Eric Alterman is a liberal columnist I respect, even though I disagree with his views on Israel and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign. Today, in a New York Times op-ed piece about the BDS movement on campus titled, “Free Speech, Even if It’s Obnoxious,” he offers an encouraging insight:
Aside from Facebook and Twitter posts, where anonymity often invites abuse, I’ve never heard a single anti-Semitic syllable uttered on any CUNY campus in the dozen years I’ve been on the faculty. My classes on Jewish history and culture often discuss extremely delicate questions of Jewish identity without anyone, Jew or gentile, evincing the slightest discernible discomfort.
Great. But earlier in the same article, Alterman tosses out the observation that there’s lots of anti-Semitism on American campuses, including among anti-Zionists:
Anti-Semitism is no doubt a problem on many college campuses. And the boycott Israel movement — which has inspired these arguments — is tainted with it . . .
. . . the boycott movement on campus is thriving not because of, but in spite of, the anti-Semitism of some of its adherents . . .
This is a serious charge. Alderman is claiming that anti-Jewish bigotry is widespread on U.S. campuses and that it taints the BDS campaign. You would think that he would at least make an effort to provide some proof for such an allegation. But the only actual evidence in the piece is of his own first-hand experience at CUNY, where he “never heard a single anti-Semitic syllable uttered.” Which is it, Alterman?
(Yes, Alterman does cite a case in which four pro-Israel Jewish students were ejected from a Brooklyn College event, but CUNY ruled that the basis of that decision was not anti-Semitic. “In our view, there is no support for an inference of discrimination based on religion.”)
Zionism rots the brain. Remember the star reputation of the Germans for culture before Nazism took over? “When I hear the word ‘culture’ I unlock the bolt of my Mauser (rifle).”
Over 60,000 American dual citizens are now proud, racist and violent squatters in the West Bank.
He says BDS is thriving “in spite of” (any) antisemitism (of some adherents). Great. He doesn’t say how much A/S. He doesn’t say it is much. He says it is “tainted”. I think he is just saying what he is (he supposes) supposed to say. How could there NOT be A/S?
Altman’s message: BDS is thriving legitimately. I’m satisfied with that!
As to A/S, how can one prove a negative? I could not say that there is NO A/S among BDS folks. And so what? I don’t like that “ignore the message if you’d prefer to shoot the messenger” business. Even an A/S can argue BDS forcefully and “legitimately” focusing only in what Israel does.
Alterman’s statement below is an understatement to everyone but the leftofascists aka the Mondoweiss folks.
“Anti-Semitism is no doubt a problem on many college campuses. And the boycott Israel movement — which has inspired these arguments — is tainted with it . . .”
Q: What is Alterman’s definition of antisemitism?
In all these alleged incidents of antisemitism we must assert as a first principle that the accusers define their terms. If their definition of antisemitism includes any reference to or conflation of Judaism to Zionism or Israel we can, and must, dismiss it out of hand. That is how a term is rendered moot. Same goes for CUNY, California Board of Regents and all the other institutions that claim to be capable of spotting antisemitism. In the absence of a rational, universal, common-sense definition no real progress will be made towards eradicating antisemitism. Only robust debate can bring that about.
We should point out to Mr. Alterman that the American revolutionaries were “obnoxious” to the English crown; the Abolitionists were “obnoxious” to the Confederate slavocracy as was the anti-Vietnam war protests to the Nixon administration and in all cases the “obnoxious” party represented the masses and the future. Same today for BDS.
Um no were not lefto fascists, were Jews.