[Salon] The Triviliazation of “Anti-Semitism” By Using This False Charge To Silence Criticism Of Israel

THE TRIVIALIZATION OF “ANTI-SEMITISM” BY USING THIS FALSE CHARGE TO
                          SILENCE CRITICISM OF ISRAEL
                                                             BY
                                          ALLAN C. BROWNFELD
——————————————————————————————————————————-
At the present time we are witnessing a growing campaign to label critics of Israel as being guilty of “anti-Semitism.” Among those who have been characterized in this
way in recent days include such respected organizations as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as the Harvard Crimson.

This tactic is not a new one and, sadly, tends to trivialize the real examples of anti-Semitism we observe on the fringes of society. Some Israelis openly admit that this is precisely what they are doing. Shulamit Aloni, a leader of the Meretz Party and former Minister of Education who received the Israel Prize for her “struggle to right injustices and for raising the standard of equality,” described how this works: “It’s a trick. We always use it. When from Europe, somebody criticizes Israel, we bring up the Holocaust. When, in the United States, people are critical of Israel, then they are anti-Semitic.”

Early Israeli leaders promoted this idea even before the state was established. “henceforth, to be anti-Israel was to be anti-Semitic,”. Abba Eban, who served as Israeli ambassador to the United Nations as well as deputy prime minister, expanded the definition of anti-Semitism. He said that, “One of the chief tasks of any dialogue with the Gentile world is to prove that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not a distinction at all.”

In a prerecorded speech at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) annual leadership summit on May 1, 2022, ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt declared that, “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.” He argued that groups calling for equal rights for Palestinians in Israel are “extremists,” and he equated liberal critics of Israel with white supremacists.

Greenblatt told the ADL that, “Anti-Zionism as an ideology is rooted in rage and is predicated on one concept: the negation of another people, a concept as alien to modern discourse as white supremacy. It requires willful denial of even a superficial history of Judaism and the vast history of the Jewish people. And when an idea is born out of such shocking intolerance, it leads to, well, shocking acts.”

According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (May 2, 2022), “Greenblatt equated anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism and said its rhetoric runs the same risk of violent outcomes. ‘that is why we are seeing this jump in anti-Semitic incidents,’ he said…He singled out groups on the Left: Jewish Voice for Peace, the Council on American Islamic Relations, and Students for Justice in Palestine for what he said were anti-Semitic conspiracy mongering…”

In an editorial in its issue of April 29, 2022, the Harvard Crimson endorsed the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, declaring BDS “a living breathing movement of great promise to liberate Palestinians.” Anticipating accusations of “anti-Semitism, “ the editorial made clear that it opposes bigotry of all kinds: “In the wake of accusations suggesting otherwise, we feel the need to assert that support for Palestinian liberation is not anti-Semitic. We unambiguously oppose and condemn anti-Semitism in every and all forms, including those times when it shows up on the fringes of otherwise worthwhile movements. Jewish people—-like every people, including Palestinians, deserve nothing but life, peace and security.”

The backlash was immediate. A letter from six former Crimson editors declared that the editorial “is quite simply an accelerant of anti-Semitism.” Former Harvard president Larry Sommers declared that the BDS movement was “taking positions that were basically anti-Semitic and immoral.” A petition was signed by more than 60 Harvard faculty members condemning the editorial as “anti-Semitic.” Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz declared: “The megaphone of the Crimson will increase the high rate of anti-Semitism on campus. It takes no courage on campuses to oppose Israel’s existence.”

The tactic of attempting to silence criticism of Israel by calling it “anti-Semitic” is becoming increasingly recognized. Jewish Voice for Peace executive director Jamie Fox notes that, “Instead of dismantling anti-Semitism by fighting white supremacy, the ADL is dangerously conflating all Jewish people with the state of Israel and attacking groups that hold the Israeli government accountable for running an apartheid regime. We’re not backing down. The anti-Zionist left and the movement in solidarity with Palestinian liberation is growing stronger daily and we won’t stop until we’ve built a future grounded on justice and equality.”

Rabbi Brant Rosen of Congregation Tzedek Chicago notes that his congregation recently amended its core values statement to say that “we are anti-Zionist, openly acknowledging that the creation of an ethnic Jewish nation state in historic Palestine resulted in an injustice against the Palestinian people. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to deny the fundamental injustice at the core of Zionism.”

For many years we have seen critics of Israel falsely been called “anti-Semitic.” One of the leading practitioners of this tactic has been Norman Podhoretz, for many years editor of Commentary. In an article “J’Accuse,” (Commentary, Sept. 1983), Podhoretz charged America’s leading journalists, newspapers and television networks with “anti-Semitism” because of their reporting of the war in Lebanon and their criticism of Israel’s conduct. Among those so accused were Anthony Lewis of the New York Times, Nicholas Von Hoffman, Joseph Harsch of the Christian Science Monitor, Rowland Evans, Robert Novak, Mary McGrory, Richard Cohen, Alfred Friendly of The Washington Post, and a host of others. These individuals and their organizations were not criticized for bad reporting or poor journalistic standards. Instead they were the subject of the charge that always seemed to be on Podhoretz’s lips: anti-Semitism.

A list of those who have been falsely accused of anti-Semitism because of their criticism of Israel would be a long one. In 2014, Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick declared that Secretary of State John Kerry is “anti-Semitic.” According to Glick, “Kerry is obsessed with Israel’s economic success…The anti-Semitic undertones of Kerry’s constant chatter about Jews and money are obvious.” Writing in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, Cameron Kerry, a brother of the Secretarynof State and formerly general counsel of the U.S. Department of Commerce, declared that charges of “anti-Semitism” against his brother “would be ridiculous if they were not so vile.” Cameron Kerry, a convert to Judaism, recalled relatives who died in the Holocaust. The Kerrys’ paternal grandparents were Jewish.

Those who have been labeled “anti-Semitic” because of their criticism of Israeli policies include former President Jimmy Carter, journalists Andrew Sulliva, Bill Moyers and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. Peter Beinart, a contributing editor to Jewish Currents and author of “The Crisis of Zionism,” calls the idea that such individuals are anti-Semitic “absurd.”

From its very beginning, Zionism was vigorously opposed by a majority of Jews. For Reform Jews, the idea of Zionism contradicted almost completely their belief in a universal, prophetic Judaism. The first Reform prayer book eliminated references to Jews being in exile and to a Messiah who would miraculously restore Jews throughout the world to the historic land of Israel and who would rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem. The prayer book eliminated prayers for a return to Zion. The distinguished rabbi Abraham Geiger declared that the Jewish people were a religious community destined to carry on the mission to “serve as a light to the nations,” to bear witness to God and His moral law. The dispersion of the Jews was not a punishment for their sins, but part of God’s plan whereby they were to disseminate the universal message of ethical monotheism.

If opposition to Zionism equals “anti-Semitism,” as the ADL and others now tell us, most Jews would historically have to be considered “anti-Semites.” In 1897, the Central Conference of American Rabbis adopted a resolution disapproving of any attempt to establish a Jewish state. The resolution declared, “Zion was a precious possession of the past…as such it is a holy memory, but it is not our hope of the future. America is our Zion.”

In 1929, Orthodox Rabbi Aaron Samuel Tamarat wrote that the very notion of a sovereign Jewish state as a spiritual center was “a contradiction to Judaism’s ultimate purpose.” He wrote that, “Judaism at root is not some religious concentration which may be localized or situated in a single territory. Neither is Judaism a nationality, in the sense of modern nationalism, fit to be woven into the three-foldedness of ‘homeland, army and heroic songs.’ No, Judaism is Torah, ethics and exaltation of spirit. If Judaism is truly Torah, then it cannot be reduced to the confines of any particular territory. For as Scripture said of Torah, ‘its measure is greater than the earth.’”

One of the leading Jewish theologians and philosophers of the 20th century, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who marched with the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. for civil rights for all people, said, “Judaism is not a religion of space and does not worship the soil. So, too, the State of Israel is not the climax of Jewish history, but a test of the integrity of the Jewish people and the competence of Israel.”

Only with the rise of anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe and of Nazism in Germany, did American Jews begin to sympathize with Zionist goals of a Jewish state in Palestine. But they never adopted the Zionist view that they were “in exile” or that they were any different from other Americans, except in their religious faith. Despite Zionism’s claim that Israel is the “homeland” of all Jews, few Jewish Americans ever shared that view. Now, the State of Israel, in the view of increasing numbers of American Jews, has become for many a replacement for God and the Jewish moral and ethical tradition, indeed, a form of idolatry, much like the Golden Calf in the Bible.

Israel claims to speak in the name of all Jews. This is, of course extraordinary, for any state to claim to speak in the name of millions of men and women who are citizens of other countries. Beyond this, its actions toward the indigenous population of Palestine violate essential Jewish moral and ethical values. Jewish Americans believe in equal rights for people of every race, religion and nation. In Israel, Jews are given preferential treatment to Palestinians. In the illegally occupied territories, Palestinians are clearly a colonized people. American Jews believe in religious freedom. Israel has a state religion, ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Reform rabbis cannot perform weddings, conduct funerals or have their conversions recognized. This is not a government which in any way represents the values of the American Jewish community.

Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid in history, currently receiving more than $3 billion annually. Without this aid and U.S. diplomatic support, its occupation of the West Bank would be an extraordinarily difficult undertaking. Americans have every right to criticize Israeli policy, which they have financed for decades, without being accused of “anti-semitism” for doing so.

Jonathan Greenblatt, Alan Dershowitz, Larry Sommers and others who use the term “anti-Semitism” to try to silence critics of Israel’s inhumane and un-Jewish treatment of Palestinians, are trivializing the term. If and when real anti-Semitism appears, intemperate and injudicious voices such as these will find it difficult to gain a hearing. Israel has been accused of being an “apartheid” state by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem——not because these groups are “anti-Semitic,” but because Israel has been acting toward Palestinians in an inhumane manner which violates Jewish moral and ethical standards. In the end, history will decide and there is little doubt what that decision will be.
                                                       ##