unz | As the world has witnessed the oppression and
ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, many people have risen in protest. In
response, the Israeli government and certain of its advocates have
conducted a campaign to crack down on this activism, running roughshod
over civil liberties (and the English language) in the process.
The mechanism of this crackdown is the redefinition of “antisemitism”[1] to include criticism of Israel, and the insertion of this definition into the bodies of law of various countries.
Where
most people would consider “antisemitism” to mean bigotry against
Jewish people (and rightly consider it abhorrent), for two decades a
campaign has been underway to replace that definition with an
Israel-centric definition. That definition can then be used to block
speech and activism in support of Palestinian human rights as “hate.”
Various groups are applying this definition in law enforcement
evaluations of possible crimes.
Proponents
of this Israel-centric definition have promoted it step by step in
various arenas, from the U.S. State Department and European governments
to local governments around the U.S. and universities.
While
this effort has taken place over the last two decades, it is
snowballing rapidly at this time. The definition is increasingly being
used to curtail free speech and academic freedom, as well as political
activism.
Furthermore,
such politicizing of an important word may reduce its effectiveness
when real antisemitism occurs, doing a disservice to victims of true
bigotry.
As
of this writing, the U.S. Congress has endorsed the distorted
definition, the governments of the UK and Austria have officially
adopted it (in December and April, respectively), various U.S. State
legislatures are considering it, and numerous universities are using it
to delineate permissible discourse. Many representatives and heads of
other states around the world have embraced the new meaning, even if
they have yet to officially implement it.
This
article will examine the often interconnected, incremental actions that
got us where we are, the current state of affairs, and the public
relations and lobbying efforts that are promoting this twisting of the
definition of “antisemitism” — often under cover of misleadingly named
“anti-racism” movements.
0 comments:
Post a Comment