Abstract: As a consequence of the Holocaust, Israel’s security is officially regarded as part of Germany’s
“reason of state”. Yet the criteria for a responsible relationship between Germany and Israel are by
no means self-evident or without logical or practical contradictions. One of the complications is
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In order to better understand this complication, I examine two
familiar national narratives, one from each side, about possible connections between the Nazi era,
the Holocaust, and this conflict. I also put the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a broader historical
context. It turns out that the examined relationships are not as obvious as the familiar narratives
describe them. The origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are older than the Nazi era and the
Holocaust, and they also point to broader European responsibilities more generally, to Europe’s
nationalism, anti-Semitism, colonialism and imperialism – with irresponsibilities towards both
Jews and Arabs. In no way does such a comprehensive perspective affect Germany’s special historical responsibilities resulting from the Holocaust. But it puts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a
more complete and also more honest framework, with consequences for Germany’s moral and
political position
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: This study considers the flying of Palestinian flags by Celtic Football Club supporters in Scotland as an illustration of political activism in sport. Despite being over 4000 kilometres away and holding no ethnic, national or religious connections with any community involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle-East, fans wave these flags to demonstrate backing for Palestinian people. With reference to an historical context of the ethno-religious origins of Celtic FC and its supporting fanbase being significantly composed of members of a multi-generational Irish-Catholic diasporic minority community in Scotland, through utilizing fan writings, self-representations, and the results of a small survey of supporters, this research provides for deeper understanding of the intermittent use of sport as a space for ‘taking sides’ in conflicts that have ethnic, national, religious, and political resonances. Critically, this insight also offers important reflections regarding narratives of antisemitism in football and beyond.
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: This chapter introduces the notion of ‘enabling concepts’: concepts which may or may not themselves constitute a mode of hate speech, but which through their broad social acceptability facilitate or legitimate the articulation of concepts which can be more directly classed as hate speech. We argue that each distinct hate ideology will contain its own, partly overlapping set of ‘enabling concepts.’ In this chapter, we will focus on the enabling role of references to apartheid for the constitution of antisemitism in British online discourse around Israel. This argument does not rest on agreement as to whether the ‘apartheid analogy’—comparisons between contemporary Israel and the former Apartheid regime in South Africa—itself constitutes a form of antisemitism. The chapter draws on qualitative analysis of more than 10,000 user comments posted on social media profiles of mainstream media in the UK, undertaken by the Decoding Antisemitism project in the wake of the May 2021 escalation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict. We will show how web commenters frequently use the apartheid analogy to trigger more extreme antisemitic stereotypes, including age-old tropes, intensifying and distorting analogies (such as Nazi comparisons) or calls for Israel’s elimination. The results will be presented in detail based on a pragmalinguistic approach taking into account the immediate context of the comment thread and broader world knowledge. Both of these aspects are relevant preconditions for examining all forms of antisemitic hate speech that can remain undetected when conducting solely statistical analysis. Based on this large dataset, we suggest that—under the cover of its widespread social acceptability—the apartheid analogy thus facilitates the articulation and legitimation of extreme antisemitic concepts that would, without this prior legitimation, be more likely to be rejected or countered.
Abstract: Over the past 3.5 years, the Decoding Antisemitism research project has been analysing antisemitism on the internet in terms of content, structure, and frequency. Over this time, there has been no shortage of flashpoints which have generated antisemitic responses. Yet the online response to the Hamas attacks of 7 October and the subsequent Israeli operations in Gaza has surpassed anything the project has witnessed before. In no preceding escalation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict has the predominant antisemitic reaction been one of open jubilation and joy over the deaths of Israeli Jews. As demonstrated in the sixth and final Discourse Report, this explicit approval of the Hamas attacks was the primary response from web users. The response to 7 October therefore represents a turning point in antisemitic online discourse, and its repercussions will be felt long into the future.
The report contains analysis of the various stages of online reactions to events in the Middle East, from the immediate aftermath to the Israeli retaliations and subsequent accusations of genocide against Israel. As well as examining online reactions in the project’s core focus—the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—this report also, for the first time, extends its view to analyse Israel-related web discourses in six further countries, including those in Southern and Eastern Europe as well as in North Africa. Alongside reactions to the escalation phase, the report also examines online responses to billionaire Elon Musk’s explosive comments about Jewish individuals and institutions.
Additionally, the report provides a retrospective overview of the project’s development over the past 3.5 years, tracking its successes and challenges, particularly regarding the conditions for successful interdisciplinary work and the ability of machine learning to capture the versatility and complexity of authentic web communication.
To mark the publication of the report, we are also sharing our new, interactive data visualisations tool, which lets you examine any two discourse events analysed by our research team between 2021 and 2023. You can compare the frequencies and co-occurrences of antisemitic concepts and speech acts by type and by country, look at frequencies of keywords in antisemitic comments, and plot keyword networks.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Discourse, Antisemitism: Monitoring, Internet, Social Media, Main Topic: Antisemitism, War, Terrorism, Attitudes to Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)
Abstract: The initiatives that took place to support Israeli families temporarily in the UK
started within three days after 7th October.
• Key organisations in the Jewish Community came together to help: JAFI, UJIA,
PaJeS, CST.
• They were supported by other organisations in various ways, e.g. JVN, and by
many individuals.
• There was a huge gap between the large number of expressions of interest in
school places and eventual places taken up.
• Each Local Education Authority Admissions process was different from each other,
and LEAs waived usual procedures to be accommodating and speed up the
admissions processes.
• Almost all temporary Israeli families were able to visit their UK school prior to
accepting a place and starting school.
• By November, more than 100 children had been placed in schools, mostly in the
primary sector.
• Whilst each school dealt uniquely with the situation of having temporary families in
their schools, there were many commonalities, e.g. acquiring school uniform,
communication, pairing with other Hebrew speakers.
• Relating to the school system in the UK has been a steep learning curve for these
families.
• PaJeS has been significantly involved in providing support, especially in
admissions advice, Hebrew, wellbeing, funding and resources.
• A concern at the beginning, which was that the regular school population would be
disadvantage by schools accepting these additional families, has not materialised.
• By the beginning of December 2023, although some families are still arriving, the
number of Israelis temporarily in UK schools has already begun to decrease.
• Some families who are leaving, want an option to return and want schools to “save”
their places for them, which challenges the schools.
Abstract: In this report:
Five weeks after the barbaric attack on innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas, this factsheet uses data from recent polling by two major polling agencies, Ipsos and YouGov, alongside historical data on these issues, to shed light on what people in the UK think about the conflict, where their sympathies lie, and what they believe the British government should do in response to the latest events in Israel and Gaza.
Some of the key findings in this report:
Since the 7 October attack, the proportion of British adults sympathising with the Israeli side has doubled from a pre-war level of about 10% to about 20%, whereas sympathy for the Palestinian side has fallen by a few percentage points from 24% to around 15%-21%;
Nevertheless, levels of sympathy for the Palestinian side have been gradually climbing since October 7, and are now approaching their pre-war levels;
Young adults are much more likely to sympathise with the Palestinians than the Israelis; older people hold the opposite view;
British adults are over twice as likely to think that Israel does not try to minimise harm to civilians than it does make such efforts;
British adults are more likely to think the UK should be more critical toward Israel than it has been, as opposed to more supportive. The younger respondents are, the more likely they are to believe the UK should be more critical;
British adults are twice as likely to think the police should be making more arrests at pro-Palestinian demonstrations than less, though there is are clear generational differences of opinion on this issue;
Almost all subgroups think the police should arrest people who openly support Hamas at demonstrations in the UK.
Abstract: Key findings
• Since 7 October, Decoding Antisemitism has analysed more than 11,000 comments
posted on YouTube and Facebook in response to mainstream media reports of the
Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel.
• Our analysis reveals a significant jump in the number of antisemitic comments, even
compared with other violent incidents in the Middle East.
• CELEBRATION, SUPPORT FOR and JUSTIFICATION OF THE HAMAS TERROR ATTACKS make up the
largest proportion of antisemitic comments – ranging between 19 % in German
Facebook comment sections and 53 and 54.7 % in French Facebook and UK YouTube
comment sections, respectively – in contrast to previous studies where direct
affirmation of violence was negligible.
• The number of antisemitic comments CELEBRATING THE ATROCITIES rises in response to
media reports of attacks on Israelis/Jews themselves, compared with reports on the
conflict more generally.
• Beyond affirmation of the Hamas attacks, other frequently expressed antisemitic
concepts across the corpus included DENIALS OF ISRAEL’S RIGHT TO EXIST, attributing SOLE
GUILT to Israel for the entire history of the conflict, describing Israel as a TERRORIST
STATE, CONSPIRACY THEORIES about Jewish POWER, and ideas of inherent Israeli EVIL.
• As with the project’s past research, this analysis reveals a diversity of antisemitic
concepts and communicative strategies. The findings reaffirm that antisemitism
appears as a multifaceted mosaic, as a result of which it is not possible to deal with
all the elements. Only the most prominent tendencies are brought into focus here.
Abstract: This chapter addresses the effects of the German politics of memory and the historical overdetermination of the discourse on antisemitism in the country. German antisemitism discourse builds on an exceptionalist conception of antisemitism as delusional and exterminist, which is derived from the experience of the Holocaust. This conception has proven to be unhelpful in understanding, tackling or fighting contemporary manifestations of antisemitism in all their diversity, varying formative contexts and differing degrees of severity or threat, especially with regard to the overlap between antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The current debate on BDS, along with the range of legal and quasi-legal efforts to severely restrict the movement, is symptomatic of this discourse. Rather than conceptualising (and criticising) the movement in all its heterogeneous facets and ideological and practical ambivalences and contradictions, the bulk of the German anti-BDS discourse tends to equate BDS with the Nazi boycott against Jews. The IHRA’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, with its blatant weaknesses, gaps, internal contradictions and political bias, is applied as a helpful tool in these efforts. This chapter outlines the German debate on DBS, including various public scandals and tightening administrative measures tied to Germany’s symbolic anti-antisemitism. In doing so, it highlights trends towards the juridification, securitisation and ‘antifa-isation’ of the discourse on antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Abstract: Eine internationale Mobilisierung des israelbezogenen Antisemitismus durch Organisationen, die der islamistischen Muslimbruderschaft und den Terrorgruppen Hamas und PFLP nahestehen oder mit ihnen sympathisieren, bildete den Hintergrund für zahlreiche Gewaltvorfälle und Bedrohungen von Jüdinnen_Juden im vergangenen Mai. Viele antisemitische Vorfälle ereigneten sich im Umfeld antiisraelischer Versammlungen, doch war für jüdische Communities die Bedrohung durch Antisemitismus vielfältig im Alltag spürbar. Dies geht aus dem gemeinsamen Bericht des Bundesverbandes der Recherche- und Informationsstellen Antisemitismus e.V. (Bundesverband RIAS) und des Internationalen Institut für Bildung, Sozial- und Antisemitismusforschung (IIBSA) über antisemitische Vorfälle im Kontext der Eskalation der Gewalt im Nahen Osten im Mai 2021 hervor.
Der Bericht „Mobilisierungen von israelbezogenem Antisemitismus im Bundesgebiet 2021” befasst sich mit der internationalen und bundesweiten Mobilisierung von israelbezogenem Antisemitismus im Mai 2021 sowie mit den zwischen dem 9. und 24. Mai 2021 bekannt gewordenen antisemitischen Vorfällen in Deutschland im Zeitraum des bewaffneten Konflikts zwischen der Hamas und Israel.
Die Analysen des Forschungsinstituts IIBSA zeigen eine breite Mobilisierung des Antisemitismus, die von links/antiimperialistischem Spektrum über die politische Mitte bis hin zu nationalistischen, neonazistischen und islamistischen Milieus reichte. Verschiedene internationale Akteur_innen und ihre Sympathisant_innen waren an der Aufstachelung von antisemitischem Hass, Gewalt oder Terrorismus beteiligt, etwa die Palästinensische Front zur Befreiung Palästinas (PFLP), die Millî Görüş-Bewegung, die Grauen Wölfe und das türkische Präsidium für religiöse Angelegenheiten, Diyanet. Eine besondere Rolle nahmen hierbei bereits im Vorfeld der kriegerischen Auseinandersetzung Organisationen ein, die der islamistischen Muslimbruderschaft und den Terrorgruppen Hamas nahestehen oder mit ihnen sympathisieren, wie etwa die Palästinensische Gemeinschaft in Deutschland (PGD).
Zeitgleich zur Eskalation im israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt zwischen dem 9. und dem 24. Mai 2021 dokumentierte der Bundesverband RIAS deutschlandweit 261 antisemitische Vorfälle mit einem entsprechenden Bezug – im Schnitt mehr als 16 Vorfälle am Tag. Bekannt wurden u.a. 10 Angriffe, 22 gezielte Sachbeschädigungen und 18 Bedrohungen.
Dabei war Antisemitismus nicht nur auf den antiisraelischen Versammlungen zu beobachten, sondern ein alltagsprägendes Phänomen für Jüdinnen_Juden: Er begegnete ihnen am Arbeitsplatz, in Gesprächen und Diskussionen im Bekannten- oder Freundeskreis, im Umfeld von Synagogen, während zufälliger Begegnungen im Supermarkt, im öffentlichen Personennahverkehr, auf der Straße und im eigenen Wohnumfeld.
Abstract: What do Jews in the UK think in regard to Israel’s military conflict with Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza? This report looks into the opinions of over 4,000 of JPR’s Research Panel members, following the May 2021 conflict between the sides. Respondents were asked to state how much they agree or disagree with two different statements: “Israel’s government handled the military aspects of the conflict appropriately” and “Israel’s government engaged in the conflict primarily for political rather than military reasons”.
The report finds that overall, Jews support Israel’s right to defend itself militarily but that this support is not uncritical. Moreover, Jews in the UK do not hold uniform views on Israel: levels of attachment to Israel, support for Britain’s Labour Party and holding a degree level qualification were found to be the key predictors of attitudes.
Some of the key findings in this report:
57% of the respondents agreed that Israel’s government handled the military aspects of the conflict appropriately, while 33% disagreed.
42% of the respondents agreed that Israel’s government engaged in the conflict primarily for political rather than military reasons, while 47% disagreed.
The main predictor of attitudes about this conflict is a person’s level of emotional attachment to Israel. Those with stronger feeling of attachment are more willing to give Israel the benefit of the doubt, independent of other variables such as political stance, religiosity and education.
In general, respondents who felt more weakly attached to Israel, or who were younger or more secular, or politically leftist, or university educated, were more likely to hold a more critical stance than those who were older, or more religious, or politically rightist, or non-university educated
Abstract: This book focuses on the development of bilateral Jewish-Muslim relations in London and Amsterdam since the late-1980s. It offers a comparative analysis that considers both similarities and differences, drawing on historical, social scientific, and religious studies perspectives. The authors address how Jewish-Muslim relations are related to the historical and contemporary context in which they are embedded, the social identity strategies Jews and Muslims and their institutions employ, and their perceived mutual positions in terms of identity and power. The first section reflects on the history and current profile of Jewish and Muslim communities in London and Amsterdam and the development of relations between Jews andMuslims in both cities. The second section engages with sources of conflict and cooperation. Four specific areas that cause tension are explored: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; antisemitism and Islamophobia; attacks by extremists; and the commemoration of wars and genocides. In addition to ‘trigger events’, what stands out is the influence of historical factors, public opinion, the ‘mainstream’ Christian churches and the media, along with the role of government. The volume will be of interest to scholars from fields including religious studies, interfaith studies, Jewish studies, Islamic studies, urban studies, European studies, and social sciences as well as members of the communities concerned, other religious communities, journalists, politicians, and teachers who are interested in Jewish-Muslim relations.
Abstract: On 12 June 2014, three Israeli teenagers were abducted in the West Bank, against a backdrop of heightened tension between the Israeli state and Palestinian forces, including a renewal of settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The abduction was followed by days of escalating violence, including a massive Israeli policing operation in the West Bank, the murder of a Palestinian teenager after the bodies of the kidnapped Israelis were found, and increasing numbers of rockets fired from Gaza into Israel. A series of Israeli air strikes on targets in Gaza on the night of 30 June'1 July marked the start of sustained Israel’s military engagement, and Operation Protective Edge was launched on 8 July, comprising initially of airstrikes on targets associated with rocket fire (with around 200 people killed in the strikes), followed by ground engagement a week later. De-escalation began on 3 August, with Israel withdrawing ground troops from Gaza, and an open-ended ceasefire concluded this round of the conflict on 26 August. In total, over 2100 Palestinians were killed (with estimates of civilians ranging between 50% and 76% of the losses), along with 66 Israeli combatants, 5 Israeli civilians and 1 Thai national. There were demonstrations against Israel’s prosecution of the conflict across the world, including several in the UK, as well as other manifestations of protest, such as public calls for and acts of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel. There were some reports of antisemitic content in some of these demonstrations, against a broader context in which antisemitic incidents spiked dramatically. Over 130 antisemitic were recorded by the Community Security Trust (CST) in July, making it the highest monthly total since January 2009 (a previous period of war in Gaza and Israel’s Operation Cast Lead). This short report examines the 2014 protests, exploring the extent and degree of antisemitism in the anti'Israel protests, as well as the reporting of this antisemitism and its impact on the Jewish community. It focuses in particular on the 50 days of Operation Protective Edge. The research questions which this report attempts to address are: • What were the predominant discourses in the UK protests relating to Operation Protective Edge? • Were antisemitic discourses present? If so, how prevalent were they? • Are UK protests relating to Operation Protective Edge comparable in scale and in discourse to protests relating to other conflicts? • How do these issues relate to mainstream and Jewish media reporting on the conflict and on the demonstrations? • How do these issues and their media representation affect Jewish feelings about antisemitism?
Abstract: On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait, unleashing the fi rst Gulf crisis. When, by January, the United Nations’ economic sanctions had failed to force Iraqi withdrawal, the United States and a thirty-four nation coalition invaded. Although Israel did not participate, this brief war, over by February 28, could not help but intersect with the ongoing Arab-Israeli confl ict. Not only did the Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, choose to drop missiles on Tel Aviv, touching off a secondary crisis over potential Israeli involvement, but calls to resolve the Palestinian question as part of a regional settlement circulated widely. For Muslims and Jews watching developments from afar, the First Gulf War thus became more than a conflict over Kuwaiti independence, oil rights or western imperialism. Rather it became a barometer of Muslim-Jewish relations around the world.
Abstract: Depuis 1967, le conflit israélo-palestinien a souvent été un facteur de tension au sein de la société française. Racisme, antisémitisme, affrontements communautaires se nourrissent de l’interminable crise du Proche-Orient. Pour quelles raisons particulières la France est-elle plus sensible qu’aucun autre pays occidental aux échos d’un conflit lointain et localisé ? Dans ce livre informé, Denis Sieffert s’efforce de remettre en perspective les relations tumultueuses entre la France et Israël. Plus qu’une simple affaire de politique étrangère, le Proche-Orient agit comme un miroir pour la société française et les communautés qui l’habitent. C’est pourquoi toute prise de position prend un caractère passionnel. Depuis le parrainage d’Israël par la IVe République jusqu’au caillassage du Premier ministre Lionel Jospin à l’université de Bir Zeit, en passant par la fameuse déclaration du général de Gaulle en 1967 à propos du peuple juif « sûr de lui-même et dominateur », et le « sauvetage » de Yasser Arafat par François Mitterrand en 1982, les débats et polémiques ont souvent divisé l’opinion française et ses responsables politiques. Denis Sieffert explore ici le rôle du passé colonial français toujours douloureux, la relation difficile entre le sionisme et la République et, plus largement, le problème que soulèvent les doubles allégeances. Il rappelle les liens que les grandes familles politiques conservent, plus d’un demi-siècle après la naissance d’Israël, avec les protagonistes du conflit. Il montre en particulier que les socialistes, comme leurs ancêtres de la SFIO, restent souvent très liés à Israël, alors que les communistes, l’extrême gauche, les Verts et les altermondialistes sont, eux, engagés dans le soutien des Palestiniens.
Abstract: Loin d’avoir disparu, la haine des Juifs est entrée dans un nouveau régime en se fixant sur Israël, cible d’une guerre médiatique de haute intensité. L’antisionisme radical, dont l’objectif est la destruction de l’État juif, représente en effet la dernière figure historique prise par la judéophobie. À ce titre, négatrice du droit à l’existence d’une nation, elle constitue l’une des principales formes contemporaines du racisme. Pour comprendre comment s’est accomplie la mondialisation de cette nouvelle configuration antijuive, l’auteur dissèque le nouveau discours de propagande des ennemis déclarés d’Israël tel qu’il s’est développé au cours des années 2000-2010. La nouvelle vision antijuive, qui consiste à « nazifier » les « sionistes » en tant qu’« agresseurs » et à « judaïser » corrélativement les Palestiniens en tant que « victimes », permet d’accuser les « sionistes » de « génocide » ou de « palestinocide ». Ce discours de propagande est replacé dans son contexte international, marqué par une menace islamiste centrée sur l’appel au jihad contre les Juifs.
Analysant divers matériaux symboliques exploités par la nouvelle propagande antijuive — images ou discours —, P.-A. Taguieff donne à comprendre comment et pourquoi la haine des Juifs, plus d’un demi-siècle après la Shoah, a pu renaître sous les habits neufs de l’« antiracisme » et de l’« anticolonialisme » et, grâce aux médias, se diffuser en recueillant l’assentiment d’individus parfois convaincus d’être étrangers à tout préjugé antijuif.
Abstract: Placards carrying images of swastikas superimposed on the Star of David and the Israeli flag were commonplace in street-level protests about the recent Israeli military actions and the conflict in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009. Allusions between Nazi genocidal practices and the activities of the Israeli state were also drawn in some of the speeches at protest meetings and press commentary on the conflict. Although this was not the first occasion that the ‘Nazi card’ had been played against Israel and Jews, the prevalence of the phenomenon appears to indicate its growing normalisation. Playing the ‘Nazi card’ is a discursive act involving the use of Nazi or related terms or symbols (Nazism, Hitler, swastikas, etc.) in reference to Jews, Israel, Zionism or aspects of the Jewish experience. It manifests in words uttered in speech or in writing, or in visual representations such as artwork, drawings, caricatures, cartoons, graffiti, daubings and scratchings, or visual expressions such as a Nazi salute or the clicking of heels. In many instances, the playing of the Nazi card is unquestionably antisemitic. However, the inclusion of particular modes of criticism of Israel in definitions of antisemitism has provoked controversy. The result has been a war of words which has stagnated into an intellectual and discursive cul-de-sac of claim and counter-claim about what does and does not qualify as antisemitism. Because of this, in focusing on discourse, this report attempts to shift the focus of analysis of contemporary antisemitism onto new ground: away from labelling and defining the problem, to an understanding of the consequences of particular discourse. By unravelling and dissecting various manifestations of the phenomenon, the report reveals how the playing of the Nazi card scratches deep wounds by invoking painful collective memory of the Holocaust. It also offers some recommendations as to how the problem might be addressed.
Abstract: Insbesondere für die deutsche Linke hat der Nahost- und Antisemitismusstreit eine immense Bedeutung und Sprengkraft. Er ist Dauerthema in linken Zeitschriften und Veranstaltungen sowie beliebter Gegenstand der Agitation konservativer Medien gegen die Linke. Gelegentliche Eskalationen zu verschiedenen Anlässen sorgen dafür, dass die Problematik ganz oben auf der politischen Agenda bleibt. Dabei verläuft die Auseinandersetzung auch innerhalb der Linken selten solidarisch. Starke Identifikationen sowie extreme und zudem häufig antagonistische Positionierungen und Blickwinkel kennzeichnen die Debatte. Regelmäßig kommt es auch zu sehr persönlichen und verletzenden Vorwürfen und Angriffen; sogar vor physischer Gewalt wird nicht haltgemacht. Und im Gewand dieser Debatte wird immer wieder auch verhandelt, was eigentlich (noch) links ist.
Ziel dieser kommentierten Bibliografie zur Thematik Linke, Nahostkonflikt und Antisemitismus ist es, zu einer Versachlichung der Diskussion beizutragen. Sie will den einseitigen Positionen, schablonenhaften Schuldzuschreibungen und ritualisierten Phrasen komplexere Perspektiven entgegensetzen, Zugang zu Hintergrundwissen und «Fakten» sowie zu den Bedingungen ermöglichen, die diese erst zu solchen machen, und somit Anregungen zur (selbst-)kritischen Reflexion geben. Die Broschüre soll zudem einen leichten Einstieg in die inzwischen doch recht umfassende Literatur zum Thema bieten. Denn insbesondere in der Zeit nach 1990 ist eine Vielzahl von relevanten Studien und ernsthaften Debattenbeiträgen erschienen, die eine gute Grundlage bieten für die fundierte und kritische Auseinandersetzung mit spezifischen Traditionen, ideologischen Erbschaften, Prägungen und grundlegenden Ambivalenzen linker Politik in Hinblick auf den Nahostkonflikt. Im Folgenden werden die wichtigsten dieser Beiträge in Form von kurzen Inhaltsangaben und Kommentierungen vorgestellt. Als Sammlung von Basistexten ist diese Broschüre vor allem für die Nutzung in der politischen Bildungsarbeit gedacht. Doch auch Studierende, Wissenschaftler/innen und alle anderen Interessierten werden sich mit ihrer Hilfe schnell einen Überblick zum aktuellen Stand der Forschung verschaffen können.
In die Darstellung wurden vor allem Bücher aufgenommen, die Grundlegendes zum Verständnis linker Kontroversen zum Thema in einer bestimmten Epoche leisten (zum Beispiel zur Zionismus- Debatte in der Arbeiter/innenbewegung des 19. Jahrhunderts) oder die wesentliche Begriffe beziehungsweise theoretische Perspektiven in die Diskussion eingeführt haben (beispielsweise «antiimperialistischer Antizionismus»). Neben recht bekannten, weitverbreiteten und häufig zitierten Publikationen sind auch solche berücksichtigt, die hierzulande bisher weniger rezipiert wurden – sei es, weil sie nicht in deutscher Sprache veröffentlicht wurden oder weil die Texte aus anderen Gründen nicht leicht zugänglich sind. Soweit Zitate vom Englischen ins Deutsche übertragen wurden, stammen die Übersetzungen vom Autor. Nicht alle besprochenen Bücher werden im gleichen Umfang behandelt. Dahinter steht durchaus die Absicht, eine Gewichtung vorzunehmen und unnötige Wiederholungen zu vermeiden. Stattdessen wird die jeweilige Bedeutung der Texte für die Gesamtdebatte herausgestellt. Wo immer es möglich ist, werden die Leser/ innen bei Monografien auch auf kürzere Texte der entsprechenden Autor/ innen (die für Seminare und Lesekreise geeignet sind) oder Online-Ressourcen hingewiesen. Die in fünf Abschnitte unterteilte Darstellung beschränkt sich im Wesentlichen auf wissenschaftliche Beiträge
Abstract: Berlin is home to Europe’s largest Palestinian diaspora community and one of the world’s largest Israeli diaspora communities. Germany’s guilt about the Nazi Holocaust has led to a public disavowal of anti-Semitism and strong support for the Israeli state. Meanwhile, Palestinians in Berlin report experiencing increasing levels of racism and Islamophobia. In The Moral Triangle Sa’ed Atshan and Katharina Galor draw on ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with Israelis, Palestinians, and Germans in Berlin to explore these asymmetric relationships in the context of official German policies, public discourse, and the private sphere. They show how these relationships stem from narratives surrounding moral responsibility, the Holocaust, the Israel/Palestine conflict, and Germany’s recent welcoming of Middle Eastern refugees. They also point to spaces for activism and solidarity among Germans, Israelis, and Palestinians in Berlin that can help foster restorative justice and account for multiple forms of trauma. Highlighting their interlocutors’ experiences, memories, and hopes, Atshan and Galor demonstrate the myriad ways in which migration, trauma, and contemporary state politics are inextricably linked.
Abstract: This book is the first comprehensive study of postwar antisemitism in the Netherlands. It focuses on the way stereotypes are passed on from one decade to the next, as reflected in public debates, the mass media, protests and commemorations, and everyday interactions. The Holocaust, Israel and 'the Jew' explores the ways in which old stories and phrases relating to 'the stereotypical Jew' are recycled and modified for new uses, linking the antisemitism of the early postwar years to its enduring manifestations in today's world.
The Dutch case is interesting because of the apparent contrast between the Netherlands' famous tradition of tolerance and the large numbers of Jews who were deported and murdered in the Second World War. The book sheds light on the dark side of this so-called 'Dutch paradox,' in manifestations of aversion and guilt after 1945. In this context, the abusive taunt 'They forgot to gas you' can be seen as the first radical expression of postwar antisemitism as well as an indication of how the Holocaust came to be turned against the Jews. The identification of 'the Jew' with the gas chamber spread from the streets to football stadiums, and from verbal abuse to pamphlet and protest. The slogan 'Hamas, Hamas all the Jews to the gas' indicates that Israel became a second marker of postwar antisemitism.
The chapters cover themes including soccer-related antisemitism, Jewish responses, philosemitism, antisemitism in Dutch-Moroccan and Dutch- Turkish communities, contentious acts of remembrance, the neo-Nazi tradition, and the legacy of Theo van Gogh. The book concludes with a lengthy epilogue on 'the Jew' in the politics of the radical right, the attacks in Paris in 2015, and the refugee crisis. The stereotype of 'the Jew' appears to be transferable to other minorities.
Contents:
Preface
1 Why Jews are more guilty than others : An introductory essay, 1945-2016
Evelien Gans
Part I Post-Liberation Antisemitism
2 ‘The Jew’ as Dubious Victim
Evelien Gans
3 The Meek Jew – and Beyond
Evelien Gans
4 Alte Kameraden: Right-wing Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial
Remco Ensel, Evelien Gans and Willem Wagenaar
5 Jewish Responses to Post-Liberation Antisemitism
Evelien Gans
Part II Israel and ‘the Jew’
6 Philosemitism? Ambivalences regarding Israel
Evelien Gans
7 Transnational Left-wing Protest and the ‘Powerful Zionist’
Remco Ensel
8 Israel: Source of Divergence
Evelien Gans
9 ‘The Activist Jew’ Responds to Changing Dutch Perceptions of Israel
Katie Digan
10 Turkish Anti-Zionism in the Netherlands: From Leftist to Islamist Activism
Annemarike Stremmelaar
Part III The Holocaust-ed Jew in Native Dutch Domains
since the 1980s
11 ‘The Jew’ in Football: To Kick Around or to Embrace
Evelien Gans
12 Pornographic Antisemitism, Shoah Fatigue and Freedom of Speech
Evelien Gans
13 Historikerstreit: The Stereotypical Jew in Recent Dutch Holocaust Studies
Remco Ensel and Evelien Gans
Part IV Generations. Migrant Identities and Antisemitism in the Twenty-first Century
14 ‘The Jew’ vs. ‘the Young Male Moroccan’: Stereotypical Confrontations in the City
Remco Ensel
15 Conspiracism: Islamic Redemptive Antisemitism and the Murder of Theo van Gogh
Remco Ensel
16 Reading Anne Frank: Confronting Antisemitism in Turkish Communities
Annemarike Stremmelaar
17 Holocaust Commemorations in Postcolonial Dutch Society
Remco Ensel
18 Epilogue: Instrumentalising and Blaming ‘the Jew’, 2011-2016
Evelien Gans
