Search results

Your search found 108 items
Previous | Next
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year View all 1 2 3
Home  / Search Results
Date: 2021
Abstract: CST’s Antisemitic Incidents Report 2020 shows that last year CST recorded 1,668 antisemitic incidents across the UK. This is an 8% fall from the 1,813 incidents recorded in 2019 but is still the third-highest number of incidents CST has ever recorded in a calendar year. There were 1,690 antisemitic incidents recorded in 2018, 1,420 in June 2017 and 1,275 antisemitic incidents in 2016.

A further 402 reports of potential incidents were received by CST in 2020 but were not deemed to be antisemitic and are not included in this total of 1,668 antisemitic incidents. Many of these 402 potential incidents involved suspicious activity or possible hostile reconnaissance at Jewish locations; criminal activity affecting Jewish people and buildings; and anti-Israel activity that did not include antisemitic language, motivation or targeting.

The 1,668 antisemitic incidents CST recorded last year were clearly influenced by the pandemic. There were 41 incidents that referenced the pandemic alongside antisemitic language, and 19 cases of Jewish religious, educational or social events being ‘zoombombed’ by antisemites who accessed the events to express antisemitic abuse. There was a reduction in the number of incidents affecting Jewish schools, teachers and school students, but an increase in the number of incidents at people’s homes. The highest monthly totals came in January, February and June, when the pandemic either had not yet fully struck or when restrictions had been eased. In contrast, the lowest monthly incident totals came in March, April and December, when lockdown measures were at their strictest. Nevertheless, CST still recorded over 100 incidents in all but one month in 2020, which continues the pattern of historically high antisemitic incident figures in recent years: December 2020 was the first month for three years in which CST recorded fewer than 100 antisemitic incidents.

Forty-one incidents in 2020 involved references to the pandemic alongside antisemitic rhetoric. This ranged from conspiracy theories alleging Jewish involvement in creating and spreading Covid-19 (or creating the so-called ‘myth’ of Covid-19), to simply wishing that Jewish people catch the virus and die from it. Overall, 332 incidents, or almost one in five of all antisemitic incidents reported to CST in 2020, involved the expression of antisemitic conspiracy theories (compared to 370 incidents in 2019).
Date: 2019
Abstract: Wie denken, fühlen und kommunizieren Antisemiten im digitalen Zeitalter? Welche Rolle spielt das Internet bei der Verbreitung und Radikalisierung von Judenhass? Diese Fragen werden anhand von Beispielen aus dem Web 2.0 und auf der Basis einer umfassenden Studie im Buch anschaulich sowie präzise erläutert.


Weltweit nimmt die öffentliche Verbreitung von Antisemitismen über das Internet drastisch zu. Dabei zeigt sich, dass uralte judenfeindliche Stereotype sich mit aktuellen Konzeptualisierungen verbinden. Die Basis von Judenhass zeigt sich unabhängig von politischen, sozialen, ideologischen und ökonomischen Faktoren als ein kultureller Gefühlswert, der auf der Wahnvorstellung fußt, Juden seien das Übel in der Welt. Anhand zahlreicher Beispiele aus der Internet-Kommunikation erörtert Monika Schwarz-Friesel, dass sich zwar oberflächliche Formen und kommunikative Prozesse im digitalen Zeitalter verändern, der alte kollektive Hass gegenüber Juden jedoch ungebrochen die semantische Grundlage ist.

Dabei zeigt sich, dass Antisemitismus nicht bloß ein Vorurteilssystem ist, sondern ein auf Phantasmen basierendes Weltdeutungssystem, das über Sprachgebrauchsmuster ständig reproduziert wird und im kollektiven Bewusstsein lebendig bleibt. Auch die Erfahrung des Holocaust hat diese Tradition nicht gebrochen. Den aktuellen Antisemitismus und seine derzeit dominanten Manifestationen des Anti-Zionismus und Anti-Israelismus kann man daher nicht ohne seine kulturhistorische Dimension verstehen.
Date: 2020
Abstract: Antisemitismus ist ein umfassendes Phänomen der Ausgrenzung, das unabhängig von Alter, Religion, Herkunft, Bildungsabschluss, Geschlecht oder Hautfarbe auftritt. Somit liegt es im gesamtgesellschaftlichen Interesse, seine Ausdrucksformen und die ihm zugrunde liegenden Ursachen zu erkennen, zu begreifen und – aus der Geschichte lernend – wiederkehrende antisemitisch motivierte, eskalierende Bedrohungen rechtzeitig wahrzunehmen und zu unterbinden. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit antisemitischen Haltungen, Denkfiguren und Handlungen sowie ein faktenbasiertes Wissen gehören daher in den Kanon politischer Bildung.
Dieses Buch erscheint in einem historischen Kontext, in dem Risse in der Fassade des gemeinsamen deutsch-jüdischen Gebäudes erkennbar geworden sind. Mit dem zunehmenden zeitlichen Abstand zum Nationalsozialismus und dem Verblassen der Erinnerung nehmen Geschichtskonstruktionen, Verzerrungen oder Leugnungen der historischen Geschehnisse zu. Subtile antisemitische Einstellungen werden immer häufiger durch offen vorgetragene juden- und israelfeindliche Positionen überlagert.
Der Band diskutiert aktuelle Antisemitismus-Studien in Hinblick auf ihre pädagogischen Konsequenzen aus wissenschaftlichen, politischen und bildungspolitischen Perspektiven.

Mit Beiträgen von Matthias J. Becker | Uwe Becker | Julia Bernstein | Michael Blume | Micha Brumlik | Marina Chernivsky | Florian Diddens | Andreas Eberhardt | Thomas Eppenstein | Matthias Heyl | Dervis Hizarci | Doron Kiesel | Felix Klein | Salomon Korn | Deborah Krieg | Thomas Krüger | Yael Kupferberg | Beate Küpper | Simon Lengemann | Friederike Lorenz | Harry Schnabel | Stefanie Schüler-Springorum | Monika Schwarz-Friesel | Luisa Maria Schweizer | Christian Staffa | Natan Sznaider | Christiane Thompson | Martin Vahrenhorst | Greta Zelener | Andreas Zick

Konzept und Redaktion: Doron Kiesel, Thomas Eppenstein

Inhalt

Doron Kiesel & Thomas Eppenstein: Einleitung
Salomon Korn: „Die Erforschung des Antisemitismus in all seinen chamäleonhaften, gefährlichen Erscheinungsformen bleibt unverzichtbar.“
Harry Schnabel: „Antisemitische Attacken sind schlimm genug, aber noch schlimmer ist es, diese zu ertragen, wenn alle wegschauen.“
Felix Klein: „Wir brauchen neue und bessere Instrumente im Kampf gegen den
Antisemitismus.“
Uwe Becker: „Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass das Wort ,Jude‘ heute wieder als
Schimpfwort auf Schulhöfen gebraucht wird.“
Greta Zelener: „Nie wieder“? – Es war nie weg. Pädagogische Ansätze zur
Antisemitismusbekämpfung
Yael Kupferberg: Antisemitismus in Deutschland – Kontinuität oder Zeitenwende?
Natan Sznaider: Antisemitismus zwischen Schwertern und Pflugscharen
Christian Staffa: Von der gesellschaftlichen Notwendigkeit christlicher Antisemitismuskritik
Micha Brumlik: Erziehung zur Mündigkeit und Kritik des Autoritären
Christiane Thompson: Erziehung nach Auschwitz – Erziehung nach den Antisemitismus-Studien?
Stefanie Schüler-Springorum: Antisemitismus-Studien – ein Überblick
Andreas Eberhardt & Luisa Maria Schweizer: Antisemitismus-Studien und ihre Folgen für die historisch-politische Bildungsarbeit
Beate Küpper & Andreas Zick: Antisemitische Einstellungen in Deutschland – Befunde aus Bevölkerungsumfragen und Ableitungen für die politische Bildung
Julia Bernstein & Florian Diddens: Antisemitismus an Schulen
Marina Chernivsky & Friederike Lorenz: „Das ist überhaupt nicht greifbar, und deswegen ist es so schwer, dagegen auch was zu machen“ – Eine Studie zu Antisemitismus im Bildungswesen
Monika Schwarz-Friesel: Antisemitismus im Web 2.0 – Judenhass zwischen Kontinuität und digitaler Adaption
Matthias J. Becker: Antisemitismus im Internet – eine unterschätzte Herausforderung mit wissenschaftlichem Handlungsbedarf
Thomas Krüger & Simon Lengemann: Antisemitismus und „Volksgemeinschaft“. Notwendige Impulse für historisch-politische Bildung in identitären Zeiten
Thomas Eppenstein: Grenzen und Spannungsfelder antisemitismuskritischer Bildung
Deborah Krieg: Bildungsarbeit gegen Antisemitismus – Perspektiven für die Praxis
Derviş Hızarcı: „Du Jude“ – Wie man mit Diskriminierung im Unterricht umgeht
Michael Blume: Welche Bildung hilft gegen Antisemitismus?
Martin Vahrenhorst: Der Umgang mit Antisemitismus im christlichen Religionsunterricht
Matthias Heyl: Was können bundesdeutsche KZ-Gedenkstätten zu einer
antisemitismuskritischen Bildungsarbeit beitragen?
Date: 2004
Date: 2009
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.
Date: 2020
Abstract: In this article, we conduct a comprehensive study of online antagonistic content related to Jewish identity posted on Twitter between October 2015 and October 2016 by UK-based users. We trained a scalable supervised machine learning classifier to identify antisemitic content to reveal patterns of online antisemitism perpetration at the source. We built statistical models to analyze the inhibiting and enabling factors of the size (number of retweets) and survival (duration of retweets) of information flows in addition to the production of online antagonistic content. Despite observing high temporal variability, we found that only a small proportion (0.7%) of the content was antagonistic. We also found that antagonistic content was less likely to disseminate in size or survive for a longer period. Information flows from antisemitic agents on Twitter gained less traction, while information flows emanating from capable and willing counter-speech actors—that is, Jewish organizations—had a significantly higher size and survival rates. This study is the first to demonstrate that Sampson’s classic sociological concept of collective efficacy can be observed on social media (SM). Our findings suggest that when organizations aiming to counter harmful narratives become active on SM platforms, their messages propagate further and achieve greater longevity than antagonistic messages. On SM, counter-speech posted by credible, capable and willing actors can be an effective measure to prevent harmful narratives. Based on our findings, we underline the value of the work by community organizations in reducing the propagation of cyberhate and increasing trust in SM platforms.
Date: 2020
Author(s): Elman, R Amy
Date: 2015
Date: 2015
Date: 2002
Abstract: The article presents the results of surveys done on anti-Semitism in Poland in 1992, which in part were compared to results from a 1996 survey. The group, under the author's direction researched anti-Semitism in the context of Poles' attitudes towards other nations, as well as in terms of their own national identity. Two types of anti-Semitic attitudes were observed: traditional, religiously grounded anti-Semitism, and anti-Semitism rooted in anti-Semitic political ideology, of the type that has developed since in the French Revolution. Traditional anti-Semitism occurs only among older people who are not well educated and live in rural areas; increased education results in the disappearance of this type of anti-Semitism. Modern anti-Semitism, on the other hand occurs among both the lowest and most highly educated groups in society. Moreover, from 1992 to 1996, the percentage of the respondents declaring anti-Semitic views increased. At the same time, however, there was also a larger increase in the number of respondents declaring anti-anti-Semitic views, which has meant that there has been a clear polarization of attitudes. Having a university education makes a person more likely to be ill-disposed toward anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, the attitude of Poles toward Jews cannot be described simply on the basis of anti-Semitic attitudes. The researchers noted that there was also an attitude of "not liking Jews", which was less engaged than the anti-Semitic views, and to a large extent a result of the content comprising Polish national identity. The model of Polishness assumes a Romantic-Messianic image of the Polish nation. According to this model, Poles see themselves as being distinguished by their noble fulfillment of obligations, even when it is to their own detriment, particularly with respect to symbolic Jews and Germans. Researchers also assumed that there was a particular kind of competition between Poles and Jews with respect to the moral superiority of their respective nations. The results from 1992 in part confirmed this hypothesis.
Author(s): Allington, Daniel
Date: 2018
Abstract: Existing research suggests that, in contemporary liberal democracies, complaints of racism are routinely rejected and prejudice may be both expressed and disavowed in the same breath. Surveys and historical research have established that – both in democratic states and in those of the Soviet Bloc (while it existed) – antisemitism has long been related to or expressed in the form of statements about Israel or ‘Zionist’, permitting anti-Jewish attitudes to circulate under cover of political critique. This article looks at how the findings of a survey of anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli attitudes were rejected by users of three Facebook pages associated with the British Left. Through thematic discourse analysis, three recurrent repertoires are identified: firstly, what David Hirsh calls the ‘Livingstone Formulation’ (i.e. the argument that complaints of antisemitism are made in bad faith to protect Israel and/or attack the Left), secondly, accusations of flawed methodology similar to those with which UK Labour Party supporters routinely dismiss the findings of unfavourable opinion polls, and thirdly, the argument that, because certain classically antisemitic beliefs pertain to a supposed Jewish or ‘Zionist’ elite and not to Jews in general, they are not antisemitic. In one case, the latter repertoire facilitates virtually unopposed apologism for Adolf Hitler. Contextual evidence suggests that the dominance of such repertoires within one very large UK Labour Party-aligned group may be the result of action on the part of certain ‘admins’ or moderators. It is argued that awareness of the repertoires used to express and defend antisemitic attitudes should inform the design of quantitative research into the latter, and be taken account of in the formulation of policy measures aiming to restrict or counter hate speech (in social media and elsewhere).
Author(s): Partington, Alan
Date: 2012
Date: 2011
Date: 2017
Date: 2018
Date: 2019
Abstract: CST recorded a record high total of 1,652 antisemitic incidents in the UK in 2018. 2018 was the third year in a row that CST has recorded a record high incident total and means the problem of rising antisemitism in our country continues to grow.

The 1,652 antisemitic incidents CST recorded in 2018 represent a 16 per cent rise from the 1,420 incidents recorded in 2017. These 1,652 incidents were spread throughout the year, with over 100 incidents recorded in every month for the first time in any calendar year; indicating that a general atmosphere of intolerance and prejudice is sustaining the high incident totals, rather than a one-off specific ‘trigger’ event. In addition to more general background factors, the highest monthly totals in 2018 came when the problem of antisemitism in the Labour Party was the subject of intense discussion and activity, or when violence surged temporarily on the border between Israel and Gaza; suggesting that these events, and reactions to them, also played a role in 2018’s record total.

The highest monthly totals in 2018 came in May, with 182 incidents; April, with 151 incidents; August, with 150 incidents; and September, with 148 incidents. It is likely that these higher monthly totals were partly caused by reactions to political events in the UK and overseas, involving the Labour Party and violence on the border of Israel and Gaza, during those months.

CST recorded 148 antisemitic incidents in 2018 that were examples of, or took place in the immediate context of, arguments over alleged antisemitism in the Labour Party. Of these 148 incidents, 49 occurred in August, 16 in September and 15 in April. These were all months in which allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party attracted significant media and political attention. Also in April and May, several Palestinians were killed and many injured in violence connected to protests at the border between Israel and Gaza. CST recorded 173 antisemitic incidents in 2018 that showed anti-Israel motivation alongside antisemitism, of which 47 incidents – over a quarter – occurred in April and May. In 2018 as a whole, CST recorded 84 antisemitic incidents that showed far right motivation, and 13 that showed Islamist motivation.

The 182 incidents recorded by CST in May is the highest monthly total CST has recorded since August 2014, when Israel and Hamas last fought a sustained conflict over Gaza, and is the fourth-highest monthly total CST has ever recorded.

2018 saw an increase in the number and proportion of antisemitic incidents that used political or extremist language and imagery. Forty-five per cent of the incidents recorded by CST in 2018 involved the use of extremist language or imagery alongside antisemitism, compared to 30 per cent of incidents recorded in 2017. Not all of these incidents revealed a clear, single ideological motivation: many involved the varied and confused use of different extremist motifs, drawn from a broad reservoir of antisemitic sources. Of the 1,652 antisemitic incidents recorded during 2018, 456 involved language or imagery relating to the far right or the Nazi period; 254 involved references to Israel and the Palestinians, alongside antisemitism; and 29 involved references to Islam and Muslims. In 285 incidents, more than one type of extremist discourse was used.
Date: 2019
Abstract: What can the internet tell us about antisemitism in the United Kingdom? It has been shown that people are remarkably honest when they search for information online. Their Google searches and queries reveal interests, prejudices and hatreds that they might keep hidden from friends, family members, neighbours, surveys and even from themselves. They have been shown to share their health secrets, sexual preferences, and hostility towards other groups.

We decided to put this to the test to see what the Google searches made by people in the United Kingdom could tell us about attitudes
towards Jewish people in this country and in general towards Jews. Unsurprisingly perhaps, we found that, every year, people in this
country express antisemitic thoughts through their internet searches. People make some Google searches that are disturbing, including searches such as “I hate Jews,” and “Why are Jews evil?”, along with other searches expressing violent intentions towards Jews. Others post on anonymous hate sites such as the far right Stormfront website, expressing their antisemitic feelings about various Jewish Members of Parliament and celebrities.

By analysing this data, we can get a better sense of the where, when, who and what of antisemitism in Britain today. For example,we looked at whether the voting patterns of towns and cities affect the number of antisemitic searches in those places. We found that searches looking for information on the Holocaust being a hoax rise about 30 per cent every year on Holocaust Memorial Day. We learnt that Jewish women in public life or positions of power are the subject of more antisemitic searches than Jewish men in similar positions. We found evidence of the rise in popularity of antisemitic conspiracy theories, such as the discredited myth relating to the role of the Rothschild family in running the world. And we found that sometimes heightened media focus on Jews or Israel, even if it is positive, can still lead to an increase in online searches for antisemitic content.

We also found strategies that technology companies and civil society organisations can use to fight hatred. For example, our research shows that, when Google changed its autocomplete formula to eliminate antisemitic search suggestions, this lowered the number of people searching for antisemitic material (which also means that, before removing those antisemitic search prompts, Google was directing people to make antisemitic searches
who might otherwise not have done so).

This is the story of the hidden hate that our report reveals.