New Theory on Antisemitism
New Theory on Antisemitism
A new and perverse theory on antisemitism seems to be taking hold, and some of its proponents come from very unlikely quarters. Let us take the example of a long-time friend of Israel, Liberal MP Anita Neville. In comments at a hearing of the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism, she alleged that the Jewish community faced a possible “backlash” of hate in response to the Harper Government’s proclamations in support of the Jewish State and its decisions to defund organizations engaged in antisemitic activity. What is surprising is that her comments were tantamount to a repeat of various other statements emanating from organizations such as the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF), which also recently alleged that the government’s support of Israel is “fostering” antisemitism.
To B’nai Brith Canada, Canadian Jewry’s senior advocacy organization, suggesting that the government’s clear and principled policies on the Middle East and on countering antisemitism are creating a backlash against the Jewish community is simply preposterous.
All mainstream Jewish organizations in Canada have continually appealed to governments of varying political affiliations to counter, both verbally and materially, all manifestations of antisemitism in Canada, and to stop the moral equivalency between the democratic state of Israel and the terrorists who seek its destruction. These Jewish organizations, ours included, also urged governments to ensure that there be full accountability for all taxpayer dollars funding overseas NGOs, and to give unqualified assurance to Canadians that these funds will not be utilized directly or indirectly in promoting un-Canadian activities such as glorifying terrorism, the publication of textbooks that include antisemitic and anti-Christian material, or any other activity which undermines the legitimacy of a fellow democracy and ally.
Today, Canada has exactly such a government. It has assumed the responsibility of ensuring that there is full accountability for Canadian taxpayers’ dollars in the foreign aid that we distribute. As an example of this principled position, we recently learned that Canadian funds which used to be sent to the general fund of UNRWA (an organization with a history of terrorist infiltration) have now been redirected to food aid. Specific projects which will lay the groundwork for a fully-functioning justice system in the West Bank, a crucial element in building a strong Palestinian civil society that will strive for peace, will also be funded. How ironic it is that there are now suggestions that this sort of accountability in the re-distribution of Canadian aid dollars for the benefit of the Palestinians will somehow lead to a backlash against the Jewish community. How sad if such a far-fetched notion were true. How short-sighted to try to create any kind of conceptual justification for such activity.
The demonization and delegitimization of the world’s only Jewish State amounts to antisemitism: it is the denial of the legitimate right of the Jewish people as a collective entity to self-determination in its own homeland in much the same way as Jews as individuals were denied basic human rights accorded to all others in the past. This is a statement which has emanated not only from Canadian parliamentarians from more than one side of the political spectrum, but indeed from authoritative sources and public figures from across the globe. Pushing the idea that taking action to denounce and defund exactly that type of antisemitism in Canada will somehow endanger the Jewish community is ill-advised since it unwittingly gives license to the base motives of Jew-haters everywhere.
In essence, the newest theory on antisemitism seems to go like this: when the Government makes policy changes which support an ally and fellow democracy, Jews are ultimately responsible and, therefore, bring upon themselves any repercussions from antisemites who take offence at those changes. Such an assertion would be laughable, if not for the chorus of disparate voices saying just that.
If, according to the likes of CAF, action taken against the enemies of the Jewish community and Israel will in some way encourage antisemitism, than what is the suggested course of action? Is our government supposed to sit back and continue sending millions of public dollars to obsessively anti-Israel entities in order to appease them and their Canadian supporters? Is this to be done out of fear of the purported “repercussions” to be faced by Canadian Jews? The success of appeasement in solving global issues in modern history has a very sad track record. We would do well to bear that lesson in mind, instead of crafting theories that could, unfortunately, become self-fulfilling prophecies.
Tags: Anti-Semitism, Antisemitism, CPCCA, Frank Dimant
February 15th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
I believe this is the Liberal party at its most desperate. They’re flailing, reaching for anything, employing pretzel logic to appear “fair”, yet just as principled as the Conservatives on matters pertaining to Israel and the Jewish people. It won’t work.
February 15th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
Dear Frank:
Thank-you for your brilliant and articulate blog on the new theory of antisemitism. I agree with your thesis.
You said,
“In essence, the newest theory on antisemitism seems to go like this: when the Government makes policy changes which support an ally and fellow democracy, Jews are ultimately responsible and, therefore, bring upon themselves any repercussions from antisemites who take offence at those changes. Such an assertion would be laughable, if not for the chorus of disparate voices saying just that.”
How true.
Mark Borkowski, pres.
Mercantile Mergers & Acquisitions Corp.
I King Street West, Suite 714
Toronto, Ontario
M5H 1A1
(416) 368-8466 ext. 232
mark@mercantilema.com
http://www.mercantilemergersacquisitions.com
February 15th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
I think you’re on to something, here, but it’s something so twisted it can only come from a conscious attempt to dissemble. The rhetoric that supporting “the friend of my enemy” will somehow bring down the wrath of those already “the enemy of my enemy” is simply an unsophisticated attempt to sow the seeds of terror in the Canadian Jewish Community, and should be treated as the sick, twisted logic it is.
Unveiling the assertion that supporting Israel will somehow create backlash anti-semitism reveals the naked scare tactic of a bully. On a positive note, only people/organizations deeming themselves in a position of relative weakness and irrelevancy use tactics like this.
This logic will go the way of the dodo bird, but only if we speak out and call it by its true name. The last thing we should do is allow ourselves to be drawn into any so-called debate. There is no debate; only the brutish attempt to silence not only Jews in Canada, but all Canadians. I believe it’s called jihad by rhetoric.
I think the Harper government recognizes the inherent danger in undermining world democracies, whatever their ethnic background and/or make-up and in the subtler, yet more devasting damage that can be done (and was done for decades under Liberal rule) to the Canadian national psyche by not standing up for what is morally right.
It may take courage to reject appeasement as strategy, but mostly it takes clarity of thought.
I think Churchill said it best: “Appeasement is the art of ensuring the crocodile eats you last.”
February 15th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
My former MP colleagues from the House of Commons who claim to be supporters of Israel sometimes reveal that they are ‘NDPers’ or ‘Liberals’ first, then down the list in priority, supporters of Israel. In the past, these MPs such as Cotler and Neville have failed miserably to deal with their internal Party policies that have not been friendly to Israel. When the Liberals were previously in government, they were terrible in both policy and in government operations for Israel. They appear all too willing to excuse their own political Party, instead of standing up within their own ranks and set things right, or quit the Party. Since they appear to have chosen their Party interests of working to not offend anyone for votes, they have shown a willingess to compromise themselves when it comes to Israel.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Do I read you right to suggest MP Anita Neville is pandering to antisemites? Surely I have that wrong — we need to be strong and support the right policies — and kudos to the Conservatives for being strong on Israel (as are the Liberals — Israel is not and must not be a wedge issue). But seeing enemies among friends is counterproductive.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Good to see you back again Frank. The MP Neville & the CAF are indeed sadly correct in their conclusion between linking support for Israel with increased pressure on the Canadian Jews. As Canada shows support for Israel for all the good reasons you have pointed out, the Arabist/Islamist lobby react by raging at the system bolstered by blood libels from their old country, college campus activists, and from the Christian Church based on replacement theology & as a derivative palestinian liberation theology from groups like Sabeel. Not a pretty sight & as a “Christian” , I must offer my apologies. It is not logical but rather the notion that we people of the book must assume a dhimmitude role in our western world until the peace of Islam arrives at our shores. Then we convert or ……….
February 15th, 2010 at 8:52 pm
It is Islam that must be delegitimized as a protected “religion”. It, as classically practiced, is no more a religion than National Socialism or Communism (both of which, by the way, had many of the trappings of a religion*). The government must pass laws (before it is too late), in effect sedition laws, that have been promulgated in the US during times of war (as this IS), that will single out Islam as an enemy fifth column (which it is).
* I saw with my own eyes in the Tashkent (Uzbek USSR) airport in 1970, a sign that read:
“Lenin lived; Lenin lives; Lenin will live”.
February 15th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Here is the hypocrisy. Those who would harm us claim that their criticism of Israel is not linked to anti-Semitism. Then how do we get to the point where our support of Israel will inspire anti-Semitism in those same people? Is this not an admission that opinions about Israel and anti-Semitism are linked?
I will believe that the opponents of Israel are not anti-Semitic when they begin to make harsh, deserved criticisms of Israel’s enemies as well. I will believe that the opponents of Israel are not anti-Semitic when they can look us straight in the eye and say unequivocally that if Israel were a Muslim nation they would criticize her with the same conviction.
February 15th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Frank. We need you on that wall.
February 15th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Personally, I don’t like the term anti-semitism. I prefer Jew hatred.Anti-semitism refers to a particular type of Jew hatred based on the pseudo-science of race. “I’m not an anti-semite, I don’t even think of Jews as a people”. “I am not an anti-semite, I like Arabs.” (Vanessa Redgrave).
February 15th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
Frank, you have misnamed your article, for yours is no theory of anti-semitism, but rather just one more example of how anti-semitism manifests.
Further, you are confusing what should not be and what is.
Of course Harper’s cutting funding recently to Kairos and now re-directing funding to the Palestinians for specific purposes, by any reasoned logical measure should be no cause for an anti-semitic backlash in Canada as predicted by Neville or the CAF.
Nonetheless, you said it yourself:
“Such an assertion would be laughable, if not for the chorus of disparate voices saying just that.”
Once again, this kind of reaction from CAF, Neville and I am sure other disparate voices on both sides of the Israel vs. Palestinian war, calls for much better and effective pro-Israel and Defence Against anti-Semitism advocacy and activist strategies.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:08 am
This column is spot on! And kudos to B’nai Brith Canada for continuing to congratulate and support this government’s very positive and principled efforts. The moral equivalency espoused by previous governments always made me sick to my stomach - imagine if they took the same approach with our criminal justice system! I applaud this government’s efforts and I totally agree with this perfectly articulated post.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Thank you so much for that comment refuting one of the most idiotic suggestions I have ever read. Ms. Neville reminds me of some of the Jews in Germany prior to 1939. The ‘let’s not rock the boat’ attitude where Jews and other sane Germans were too scared to say what needed to be said out loud when they had a chance of being listened to. We better not call the police when the murderer comes to our door for fear that we might piss him off.
Is she really that dumb or was she coerced to come up with that policy from her higher ups in an attempt to criticize the Harper government at any cost?
February 16th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Frank you have said
“The demonization and delegitimization of the world’s only Jewish State amounts to antisemitism: it is the denial of the legitimate right of the Jewish people as a collective entity to self-determination in its own homeland in much the same way as Jews as individuals were denied basic human rights accorded to all others in the past.”…”… when the Government makes policy changes which support an ally and fellow democracy, Jews are ultimately responsible and, therefore, bring upon themselves any repercussions from antisemites who take offence at those changes…”
These observations are very damning and very true.However, I would like to illuminate that the new theory of antisemitism comes from the old theory of anti semitism. The basis of these views is the antisemetic conspiracy theory that the Jews have too much power and run the world already and therefore try to get their own interests furthered at evryones’ expense.I think that is the underlying lie that these scare tactics that masquerade as a theory are based on.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:32 am
Meyse says “it is Islam that must be delegitimized as a protected “religion”. It, as classically practiced, is no more a religion than National Socialism or Communism”.
It is hard to see how anyone can deny Islam is a religion — it isn’t my religion but to suggest it is the same as National Socialism or Communism is just nonsense. Canadian Muslims have (and must have) the same right to practice their faith as Canadian Christians and Jews. And to slander their faith is most unfair, unhelplful and, dare I say it, unCanadian.
March 9th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
I think if you were to try to counter this new theory you should also include the fact that it was the British mandate in creation of Israel which brought the reaction that they ,as white suprememacists themselves in the colonized countries, knew it would. I really believe that the British were trying to create a force to keep the Muslim countries down USING the Israelis _divide and rule. Jews have every right to expect a homeland but have to weigh whether they 1) want to be used this way and 2) would want to continue to have losses. I am once again saying that losses of human life and peace of mind arent worth a piece of land not that the Israelis brought this on themselves.
June 30th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
This leaves only one question: how in good conscience can Irwin Cotler still associate himself with the Liberals?
July 2nd, 2010 at 5:21 pm
I cannot think of any case where appeasement has produced any useful
result for the appeaser. The idea that we should not speak out and take action against Jew haters because this may produce more Jew hatred is not
just illogical - it is absurd.