Kritische Auseinandersetzung mit den Medien

Alvin H. Rosenfeld über den Neoantisemitismus Dienstag, 18. April 2006

Filed under: Antisemitismus,Geschichte — peet @ 10:19 Uhr
Tags: , ,

Ein wissenschaftlicher Text, mit Zitaten und Widerlegungen, gut geschrieben, leicht leserlich. Und traurig…

Der Autor – Alvin H. Rosenfeld – ist eine anerkannte Größe auf dem Gebiet, eins von seinen Bücher ist übersetzt worden. Also lesen und nachdenken.

Ein paar Fragmente?

“German fascism came and went. Soviet Communism came and went. Antisemitism came and stayed.” […]

Is there a new antisemitism today? There is, and while much of it resembles the antisemitisms of the past, certain features of present-day hostility to Jews and sometimes also to Judaism do seem new. One is that, like so much else today, Jew-hatred has been globalized and effortlessly leaps across borders. In the past, antagonism to Jews tended to take the form of localized activities, but thanks to the internet and other global media, antisemitism now belongs to the world at large.

Like all states, Israel at times makes costly mistakes. Its policy of large-scale settlement in Gaza and the West Bank has long been a flashpoint of dispute, and its sometimes harsh treatment of Palestinian Arabs living in those areas has also drawn a great deal of negative attention.
Criticizing such policies and actions is, in itself, not antisemitic. To call Israel a Nazi state, however, as is commonly done today, or to accuse it of fostering South African-style apartheid rule or engaging in ethnic cleansing or wholesale genocide is to go well beyond legitimate criticism. Apart from the United States, to which it is almost always linked by its enemies, no country on earth is as vilified as the Jewish state. Moreover, those who denounce it as an outlaw or pariah nation are found on both the left and the right, among the educated elites as well as the uneducated classes, and among Christians as well as Muslims. In some quarters, the challenge is not to Israel’s policies but to its legitimacy and right to an ongoing future. Thus, the argument leveled by Israel’s fiercest critics is no longer about 1967 and the country’s territorial expansion following its military victory during the Six Day War, but 1948 and the alleged “crime,” or “original sin,” of its very establishment. The debate, in other words, is less about the country’s borders and more about its origins and essence. One of the things that is new and deeply disturbing about the new antisemitism, therefore, is precisely this: the singling out of the Jewish state, and the Jewish state alone, as a political entity unworthy of a secure and sovereign existence. […]

As if the foregoing were not bad enough, to point up how tainted Zionism is, Rose reaches for the ultimate weapon in the arsenal of the anti-Zionists–the alleged link between the Jewish national movement and Nazism–and offers this gratuitous and altogether baseless anecdote:
“It was the same Paris performance of Wagner,” she writes, “when– without knowledge or foreknowledge of each other–they were both present on the same evening, that inspired Herzl to write Der Judenstaat and Hitler Mein Kampf “ (pp.64-65). Inasmuch as Herzl died in 1904 and Hitler never set foot in Paris until his triumphal entry into the French capital in 1940, this story is entirely apocryphal. Even if there were some historical basis for placing Hitler in the Paris opera house at the time when Herzl attended–and there is not–Hitler would have been a mere child then and hardly likely to draw inspiration for the writing of Mein Kampf. Surely Rose would have known that. Why, then, did she make this glaringly mendacious linkage between the father of Zionism and the father of Nazism? […]

in left-wing rhetoric, including that of many “progressive” Jews, “Zionism” has now become a term of abuse, meant to convey a dangerous and defiled ideology that has given rise to a corrupt and evil state. To bring this state to its knees by aligning it with the most atrocious behavior of the past century’s most notoriously criminal states is the aim of the anti-Zionists. […]

The fact that anti-Zionism–the rejection of the long-established Jewish right to a secure national homeland in Israel–is essentially nothing more than a version of antisemitism either eludes or fails to trouble Jews who identify with these political tendencies.

UPDATE: Inzwischen ins Deutsche übersetzt (Link).


3 Responses to “Alvin H. Rosenfeld über den Neoantisemitismus”

  1. Ingo Says:

    Ist dieser Essay irgendwo gedruckt veröffentlicht worden?

  2. peet_g Says:

    Der Text wird als eine pdf-Datei öffentlich zur Verfügung gestellt, da es um einen Vortrag handelt. Siehe: Link.

  3. Ingo Says:

    In dieser Seminarreihe scheint es noch einige andere interessante Vorträge zu geben.

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google+ Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google+-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Verbinde mit %s