#they also downplay jewish indigeneity

[gay-jewish-bucky]

op of this post

is in support of the pogrom, the irony

[jewish-sideblog]

I have this one friend on another site who is smart in most ways, but she believes all the falsehoods about the I/P conflict and thinks that what Israel is doing to Palestine is as bad as what the Nazis did to Jews. Why do you suppose she believes all that?

I mean the simple answer is that someone told her so, and it matched the preconceptions she had about the situation.

A more detailed answer would go on longer than I'd care to type, but I'm always eager to quote from Guilt, Resentment, and Post-Holocaust Democracy (Lars, 2017):

"The phenomenon of secondary antisemitism may be observed in other delegations and projections of guilt, such as colonial guilt. The wish to negatively portray Jews in the Middle East and Israel as representatives of a "white," colonial, demonic evil empire ruthlessly exterminating the indigenous Arab population may also be explained by the need of citizens of former colonizing countries to be relieved of their nation's historical guilt and complicity in colonial crimes-- or to make up for it.

"The equation of the democratic Jewish State of Israel with Nazism's anti-Jewish terror regime is another marker of such peculiar secondary antisemitism. It demonizes Israelis as it simultaneously downplays the horrors committed against Jews in the past, whereby Israel serves as a "collective Jew" onto which classical antisemitic stereotypes are frequently projected. Commonly invoked Nazi references and inversions vis-a-vis Jews as a collective entity are displayed in phrases like Palestinians are the "victims of the victims," or "Muslims are the Jews of today" (implying that Muslims are persecuted on the same level today in Western societies as Jews were in Nazi Germany). Such inversions may also point, following Critical Theory, to the deep wish to turn the persecuted victims of European history into today's perpetrators. These constructs collectively denigrate Jews and turn them into a morally reprehensible, guilty party by demonizing Israel as a unified, evil entity that represents Jews. These tropes relativize the genocide and the still unmastered legacy of the Holocaust as well as the historical guilt associated with it on the European continent."

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Morton A. Klein and Susan B. Tuchman

Ms. Debra P. Wilson President, National Association of Independent Schools 2001 K Street NW, Suite 1150 Washington, D.C. 20006

Dear Ms. Wilson:

               We write on behalf of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), the oldest pro-Israel organization in the U.S. and a leader in the fight against antisemitism in schools and on college campuses. We know that four of our fellow Jewish communal organizations wrote to you on December 11, 2024, to communicate their concern about the antisemitism that was expressed and applauded at the NAIS People of Color Conference, which took place on December 4-7, 2024. We also know that you immediately responded, expressing remorse for the “divisive and hurtful rhetoric” of NAIS’s speakers, and indicating that changes to NAIS’s speaker selection and content review processes were underway.

               While we appreciate your immediate and positive response, what occurred at the conference was horrifying and the impact was serious, far-reaching, and even dangerous. As you know, the NAIS conference felt hostile, unwelcoming and even unsafe for many Jewish participants, compelling some of them to leave early and some to hide their Stars of David out of sheer fear. We strongly believe that NAIS must take additional steps to send an unequivocal and more powerful message to its members and to the public: that NAIS will not tolerate antisemitism in any form – including when it is masked as criticism of Zionism or Israel – and that NAIS is truly committed to “the rights of every individual to belong and flourish,” including Jews.

               As our colleagues’ letter to you described, the keynote speaker at the conference, Dr. Suzanne Barakat, abused the platform that NAIS gave her to demonize Israel. In her remarks to the approximately 8,000 educators and students who attended the NAIS conference, Dr. Barakat falsely and offensively accused Israel of “genocide” when in fact it is the terrorist group Hamas that is openly committed – as reflected in its charter – to the destruction of Israel and the murder of every Jew. Rather than condemn Hamas and its massacre of over 1,200 men, women and children in Israel on October 7, 2023, Dr. Barakat not only downplayed the slaughters, the rapes and the mutilation of bodies by Hamas terrorists, but also reportedly rationalized Hamas’s atrocities. In addition, Dr. Barakat outrageously denied the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and omitted from her remarks the incontrovertible fact that Jews are indigenous to the Land of Israel. Indeed, she deliberately misinformed the thousands of educators and students at the NAIS conference that Jews were “colonists,” and that Israel, the religious and ancestral homeland of the Jewish people, was “founded on ethnocentric superiority and an inherently systemically racist framework.”

               What is almost more troubling than Dr. Barakat’s appalling antisemitic speech was the response to it: Thousands of educators, who teach at some of our country’s most prestigious schools, stood up and cheered her. No one from NAIS intervened to stop Dr. Barakat’s false and hateful speech, as someone surely would have if a speaker were wrongly and maliciously targeting and demonizing Blacks, Asians, Muslims or any other racial or ethnic group. No one from NAIS immediately publicly condemned Dr. Barakat for misusing the platform that NAIS gave her and fueling already soaring antisemitism in the U.S. and around the world.

               Even after Dr. Barakat’s antisemitic keynote speech, when many educators had reportedly reached out to NAIS to express their outrage, NAIS took no action and permitted the antisemitism to continue. The closing speaker, Dr. Ruha Benjamin, repeated the vicious lie accusing Israel of “genocide” and denied Israel’s right to defend itself, again to the applause of the crowd.

               Respectfully, it is not enough for you to express remorse in a letter to our colleagues, four Jewish communal organizations. It is not enough for NAIS to post a “an important note” on the NAIS website “regarding divisive and hurtful comments expressed” at the conference. The note does not even acknowledge the comments as antisemitic, let alone condemn the Jew-hatred that NAIS speakers expressed at the conference and educators shamefully applauded.

               A truly meaningful response requires NAIS to issue a public statement that it also disseminates to all its more than 2,000 member schools and associations of schools. The statement should:

               (1) Condemn the speakers by name who misused the platform that NAIS gave them to spout and promote antisemitic lies about Jews and Israel;

               (2) Condemn their speech as antisemitic and explain why it is antisemitic;

               (3) Make it clear that NAIS will not tolerate antisemitism in any form, including when the hatred of Jews is camouflaged as criticism of Zionism or Israel; and

               (4) Encourage all of NAIS’s member schools and associations of schools to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, a critical, internationally accepted resource for understanding how antisemitism is expressed today, including related to Israel. NAIS should make it clear in its statement that schools cannot effectively address antisemitism if they do not understand what antisemitism is and how it can manifest.

               We urge you to take all these steps to truly demonstrate NAIS’s commitment to inclusivity and its zero tolerance for antisemitism in all of its ugly forms. We look forward to your response and, like our colleagues, are here as a resource for you and NAIS.

[kick-a-long]

Re: antisemitism being seen as a "jew only" problem, as someone with indigenous heritage, I must say that it's also seen as a "white people" problem.

Non-jews act like antisemitism has no connection to other forms of bigotry which really pisses me off because there are so many parallels between indigenous oppression and jewish oppression. Soviet jews experienced something like residential schools and historically jewish kids have been kidnapped and forced to convert or just "disappeared" during pogroms. The fact that just like jews antisemitism has been "other"ed and people cannot see the connections unless it's time to downplay/universalize jewish pain or call literally anything a holocaust is horrifying.

Another issue is that the same people saying pain/trauma doesn't expire tell jews that it was "a long time ago" to "get over it".

absolutely spot on. it also poses a long term question about dealing with bigotry and oppressive systems. a big reason why people don't care about antisemitism is that they think that it's over. they think it started in WW2 and ended with it and any antisemitism today is fringe (which it very much isn't.) but that implies that you only have to oppose racism or bigotry as long as the group targeted is still seen as poor unfortunates. there's no thought given to how bigotry moves in cycles. antisemitism happens to run in very predictable 70 year cycles but other forms of bigotry move in cycles too. a culture, race, or sexuality will become a trend, like native peoples in the 70s, middle eastern people in the 1920s, asian people in the 2010s, black people in the 1910s/20s or in 1970s, gay people in the 1920s/1990s. these don't always correspond to when the group is having it's best time but it usually corresponds to when the group is about to have a terrible time. so a group will finally see a modicum of success and as soon as it's noticed they are building something from the ashes bigotry against them starts up again and they end up screwed.

it kills me that so much of the antisemitism i see is from people of color, leftists and women. the attitudes they have about jews are what hurt them too. the lies they believe about jews are the things used against them. if you want to know where the bigotry a group faces comes from, you can find it in the history of antisemitism word for word. black immigrants in ohio eating pets? thats just a kind of blood libel repackaged into a "blacks are savages" trope. gay people are grooming kids, gay gov agenda, and making/converting them gay? that's based on shit they say about jews interacting with christian and muslim communities.

"none of us are free until all of us are free" isn't a cutesy hippy bullshit sentiment about how we should work together. it's saying that no one escapes the cycle of bigotry unless everyone does. it's the summery of the problem. the problem is that you can't fix bigotry against one group first and then expect them to be willing or be able to help the other group before they get knocked back into the shit with you.

it's like building sandcastles next to unrelated groups on the beach and expecting the rising tide to leave yours alone.

[beardedmrbean]

[Huey Zoomer Anon]

I’m feel sorry for many Jewish people who feel betrayed by several artists and fandom blogs where you have to now hide your identity and such despite several years of them saying I “I’m a ally towards Jewish people!”

Well…I mention before I’m an African American with ADHD and Autism. And I felt alienated af even when I prefer very tamed villains that was coming out in the 2010’s

Pffft, the amount of pre 2010’s maniacs I like…

And another thing….a lot of leftists tend to forget the modern Jewish people ARE the descendants of the Hebrew tribes which you know are in the Bible/Torah?

Like…I think a lot of leftists (especially Americans) can’t comprehend that people in the European, Middle East, Asia, etc…see ancient civilizations in similars ways American see the Pilgrims.

Off tangent, it like people saying Dreamworks take on Moses is historically accurate…it almost like a fuckton of his descendants or those who are part of his tribe are still alive? Hint they are

And the left only really knows the exodus and holocaust part of Jewish history. And for the latter tragedy, they use it as a crunch to bash white people…while infantilize Muslims because remember the left mainly relies on the POP CULTURE take of history. So the fact that our education and entertainment systems mostly ignore Arab/Islam Imperialism.

They now think the original inhabitants of the Promised Land are colonizers because a lot of the Jewish Diaspora came back in masses in recent generations

Calling modern Israel a colonial place…are you saying that indigenous people who was heavily forced into financial, scientific, and other “white collar” jobs due to centuries of persecution are going to modernized themselves and make sure that are at mercy of monsters again.

Especially when the nearby Arab/Muslims basically said they want the Jews extinct or become their Dhimmi again?

Oh right right I read up on Middle East history before the euros part of it.

I don’t want to downplay, but I realize something

We are taught to hate the Nazis image, not it ideology. Because at the end of the day Nazism is built upon conflict theory which plagues colleges and systems to this day

I heard people (who are mostly likely adults) say that they loose empathy towards Anne Frank because they learned she was roughly our idea of upper middle class and had maids and such before the rise of the Nazis.

I think that should have been spread around Jewish communities to prepare them for the mess they are in rn

I mean I foreseen because my experience with the left…well at least you guys can counter it this time.

I’m feel sorry for many Jewish people who feel betrayed by several artists and fandom blogs where you have to now hide your identity and such despite several years of them saying I “I’m a ally towards Jewish people!” Well…I mention before I’m an African American with ADHD and Autism. And I felt alienated af even when I prefer very tamed villains that was coming out in the 2010’s Pffft, the amount of pre 2010’s maniacs I like…

There's a lot of people that got some really rude awakenings about the circles that cried about antisemitism over a horn in a game or yelled about having safe spaces for ethnic minorities to go to that they thought would be on their side.

Also a good number that were prepared because they saw the writing on the wall when the womens march decided that Pride flags with the Star of David on them would be banned, still gotta hurt though.

And another thing….a lot of leftists tend to forget the modern Jewish people ARE the descendants of the Hebrew tribes which you know are in the Bible/Torah?

ya, we're supposed to trust the science when the covid vaccine hit, but for some reason a plethora of genetic studies proving that are invalid somehow.

Like…I think a lot of leftists (especially Americans) can’t comprehend that people in the European, Middle East, Asia, etc…see ancient civilizations in similars ways American see the Pilgrims.

Some do I'm sure, there's others that have been there forever too, but human migration is nothing new at all

Off tangent, it like people saying Dreamworks take on Moses is historically accurate…it almost like a fuckton of his descendants or those who are part of his tribe are still alive? Hint they are

Last name is Cohen, there's a fair chance you're in the Levite line I believe it is.

And the left only really knows the exodus and holocaust part of Jewish history. And for the latter tragedy, they use it as a crunch to bash white people…while infantilize Muslims because remember the left mainly relies on the POP CULTURE take of history. So the fact that our education and entertainment systems mostly ignore Arab/Islam Imperialism.

That's been wild to me the entire time I've been aware of all of it, these guys hacked and slashed their way all the way into Spain with their 3 choices of convert, pay jizya, or die.

Not even going to talk about the slavery they did, I don't care what privileges some of them may have had, you're still someones property.

They now think the original inhabitants of the Promised Land are colonizers because a lot of the Jewish Diaspora came back in masses in recent generations

Calling modern Israel a colonial place…are you saying that indigenous people who was heavily forced into financial, scientific, and other “white collar” jobs due to centuries of persecution are going to modernized themselves and make sure that are at mercy of monsters again.

not 100% on who the original are, but they sure as shootin are the oldest we know of, and I'm not sure what the cutoff is for years living somewhere as a people and culture it takes for folks to be considered indigenous and how many away it takes for them to lose that status.

Especially when the nearby Arab/Muslims basically said they want the Jews extinct or become their Dhimmi again? Oh right right I read up on Middle East history before the euros part of it.

Both on that first one, and ya it's wild how short on information about that region so many people are, as I've told you before I don't actually recall learning much if anything about the Ottoman Empire in my k-12 years, and I'm sure that's not unique.

I don’t want to downplay, but I realize something We are taught to hate the Nazis image, not it ideology. Because at the end of the day Nazism is built upon conflict theory which plagues colleges and systems to this day I heard people (who are mostly likely adults) say that they loose empathy towards Anne Frank because they learned she was roughly our idea of upper middle class and had maids and such before the rise of the Nazis.

First bit is shown out when you have people all over that have absolutely no clue how to classify fascism,

And ya, the loss of empathy for her and her family is beyond depressing there, it should actually go to show that it didn't matter if you were well off financially and socially when the ss showed up, all that mattered and all it took to sign your death warrant was your grandmother on your mothers side being Jewish, you could be Catholic and it didn't matter, you were still Jewish to them.

I think that should have been spread around Jewish communities to prepare them for the mess they are in rn I mean I foreseen because my experience with the left…well at least you guys can counter it this time.

Good number of them knew and all, even if they weren't prepared for the level it would get to, when the previously mentioned Anne Frank discourse started and gained traction folks started getting the idea I think.

[justforbooks]

Off-White: The Truth About Antisemitism by Rachel Shabi

In this sharp and engaging book, Shabi addresses the need to understand and confront antisemitism at a time when it is being downplayed by parts of the left and exploited by others on the right

When I started to read Rachel Shabi’s new book, I felt a profound sense of relief and recognition. As she writes: “The left has ceded the space on antisemitism… and the right has smartly and strategically filled that void.” As someone who has been involved for years with various causes where leftwing people gather, I wholeheartedly concur. It’s more than time to take back that space. The downplaying of antisemitism by the left has led to some racism being given a free pass, and it has also resulted in a depressing lack of empathy around the Jewish experience and a weakening of potential solidarity.

It has been hard to talk about this for a long time, for fear of detracting from what feels like more pressing anti-black racism. But now, when charges of antisemitism are being used by defenders of Israel��to head off criticism of horrific crimes against Palestinians, it often feels pretty much impossible. Still, not dealing with it is not doing anyone except racists any favours, and many of us will feel grateful to Shabi for stepping out into this maze.

While the book is subtitled The Truth About Antisemitism, it quickly becomes clear – if we didn’t already know – that there is no simple truth here, but rather a host of interconnected and complex stories. Shabi, who was born in Israel to Iraqi Jewish parents, and whose previous book explored the experiences of Israeli Jews from Arab countries, is a good and careful guide through many of these thorny paths.

She is sharp on the ways that antisemitism differs from other kinds of racism, and how that can make it difficult to confront. Our paradigm of racism is so often that it targets “people of colour in order to subjugate, segregate, colonise, enslave and kill them”, and we expect it to be baked into political and social structures in myriad instances of inequality. Antisemitism does always not fit into that model, not least, as Shabi says, because Jews, by and large, in most places today “don’t face that kind of structural racism”. As other writers have also pointed out, this makes Jews both white and not white – as the title has it: Off-White – depending on the situation.

But antisemitism can be as harmful as any other racism, and spawned the genocide whose trauma still echoes down the generations. Shabi is honest that, while she doesn’t personally share this sense of trauma, she recognises that for many Jewish people it is still present, and the assumption that they should see themselves as “white” “can flatten out the sense of paper-thin conditionality that feels ever-present for many Jewish people”. Any Jew brought up in a family still dealing with the ghosts of the past, would agree that leftwingers need to do better at accepting this all-too-real sense of vulnerability, “without dismissal, disbelief, or bad faith”. For sure, the Holocaust is currently being weaponised to head off criticism of Israel, but we don’t get past that simply by denying the reality of Jewish anguish. As Shabi says at one point: “There has rarely been a more urgent need for us to stretch our compassion, to hold Jewish trauma even while a savagely catastrophic war is inflicted on Palestinians in its name.”

The horror of the Holocaust also needs to be recognised in order to understand Israel’s founding, which is not just a simple tale of colonialism. Shabi quotes Edward Said saying “the Palestinians are the victims of the victims, the refugees of the refugees”. Recognising the complexity of Israel’s past and present means that “decolonisation cannot involve drawing up rigid lists of the indigenous and the colonisers”. This may seem obvious, but Shabi’s reminder to readers that Jewish life and Palestinian life must be treated as equivalent is, sadly, a necessary counterbalance to those on the left who seem to believe that massacring civilians in a gruesome attack can on some level be justified when those people are Israeli Jews.

Another part of the book that I found particularly valuable is its exploration of the way the right is using antisemitism now. I’ve found it really disconcerting to see xenophobic rightwing commentators in Britain suggesting that Jews should make common cause with the far right against Muslims. Are Jews meant to be grateful that at some point we got promoted from being the darkest stain on western civilisation to its frontline defenders? It’s good to see that phenomenon explored along with the mad fringe of Christian Zionism, and the bizarre friendships that Israel is trying to make with some of the worst authoritarian governments in the world.

What’s even more disconcerting than the newfound friendship between some Jews and the right is the growth of crazy conspiracy theories that build on old antisemitic patterns of the super-powerful Jew. It’s vital that we are ready to call out and bring into the light these conspiracy theories, which often centre on the “great replacement” – the idea that Jews are trying to orchestrate the replacement of white people through immigration – and are becoming frighteningly widespread.

I ended the book invigorated by Shabi’s engaged clarity, and would have liked even more. For instance, I would have been interested in more discussion of antisemitism in Muslim communities. Having travelled in Saudi Arabia and Iran, I’ve been struck by the shocking antisemitism that I’ve encountered, which can go way beyond anti-Zionism. Muslims in Europe also tend to hold more antisemitic attitudes than the population as a whole. It may be true, as Shabi suggests, that antisemitism across the Middle East has been imported from western traditions of racism, now fanned by western support for Israel, but it would still be useful to have more discussions about how this is playing out in Muslim communities and what can be done to challenge it.

As Shabi herself says, this book is not intended to be the end of this discussion, but a vital part of those overdue conversations that are needed in order to build greater solidarity in this time of crisis. We need to be more confident in separating justified criticism of Israel from antisemitism, and this timely and valuable book should help to build that confidence. Because her key message is a vital one – that the fight against antisemitism is an essential part of the fight against all injustice and dehumanisation.

Daily inspiration. Discover more photos at Just for Books…?

[psychotrenny]

Hi! May I share your thread on TikTok? The one on how Israel isn't egalitarian in its "safe haven" for Jewish folk. It was so well written and informed. I wanted to make a similar video about how it indirectly Stokes antisemitism, but it'd would be better to highlight Jewish voices as I'm a black muslim

Feel free to if you want but to be absolutely clear that I myself am not Jewish. I just made that post to share some oft he things I've learned in response recent tide of zionist propaganda that's been all over the western media.

If your interested in a Jewish perspective then many Jewish tumblr users have made a lot of very good posts and additions that covers a lot of similar matters. Just of the top of my head there's lesbianchemicalplant (with posts like this, this and this ) and determinate-negation (i.e. this one and this one ) There's many others of course but between tumblr's awful search function and my own inconsistent tagging habits its hard to keep track of what I've read and no doubt there's many that I just haven't seen

Several of the articles I linked are also written by Jewish people or centered on a Jewish Perspective. This theme is likely most prominent in this article, which is focuses on an interview with the scholar Benjamin Balthaser about Jewish Leftist anti-Zionism in the 20s and 30s

Also looking back on that thread and its responses I've realised a number of errors, or at least points where I employed poorly chosen language. I've conflated the Shepardic and Ashkenazis Old Yishuv in ways that I don't think are helpful; as the term is one coined by Zionist settlers to describe the various Jewish people already present in Palestine at the start of the settlement process and thus includes a number of different groups with differing histories and relationships to the land. I also used the term "indigenous" to describe them. This was in an attempt to outline how Jewish presence in Palestine isn't synonymous with Zionism (i.e. the creation of an ethno-state supposedly for all Jewish peoples everywhere) but it also had the effect of implying that they are exempt from participation n the Zionist colonial project which thy are very much not. My point was that there have been Jewish people in Palestine far before the era of Zionist colonialism but in the political sense referring to them as "indigenous", especially in implied reference to the contemporary political situation, was a poor use of the word . Additionally, while my readings on the early development of modern vernacular Hebrew reminded me very much of self-indigenization in terms of how it often evoked an ancestral connection to the ancient Kingdom of Israel (thinking of quotes from Eleizer Ben-Yehuda like "The Hebrew language can live only if we revive the nation and return it to the fatherland" ) it has been pointed out that this was very likely not the primary intention considering that Zionism originated at the very height of European settler-colonialism when such downplaying rhetoric wasn't really necessary. The (frequently forced) use of Hebrew as the spoken language likely had had far more to do with creating a new common culture and stripping Jewish migrants of their own so they could be more easily integrated into the state. While it seems to me that appeals to an ancestral land connection still featured far more in even early Zionism that in any other strain of European Settler-Colonialism (which indeed often made the "newness" of the conquered land a rhetorical point of pride, disregarding indigenous claims to the land without insisting that the settlers had any more rights than was granted with their force and diligence), I suppose that the term "self-indigenisation" may not be the most appropriate in this context and would be best restricted to the more modern faux-progressive forms of Zionist apologia. I'm sure there are many other mistakes I've made in that post or things I've overlooked, but these currently appear to me to be the most important once. Overall I'm honoured that you'd consider my writing worthy of such attention but would urge caution and insist that you seek out other sources in addition to it. Thank you for your time and good luck with the video

[papirouge]

Jews did not just leave the land, they where banished, or like you like to say ethnic cleansed by romans, some stayed, and lived in israel for over 3000 years, but not alot where allowed, non of the empires that came after allowed them to return, muslim and christian rulers weren't so kind to say the least.

With your logic, if palestinians are banished for a millenia with no way to return, than problem solved, they are not indigenous.

No one should have left their home, there was a partition plan, but arabs declined any form of it and started a war, they still do reject the idea.

"But the land was already taken"- thats literally every land by 20th century except antarctica, no one wanted jews, especially not a bunch of black and brown jews which are ~60% of jews in israel.

My own logic is actually that nobody should be kicked out of their home regardless whoever lived there thousands year before, get your facts straight anon.

Like, no one was there when Jews got banished from these land so there's no point to try to shift the blame on anyone or accuse anybody of downplaying the sadness of exile.

What's fascinating is that Jews rehash things that they've been victim of in the past (exile bc of Romans but also Babylonians)....yet use them as a leverage to do EXACTLY THE SAME to others. That's psychotic IDC

And what's also psychopatic is invading a land, propose a "repartition plan" and then act shook the natives don't want none of it...get real anon. 💀Why couldn't Jews just mingle with Arabs on that land ?🤔

No offense anon, but Zionist who are like "yup we came back, took that land to make it a Jewish state :)" are more respectable in their blunt honesty than gaslighter like you...

"but the land was already taken" so you agree? Israel "took" that land? Cool, because last time I checked, out of all nations responsible of invading and even genociding natives to make space, Israel is the only one acting like a victim for doing that 🤔

[superbdragoncollection-stuff]

don't forget:

Outdated posts about John Brown

Anti Semitic rants and people downplaying said anti semitism, and Jewish people responding to that

"why are we talking about the war in the US think about what they are doing to the [insert slur for indigenous people here]"

Reblogging the extremely racist cornerstone speech and going "wow this is messed up"

Complaining about union soldiers

People saying their white relatives got carted off as slaves, and flame wars starting in the comments over who qualifies as white

Fun fact: the definition of "black" was very different back in the day. It varied from state to state, with things like the "one drop rule", where if you had 1/8th black ancestry, but had snow white skin, you legally were considered black. There are also a bunch of escaped slave posters that describe the victims as "can pass as white", with details like blonde, blue eyes, "will try to pass as white", etc. Some would even say things like "would not be readily taken as a slave". Basically, if you had curly hair, and no one to vouch for you, a slave catcher could haul you away. Seriously, that is how insane this stuff was. Many people claimed Cuban or Welsh ancestry to try and escape being enslaved, and there are stories of people visiting New Orleans and being astounded at how white everyone looks.

This is NOT, repeat, NOT to downplay the racism in society at the time. It is to show how ARBITRARY it was, and how race is a social construct. Like, what they defined as black was in the eye of the beholder. You could be white, blonde, and blue eyed, yet according to racist logic, if you had curly hair, or a certain kind of nose, you would be considered 1/5th of a human being. The definition of black varied from state to state for crying out loud! There is a book from the 1890s, Iola Leroy, taking place in 1859, where a white woman is up north, defending slavery, only for literally an hour later to discover her mother was an escaped slave, and she is legally also a slave. She gets hauled down south until liberated by the federal army. And characters comment on the arbitrary nature of this. A white doctor who claims he knows "those people" on sight thinks she's attractive. He is then immediately repulsed when he hears who this white woman's mother is.

This is why slavery wasn't just a "black people" problem: because black was whatever the slaver said it was.

what my dashboard would actually look like in 1861:

i can't believe no one is talking about the war in the united states

i'm so sick of posts about the war in the united states; why is the hellsite so america-centric

IF YOU ALL DON'T STOP POSTING UNTAGGED SPOILERS FOR THE NEXT INSTALLMENT OF GREAT EXPECTATIONS I SWEAR TO GOD

george eliot setting off a flurry of debate regarding which other authors are Actually Secretly Ladies

put down "idylls" and read some actual arthuriana 🙄🙄🙄

are gothic and sensation novels poisoning the minds and morals of the youth? discuss.

a call-out post by a lady's maid of her former employer, leading to the latter getting doxxed

extremely gung-ho spiritualists

swifties but make it jenny lind

coquette but make it pre-raphaelite

james steerforth x y/n fic written by someone whose URL is rosadartles

temperance movement discourse

Girls When Whatever Our Souls Are Made Of His And Mine Are The Same

"getting a lot of anthony trollope vibes from this" <- guy who's only ever read anthony trollope

hysterical unsourced posts about the horrors of white slavery with thousands of notes; debunkings of the same that have maybe a few hundred

[amogharakali]

#TwitterReact 001: To Musk's Comment About Decolonization

I believe it's very easy to co-opt and hijack the idea of decolonization for problematic causes, which is why I don't like using the term.

But it's idiotic to make such a simplistic equivalence as Musk made recently, when he equated decolonization to calls for gen***de against Jewish people. For the record, before I go on, I do not and will not endorse any call for harm against any Jewish person. To make things very clear, I oppose the October 7 attack on Israeli civilians, as well as any similar act of violence.

Decolonization can cover a range of practices that challenge foreign power (see this book chapter from the American Council on Foreign Relations for a fairly good summary). Some of these advocate harm (which I see as a problem), but others do not.

Example 1: India's policies favouring Indian industry over foreign ones can also be classified as a decolonial practice. Among other goals, a primary concern for both Indian governments and the Indian people is the fear of being having their domestic markets occupied by companies which listen more to their own governments than India's, thereby creating conditions similar to colonization.

(Don't forget that India's colonization in the 1600s and 1700s by the British and the French began with foreign private corporations that did not listen to local rulers or follow local law)

Note how different Example 1 is from Musk's definition of decolonization. And that's my point - decolonization covers a vast vast range of ideas, practices, and opinions from pretty much the bulk of the world's population.

This is both its strength and its weakness. Its strength is that it allows a wide range of movements, groups, interests, ideas, and institutions to link themselves to a common history of being subject to colonial practices and norms, as well as a common goal in dismantling such norms which may impede their progress. This allows for sharing of knowledge, resources, and support in each other's progress and growth.

The weakness: Over the years, this same broadness of the concept has also been used by people of multiple ideologies to justify questionable practices, which many decolonization scholars may not actually support. This does not mean broadness is a bad thing, but it nevertheless has a weakness that practitioners should be aware of.

Example 2: Conservatives in the global south have used decolonization as an excuse to support indigenous medical practices being exempt from evidence-based medical standards.

Their claim is that evidence-based medicine is "too westernized" to understand traditional medicine. The enormous harms which may come from widespread use of unregulated medicine are downplayed in the name of decolonization, or related terms.

Example 3: Left scholars and activists have used decolonization as an excuse to justify terror activities against civilians. Their claim being that civilians from colonizer communities are as much to blame for colonization as the states and governments they belong to.

I do not endorse either of the above examples. However, examples like 2 and 3 drag the spotlight away from dozens of scholars and activists who may be engaging with a wide range of decolonization practices in multiple forms. Most of whom are actively trying to make positive change while minimizing harm.

For instance, there are medical practitioners who may be improving traditional medicine by subjecting medical interventions to rigourous testing. There are opponents to colonization who are building active non-violent civil disobedience movements.

By equating decolonization to those who are justifying violence against the Jewish community (and labelling all calls for resistance to Israeli violence to anti-semitism), Musk is being deliberately lazy, perhaps even malicious. With such broad-brush strokes, he's going to ban people who may have actually been against anti-semitism.

Like I've said above, I don't like a lot about decolonization, at least in the way it's often articulated today. But there's a difference between saying that an idea can be used to justify atrocious acts and equating that idea with atrocity itself. Decolonization needs to be debated, discussed and fought over. But it shouldn't be banned.

I don't expect Musk to understand this though. The man has enough intelligence to cause harm, but not enough wisdom to reduce it.

---

PS - I don't consider myself a scholar of, or as being inspired by, the concept of decolonization - at least in an academic sense. I'm speaking from outside the field and providing a viewpoint of an outsider. There will be decolonization scholars who will disagree with what I've said above.

[jewish-sideblog]

Sharing some quotes from this article from the first issue of Antisemitism Studies because I've been thinking a lot about it lately.

"Jews often become identified with the whole murderous complex of the Holocaust and the unpleasant, unwelcome feelings it may cause. By splitting feelings of guilt and superego functions from one's self, one may project these feelings onto Jews. According to Adorno, this projection, which is not just an individual perception but carries social force, represents a particular socio-psychological defense mechanism: the wish to repress the memory of the German atrocities helps to reproduce the resentment that has caused these crimes.

The wish to negatively portray Jews in the Middle East and Israel as representatives of a "white," colonial, demonic evil empire ruthlessly exterminating the indigenous Arab population, then, may also be explained by the need of citizens of former colonizing countries to be relieved of their nation's historical guilt and complicity in colonial crimes-- or to make up for it.

Creating or reproducing the demonized image of Jews as the collectivized "white colonizers" and "alien bodies" who do not belong in the Arab world has become a common trope in European discourse and public opinion since the late 1960s. While colonial guilt may be motivating these binary discourses, such tropes unwittingly replicate ethnic-nationalist and antisemitic Nazi ideologies portraying Jews as "parasitic," "alien," and homeless people who threaten European nations and their autochthonous populations-- ideologies from which one allegedly seeks distance.

The equation of the democratic Jewish State of Israel with Nazism's anti-Jewish terror regime is another marker of such peculiar secondary antisemitism. It demonizes Israelis as it simultaneously downplays the horrors committed against Jews in the past, whereby Israel serves as a "collective Jew" onto which classical antisemitic stereotypes are frequently projected. Commonly invoked Nazi references and inversions vis-a-vis Jews as a collective entity are displayed in phrases like Palestinians are the "victims of the victims," or "Muslims are the Jews of today" (implying that Muslims are persecuted on the same level today in Western societies as Jews were in Nazi Germany). Such inversions may also point, following Critical Theory, to the deep wish to turn the persecuted victims of European history into today's perpetrators. These constructs collectively denigrate Jews and turn them into a morally reprehensible, guilty party by demonizing Israel as a unified, evil entity that represents Jews. These tropes relativize the genocide and the still unmastered legacy of the Holocaust as well as the historical guilt associated with it on the European continent."

[marshinnx]

Victimhood Sacrificial Complex.

Women, Color Caste people, Jews and the LGBT like when people of their identify group suffer and die.

These different identity groups have become brands and the angle of the brands are victimhood.

White is also a brand but it's angle is superiority so they don't have to sacrifice members of the brand to recharge it, not typically anyway.

They just took over education, religion, (where is Jesus described as being pale, brown haired and blue eyed with small facial features?) and the media then bombard us with their supposed superiority and perfection.

Black Caste people like, no, yearn for Black death and discrimination. It validates their brand, their victim persona's and recharges them.

It's a free pass to judge and degrade everyone (rapping about b*tches and f*gs is okay but don't say the "N word") and it's a benefit card, they DESERVE all of those handouts and (over)representation. They even cling to the industrial kidnapping complex (that ended 400 years ago) as a quick brand sanitizer.

We can see that the Tribal Caste people love talking about missing 'Indigenous' Women. It's never about solutions or reforms, the bodies are just waved around like vitcimhood trophies for superficial attention, for the spotlight. Being romanticized as magical wise folk nature protectors and their high crime rates being downplayed isn't enough for them.

Those with Mestizo heritage liked that they were mass shot at wal-mart, well, not them personally, the brands want sacrifices but they never want it to be them, it's like wishful thinking lottery. They liked the shooting because they finally got the attention that they crave.

This was taken to the next level with #stopasianhate. So many of them were so excited by the deaths because they knew it may spur BTS and these different kpop groups to speak out, anything for popularity, anything to be framed as angelic, the hero. If it's forced and expected how is there any space for it to be authentic? Many Asian Caste people couldn't name the people who were shot and many don't even register Asian Caste people if they aren't pale and college graduates.

Gay people are rarely killed anymore but Gay people will search for them to justify pride, as if parading around in short shorts is going to change anything. Trans people take the death of transwomen out of context and use them like firewood to power the brand, suicides are act as a battering ram.

Jew Caste people have mastered this. We don't learn about our histories in school but somehow tons of energy is dedicated to anne frank and the holocaust. The holocaust deaths are whipped out like badges, like vitcimhood olypmic gold medals. Every time there is an attack on Jewish people it recharges their brand, the actual victims become forgotten batteries.

If the Jewish Caste mastered this Women are the gurus. It's not even victimhood, it's tragichood. Women will bring up rape statistics then will proceed to literally make demands. They use these survivors as leverage, as hammers, as proof and this proof is a crown that entitles Women to be dictators. Femicide is literally a media industry powered by Women, serial killers are heartthrobs now, household names. Women have become like fish and female death is water.

It's all about being the main character at any cost. Never about polices, laws, reforms, strikes, or boycotts. Just superficial, pop, feel good politics, more 'our lives are movies' BS. Ignoring dozens of red flags to elect Biden and Kamala was just a happy ending. Who needs real reform when we have our brands as our identities. Ignore our parts in this broken society, ignore the bad behavior of our brand members, all so we can go in a circles, sacrifice people and consume the planet to death.

[eruhamster]

By the way, if you guys see posts like this, this is literally the same as when TERFs try to pretend to not be transphobic. Put your thinking cap on and actually read what this person has posted and the screenshots they're sharing.

Do not talk about the human rights violations. And focusing on the value of safety - the term "safety" is only brought up by pro-Israelis to argue that the genocide is necessary to ensure their own safety. This is explicit pro-Israel, Zionist framing.

This is pretending to be about Palestinians with how it adds them in there, but remember explicitly that Israel has a mandatory draft that sees that every Israeli person is at least partially culpable unless they draft-dodge. Additionally, many Israelis are immigrants. They are willingly choosing to live in this settler-colonist state. Additionally, a large part of the problem are the illegal Israeli settlers who are actively pushing Palestinians further and further into smaller pieces of land. Many average Israelis are literally culpable for the genocide.

Do not talk about the actual people who made the actual choices that led to the actual genocide, for some reason. Maybe because that would feel too mean :(

Don't talk about what is really happening, just talk vaguely, because using words like "occupation" and "Zionism" and "genocide" would be too obvious that Israel is fully in the wrong, and that would be bad. Remember that "people cannot organize against ideas" is just. Wrong. If you are from a settler nation like the US, think of how you would feel if this was written about your nation vs the oppressed indigenous people. This would be as if you cannot talk about Land Back and the US occupying Native land, and cannot use terms like "Manifest destiny." It's ridiculous and kneecapping the real discussion in order to try and equalize the situation and paint both groups as equally at fault and equally as innocent.

This person also brings up Hamas being corrupt in order to cloud your judgement. Unless you are a crazed tankie, you are not defending Hamas. How many pro-Palestinian leftists have you seen outright defending Hamas, other than the acknowledgement that an occupational force committing war crimes will create terrorists, an known fact that we see from the US's work in the Middle East?

Hamas was created and funded by Israel specifically to kneecap Palestinian liberation.

I want you to think very critically when you see people talk too much about how they feel as an Israeli (or as a Zionist Jewish person who has conflated their religion with the state of Israel) regarding a genocide. I want you to think about how you would feel if you read those words coming from an American could any group of people that the US government is currently oppressing, or how you would feel if you read this and imagined it from a white South African during apartheid. It will open your eyes.

And also remember, crucially, that Israel is a nation less than 100 years old, and was founded by two separate terrorist Zionist organizations through terror attacks. The current Israeli government is an offshoot of one of these terrorist organizations, Irgun.

Israel and Palestine is not an equal playing field, and be critical of anyone who even suggests otherwise. Especially if they downplay your activism as 'performative.' Calling protests to pressure Israel into a ceasefire, spreading news from Palestinian journalists about what is going on in Gaza, supporting Palestinian businesses, and donating directly to Palestinian foundations like the Palestinian Children's Relief Fund "performative" is further proof that this person has no interest in the lives of Palestinian people, only the defense of a nation that is at its core an apartheid state that to this day does not even recognize inter-faith marriage.

but seriously if you are at all blogging about the i/p conflict you NEED to read that standing together article from that post i just reblogged. please. please please please please please. these are the people who are actually doing something about freeing palestine and have been for years. And here's the thing:

IF YOU WANT PEACE IN ISRAEL, IN PALESTINE, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE IT'S GOING TO COME FROM.

Because yeah. The way this site is spreading around uncritical posts is a huge issue (and a reason I haven't been around since October). Standing Together is doing a hell of a lot more than blogging about it. They're on the ground putting in the work. Nine days before the October 7 attack, they were in Tel Aviv publicly protesting about the systematic oppression of Arabs (not just Palestinians) in Israel.

"The global left has to be synced with what we need." Trust me, the right is. Boy HOWDY is the right synced. I have gotten more support about my Judaism from the far right than the left and it's??? kinda fucked up??? Someone who worked for Pat Robertson should not feel safer than someone dedicated to activism, but here we are. I can feel how easy it would be to be radicalized towards the right, and I'm actively fighting against it. Now imagine that multiplied by millions of people, plenty of whom don't have the same desire to do so, or feel like they don't have the luxury of safety to do so.

Seeing Hamas being portrayed as sympathetic and talked about like they had a right to commit all of the atrocities that they have is making me lose my MIND. They're a group run by corrupt billionaires who actively started this conflict with the intent of silencing the Palestinian people who have been protesting their tyranny. They have been siphoning money from Palestinians for years and this entire attack is them deliberately throwing Palestinians into the path of slaughter to distract from that fact, the same way that Netanyahu absolutely took advantage of the threat and tragedy to try and get himself off the hook for his own corruption.

Also check out the google doc linked in the article. It's not just a good way to learn how to communicate, but a very good resource for finding out if something you're sharing is worthwhile. In fact, it does a really god job of breaking down why I've felt so uncomfortable about a bunch of the posts on my dash. Some excerpts:

This got way longer than I had intended, but hopefully does its job. Go read the article and, yes, if you need to, reevaluate your activism. Because if it's not what people involved actually want or need, then it's just for you. And that's kinda fucked up.

[dnalkaline]

(I am speaking here as an Indigenous person)

BIPOC wasn't meant to be a replacement for POC, it was meant to only be used in specific contexts for certain conversations pertaining to Black and Indigenous issues that other POC don't face or don't face as often and it really irks me to see white allies try and market it like the more "politically correct" version of POC just because they don't want to take the time to understand nuance and the idea of "there's a time and a place for this"

Because when used as a general descriptor to replace POC you're basically acting like race is some kind of caste system and someone is guaranteed to have it The Worst all the time. But race issues can get complex. Every race has their own specific issues. Separating Black and Indigenous people from other POC as a normal thing for no reason is really othering and ignores mixed people's complicated experiences. I also have a bit of a problem with it because Latine people are literally being put in cages and gassed and are always used for slave labor and yet people try to... Downplay that?

I also see this weird misconception that Black and Indigenous people are the only people killed by police, and that other POC "only" have to deal with slurs when that's... not true. There are dark-skinned Asians, dark-skinned Latine people, Middle Eastern people, etc. And these people also get brutalized, given unfair sentences, etc. But from my experience, these stories aren't shared as often. (Remember how hate crimes against Asian people went up after Covid with people literally being stabbed, mauled, etc... And people only cared for about a week? Even worse still, I saw other communities of color make horrid comments laughing about this treatment and saying that the "Filthy Chinese" are finally getting what they deserve...)

I've also heard the argument that Black and Indigenous communities need to be separated because the "white-adjacent" (okay seriously what the fuck is up with this term?) races are typically racist to them as well. But this ignores the fact that Indigenous communities have anti-Black issues and that Black communities have anti-Indigenous issues. Horizontal aggression exists everywhere.

There's also a thing I see in (American) aggressive leftist spaces where if someone fucks up and they're considered to be a "white-adjacent" race, it's suddenly okay to be racist to them. (Examples being this happens a lot with Asians and Mexicans from what I've seen, people threatening to deport a LEGAL Mexican person, bringing up Hiroshima to Japanese people, people saying they want to shoot Filipinos, etc. I also see people being EXTREMELY antisemitic, saying they want to gas Jewish people.) While a person might have light-skinned privilege and that is something to be discussed, the solution isn't to just... Be racist right back at them when they're also a marginalized group who has to deal with shit from white people?

I don't know. There's just a lot going on here and I hope this all made sense.

I guess the TL;DR is just "things are too complex to fix with one acronym"

[mikhalsarah]

Every single media outlet mentioned this when discussing this report, which she goes on to admit as she later contradicts herself from “However, not a single one – save for articles from The Canadian Jewish News, and B’nai Brith Canada, of course – mentioned that Jews are the most targeted group for hate crimes, a statistic you’d think would warrant attention.” to “ For most outlets, the staggering number of antisemitic hate crimes was mentioned almost as a passing thought. “Oh, and Jews are still the most targeted, by the way.”

So what gives?

1) News is, by definition, about what is NEW...that is what has changed relatively recently. Antisemitism is old, Islamophobia is new. 

2) If it bleeds it leads. The negative sells. “Rate of X (negative thing) down” will never stand a chance against “Rate of Y (negative thing) up”.

3) Sudden drastic changes like a 60% change (such as the rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes) is much more interesting than a more modest change of 19% (the decline in antisemitic acts). Even if they were both moving in the same direction 60% would still be the more drastic change and receive more attention.

4) Things with relatively clear, recent causes (populist political pandering = rise in anti-Muslim acts) are easier to report on than longstanding, complicated issues with no one clear cause and which have defied easy solutions for thousands of years. People prefer to discuss things that appear to have simple, possible solutions....people also want to confront a new problem BEFORE it becomes another old, complicated, entrenched problem we have to deal for thousands of years to come. It’s a “nip it in the bud” thing.

It’s not fair, but one need not resort to a conspiracy to ignore Jewish suffering to explain how the media works. It must sell itself to survive, therefore it must exploit the way the human brain can be convinced to part from a few of its hard-earned dollars on a regular basis. Simple cause and effect neurology at work. For the same reason, large swathes of Jewish media have downplayed, “splained” and said, “Yes, but..” to the sudden increase in anti-Muslim hate. Dwelling on our own misery sells Jewish newspapers in much the same way.

 But tell me, how many Jewish papers have seriously reported on the racism experienced by Indigenous Peoples? You know, the missing/murdered kids in Thunder Bay, the daily round of insults, the garbage and bottles thrown at Natives from passing cars?

Let’s face it. These things don’t get mentioned at all in a Jewish paper anywhere in the world, except when Jews want to pat themselves on the back for not being involved directly in systemic racism against Natives....since we are a tiny minority who never provided Native schooling, doesn’t control the government, and there are nearly no Natives trying to convert to Judaism, we essentially needed to do nothing but continue breathing to not be directly involved. But bring up the topic of Natives round the Shabbat table and you’ll see how much we’re still a part of the system.

[deborahdeshoftim5779]

Letter to MP against UK university anti-Semitism

A copy of a general letter to MPs against universities that inexplicably refuse to endorse the IHRA’s definition of anti-Semitism, because attacking Israel is more important to them than treating Jews and their nation-state fairly (criticised when wrong, praised when right). 

(Generic letter content in quotations, additional comments in bold). 

I am writing to you with great concern over increasing anti-Semitism in our society, which endangers the city's small Jewish population and destroys the fabric of our society. I hereby append a letter from the IsraelBritain Alliance organisation, which makes my own views plain, and will also include my own commentary thereto.

The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has announced that universities who fail to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism will be named and will face possible funding cuts.

I agree with the Secretary of State.

Our universities are funded to the tune of £billions each year by taxpayers and are covered by the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), which requires them to eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation.

It remains a matter of great concern to me that vice-chancellors at UK universities allow Israel Apartheid Week events to take place on their campuses, when the evidence shows that they generate discrimination, harassment and victimisation.

Copious evidence will demonstrate the blatant anti-Semitic hatred which features at anti-Israel events. Examples include promotion of Nazi genocide against Jews, comparing Jews to Nazi's, insults towards Jewish students who support Israel, and calls to wipe Israel from the map.

This evidence can be demonstrated in slogans, videos, posters, talks, and views held by those attending such events. The level of hostility directed towards Jews even by holding such events cannot be underestimated, with Jewish students nationwide testifying to increased discomfort on university campuses, increased abuse, and even fear. Bear in mind that the Jewish population in Britain numbers between 250 000- 350 000, a tiny proportion. 

Moreover, there is a strong case that these events breach the IHRA definition, by allowing double standards to be applied, requiring of Israel a behaviour that is not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Israel acts in self-defence to protect its population. While we do not forbid the fair criticism of Israel's military actions (which occurs regularly within the Jewish State), we do question those who attack Israel's actions without offering any criticism of Palestinian terrorism.

Thousands of Israelis, most of whom are Jews, have lost their lives due to terrorist attacks. Names such as Kim Yehezkel, Ziv Hagbi, Ari Fuld, Rina Shnerb, Dvir Sorek, are just a few of the recent heartrending cases. The true list is longer. Bear in mind that these terrorist attacks from Palestinians can occur even when Israel does not employ military action.

Promoters of BDS and attacks on Israel often downplay or even justify the murder of Israeli Jews, particularly if they live in the disputed territories. Very few, if any other people living on disputed land face the wholesale downplaying or justification of terrorist murder. 

The architects of Israel Apartheid Week seek to make a comparison with Apartheid South Africa, a baseless comparison that cannot be supported factually or with the most generous definition of hyperbole.

Those who promote Israel Apartheid Week slanderously claim that the conflict is being motivated by the same reasons for the South African apartheid regime: race/ethnicity. They posit the claim that Israeli actions are motivated by European racism against the "indigenous" Palestinians.

In fact, around 51% of Israel's Jewish population are Middle Eastern/North African Jewish descendants, with small populations from Ethiopia, Eritrea, India, and other nations. A fifth of Israel's population is Arabic, with small proportions of other ethnicities and cultures. Israel enshrined equality before the law in its very founding documents.

Israel's detractors will claim that the building of settlements in disputed territories constitutes apartheid, ignoring crucial facts: 1)- terrorism against Jews by Palestinians in those areas, leading to increased security which was not required beforehand, 2)- the numerous Palestinians living and working with Jews in those regions (the victims of the Barkan terror attack worked with Palestinians on a daily basis), 3)- the offers of this land to the Palestinians, met with repeated refusal, 4)- the insistence made by Palestinians that no Jews would be allowed to live in their potential state, 5)- the physical danger, particularly for Jewish women, from entering Arabic villages in those same disputed territories.

Disputed land conflicts occur all over the world, and are usually solved through negotiation. Falsely accusing one side of practicing apartheid when that same side has repeatedly offered most of this land to their accusers, is an abuse of language and an abuse of the truth. Israel does not have a system of apartheid, and has a legal system which discourages and punishes unjust treatment of anyone. This can easily be confirmed by documentation.

Furthermore, one must wonder what motivates universities in the UK to withhold their endorsement of the IHRA definition when it explicitly breaches their compliance with their responsibilities under the PSED.

It may or may not surprise you to learn that the University of London SOAS had a Hamas linked group, Europal, on its campus in early March. Worse still they have lied to the public about the event taking place. You can read more at this link - http://david-collier.com/soas-lying/.

As your constituent, and in line with your role as a political leader in our community, will you publicly support Robert Jenrick’s position, and will you confirm that you will contact the universities that serve our community and ask them to confirm that they have, or will be, endorsing the IHRA definition?

Bearing in mind that definitions of what constitutes other kinds of prejudice have been accepted without question by various institutions around the United Kingdom, the fact that people struggle to accept an internationally-recognised definition of anti-Semitism exposes the problem at universities. This has nothing to do with alleged concern for the Palestinians, and more to do with anti-Jewish bigotry. Your support could help hold those bigots accountable. 

I look forward to hearing from you.

This letter has been copied to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Secretary of State for Education and to Alistair Jarvis, the Chief Executive of Universities UK.

Also, recognising that education is a devolved issue, this letter has been copied to the politicians responsible for education policy in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.