Weaponization of antisemitism

The weaponization of antisemitism, also described as the instrumentalization of antisemitism, is the use of the charge of antisemitism or the deployment of antisemitism and antisemitic sentiments.

In one context, it can be a bad faith charge of antisemitism against a person for political purposes, particularly with respect to criticism of Israel. It has been criticized as a form of playing the race card, smear tactics and an "appeal to motive".

Suggestions of such actions have been raised during phases of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, in the adoption of the controversial Working definition of antisemitism by various organizations, the 2014–20 allegations of antisemitism in the UK Labour Party, and the 2023 United States Congress hearing on antisemitism.

Critics of the concept have in turn argued that charging weaponization amounts to an antisemitic ad hominem attack whose use fails to address the issue at hand of antisemitism. The charge has also been criticized as a "testimonial injustice", rooted in presumption rather than evidence.

Descriptions

Israel-Palestine context

Charges of antisemitism relating to pro-Palestinian sentiment have been levied by international Israeli advocacy groups against prominent individuals such as President Jimmy Carter and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Ben White wrote in the Journal of Palestine Studies.

Academics John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein have said accusations of antisemitism rise following aggressive actions by Israel: following the Six-Day War, following the 1982 Lebanon War, the First and Second Intifadas and the Israeli bombardments of Gaza. US politician Paul Findley, in his 1985 book They Dare to Speak Out, wrote: "In its latest usage, the term anti-Semitism stands stripped of any reference to ethnic or religious descent, signifying nothing more than a refusal to endorse all policy decisions of the government of Israel ... It has been a powerful factor in stifling debate of the Arab-Israeli dispute."

Philadelphia Inquirer opinion writer Abraham Gutman wrote in 2021 that claims by Israel's leaders to represent all Jews worldwide had equated criticism of Israel to prejudice against all Jews. He wrote that this had led to weaponization against pro-Palestinian voices "sometimes in ridiculous ways", including by Marjorie Taylor Greene. Chomsky argued in 2002: "With regard to anti-Semitism, the distinguished Israeli statesman Abba Eban pointed out the main task of Israeli propaganda (they would call it exclamation, what's called 'propaganda' when others do it) is to make it clear to the world there's no difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. By anti-Zionism he meant criticisms of the current policies of the State of Israel."

Various writers have said that charges of antisemitism raised in discussions of Israel can have a chilling effect, deterring critical commentary on Israel due to fear of being associated with beliefs linked to antisemitic crimes against humanity such as the Holocaust. Mearsheimer and Walt wrote in 2008 that the charge can discourage others from defending in public those against whom the charge of antisemitism has been made. Mearsheimer and Walt also argued that rhetorical accusations of antisemitism put a burden of proof on the person against whom the charge is raised, putting them in the "difficult" position of having to prove a negative. They wrote that accusations of antisemitism are resonant with many Jewish communities, who have learned to be vigilant of antisemitism as a result of antisemitic tragedies in Jewish history. They argued that by stifling discussion it allows myths about Israel to survive unchallenged. Kenneth L. Marcus wrote in 2010 that although Mearsheimer and Walt described such accusations as "the Great Silencer", they had not themselves been silenced and had instead received a wide audience through their book and appearances.

Joshua Leifer, an editor of Dissent magazine, wrote in 2019 that campaigns which redefine anti-Zionism as antisemitism aim to shift criticisms of the actions of the Israeli government "beyond the pale of mainstream acceptability". Presuming that Muslims or Arabs criticizing Israel are motivated by antisemitism was described as Islamophobic in 2023 by ReThinking Foreign Policy president Mitchell Plitnick and Rutgers University law professor Sahar F. Aziz. Ronnie Kasrils in 2020 compared claims of antisemitism in Britain to rhetorical strategies employed against the anti-apartheid movement by supporters of the South African government.

Atalia Omer wrote in Contending Modernities in 2021 that weaponization of antisemitism is negative for all involved, including Israel and the broader Jewish community.

Marcus, while warning in 2010 against denying or minimizing antisemitism, also cautioned against the rhetorical overuse of the "anti-Semitism card", paralleling concerns raised by Richard Thompson Ford with the broader misuse of "the race card": that it can be dishonest and mean-spirited, risks weakening legitimate accusations of bigotry, risks distracting socially concerned organizations from other social injustices, and hurts outreach efforts between Jewish and Arab or Muslim groups. Marcus wrote that many pro-Israel commentators who had condemned what they viewed as antisemitism in anti-Zionist rhetoric had also taken pains to say that many criticisms of Israel were not antisemitic.

During the Israel-Hamas war, Bernie Steinberg, the former director of Harvard Hillel, told The Harvard Crimson that pro-Israeli activists should stop "weaponizing" charges of antisemitism against pro-Palestinian activism, writing, "It is not antisemitic to demand justice for all Palestinians living in their ancestral lands." Marshall Ganz, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, also criticized the "weaponization" of antisemitism, writing the "tactics are remarkably similar to those used by Senator Joseph McCarthy".

Conceptual criticism

In the 1970s, the concept of "new antisemitism" emerged, with cultural critics identifying a novel form of antisemitism disguised as critique of Israel and Zionism.

Sociologist David Hirsh has criticized the charge of weaponization in discourses about Israel, arguing that accusations of 'playing the antisemitism card' are often made in bad faith. Hirsh coined the name the Livingstone Formulation, after Ken Livingstone, to refer to the charge of weaponizing claims of anti-semitism. In 2005, Livingstone made the argument that he was being subjected to weaponized charges of antisemitism after he compared a Jewish journalist to a concentration camp guard. Hirsh criticizes the rhetorical formulation as containing within it "a counter-charge of dishonest Jewish (or 'Zionist') conspiracy". He also observes an inversion within the argument, in which antisemitism that has nothing to do with Israel is rhetorically defended with the claim that charges of antisemitism are misapplied to all criticisms of Israel. He terms this 'crying Israel', as opposed to 'crying antisemitism'. He writes: "The Livingstone Formulation does not allege that Jews often misjudge what has happened to them, it alleges that they lie about what has happened to them. It is not an allegation of error, or over-zealousness, perhaps explicable by reference to the antisemitism of the past. It is an allegation of conspiracy." He later compared the concept's invocation in discourses about antisemitism, writing that "The Macpherson principle says that if a black person says they have experienced racism you should begin by assuming that they are right. The Livingstone principle says: if Jews complain about antisemitism on the left then you should begin by assuming that they are making it up to silence criticism of Israel or to smear the left."

Hadar Sela, writing for the Jerusalem Post in 2019, criticized the BBC for "amplification of antisemitic tropes" in alleged use of the Livingstone Formulation. Lesley Klaff called the charge a "denial of contemporary antisemitism [that is] commonplace in Britain."

Jon Pike argues that the charge of weaponizing antisemitism is an ad hominem attack that does not address the allegation of antisemitism levied: "Suppose some discussion of a 'new antisemitism' is used in an attempt to stifle strong criticism. Well, get over it. The genesis of the discussion and the motivation of the charge [don't] touch the truth or falsity of the charge. Deal with the charge, rather than indulging in some genealogical inquiry."

David Schraub has called the charge "a first-cut response that presents marginalized persons as inherently untrustworthy, unbelievable, or lacking in the basic understandings regarding the true meaning of discrimination."

The formulation has been described by Terry Glavin as a device deployed to shield left-wing anti-Semites from scrutiny.

In 2020, the EHRC investigated antisemitism in the UK Labour Party and found that agents of the party had committed "unlawful harassment" by "suggesting that complaints of antisemitism are fake or smears," asserting in their report that "this conduct may target Jewish members as deliberately making up antisemitism complaints to undermine the Labour Party, and ignores legitimate and genuine complaints of antisemitism in the Party."

See also

• Antisemitism
• New antisemitism
• Islamophobia

Bibliography

• 104 civil society organizations (2023-04-04), "Human Rights and other Civil Society Groups Urge United Nations to Respect Human Rights in the Fight Against Antisemitism", Human Rights Watch{{citation}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
• 128 scholars of Jewish history and Holocaust studies (2022-11-03). "Scholars to UN: Don't adopt 'weaponised' antisemitism definition" (PDF). EUobserver. Retrieved 2024-01-01.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
• 'Abd al-Hay, Walid; Centre, Al-Zaytouna (2021-10-14), Israel's Employment of "Anti-Semitism", Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultations, retrieved 2024-01-01
• Butler, Judith; Jewish Voice for Peace (2017). On Antisemitism: Solidarity and the Struggle for Justice. G - Reference,Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series. Haymarket Books. ISBN 978-1-60846-761-7.
• Chomsky, Noam (2002). "Anti-Semitism, Zionism, and the Palestinians" (PDF). Variant (magazine). 2 (16).
• Cook, Jonathan (2023-09-22). "UK and Israel: Has the fightback against weaponised antisemitism begun?". Middle East Eye. Retrieved 2024-01-08.
• Cooke, Steve (2019-06-05). "Is antisemitism a trick? A closer look at that Shulamit Aloni meme". Medium. Retrieved 2024-02-17.
• Feldman, David; Volovici, Marc (2023). Antisemitism, Islamophobia and the Politics of Definition. Palgrave Critical Studies of Antisemitism and Racism. Springer International Publishing. ISBN 978-3-031-16266-4.
• Findley, Paul (1987). They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby (2 ed.). Islamic Propagation Centre International. ISBN 978-0-88208-180-9. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
• Finkelstein, Norman (2008). Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-24989-9.
• Franklin, Shai (2013-05-08). "Israel's Overplayed 'Anti-Semitism' Card". HuffPost. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
• Friedman, Lara (2023-09-05). "Targeting Free Speech & Redefining Antisemitism: How Pro-Israel Actors Are Using US Laws to Attack Palestinian Activism & Solidarity". University of the Pacific Law Review. 54 (4).
• Gould, Rebecca Gould (2023). Erasing Palestine: Free Speech and Palestinian Freedom. Verso Books. ISBN 978-1-83976-902-3.
• Hirsh, David (2010). "Accusations of malicious intent in debates about the Palestine-Israel conflict and about antisemitism The Livingstone Formulation, 'playing the antisemitism card' and contesting the boundaries of antiracist discourse". Transversal: 44–77. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
• Lerman, Antony (2022). Whatever Happened to Antisemitism?: Redefinition and the Myth of the 'Collective Jew'. Pluto Press. ISBN 978-0-7453-3879-8.
• Lerman, Antony (2024-02-14). "Weaponising antisemitism: The gift that keeps on giving". Declassified Media Ltd. Retrieved 2024-02-17.
• Levi, Lili (2023-04-09). "Politicizing Antisemitism Amid Today's Educational Culture Wars". Lewis & Clark Law Review. SSRN 4450218.
• Marcus, Kenneth L. (2010). "Anti-Semitism Denial and Minimisation". Jewish Identity and Civil Rights in America. Cambridge University Press. pp. 67–69. ISBN 978-1-139-49119-8. Retrieved 2024-01-01.
• Mearsheimer, John; Walt, Stephen (2008). "The Great Silencer". The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 191–196. ISBN 978-0-14-192066-5.
• Plitnick, Mitchell; Aziz, Sahar F. (2023-11-23). Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine Israel Discourse (PDF). Rutgers University Law School Center for Security, Race, and Rights.
• Robinson, William I.; Griffin, M.S.; Falk, R.A. (2017). We Will Not Be Silenced: The Academic Repression of Israel's Critics. AK Press. ISBN 978-1-84935-277-2.
• Steinberg, Bernie (2023-12-29). "For the Safety of Jews and Palestinians, Stop Weaponizing Antisemitism". The Harvard Crimson.
• Thompson, Prof. Jon (2012). No Debate: The Israel Lobby and Free Speech at Canadian Universities. Canadian Association of University Teachers. Lorimer. ISBN 978-1-55277-657-5. Retrieved 2024-01-09.
• Waxman, Dov; Schraub, David; Hosein, Adam (2022-07-04). "Arguing about antisemitism: why we disagree about antisemitism, and what we can do about it". Ethnic and Racial Studies. 45 (9): 1803–1824. doi:10.1080/01419870.2021.1960407. ISSN 0141-9870.
• White, Ben (2020-02-01). "Delegitimizing Solidarity: Israel Smears Palestine Advocacy as Anti-Semitic" (PDF). Journal of Palestine Studies. 49 (2): 65–79. doi:10.1525/jps.2020.49.2.65. ISSN 0377-919X.