DEAR News Of The Area,
THE Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion has produced some interesting insights.
The most interesting one, to my mind, is to clarify what is meant by antisemitism, and what is the distinction between Judaism, Zionism, and the state of Israel.
Judaism is an ethno-religion, comprising a mix of faith, culture, ancestry, and history that predates the modern concepts such as race, nationality, or ethnicity, making it hard to use these latter terms as descriptors.
People sometimes try to make the point that, although the Jews are described as Semites, the Palestinians are also Semites. Be that as it may, the commonly used parlance is that antisemitism is synonymous with hatred of Jewish people for being Jews, making it a form of discrimination akin to racism.
Zionism is a political ideology, established in the late 19th century, that sought to create a Jewish state in the lands of Palestine.
At the same time as Zionism was being promoted, another section of Jewish people were organised around the Jewish Bund. Their premise was not for a Jewish homeland but for the right to be accepted as equals in any country.
So, to disparage a person for being Jewish is no different to disparaging a person for being Muslim, or Christian, or Hindu. It is akin to racism and is hateful.
Criticism of a state, or a political ideology, however, is fair game and, I would put, a necessary part of political discourse.
Some people are more articulate in their criticism than others.The danger, and the need for careful language, is not to conflate the criticism of a state or political ideology with a religion or a people. Or to conflate all people with an ideology.
There are many Jewish people and organisations, including of Israeli origin, who are opposed to the actions of the Israeli state in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. Just as there is a variety of opinion and practice among Christian, or Muslims, there is a variety of opinions among Jews.
There are Jewish and Palestinian voices that are recognising that the current actions of force are mutually self destructive. Appeals for peace based upon rights and values are fraught and often do not succeed.
Perhaps, they suggest, appeals to mutual self interest is a more fruitful path. Recognition that the current way of resolving issues will bring neither peace nor dignity to either side is, at least, a start to exploring more productive solutions.
At the end of the day, the peoples living in Israel / Palestine will find a way to live together that ensures peace, security, and dignity for all of them because the alternative is an endless war of destruction.
Both populations are traumatised people, the Jews from the Holocaust of World War II, and the Palestinians from the Nakba of 1948.
In order to build peace we must not descend to demonising the other. We must recognise the humanity of all people and acknowledge that there is no freedom unless all people are free.
Regards,
Peter Sobey,
Valla.

