| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Saying Israel has no right to exist as a Jewish state is not anti-Semitic
As you surely know, the British Labour Party is today embroiled in a controversy over whether certain criticisms of the state of Israel can be considered anti-Semitic. The controversy is sure to come to the United States, even during this political cycle; and without wading into the statements and personalities involved, we need to point out that one aspect of the dispute is the claim that it is anti-Semitic to say– as many advocates for Palestinians do– that Israel does not have the right to exist as a Jewish state.
The “Jewish state” language is a key element of the English debate, and of the Israel conversation globally. As Robert Mackey has written at the Intercept:
When the debate is unpacked, however, it becomes clear that what’s at stake is something much broader: whether critics of Israel, who question its government’s policies or its right to exist as a Jewish state, are engaged in a form of coded anti-Semitism.
And this is not just in the UK. The U.S. State Department maintains just such a view as well. It has endorsed a definition of anti-Semitism that includes efforts to:
DELEGITIMIZE ISRAEL [by] Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist
The State Department language has helped to shift the discourse in the U.S. For example, the California Board of Regents has also recently accepted a definition of anti-Semitism that includes anti-Zionism:
Anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and other forms of discrimination have no place at the University of California.
This same trend can be seen in the presidential race. Hillary Clinton has said that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement meets this definition of anti-Semitism.
Philosophers stone – selected views from the boat http://philosophers-stone.co.uk
Source: http://www.philosophers-stone.co.uk/?p=11018
