The charge is led by the The Barnet and Queensbury (35/35) circuit which has the highest percentage of Jewish residents in the UK. Last month I heard their impressive superintendent speak at a meeting in Harrow and was very impressed by what he had to say.
Their memorial M32 outlines the growing difficulties facing the Jewish community in the UK and asks conference to reaffirm our formal opposition to anti-Semitism. Possibly the most significant sentence in the memorial is the inclusion of the The European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, ‘Working Definition of Anti-Semitism’
This however will create difficulties for the British Methodist Church. For example at last year's conference a guest speaker Naim Ateek accused Jews of using the Holocaust as a Zionist tool, with the Holocaust used as an "industry" which is "exploited for financial gain". This speech was applauded by the very people, such as our outgoing President, who are now running round boasting that we are involved in interfaith engagement with the Jewish community in Britain.
Our outgoing President herself repeated, without evidence, an anti-Semitic urban myth perpetuated by the anti-Semites in Palestine. I heard with my own ears one of the members of the working party say that the Jews in Israel were creating a "new Holocaust" in the Holy Land. And as for Elizabeth Harris's rant which hung around on the official website for several years, what do we make of that?
All these actions, all in the official name of British Methodism clearly contravene the EUMC definition of anti-Semitism.It will be interesting to see if the Barnet and Queensbury memorial survive intact. I will comment on the other memorials later in the week. In the meantime, less there be any doubt, here is the working definition in full:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
Posts
12 comments:
This is quite an extensive definition. As I was reading it, I was wondering whether reading the Gospel of John out loud in public would fall afoul of this standard.
John I think you are trying to create an elephant trap here. John's gospel was written by Jews and for Jews. I do appreciate though that some people have used it malevolently against Jews.
The Gospel of John relates to an internal Jewish conflict - don't forget the church began as a Jewish sect - so it's not relevant here.
My only concern with this is the clauses about the State of Israel, which could easily be used to muddy the waters; the existence of a state is one thing, its policies are another. Any and every critique of Israel is routinely going to be damned as antisemitic by someone.
In 1948, the idea of an ethnically based state was routine; it was still the era of white domination; the Jews moving to Israel, as it became, were Europeans. It was the year apartheid became law in South Africa. These days, such states are not accepted in any other context. Apartheid is gone; nobody calls Britain a 'white country' any more.
As long as we continue to treat Israelis as 'honorary whites', and allow antisemitism to be used to deny criticism of their occupation of the West Bank, their quarantining of the Gaza Strip, their establishment of illegal settlements - what amounts to an apartheid policy established in defiance of international law - then problems are inevitably going to continue. I think there's a lot of anti-Arab prejudice mixed up in this; we've had the myth that the Arabs were incapable of democracy, etc, etc; the answer has to lie in the establishment of a regime in Palestine where both Jew and Arab can flourish together, in equality.
Robert you say:
"the answer has to lie in the establishment of a regime in Palestine where both Jew and Arab can flourish together, in equality."
Such a country already exists - it is called Israel. Israeli Arabs have exactly the same civil rights as Israeli Jews!
The lion's share of Palestine was given to the Arabs. It's called Jordan. The Jordanians occupied the West Bank and the Egyptians occupied Gaza. When Israel took back what had been legally Mandated to it, suddenly they are the occupiers and the oppressors. Gaza is not quarantined, except militarily. There is no mass poverty there.
A lot of Israeli Arabs wish to stay in Israel. There is evidence that some of these Arabs have Jewish ancestry but are too scared of the Arab militants to say so.
The one thing that Robert, MP and I all agree on is that bringing in the Gospel of John is an irrelevance.
You'd have to say that if it's good enough for the EU, which could hardly be described as being uncritical of Israel, then it should be good enough everyone else and that includes methodists. I fail to see what the debate is about.
I am very unhappy with Robert's phrase"...treat Israelis as 'honorary whites'...". It is very easy to interpret this thus:
"The only people who support Israel are racists who believe that Israelis are white people doing God's will by keeping the blacks (sc.Arabs) down. But in fact Israelis aren't white, and they themselves should know their place as second-class human beings." Robert, please convince me that this is not what you meant!
Thank you for clearing it up. I was not trying to create any kind of trap. I've been told by others in other contexts that the Gospel of John is hard to preach because it blames "the Jews."
I saw that line about blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus in the list of prohibited activities and those conversations came to mind.
Thanks for clearing it up.
I don't know why you're dragging God into it, Ric, but I'd like to know why so many people conveniently ignore Israel's behaviour in the Occupied Territories, which are not part of Israel. There has to be something behind it. There's an obvious road to peace there; let them take it instead of building ever more settlements. The only other possibility would be a single-state solution.
Robert I don't know of anyone who conveniently ignores Israel's behaviour in the occupied territories. The European obsession with Israel tends to eclipse just about every other human rights issue in the world regardless of how many lives are lost.
Clearly most people including Israelis are not in favour of the settlements and see them as an obstacle to peace but bandying about words like a apartheid shows a rather limited understanding of what that words means and of the situation in Israel. In fact that type of hysterical rhetoric undoubtedly plays into the hands of Israel's rightwing and is held up as proof positive of endemic European prejudice and bigotry.
It would be useful if methodists tried to view Israelis and Palestinians as human beings with legitimate concerns and fears not merely as oppressor and victim, a view that only benefits the rightwingers of Likud and the Fascists of Hamas.
Good on you David for challenging the orthodoxy being bandied about by a few people at the top.
It would be "useful" if Christians kept their noses out of the whole affair! All this clamor about "Antisemitism"... where is the concern for the Palestinians, whom are as Semitic as any Israeli? Why is mainstream "Christianity" so concerned with promoting anti-Christian (Zionist) propaganda?
More political correctness, as if we don't have enough burdening this world!
Robert enlightens us with some breathtaking ignorance and propaganda - "the Jews moving to Israel, as it became, were Europeans"
Really?
Here is some real news –
In 1948-49, 600,000 Jewish refugees fled the Arab countries, you know Robert those "oriental" "dark-skinned" "ninny" types. They were driven out penniless and were given refuge in Israel, the only place in the world that afforded them welcome and absorption. Your mum and dad in bigot Britain certainly didn't want them.
In total more than 850,000 Jews have been displaced from Arab countries from 1948 until today. This means that over 97% of Jews from Arab lands have left their countries of origin, the home for some of them since the first exile in 586 BCE!
Robert repeats the anti-Zionist lie that has become a damning indictment of the international community. It disproportionately bemoans and favours treatment towards Palestinian refugees whilst it completely failed to respond to the plight of Jewish refugees.
Commenting on a 2003 report, Justice for Jews from Arab Countries chairman, Professor Irwin Cotler charged that Arab regimes in 1948 were guilty of "a pattern of ethnic cleansing" and "criminal conspiracy in dealing with their native Jewish populations.
Cotler explained further that "Any narrative of the Middle East that does not include justice for Jewish refugees from Arab lands, is a case study in Middle East revisionism. It's an assault on truth and memory and justice."
He also accused the United Nations of singling out Israel for differential and discriminatory treatment in the international arena.
"Since 1947, there have been some 687 resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, which have dealt with the Arab-Israeli conflict," explained Cotler. "101 of those resolutions dealt with the question of refugees. All 101 dealt with Palestinian refugees only. Not one resolution dealt with the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab lands."
Dear Robert, less than half of Israel’s multi-ethnic multi-racial population is “white European”. Go away and read some proper history and learn the facts, not just the myths.
Post a Comment