Reader Post: Anti-Zionism And Antisemitism Are One And The Same

octopus boatI’ve had some disagreements over the past couple of days on whether or not anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism. Those of you who know me, already know my answer. What I want to do here is explain why.

First thing’s first, let’s get the definitions out of the way so that we may stymie any possible confusion that might result from this post. Zionism is the belief that Jews have a fundamental legal and moral right for self-determination in Israel, grounded in principles of indigenous rights (Jews being indigenous to Israel), international law, and a firm belief in both national freedom and self-defense for a globally persecuted ethnic minority. Irshad Manji once compared it to affirmative action, due to its favoring of Jewish refugees in a world where Jews are especially vulnerable. More importantly, it elevates us to an equal level of power and autonomy in relation to other ethnic groups, barring those who have not yet achieved independence (e.g. Kurds, Balochi, Yazidis, etc). In contrast, anti-Zionists hold that we have no such rights. In general, they believe that Israel’s re-establishment was a “crime”, and that we are entitled only to full civil rights (and in many cases, not even that) in our diaspora countries of residence, or under a “binational” (read: Arab majority) state of Palestine.

So now you might be asking “why is this antisemitic”? There are many reasons, but let’s start with the most obvious one: it is discriminatory. If you maintain that one group should be deprived of fundamental civil rights, while simultaneously accepting that other groups can and should have these rights, that is discrimination. And we have a word for discrimination against Jews: antisemitism. This is pretty basic. For any non-Jewish group (more on Jewish anti-Zionism later) to agitate against Jews having the same political rights that they wouldn’t dare question for any other group is tantamount to an expression of privilege. As a matter of fact, it is pedagogically much more helpful to view the issue of anti-Zionism as antisemitism through the lens of privilege, rather than conscious malice or hatred.

Secondly, anti-Zionism exhibits a callous indifference, if not outright hostility, to the legitimate existential concerns of our people. As a political movement, Zionism arose in the 19th century when it became clear to Jews in diaspora that the post-Enlightenment guarantees of “equality” were little more than empty promises. The declining relevance of Christianity and the prevalence of secular, egalitarian values in the West had, in the end, proven ineffective against antisemitism, which by that point had been so deeply baked into European/Western culture that it no longer needed the incitement and provocations of men to survive. This colossal hatred had taken on a life of its own.

And at no point did this become clearer to us than during the Second World War, when the rest of the world (save for a few notable exceptions) heartlessly closed its doors to Jews who were desperate to flee the Nazis. Instead, they were either indifferent to the Nazi’s extermination program, or they were actively supportive of it and all too eager to join in on the fun. In the years immediately following the Holocaust, it had become clear to just about everybody that we needed our own state back. It was (and still is) our only guarantee that we will have somewhere to go when things get bad, but this means very little to anti-Zionists, who are content in restoring us to permanent minority status, effectively robbing us of our ability to protect ourselves and control our own fate. One does not need to be a wife-beater to believe that a woman’s place is in the kitchen.

Lastly, and most importantly, anti-Zionism is contingent on the acceptance of myths and falsehoods directed against the Jewish state, or the Jewish people as a whole. Those who are familiar with the history of antisemitism will know that anti-Jewish incitement based on defamation and libels is nothing new. This is how antisemitism has worked for generations. The Jewish people have been accused of everything from killing God, to drinking the blood of white babies, to controlling the world via a vast global conspiracy, you name it. Similarly, the accusations against the Jewish STATE run the gamut from colonialism, to genocide, to apartheid, to organ harvesting, etc. And as always, these accusations are all baseless, stemming largely from hearsay or biased/inaccurate media reporting. In fact, many of them are simply updated blood libels and stereotypes from the glory days of antisemitism in ancient, medieval, and post-medieval Europe. And of course, it’s one thing if some naive, hapless kid is exposed to these lies and doesn’t know any better, but it’s another thing when these lies are exposed for what they are and this same person insists on repeating them anyway. That’s when we can safely say they have a Jewish problem.

For Jews who self-identify as anti-Zionists, it is more complicated. Jewish anti-Zionists, unlike their non-Jewish counterparts, are usually motivated by fear, naivety, and/or a desire for acceptance, especially by their host countries or their own social circle. And Zionism, with its emphasis on Jewish nationhood, independence, and ethnic origins in the Middle East, spits directly in the face of the oft-repeated notion that Jews are merely Poles, Russians, Germans, or Americans of a “different faith”. Many (if not the vast majority) anti-Zionist Jews cling steadfast to the belief that complete assimilation into their host countries will eventually eliminate antisemitism (the Holocaust ultimately proved them wrong), and Zionism only gets in the way of that. There are other reasons for Jewish anti-Zionism, including internalized Christian propaganda (in the case of NK and Satmar) or even simple ignorance, but appeasement is the most common. The fact that Jewish antisemites have existed throughout most of our history (going all the way back to Josephus) has not stopped non-Jewish anti-Zionists from holding them up as “proof” that the ideology on offer is not racist.

Of course, you can protest as much as you’d like about how you “don’t hate Jews, just Zionists”, or how you are “also a Semite”. These are the typical reactions of people who are confronted with their privilege. Needless to say, it’s not good enough for me. It shouldn’t be good enough for ANY self-respecting minority. As a Jew, I demand equal treatment. I will not settle for anything less, because my civil rights and my humanity are not up for negotiation. Historically, we WERE expected to settle for social and/or legal inequality, if it meant guaranteeing our safety. But we are no longer willing to do that, and this is what incenses so many people, especially in the Arab world (where Jews were traditionally guaranteed “protection” insofar as they accepted legal and social inferiority). If you do not respect our rights, our indigenous identity, or our history, you are an enemy of our people. And more importantly, you are MY enemy, and you can be damned sure that I will treat you like one.

23 thoughts on “Reader Post: Anti-Zionism And Antisemitism Are One And The Same”

  1. I do not understand why you write “including internalized Christian propaganda (in the case of NK and Satmar)”.

    First, it must be clarified, there are really three groups you have in mind, Satmar, Neturei Karta, and ‘a dozen or two psychopaths who call themselves Neturei Karta and who are ostracized by Neturei Karta themselves’.
    This distinction must be clear. Those guys who hug Arafat, go to Iranian Holocaust denial events, etc. etc. represent nobody but their own, tiny religion of hate, and are shunned by everybody else in the Jewish people.
    In contrast, Satmar bases its anti-Zionism in a purely theological sense, saying in essence “according to our reading of the sources, it is wrong to found a secular state in the Holy Land, and we must wait for the Mashicah to come”.
    But, let it be clear, that doesn’t mean Satmar doesn’t love its fellow Jews. In fact, the Rebbe of Satmar famously raised money for the IDF during the 1973 war (if I recall correctly). He appreciated the difference between opposing the secular State as a principle, and the practicalities of the safety of the Jews who lived there.
    Neturei Karta is an offshoot of Satmar in this way. They are more “extreme”, though I admit the fine details of how are not clear to me.
    As part of this, Neturei Karta (and I think Satmar too) don’t take any money from the government of Israel. They have integrity, whether or not you and I agree with them overall. (And yes, we all know stories about wicked individuals, but every group has those, so it’s not relevant to our discussion.)
    The dozen nutcases, meanwhile, is a cult of hate, and have been labeled personae non gratae by even Neturei Karta itself.

    With all of that said, why do you indeed attribute any of this to “internalized Christian propaganda”? The nutcases just hate other Jews, and pull any and all anti-Semitic material to their vile cause. They took the “anti-Zionism” of Satmar and twisted it into a new “religion” of pure hate. It’s still not an issue of internalized Christianity.

    1. And as a Christian I am continually astounded as to how there could be any theological argument at all to oppose Zionism or support Jew hatred.

      The only convincing explanation I can see for over a thousand years of cumulative cross-cultural Jew hatred is that wiping out the Jewish people has to be Satan’s top priority.

      1. So, essentialy, you are admitting you don’t understand where the nutcases are coming from, so you assume it came out of Christianity. OK, fine. I don’t really get those guys either.

        But make sure you understand there’s two kinds of “anti-Zionism”. There’s the kind you intelligently described, which is based in bigotry against Jews, either from ignorance or hatred. To this kind, even Satmar and the real Neturei Karta are equally opposed.

        The other kind is a sort of internal, Jewish, clinical anti-Zionism. It shares nothing with the first kind except in name only. It opposes the secular State of Israel insofar as it is insufficiently faithful to the ancient, religious traditions of the Jewish people. It is a reading of scripture and the Jewish oral tradition that says, “we have no right to found a State before the mashiah, and/or especially not a secular State on Holy soil”. This surely you can understand at least abstractly.

        The nutcases, meanwhile, sign on to the hateful kind with gusto. I cannot explain how that makes sense to them. I can confidently say, however, that historically it started as the clinical type of anti-Zionism, and somehow mutated into the hatred kind. How they reconcile that in their heads is a mystery to me too.

        1. Hmm. Given the “we have no right” argument from Jewish religious grounds, surely there are only two other logical possibilities for religious anti-Zionist Jews:

          1) they must concede this holy ground’s statehood to Islam, an entire culture based on the idea of violating all the Ten Statements given to Moses.
          2) they must concede this holy ground’s statehood to less traditionally religious Jews who will allow the more religious Jews to live there, and keep the jihadist lunatics out – on the basis that they are the only other people who want the land.

          So obvious is the solution to this dilemma that I suspect that madness prevails in those who do not see it.

          1. Well, you need to understand this theological debate dates from before the State of Israel as such existed. Today, it’s much less relevant. Nobody (except the hateful nutcases, or the occasional ignorant idiot) would suggest we surrender to the genocidal Arabs/Muslims today.
            Now, today, everybody more-or-less accepts the existence of the State of Israel, and the only debate left (among the clinical anti-Zionists) is the question of “to what degree do we participate in the State’s institutions?”. Some don’t participate at all (including refusing even to vote), some participate (including having their own political parties to advance their interests, but refuse to take top-level posts as that would constitute being accomplices of the secular state). Questions like, do they go to the Army or not? Etc.
            The rest of religious Jews meanwhile accept the State for better or worse, and are Zionists.
            So, in essence, everybody does your “Possibility 2” today.
            But again, the article (as I now notice you are not the author responding to me) brought up Satmar and Neturei Karta, and I want to make clear that their “anti-Zionism” is quite Zionistic, in fact, relative to the hateful anti-Zionism we see across the world. It’s a confusion of terms.

            1. Ha ha, no, I am not the author. An interesting series of points you bring up, but in the grand scale of things, I suppose Jewish religious anti-Zionism is a single honeybee’s sting, compared to the ethnic anti-Zionism wasps’ nest.

              1. Let me rather say it this way. Legitimate religiously Jewish “anti-Zionism” versus secular Zionism is a debate within the hive about how the honey is supposed to taste. Both sets of bees have a sweet end goal in mind, in theory.
                Worldwide anti-Zionism is an outsider’s debate about whether to smoke out the hive and give half of the hive away to bears, or just poison the hive. Some Jews hook up to that one, too, for some reason.

          2. ahad_ha_amoratsim

            Your two choices assume a pragmatic approach that is not an option for those who see their position as mandated by G*d. They would tell you there is a third approach:
            3) Let G*d worry about who controls this holy ground, which He does whether we like it or not, and reconcile ourselves to the fact that — as He foretold — we will not control it until He sends Mashiach, at which time — as He foretold — we will again have sovereignty over the land that He promises us, and that is ours only by virtue of that promise, and subject to all the conditions that promise entails.

            1. So in other words, concede it to whoever on Earth wants it and has the resources and resolve to acquire it – ie. options 1 and 2.

    2. ahad_ha_amoratsim

      ‘a dozen or two psychopaths who call themselves Neturei Karta and who are ostracized by Neturei Karta themselves’. — this is nearly always overlooked, and needs to be brought to people’s attention again and again.

  2. Jews are conscious of being a minority. Jewish anti-Zionism is simply Jewish acquiescence to powerless, insecurity and domination by a non-Jewish majority, with the Jewish fate ultimately controlled by that majority.

    Non-Jewish anti-Zionists are not even content to allow Jews to survive as a minority. They simply want to wipe out the Jewish people, period.

    It follows that the only guarantee of Jewish survival in an increasingly hostile world is Israel. Jews can live on their own terms there without having to be at the mercy of others, whether they wish them good or ill.

    And if Jews are ultimately to die, its better for them to die standing on their feet than living in degraded subjugation as a slave. The Jewish people will never go back to the latter condition, to the twilight of their existence.

    Anti-Zionists, like other anti-Semites, face tremendous odds to destroy the Jewish people’s right to live as a free and independent people upon this earth. What has changed from the past is Jews are now able to resist their genocidal dreams with safety in numbers and a powerful army to defend them.

    Israel’s enemies no longer get away with simply killing Jews in cold blood. Those days are gone forever.

    1. Well, I would argue somewhat differently.
      With regard to secular Jews who sign on to the hate-filled anti-Zionism, I see it much as the Hellenists of the Channukah period, or apostates of later periods. They’ve thrown their lot in with the “new world order”, and when that order goes antisemitic (as it always does eventually), they feel compelled to prove their loyalty by throwing their troublesome brothers and sisters under the bus.
      It’s less about hating Jews (in most cases, anyway) and more about loving the “wondrous, new weltanschauung that will surely cure the world this time”. These individuals, themselves, identify with something “beyond” their Jewish identities, and see the rest of us as “part of the problem”. They don’t see as we do that their “new” secular messianism is doomed to failure, as such messianic movements have failed in the past (and that the Jews are only the first scapegoats).

      1. Both interpretations don’t exclude the other. Jewish anti-Zionists hope their opposition to Israel will get them accepted by Israel’s enemies and from their viewpoint, Israel’s disappearance would attenuate anti-Semitism that’s widely identified as resentment of Israel and its controversial policies. They’re dead wrong of course but the Jewish need to be loved by others is a strong need and for some Jews, the easy path to finding it is by throwing Israel under the bus.

  3. Unfortunately, this kind of discussion can actually stifle healthy debate and prevent people with a different point of view from finding some common ground and building a constructive dialogue. Public figures on the political Left who I see as unambiguously pro-Israel are often labeled as anti-Zionist, self-hating Jews or even anti-Semitic. I believe this is done to shut them up, marginalize them so those in opposition don’t have to deal with the arguments they are making in any serious way.

    1. Norman_In_New_York

      “Antisemitism is the socialism of fools,” observed Karl Kautsky, a 19th Century founder of Germany’s Social Democratic Party. The debate here is nationalism vs. internationalism. Zionism is a form of nationalism. Accordingly, haters of Israel and Jews insinuate themselves into the internationalist camp, beginning with the UN. Everything they touch they corrupt and pervert, which is why a healthy debate is very difficult and internationalist-leaning Jews find themselves in a serious dilemma. When it comes to this debate, there is good as well as bad in nationalism and bad as well as good in internationalism. It is the anti-Semites who do the most to undermine the constructive dialogue you seek.

      1. These same internationalists, who hate Israel for its nationalism, often enthusiastically support Palestinian nationalism – an apartheid nationalism that openly declares its Judenrein aspirations, no less. How is that explained?

        1. Norman_In_New_York

          The Palestinians are “downtrodden and oppressed” and therefore deserves the world’s sympathy and special attention, including the lawfare of international bodies against the oppressor and huge sums of money, which are stolen by the leaders.

          1. Oh, so the sympathies are only temporary, then. If the Pals ever get their state and become independent, then these internationalists will turn on them, too.

            1. No, if that were ever to happen the “internationalists” would ignore them the same way they do all other small nations who are not immediately useful tools of the leftist project.

  4. Brad_Brzezinski

    This argument is technically correct but I believe it is usually
    counterproductive to make it. Most people assume automatically that
    antisemitism just means not liking Jews and one can be anti-Israel (as
    are many Jews) without holding this prejudice. Yes, denying Jews a
    homeland is bad for “the Jews” but you have to think about it to get
    there and anti-Zionists usually don’t think very well.

    This last
    point brings opportunity though because their approach almost always
    ends up involving contradictory ideas. The best zingers come from
    finding these and whacking them with their own hypocrisy. This of course
    requires customisation to the particular anti-Zionist individual or
    group, which is not always possible. My suggested general approach goes something like this:

    Anti-Zionism
    is often carried out by people who do not specifically hate Jews but
    it’s an unavoidable fact that every aspect of antisemitism is present in
    the way the world treats Israel.* This is a bad omen for the world, in
    the same way the antisemitism of the 1930s was. It will also lead easily to
    antisemitism of the old kind – which we are now seeing Europe.

    *One needs to give a summary to illustrate this point of course.

  5. At some abstract level, there may be a rejection of Jewish particularism conjoined to an absence of hostility to Jews per se.
    Practically, Israel’s detractors (whether they are soi-disant anti-Zionists are not) are either flagrantly silly (refusing to contemplate the relationship between acts and consequences) or quite hostile to the material interests of the Jewish people. You can call it ‘anti-semitism’ or you can call it ‘stickball’, the substance is the same. I’m not talking about frothing-at-the-mouth Egyptian imams, either. I’m talking about the journalists and lapsed foreign service officers who issue the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and the alt-right publicists who write for The American Conservative and The Unz Review.
    It’s not as if the Oslo disaster was not played out in the newspapers for 11 years and it’s not as if journalists and academics have no access to public opinion surveys taken of the West Bank and Gaza or of the (infrequent) election returns from those territories. You very seldom see explicit acknowledgement of what the observable political attitudes of the Arab population actually are (much less anyone drawing the obvious conclusion from the behavior of Al Fatah bosses over twenty-odd years or the obvious conclusions from the behavior and statements of HAMAS bosses). It might help a wee bit in educating the ingénues if the U.S. government stopped pretending the ‘peace process’ were anything but what it is: a decades-long wheel-spinning exercise.

  6. There are other reasons for Jewish anti-Zionism, including internalized Christian propaganda (in the case of NK and Satmar) or even simple ignorance, but appeasement is the most common. The fact that Jewish antisemites have existed throughout most of our history (going all the way back to Josephus) has not stopped non-Jewish anti-Zionists from holding them up as “proof” that the ideology on offer is not racist.
    I’d lay off that for the time being. Contemporary antagonism to Israel and the Jews among Christians tends in the occidental world to come from the ‘social justice’ wing of the protestant bodies and the Catholic Church. They use a different idiom than the secular red haze, but they have some very similar impulses. They’re a branch of Gauche International. There is another (tiny) rivulet derived from Latin traditionalists in the Catholic Church. The thing is, Latin traditionalists are a small current and their literature makes only incidental references to political topics. With a few exceptions (Solange Hertz, Joseph Sobran), the Jews are not much of an interest for them (bar in a very abstract theological way). Of course, defamation of Pius Xii (which appears to be a project of the Podhoretz circle) does piss off a larger Catholic constituency.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top