Confronting Antisemitism

Confronting Antisemitism: Domestic and International

Confronting Antisemitism

Hamas-Israel Conflict: Confronting Antisemitism takes a brief look at the response to terror attacks. We focus on the condition where the attacker is known to be an international terror organization. When the attack is profoundly rooted in Western Christianity, and when the attacked is Israel all bets are off.

Antisemitism persists throughout Western history. Its presence continues to cast a dark shadow over the discourse surrounding the Hamas-Israel conflict. The bias against Jews often manifests in the form of disproportionate criticism of Israel. The denial of its right to exist as a Jewish state since its founding in 1948. This prejudice influences public opinion, shapes political stances, and distorts the way the world perceives the conflict.

Criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic. It is entirely legitimate to question and discuss Israeli policies and actions, as with any other nation. First, this criticism crosses the line onto the demonization of the Israeli people. It fuels hatred and perpetuates an atmosphere of distrust and hostility. Secondly, if a similar attack against Western Democracy occurs, and the victim retaliates against the terror, the world falls silent. No accusation of inhumanity in the retaliation occurs.

Such an environment hinders the prospects of meaningful dialogue and a peaceful resolution under all circumstances and conditions.

The extra condition where the attack against Israel requires addressing antisemitism deeply engrained in European thought and history. In the context of the Hamas-Israel conflict but also in the broader spectrum of international relations. It is a step towards fostering a fair and unbiased approach to resolving complex geopolitical issues.

Confronting Antisemitism: A History of Survival

The history of Israel is a testament to resilience and determination. Established in 1948, Israel emerged from the ashes of the Holocaust. A catastrophe that led to the systematic extermination of six million Jews. The horrors of the Holocaust serve as a haunting reminder of the consequences of unchecked hatred and bigotry.

Since its inception, Israel finds itself in a perpetual battle for survival in a region marred by violence, and conflict. Its neighbors, some of which consistently refuse to recognize its right to exist. Created excuses to wage war, launch intifadas, and support militant groups. Throughout this tumultuous journey, Israel has defended itself from existential threats, terrorist attacks, and regional conflicts.

Understanding this history of survival is crucial in evaluating Israel’s actions in the face of attacks by groups like Hamas. The Israeli government’s primary responsibility is to protect its citizens. This duty influences its policies and strong responses to security threats.

Confronting Antisemitism: The Challenge of False Equivalency

In recent years, a disturbing trend has emerged, especially within certain segments of the Progressive movement. This trend equates to the actions of the attacker (Hamas) and the responses to the attack (Israel). It fails to recognize the distinct responsibility held by the aggressor for creating the crisis.

Hamas’s actions, including the launching of rockets at Israeli cities and the use of civilians as human shields, cause immense suffering on both sides. Israel, like any nation, has the right to defend itself and protect its citizens. False equivalencies obscure this fundamental distinction and undermine the pursuit of peace.

In Conclusion

Gaining a deep understanding of the Hamas-Israel conflict requires an examination of historical, political, and social complexities. Confronting antisemitism and removing it from the discourse is a crucial step in achieving a fair and balanced approach.

Acknowledging Israel’s history and the reason for its founding in a turbulent region allows hoe policies and actions are framed. Challenging false equivalencies is essential to grasp the genuine responsibility of the parties involved.

By acknowledging these factors, the two-tiered response to terror may mute the antisemitic voices that blame Israel.

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

Leave a Reply