People who write comments on Jewish-centred websites like this typically fall into one of three categories:

1) Jews, or people with Jewish family members etc
2) Philo-Semites
3) Anti-Semites

Which category would you place yourself in?

I find it hard to believe that you are simply a disinterested observer, given how frequently and passionately you comment on here.

I completely agree that anti-semitism is a grave matter and charge to make.

I can also agree with you that accusations of anti-semitism are thrown around in a casual manner which is not befitting those making the charge and/or is appropriate to the situation.

However this fact alone does not necessarily mean that an informed and principled individual should disregard the accusation – precisely because it is so serious it deserves especial attention.

What happens if the accusation comes from an informed/intelligent contributer to the discussion? Are you suggesting that it should be disregarded because it has been misused in other circumstances?

The problem arises when people “think”, or better yet, “know”, they are not anti-semitic and yet indulge in anti-semitic arguments, tropes, associate with anti-semites, etc all in the name of solidarity with the oppressed Palestinians or Lebanese etc. Their committment to social justice etc blinds them to the fact that they are involved in this sort of prejudice and/or excuses it in their mind – they become incapable of introspection and this is extremely tragic.

Those who presume to be of the left shouldn’t compromise their core values in any circumstance, especially to associate with elements (eg. Hezbollah, Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood) that if were in their own societies they would justifiably find repugnant.

I’m not saying that critics of Israel should be silenced. I’m calling for some intellectual honesty from them – criticise all human rights abusers and regimes and apply their standards equally. Otherwise be prepared to explain why you focus on Israel and Jews disproportianately.

As to my own views on anti-semitism – I’m a known Jew in my workplace and life. I take the charge seriously and don’t use it casually.

I certainly don’t challenge complete strangers to publish material just to confirm my own views about whether they’ll be accused of anti-semitism which strikes me as devaluing the matter if anyone is.

if you disagree with an Israeli action, have you ever stated that? Have you ever publicly criticized Israel? Please provide some links. If you do so in a way that is actually noticeable, then you will attract accusations of antisemitism and self-hatred. Simple as that. Don’t believe me? Why not try it sometime? How about you write an article in The Age, detailing your favourite (but until now secret?) critique of Israel? I look forward to witnessing your act of courage, but I’m not holding my breath or anything.

You wrote:

“This extremely serious charge is wantonly thrown around at anybody who finds themselves unable to agree with everything Israel does.”

I do not agree with everything Israel does, and yet to the best of my knowledge, no one has ever called me an anti-Semite.

What interests me is the relative disregard of this charge on the part of the people being accused of it.”

It’s very simple.

1. Yes you are right, it is a very serious charge. Extremely serious.

2. This extremely serious charge is wantonly thrown around at anybody who finds themselves unable to agree with everything Israel does.

3. Consequently, most people accused in this way *already* know they are not guilty of it. So they don’t *need* to give any consideration to it. Furthermore they have already seen countless examples of good, honest, thoughtful people being smeared with this very same accusation.

Consider what it is like to be accused of hatred that you do not have. Hate is a strong emotion. You know if you hate something. So if someone accuses you of possessing a strong emotion that you do not possess, it doesn’t take much reflection to determine that they are in error.

It seems to me that you have lost sight of what anti-semitism really means, but you are hardly alone in this. What are you going to say when you see a real anti-semite? You’ll have nothing to say because you’ve already devalued the expression trying to win arguments using a dishonest smear.

*I bring this up as Brull wrote about the SJ site regarding not responding adequately to the accusations made against him personally.

I’m the editor of newmatilda.com.

I just wanted to put on record that the ADC never sent me a copy of their report and i was never given the opportunity to respond to its contents before they were widely publicised. Putting aside the legal concerns this raises, i also think it is just a little bit hypocritical given the ADC’s charges of unprofessional conduct on my part.

If anyone wants to read the editorial on this by NM, it’s here:
http://newmatilda.com/2009/07/07/debate-needs-take-good-look-mirror

jewinthefat’s links don’t seem to be working

best
marni

Firstly, I think everyone would agree that anti-semitism is a grave charge.

What interests me is the relative disregard of this charge on the part of the people being accused of it. Instead of actually perhaps standing back and examining the issue – i.e. why are people regarding this as anti-semitic?, instead we see a dismissal of it as a smear or tactic to stifle their views. There doesn’t seem to be any serious introspection on the part of the accused.

This leads one to consider is it worth actually engaging these people directly? Let’s be real – if they cannot see the seriousness of being accused of bigotry/racism etc how ever are they going to see any validity in an opposing narrative/view/argument? Are they so emotionally invested in their position as to have lost any critical/objective ability? And if so, can you engage them with any hope of honest discourse?

Secondly, noting the gravity of the charge – are Jewish organisations actually using this in a cynical way to stifle debate? Can examples be pointed out which clearly demonstrate this? Is this a tactic? If it is, how should we address it?

Thirdly, we see another poster bring up the issue of comparing to other western/democratic examples making it difficult to defend. Fair enough – however, why aren’t the critics also talking about BDS against the US for its crimes, or even Australia for its crimes for example?

Why the exclusive focus on the I/P conflict? Is this the most important human rights issue in the world today and who made it so?

Similarly, if the critics pretend to have concerns for the oppressed then who cares if the regimes are dictatorships etc? their people still deserve solidarity and we in the liberal west are in the position they are not in to assist them.

To argue that they are dictatorships and that criticism wont matter is to callously disregard the oppressed as a lost cause and undermines one’s own moral credibility. Call for BDS against China – they are heavily invested in trade etc and will be affected by it. Call for BDS against Israel too, but while your at it, apply it to Hamas as well for its atrocious political and social positions – positions which were given political recognition through a democratic process on the part of the Palestinian people and are the antithesis of left-wing values.

“Islam has proven itself to be beyond doubt a terrorist organisation, which terrorises not only it’s own followers (just ask Fatah) – but anyone within (missile) reach. When is the Australian government going to shut the door on the political hornet’s nest of islam? You only have to walk around the western suburbs of Sydney to see how many women are dressed in islamic gear – having publicly declared war on Australian society – to be very concerned.”
Tony of Sydney
Wed 07 Jan 09 (07:00pm)

Many more such comments are still on the Telegraph’s website.

However, the ADC has not raised a peep of concern about such racist vitriol, preferring to focus on the New Matilda, which looks like a model of civilised discourse by comparison.