    THE SILENCING OF DISSENT - How do they get away with it? By Paul Eisen

    As the onslaught on the Palestinian people continues and the
    hundred-year conquest of Palestine enters what may be its final stages,
    efforts by the Israeli, Zionist and Jewish establishments to silence any
    remaining criticism of Israel and Zionism intensify. At the centre of
    these efforts is the claim that anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism.
    Critics of Israel are warned that whilst like any other democratic
    state, Israel is open to criticism of its policies, any criticism of
    Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is, by definition,
    anti-Semitic.

    As the onslaught on the Palestinian people continues and the
    hundred-year conquest of Palestine enters what may be its final stages,
    efforts by the Israeli, Zionist and Jewish establishments to silence any
    remaining criticism of Israel and Zionism intensify. At the centre of
    these efforts is the claim that anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism.
    Critics of Israel are warned that whilst like any other democratic
    state, Israel is open to criticism of its policies, any criticism of
    Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is, by definition,
    anti-Semitic.

    First, it is not true that we are free to criticize Israeli policies
    since so many perfectly legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy are
    blanketed as attacks on Israel's right to self-defense and therefore as
    attacks on Israel's right to exist and, therefore themselves as
    anti-Semitic. But what of the core argument that, since all other
    peoples are entitled to statehood, to deny to Jews that which is granted
    to everyone else is discriminatory and, therefore, anti-Semitic?

    There are of course some who really do want to "push the Jews into the
    sea", and there are certainly those who say that Jews are not a nation,
    but a religious group. There are others who undoubtedly would deny the
    right of Jews to establish a state anywhere. These people can fight
    their own battles. For my part, if Jews say they are a nation, that's
    fine and if Jews want to wear blue-and-white, wave flags and set up a
    state on some piece of uninhabited and unclaimed land, although I won't
    be joining them, that's also fine. The problem is when this state is
    established on someone else's land and maintained at someone else's
    expense.

    So what is this state of Israel, this Jewish state, whose existence we
    are forbidden to question? Founded on the expulsion and exile of another
    people, and defining itself as for Jews alone, Israel officially and
    unofficially, overtly and covertly, discriminates against non-Jews. Is
    denying Jews such a state denying them that which is granted to all
    others? One may agree or disagree with any of this. One may argue for or
    against Jewish nationhood, the need for a Jewish state, the right of
    Jews to have a state in Palestine, and even, post-Holocaust, the
    justification for Jews to establish that state at the expense of another
    people. One can agree or disagree with any of this, but is such
    agreement or disagreement necessarily anti-Semitic?

    ANTI-ZIONISM EQUAL ANTI-SEMITISM?

    The anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism argument amounts to this: If you
    do not agree with the right of Jews to go to Palestine, settle there en
    masse against the wishes of the indigenous population, expel this
    population from 75% of their land and then, for the next fifty years and
    more, continue this assault on the remaining land and population, then
    you are an anti-Semite. Similarly, if you do not support the existence
    of an ethnically based state which defines itself as being for Jews only
    and discriminates officially both inside and outside its borders against
    non-Jews, then, again, you are an anti-Semite.

    This would be laughable if it came from any other group of people, yet
    coming from Jews, even though not always agreed with, it is still seen
    as legitimate. So how do they get away with it? No-one else does, so
    what's special about Jews?

    Whether there is anything special about Jews is not really relevant.
    What is relevant is that a large part of the Western world, even the
    most secular part, seems to believe that there is, or, if they don't
    believe it, are not confident enough in their disbelief to say so. The
    Western world seems at times almost obsessed with Jews and Jewish life.
    Stories of struggle from the Hebrew Bible, such as the Exodus from
    Egypt, have become paradigms for other people's struggles and
    aspirations. The emigration of Jews from Eastern Europe into their
    Golden Land in America has become as American a legend as the Wild West.
    Jewish folklore and myth, stereotypes of Jewish humour, food and family
    life-all are deeply woven into the fabric of Western, particularly
    American, life. Yet these preoccupations are complicated and often
    ambivalent Despite our present secularity, Christianity still occupies a
    central place in Western culture and experience, and Jews occupy a
    central place in the Christian narrative, so it is no surprise that Jews
    and Jewish concerns receive a lot of attention. But Christian attitudes
    towards Jews are themselves complex and contradictory: Jesus was born a
    Jew and died a Jew, and yet, traditionally, His teachings supersede
    those of Judaism. Jesus lived amongst Jews, His message was shaped by
    Jews yet He was rejected by Jews and, it has been widely believed, died
    at the behest of Jews. So, for many Christians, Jews are both the people
    of God and the people who rejected God, and are objects of both great
    veneration and great loathing. This ambivalence is reflected in the
    secular world too where Jews are widely admired for their history and
    traditions and for their creativity and success yet are also held in
    some suspicion and dislike for their exclusivity and supposed feelings
    of 'specialness'. Jews seem either loved or hated and, now since the
    Holocaust, publicly at least, they seem loved or at least if not loved,
    then certainly, indulged.

    IS JEWISH SUFFERING UNIQUE?

    The establishment of the state of Israel in May 1948, coming just three
    years after the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945, marks, for
    Jews, the transition from enslavement to empowerment. This empowerment
    of Jews took place not only with the establishment of Israel, but also
    continuously, from the mass emigration of Jews to the West in the late
    nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, to the present day. Today in
    the West Jews enjoy unparalleled political, economic and social power
    and influence. Jews are represented way beyond their numbers in the
    upper echelons of all areas of public and professional life-politics,
    academia, the arts, the media and business. But even more than the
    political and economic power which Jews possess, is the social power.
    Jews have a moral prestige derived from their history and traditions as
    a chosen and as a suffering people. In these more secular times,
    however, especially since the Holocaust, it is as a suffering people
    that Jews occupy their special place in Western culture.

    That Jews have suffered is undeniable. But acknowledgement of this
    suffering is rarely enough. Jews and others have demanded that not only
    should Jewish suffering be acknowledged but that it also be accorded
    special status. Jewish suffering is rarely measured against the
    sufferings of other groups. Blacks, women, children, gays, workers,
    peasants, minorities of all kinds, all have suffered, but none as much
    as Jews. Protestants at the hands of Catholics, Catholics at the hands
    of Protestants, pagans and heretics, all have suffered religious
    persecution, but none as relentlessly as Jews. Indians, Armenians,
    Gypsies and Aborigines, all have been targeted for elimination, but none
    as murderously and as premeditatedly as Jews

    Jewish suffering is held to be mysterious and beyond explanation.
    Context is rarely examined. The place and role of Jews in society -
    their historical relationships with Church and state, landlords and
    peasantry - is hardly ever subject to scrutiny, and, whilst non-Jewish
    attitudes to Jews are the subject of intense interest, Jewish attitudes
    to non-Jews are rarely mentioned. Attempts to confront these issues are
    met with suspicion, and sometimes hostility, because of a fear that
    explanation may lead to rationalization, which may lead to exculpation,
    and then even to justification.

    The stakes in this already fraught game have been raised so much higher
    by the Holocaust. Is the Holocaust "The ultimate mystery, never to be
    comprehended or transmitted" as Elie Wiesel would have us believe? Are
    attempts to question the Holocaust narrative just a cover for denial or
    even justification? Was Jewish suffering in the Holocaust greater and of
    more significance than that of anyone else? Were the three million
    Polish Jews who died at the hands of the Nazis more important than the
    three million Polish non-Jews who also died? Twenty million black
    Africans, a million Ibos, a million Kampucheans, Armenians, Aborigines,
    all have perished in genocides, but none as meaningfully as the six
    million Jews slaughtered in the only genocide to be theologically named
    and now perceived by Jews and the rest of the Western world to be an
    event of near religious significance.

    Jews have not been just passive recipients of all this special treatment
    and consideration. The special status accorded to Israel's behaviour in
    Palestine, and Jewish support for it, is not something that the Jewish
    establishment has accepted reluctantly. On the contrary, Jews and Jewish
    organisations have demanded it. And at the heart of this demand for
    special consideration is the demand that the whole world, recognising
    the uniqueness of Jewish suffering, should join with Jews in their fears
    about anti-Semitism and of its resurgence.

    Anti-Semitism in its historic, virulent and eliminationist form did
    exist and could certainly exist again, but it does not currently exist
    in the West in any significantly observable form. Jews have never been
    so secure or empowered, yet many Jews feel and act as if they are a
    hair's breadth away from Auschwitz. And not only this, but they require
    that everybody else feel the same. So soon after the Holocaust this is
    perhaps understandable, but less so when it is used to silence dissent
    and criticism of Israel and Zionism. Jews, individually and collectively
    use their political, economic, social, and moral power in support of
    Israel and Zionism. In their defense of Israel and Zionism, Jews
    brandish their suffering at the world, accusing it of reverting to its
    old anti-Semitic ways.

    THE SILENCING OF DISSENT.

    Is a Jewish state acceptable in this day and age? Are the Jews a people
    who qualify for national self-determination, or are Jews a religious
    group only? Post-Holocaust, does the Jewish need for a state of their
    own perhaps even justify the displacement of the Palestinians? Are Jews
    who wield power to serve what they perceive as their own ethnic
    interests and to support Israel, to be held politically accountable?
    What is anti-Semitism? Is anti-Zionism anti-Semitism? All this and a
    great deal more could and should be debated. What need not be debated is
    this: that every complexity and ambiguity of Jewish identity and
    history, every example of Jewish suffering, every instance of
    anti-Jewish prejudice, however inconsequential, is used to justify the
    crimes of Israel and Zionism. Every possible interpretation or
    misinterpretation of language, and every kind of intellectual sophistry
    is used by Zionists to muddy the waters and label the critic of Israel
    and Zionism an anti-Semite. Words and phrases become loaded with hidden
    meanings, so that even the most honest critic of Israel has to twist and
    turn and jump through hoops to ensure that he or she is not perceived as
    anti-Semitic.

    And the penalties for transgression are terrible. For those who do not
    manage to pick their way through this minefield, the charge of
    anti-Semite awaits, with all its possibilities of political, religious
    and social exclusion. No longer a descriptive term for someone who hates
    Jews simply for being Jews, 'anti-Semite' is now a curse to hurl against
    anyone who dares to criticise Jews and, increasingly against anyone who
    dares, too trenchantly, to criticize Israel and Zionism. And for those
    Jews of conscience who dare speak out, for them there is reserved the
    special penalty of exclusion from Jewish life and exile.

    Marc Ellis's 'ecumenical deal' which translates also into a political
    deal, says it all. It goes like this: To the Christian and to the entire
    non-Jewish world, Jews say this: 'You will apologise for Jewish
    suffering again and again and again. And, when you have finished
    apologising, you will then apologise some more. When you have apologised
    sufficiently we will forgive you, provided you let us do what we want in
    Palestine.'

    As hard as it may be, for the sake of us all - Jew and non-Jew alike, do
    we not now have to break free?

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -------

    Paul Eisen is a director of Deir Yassin Remembered and is on the
    Executive Committee of Sabeel UK. dyr@eisen.demon.co.uk

    This article is based on "Speaking the Truth to Jews" which will appear
    in a forthcoming book, "Speaking the Truth about Israel and Zionism",
    edited by Michael Prior and published by Melisende in March 2004.