Search results

Your search found 65 items
You ran an advanced options search Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year View all 1 2
Home  /  Search Results
Date: 2015
Abstract: La presente “Lettera di informazione” riassume i principali casi di antisemitismo e di pregiudizio
antiebraico registrati in Italia nel 2014.
• Nel 2014 l’“Osservatorio antisemitismo” della Fondazione CDEC ha registrato una novantina di
episodi di antisemitismo, un numero nettamente superiore a quello degli ultimi tre anni e doppio
rispetto al 2013.
• Come ogni anno molti episodi di antisemitismo si sono concentrati intorno al 27 Gennaio “Giorno
della Memoria”. L’altro picco di antisemitismo è stato raggiunto tra i primi di luglio e la fine di
agosto in concomitanza con il conflitto tra Hamas e lo Stato di Israele nella Striscia di Gaza.
• Il livello di aggressività, in particolare quello verbale, è in crescita.
• Episodi di antisemitismo ed attacchi contro gli ebrei vengono da ambienti estremisti e marginali.
• Il pregiudizio antisemitico inteso come opinioni è trasversale ai diversi ceti socio culturali e politici,
l’antisemitismo - come episodi, attacchi verbali e azioni di ostilità antiebraica - contraddistingue i
gruppi politici estremisti di destra e di sinistra. I discorsi antisemiti, ossia argomentazioni fatte
pubblicamente che si riferiscono a una ideologia o a un pensiero culturale denso di stereotipi, a
seconda del paradigma cui attingono: cospirativismo, negazione della Shoah, demonizzazione di
Israele vengono espressi invece in vari contesti, non necessariamente estremisti.
• Esponenti e simpatizzanti di partiti e movimenti della destra radicale nel 2014 sono stati
protagonisti di molteplici episodi e polemiche antisemite e negazioniste, e di banalizzazione del
nazifascismo.
• Il negazionismo è molto attivo, principalmente nel web e fa parte del bagaglio ideologico e militante
di movimenti e partiti neonazisti.
• L’antisemitismo nel web è in continua crescita.
Author(s): Kosmin, Barry A.
Date: 2016
Abstract: Launched by the American Jewish Joint Distribution
Committee’s International Centre for Community
Development (JDC-ICCD), and conducted by a research
team at Trinity College (Hartford, Connecticut, USA)
between June and August 2015, the Third Survey of
European Jewish Leaders and Opinion Formers presents
the results of an online survey administered to 314
respondents in 29 countries. The survey was conducted
online in five languages: English, French, Spanish, German
and Hungarian. The Survey of European Jewish Leaders
and Opinion Formers is conducted every three or four
years using the same format, in order to identify trends
and their evolution. Findings of the 2015 edition were
assessed and evaluated based on the results of previous
surveys (2008 and 2011).
The survey posed Jewish leaders and opinion formers a
range of questions about major challenges and issues that
concern European Jewish communities in 2015, and about
their expectations of how communities will evolve over
the next 5-10 years. The 45 questions (see Appendix) dealt
with topics that relate to internal community structures
and their functions, as well as the external environment
affecting communities. The questionnaire also included
six open-ended questions in a choice of five languages.
These answers form the basis of the qualitative analysis
of the report. The questions were organized under the
following headings:
• Vision & Change (6 questions)
• Decision-Making & Control (1 question)
• Lay Leadership (1 question)
• Professional Leadership (2 questions)
• Status Issues & Intermarriage (5 questions)
• Organizational Frameworks (2 questions)
• Community Causes (2 questions)
• Jewish Education (1 question)
• Funding (3 questions)
• Communal Tensions (3 questions)
• Anti-Semitism/Security (5 questions)
• Europe (1 question)
• Israel (1 question)
• Future (2 questions)
• Personal Profile (9 questions)
Author(s): Clark, David
Date: 2007
Abstract: The immediate postwar in Europe was characterised by collective amnesia concerning where Jews had lived prior to the Holocaust. By the 1970s and mid-1980s, there was a revival of interest in residential areas, synagogues and cemeteries connected with a Jewish past, right throughout Europe, including former communist countries in the 1990s. This resulted in much renovation and the attempt to provide new uses for such sites as museums and cultural centres.

My paper focuses on the shift in emphasis from the need to preserve such sites as places of memory to an increasing concern with other issues. Such issues range from tourism promotion to the promotion of multiculturalism. This emphasis on preparing the younger generation for a future in a new multicultural state provides much of the motivation for central and local government to lend support to such initiatives, whether in Sweden, Germany or Italy, for instance.

The paper focuses on the Jewish Museum in Bologna, where I conducted fieldwork between 1999 and 2002. The study illustrates the mix of policy objectives involved, such as heritage preservation, urban regeneration, cultural policy and educational objectives. The theoretical discussion seeks to combine Clifford's notion of the museum as a contact zone (Clifford, 1997) with Foucault's notions on discourse formation (Foucault, 1972). In the process, the analysis of the museum's political economy extends beyond the four walls of the museum into the adjoining space of the ghetto and the city.

Author(s): Nissan, Ephraim
Date: 2011
Date: 2009
Abstract: The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights presents its 5th brief
update of its 2004 report “Manifestations of anti-Semitism in the EU”. The
overview contains the latest governmental and non-governmental
statistical data covering 2001 to 2008 for those EU Member States that
have official or unofficial data and statistics on anti-Semitic incidents. The
Agency collects regularly publicly available official and unofficial data and
information on racism and xenophobia in the EU Member States through
its Racism and Xenophobia Network (RAXEN) with a special focus on
anti-Semitism.

The Agency’s data collection work shows that most Member States do not
have official or even unofficial data and statistics on anti-Semitic incidents.
Even where data exist they are not comparable, since they are collected
following different methodologies. For some countries, RAXEN National
Focal Points provide the Agency with lists of cases collected either ad hoc
by civil society organisations or through the media with varying degrees of
validity and reliability. Detailed data and incidents lists are presented in the
FRA electronic database, Info_Portal at http://infoportal.fra.europa.eu.
The Agency’s regular review of data collection systems indicates that most
Member States have a serious problem of underreporting, particularly in
reference to official systems of data collection that are based on police
records and on crime and law statistics, because not all anti-Semitic
incidents registered officially are categorised under the label “antiSemitism”
and/or because not all anti-Semitic incidents are reported to the
official body by the victims or witnesses of an incident.

A complementary problem to underreporting is misreporting and overreporting:
This could be the case in unofficial data collection carried out by
organisations that do not provide information concerning their
methodologies.
Author(s): Sion, Brigitte
Date: 2016
Abstract: The goals of the Foundation in conducting this survey were manifold:
we aimed to generate a comprehensive picture of the Jewish museum
landscape across Europe, and to identify the most pressing issues,
challenges and needs faced by these institutions. We wanted to learn about
the mission, philosophy and methodology of Jewish museums, and better
understand their role and position in the cultural and educational realm at
large. We were also interested in the level of professionalization of Jewish
museums, both in staff training, collection preservation and cataloguing,
management, and the ways in which Jewish museums communicate and
arrange partnerships with one another. With a better understanding of
these issues, we want now to assess the resources needed and the funding
priorities for the next five to ten years.

The questionnaire was sent to 120 institutions in 34 countries and we
received 64 completed forms from 30 countries. The questions addressed
eleven broad topics: organisation, collections, permanent and temporary
exhibitions, facility, visitor services, public programmes, visitor
demographics, marketing and PR, finances, future plans and needs.

This diverse sample enabled us to get, for the first time, a quasicomprehensive
picture of the Jewish museum landscape in Europe, from
small community museums to landmarks of “starchitecture;” from
institutions boasting thousands of rare objects to others mostly text
panels- or technology-based; from museums employing scores of
professional staff and interns to synagogues-turned-exhibition halls run by
volunteers for a few hours a month. That was precisely the challenge: the
large and numerous discrepancies between institutions, depending on their
location, their financial and human resources, their political and economic
context, the type of visitors they receive, and other contextual
considerations.

The results point to four major findings:
1. Transition from museums to multi-purpose hubs;
2. Lack of collaboration and partnerships;
3. Tension between particularistic and universalistic missions;
4. Increasing need to serve a diverse audience.

Search results

Your search found 65 items
You ran an advanced options search Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year View all 1 2