……what they are and why they are necessary.
This is racist.
The pillar sustaining the State of Israel is, of course, the US. In place of the US you can insert “the West”, given that the foreign policy of most Western nations can be summarised as “stay close to the Americans”. This was famously exemplified by Tony Bliar’s famous instruction to the British Ambassador in Washington, “get up the White House’s arse and stay there”.
Israel is the most dependent nation on earth. No other nation is entirely dependent on another for its very existence.
That having been said, a second crucial existential pillar is “anti-Semitism”. Anyone that doubts this should try to imagine the landscape without it. Imagine if Israel had to get along without anti-Semitism, just as white South Africans had to get along without anti-Dutch racism and the Soviets had to get along without anti-Slav racism. Imagine if the State of Israel and the wider Hasbarafia were divested of the anti-Semitism card, and the goons at CAMERA and similar organisations were not able to launch into self pitying squeals of “anti-Semite” at any reference to Israel that fell short of eulogy.
These squeals aggregate into an impenetrable crescendo of deafening noise that intimidates the target leaving him/her/it battered and bewildered. The churches are particularly susceptible to being quieted and having their public positions “modified” by this phenomenon. Ask the Methodist Church in Great Britain.
Unfortunately, most targets of this white noise either back down or make the fatal error of trying to go through it, only to find it, as I have said, impenetrable. Those few who have wised up simply put their ear plugs in, step around it, and leave them to squeal at the moon.
“persecution of or discrimination against Jews” Collins English Dictionary
“hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group” Merriam Webster Dictionary
“hostility and prejudice directed against Jewish people; (also) the theory, action, or practice resulting from this” OED
Now here, we have statements of the meaning of anti-Semitism, the definition of anti-Semitism, arrived at by the dictionary compilers’ observations of the aggregate force of the uses of the expression by the multitudes that speak the natural language. Unfortunately for the Hasbarafia, in the West, there is not a lot of it about. As the regulars will testify, down at the Dog and Duck, when the boys have had a few and the racist garbage starts to flow, Jews rarely, if ever, warrant a mention. There certainly isn’t enough to keep the Hasborafia squealing about it 24/7.
Worse, there is no reference to Israel in the definition. Why should there be? If you stand on any random street and ask 100 random passers-by what they understand by anti-Semitism, you can be confident that Israel won’t get a mention.
The Hasbarafia overcome these problems by creating a private language in which they stipulate a privatised definition that they energetically seek to force on the rest of us.
And, of course, there is always anti-Semitic tropes. They are not as good as anti-Semitism but they are better than a blank minute.
Anti-Semitic tropes expand the arsenal of the Hasborafia, infinitely. So, what are they?
You are in the presence of an anti-Semitic trope when it is suggested that a Jew, or group of Jews is guilty of something that Jews, as a collective, have been accused of in the past, however dim and distant. This constitutes a “libel against the Jewish people” and is anti-Semitic.
This kind of libel is different from the more familiar kind of libel, in that these are libels to which there is NO defence. If the man down the road accuses me of libeling him, I have certain potential defences; fair comment, privilege etc., etc. The best defence of all, of course, is that the published statement is true. None of these defences is available in the case of an anti-Semitic trope. Truth and falsehood are entirely irrelevant. Whether the statement is true is not any part of the issue.
So, if you imply or state that a Jew has blood on his hands as in the now famous Scarfe cartoon (above ) you are anti-Semitic. This is because way back in the 13C, Jews were persistently accused of using the blood of Christian children in their religious rituals. So, to suggest that a Jew has blood on his hands today, is an invocation of this 13C blood libel. I am not sure whether accusing a Jew of killing someone bloodlessly, eg. by poison, counts as a blood libel or whether it doesn’t.
So, the above cartoon is racist but the many depictions of, for example, Tony Bliar with blood on his hands is not, Tony Bliar not being Jewish.
For centuries, Jews as a collective have been suspected and accused of being in the habit of poisoning Gentile water supplies. This makes it difficult to discuss Abba Kovner and Nakam. It is said that Kovner and his boys poisoned the water supplies of several German cities in the immediate aftermath of WW2. Once again, whether this is true or false is not in any way the issue. It probably isn’t true. What is certain is that they planned to. How far they got with these plans is disputed. But it is anti-Semitic to even talk about this because that puts us in the presence of an anti-Semitic trope and we are therefore, racists.
Another centuries old canard is that Jews were engaged in one great plot to control the world, if not the cosmos. What that means for us today, is that it is anti-Semitic to connect a group of Jews with power and influence. This is particularly so when this power and influence relates to policies and attitudes in respect of The State of Israel. Making such connections amount to invocations of the “rule the world” canard and are libels of the Jewish people. Only anti-Semites suggest these kind of connections.
Once again, truth and falsehood are irrelevant. So, we cannot make references to an American Jewish/Israel lobby despite everyone being perfectly aware that not only is there such, but it is immensely powerful and well organised, second only to the gun lobby. So powerful that no American President, Senator, Congressman, candidate or wannabe candidate dare stray from its line for very long. Menachim Begin famously told Ronald Reagan, “Don’t worry about the Hill Ron, I’ll take care of them”. In making these assertions you can be sure that no Zionist will tell me I am mistaken. Why get involved in that, when simply calling me anti-Semitic, settles the issue once and for all.
The idiotic Zio-fascist (albeit now defunct ), Jonathan Hoffman, went so far as to tell the Channel 4 presenter Jon Snow, that he was anti-Semitic after he expressed doubts about the strength of this lobby. Hoffman explained that any reference to the lobby was anti-Semitic, even in the form of a negative existence statement, because it conjured up unwelcome evocations.
Jewish organisations may not be as powerful outside the US, but they are invariably well organised and effective, especially in the UK and Australia.
Lobbying and the seeking of influence is perfectly legitimate in a democracy of course, but then so is the the pointing out that this influence has been sought and obtained. Except that it isn’t. It’s anti-Semitic. It’s one of those tropes.
Further, it needs to be said that the lobbying isn’t always legitimate, in that the employment of tactics involving bullying, threats, intimidation and even blackmail, is not Kosher. My detailed knowledge is restricted to the UK, but I am able to testify that these illegitimate tactics are common. They don’t boast about it like they used to, because they don’t want Harriet to see what they are up to. But Harriet sees anyway. Anyone harbouring doubts about this needs only to visit our sister site, Harriet’s Methodist Room here.
For centuries, among the excuses for intensified persecution of Jews, pogroms, the charge of disloyalty to the “host country” was often prominent. What this means for us today is that we cannot state, with impunity, the blindingly obvious fact that many Jews and Jewish organisations find choosing between the interests of Israel and the interests of their own country, when they conflict, as they often do, a no brainer. In America, they are called “Israel firsters’. The existence of these people and groups is rarely allowed to become a subject for debate. The inconvenient truth is dealt with by declaring an anti-Semitic trope, since this truth has some resemblance to charges laid against Jews in the days of yore. Anyone suggesting such a thing is anti-Semitic. End of story.
In the UK, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, at one time the primary Jewish organisation, but now in terminal, precipitous decline, functions as an extension of the Israeli Embassy, a fact ruefully acknowledged by the Board treasurer Laurence Brass, one of the saner members of this lamentable organisation.
The interests of the UK and the perceived interests of Israel are clearly often at odds. For example, the continuation of occupation is manifestly contrary to British interests as evidenced by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s designation of the territories as “The Occupied Palestinian Territories”, and affirmation of the illegality of the colonising of the West Bank. The Board rejects the advice of its own government in favour of “whatever the government of Israel sees fit.”
The Jewish organisations work in close tandem with the Israeli Embassy and regularly seeks its advice, for example when the JLC and the Board proposed to visit the territories in 2012. When doubts set in, they sought the advice, not of their own Foreign Office, but that of the Israeli Embassy. That is, they sought permission from the Embassy. Permission was denied and the trip did not take place.
The former CEO of the JLC and official spokesperson for the Chief Rabbi, the notorious perjurer Jeremy Newmark, is merely a gopher on behalf of the Embassy. Newmark was APPOINTED to the steering committee of the Global Coalition for Israel by the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
The Jewish organisations work closely with the Embassy in conducting lawfare campaigns against British citizens and organisations. That is, organisations of BRITISH Jews, collaborate with a foreign power to constrict the civil liberties, including the right to assembly or non-assembly of other British citizens.
Now, I do not expect to be challenged on these facts. Once again truth and falsehood are not the issue since we are in the presence of an anti-Semitic trope. I am therefore, anti-Semitic, matter resolved.
This is not an exhaustive list of anti-Semitic tropes. There are many others. However, I hope to have outlined enough to make it easy to spot others, when they are encountered.
How to deal with the accusation of being a purveyor of anti-Semitic tropes?
Yawn, ignore it and carry on, regardless.