Search results

Your search found 1192 items
You ran an advanced options search Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year
turned off because more than 500 resultsView all
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >>
Home  /  Search Results
Date: 2017
Abstract: Одной из примет нашего времени стало по­явление так называемых «новых этнических диаспор», которые стали итогом массовых межгосударственных миграций – как прямых, так и возвратных – особенно интенсивных после Второй мировой войны. Члены этих диаспор, в отличие от мигрантов предыдущего поколения, не спешат растворять­ся в социокультурной среде принимающих сообществ, а достаточно долго, иногда на протяжении поколений, сохраняют многообразные социальные, культурные, идентификационные и даже политические связи со странами исхода. Еврейский мир также не остался в стороне от этих процессов. Важным со­бытием последних десятилетий стало появление двух новых транснациональ­ных еврейских диаспор: израильской и русско-еврейской. Обе эти группы, не­сомненно, стали заметным фактором современной еврейской жизни и важным элементом многокультурной мозаики внутри еврейских коллективов стран пребывания и их обществ в целом. При том, что еврейской эмиграции из Израиля и возникшей за его преде­лами «израильской диаспоре» (термин, который в научный оборот ввел Стивен Гольд) посвящена довольно обширная научная литература, а «всемирное рус­ско-еврейское сообщество» также стало объектом ряда фундаментальных работ3, общий компонент этих диаспор – эмигрантские сообщества русскоязычных израильтян – пока очень малоизучен. Речь идет как о тех уроженцах (бывшего) СССР, которые в составе изра­ильской миграции оказались в странах Запада, так и в особенности об участни­ках «возвратной миграции» на постсоветское пространство. В академической литературе существует некоторое количество информации о русскоязычных израильтянах в разных странах Запада, и крайне немного – об израильтя­нах в странах бывшего СССР. Что же касается украинского сегмента этой диаспоры, то его до недавнего времени исследователи почти вообще не изуча­ли. (Единственным известным нам исключением является исследование изра­ильтян в Одессе, которое провела украино-британский антрополог Марина Са­прицкая.) Исследование, которое легло в основу этой статьи, было призвано заполнить этот пробел. Его совместно провели Центр еврейского образования в диаспоре им. Лук­штейна (Университет Бар-Илан, Израиль) и Институт иудаики НаУКМА при поддержке Министерства алии и абсорбции Израиля и Евроазиатского еврей­ского конгресса. В ходе этого исследования в два «раунда» (в начале 2009 и в конце 2011 гг.) методом стандартизированного интервью было опрошено соо­тветственно 167 и 147 респондентов из числа израильтян, с разной степенью по­стоянства живущих в Украине6. При этом нам представлялось верным сравнить сообщества русскоязычных израильтян в Украине с сопоставимыми с ними по базовым параметрам контрольными группами, прежде всего – с израильтяна­ми, живущими и/или работающими в России. One of the distinctive features of our times is the appearance of the so-called “new ethnic diasporas” resulting from mass state migrations—both direct and reverse—which especially intensified after the Second World War. Unlike previous generations of migrants, the members of these diasporas are not in a hurry to assimilate into the socio-cultural environment of the receiving societies. Instead, they continue to maintain—sometimes for several generations—a multifarious social and cultural identity and even political ties with their countries of origin. The Jewish world did not remain on the sidelines of this process. An important development in recent decades is the appearance of two new transnational Jewish diasporas: Israeli and Russian-Jewish. Both these groups undoubtedly became a noticeable factor of contemporary Jewish life and an important element in the multicultural mosaic within Jewish communities of the host countries and within host societies at large. Although the Jewish emigration from Israel and the “Israeli diaspora” (a term introduced by Steven Gold) has received considerable attention in the scholarly literature and the “global Russian-Jewish community” has become the subject of a series of fundamental works, the common component of these diasporas—Russian-speaking Israelis—remains understudied. The reference points here are both natives of the former USSR who came to the West as part of the emigration from Israel and participants of the “reverse migration” to the post-Soviet states. The academic literature contains a certain amount of information about Israelis in the countries of the West and very little about Israelis in the countries of the former USSR. The Ukrainian segment of this diaspora was practically ignored by scholars until recently. The only exception we are aware of is the research project on Israelis in Odessa carried out by the Ukrainian-British anthropologist Marina Sapritsky. The research on which this article is based aimed to fill this important gap. The project was implemented by the Lukshtein Center of Jewish Education in the Diaspora (Bar-Ilan University, Israel) and the Judaica Institute of the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (Ukraine) with the support from the Ministry of Aliyah and Absorption and the Eurasian Jewish Congress. In the course of this study, researchers held two rounds of interviews in 2009 and 2011 with 167 and 147 respondents from among Israelis who reside in Ukraine more or less permanently. We wanted in this process to compare the communities of Russian-speaking Israelis in Ukraine with similar control groups, primarily with Israelis working and living in Russia.
Author(s): Ildiko, Barna
Date: 2014
Abstract: AZ antiszemitizmus elleni küzdelem egyik legfontosabb
feltétele a helyzet pontos ismerete, az
antiszemitizmus valódi elterjedtségének vizsgálata.
A Tett és Védelem Alapítvány egyik célja éppen a
kérdést övező ismerethiány felszámolása. Ennek
eszköze többek között a folyamatos és szakmailag
megalapozott közéleti monitoring tevékenység,
mivel a tényleges információk összegyűjtése,
elemzése nélkül nem lehet valós védelmet biztosítani
a közösség számára. A monitoring
eredményét az Alapítvány havi jelentéseiben
ismertettük. Jelen kötetünkben a 2013 májusa és
2014 áprilisa között eltelt első egy év eredményeit
foglaljuk össze.
A jelentés kétféle cselekménnyel foglalkozik: az
antiszemita gyűlölet bűncselekményekkel, illetve a
gyűlölet motiválta incidensekkel. A jelentésben ezt
a kettőt összefoglalóan gyűlölet-cselekményeknek
nevezzük. Mindkettő esetében fontos kritérium,
hogy azok elkövetésekor azonosítható az antiszemita
motiváció.
Kötetünkben részletesen beszélünk a Tett és Vé-
delem Alapítvány szerteágazó tevékenységéről.
Ezután a jogi háttér bemutatása következik. Ezt
két oldalról közelítjük meg: egyrészt a szabá-
lyozás felől, másrészt pedig a jogalkalmazás felől.
Az első esetében részletesen beszélünk azon
jogszabályokról, amelyek jelenleg a gyűlöletcselekmények
elleni küzdelem jogi keretét adják
Magyarországon. A következő részben az ezen
bűncselekmények esetében jellemző látenciáról,
illetve a meglévő jogszabályok tényleges
használatáról szólunk. Ezt elemezve látszik, hogy
bár a jogszabályi környezet adott lenne a gyűlöletbűncselekmények
elleni hatékony küzdelemhez,
a jogalkalmazás során számos hiányosságot
tapasztalunk, mivel a bírói gyakorlatban igen
ritkán használják ezeket a tényállásokat.
Az antiszemita gyűlölet-cselekmények minél
szélesebb körű monitorozásához sokféle forrás
együttes használatára van szükség. Az események
regisztrálásán kívül fontos azok különböző
jellemzőinek számbavétele is. A havi jelentések
adatait összegezve éves jelentésünkben az
eseteket incidenstípusok, az incidensek áldozatai
és elkövetői és a szervezettség szintje szerint
elemeztük.
A 2013. május–2014. április közötti időszakban
az Alapítvány 57 antiszemita gyűlölet-cselekményt
azonosított. A vizsgált időszakban
ezek száma csökkenő tendenciát mutatott. A
regisztrált cselekmények közül 5 a támadás, 10 a
rongálás, 4 a fenyegetés és 38 a gyűlölet-beszéd
kategóriájába tartozik. A gyűlölet-cselekmények
közel kétharmada (37 eset) a fővárosban történt.
Az ismert elkövetők elsöprő többségben férfiak. A
személyek ellen irányuló gyűlölet-cselekményekről
elmondható, hogy áldozataik is legnagyobb
részben a férfiak közül kerülnek ki. A regisztrált
gyűlölet-cselekmények kétharmada spontán,
egyharmada szervezett esemény volt. A gyűlöletcselekmények
nagy része a Jobbikhoz köthető, ez
különösen igaz a szervezett cselekményekre.
Jelentésünkben néhány kiemelt üggyel is foglalkozunk,
amelyek a vizsgált időszak bizonyos
részében a nyilvánosság nagy érdeklődésére tar-
tott igényt. Az esetek leírásán keresztül megfigyelhetjük,
hogyan reagáltak a különböző
hivatalos és félhivatalos szervek, civil szervezetek
az antiszemita cselekmények megjelenésére.
Az Alapítvány másik célja, hogy jogi úton
küzdjön az antiszemitizmus terjedése ellen.
Az antiszemita töltetű cselekmények elleni
harcot a törvényileg szabályozott tényállások
segítik. Az Alapítvány a vizsgált év folyamán 35
beadványt tett, melyek 37 tényállást rögzítettek.
Az Alapítvány a beadványok négyötödével a
gyűlöletbeszéd visszaszorítására tett kísérletet.
A gyűlöletbeszédek között kiemelkedő volt
a holokauszt-tagadás: 16 esetben ezért tettek
feljelentést. Az elindított ügyek közül 25 esetben
született határozat a vizsgált év időtartamán
belül, amelyeknek többsége nem az Alapítvány
javára határozott, viszont kikristályosodott
a kuruc.info letiltásáért folytatott küzdelem
fontossága és Lenhardt Balázs zászlóégetés
miatti számonkérésének jogi lehetetlensége. Az
Alapítvány így célul tűzte ki a szélsőjobboldali
portál megszüntetését és annak elérését, hogy
közösség képviseleteként akár az Egységes
Magyarországi Izraelita Hitközség (EMIH) is
feljelentést tehessen a zsidó közösség egészét
érintő gyűlölet-cselekményekben. E két célt a
vizsgált időszakban a jogi határidők és buktatók
miatt nem sikerült elérni, de az Alapítvány
folyamatosan tesz azért, hogy végül pozitív
eredménnyel záruljanak ezek az ügyek.
Az Alapítvány tevékenysége során jobboldali
vagy szélsőjobboldali kötődésű emberekkel
szemben is kezdeményezett eljárásokat. Ezek az
emberek nagy nyilvánosság előtt közösség elleni
uszítást vagy holokauszttagadást követtek el.
Például a Hegedűs Loránt vagy Lenhardt Balázs
ellen tett feljelentéseknek egyfajta üzenetértéke
is van: mindenkinek számolnia kell azzal, hogy
hivatalosan is kérdőre vonhatják tetteiért.
Az Alapítvány ezután is folytatja monitoring tevé-
kenységét és a jogi harcot az antiszemitizmus ellen.
Havi jelentéseinkben továbbra is folyamatosan
nyomon követhető a monitoring tevékenység során
beazonosított gyűlölet-cselekmények számának
alakulása, valamint a folyó jogi ügyekben történt
változásokat is ismertetjük.


ONE of the most important requirements
for the struggle against anti-Semitism is an exact
awareness of the situation, that is, an investigation of
the actual prevalence of anti-Semitism. Therefore,
one of Action and Protection Foundation’s goals
is contending with the lack of knowledge about
this issue. The resources include a continuous and
professionally valid monitoring activity, since it
is impossible to provide real protection for the
community without collecting and analyzing the
actual information. We publish the results of the
monitoring in the Foundation’s monthly reports.
In this volume, we summarize the results for the
first year from May 2013 to April 2014.
The report deals with two forms of behaviour:
anti-Semitic hate crimes, and hate motivated
incidents. In the report, they are both referred
to as “hate incidents”. An important criterion for
both is an identifiable anti-Semitic motivation
when the act is committed.
Our volume will detail Action and Protection
Foundation’s manifold activities and will introduce
the legal background. This will be done
by discussing legal regulations as well as the
application of the law. In the first aspect, the volume
will detail the Hungarian regulatory framework
that currently provides the basis for combating
hate actions. The second part of this section will
explain the lack of timely legal action typical for
these kinds of crimes and the actual use of the
existing law. When analyzing the above, we can
see that although the legal framework should be
enough to effectively combat against hate crimes,
many deficiencies are experienced in the course
of law enforcement because such regulations and
laws are rarely cited by judges in court.
Various resources should be used to monitor antiSemitic
hate crimes extensively. Besides registering
events, their various attributes should be reviewed
as well. After summarizing the monthly report
data in our annual report, we have analyzed the
events by incident type, victims and perpetrators,
and levels of organization.
In the period between May 2013 and April 2014,
the Foundation identified 57 anti-Semitic hate
actions. In the period analyzed, the number shows
a decreasing number of these incidents. Of the
events registered, 5 can be categorized as assaults,
10 as defacement of property, 4 as threats and 38 as
hate speech. Nearly two-thirds of hate actions (37
cases) took place in the capital city of Budapest.
The vast majority of the identified perpetrators
were male. As for the hate actions against persons,
the victims were mostly men as well. Two-thirds
of the registered hate actions were spontaneous
while one-third was organized. A large number of
hate actions can be traced to Jobbik, especially the
organized ones.
Our report presents some cases which have had
high media exposure with a good deal of public
interest. Through the descriptions of the cases, we
can see the reaction of various government and
semi-official agencies and NGOs to incidents of
anti-Semitism.
The Foundation’s other goal is to use legal action
to combat the propagation of anti-Semitism.
Legally regulated statements of fact facilitate the
combat against anti-Semitism. During the year
analyzed, the Foundation submitted 35 petitions
recording 37 statements of fact. Four-fifths of
the petitions were the Foundation’s attempts to
repel hate speech. A substantial number of the
cases of hate speech were Holocaust denials, with
16 complaints filed. In 25 of the cases initiated,
rulings were made within the year inspected,
most of them in favour of the other party rather
than the Foundation. However, the events clearly
indicate the importance of the fight to ban kuruc.
info and that it is legally impossible to hold
Balázs Lenhardt responsible for the flag burning.
Therefore, the Foundation decided to fight for the
elimination of the far-right portal and to achieve
the goal to enable the Unified Hungarian Israelite
Community (Egységes Magyarországi Izraelita
Hitközség, EMIH) to file complaints in cases
affecting the Jewish community as a whole. These
two goals couldn’t be accomplished in the period
reviewed but the Foundation continues to work
for the positive conclusions of these causes.
Part of the Foundation’s activity was to take
action against right-wing or far-right persons who
committed incitement against a community or
make claims of Holocaust denial before the public
at large. For instance, reports against Loránt
Hegedűs and Balázs Lenhardt also convey the
message that everybody must understand that
they may be held responsible for their actions.
The Foundation will continue its monitoring
activity and legal fights against anti-Semitism.
Our monthly reports continue to keep track
of the number of the hate actions identified
by our monitoring process and inform about
developments in current legal case
Author(s): Ildiko, Barna
Date: 2015
Abstract: AZ antiszemitizmus elleni küzdelem egyik
legfontosabb feltétele a helyzet pontos ismerete, az
antiszemitizmus valódi elterjedtségének vizsgálata.
A Tett és Védelem Alapítvány egyik célja éppen a
kérdést övező ismerethiány felszámolása. Ennek
érdekében egyrészt az Alapítvány megbízásából
a Medián Közvélemény- és Piackutató Intézet
2013 novemberében és 2014 novemberébendecemberében
átfogó, országos reprezentatív
felmérést végzett a magyar társadalom
zsidósághoz való viszonyáról, az antiszemitizmus
elterjedtségéről. Másrészt ennek eszköze továbbá
a folyamatos és szakmailag megalapozott közéleti
monitoring tevékenység, mivel a tényleges
információk összegyűjtése, elemzése nélkül
nem lehet valós védelmet biztosítani a közösség
számára. A monitoring eredményét az Alapítvány
havi jelentéseiben ismertettük. Jelen kötetünkben
a 2014. évre eső eredményeket foglaljuk össze.
A jelentés kétféle cselekménnyel foglalkozik: az
antiszemita gyűlölet bűncselekményekkel, illetve a
gyűlölet motiválta incidensekkel. A jelentésben ezt
a kettőt összefoglalóan gyűlölet-cselekményeknek
nevezzük. Mindkettő esetében fontos kritérium,
hogy azok elkövetésekor azonosítható az
antiszemita motiváció.
Kötetünkben részletesen beszélünk a Tett és
Védelem Alapítvány szerteágazó tevékenységéről.
Ezután a jogi háttér bemutatása következik
Ezt két oldalról közelítjük meg: egyrészt a
szabályozás felől, másrészt pedig a jogalkalmazás
felől. Az első esetében részletesen beszélünk azon
jogszabályokról, amelyek jelenleg a gyűlöletcselekmények
elleni küzdelem jogi keretét adják
Magyarországon. A következő részben az ezen
bűncselekmények esetében jellemző látenciáról,
illetve a meglévő jogszabályok tényleges
használatáról szólunk. Ezt elemezve látszik, hogy
bár a jogszabályi környezet adott lenne a gyűlöletbűncselekmények
elleni hatékony küzdelemhez,
a jogalkalmazás során számos hiányosságot
tapasztalunk, mivel a bírói gyakorlatban igen
ritkán használják ezeket a tényállásokat.
Az antiszemita gyűlölet-cselekmények minél
szélesebb körű monitorozásához sokféle forrás
együttes használatára van szükség. Az események
regisztrálásán kívül fontos azok különböző
jellemzőinek számbavétele is. A havi jelentések
adatait összegezve éves jelentésünkben az
eseteket incidenstípusok, az incidensek áldozatai
és elkövetői és a szervezettség szintje szerint
elemeztük.
2014-ben az Alapítvány 37 antiszemita gyűlöletcselekményt
azonosított. A vizsgált időszakban
a regisztrált incidensek számában havi szinten
nem lehet egyértelmű tendenciát megállapítani.
Annyi azonban egyértelműen látszik, hogy
az év első felében kevesebb (összesen 7), az év
második felében pedig összességében lényegesen
több (összesen 30) ilyen cselekmény történt. A
regisztrált cselekmények közül 1 a támadás, 2 a
rongálás, 2 a fenyegetés és 32 a gyűlölet-beszéd
kategóriájába tartozik. Az incidensek több mint
fele (21 eset) a fővárosban, hét 100.000 lakosnál
nagyobb, négy 20.000-100.000 lakosú közepes, két
eset pedig ennél kisebb városban történt. Kettőnek
a helyszíne község volt. Egy eset beazonosítatlan
helyen történt. Az ismert elkövetők elsöprő
többségben férfiak. A személyek ellen irányuló
gyűlölet-cselekményekről elmondható, hogy
áldozataik is legnagyobb részben a férfiak közül
kerülnek ki. Az események közül 27 spontán volt,
azonban több mint felük (15 eset) valamilyen
eseményhez kötődött.
Jelentésünkben néhány kiemelt üggyel is
foglalkozunk, amelyek a vizsgált időszakban a
nyilvánosság nagy érdeklődésére tartott igényt.
Az esetek leírásán keresztül megfigyelhetjük,
hogyan reagáltak a különböző hivatalos és
félhivatalos szervek, civil szervezetek. 2014-
ben a német megszállás emlékműve és a Sorsok
Háza projekt kapott kiemelkedő figyelmet. Ezen
kívül monitoring tevékenységünk során feltárt,
a Jobbikhoz tartozó politikusokhoz köthető
antiszemita megnyilvánulásokat mutatjuk be
részletesen. Az országgyűlési választásokra
készülve jól érzékelhető volt a Jobbik tudatos, a
nyilvánosság felé mutatott irányváltása, amivel
egy mérsékelt párt benyomását igyekezett kelteni.
Ezt lehetett tetten érni abban is, hogy a nyilvános
politikai mezőben elhangzó nyíltan antiszemita
jobbikos megnyilvánulások visszaszorultak.
A bemutatott megnyilatkozásokból azonban
továbbra is világosan látszik a Jobbik valódi arca.
Az Alapítvány célja az is, hogy jogi úton
küzdjön az antiszemitizmus terjedése ellen. Az
antiszemita töltetű cselekmények elleni harcot a
törvényileg szabályozott tényállások segítik. Az
Alapítványnak 2014 folyamán 40 aktív ügye volt,
melyek 47 tényállást rögzítettek. Az Alapítvány
a beadványok háromnegyedével a gyűlöletbeszéd
visszaszorítására tett kísérletet. Ezek között
kiemelkedő volt a holokauszt-tagadás vagy
holokauszt relativizálás: 25 esetben ezért tettek
feljelentést. Az elindított ügyek közül 20 esetben
született határozat a vizsgált év időtartamán belül,
amelyeknek többsége nem az Alapítvány javára
határozott. Az Alapítvány továbbra is küzd azért,
hogy a közösség képviseleteként akár az Egységes
Magyarországi Izraelita Hitközség (EMIH) is
feljelentést tehessen a zsidó közösség egészét érintő
gyűlölet-cselekményekben.
Az Alapítvány tevékenysége során jobboldali vagy
szélsőjobboldali kötődésű emberekkel szemben
is kezdeményezett eljárásokat. Ezek az emberek
közösség elleni erőszakot, garázdaságot vagy nagy
nyilvánosság előtti holokauszttagadást követtek el.
Pörzse Sándor Esztergomban hívott verekedésbe
ellentüntetőket, Lenhardt Balázs zászlóégetési
ügye az Alkotmánybíróságon folytatódik, Orosz
Mihály Zoltán bábukat akasztott fel és izraeli
zászlót taposott meg, Ágoston Tibor pedig egy
megemlékezésen követett el holokauszttagadást.
Az Alapítvány ezután is folytatja monitoring
tevékenységét és a jogi harcot az antiszemitizmus
ellen. Havi jelentéseinkben továbbra is
folyamatosan nyomon követhető a monitoring
tevékenység során beazonosított gyűlöletcselekmények
számának alakulása, valamint a folyó
jogi ügyekben történt változásokat is ismertetjük.


ONE of the most important requirements
in the struggle against anti-Semitism is an exact
awareness of the situation, that is, an investigation
of the actual prevalence of anti-Semitism.
Therefore, one of Action and Protection
Foundation’s goals is contending with the lack of
knowledge about this issue. For this reason, the
TEV Foundation commissioned a comprehensive,
nation-wide, representative survey on Hungarian
society’s attitude towards Jews and the spread of
anti-Semitism. The Medián Institute of Public
Opinion and Market Research conducted the
survey in November 2013 and NovemberDecember
2014. The foundation also conducts
permanent monitoring of the public space, since
it is impossible to provide real protection for the
community without collecting and analyzing the
actual information. We publish the results of the
monitoring in the Foundation’s monthly reports.
The monitoring results were published in the
monthly reports of the Foundation. The present
volume summarizes the results of year 2014.
The report deals with two forms of behaviour:
anti-Semitic hate crimes and hate motivated
incidents. In the report, they are both referred
to as “hate incidents”. An important criterion for
both is an identifiable anti-Semitic intent when
the act is committed.
Our volume will detail Action and Protection
Foundation’s many activities and will introduce the
legal background, by discussing legal regulations as
well as the application of the law. The first part of
this section will detail the Hungarian regulatory
framework that currently provides the basis for
combating hate actions. The second part of this
section will explain the lack of timely legal action
typical for these kinds of crimes and the actual use
of the existing law. When analyzing the above,
we can see that although the legal framework
should be enough to effectively combat against
hate crimes, many deficiencies are experienced
in the course of law enforcement because such
regulations and laws are rarely cited by judges in
court.
Various resources should be used to monitor antiSemitic
hate crimes extensively. Besides registering
events, their various attributes should be reviewed
as well. After summarizing the monthly report
data in our annual report, we have analyzed the
events by incident type, victims and perpetrators,
and levels of organization.
The monitoring activity of TEV Foundation
identified 37 hate crimes in 2014. No clear
tendencies can be identified on a monthly level in
the number of recorded incidents in the examined
period. There were fewer hate crimes recorded in
the first half of the year (7) than the second half
(30). The recorded events can be classified into
several categories: 1 attack, 2 vandalisms, 2 threats,
and 32 instances of hate speech. More than half
of the incidents (21 cases) happened in Budapest,
seven cases in larger cities with over 100,000
inhabitants, four cases in middle-sized cities with
20,000 to 100,000 inhabitants, and two cases in
smaller settlements. Two other cases happened
in villages. An incident occurred at unidentified
place. The vast majority of the identified offenders
are male. In cases of hate crimes directed towards
persons, the vast majority of victims are also male.
27 cases were spontaneous, while 15 cases were
connected to some event.
The report also treats some key events that were of
special interest to the larger public. The description
of the cases displays the response of various official
and semi-official authorities and NGOs. The
monument of German occupation and the Sorsok
Háza (House of Fates) project gained the most
attention in 2014. In addition, the report also
presents in detail the anti-Semitic actions that
can be connected to Jobbik politicians, revealed
in the course of the Foundation’s monitoring
activity. Jobbik has recently been trying to soften
and moderate their image for the forthcoming
parliamentary elections. With this has come a
decrease in openly anti-Semitic statements made
by Jobbik representatives to the public. However,
the actions presented in the report still show the
true face of Jobbik and many of its supporters.
The Foundation’s aim is also to taking legal steps
to combat the spread of anti-Semitism. Legally
regulated statements of fact facilitate the combat
against anti-Semitism. The Foundation had 40
active legal actions in 2014, recording 47 states
of facts. Through three quarters of the reports,
the Foundation attempted to fight hate speech.
Among these, Holocaust denial or relativization
emerged as most important. There were 25
complaints filed for hate speech. In the analyzed
year, a decision was reached in 20 cases started in
previous years, most of which were not in favour
of the Foundation. The Foundation continues to
fight for the Unitary Jewish Religious Community
of Hungary (EMIH), initiator and founder of
TEV Foundation, and one of the prominent
representatives of the community, to have the
right to report hate crimes involving the entire
Jewish community.
The Foundation has also taken legal action
against people of right- or far-right orientation.
These people committed violent acts against the
community, vandalism, or public denial of the
Holocaust. In Esztergom, Sándor Pörzse invited
protesters to fight, Balázs Lenhardt’s flag-burning
case went to the Constitutional Court, and
Mihály Zoltán Orosz hanged puppets and trod on
the flag of Israel. Tibor Ágoston publicly denied
the Holocaust at a commemoration.
The Foundation will continue its monitoring
activity and legal fights against anti-Semitism.
Our monthly reports continue to keep track
of the number of the hate actions identified
by our monitoring process and inform about
developments in current legal cases.
Date: 2016
Abstract: TEV Foundation and its associated research center, The Brussels Institute, are new additions in the struggle against anti-Semitism. Their activities include the scientific research and monitoring
of anti-Semitism and related prejudices—confronting and surmounting ignorance. Since 2013, the Institute has issued monthly and yearlyreports on anti-Semitism. The reports cover two types of actions: hate crimes and hate-motivated incidents, defined by OSCE as follows:

• hate crime: a criminal offense motivated by bias or prejudice towards particular groups of people
• hate-motivated incident: an offense motivated by bias or prejudice towards particular groups of people which may not reach the threshold of a criminal offense

The extensive monitoring of anti-Semitic hate crimes requires the simultaneous use of several types of sources. The events must be recorded and categorized based on their characteristics.

The annual report summarizes the data from the monthly reports by types of incident and presents the legal cases. Based on standard international methodology, in our monthly and annual reports we categorize hate crimes as actions, events, atrocities or manifestations with proven antiSemitic intention or content that are directed towards Jewish people and their institutions or property. The seven form of hate crimes are: murder, serious physical offense, assault, vandalism, threat, hate speech and discrimination.
Of these, the amount of hate speech is clearly the highest since 2013; other recorded forms were vandalism, assault and threat. Other forms have not been reported.

Since 2013, TEV Foundation has provided an annual, comprehensive survey on Hungarian society’s attitudes towards Jews. The third questionnaire-based survey, conducted in
November 2015, shows that the proportion of anti-Semitism slightly increased last year. The summary of the results shows that one-third of the population harbors (to varying extents) the most
common and clichéd anti-Semitic stereotypes.

The survey examined the respondent’s opinions and attitudes towards Jews, the frequency and strength of anti-Semitic prejudices, perceptions, and associations of anti-Semitism. The sample size was 1200 respondents, aged 18 and older. The respondents were questioned in person. We based our survey methods on the ideas and questionnaires developed by the sociologist András Kovács. We used updated, extended versions of
questionnaires that have been used repeatedly since 1995, allowing us to juxtapose data from different years.

We also discuss an encouraging legal action: punishment for denial of the Holocaust by a Mrs. Z. V., the result of action taken by the TEV Foundation.
Date: 2012
Abstract: Desde que en 2009, el Observatorio de Antisemitismo comenzó a recopilar información sobre incidentes antisemitas
en España, es recurrente recibir las mismas preguntas: ¿Existe antisemitismo en España?, ¿Cuántos casos hay ?
Lamentablemente, la respuesta es Sí. El antisemitismo en España no es ni un mito ni un mal recuerdo del pasado.
Es una realidad que está presente en nuestra sociedad.
Pero mientras que la violencia física contra una persona o una propiedad judía son claramente actos antisemitas,
ciertas manifestaciones, actos e incluso palabras que forman parte del lenguaje cotidiano no son claramente
identifi cados como antisemitas. Sin embargo, son estos los ejemplos que nos ilustran acerca de cuan profundas
son las raíces del odio antijudío en España. Un mal social tan antiguo como persistente y camaleónico.
Muchos de las denuncias recibidas por este Observatorio a lo largo del 2011, refi eren a las huellas y residuos del
odio que se han trasmitido a lo largo de la historia.

Since 2009, when the Observatory on Anti-Semitism in Spain began to gather information about anti-Semitic
incidents in Spain, it is recurrent getting the same questions: Is there Anti-Semitism in Spain? How many cases
occur?
Unfortunately, the answer is Yes. Anti-Semitism in Spain is not a myth, nor a bad memory from the past. It is a reality
present in our society.
But while physical violence against Jewish persons or properties are clearly anti-Semitic acts, certain events, actions
and even words, that are part of the everyday language, are not clearly identifi ed as anti-Semitic. However, these
are the examples that illustrate us about how deep are the roots of Jew-hatred in Spain. A social evil so ancient as
persistent and chameleonic.
Many of the reports received by the Observatory during 2011 refer to the traces and residues of hatred that have
been transmitted throughout history
Date: 2013
Abstract: Por cuarto año consecutivo el Observatorio de Antisemitismo compila en un informe los hechos y denuncias registrados a largo del año. A diferencia de otros países europeos, y pese a los requerimientos de distintas organizaciones españolas y de instituciones internacionales, en España no existe registro ofi cial del Estado sobre incidentes y delitos de odio. Sin embargo, el antisemitismo tanto organizado como latente es evidente como muestra la información recogida en el Observatorio de Antisemitismo. En 2012, por cantidad de denuncias, a la cabeza están las expresiones en páginas web y redes sociales, seguidas de pintadas y grafi tis, un poco más distante, los medios de comunicación y en menor medida agresiones personales verbales y a la propiedad. Los actos de violencia física contra personas o inmuebles son casi inexistentes. Además, el presente Informe recoge iniciativas encaminadas a combatir, denunciar y analizar el antisemitismo. El antisemitismo que se da en nuestro país tiene sus singularidades. Se trata de un rechazo hacia “lo judío” sin que la población española conozca a ningún judío, dadas las escasas dimensiones de la comunidad judía española.

For the fourth consecutive year, the Observatory on Anti-Semitism in Spain collects the facts and complaints registered during the year. Unlike other European countries, and despite the requirements of international institutions, in Spain it does not exists an offi cial statistical fi le of hate crime incidents recorded by the Government, and therefore, we lack of an objective measurement of anti-Semitic incidents. However, both latent and organized anti-Semitism, are an evidence, as shown by the information gathered by the Observatory on Anti-Semitism in Spain. In 2012, by number of complaints, the most frequent anti-Semitic incidents can be found in websites and social media, followed by anti-Semitic graffi ti, and to a lesser extent verbal assaults and damage to property. Acts of physical violence against individuals or property are almost non-existent. In addition, this report includes initiatives to combat, report and analyze anti-Semitism. Spanish Anti-Semitism is quite peculiar. It is a rejection of any kind of Jewishness, without the Spanish population probably knowing any Jew at all, given the small size of the Spanish Jewish community
Date: 2016
Abstract: The International Institute for Jewish Genealogy in Jerusalem is attempting the first-ever demographic and genealogical study of a national Jewry as a whole, from its inception to the present day. This article describes the project, its aims, methodology and preliminary results. We use specially developed data retrieval methods that enable the access of available online sources, and we demonstrate that the extensive datasets we have generated are amenable to multidisciplinary analysis and interpretation. Utilising detailed information from the Scottish Census in 1841 till the 1911 Census (the most recent available under access regulations) and vital records from the middle of the nineteenth century to date, plus newly digitised Scottish newspaper and court records, a new and clearer picture of Scottish Jewry emerges. In presenting demographic and historical results already available from the study, we challenge some conventional perceptions of Scottish Jewry and its evolution.

By way of illustration, the article presents some of the preliminary demographic and historical results of the study, which challenge conventional wisdom. Among other things, the study reveals the migrant and transitory nature of the Jewish population in the nineteenth century and documents its stabilisation and eventual decrease in the twentieth century, on the basis of birth, marriage and death rates; and its dispersal throughout the country, beyond the major concentrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh. Hopefully, this study will serve as a model for other genealogical research into defined groups, religious or otherwise, at the national level.
Date: 2016
Abstract: Following the unprecedented number of antisemitic incidents in the summer
of 20141, the Scottish Government funded the Scottish Council of Jewish
Communities (SCoJeC) to carry out a small-scale inquiry into ‘What’s changed
about being Jewish in Scotland’ since our 2012 inquiry into the experience of
‘Being Jewish in Scotland’.
Our principal findings were:
- 38 respondents to our survey (32%) explicitly talked about a
heightened level of anxiety, discomfort, or vulnerability, despite not
having been directly asked.
- 20 respondents (17%) – many more than in 2012 – told us that they
now keep their Jewish identity secret.
- As a result there is less opportunity for Jewish people to develop
resilient and supportive networks and communities.
- 76% of respondents said that events in the Middle East have a
significant impact on the way they are treated as Jews in Scotland.
- 80% of respondents said that the events in the Middle East during
summer 2014 had negatively affected their experience of being
Jewish in Scotland.
- 21 respondents (18%) mentioned the raising of Palestinian flags
by some Local Authorities as having contributed to their general
sense of unease.
- 16 respondents (13%) told us that they no longer have confidence in
the impartiality of public authorities, including the police.
- Several respondents said that, for the first time, they were
considering leaving Scotland.
- Antisemitism in social media was a much greater concern than in
our 2012 inquiry.
- 12 respondents (11%) told us they found it difficult to find anything
good to say about being Jewish in Scotland.
Commenting on the preliminary findings of our inquiry into What’s Changed About
Being Jewish in Scotland, Neil Hastie, head of the Scottish Government Community
Safety Unit, said: “The emerging themes from this report are particularly valuable;
as is the data on how the international context can impact very palpably on the
experience of being Jewish in Scotland. There is much in this for us (and Ministers)
to consider.”
We are disturbed by the extent to which this inquiry shows that Jewish people’s
experience in Scotland has deteriorated as a result of the wider community’s
attitudes towards events in the Middle East. But despite the negativity and level
of discomfort expressed by many respondents, and the fact that some are, for
the first time, wondering whether they should leave Scotland, the vast majority of
Scottish Jews are here to stay, and we therefore welcome the Scottish Government’s
willingness to listen to the concerns of Jewish people in Scotland to ensure their
safety and well-being
Author(s): Katz, Ethan B.
Date: 2015
Abstract: Headlines from France suggest that Muslims have renewed an age-old struggle against Jews and that the two groups are once more inevitably at odds. But the past tells a different story. The Burdens of Brotherhood is a sweeping history of Jews and Muslims in France from World War I to the present. Here Ethan Katz introduces a richer and more complex world that offers fresh perspective for understanding the opportunities and challenges in France today.

Focusing on the experiences of ordinary people, Katz shows how Jewish–Muslim relations were shaped by everyday encounters and by perceptions of deeply rooted collective similarities or differences. We meet Jews and Muslims advocating common and divergent political visions, enjoying common culinary and musical traditions, and interacting on more intimate terms as neighbors, friends, enemies, and even lovers and family members. Drawing upon dozens of archives, newspapers, and interviews, Katz tackles controversial subjects like Muslim collaboration and resistance during World War II and the Holocaust, Jewish participation in French colonialism, the international impact of the Israeli–Arab conflict, and contemporary Muslim antisemitism in France.

We see how Jews and Muslims, as ethno-religious minorities, understood and related to one another through their respective relationships to the French state and society. Through their eyes, we see colonial France as a multiethnic, multireligious society more open to public displays of difference than its postcolonial successor. This book thus dramatically reconceives the meaning and history not only of Jewish–Muslim relations but ultimately of modern France itself.
Author(s): Sapiro, Philip
Date: 2016
Abstract: The use of geodemographic analysis has a long history, arguably stretching back to Charles Booth's Descriptive Map of London's Poverty, produced in 1886 and the published classification of areas has invariably been based on all residents. The work described in this paper, however, is novel in the use of geodemographic analysis to focus on a single minority group within a national census. This paper describes the development of a methodology which allows geodemographic analysis to be applied to unevenly distributed minority sub-populations, overcoming two particular issues: finding a suitable geographic base to ensure data reliability; and developing a methodology to avoid known weaknesses in certain clustering techniques, specifically distortion caused by outlier cases and generation of sub-optimal local minimum solutions. The approach, which includes a visual element to final classification selection, has then been applied to establish the degree to which the Jewish population in an area is similar in character to, or differs from, Jews living in other areas of England and Wales, using data from the 2011 census. That group has been selected because of the maturity of its presence in Britain — study of this group may point the way for examination of other, more recently arrived, sub-populations. Previous studies have generally assumed homogeneity amongst ‘mainstream’ Jews and have not considered spatial variation, separating out only strictly orthodox enclaves. This paper demonstrates that there are indeed distinct socio-economic and demographic differences between Jewish groups in different areas, not fully attributable to the underlying mainstream social geography, whilst also identifying a strong degree of spatial clustering; it also establishes the practicality of applying geodemographic analysis to minority groups.
Date: 2016
Date: 2016
Abstract: Focusing on three contemporary grassroots initiatives of preserving Jewish heritage and commemorating Jews in Belarus, namely, the Jewish Museum in Minsk, Ada Raǐchonak’s private museum of regional heritage in Hermanovichi, and the initiative of erecting the monument of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda in Hlybokae, the present article discusses how local efforts to commemorate Jews and preserve Jewish heritage tap into the culture of political dissent, Belarus’s international relations, and the larger project of redefining the Belarusian national identity. Looking at the way these memorial interventions frame Jewish legacy within a Belarusian national narrative, the article concentrates in particular on the institution of the public historian and the small, informal social networks used to operate under a repressive regime. Incorporating the multicultural legacy of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth into the canon of Belarusian national heritage and recognizing the contribution of ethnic minorities to the cultural landscape of Belarus, new memory projects devoted to Jewish history in Belarus mark a caesura in the country’s engagement with its ethnic Others and are also highly political. While the effort of filling in the gaps in national historiography and celebrating the cultural diversity of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania overlaps in significant ways with the agenda of the anti-Lukashenka opposition, Jewish heritage in Belarus also resonates with the state authorities, who seek to instrumentalize it for their own vision of national unity.
Editor(s): Gitelman, Zvi
Date: 2016
Abstract: In 1900 over five million Jews lived in the Russian empire; today, there are four times as many Russian-speaking Jews residing outside the former Soviet Union than there are in that region. The New Jewish Diaspora is the first English-language study of the Russian-speaking Jewish diaspora. This migration has made deep marks on the social, cultural, and political terrain of many countries, in particular the United States, Israel, and Germany. The contributors examine the varied ways these immigrants have adapted to new environments, while identifying the common cultural bonds that continue to unite them.

Assembling an international array of experts on the Soviet and post-Soviet Jewish diaspora, the book makes room for a wide range of scholarly approaches, allowing readers to appreciate the significance of this migration from many different angles. Some chapters offer data-driven analyses that seek to quantify the impact Russian-speaking Jewish populations are making in their adoptive countries and their adaptations there. Others take a more ethnographic approach, using interviews and observations to determine how these immigrants integrate their old traditions and affiliations into their new identities. Further chapters examine how, despite the oceans separating them, members of this diaspora form imagined communities within cyberspace and through literature, enabling them to keep their shared culture alive.

Above all, the scholars in The New Jewish Diaspora place the migration of Russian-speaking Jews in its historical and social contexts, showing where it fits within the larger historic saga of the Jewish diaspora, exploring its dynamic engagement with the contemporary world, and pointing to future paths these immigrants and their descendants might follow.

Introduction: Homelands, Diasporas, and the Islands in Between
Zvi Gitelman
Part I Demography: Who Are the Migrants and Where Have They Gone?
Chapter 1 Demography of the Contemporary Russian-Speaking Jewish Diaspora
Mark Tolts
Chapter 2 The Russian-Speaking Israeli Diaspora in the FSU, Europe, and North America: Jewish Identification and Attachment to Israel
Uzi Rebhun
Chapter 3 Home in the Diaspora? Jewish Returnees and Transmigrants in Ukraine
Marina Sapritsky
Part II Transnationalism and Diasporas
Chapter 4 Rethinking Boundaries in the Jewish Diaspora from the FSU
Jonathan Dekel-Chen
Chapter 5 Diaspora from the Inside Out: Litvaks in Lithuania Today
Hannah Pollin-Galay
Chapter 6 Russian-Speaking Jews and Israeli Emigrants in the United States: A Comparison of Migrant Populations
Steven J. Gold
Part III Political and Economic Change
Chapter 7 Political Newborns: Immigrants in Israel and Germany
Olena Bagno-Moldavski
Chapter 8 The Move from Russia/the Soviet Union to Israel: A Transformation of Jewish Culture and Identity
Yaacov Ro’i
Chapter 9 The Economic Integration of Soviet Jewish Immigrants in Israel
Gur Ofer
Part IV Resocialization and the Malleability of Ethnicity
Chapter 10 Russian-Speaking Jews in Germany
Eliezer Ben-Rafael
Chapter 11 Performing Jewishness and Questioning the Civic Subject among Russian-Jewish Migrants in Germany
Sveta Roberman
Chapter 12 Inventing a “New Jew”: The Transformation of Jewish Identity in Post-Soviet Russia
Elena Nosenko-Shtein
Part V Migration and Religious Change
Chapter 13 Post-Soviet Immigrant Religiosity: Beyond the Israeli National Religion
Nelly Elias and Julia Lerner
Chapter 14 Virtual Village in a Real World: The Russian Jewish Diaspora Online
Anna Shternshis
Part VI Diaspora Russian Literature
Chapter 15 Four Voices from the Last Soviet Generation: Evgeny Steiner, Alexander Goldstein, Oleg Yuryev, and Alexander Ilichevsky
Mikhail Krutikov
Chapter 16 Poets and Poetry in Today’s Diaspora: On Being “Marginally Jewish”
Stephanie Sandler
Chapter 17 Triple Identities: Russian-Speaking Jews as German, American, and Israeli Writers
Adrian Wanner
Afterword: The Future of a Diaspora
Zvi Gitelman

Search results

Your search found 1192 items
You ran an advanced options search Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year
turned off because more than 500 resultsView all
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >>