Abstract: From an intercultural perspective, this article explores majority/minority and between minorities interactions, and revisits Allport’s contact theory, in a socially and ethnically diverse urban area hosting a large proportion of Jews and Muslims. The data comes from a telephone survey of a sample of inhabitants of the 19th arrondissement of Paris. Open and closed questions explore the symbolic social and political boundaries respondents construct between ‘us’ and ‘them’, and their patterns of sociability. Survey experiments with vignettes deal with more sensitive issues (reactions to circulating cartoons at school and police reactions to verbal assault, according to the ethnicity of the victim). The immediate social and ethnic surrounding of each respondent is reconstructed on the basis of census and ethnographic data. The results go against several common beliefs. Religion is not the only dimension of respondents’ identity; it intersects with social class, gender and generation. The relations between Jews and Muslims are not so much conflictual as ambivalent. Being minorities and feeling discriminated against as such brings them together. They both are more religious than the majority population, more traditional on sexual issues and more family-oriented, and most of them consider that Jews and Muslims have a common cultural heritage and should be united against discrimination. Nevertheless, there are friction points (Israeli-Palestinian conflict/the colonial past of France). Politically and socially Muslims are closer to the non-European immigrants, while Jews are closer to the French and the European-born ‘white’ population. Antisemitism is a clear taboo; anti-Jewish cartoons are seen as far more reprehensible than any other. But a majority of the sample, and Muslims a little more than average, see Jews as a ‘group apart’, and believe in the old stereotype about Jews having more influence, being more likely, for instance, to be helped by the police if needed.
Topics: Attitudes to Israel, Attitudes to Jews, Holocaust, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Israeli-Arab Conflict, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Culture and Heritage, Memory, Literature, Film, Television
Abstract: Examines an important relational shift in British and German cultural depictions of Palestine and Israel since 1987
Develops relationality as a critical tool to challenge mainstream ideas about Israeli and Palestinian narratives as separate and not connected to European histories of the Holocaust and colonialism
Argues that Israel and Palestine are used as geopolitical and imaginary spaces to discuss social and political concerns in the United Kingdom and in Germany
Examines works by authors and directors from outside of Israel and Palestine, including those with no direct link to the conflict, thus extending our understanding of Palestine and Israel as signifiers in the contemporary period
Offers a comparative analysis of British and German literature, TV drama, and film which focuses on country-specific case studies to identify common trends in imagining and reimaging Israel and Palestine since the first Palestinian Intifada
Discusses works published since 1987 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians since 1947 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians and their narratives since 1947
Isabelle Hesse identifies an important relational turn in British and German literature, TV drama, and film published and produced since the First Palestinian Intifada (1987-1993). This turn manifests itself on two levels: one, in representing Israeli and Palestinian histories and narratives as connected rather than separate, and two, by emphasising the links between the current situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the roles that the United Kingdom and Germany have played historically, and continue to play, in the region. This relational turn constitutes a significant shift in representations of Israel and Palestine in British and German culture as these depictions move beyond an engagement with the Holocaust and Jewish suffering at the expense of Palestinian suffering and indicate a willingness to represent and acknowledge British and German involvement in Israeli and Palestinian politics.
Abstract: On October 7, 2023, a Hamas-led terrorist attack in Israel killed 1,200 Israelis and kidnapped about 250 others. The almost immediate spread of news and images of the attack produced heavy emotional reactions in public opinion in many countries. The article analyzes data from a representative survey on the attitudes toward Jews and Muslims of Italian undergraduates conducted between late September and late October 2023, encompassing both those dramatic events and the war that followed. Four main findings emerge. First, Italian students tend to organize attitudes towards Jews around three main dimensions, those toward Muslims around one. Second, attitudes towards the two groups vary according to cultural values of reference, commitment to study, and political orientation. Third, negative attitudes towards Muslims are more prevalent than those toward Jews, but this difference narrows between center-left and left-leaning students and, in some cases, reverses. Finally, the analysis shows that one of the dimensions organizing unfavourable attitudes towards Jews experienced very substantial growth on the days immediately following October 7, that is, the date of the Hamas terrorist attack inside Israeli territory.
Abstract: There is a rich body of research concerning Jews who lived in Germany before 1933. Publications on the Holocaust are equally numerous, a significant proportion of this output tackling historical (and contemporary) antisemitism in Germany from a non-Jewish perspective. Much less is known about the post-1945 Jewish population of the former East and West (now reunited) Germany: in terms of Jewish socio-demography, life-worlds, cultural heritage, praxes and about Jewish perspectives on antisemitism. The aim of this article is threefold. Content-wise, it sets out to summarise the existing social scientific research on the post-1945ers, and to identify gaps therein in terms of empirical research, both quantitative and qualitative. Structurally, it seeks to determine the scope and frame of research concerning the post-1945 Jewish population of Germany, demonstrating thus that the study of contemporary Jews is replete with lacunae. Practically, the article outlines the consequences of patchy knowledge, and the hampered knowledge transfer within academia and to the public – consequences which have become painfully clear in the wake of October 7, 2023.
Abstract: Muslims across Europe have been labeled as uncivil since the migration waves of postcolonial and guestworker migrants in the mid-20th century. In this paper, I bring the Muslim experience in the German capital into conversation with Civil Sphere Theory (CST), which analyzes how senses of cultural boundedness are supported, shaped, and contested through the interrelations between the institutions of civil society and social movements aimed at expanding civic inclusion. Drawing on two years of ethnographic research in a Berlin mosque, I move from Muslim associations with incivility to the actions these associations provoke in relation to the civil sphere: exploring how those deemed uncivil exert agency in response to, and also in spite of a civil/uncivil divide. Through the voices and experiences of my interlocutors, I show that Muslims are not simply a victimized out-group excluded from the German civil sphere, but are also agents of change who actively seek to gain full inclusion within it. Specifically, I trace how my German Muslim interlocutors contend with their negative social status by drawing on narratives, and enlivening connections that link them to the German Jewish experience: seeking incorporation in the civil sphere through identifications with another “Other,” and through this other, also mainstream society.
Abstract: Syrian refugees have become a significant minority in Germany over the past decade, with approximately one million now residing in the country. Most of them plan to stay and are eager to integrate into German society. Alongside practical challenges such as uncertain legal status, securing housing, finding employment, facing racism, and learning the German language, they must also navigate an ideological environment where common views on the Middle East, Islam, Israel, Jews, and the Holocaust differ significantly from those in their home country. This necessitates a certain degree of adaptation. Based on qualitative interviews with more than 200 Arab and Kurdish Syrian refugees, we examine self-perceptions, views on developments in the Middle East, and attitudes toward Jews. Significant differences emerged between Arab and Kurdish respondents. Especially among Syrian Kurds, there’s a noticeable openness to challenge antisemitic attitudes, often motivated by a rejection of Arab nationalist ideology and anti-Zionist propaganda. Syrian Kurds often perceive Jews and Israel more favorably than Arab Syrians. Their history of discrimination and oppression in Syria contributes to their rejection of hatred of Jews and Israel.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Attitude Surveys, Antisemitism: Christian, Antisemitism: Definitions, Antisemitism: Discourse, Antisemitism: Education against, Antisemitism: Far right, Antisemitism: Left-Wing, Antisemitism: Monitoring, Antisemitism: Muslim, Antisemitism: New Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Online, Internet, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Attitudes to Jews, Anti-Zionism, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Methodology, Social Media
Abstract: This open access book is the first comprehensive guide to identifying antisemitism online today, in both its explicit and implicit (or coded) forms. Developed through years of on-the-ground analysis of over 100,000 authentic comments posted by social media users in the UK, France, Germany and beyond, the book introduces and explains the central historical, conceptual and linguistic-semiotic elements of 46 antisemitic concepts, stereotypes and speech acts. The guide was assembled by researchers working on the Decoding Antisemitism project at the Centre for Research on Antisemitism at Technische Universität Berlin, building on existing basic definitions of antisemitism, and drawing on expertise in various fields. Using authentic examples taken from social media over the past four years, it sets out a pioneering step-by-step approach to identifying and categorising antisemitic content, providing guidance on how to recognise a statement as antisemitic or not. This book will be an invaluable tool through which researchers, students, practitioners and social media moderators can learn to recognise contemporary antisemitism online – and the structural aspects of hate speech more generally – in all its breadth and diversity.
Abstract: According to the Jewish Chronicle, on December 1, 2021, a group of Jewish bus passengers on their way to celebrate Chanukkah in London were attacked by a mob, spit upon, verbally abused, and subjected to Nazi salutes.1 Similarly, the monitoring group Tell MAMA reported that in the week after the Daily Telegraph published a column written by the then prime minister Boris Johnson, in which he compared Muslim women to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers,” Islamophobic incidents in the United Kingdom rose by 375 percent. In December 2019, a fourteen- year- old Muslim girl was violently attacked on her way home from school. The same month, a rabbi waiting in the Stamford Hill overground station was beaten by two men who shouted, “fucking Jew, dirty Jew” and “kill the Jews”; a month earlier a Jewish father and his two young sons were the targets of antisemitic abuse on the London Underground. While these forms of generalized Islamophobia and antisemitism have unfortunately become commonplace in the United Kingdom , there exists a largely unexamined form of antisemitic/Islamophobic violence perpetuated against LGBT Muslims and Jews— double minorities. In this chapter, I examine discourses present in the British print media that may contribute to a framing of LGBT Muslims and Jews in ways that can lead to the demonization of members of both communities. Robert Phillips My focus here is in the collective representation of double minorities by the British press. In choosing this focus, I should point out that those minorities who are the targets of harassment are targeted largely due to the saliency of their difference. As noted above, women wearing head or body coverings of any degree and men and boys wearing what are perceived to be “Muslim” or “Jewish” clothing or hairstyle (head coverings/payot) are often targeted. This includes Sikh men and boys wearing turbans, in that some may incorrectly identify them as Muslims. Because of outward appearance, many of the victims of these crimes may also be perceived to be observant in their faith and perhaps even threatening to national security and identity. This chapter is concerned with members of these communities who also identify as LGBT, positioning them as double minorities. As with members of other diasporic communities around the globe, LGBT Muslims and Jews have assumed unique types of identity forged through a combination of factors brought about by, among other things, processes of transnational migration. As both Muslims and Jews form some of the smallest ethnic communities in Britain, they are far outnumbered by more dominant Anglo groups and share a type of liminal subjectivity. Gay Muslim and Jewish men are both an ethnic and a sexual minority, further complicating this relationship. This dual-minority status has had a distinctive effect on how nonminority British view these individuals. For instance, Yip focuses on kin relations when examining the narratives of non-heterosexual British Muslims and suggests that within these communities , there is a perception of homosexuality as a “Western” disease that did not exist in the family’s community of origin. They also point out the fraught negotiations between parents and children, complicated further by sociocultural and religious factors, when it comes time to marry and the subsequent strategies employed by the children. In terms of how the nation views Muslims in Britain, Jaspal and Cinnirella position such subjects as a hybridized threat— British Muslims are positioned solidly as “other” while simultaneously being framed as a threat to the survival of the “in- group.”
Abstract: La ricerca rientra nel progetto PCTO sull’antisemitismo a cui hanno aderito 84 studenti di tre scuole superiori della Regione Lazio, due licei e un istituto d’istruzione superiore, insieme a Progetto Memoria e alla Fondazione CDEC per l’anno scolastico 2022-2023.
Studenti e studentesse delle classi terze e quarte, insieme ai docenti referenti hanno coinvolto Progetto Memoria quale tutor esterno (Sandra Terracina) e due dipartimenti della Fondazione CDEC (Betti Guetta, Stefano Gatti e Murilo Cambruzzi per l’Osservatorio antisemitismo; Patrizia Baldi per la Didattica) per sviluppare il progetto, ricevere formazione, essere coadiuvati nell’analisi e nella riflessione su stereotipi e pregiudizi, in particolare sugli ebrei. Tra gli obiettivi del progetto, la promozione di un processo conoscitivo sulle cause e sulle dinamiche dell’antisemitismo, indirizzato a far emergere comportamenti e atteggiamenti diffusi nella società, al fine di orientare ai valori di una collettività democratica e inclusiva, partendo dalla fotografia realizzata dall’indagine delle Fondazione CDEC. L’apprendimento di carattere storico, sociologico, psicosociale e statistico ha permesso agli studenti di sviluppare le attività a loro affidate. Sono stati stimolati a confrontarsi con figure esterne al mondo della scuola e a gestire, nelle varie fasi del progetto, dinamiche tra pari. Il lavoro di formazione e di tutoraggio si è tenuto in modalità ibrida.
Gli studenti coinvolti nel progetto di formazione hanno compilato un questionario (già utilizzato nell’anno scolastico precedente) finalizzato a valutare il grado di conoscenza degli ebrei e la presenza di pregiudizi e stereotipi nei loro confronti.
Il questionario è composto da 13 domande chiuse ed è stato somministrato tramite Google Forms, tra l’aprile e il maggio 2023, dagli studenti dei tre istituti che hanno partecipato alla seconda edizione del PCTO “Progetto sull’antisemitismo”.
La scelta metodologica è stata quella di coinvolgere nell’indagine i ragazzi del primo anno delle superiori e quelli dell’ultimo anno per cercare di valutare se il percorso scolastico (lungo 5 anni) possa avere un effetto sulla conoscenza degli ebrei e la condivisione di pregiudizi antisemiti.
In totale sono stati compilati 673 questionari 481 al liceo A (71.5%) e 29 al liceo B (4.3%), e 163 all’istituto d’istruzione superiore (24.2%). Il 73% degli studenti è iscritto al percorso scientifico e il 24% al tecnico, gli altri 3% si dividono tra il linguistico e il classico. Il 46 % degli studenti frequenta il primo anno e il 54 % il quinto. Il 45% ha dichiarato di appartenere al genere femminile e il 51% al maschile, il 4% rimanente non ha voluto indicarlo o ha indicato altro.
Abstract: The Gaza War is a watershed moment not only in the Middle East. It has also increased political divisions in Germany, where Israel’s security and the fight against anti-Semitism are part of its historical legacy and political and moral identity. Incidents of anti-Semitism have increased dramatically, as have overdrawn accusations of it. An analysis of controversies about the definition of anti-Semitism, about the use of the term apartheid for the situation in the West Bank, of the BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), and particularly the characterization
of Israel as a settler-colonial state shows how difficult it has become to maintain a fair, honest, and frank discussion considering different points of view. The current crisis should be used as an opportunity for Germany to, on the one hand, face the unavoidable contradictions in its responsibilities stemming from the crimes of its Nazi past and, on the other hand, come to grips not only with Arab and Iranian terrorism and eliminationist rhetoric but also with the deficiencies in Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians. Germany’s new leitmotiv ought to be: ‘Between the River
and the Sea, Jews and Arabs should be free.’
Abstract: Les différentes réalités de l’antisémitisme sont enfin objectivées.
L’Institut Jonathas présente les résultats du premier sondage réalisé en Belgique sur la perception des Juifs, de l’antisémitisme, des autres minorités et de la guerre en cours à Gaza et en Israël.
Créé en mars 2024, l’Institut Jonathas est un centre d’études et d’action contre l’antisémitisme et contre tout ce qui le favorise en Belgique. Il a demandé à IPSOS d’objectiver et de mesurer, à la veille des élections du 9 juin, les opinions des Belges sur des sujets qui sont au cœur de sa raison d’être.
IPSOS a interrogé, du 8 au 12 mai, un échantillon de 1.000 personnes, représentatif de la population belge de 18 ans et plus, avec le même panel et la même méthodologie que pour les sondages politiques.
En l’absence de sondages pouvant tenir lieu de points de comparaison en Belgique, plusieurs questions ont été reprises de sondages récents menés en France par IPSOS ou par IFOP. Les résultats français sont indiqués ci-après, lorsque la comparaison avec les résultats belges est pertinente.
Le sondage réalisé par IPSOS pour l’Institut Jonathas met en lumière et objective les différentes facettes de l’image des Juifs et de l’antisémitisme dans la société belge :
Une image très moyenne des Juifs, 80 ans après la Shoah.
Des marqueurs d’antisémitisme primaire prégnants dans toutes les composantes de la société belge et sur-représentés à l’extrême-gauche, à l’extrême-droite et chez les musulmans
En plus de ces préjugés « traditionnels » (argent, pouvoir, religion…), des marqueurs d’antisémitisme dit « secondaire », aboutissant à banaliser la Shoah et à nazifier Israël
Une méconnaissance générale des Juifs, du judaïsme et de la réalité de l’antisémitisme en Belgique
Trois premières sources d’antisémitisme en Belgique, selon les Belges : l’hostilité à Israël, l’islamisme radical et les préjugés sur les Juifs
Un écho limité chez les Belges des sujets relatifs à Israël, à la Palestine et à la guerre, à l’exception d’une minorité dont certains éléments souhaitent la destruction de l’Etat d’Israël
Distance ou indifférence d’environ 50% des Belges vis-à-vis de la guerre entre Israël et le Hamas, mais aussi polarisation sur ce conflit de segments précis de la population belge.
La guerre, source d’inquiétude pour les Juifs en Belgique selon la majorité des Belges, mais aussi matière à hostilité contre les Juifs en Belgique pour une minorité de Belges
Un antisémitisme s’inscrivant dans une société belge plutôt tendue et inquiète concernant ses relations avec les différents groupes minoritaires et, en particulier, les musulmans et les Maghrébins.
Abstract: У статті розглядається вплив масової прощі представників закордонних хасидських громад на динаміку розвитку українсько-єврейських взаємин зокрема та на етнополітичні процеси сучасної України загалом. Актуальність дослідження визначається, по-перше, недостатньою вивченістю вказаного явища у вітчизняній науці; по-друге, тією обставиною, що кількість паломників, які щороку відвідують нашу країну, суттєво перевищує чисельність парафіян місцевих юдейських громад. Специфіка хасидського віровчення вимагає, щоби віруючі регулярно відвідували місця поховання своїх провідних лідерів. Тому, оскільки згаданий релігійний рух зародився саме в Україні, зв’язок з нею багатьох закордонних юдейських релігійних громад тримається на високому рівні, незважаючи на жодні обставини. Ні пандемія, ні війна суттєво не зменшили кількість відвідувачів місць поховання вчителів хасидизму. Наведені автором факти дозволяють виявити дві суперечливі тенденції в реакції місцевих мешканців на прибуття численних послідовників юдейського релігійно-містичного руху: 1. Поширення ворожих настроїв та акцій, скерованих проти прибульців; 2. Зростання зацікавленості в розвитку прощі і збільшення толерантності.
Перша тенденція зумовлена суттєвими розбіжностями у світогляді, культурі та побутових звичках. Вона також є наслідком корупційних проблем, оскільки муніципальна влада вводить до місцевих бюджетів лише малу частину здобутих від паломників коштів. Друга тенденція визначається зацікавленістю місцевих мешканців у заробітках, пов’язаних з обслуговуванням прочан, і толерантністю, яка дедалі більше поширюється в суспільстві. У висновках відзначається, що розвиток дружніх стосунків між місцевим населенням і хасидами-паломниками сприяє позитивній динаміці іміджу українського суспільства не лише в єврейському середовищі, але також і в численних спільнотах сучасного західного світу, які безпосередньо не причетні до юдаїзму. Це, в свою чергу, допоможе Україні під час повоєнної розбудови. Задля вирішення пов’язаних з прощею проблем автор рекомендує низку просвітянських заходів для місцевого населення, регіонального чиновництва та самих паломників.
Abstract: Our narrative and expert interviews with Jewish and non-Jewish key figures in public and political life mainly focussed on the question of to what extent have Jewish-non Jewish relations changed, compared to the discord prior to 1933, and the general reservation and uncertainty after 1945? We also raised other key questions like: to what extent do Jews in Germany feel integrated into today’s non-Jewish majority society? What do they consider core elements of their Jewish identities? What is the meaning of Israel in their lives as Jews? How do they cope with new trends of antisemitism in Germany? As a complementary question, we wanted to know from our non-Jewish interviewees how different they consider Jewish/non-Jewish relations today? To what extent does Shoah memory (still) affect these relations? How do Jews and non-Jews cooperate in social activities, and are there new, joint strategies to combat antisemitism?
Our interviews revealed that Jews in present-day Germany do not romanticize their lives in the country of the former Nazi regime. However, they appreciate efforts by the state to promote future Jewish life, to carry out dignified politics of commemoration, and to ensure security. Antisemitism is perceived as a societal problem but not as an existential threat. None of the Jewish interview partners considered Germany as a place that is too dangerous for Jews. Memory of the Shoah is considered important, but building a Jewish future, especially for one’s
own children, is the more relevant issue.
A key finding of our interviews in Germany is that a new generation of young Jews has grown up neither justifying living in the “country of the offenders” nor considering themselves representatives of the State of Israel. Young Jews in Germany run their own multifaceted networks, understanding themselves as Jews but to a similar extent also as Germans. Some of them enjoy participation in public and political life, deliberately acting in both roles
Abstract: Quelques jours après l’attaque du Hamas en Israël, l’IFOP a réalisé pour le Journal du Dimanche, un sondage destiné à comprendre quelles étaient les représentations des Français à l’égard du conflit et de son impact sur une éventuelle importation de violences antisémites en France.
Premier enseignement de cette étude, le conflit au Proche-Orient apparaît comme particulièrement anxiogène. 86% des Français indiquent être inquiets (36% « tout à fait inquiets »), soit un niveau d’inquiétude proche de celui mesuré au début du conflit russo-ukrainien. Le sentiment d’inquiétude atteint son acmé dans certains segments de la population traditionnellement plus favorables à l’Etat Hébreu : les plus de 65 ans (44% de tout à fait inquiets parmi les plus de 65 ans contre 25% parmi les 18-24 ans) ou encore les électeurs de Valérie Pécresse (50% de « tout à fait inquiets »).
Deuxième enseignement de cette étude : les Français établissent clairement un lien entre les évènements au Proche-Orient et l’importation de violences antisémites en France. 48% des sondés estiment ainsi que les Français de confession juive sont plus en danger et 79% se déclarent inquiets que le conflit se traduise par une augmentation des actes antisémites.
Plus globalement, les Français identifient bien les « nouvelles formes d’antisémitisme » comme étant des causes à ce phénomène : 77% citent le rejet et la haine d’Israël, 76% les idées islamistes, soit des niveaux supérieurs à ceux mesurés pour les idées d’extrême droite (66%).
Dernier point, les pouvoirs publics bénéficient d’une certaine mansuétude dans l’opinion : 60% des Français estiment leur faire confiance pour assurer la sécurité des Français de confession juive. Jean-Luc Mélenchon suscite en revanche la défiance sur ce sujet : il apparait comme la personnalité politique qui suscite le moins de confiance pour lutter contre l’antisémitisme (17%), loin derrière Edouard Philippe (46%), Gerald Darmanin (42%), Marine Le Pen (42%) ou encore Emmanuel Macron (41%).
Abstract: Lorsqu’un tribunal allemand à Cologne décida que l’ablation du prépuce pour motif religieux relève de coups et blessures volontaires, il ne pensait pas faire de politique. Lorsque les porte-parole des Juifs en Allemagne s’indignèrent que cette décision revienne en somme à bannir les juifs du pays, éclata un scandale politique national aux proportions mondiales. La chancelière Angela Merkel, rapporte-t-on, réagit en disant « Je ne veux pas que l’Allemagne soit le seul pays au monde dans lequel les Juifs ne peuvent pratiquer leurs rites. Sinon on passerait pour une nation de guignols ». En réalité ce n’est pas le ridicule que l’Allemagne craignait, c’était qu’après avoir tenté d’éradiquer les Juifs d’Europe, avec un certain succès, elle affiche une inhospitalité foncière à l’égard des Juifs. Mais il n’est pas fortuit que ce soit précisément en Allemagne que les droits de l’homme, les droits les plus individuels, soient scrupuleusement approfondis jusqu’à une conclusion politiquement intenable.
Le tribunal de Cologne, en pénalisant la berit milah, ne fait pas de politique, il protège l’intégrité physique de la personne et déclenche pourtant un scandale politique et des réactions en chaîne qui poussèrent le législateur allemand à amender dans l’urgence cette embarrassante décision. Et les juifs, lorsqu’ils circoncisent, que font-ils exactement ? Les anthropologues ont échafaudés un ensemble d’hypothèses sur la fonction de la circoncision. Les réponses varient selon le groupe étudié, mais souvent se chevauchent…
Abstract: Si l’on considère à deux ans de distance le débat sur la circoncision qui a secoué l’Allemagne en 2012, et du point de vue d’un combattant juif alors focalisé uniquement sur la circoncision juive de garçons, ma conclusion est que la circoncision a perdu son innocence. Certes, il y a toujours eu des livres de Juifs et des articles de non-Juifs pour s’en prendre à la circoncision ; et certes, il y eut de nombreuses discussions sur certaines pratiques, comme la Metzitza bePeh, la succion du sang par le mohel qui exécute la circoncision, par exemple quant à savoir si l’usage d’une paille en verre devait être rendu obligatoire – et malgré tout, la circoncision était un acte qui semblait aller de soi. Et quiconque souhaitait y renoncer pour son fils y renonçait.
Or, avec le débat sur la circoncision, qui a eu lieu dans une Europe centrale qui considère la religion avec méfiance dès qu’elle poursuit des buts autres que thérapeutiques, les choses ont changé d’un coup. Au prétexte des complications qui survinrent lors de la circoncision d’un garçon musulman, circoncision qui n’avait pour ainsi dire rien à avoir avec une berit milah (considérant l’âge du garçon, le lieu, les participants et les conditions de l’acte) – la circoncision a été prise dans une spirale de légitimations, qui n’avait pour ainsi dire rien à voir avec le rapport que la majorité des juifs entretiennent à l’égard de cette tradition, ou, pour employer ici le terme religieux, de cette mitsvah.
Abstract: Partons d’un constat, qui est à l’origine de notre volonté – avec Danielle Cohen-Levinas – d’organiser ce colloque pour le penser collectivement : en juin 2012, un jugement de la cour d’appel de Cologne déclarait la circoncision d’un enfant pour des raisons religieuses constitutive d’atteinte à l’intégrité corporelle. Cette pratique très ancienne et commune au judaïsme et à l’islam était dès lors interdite dans toute l’Allemagne. Quelques semaines plus tard, l’Autriche et les hôpitaux universitaires de certains cantons suisses décidaient à leur tour d’un moratoire sur les circoncisions rituelles. Dans cette Allemagne repentante depuis des décennies, les Juifs se sont retrouvés de manière inattendue et soudaine au cœur d’une polémique puissante qui les renvoyait, aux côtés des musulmans, à une pratique décrétée mutilatrice, archaïque, voire barbare. Ce rituel, fondamental au point que son interdiction rendait impossible la présence juive en Allemagne, selon le Zentralrat der Juden, semblait contredire et bafouer des valeurs essentielles de la République fédérale. Ce débat s’est élargi, puisqu’en octobre 2013 c’est le Conseil de l’Europe qui publiait un avis préconisant de légiférer dans le sens d’une limitation, voire d’une interdiction de la circoncision rituelle à l’échelle du continent. L’affaire est sérieuse, une incompatibilité entre l’Europe et ses minorités juive et musulmane est explicitement énoncée, ce fait est sans précédent depuis la fin du nazisme.
Abstract: The question was asked by a girl of about 12 standing in front of the synagogue. It shows many of the aspects that play a role in the encounter with the New Synagogue Dresden as an out-of-school place of learning and which will be explored here. What is striking is a diffuse lifeworld knowledge with a simultaneous failure to differentiate between different religions, the understanding of symbolism and the double occupation of “Why?” between causal and final cognitive interest. On the one hand, then, the question speaks to the consideration of for what reason, and on the other hand, for what purpose, certain signs and practices occur. After an introduction to the New Synagogue, its potentials for the development of competencies, especially among children and young people, are explored. After that, the focus is on the conditions necessary for its use, and another section deals with the specific difficulties that can arise. The book concludes with a plea for the synagogue as an out-of-school place of learning, also beyond the topic of Judaism.
Abstract: This article follows up on assumptions of Rogers Brubaker and Benjamin Moffitt, according to whom, some Western and Northern European right-wing populist parties use ‘civilisationist’ and liberal-illiberal narratives that are, for instance, characterised by a ‘philo-Semitic stance’. The paper analyses to what extent the German right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany (AfD) fits into this concept, considering the party’s ambivalent attitude towards Judaism, Jews, and Israel. Using qualitative content analysis, the study is based on an examination of AfD electoral manifestos and parliamentary documents from the federal level as well as from states such as Berlin, Baden-Württemberg, and Thuringia between 2014 and 2019. Our results reveal differences that range from open anti-Semitic statements to self-definitions as a ‘pro-Jewish’ party. We argue that different positions can be explained by regionally divergent discursive opportunity structures as well as personnel heterogeneity across the party sections under study. Furthermore, we reason that a combination of anti-Semitic and pro-Jewish/Israeli statements fits into the AfD’s strategy of addressing both voters from the radical right with anti-Semitic prejudices and more moderate, conservative voters that reject open hostility towards Jews and Israel. We conclude that the AfD fulfils Brubaker’s and Moffitt’s concepts only to a rather limited extent.
Abstract: Campaigning organisation Avaaz commissioned ICM Unlimited to conduct a nationally representative poll to look into attitudes of the British public towards Jews and Muslims.
Some of the key findings include:
Overall, just under half of British adults say that they have a positive view of Jews (47%), while 7% say that they have a negative view. When it comes to Muslims, the British public’s attitudes are more unfavourable. A quarter say that they have a negative view of Muslims (26%), while a third say that they have a positive view (32%).
2017 Conservative voters are more likely than those who voted Labour to have a negative view of Muslims. Just under four in ten of those who voted Conservative in 2017 say that they have a negative view of Muslims (37%), more than double the proportion of those who voted Labour who have a negative view (16%).
A greater proportion of people agree than disagree for four of the five statements about Muslims/Islam that Avaaz tested. That is, more people agree than disagree that: Islam threatens the British way of life (45% agree vs. 31% disagree), Islamophobia in Britain is a response to the everyday behaviour of Muslims (36% vs. 34%), parts of the UK are under Sharia law (33% vs. 28%), and that there should be a reduction in the number of Muslims entering Britain (41% vs. 25%). The only statement with which more people disagree than agree is: ‘Islamic terrorism reflects the views of the Muslim community in Britain’ (26% agree vs. 49% disagree).
Six in ten 2017 Conservative voters agree that ‘Islam threatens the British way of life’ (62%), compared to 35% of 2017 Labour voters.
When it comes to attitudes towards Jews, just over one in seven of people agree that ‘Jews have disproportionate influence in politics’ (15%). Among 2017 Labour voters, this figure rises to one in five (20%), compared to one in seven 2017 Conservative voters (14%).
