Published by Academic Studies Press

Volume 4 Issue 2

Issue of Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism

Contents
Journal Overview

Publicly Available January 12, 2022

Titelei

Page range: i-iii

Download PDF

January 12, 2022

Page range: iv-vi

January 12, 2022

ARTICLES

Open Access January 12, 2022

How the Word “Zionist” Functions in Antisemitic Vocabulary

David Hirsh

Page range: 1-18

More Download PDF

Abstract

This paper is a partial response to the intuitive claim that hostility to “Zionists” is not hostility to Jews and so is not antisemitic. It examines ways in which the terms “Zionist” and “Zionism” themselves feature in antisemitic text and discourse. It argues that antisemitism should be understood as a complex phenomenon that is observable in the social world only with some difficulty, and that understanding should begin in a consideration of that observation data. This paper is critical of the opposite method, which sees the observable world only through pre-existing a priori concepts; an example of this is the construction of the concept of Zionism as essentially racist. This method treats observable phenomena, like racism, as inevitable manifestations of the predetermined concept, Zionism. Zionism, and its relationship to racism, should be understood after observing their actuality in the world, not as a priori definitions, which then structure what is observed. Much understanding of Zionism therefore adds a methodological double standard to the double standards of judgment, which have already been well described. The paper draws on a number of case studies, that is, actualizations of Zionism and antisemitism in the existing world: the opposition to David Unterhalter’s nomination to the Constitution Court in South Africa; the antizionist construction of Zionism as racism without the consent or the collaboration of people who self-identify as Zionists; statements circulating in academia that define the communities of scholarship and of morality in ways that exclude most Jews; the designation of Israel as apartheid. The paper concludes with a word on how antizionist nostalgia resists facing the material changes to Jewish life, which were enforced during the twentieth century.

January 12, 2022

Does Academic Freedom Protect Antisemitism?

Cary Nelson

Page range: 19-46

Abstract

The examples listed in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism suggests that some political views common in humanities and social science disciplines are antisemitic. In some disciplines, these views are well established in both teaching and publication. Yet the American Association of University Professors has long used prevailing disciplinary views as a guide to which faculty statements cannot be sanctioned. What should universities do when not just individual faculty, but entire disciplines have been captured by radical antizionism, when students are taught that Israel has no moral legitimacy and must be eliminated? How should personnel decisions be affected? Should this evolving situation lead us to rethink the relationship between advocacy and indoctrination? Can universities keep the search for the truth at the core of their mission in the wake of disciplinary solidarity behind antisemitism?

Open Access January 12, 2022

In the House of the Hangman One should not Mention the Noose: Jewish Voice for Labour’s Attack on the Equality and Human Rights Commission

Derek Spitz

Page range: 47-92

More Download PDF

Abstract

In May 2021 Jewish Voice for Labour (“JVL”) published a combative document entitled How the EHRC Got It So Wrong-Antisemitism and the Labour Party. The document criticises the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s October 2020 Report of its investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party. The Commission found the Labour Party responsible for antisemitic conduct giving rise to several unlawful acts in breach of the Equality Act 2010. In addition to its legal findings, it also made critical factual findings, identifying a culture of acceptance of antisemitism in the Labour Party, which suffered from serious failings in leadership, where the failure to tackle antisemitism more effectively was probably a matter of choice. The essence of JVL’s attack on the Commission’s Report is as follows. First, it is said that the Commission did not and could not lawfully investigate antisemitism as such; to the extent that it purported to do so, its findings of unlawfulness are purportedly meaningless. Secondly, JVL claims that the Commission made no finding of institutional antisemitism. Thirdly, by failing to require production of evidence referred to in a certain leaked report, probably prepared by Labour Party officials loyal to Jeremy Corbyn, the Commission is accused of nullifying at a stroke the value of its own Report as a factual account. Fourthly, JVL claims the Commission’s Report is not just legally untenable, but purportedly a threat to democracy. Finally, JVL claims the Commission’s analysis was not just wrong, but that it exercised its statutory powers in bad faith. This article offers a response to each of the five pillars of JVL’s attack, all of which collapse under scrutiny. As to the first pillar, the article identifies the disappearing of antisemitism as the linchpin of JVL’s argument and shows how JVL’s criticism is underpinned by a political epistemology of antisemitism denialism. As to the second pillar, it shows that the absence of the term “institutional antisemitism” in the Commission’s Report is a semantic quibble. In substance, the Commission found that the conduct under investigation amounted to institutional antisemitism. As to the third, the article demonstrates that JVL’s complaint about the Commission’s failure to call for production of the leaked report is perverse because that report constitutes an admission of the correctness of the complaints put before it. Moreover, the Corbyn-led Labour Party itself decided that it did not want the Commission to consider that material. As to the fourth pillar, the article shows that far from being a threat to democracy, the Commission’s Report grasps the nettle of antisemitism denial. It concludes that continuing to assume and assert that Jews raising concerns about antisemitism are lying for nefarious ends may itself be, and in at least two cases was, a form of unlawful anti-Jewish harassment. As to the fifth, the article rebuts the extraordinary charge that the Commission exercised its powers in bad faith. Rather strikingly, neither JVL nor Jeremy Corbyn was willing to take the Commission on judicial review. The article concludes by considering how the poverty of JVL’s reasoning, coupled with the extravagance of its accusations, invites a symptomatic reading of Antisemitism and the Labour Party as a disappointing illustration of left-wing melancholia.

PERSPECTIVES

January 12, 2022

The Old Jewish Cemetery in Sarajevo

Jasna Levinger-Goy

Page range: 93-98

RESEARCH NOTES

January 12, 2022

The Palestinian Flag as a Tool of Oppression

Euan Philipps

Page range: 99-106

Abstract

The outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas in May 2021 encouraged a wave of protests against Israel’s actions across the United Kingdom. What was the explicit and implicit meaning of these protests, what was their impact and what can they tell us about antizionist antisemitism? This paper assesses the way the signifiers of the pro-Palestinian movement convey aggressive antisemitic meanings across a range of platforms, not only causing significant distress to Jewish communities but also misrepresenting a complex conflict, which, in turn, hampers the prospects of a workable peaceful solution.

January 12, 2022

Does BDS Produce Antisemitic Disruption to Student Government and Jewish Student Life? An Analysis of Pro-BDS Resolutions at Ohio State University and the Exclusion of Jewish Students on Campus

Miriam Shenkar, Jack Staples-Butler

Page range: 107-120

Abstract

The proliferation of debates and resolutions related to the “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions” movement at US colleges and universities raises questions about the relationship between the objectives of Israel- and Palestine-related student activism with that of student governments and their nature and purpose within campus life. This study makes use of direct observation by the first author of two debates held at Ohio State University (OSU) in January 2018 and December 2018 over resolutions proposed to the university’s Undergraduate Student Government (USG) to adopt a pro-BDS platform. The authors examine the recognition and non-recognition of Jewish students’ right to perceive and identify racism and exclusion within these contexts. The authors further examine whether purported goals of inclusion, constructive dialogue and conflict resolution are benefited by contemporary BDS resolution debates, concluding that such goals-in addition to the formal purpose and function of student governments-are ill-served by the process, content, and outcomes of debates in the form taken at OSU.

REVIEWS

January 12, 2022

Not in Kansas Anymore: Academic Freedom in Palestinian Universities

Bernard Harrison

Page range: 121-124

January 12, 2022

Criminaliser les Juifs: Le mythe du “meurtre rituel” et ses avatars (antijudaïsme, antisémitisme, antisionisme)

Alexis Chapelan

Page range: 125-130

January 12, 2022

Touched with Fire: Morris B. Abram and the Battle against Racial and Religious Discrimination

Mary Catherine Mueller

Page range: 131-134

January 12, 2022

Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism: Representation, Cognition, and Everyday Talk

Alvin H. Rosenfeld

Page range: 135-140

January 12, 2022

Hybrid Hate: Conflations of Antisemitism and Anti-Black Racism from the Renaissance to the Third Reich

Shalva Weil

Page range: 141-144

About this journal

The Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism (JCA) focuses on the multiple and changing manifestations of antisemitism in the contemporary world. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, secular and religious antisemitism, antisemitism on the left and the right of the political spectrum, and antizionism.

We invite scholars from disciplines across the social sciences and humanities to submit: 1) original research articles reporting qualitative or quantitative research data; 2) conceptual or theoretical articles; 3) research notes; 4) book reviews; 5) personal perspectives; and 6) accounts of, or responses to, academic controversies within the field of antisemitism studies. Contributions from activists and independent scholars are very welcome.

The Journal is run by an international team of editors and is rigorously peer-reviewed. Its aim is to provide a forum in which scholars from diverse political and intellectual backgrounds can analyze, debate, and formulate effective responses to the ever-evolving and insidious threat of antisemitism.

Further information can be found here: https://www.jcajournal.com

To discuss an idea for submission, please contact the editors at jca@academicstudiespress.com

Volume 4 Issue 2

Issue of Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism

Titelei

Contents

Editorial

How the Word “Zionist” Functions in Antisemitic Vocabulary

Abstract

Does Academic Freedom Protect Antisemitism?

Abstract

In the House of the Hangman One should not Mention the Noose: Jewish Voice for Labour’s Attack on the Equality and Human Rights Commission

Abstract

The Old Jewish Cemetery in Sarajevo

The Palestinian Flag as a Tool of Oppression

Abstract

Does BDS Produce Antisemitic Disruption to Student Government and Jewish Student Life? An Analysis of Pro-BDS Resolutions at Ohio State University and the Exclusion of Jewish Students on Campus

Abstract

Not in Kansas Anymore: Academic Freedom in Palestinian Universities

Criminaliser les Juifs: Le mythe du “meurtre rituel” et ses avatars (antijudaïsme, antisémitisme, antisionisme)

Touched with Fire: Morris B. Abram and the Battle against Racial and Religious Discrimination

Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism: Representation, Cognition, and Everyday Talk

Hybrid Hate: Conflations of Antisemitism and Anti-Black Racism from the Renaissance to the Third Reich