DISCOURSE OVER THE LABEL “ANTISEMITISM”
Recently I have read a number of commentaries concerning the words anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic. There seemed to be quite a number of debates going on at different educational institutions and in the government over those words. Of course, there was the infamous House of Representatives committee interrogation of 3 university presidents on this issue which was nothing but an excuse by the Republicans in the House to badger several presidents of eastern liberal institutions. Successively there have been a number of articles about efforts to further define anti-Semitism and the arguments over what should receive that categorization, for the purpose of responding to that behavior. I do not understand why this is a confusing issue.
As I understand the word Semitic it means a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Phoenician, Akkadian and some other ancient Middle Eastern languages. Therefore, I presume anti-Semitic can be a word that was used to define something opposed to people that spoke those language groups. However, in the context in which it seems to be used today in the United States it doesn't seem to include anti-Arabic, Aramaic or Phoenician, etc., but is meant to identify anti-Hebrew. Although, it would be humorous if we returned the word to use its historic meaning so it would include anyone who spoke a Hebrew or Arabic language. But I don't think either of the people in those two categories would agree with that definition today.
What are anti- Jewish comments or actions seems to be where the debate lies at this time. To me anti-Semitic would signify people who were making statements or taking actions which were intended to be about individuals who spoke Hebrew, had a Jewish heritage, followed Jewish customs and/or the Jewish religion. Similarly anti-Palestinian could mean derogatory actions or language toward anyone of Palestinian culture or heritage. Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be concern about people who say or do anti -Palestinian things.
Using the word anti-Semitic to categorize comments or actions against individuals because they are Jewish is correct and easy to understand. The issue seems to be clouded by a number of comments by those who support the Palestinian position with regard to the state of Israel and its treatment of Palestinians. Presumably those statements fall into two categories. The first is a negative comment about all those who are Jewish in the state of Israel and the second is about the actions of the state of Israel itself. There is no reason to have anti-Semitic comments about all the Jewish people that live in the state of Israel. That would be just like blaming all the people that live in Russia for the actions of the Russian government. Negative comments about Israel with regard to the actions of the government or the policy of the government of Israel and are not anti-Semitic. I saw an interesting comment that the US state department's position was that an anti-Israel comment could be anti-Semitic that didn't make sense to me. If the comment is about all people in Israel then it's anti-Semitic. If it is a negative comment about the government, that falls in a different category which we and others around the world make about government policies regularly.
Some confusion may exist when comments are made with regard to Zion or Zionism. Zion is an ancient term referring to Israel. Zionism became a movement in the late 1800s promoted by Jewish leaders in Europe who felt the European Jews needed to escape the prevalent anti-Semitics in a number of European countries and destructive pogroms which were occurring in Russia. These leaders we're trying to convince those Jewish people to move to Zion. The movement slowly gained force overtime and references to Zion or Zionism were talking about the lands around Jerusalem and the return of the Jewish people to those lands.
The terms Zion and Zionism today seem to be mostly used in reference to the efforts of the Israeli government and conservative Jews to absorb the remainder of the West Bank (captured from Jordan in a 1967 war) into the Israeli state to complete the fulfillment of the establishment of modern Zion. Since the Palestinians live in this area and view it as their homeland, they and their supporters offer any number of negative comments about Zionism. They view it as a movement to further expel Palestinians from Palestine. Negative comments made about Zionism in Palestinian lands do not seem to me to be anti-Semitic. They are part of the verbal battle between the supporters of the Israeli government and supporters of the Palestinians over who has what rights in the land on the west bank of the River Jordan and the Dead Sea.
Perhaps my thoughts are too simplistic, but I believe there is a simple dividing line between what is anti-Semitic and what is not. If it is a comment or action directed at a person or people who speak the Hebrew language or follow Jewish customs or the Jewish religion, they are anti-Semitic. If there are comments or actions regarding the Jewish people as a whole or the Jewish people living in Israel, they are anti-Semitic. If there are comments or actions with regard to the actions or policies of the government of Israel, then those are political comments and the fact that they are directed against the government of a country that primarily focuses on and supports its Jewish population does not make them anti-Semitic any more than complaining about the government of Iraq would make the comment anti-Arab (or anti-Semitic) with regard to its Arab population.
It is also worth noting that with all of the consternation about new or renewed anti-Semitism there does not seem to be any discourse about anti-Palestinian comments or actions. Then again in our highly charged partisan political atmosphere, where there are more votes and financial contributions to be had from sJewish voters than Palestinian voters, maybe that should be expected.
Obadiah Plainman