Racism and Anti-Semitism—Part 5

On May 14, 1948, Palestinian Jews declared their own State of Israel and became “Israelis.” Since that time, the concept of anti-Semitism has become confused with anti-Israelism, which is further confused with anti-Zionism.

Zionism

Zionism is an ideology and a political movement. As an ideology, it, “… holds that the Jews are a people or nation like any other, and should gather together in a single homeland. … The term “Zionism” was apparently coined in 1891 by the Austrian publicist Nathan Birnbaum, to describe the new ideology, but it was used retroactively to describe earlier efforts and ideas to return the Jews to their homeland for whatever reasons, and it is applied to Evangelical Christians who want people of the Jewish religion to return to Israel in order to hasten the second coming. “Christian Zionism” is also used to describe any Christian support for Israel.”

The history of Zionism, as well as the widely different forms it has taken, (from Christian Zionism to Socialist Zionism), is extremely complex and well beyond the scope of these articles. However, it’s significance is important, because anti-Zionism is confused with anti-Semitism, and they are not the same thing. Those who have opposed the Zionists, both ideologically and politically, are often labeled anti-Semitic, which some anti-Zionists certainly are (such as the Muslims), but opposing Zionism is not itself anti-Semitic. It is an interesting historical fact, that some of the most radical anti-Zionists were Orthodox Jews, especially those who were inhabitants of Palestine in 1948 when a secular Zionist state was literally forced on them by the United Nations. One can hardly call those anti-Zionist Jews, anti-Semitic.

Zionism and Israel

The existence of Israel today, as an independent state is certainly the result of the political influence of Zionism, with the support of Western Governments largely spurred on by recognition of the horrors of Jewish persecution preceding and during the Second World war. In the West, the creation of a Jewish state was perceived as the only solution to the Jewish war refugee problem. Israel was to be a haven for persecuted Jews.

Some question how much of a haven Israel is for the Jews today in the face of the constant terrorist attacks and hateful threats being hurled at Israel by the Islamic countries surrounding it. One might also question the wisdom that led to the formation of Israel in the first place, or the wisdom of the political decisions subsequently made by Israel itself, as well as all other nations in relationship to it. The fact is, Israel exists, and the people living there do not deserve the persecution they face daily whatever stupid decisions politicians have made.

While not all anti-Israelism, is anti-Semitism, there is in that form of anti-Israelism propagated in Western media and academia the very same kind of anti-Semitism that is evidenced by the growing violence and persecution against Jews in all of Europe. There is an apparent reason for the growth of anti-Israelism that must be looked it, if the real cause of the irrational hatred of the Jews is to be understood.

Israel has a built-in problem. Israel is a racist state.

Israel, a Racist State

Technically, Zionism is a form of racism; it is autoracism as defined in the first article in this series. Furthermore, Israel itself, the product of Zionism, is a racist state. Please note, this is not a statement about Jews, or Judaism, but Zionism and the “State” of Israel. Also note I am clearly emphasizing the racism of Israel is autoracism, not exoracism–nevertheless, it is racism, and, as such, a mistake.

In discussing the racism of Nazi Germany and Russia, Ayn Rand wrote: “The racism of Nazi Germany—where men had to fill questionnaires about their ancestry for generations back, in order to prove their Aryan descent——has its counterpart in Soviet Russia, where men had to fill similar questionnaires to show that their ancestors had owned no property and thus to prove their proletarian descent.”

To whatever extent the purpose was realized, “Israel was to be a haven for persecuted Jews,” an “Jewish homeland.” The kind of “proof” one required in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia is required of those who wish to immigrate to Israel and become a citizen. There is no suggestion here that there is any similarity in the intentions of Israel toward those without proof as existed in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia–it is the necessity of proof that one “belongs to a particular nationality” that is significant, and racism.

“Israeli rules for aliyah creates Israelis but not Jews. One area where the traditional definition of Jew is not followed by the Israeli government is in deciding who qualifies to make aliyah (“immigrate [to Israel]”) and acquire citizenship under the Law of Return.

“The requirements here differ significantly from the definition of a Jew under halakha, in permitting anyone with only one Jewish grandparent, or as non-Jewish spouses of Jews, to move to Israel. A person with only one Jewish grandparent is presently allowed to make aliyah but that does not confer the status of Jew upon that person according to Jewish law neither in Israel nor anywhere else.

… “Current Israeli definitions however, specifically excludes Jews who have openly and knowingly converted to a faith other than Judaism. [My emphasis.]

This definition is not the same as that in traditional Jewish law; in some respects it is a deliberately wider, so as to include those non-Jewish relatives of Jews who may have been perceived to be Jewish, and thus faced anti-Semitism, but in other respects it is narrower, as the traditional definition includes apostate Jews.

Mostly implied, but never far from the surface, it is the racist nature of Israel that is used to “justify” the growing anti-Israel sentiment in the west. But this presents a great irony.

Why Israel

It is a fact that Israel is a racist state, clearly an “ethno-religious” state, which “specifically excludes Jews who have openly and knowingly converted to a faith other than Judaism.” The fact is, practically every middle eastern country is a racist state. Most are actually theocracies, though the “God” of those states is Allah, not Jehovah.

While Israel is technically a secular state, one cannot be a citizen if they have chosen any religion that does not worship the Jehovah of the Torah. Can the reason for the hatred of Israel be that it’s God is named Jehovah, and the name of the God of all it’s enemies who have vowed to destroy Israel and who are embraced by Western media and academia is Allah?

The reason for the almost universal hatred of Israel and the almost universal embracing of all Islamic countries is not the difference in the name of the God associated with them. In fact, it is a much more obvious difference, so obvious it drives those who hate Israel to distraction.

The difference between Israel and all other Middle Eastern countries is apparent to anyone who will open their eyes—Israel is the only Middle Eastern country with the kind of prosperity associated with Western Civilization. In spite of the enormous wealth that petroleum provides the other Middle Eastern countries who confiscated it from the Western businesses that discovered and made it available, their entire populations remain impoverished, ignorant, culturally primitive, socially backward, and oppressed. Yet, it is none of these backward “theocracies” that are hated—it is the only economically and socially successful country that is hated.

Anti-Zionism and Anti-Israelism, in themselves, are not always anti-Semitism, but the irrational hatred of Israel today is the clue to what is behind all anti-Semitism. It is not the Jew’s religion or culture, it is not their desire to have a country of their own (with all its problems), it is not any of the absurd accusations of political or cultural influence they are accused of (even when some of those accusations are substantive)—the Jews are hated for one reason only—they are successful capitalists, industrious, independent creators and producers of wealth, and fierce defenders of principles, that is, their values.

Who would hate such people? That should be obvious by now and we’ll examine it in the next article.

—(01/22/06)