The Resurgence of Anti-Semitism: Jews, Israel, and Liberal Opinion.
Bernard Harrison
Rowman & Littlefield. 224 pp. $22.95.
According to the famous 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (1910), “Anti-Semitism is a passing phase in the history of culture.” Since that sanguine declaration, anti-Semitism has had several very good rolls of the dice, culminating in the destruction of European Jewry.
The latest recrudescence of anti-Semitism is by now the subject of at least a half dozen books, published in America, England, France, and Italy. Their shared conclusion, set forth from a variety of perspectives, is that the physical violence of the new Jew-hatred is largely the work of young Muslims, but that the ideological violence is the work primarily of leftists, battlers against racism, professed humanitarians, and liberals (including Jewish ones). The Resurgence of Anti-Semitism, Bernard Harrison’s superb new book, deals almost entirely with this drifting of liberals and leftists into anti-Semitism, and it brings to the subject a new authorial identity, a different academic background, and a distinctive and (despite the topic) exhilarating voice. Resurgence is also the first book on contemporary anti-Semitism by a Gentile, and a British one to boot. (According to Harrison, a professor of philosophy, this has also made him privy to the expression of anti-Semitic prejudice by apparently respectable academic people “when Jews are absent.”)
Recent years have furnished a great deal of material suited to his talents and expertise. Harrison brings to his subject the “habitual skepticism, bitterly close reading, and aggressive contentiousness” produced by “forty years in the amiable sharkpool of analytic philosophy.” His merciless deconstruction of the anti-Israel invective and smug clichés of the New Statesman, the Guardian, the Independent, the BBC, and other bastions of anti-Jewish sentiment in England reminds one of the powerful literary scrutiny pioneered in this country by the New Critics.
Harrison’s method is to scrutinize the statements of Israel-haters for internal contradictions, inconsistencies, specious reasoning, misstatements of fact, and outright lies. To read the fulminations of such people as John Pilger, Robert Fisk, or Jacqueline Rose concerning Israel ordinarily requires the mental equivalent of hip-boots; Harrison, however, takes up a rhetorical scalpel and dissects their ravings with surgical precision.
He devotes all of the book’s second chapter, for example, to a single infamous issue of the New Statesman. The cover of January 14, 2002 showed a tiny Union Jack being pierced by the sharp apex of a large Star of David, made of gold. Below, in large black letters, was a question posed with characteristic English understatement: “A Kosher Conspiracy?” It would not have been out of place in Der Stürmer; and the articles that followed it had at first suggested to Harrison that he entitle his analysis of them “In the Footsteps of Dr. Goebbels.” (He decided, however, that this would be “inadequate to the gravity of the case.”)
Among the many canards that Harrison dismembers in the book: “Israel is a colonialist state”; “Israel is a Nazi state, and the Jews who support it are as guilty as Nazi collaborators were”; “Anybody who criticizes Israel is called an anti-Semite”; “Jews do not express grief except for political or financial ends.” Take, for example, the way in which he draws out the implications of the Israel-Nazi Germany equation, without which people like Noam Chomsky would be rendered almost speechless: “To attach the label ‘Nazi’ to Israel, or to couple the Star of David with the swastika is . . . not just to express opposition . . . to the policies of one or another Israeli government. It is to defame Israel by association with the most powerful symbol of evil, of that which must be utterly rejected and uprooted from the face of the earth.”
Harrison consistently criticizes contemporary liberals who have allowed their moral indignation on behalf of Palestinians to pass into something “very hard to distinguish from anti-Semitism of the most traditional kind.” Yet he just as consistently refrains from calling them anti-Semites. (He does, however, wonder whether, in their dreams, they call themselves anti-Semites.) Thus the editor of the New Statesman who approves a cover worthy of Julius Streicher is “an entirely honest, decent man,” and Dennis Sewell, author of the essay on the Anglo-Jewish “kosher conspiracy” belongs to the rank of “sincere humanitarians.”
Two factors play a role in Harrison’s mitigation of his criticisms. One is his assumption, oft-repeated, that liberals and leftists in the past were almost always opposed to anti-Semitism. But this is open to question. In France, for example, the only articulate friends of the Jews prior to the Dreyfus Affair were conservative writers who denounced anti-Jewish attitudes as “one of the favorite theses of the 18th century.” French leftist movements of the 19th century had been outspoken in their antipathy to Jews until the Dreyfus Affair forced them to decide whether they hated the Jews or the Catholic Church more. (They became Dreyfusards.) In England, Dr. Thomas Arnold, headmaster of Rugby and father of Matthew, called English Jews “lodgers” and wanted them barred from universities and citizenship. Gladstone referred to Disraeli as “that alien” who “was going to annex England to his native East & make it the appanage of an Asian empire.” Ernest Bevin, Labor foreign minister from 1945-51, was notoriously short of sympathy in the Jewish direction.
The other, more positive motive for Harrison’s use of such delicate epithets stems, perhaps, from his education in philosophy: he seems to believe genuinely in the ability of people to self-correct, to be swayed by reason. Let us hope that he is right. My own, darker view is that a thinker’s ideas are an expression of character. If Harrison believes that he can reason into decency people like his fellow philosopher Ted Honderich, who espouses “violence for equality” and effusively sings the praises of Palestinian suicide bombers, I wish him joy in his efforts. But deductions have little power of persuasion, and I have no great hopes for his success.
Despite my quibbles, Harrison’s book is one of the necessary and indispensable utterances on the subject of these new, liberal anti-Semites, the people who are busily making themselves into accessories before the fact of Ahmadinejad’s plan “to wipe Israel off the map.” The fact that this eloquent and elegantly argued book has until now been totally ignored by book review editors is itself testimony to the alarming dogmatism that Harrison has so vividly criticized.
Yet
All Hamas has to do is wait until Tehran gets its first nuke, then the theater from the mullahs will become a lot more meaningful…
Agreed, Noah. This is consistent with a long-standing Arab trope towards the Palestinians: yelp but no help. Indeed, the reliance of Hamas on Iran is understood by surrounding Sunni states as a problem for them. Essentially, in some way it seems to threaten a second Shia toehold (besides the rather large footprint in Lebanon) in the Levant. Even the long-suffering Sunni bastard child of Fatah is deemed preferable to this.
Of course, Israel has never been slow in gauging the talk vs. walk realities of its neighborhood, and doubtless this was one important factor green lighting Operation Cast Lead. I just wish Westerners were as adept in comprehension.
Forgot one point. As for Hamas’ Shia allies, it’s always important to remember what matters might have looked like from the other guy’s perspective. And while the 2006 Lebanon War has been deemed a failure in both Israel and the West, it wasn’t quite a win for either Iran or Hezbollah, especially the latter. Under no circumstances will Iran or Hezbollah permit themselves to be dragged into a war by the likes of the tool Hamas. War there may someday be, but at a time and place of Iran’s choosing.
“Yet”
Well, Noah rightly includes the parenthetical ‘probably’. They probably won’t because they know there is as much preparation and readiness for possible Hizbullah, Iranian, or Syrian attacks as for the operation in Gaza. And so far thing are going well. If they take a turn for the worse I might start worrying more.
you want to understand HAMAS?
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2009/01/01/heeding-david-littman-confronting-hamas%e2%80%99-genocidal-jew-hatred-part-1/
…. below from Khalidi’s major work Haqa’iq Koraniyya al Qadiyya al-Filastinniya [“Koranic Facts Regarding the Palestinian Issue”] which was first published in 1991 by the Hamas Publishing House Manshūrāt Filastin al-Muslima, and translated into Urdu, Hindi, Turkish, Russian, and English (formerly available online at http://www.assabeel.com) due to its international popularity.
Humiliation is attached to the Jews for their entire lifetime: they were humiliated in Egypt, and when they arrived in [sic] Palestine, and when they were exiled from Palestine, and when they dispersed into the valleys of the earth. What concerns us here—in our discussion of the Jewish character—is to indicate that this humiliation is to be considered as an inveterate Jewish character trait, and a destructive Jewish perversion. Humiliation is one of their historical attributes, a fixed fact of their existence, and a qaa`ida, basis of their life… (Koran 2:61) The Jews are humiliated because they disbelieved in God, killed His prophets, disobeyed His emissaries, transgressed His prohibitions—all of this is humiliation. They are humiliated—and this is why they search out lustful indulgences, and have become their slaves. All of this is humiliation.
I wish this was like at the end of the Godfather where Michael eliminates all his enemies.
First Hamas, then Syria, then Hezbollah and finally Iran.
At first it was hard to determine the Israaeli goals. But now it has to be the destruction of Hamas.
Anything less is a failure. But if they can do that then Syria looks to jump off the Iranian bandwagon, weakening Hezbollah at the same time.
But how do we stop Iran from getting nukes?
Too many enemies – not enough time.
I hope Israelis learn from Operation Cast Lead. The rest of the world may tend to favor the terrorists over Israel, but nobody is willing to fight with them, not even their sponsors and military allies.
Americans and Europeans are reacting to Cast Lead with yawns. Despite rising anti-Semitism fostered by muslim/media/university propaganda, most people are sick and tired of “Palestinians” and their bloodthirsty culture. The entire muslim world is being viewed more and more with the contempt it’s earned. Not even the Europeans want to subsidize them anymore. They only do so because their unrepresentative governments force them to. Jihadist scum and freeloading muslim ingrates are actually detested far more in Europe than they are in America, although you’d never know they were detested at all based on media distortions.
I predict that when Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities, the world will again react with impotent acquiescence.
Israel should’ve done this a long time ago. There is nothing the muslims can do to stop it, and the rest of the world is completely unwilling to intervene militarilly, which is the only thing that could stop it. I’m sure Obama would like to place economic sanctions on Israel when he takes office but he’s too much of a pu$$y to try.
If any israelis are reading this, I hope you remember it on election day. Any population that elects a terrorist organization to govern it does not deserve to exist.
When terrorists need protection from the IDF, they go crying to the US and EU, which is usually all they need. In the present circumstance, the US has evidently not received instructions (yet) from the Saudis to stop Israel.
Yes, this makes eminent sense given Hamas’s status as a proxy. Why soil the hands when you have a gardener? Hamas and Hezbollah, and to some extent Syria, serve Iran’s purposes, not the other way around.
Israel should hope and pray they intervene.
For then it would be clear to Westerners that the problem isn’t Arab/Israeli, nor is it Israeli/Palestinian, ————— NO. The real problem is mohammedan/Jew.
Were the mohammedan powers to gang up on the Israeli, then the true battlespace would be made clear for all those of good will.
And there are still plenty of people of good will out there.
Unfortunately, there’s no good will in our present administration, less in the incoming administration, and CIA and State have become bastions of the Arab narrative.
Israel should seize on any opportunity to lure Syria into the open, and pound it thoroughly.
THAT was the whole idea behind the ’06 Lebanon incursion, but then Israel waffled, the West wilted, and the Arabs crowed about victory.
It is important to remember that rockets began landing on Israel after Israel withdrew from Gaza. There was no purpose they could have served. There was no way they could have helped either Hamas or the residents of Gaza.
In 2005, before the withdrawal, Prime Minister Sharon, and later, Prime Minister Olmert, announced that Israel hoped to withdraw unilaterally from most of the West Bank. Faced with an actual withdrawal and a promised withdrawal—the gift of an independent Palestine—the Palestinians of Gaza began launching rocket attacks with no military significance.
The so called Palestinians (I remember when that term refered to Jews living in Eretz) are not interested in a state of their own. They want the destruction of Israel and want a Judenrein middle east. Even the so called moderates such as Abbas (whose phd dissertation was a Holocaust denial piece) are of the same mind as Hamas and Iran.
Peace is not important to Israel flurishing (it has and will despite it’s neighbors), what is important is security of it’s people. Israel has a “cold” peace with Egypt and Jordan and Israeli citizens are not in danger from the those entities for the most part. Both Egypt and Jordan were thoroughly defeated in wars by Israel. What Israel needs to do and what the the rest of the western world needs to do to defeat Islamic terrorism is to allow Israel to thoroughly defeat Hamas and Iran’s other proxies. Every time Israel is about to devastate it’s enemies in a war, the USA & EU etc save the Arabs from defeat and the cycle continues!
Well, duh. Hamas’ “allies” have no fraternal interest in Hamas. Their interest is in weakening Israel and keeping her preoccupied. Hamas is a convenience in that regard. Gord is right, too, that Iran’s clients in the region serve Iran’s purposes — Iran is not there to serve theirs.
Richard F is right on with his observation that “…while the 2006 Lebanon War has been deemed a failure in both Israel and the West, it wasn’t quite a win for either Iran or Hezbollah, especially the latter.” The deterrent effect of even a less than satisfying effort may still be enough to qualify it as a success if not a victory.
I ain’t one of them fancy people who knows what the word “rodomont” means.
To Brian 16: You will, Brian, you will!
To Ploome 6: Barack’s best friends, Rashid and Mona, around whose table his education was vastly furthered, are like Balaam, who in trying to curse Israel inadvertently blessed us “How goodly are your tents, O Israel….”
To humilliate means to make humble, and that indeed is what every prophet in Israel tried to do from Moses…”Circumcise ye therefore the foreskin of your hearts and be no more stiff-necked…”Deuteronomy 11…to David…”The Lord is my Shepherd…”…to Elijah..”How long will ye dither between two opinions?…
Where Khalidi is disingenuous is in trying to put a pejorative meaning to the word “humiliation” and to somehow argue that Jewish humiliation has come at the behest of the Muslims…but we know different…Our humiliation cannot be caused by the machinations of men….
The proof? Muslims are on their knees 5 times daily, kow-towing; Christians genuflect also and pray on their knees…Not so Jews who are only permitted to be truly “humiliated” once a year, at the very height of the Atonement Service, the AVODAH, and then only for an hour or so. Other than that, a small inclination of the head during the Amidah is permitted.
elixelx Says:
your point is?
…That Jews don’t do humble easily–at least not to Muslims–and since the formation of the State of Israel, Zionist Jews don’t do humiliation it at all!
Quoting Khalidi quoting Hadiths about Jews is simply disseminating pernicious assiniity–as witness the pernicious assininity of the quote you offered!
Found your site very interesting, full of informative articles, will add this blog to my favourites.
My first time here, i liked what i saw. Going to add it to my bookmarks.
Great post! I have only been blogging for a couple of months and your article here really has helped!