?

Log in

Politically correct anti-Semitism - tabletalk [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
tabletalk

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Politically correct anti-Semitism [Aug. 2nd, 2006|02:26 am]
tabletalk
tabletalk
[aomendoza]
Recent overt acts of anti-Semitism in the West illustrate greater society's ability to write them off. Beginning with the alleged mental illness that caused a Muslim man in Seattle to shoot several people at a Jewish centre, to Mel Gibson's drunkenness in Malibu which lead to an anti-Semitic tirade, and last, ten Middle-Eastern men throwing cement blocks at a syangogue in Sydney. What all these things have in common is that people tend to write them off as inconsequential events that are not indicative of the potential of anti-Semitism to permeate into society. When a man in Seattle goes about and kills Jews and says that it is because he hates Israel, while those Jews are in fact not in Israel, that is an anti-Semitic act. When Mel Gibson goes on a rant about Jews causing all the wars in the world, who is an influential member of the entertainment industry, can and does influence people, that is an anti-Semitic act. When members of the Muslim minority in Australia take it upon themselves to vandalise a synagogue which can spark copycats or greater violence against Jews, that is an anti-Semitic act. What all all these acts share in common is that they have the potential to ignite, inflame and influence others into committing similar acts against Jews, using the current violence in the Middle East to rationalise and justify such actions. Did not the Nazis use the spectre of world Bolshevism to embark on pogroms and persecutions of Jews, stripping them of their liberty and property and civil rights? Did we not learn these lessons that history so overtly illustrates? When external political and international events can influence anti-Semites in other countries to cloak themselves in ideals of either politically correct or cultural developments abroad and are given license by those who choose to look the other way or minimise the potential dangers of these small scale acts, are we not committing the same falacy as those in the 1930s? Much in the same way, asking for a ceasefire on the part of Hezbollah and seeing French acquiescence in seeking Iran's influence over Hezbollah as a stepping stone to guaranteeing a ceasefire, akin to appeasement as that of the 1930s, negotiating from a position of weakness and legitimising militant political factions? When Hamas and Hezbollah, who are legitimate members of democratic representative governments, hold militant cadres, kidnap soldiers, and have their own personal arsenals, declare war on sovreign nation states, should not the governments, of which these factions are a part, be held responsible? Who is ultimately responsible for Hezbollah, if not the Lebanese government? Who is responsible for Hamas, if not the Palestinian Authority? It is in this way that there are overt cases of anti-Semitism, not only in the micro sense, but in the macro sense, cloaked in the rhetoric of political correctness, cultural relativism, and white guilt.
linkReply