Why the fuss?

Is comparing a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard anti-Semitic? I’m not so sure.

Following the Ken Livingstone furor(e) from this side of the Atlantic has been relatively easy via the BBC, but I was surprised when the story popped up in the New York Times today. And then unsurprised, when I realized it was because our great leader TB had weighed in with his two-penneth.

Until now, the debate has been mildly amusing, and surprisingly similar to Ken’s thick mate Harry the Nazi:

Step 1: Public figure makes idiotic reference to the Nazis. Step 2: Politicos and outraged Jewish leaders call for apology. Step 3 Public figure is advised to apologise and it will all go away. The only difference is that in scenario 1. Harry complies, but in scenario 2. Ken refuses.

The problem is that stories like this, viewed from the United States, make Britain look like a hotbed of anti-Semitism. Witness this, not unusual paragraph in today’s New York Times:

Livingstone’s comment coincided with the release of a new report showing that the number of anti-Semitic attacks in Britain rose sharply to record levels in 2004, including physical attacks, name calling, hate mail and the desecration of property, such as the vandalism of synagogues with swastikas.

And two pars on:

In addition, the opposition Conservative Party recently accused Blair’s Labour Party of using an anti-Semitic advertisement on one its Web sites. It showed the faces of Tory leader Michael Howard and his deputy, both of whom are Jewish, transposed onto the bodies of flying pigs.

Unless it has changed considerably in the past 18 months, the UK I know is nothing like this anti-Semitic paradise. Non-Jews, living in communities with few or no Jews around them, may not understand Jews and Judaism, they may hold stereotypical views of Jews, and they may even (god forbid) have a negative impression of Israel (and by default Jews) because of the way the Arab/Israeli conflict is portrayed in the media. But none of this — not even unsympathetic reporting of violence in Israel — is anti-Semitism.

Which brings me back to the questions of what is anti-Semitism? Why a Nazi? And were Ken’s remarks anti-Semitic?

You will have to excuse this garbled definition–this is, after all, a weblog and is therefore a hurried expression of my thoughts. But in my opinion, anti-Semitism is anything which singles out a Jewish person for ridicule or hatred because they are a Jew. It is daubing anti-Semitic emblems, like swastikas, on Jewish property, inciting violence against Jews or making statements which would lead others to believe that Jews, by the simple fact of being Jewish, are evil.

Why a Nazi? Nazism is synonymous with oppression, persecution, racism, and evil. Most people use the word sparingly, but you do hear it when people refer to tyranical bosses, or anyone for that matter, who wields power ferociously. The word Nazi, like the swastika, is loaded with negativity. As (obviously) is the role of concentration camp guard. Surely everyone should be offended if they are called a Nazi? But, to call a Jew a Nazi is worse, because of the Holocaust and all the implications that go with it. Or is it?

By calling the journalist a German war criminal, ie a Nazi, Ken was insinuating that the reporter was evil, that he was oppressive, that he was persecuting him. He wasn’t singling the reporter out for being Jewish, he was singling him out for being a tenacious reporter (and, according to Ken, for harassing him and being part of the evil Associated Newspapers empire).

Now, if Ken had called him, for the sake of argument, “a Jew”, that would have been anti-Semitic. He would have been singling him out for being Jewish (and using the word “Jew” in a derogatory sense). So why the fuss?

Wel, it comes back to the usual media/political circus. The newspapers will squeeze every last drop out of this story. Meanwhile, politicians will keep voicing their righteous indignation that the mayor could be so thoughtless, racist and stubborn. At the same time, the leaders of the Jewish community will have to keep voicing their outrage that a politician could say such a thing, while the majority of the Jewish community (I assume) can’t understand what all the fuss is about, and will concentrate on the more important things in life like weddings, Bar Mitzvahs and whose house they are going to for Passover!

The full NY Times article can be read here

PS Never mind idiotic campaign advertisements about flying pigs (which NEVER would have been published if anyone had realized the Jewish angle). If you want to see a really worrying trend in rising anti-Semitism, try Russia where the BBC reports that:

Last month, 19 members of the Duma threw their support behind a letter to the country’s prosecutor general.

Claiming that a centuries-old Hebrew text incites violence, the letter compared Judaism to Satanism and accused Jews of ritual murder. It also called for all Jewish organisations in Russia to be investigated and banned.

Full story is here.