also be considered antisemitism. Where it ends?30 RecommendShareFlag

5 REPLIES

S.M. Stirling

Santa Fe, NMDec. 11

@FS We bombed the bejayzus out of German and Japanese civilians in WWII, and killed hundreds of thousands, and burned down schools and hospitals. When we firebombed Tokyo in May of 1945, 100,000 civilians died in a single night and rivers of boiling human fat ran through the gutters. This is called “war”, and that stuff always happens in war. There’s no rule against killing civilians, only against -targeting- civilians. If they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, c’est la guerre. There are reasons war isn’t generally considered a Good Thing, you know. Hamas started the current conflict, so all death and destruction is solely on them.2 RecommendShareFlag

thector commented December 11

GymMom

PA, USADec. 11

@FS anti-Zionism is the belief that Jews should not have the right of self-determination in their own ancestral homeland, or the right to defend that homeland against the people trying to take it away from them. Zionism means believing that Jews should have a right to self-determination in their homeland. Period. Zionism does NOT mean anti-Palestinianism. It doesn’t mean Jewish supremacy. It doesn’t mean supporting the settlements in Judea and Samaria, or the way that the current war is being conducted. Many Zionists want a 2-state solution. We equally oppose Hamas and Fatah who want all of the land for an Arab state, and Netanyahu and his cronies who want it all for Israel, and want to strip Arabs of their rights.RecommendShareFlag

RO commented December 11

CaliforniaDec. 11

@FS You can be anti- the Israeli government and not Anti-Zionist. In fact I very much am. I am a Zionist who is disgusted with Netanyahu and his government (anti-Israeli government). Being Anti-Zionist is the belief that the state of Israel should not exist. Period. If you can’t understand the difference to that, you should take yourself out of the conversation.RecommendShareFlagVIEW ALL REPLIES

thector

Puerto RicoDec. 11

Anti-zionism and anti-semitism are not the same. Israelis want to make us all think they are the same but they are not. And we should all be against all, every, and any religious-based nation or government, whether Jewish, Islamic, or Christian.25 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

JJM commented December 11

JJM

Brookine, MADec. 11

@thector Like Britain or Italy?1 RecommendShareFlag

Anonymous commented December 11

GymMom

PA, USADec. 11

@thector So I guess you missed the memo. Israel is not a religious-based nation, it’s the nation-state of the Jewish PEOPLE. But there are plenty of countries you should be protesting, that are officially Muslim or Christian nations. And you should definitely oppose Hamas, which wants to impose militant Islam on the whole world.3 RecommendShareFlag

Anonymous

Wondering commented December 11

@thector Straw man. Israel says no such thing. There were protests of hundreds of thousands of Israelis of the Netanyahu government just before 10/7.3 RecommendShareFlag

Wondering

Left CoastDec. 11

One of the most offensive statements I’ve ever seen in the NYT is this one, in the context of a debate over the necessity of a Jewish state: “Jews, after all, survived without a state for nearly 2,000 years after the Romans destroyed the Second Temple in Jerusalem and scattered the inhabitants of the Holy Land to the four corners of the earth.” So… 2000 years of continuous expulsions, persecutions, and pogroms, increasing in intensity until the extermination of 2/3 of the Jews in Europe (about 1/3 of the world’s total Jewish population)… is summed up as, “Jews, after all, survived without a state for 2000 years.” Our grandparents and great-grandparents are rolling over in their mass graves.26 RecommendShareFlag

3 REPLIES

MA commented December 11

Mass, USADec. 11

@Wondering Those of us who learned from our grandparents and great grandparents should do our part to keep the beautiful dream, a homeland for the Jewish people, alive and not succumb to ideological power games or falsehoods about what our ancestors endured —mass expulsions, conversions, and martyrdom that some say well we christians and muslims were oppressed too. Lies by equivocation are making the young members of our society try to erase or fail to learn their own history and that in itself is dangerous for a peaceful, stable, and just society.RecommendShareFlag

R Krueger commented December 11

R Krueger

DallasDec. 11

@Wondering Yes. A truly tragic history. But Israelis cannot just keep stealing land. The settlements are illegal and have been provoking violence for years.3 RecommendShareFlag