Why such a surge of worldwide antisemitism
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Why such a surge of worldwide antisemitism
by ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Israpundit
Why are so many of the grandchildren of Nazis and Nazi collaborators who brought us the Holocaust once again declaring war on the Jews?
Why have we seen such an increase in antisemitism and irrationally virulent anti-Zionism in Western Europe?
To answer these questions, a myth must first be exposed. That myth is the one perpetrated by the French, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Swiss, the Belgians, the Austrians, and many other western Europeans: namely that the Holocaust was solely the work of German Nazis aided perhaps by some Polish, Ukrainian, Latvian, Lithuanian, and Estonian collaborators.
False.
The Holocaust was perpetrated by Europeans: by Nazi sympathizers and collaborators among the French, Dutch, Norwegians, Swiss, Belgians, Austrians and other Europeans, both Western and Eastern.
If the French government had not deported to the death camps more Jews than their German occupiers asked for; if so many Dutch and Belgian citizens and government officials had not cooperated in the roundup of Jews; if so many Norwegians had not supported Quisling; if Swiss government officials and bankers had not exploited Jews; if Austria had not been more Nazi than the Nazis, the Holocaust would not have had so many Jewish victims.
In light of the widespread European complicity in the destruction of European Jewry, the pervasive anti-Semitism and irrationally hateful anti-Zionism that has recently surfaced throughout Western Europe toward Israel should surprise no one.
“Oh no,” we hear from European apologists. “This is different. We don’t hate the Jews. We only hate their nation-state. Moreover, the Nazis were right-wing. We are left-wing, so we can’t be anti-Semites.”
Nonsense.
The hard left has a history of anti-Semitism as deep and enduring as the hard right. The line from Voltaire to Karl Marx, to Levrenti Beria, to Robert Faurisson, to today’s hard-left Israel bashers is as straight as the line from Wilhelm Mars to the persecutors of Alfred Dreyfus to Hitler.
The Jews of Europe have always been crushed between the Black and the Red – victims of extremism whether it be the ultra-nationalism of Khmelnitsky to the ultra-anti-Semitism of Stalin.
“But some of the most strident anti-Zionists are Jews, such as Norman Finkelstein and even Israelis such as Gilad Atzmon. Surely they can’t be anti-Semites?”
Why not? Gertrude Stein and Alice Toklas collaborated with the Gestapo. Atzmon, a hard leftist, describes himself as a proud self-hating Jew and admits that his ideas derive from a notorious anti-Semite.
He denies that the Holocaust is historically proved but he believes that Jews may well have killed Christian children to use their blood to bake Passover matzah. And he thinks it’s “rational” to burn down synagogues.
Finkelstein believes in an international Jewish conspiracy that includes Steven Spielberg, Leon Uris, Eli Wiesel, and Andrew Lloyd Webber!
“But Israel is doing bad things to the Palestinians,” the European apologists insist, “and we are sensitive to the plight of the underdog.”
No, you’re not! Where are your demonstrations on behalf of the oppressed Tibetans, Georgians, Syrians, Armenians, Kurds, or even Ukrainians? Where are your BDS movements against the Chinese, the Russians, the Cubans, the Turks, or the Assad regime?
Only the Palestinians, only Israel? Why? Not because the Palestinians are more oppressed than these and other groups.
Only because their alleged oppressors are Jews and the nation-state of the Jews. Would there be demonstrations and BDS campaigns on behalf of the Palestinians if they were oppressed by Jordan or Egypt?
Oh, wait! The Palestinians were oppressed by Egypt and Jordan… Gaza was an open-air prison between 1948 and 1967, when Egypt was the occupying power. And remember Black September, when Jordan killed more Palestinians than Israel did in a century? I don’t remember any demonstration or BDS campaigns — because there weren’t any.
When Arabs occupy or kill Arabs, Europeans go ho-hum. But when Israel opens a soda factory in Maale Adumim, which even the Palestinian leadership acknowledges will remain part of Israel in any peace deal, Oxfam parts ways with Scarlett Johansson for advertising a soda company that employs hundreds of Palestinians.
Keep in mind that Oxfam has provided “aid and material support” to two anti-Israel terrorist groups, according to the Tel Aviv-based Israeli Law Group.
The hypocrisy of so many hard-left western Europeans would be staggering if it were not so predictable based on the sordid history of Western Europe’s treatment of the Jews.
Even England, which was on the right side of the war against Nazism, has a long history of anti-Semitism, beginning with the expulsion of the Jews in 1290 to the notorious White Paper of 1939, which prevented the Jews of Europe from seeking asylum from the Nazis in British-mandated Palestine… And Ireland, which vacillated in the war against Hitler, boasts some of the most virulent anti-Israel rhetoric.
The simple reality is that one cannot understand the current western European left-wing war against the nation-state of the Jewish people without first acknowledging the long-term European war against the Jewish people themselves.
Theodore Herzl understood the pervasiveness and irrationality of European anti-Semitism, which led him to the conclusion that the only solution to Europe’s Jewish problem was for European Jews to leave that bastion of Jew hatred and return to their original homeland, which is now the State of Israel.
None of this is to deny Israel’s imperfections or the criticism it justly deserves for some of its policies. But these imperfections and deserved criticism cannot even begin to explain, much less justify, the disproportionate hatred directed against the only nation-state of the Jewish people and the disproportionate silence regarding the far greater imperfections and deserved criticism of other nations and groups including the Palestinians.
Nor is this to deny that many western European individuals and some western European countries have refused to succumb to the hatred against the Jews or their state. The Czech Republic comes to mind. But far too many western Europeans are as irrational in their hatred toward Israel as their for-bearers were in their hatred toward their Jewish neighbors.
As author Amos Oz once aptly observed: the walls of his grandparents’ Europe were covered with graffiti saying, “Jews, go to Palestine.” Now they say, “Jews, get out of Palestine,” by which is meant Israel.
Who do these western European bigots think they’re fooling? Only fools who want to be fooled in the interest of denying that they are manifesting new variations on their grandparents’ old biases.
Any objective person with an open mind, open eyes, and an open heart must see the double standard being applied to the nation-state of the Jewish people. Many doing so are the grandchildren of those who lethally applied a double standard to the Jews of Europe in the 1930s and 1940s.
For shame!
Article is LOCKED by moderator [smarty_function_ntUser_get_name: user_id or profile_id parameter required]
Who is online
26 visitors
Just some fodder for the Israel-bashers and the Dershowitz-bashers (Oh, and the Buzz-bashers as well).
One clarification I would make. Dershowitz' implied acceptance of the falsehood that Israel is “oppressing” the Palestinians is false. Not only was the Israeli “occupation” forced on Israel by Arab aggression, but it was the most benevolent occupation in human history, allowing the “occupied” Palestinians an economic growth rate equal to that of China, and raising the standard of living of people who had lived in desperate poverty for centuries to one near the standard of contemporary Europeans. The ‘oppression” of the Palestinians by Israel is a lie,
Buzz, it is well known to those who pay attention, it is the goal of most who surround Israel to drive them in to the sea. This is an undeniable fact. Yes and any re-writing of reality will not change that.
It is also, a well known fact, those who wish to drive Israel in to the sea fail miserably in head on confrontations.
Therefore the strategy has changed and the easily duped western media falls for it every time, hook, line and sinker.
These people who wish to drive Israel in to the sea use their idiot Palestinian proxies to sacrifice their children (for which they are richly rewarded) in their on going war of propaganda, which again, the easily duped western media laps up like sweet creme.
Yes, it really is that simple.
Steve Bannon is in Europe. This is the answer to the question.
This has been going on for a lot longer than trumps term in office.
Prior to trump programs were in place to help French Jews to move to Israel to avoid growing resentment toward them.
Did not imply that this is new. However, the bloodshed has increased and the vile nature of anti-Semitism is appearing in places it never has before---at least in recent memory.
And. Steve Bannon is in Europe. Check out what he is doing and with whom he is keeping company.
True on all accounts. My point is the trend was in place.
Jesus effen christ----check out what the eff Bannon is doing. Apologists are so effen lazy.
His antisemitism has long been known, and he seems to be organizing the ultra-right parties of Europe for the EU vote. Hopefully he is not respected by the majority there. The rise in antisemitism was not caused by him, but he is bound to cash in on its rise to further his own nefarious doings. In other words, he is not relevant to what's been happening over the years, but he is the type of person who will take advantage of it.
What does that have to do with Trump?
I get the sense at times we are trying our best to relive the 1930s all over again. Deja Vous all over again.
And should we check out what Jimmy Carter has done in weaponizing the left?
Bullseye, but it's more than just laziness. Spoiler alert: She will never check out what Bannon is up to because of an extreme partisan aversion to facts.
Hysterical.
He's very fond of Victor Orbán, the Hungarian president, who is also very fond of using antisemitic tropes to hold power.
Jews in Germany are told not to wear their kippahs in public.
Antisemitism rising sharply across Europe, latest figures show
France reports 74% rise in offences against Jews and Germany records 60% surge in violent attacks
Of course it is tit for tat.
Everyone knows a garb such as a niqaab, etc. which completely hides someones identity is exactly the same as kippah which hides someones bald spot.
Some fellas bald spots are pretty dangerous you know.
Hatred on the grounds of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ... are all on the rise.
We have a President who actively stokes the fires.
We have "religious leaders" who preach hate.
Why would hatred not be on the rise?
Maybe it's time for another world-wide flood. Whose family will God save this time, along with the beasts of the Earth who seem to be more civilized than Man?
Sadly, I do not believe God to be capable of evil.
Killing billions of people is about as evil as it gets...
If God is omniscient and omnipotent and He is our Father, our King, how could he allow the massive murder and destruction of his "children" if he is not either evil or has forgotten that we exist?
1 A God who intervenes in the world is incompatible with free will.
2 A God who is good cannot make us Her puppets.
3 Therefore God does not intervene in the world.
4 Therefore suffering is not God's doing.
No, we have a political party that stokes those fires....the democrats.
Led by Omar and Tlaib and supported by Pelosi and AOC.
Unlike Shitbag supporters who actually do the murders.
I wouldn't bring Trump into the picture when there are outspoken antisemitic congresspersons in and protected by the Democratic party, supporters of BDS which Trudeau and other world leaders have already pointed out are antisemitic organizations.
Ambient hate is Trump’s doing.
I agree !
Anything Trump likes, the "Left" hates !
Well, I don't like racists and liars, don't like people who use hate to further their own power, don't like murderous dictators......Trump does. So do we assume the opposite to be true for Trumpers? Everything Trump says and does the 'right' loves ?
Maybe Trump IS a cause of the rise of antisemitism in America, but the article is about Europe, and I doubt that he caused THAT increase.
Why such a surge of worldwide antisemitism
Another notion that I foolishly thought was in our rear view mirror.
The Jewish folks ( along with many others) have been taking a beating for over two thousand years, time to give them a break and if one really has to, try picking on someone else for at least a little while.
Any suggestions?
There are none. Troubling is that either ultra right or ultra left are taking control in Europe. Here, it's been around but quiet. Now they have come out from the shadows.
Buzz,
I read the article and while I agree with most of it, I have to say that Dershowitz got it wrong about Finkelstein. Finkelstein is actually anti BDS and calls them a cult and says Israel has the legal right to exist. So I would like proof of the further allegations against him. Believe me, I am not a fan of him, but I have videos actually Finkelstein tearing apart BDS leadership.
Perrie, I'd love to get your "take" on this article:
I just finished reading the article. I think that Trump has sent a very mixed message about Jews. While I don't think that personally, he is an antisemite, I think he is aware that some of his base is, and so has not taken a stronger stance of events like Charlottesville. This lack of strong leadership in this regard has lead the antisemites to feel free to express themselves. They feel there will be no punishment for their actions.
Aside from the fact that Trump's son-in-law is Jewish and that Trump might just be the best friend Israel ever had, what are these mixed signals you are seeing from Trump?
I think he is aware that some of his base is
Please don't do that.
so has not taken a stronger stance of events like Charlottesville.
What has Charlottesville got to do with anti-Semitism. It was about statues, was it not. Trump said there were good people on both sides - OF THE STATUE CONTROVERSY! Right?
This lack of strong leadership in this regard has lead the antisemites to feel free to express themselves.
What should he do? Go out and shoot every anti-Semite, starting with the two in the House of Representatives????
They feel there will be no punishment for their actions.
There aren't any, but you are blaming the wrong people.
That's like saying some of my best friends are Jews. It doesn't mean anything unless you take a stand and saying that some of the people in Charlottesville were "fine people" while not saying we have no time for neo-Nazis is sending a bad message. But yes, he is a friend to Israel. It does help that the evangelicals also want that, and they are part of his base.
Please don't do what? Admit that among his base there are some hateful people. Here I will make you feel better. Among some of the left side of the democratic party are some hateful people. Let's not be blind to what is going on.
Vic, you have to be kidding. Did you not see the nights riots. Do I need to show you videos? It might have been billed as being about the statues, but that is NOT what happened. It became about Jews and Blacks.
Come on Vic. He needed to say after Charlottesville that there is no room for antisemitism and he didn't. This reminds me of when Obama couldn't say, Isalmaic terrorist. I bet you were all over him for that, right? I am fair here. You seem to forget that I don't have a dog in this fight.
"I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”
Pretty clear message meant to ensure the "fine people" he was talking about (those in favor of not destroying statues), shouldn't be mixed in with neo-Nazis, who he ambiguously denounces..
Perrie, I hope I didn't come on too strong.
If there was a time or place for someone to condemn anti-Semitism it was for Nancy Pelosi to condemn the anti-Semitic remarks coming from freshmen members of her own party. She wouldn't do it. Instead she condemned "all hatred", so as to placate them. That's who is to blame.
Vic, you have to be kidding. Did you not see the nights riots. Do I need to show you videos? It might have been billed as being about the statues, but that is NOT what happened. It became about Jews and Blacks.
Yup, saw who came out, the Klan vs antifa. That being said, the issue at hand was statues. Trump commented on statues. Trump also later condemned the Klan, for about the millionth time! I guess it's never good enough.
This reminds me of when Obama couldn't say, Isalmaic terrorist. I bet you were all over him for that, right?
You bet I was. Obama had the blood on his hands. A lot of dead cops because of him!
I am fair here.
Pelosi and her freshmen members are still the elephant in the room.
Sean, he said that after the fact. Not in his first reaction to what happened. Politicians are famous for walking back comments when they see the reaction they get. Should we forgive Omar for walking back her comments? I think not.
That should be "unambiguously". Big difference there.
He said that in the same press conference he made the "fine people" remark that he gets slandered with. It's literally seconds after he said "fine people." There was no time for a public reaction. It wasn't made the next day because he was upset about how people reacted to the "fine people" statement.
"and you had some very bad people in that group," its also interesting how this part of the statement that immediately prefaces the "fine people" is never mentioned.
Which is not the same thing.
[deleted]
It's where a group of "some very fine" (per Trump) young Nazis paraded carrying torches and shouting "Jews Will Not Replace Us" --that's what it's got to do with antisemitism.
Maybe stop referring to them as "very fine people" and a year later when asked if he'd like to amend that description actually doubled down and called it a "perfect" comment.
Open your eyes and ears, vic.
What do you mean? Don't be afraid......Say it
Vic, I totally agree. As I have said, there is a problem coming from extreme parts of both parties.
Sorry, the night before there was no Antifa. It was the next day. And it was an innocent person killed by a neo-Nazi. And Trump only condemned the Klan after the reaction about his fine people comment, a day later... once.
That has nothing to do with Islamic terrorist, and while I am not a fan of Obama's, I don't see him as having blood on his hands. That would be like saying Trump has blood on his hands. Neither is responsible for other people's actions. They were responsible for giving leeway to them happening.
To some extent. But this is coming from both extreme sides and you seem to want to ignore that.
Meaning, she was on the mark and it made you uncomfortable. Not that hard to understand.
It's because that part of his statement completely undermined what came before and he just couldn't bring himself to condemn all of the little nazis.
Sean, you crack me up. Was it OK for Obama to say extremists and never say Islamic terrorist? I do recall you having an issue with it. To say: "and you had some very bad people in that group,", is not saying what they were. They were KKK and Neo Nazis. Bad people is a joke. Those bad people killed a girl.
She did do that and from either ignorance or political hatred you don't acknowledge that tells us just how committed you are to only seeing one side of every issue. Here's Pelosi's statement about what Omar said but I have no doubt you'll continue to deny it happened:
And Omar did apologize.
Vic, thanks for venting all those extremist views (not to mention false accusations)--not that we didn't know you had them but to see them all condensed like that is very helpful.
s it OK for Obama to say extremists and never say Islamic terrorist?
If i attacked Obama for, say, claiming the Paris attacks were "extremist acts" while ignoring that 5 seconds later Obama said that Islamic extremism must be condemned, you'd have a point.
is not saying what they were.
What part of the "Neo nazis and white nationalists should be condemned totally" statement is not identifying who they were?.
Your whole argument depends on isolating one clause in a press conference and ignoring what he said right before and right after in an off the cuff press conference.
There was no before comment Sean. There was an after comment and that doesn't count.
He did eagerly pick up on the lie that George Soros was paying for the migrant caravans coming to the US border from Central America:
Shitbag often uses this way of propagating lies by atrtibuting them to "a lot of people."
There was no before comment Sean. There was an after comment and that doesn't coun
Fine. You believe in taking statements out of context, I believe in judging clauses of sentences in the context of the entire statement they were made.
I hope you don't ever touch upon a subject involving Nazis without including a full throated denunciation in every single sentence that Nazis or the KKK might be relevant.
No, I believe in telling the truth and not some version of it. Here let me put it another way. Do you believe Omar when she walked back her comments? I think not.
Don't lecture me about Nazis. When half of your family died at their hands, like my mother's family did, then you can talk.
It may have started that way. But there were guys there yelling "Jews will not replace us." So whatever it was about at the outset, it came to be about antisemitism.
How many have been murdered by antifa over the last decade?
How many have been murdered by neo-fascists over the last decade?
Both sides do it?
You are taking a single clause in the middle of a press conference while ignoring his specific denunciation of Nazis literally SECONDS later. How in the world you think that compares to a issuing a prepared statement days later is beyond me.
Do you require anyone else in the world to specifically list how bad Nazis are in every single sentence they utter in which Nazis might be relevant?
A couple weeks ago on this site i wrote that Liz Cheney misrepresented what Rep Tlaib said about thinking about the Holocaust gave her a calming feeling. You, and others, who take the "fine people" fragment out of the context of Trump's larger remarks are doing the same thing Liz Cheney did.
Don't lecture me about Nazis
I'm discussing how you favor taking parts of a sentence out of context to condemn a speaker while ignoring the obvious meaning of the statement as a whole.
Bothsiderists never have to actually use facts, Bob.
Not even close, Sean. A year and a half later when asked about his original comments, Shitbag more than doubled down on them by calling them "perfect:"
Trump says he answered Charlottesville questions 'perfectly'
Could it be that the reason Shitbag's supporters keep defending his disgusting comments is they refuse to keep track of them?
There was a school shooting by left wing terrorists just the other week Bob.
I've been wondering where your homages to Kendrick Castillo are.
Nice try there.
Don't ignore the last century. As bad as the extreme right was with close to 70 million bloody deaths, the extreme left can easily claim an additional 30 million.
Extremists. hmmm?
Might want to think that through.
It isn't slander is he said it Sean.
Secondly, I can't help but wonder about these 'fine people' that Trump touted. These alleged 'fine people' gathered amongst hundreds of neo-Nazis and white supremacists, chanting anti-semantic hate and STAYED and MARCHED with them.
I've been to a protest or two in my life and no matter how worthy the cause, I sure as hell wouldn't stand or march amongst an armed group that I didn't agree with, I would have walked away. IMHO, that's what most 'fine people' would do too.
There were many actual 'fine people' in Charlottesville that Saturday. If you want to read about some of them, read this:
https://reformjudaism.org/blog/2017/08/14/charlottesville-local-jewish-community-presses?utm_source=Share&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=BlogPost&utm_content=Zimmerman
More at the link.
Bob asked about Antifa.
Why the strawman?
Let me be more precise: in America...
You're amazing, Sean.
That is not a compliment.
If you want to take an isolationists view, which, really is a non-starter these days and has been for a long while, you might as well take the view the century is far from over.
You don't think that what has happened in America is what is most significant for Americans?
You don't think what happens and has happened overseas is significant for Americans?
Never mind the fact the title of this article is:
Yes, of course. I think church bombings in America are far more significant for the state of American society than things that happen elsewhere.
No doubt, that is horribly significant and only one of many things we need to address on our shores here.
I also find such things as ones close relative come home from school to see every one of their family members dead with their brains blown out and scattered all over the house because they didn't lean far enough in one political direction. Then to learn they were next in line. Thank god he got out of that situation otherwise I would not be here today.
Funny thing he experienced a very similar thing right on his own porch from members of a foreign political party from the exact opposite side of the political spectrum threaten his family. Right of his front porch. He dispatched them. Right then and there. They flew back to the fatherland in coffins. But they came from some political upheaval thousands of miles away. Who cares? Right?
Extremists.
What are they good for? Absolutely nothing.
Endless stories about wars we have been involved in, because somebody is doing something, somewhere on of other side of the world.
How isolated are we?
Perrie, I'd love to get your "take" on this article:
I did above.
Some mix up there. Not my comment. But somehow my comment got reposted. I don't think I did that or if I did I don't know how I did so.
Nonsense, indeed, Alan. Blatantly reducing your "case" to simplistic and threadbare cant undermines whatever point you hoped to make. Labelling any opposition to what the Israeli government does politically as "hating their nation-state" would mean accusing large blocs of Jews in the US, Europe and even Israel who oppose the policies of the Netanyahu government of "hating" the state of Israel. Of course, it's politically expedient to call anyone opposing you or that government "anti-semitic" but it's not just false but dangerous. It gives comfort to the ultra-right extremes of anti-semitism as expressed in this country by the mass synagogue killings in Poway and Pittsburgh and the targeting of Democrats, particularly those who are Jewish, with pipe bombs from someone who also was an avid supporter of our current sick excuse for a president. And, of course, we see some of those types on this site who pick out liberal Jews right here for their viciously antisemitic slurs.
I'll submit that holding Israel above criticism by declaring such criticism to be antisemitic actually fuels antisemitism.
AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN members of this site make it necessary to print a permanent banner at the top of the Front Page that says "FAIR CRITICISM OF ISRAEL, THAT WHICH DOES NOT HOLD IT TO A DOUBLE STANDARD, IS NOT ANTISEMITISM" I WILL REPEAT IT AGAIN FOR THOSE WHO ARE SLOW TO UNDERSTAND.
"FAIR CRITICISM OF ISRAEL, THAT WHICH DOES NOT HOLD IT TO A DOUBLE STANDARD, IS NOT ANTISEMITISM"
BTW, although Netanyahu claims he "won" the recently election, the Knesset is so fractured that even despite (or perhaps because of) wooing of two very violently extremist political elements into his coalition, he's been unable to put together a government:
Did Netanyahu Really Win the Election? Maybe Not — and Certainly Not Yet
It was bullshit, Atheist. She has quite a history of saying such remarks.
And here is the amazing thing about her.
In the Sudan, where her family is from, they rape women, kill gays, do female circumcisions, kill Christians and women are second class citizens, yet she never addresses that. Israel is the country she focuses on about human rights. That is antisemitism at its best.
Sources?
Actually her family fled Somalia when she was 8 years old. But I hope you're not seriously holding her responsible for what Sudan is doing now particularly since that was obviously that's what she and her family were trying to escape from in Somalia. And it's not accurate to say she hasn't commented on conditions in Sudan. It was easy to find this very recent comment but I can look for more if you really need me to:
Which is just as bad as the Sudan. Of course, I don't hold her responsible for what is going on there, but if she is going to lecture about human rights, I think she should start with where she came from, where there are no human rights. But she won't because it doesn't fit her agenda.
And, what is it exactly that you think she should be doing? I don't think she's weak on human rights which is what got her in trouble for defending Palestinian rights, wasn't it ?
I have decided to permanently lock this article for two reasons. First of all, I think it has had sufficient exposure and time for the attitudes of members to be posted, and now it has come down to simply arguments between members, and secondly, for a reason that only Perrie and another member are aware of, which was and is my own choice, I am prevented from providing reply arguments to many of the comments that have been made.