From Ian:
The Problem with Anti-Zionism
The Problem with Anti-Zionism
Anti-Zionism is a flourishing politics today on many university campuses and on parts of the left, and the standard response from many Jewish organisations and from most of the Jews I know is to call it the newest version of antisemitism. But anti-Zionism is a subject in itself. I take “Zionism” to mean a belief in the rightful existence of a Jewish state, nothing more. Anti-Zionism denies the rightfulness.Ben-Dror Yemini: Israel can't allow those who call for its destruction to remain
Most versions of anti-Zionism first appeared among the Jews. The first, and probably the oldest, takes Zionism to be a Jewish heresy. According to Orthodox doctrine, the return of the Jews to Zion and the establishment of a state will be the work of the Messiah in the days to come. Until then, Jews are required to accept their exile, defer to gentile rulers, and wait for divine deliverance. Political action is a usurpation of God’s prerogative.
“Waiting for the Messiah” has a left-wing version, which might be called “waiting for the revolution.” Jews (and other minorities) were often told that all their problems would be solved, and could only be solved, by the triumph of the proletariat. Many Jews took this to be an expression of hostility, a refusal to recognise the urgencies of their situation. But I don’t see antisemitism here, only ideological rigidity and moral insensitivity.
The second Jewish version of anti-Zionism was first proclaimed by the founders of Reform Judaism in nineteenth-century Germany. There is no Jewish people, they insisted, only a community of faith – men and women of the Mosaic persuasion. Jews could be good Germans (or good citizens of any state) since they were not a nation like the other nations and did not aspire to a state of their own. Zionism was perceived as a threat to these good Germans, since it suggested that they had an allegiance elsewhere.
Many leftists have adopted this denial of Jewish peoplehood, and then they go on to claim that a Jewish state must be a religious state, something like a Catholic or Lutheran or Muslim state – political formations that no leftist could support. But Reform Jews adopted this position knowing that most of their fellow Jews didn’t share it. They weren’t all looking for a homeland in the land of Israel, but even the Bundists, who hoped for autonomy in the Tsarist empire, were Jewish nationalists.
The early Reform Jews wanted to change the course and character of Jewish history; they weren’t ignorant of that history. Leftists who argue against Jewish peoplehood are, mostly, ignorant.
From the moment Omar Shakir stepped on Israeli soil, he had the same modus operandi he always did and even traveled to Bahrain to promote a FIFA ban on Israel. Bahrain denied him entrance to the country.In front-page editorial, Jewish Chronicle urges Brits not to vote Corbyn
Last year, following the decision to cancel Shakir's visa, 15 human rights organizations, Including Israeli NGOs B'tselem and Breaking the Silence, called for the decision to be reversed.
"This decision only serves to partner Israel with a list of shady countries whose governments want to control the opinions, thoughts and actions of human beings, instead of protecting their right to free speech," the groups said.
Well, let's see: Canada banned former British MP and vehement Israel-hater George Galloway; France banned Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, considered by Sunni Muslims to be a prominent intellectual; Britain banned American anti-gay protester Fred Phelps and his daughter, Shirley Phelps-Roper from entering the country, as well as Michael Savage, a far-right conservative radio host; the U.S. denied entry to Filipina human rights activist Liza Maza who intended to attend a conference on American activity in her country; and recently, both the U.S. and Britain banned the entrance of Omar Barghouti, the co-founder of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and Omar Shakir's ideological twin.
It's safe to assume that anti-Israeli elements will resume their usual drivel about damage to free speech, which is curious given that Shakir himself is an advocate of harming free speech.
In 2015, Shakir signed a petition calling for a ban on Muslims who dared accept the invitation of the Hartman Institute (on Jerusalem-based center for pluralistic Jewish thought and education) for an educational tour of Israel.
Every country has the right to deny entry to agitators, and there's no country in the world that would allow a person who denies its right to exist enter its borders. This is true of Israel as well.
In a front-page editorial, the British Jewish Chronicle implored UK citizens not to vote for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in the upcoming December 12 election, citing his long record of comments against Israel and failure to stamp out anti-Semitism within his opposition party.
“To all our fellow British citizens. This front page is addressed not to our usual readers — but to those who would not normally read the Jewish Chronicle. In other words, to non-Jews,” it read.
In its call for British nationals to take Jewish concerns into account on election day, the editorial cited a March poll showing that 87 percent of British Jews believe Corbyn to be anti-Semitic.
“There is racism on all sides of politics and it must be called out wherever it is found. History has forced our community to be able to spot extremism as it emerges — and Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour leader in 2015 is one such example,” it said, citing Corbyn’s past affiliation with members of Hamas and Hezbollah, his presence at a ceremony that honored the Palestinian terrorists behind the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, his reaction to anti-Semitic statements by members of his party, and his 2018 comment that “Zionists” do not grasp “English irony.”


















