Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel." This is clearly antisemitism. But particularly since the genocide began, Israel's apologists have claimed that opposition to Israeli war crimes is in fact an attack on Jewish people - and thus antisemitism.
https://x.com/owenjonesjourno/status/1974167077574316428
This underlines the cynical, grubby game now being played by apologists for Israel's genocide.
The IHRA definition of antisemitism was adopted by the British government in December 2016.
It's been adopted by multiple other institutions.
The definition comes with several examples, a couple of which are rightly critiqued for stifling critique of Israel.
But the 10th example is one everyone should agree with. It reads as follows:
"Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel."
This is clearly antisemitism.
But particularly since the genocide began, Israel's apologists have claimed that opposition to Israeli war crimes is in fact an attack on Jewish people - and thus antisemitism.
That is now the argument being openly made in support of suppressing the pro-Palestinian movement in the wake of the antisemitic attack in Manchester.
It impossible to reconcile this argument with the 10th IHRA definition. If you believe that opposition to Israeli crimes constitutes an attack on Jewish people, then you are - by definition - conflating Jewish people with the actions of the state of Israel.
posted by Satish Sharma at
15:28
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home