This has been an excellent piece to read. Yet I take issue with the very last word: Antisemitism. That's a word that still has the varnish of an acceptable policy. You know: Antidisestablishmentarianism, anti-communist, and for Seinfeld afficionados, anti-dentite. I much prefer "Jew hatred." Similarly, I prefer "Jew hater" to anti-semite. Don't give these bigoted low-lifes an inch. Their real animus is hatred, pure and simple. (Note: I got this idea from Russell Roberts, a Jew who is President of Shalem College in Jerusalem, and has abandoned any use of the word "antisemitism.")
As a matter of etymology, the word antisemitism was coined in 19th century Germany in an effort to put this vile, conspiracist mindset on a “scientific” basis as its theological underpinnings were losing their force. The overall concept it sought to “rationalize” was Judenhass - Jew hatred.
So, in a strange twist, a term invented by antisemites has, for several reasons but foremost among them the disrepute caused by Hitlerite Germany and its willing European collaborators, been turned from a badge of honor (there used to be a League of Antisemites) into a label unfit to show its face in polite society.
While antisemitism is baked into Western civilization, the overhang of WWII had, until fairly recently, made it difficult to be an open about expressing one’s views directly. Hence the deflection onto Israel and the casuistry surrounding the precise definition of the word.
That the West still has problems grappling specifically with antisemitism is evident from its inability to focus exclusively on the phenomenon. It is the only prejudice, apparently, that may not be spoken of without it being part of a list of other prejudices the better to minimize it.
The only issue with reverting to Jew-hate is that it can be seen as leaving out the irrational hatred of the Jewish state, the “Jew among the nations.”
What is really required is for the non-Jewish world to grapple honestly with why this hatred of Jews. It is unfair, not to say both illogical and counterproductive, to make it the job of the Jews to explain why antisemitism and Jew hatred are not a legitimate response to anything real. It comes down to the old saying, if you want to understand antisemitism, don’t ask the Jew, ask the antisemite.
Perfectly said. The German history of this pseudoscientific term is largely ignored/unknown. But absent an understanding of the history, Jews are left to explain why Jew-hatred is unacceptable. Imagine that blacks were asked to explain racism, or God forbid, we were to suggest that all lives matter, minimizing a slogan meant only for one people. The ironies abound.
Well, there's hope in some (too few) academic quarters at least. Grown ups in charge...what a concept! The best part of the column for me is the plain and accurate "pro-Hamas" in the headline, rather than the ridiculously sanitized descriptor "pro-Palestinian," which makes me cringe whenever I see and hear it.
Shouldn’t we be more concerned about Elizabeth Warren, calling Israel’s war “genocide” (in a mosque!) and Mark Pocan, who is salivating over the prospect of cutting off Israel?
Shouldn’t we be more concerned about the party that most Jews gave their heart and soul to, practically replacing the Jewish religion with the Democratic party, becoming the party of Jew-defamation and hatred?
There's no need to choose. Elizabeth Warren doesn't hide who she is. Most universities pretend to be in the business of education -- not radicalizing -- our kids. Vigilance means fighting malign politicos and malign educational institutions.
Suit yourself. I think focusing is important. The universities are cracking down on the violent protesters. But when you've got people like Elizabeth Warren in the Senate, who wield real power, it's serious.
Here she is with Calla Walsh, radical activist, author of the "Jew Map."
When the kids come home after a suspension, since that probably terminates residence on campus as well, parents likely will take one of two positions: "You made your bed, now sleep in it" or "We'll sue."
For the latter there's considerable risk. From the Tenn statutes:
“[W]here a trial court grants a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the court shall award the party or parties against whom the dismissed claims were pending at the time the successful motion to dismiss was granted the costs and reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees incurred in the proceedings as a consequence of the dismissed claims by that party or parties. The awarded costs and fees shall be paid by the party or parties whose claim or claims were dismissed as a result of the granted motion to dismiss.” Id. (emphasis added).
This assumes dismissal would result from clear violations of acknowledged and agreed to university rules and state statutes, both prohibiting criminal trespass. Absent a showing of "I wasn't there" it would appear that no grantable claim of readmission/reinstatement is possible. Then, again, the university probably has an adjudication process. If the student loses there, as is likely, no grantable relief is available.
Imagine holding kids responsible for their actions ? What a concept !!
Yaa Vanderbilt !!
This has been an excellent piece to read. Yet I take issue with the very last word: Antisemitism. That's a word that still has the varnish of an acceptable policy. You know: Antidisestablishmentarianism, anti-communist, and for Seinfeld afficionados, anti-dentite. I much prefer "Jew hatred." Similarly, I prefer "Jew hater" to anti-semite. Don't give these bigoted low-lifes an inch. Their real animus is hatred, pure and simple. (Note: I got this idea from Russell Roberts, a Jew who is President of Shalem College in Jerusalem, and has abandoned any use of the word "antisemitism.")
As a matter of etymology, the word antisemitism was coined in 19th century Germany in an effort to put this vile, conspiracist mindset on a “scientific” basis as its theological underpinnings were losing their force. The overall concept it sought to “rationalize” was Judenhass - Jew hatred.
So, in a strange twist, a term invented by antisemites has, for several reasons but foremost among them the disrepute caused by Hitlerite Germany and its willing European collaborators, been turned from a badge of honor (there used to be a League of Antisemites) into a label unfit to show its face in polite society.
While antisemitism is baked into Western civilization, the overhang of WWII had, until fairly recently, made it difficult to be an open about expressing one’s views directly. Hence the deflection onto Israel and the casuistry surrounding the precise definition of the word.
That the West still has problems grappling specifically with antisemitism is evident from its inability to focus exclusively on the phenomenon. It is the only prejudice, apparently, that may not be spoken of without it being part of a list of other prejudices the better to minimize it.
The only issue with reverting to Jew-hate is that it can be seen as leaving out the irrational hatred of the Jewish state, the “Jew among the nations.”
What is really required is for the non-Jewish world to grapple honestly with why this hatred of Jews. It is unfair, not to say both illogical and counterproductive, to make it the job of the Jews to explain why antisemitism and Jew hatred are not a legitimate response to anything real. It comes down to the old saying, if you want to understand antisemitism, don’t ask the Jew, ask the antisemite.
Perfectly said. The German history of this pseudoscientific term is largely ignored/unknown. But absent an understanding of the history, Jews are left to explain why Jew-hatred is unacceptable. Imagine that blacks were asked to explain racism, or God forbid, we were to suggest that all lives matter, minimizing a slogan meant only for one people. The ironies abound.
Thanks for this piece.
Well, there's hope in some (too few) academic quarters at least. Grown ups in charge...what a concept! The best part of the column for me is the plain and accurate "pro-Hamas" in the headline, rather than the ridiculously sanitized descriptor "pro-Palestinian," which makes me cringe whenever I see and hear it.
Never a word about the real genocide of 2 million Christians in Southern Sudan.
Nor the half million in Syria. Nor the million in China. Nor Ukraine.
Great reporting. Thank you!
Puts me in a good mood
Love this and totally agree. Thank you.
Yeah, and all these societal crumbs are part of the COEXIST ilk.
The only thing dumber than a college professor is a college student.
Shouldn’t we be more concerned about Elizabeth Warren, calling Israel’s war “genocide” (in a mosque!) and Mark Pocan, who is salivating over the prospect of cutting off Israel?
Shouldn’t we be more concerned about the party that most Jews gave their heart and soul to, practically replacing the Jewish religion with the Democratic party, becoming the party of Jew-defamation and hatred?
https://twitter.com/RepMarkPocan/status/1776365525985042443
There's no need to choose. Elizabeth Warren doesn't hide who she is. Most universities pretend to be in the business of education -- not radicalizing -- our kids. Vigilance means fighting malign politicos and malign educational institutions.
Suit yourself. I think focusing is important. The universities are cracking down on the violent protesters. But when you've got people like Elizabeth Warren in the Senate, who wield real power, it's serious.
Here she is with Calla Walsh, radical activist, author of the "Jew Map."
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-palestinian-group-posts-map-of-massachusetts-naming-local-zionist-leaders/
https://x.com/IrkaLive/status/1777678444630863910
Warren. A true moron and full member of the Congressional Dunce Caucus.
When the kids come home after a suspension, since that probably terminates residence on campus as well, parents likely will take one of two positions: "You made your bed, now sleep in it" or "We'll sue."
For the latter there's considerable risk. From the Tenn statutes:
“[W]here a trial court grants a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the court shall award the party or parties against whom the dismissed claims were pending at the time the successful motion to dismiss was granted the costs and reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees incurred in the proceedings as a consequence of the dismissed claims by that party or parties. The awarded costs and fees shall be paid by the party or parties whose claim or claims were dismissed as a result of the granted motion to dismiss.” Id. (emphasis added).
This assumes dismissal would result from clear violations of acknowledged and agreed to university rules and state statutes, both prohibiting criminal trespass. Absent a showing of "I wasn't there" it would appear that no grantable claim of readmission/reinstatement is possible. Then, again, the university probably has an adjudication process. If the student loses there, as is likely, no grantable relief is available.