Is this anti-semitism?

having an xmas tree is the one "Christian" tradition my wife has insisted on maintaining, and it has nothing to do with Jesus to her so I don't really care. I do sort of enjoy needling Christians about their ignorance of their own traditions when it comes to Xmas (which is p striking/common, at least in the U.S.), that's good enough payback for me. You can have your silly pagan ritual that you don't even understand, what do I care. At least Hannukah has some kind of consistent logic to it.

also, more fire

less fire than the two put together when you put your menorah under the tree (don't make my mistake folks)

I don't really care how anybody celebrates anything, or what and why they identify as one thing over another. But it is called a Christmas tree, pagan roots or no, and I grew up seeing it as a symbol of conformity. I mean, I understand there are Christmas trees and celebrations all over, say, Japan, and that fits the mold differently. It's not a largely Christian country, and the holiday is celebrated as a secular thing (which I define as non-religious). But in a largely or overwhelmingly Christian country, I can't see the trappings and traditions of Christian holidays as anything less than religious, at least not until I see other religious traditions being celebrated, too.

― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 22 January 2015 18:35 (51 minutes ago) B

there are a few problems with what you wrote because you are conflating one explicitly 'secular' country where 40% of people go to church weekly, and another country with a state protestant church where 6% of people go to church weekly and 'christianity' is mostly a vestigial descriptor

this sort of vestigial religious identity is very common here, christians who never went to church, atheist muslims etc, and the hegemonic mass culture is christian only in this sense; active christian practice is no more common then rationalist nu-atheism

in america and in some european countries under the aspect of christian democrat parties it makes a lot more sense to use this sort of inter-denominational analysis to understand identity and prejudice but so much of england is dechristianized or vestigially christian and it works slightly differently -- this country's antisemitism derives from the blood libels but in its current expression it is not exactly christian

nor are the antisemitic beliefs of muslims entirely religious in origin either, it mostly seems to be the same conspiracy garbage everyone else believes, like mordy's favourite socialism of fools quote it is quite as universal as socialism was in the last century

It always feels a little bit futile to try to outline the exact parameters of an irrational religious prejudice. With muslims antisemitism, for example, I'm sure it's usually some combination of religious, political (over Israel), and pre-existing conspiracy theories that can be drawn on in confirmation (yes of course they are oppressing our people because they are part of an evil cabal that controls the world). Christian antisemitism too -- the christ-killing/savior-rejecting thing is already stacked against Jews, and then it gets mixed in with association with trades/industries seen as unsavory, sheer otherness, convenient scapegoatability, etc.

antisemitism is def an overdetermined phenomenon. there are just so many reasons to hate jews (and many of them contradictory - like when jews were simultaneously representing capitalism and communism)

Well they're both modern forces in opposition to some kind of pure, idealized, eternal european way of life

the worst part of interdenominational analysis is that it means this highy irreligious country has an important cottage industry of religious hierarchs speaking on behalf of people who do not ask to be spoken for

the archbishop of canterbury the residual spritual overlord who speaks for a large and currently schismatic communion few of whose current members are in this country, now less about fire and brimstone than appealing to secular liberals

there is a chief rabbi (ashkenazi although this is not often mentioned) who ostensibly speaks for jewry even though he doesn't really represent secular jews, liberal jews, sephardim etc

there are several muslim 'community leaders' such as this knightly opinion4u maven not all of whose opinions are all that nice and who is sort of presented in the media as if he were a cleric for a religion that does not have a hierarchical clergy in the christian sense

Anecdotally, most antisemitism I've seen in the UK has seemed to be the legacy of a cocktail of old suspicions passed through the generations without any explicit link to current religious or political beliefs.

A history teacher at school, who was a minor expert in the rise of fascism in Europe, hypothesised that British people aren't particularly good at telling who is Jewish and who isn't but a host of negative / supposedly negative traits like intellectualism (for example Ed Miliband), nouveau riche flash or a non-specific, vaguely European sinisterness (for example Michael Howard) are widely applied unconsciously as antisemitic tropes divorced from any conscious prejudice.

British people aren't particularly good at telling who is Jewish

Woman I work with thought Ed Miliband was 'Indian or something'.

those are the traditional prejudices of the people london who interact with jews mostly in the professions xp, a lot what antisemitism exists now in the uk is an 'antisemitism without jews' to deploy a phrase used about the present eastern europe, your average lincolnshire protocols reader probably has never met jews and he doesn't need to rely on gossip for his ideas

i am quite worried about the future of jewry in europe, i remember a couple of years ago talking about this on here with mordy and saying that he was a bit too pessimistic about the fate of french jews, but if it weren't already bad enough there it's got a lot worse, the uk is a different case but it's still worrying

Your average Lincolnshire protocols reader is not your average antisemite though. Agree that it is 'antisemitism without the Jews' for the most part but it is still mostly in the same vein as antisemitism in London, I think.

Not sure whether it's true but I read that the huge spike in antisemitic incidents last year came after a historic low. It's understandable to be concerned but I'm not 100% sure the general trend isn't in a positive direction (or more bluntly that people were even worse in the past) as with most racisms.

Well, it's difficult to tell who is Jewish once you've removed yourself from the country you've lived in, because said country (subconsciously?) teaches you that all Jewish people have very similar physical characteristics, traits and all generally look very similar.

For example, in Los Angeles there are many dark-looking, hairy Middle Easterners who are Jewish. It turns out, for the typical Angeleno, that is what a Jewish person looks like. And I had to clarify that the stereotype I was used to was something very different. Very few Angelenos realise that these types of Jews in LA are Iranian Jews (I know there is a term for this, but my apologies, I don't remember it at the moment), who are a specific subset of them, and are a minority within the Jewish community. I guess most of them moved to Los Angeles a really long time ago? Anyway, the point is, this is the image of Jewish people Angelenos have, which is not representative of them.

And as if the Spanish caste system hadn't taught us how ridiculous it is to try to define someone by their race and ethnicity, some Americans and surveys in America consider Jews to be under the same category as 'White', which pretty much confuses me further. So, a dark-skinned Iranian Jew can consider her or himself white. I mean, anybody can call her or himself whatever they want. There is a point where some societies (American, e.g.) use race, ethnicity and colour of skin because they believe it increases their social status. What a sad world this is. There is a point where each little group of people all over the world comes up with their own concepts (right or wrong) and we just stop being able to interpret what they mean. For example, the other day I was reading that Mexicans living in Texas, near the border, consider themselves 'White', for very different reasons, even though some have darker skin. How about we stop asking for your ethnicity and race and focus more on building a safer, more equal society (for *everyone*, it's worth repeating)?

they like to call themselves persians

My current neighborhood has definitely reduced my confidence in my own ability to "tell who is Jewish" because there are so many Israelis of various ethnicities, Bukharans, Russian Jews (who you'd think would be an easy call for me but not so much), etc.

mordy:

That is not what they have told me (I work with them). They schooled me and said Persians is basically synonymous with Iranian, except it has
a superiority meaning to it, referring to old, ancient Persia. They used some other term, because Jews are actually a minority in Iran.

interesting - all the persian jews i've ever known (quite a few - i went to college w/ a bunch) have referred to themselves as persian

Mizrahi, I think it was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrahi_Jews

(though for some reason that doesn't sound entirely right, even though the definition fits)

mizrahi is a general term - some persian jews are careful about distinguishing themselves from jews from arab-majority countries (they think they come from a classier culture) so sometimes they even contest that they're really sephardim.

"for the typical Angeleno, that is what a Jewish person looks like."

not correct. much more likely to think of ultra-religious jews living to the immediate south and east of Beverly hills, or westside & valley jewish assimilated communities

"Very few Angelenos realise that these types of Jews in LA are Iranian Jews "

a lot of angelenos don't know they (jews from iran) are jews (unless they live near Beverly Hills where they are concentrated)

they are usually referred to as persians as Mordy says

Your average Lincolnshire protocols reader is not your average antisemite though. Agree that it is 'antisemitism without the Jews' for the most part but it is still mostly in the same vein as antisemitism in London, I think.

― Wristy Hurlington (ShariVari), Thursday, 22 January 2015 21:13 (7 minutes ago)

yeah but if it isn't new school internet wackiness then it's just a cargo cult version of the first, deriving from gossip or from the london media class trotting out the same aspersions towards jewish public figures

the difference now is that jihadists have a renewed and indiscriminate wish to target jews in europe, and the current generation of jihadism seems more deranged and more easily iterated across borders than that of a decade ago

protocols super popular today in the middle east, which is where i primarily associate it - i'd be surprised to learn that it's still really popular in europe.

That might be true but it's divorced from the stats about widespread opinions you see in polls like the YouGov one. Most antisemitism in the UK is the corrosive trad kind not the violent religious nutcase kind and focusing on the latter isn't going to do much for the majority of British Jews. Xp

Which is not to say the latter should not also be a focus, etc.

well sure, they didn't ask the english if the jews killed jesus, or if they use blood to bake their matzot.

buzza:

yeah, i didn't know they were jews.

anyway, it's from my brief experience. i'm sure if you've lived in la a long time, you'd have a more nuanced perspective.

also, the persian thing came from an actual persian/iranian. i think in canada, i mostly use persian, even when referring to muslim persians.

in Los Angeles there are many dark-looking, hairy Middle Easterners who are Jewish. It turns out, for the typical Angeleno, that is what a Jewish person looks like

I haven't lived in LA in a long time but wtf @ this

lot of ashkenazi jews who make aliyah end up having kids that look sephardi - obv we're pretty malleable (or shapeshifters)

much more likely to think of ultra-religious jews living to the immediate south and east of Beverly hills, or westside & valley jewish assimilated communities

^^^ this

L.A. has the second largest population of American Jews (after NY duh) and they have been there a *long* time

Yeah, I think Mordy understands what I'm saying.

Also, we're not talking about American Jews, we're talking about Persians (who are Jewish)

I often (dependent on state of covering facial hair growth or amount of site dust all over me when I was a spark) got mistaken for Jewish or Asian because of a combination of brown eyes, Arabic looking nose and olive skin tone. Both my parents were Irish immigrants but there is definitely something else in my DNA other than that ole oversubscribed paddy tatty water.

That might be true but it's divorced from the stats about widespread opinions you see in polls like the YouGov one. Most antisemitism in the UK is the corrosive trad kind not the violent religious nutcase kind and focusing on the latter isn't going to do much for the majority of British Jews. Xp

― Wristy Hurlington (ShariVari), Thursday, 22 January 2015 21:34 (Yesterday)

this is very odd perspective, clearly the more outré and virulent antisemitisms of the young and possibly dangerous are worthy of interest because they cause disproportionate and immediate harm that might be mitigated, there is no evident way to 'do much' about about old people with curious ideas about michael howard unless they are all admitted to dave whelan's re-education programme

If a significant proportion of Brits across all age ranges hold antisemitic views, as suggested by the poll, that still needs to be addressed in the same way that all other forms of racism need to be addressed. It's a source of discrimination, abuse and lots of low-level thuggery.

Without being complacent about the risk of the low-level thuggery of the young and radical turning into something more dangerous, British Jews have never really been a focus of terrorism in the way they have in France and, if the broad downward trend in antisemitic incidents is correct, there's no reason to believe there is a greater endemic risk of violence than in other eras. Not really sure what the mitigation strategies for preventing radicalism that haven't been tried would be if that's not correct though.

nevermind that the link you posted downplays the results of the yougov poll completely and yougov and its leading questions are not the most reliable metric, (weren't you saying this the other week) 'that still needs to be addressed' is the sort of social liberal british response to everything

there isn't a lot to be done about it once people are out of school age and unless it causes workplace difficulties etc, it simply is not a public phenomenon, whereas for example one can explicitly teach kids that conspiracy myths are false, close down unlicensed centres of 'islamic education' with known links to jihad apologists etc etc

suggesting that some magic line exists between france and england because jews haven't often been a target for political violence here since the fascist day is fanciful -- syria etc has internationalized jihad to an even greater extent, why will the uk's own graduates of al q'aeda in the yemen and even more vicious factions in syria be any less inclined to target the same groups?

The point is that those people are already being targeted. Hate speech laws are aggressively going after anti-semitic preachers, radical centres of Islamic instruction are being infiltrated and shut down, anyone returning from fighting in Syria can expect to be jailed for up to ten years, anyone clicking on www.alshabab.org.uk can probably expect GCHQ to track them until they're 97 years old, etc. If there was anything else practical to do, i suspect the government would be doing it.

Beyond that, it comes back to education. Targeting resources at those on the fringes and in danger of falling into the fringes makes sense but compartmentalising corrosive antisemitism as 'a Muslim problem' is actively unhelpful when it's part of the mainstream of society. YouGov polls are inherently unreliable but the results are plausible in the context of similar polls in other countries and, even if they're 5% or 10% out, it's pretty clear that antisemitism, like other forms of racism, is widespread across all groups. Highlighting the risk of bodily harm from radicals is valid but not at the expense of acknowledging that the majority of minor things that make the lives of British Jews marginally harder than they should be are not from that world. I genuinely think that 'mainstream' antisemitism could be a factor in determining the next Prime Minister.

Again, education is key - not just in schools but socially reinforcing the idea that antisemitism is racism and racism is unacceptable. That can't just be a top-down state thing.

. I genuinely think that 'mainstream' antisemitism could be a factor in determining the next Prime Minister.

You do?

I suspect that whoever forced Miliband into awkwardly eating a bacon sandwich as a photo op does as well. Whether it's overt or unconscious, i think that a lot of the dislike of him is presented in a way consistent with a historic suspicion of Jewish intellectuals. Not that he's even particularly intellectual - he's demarcated as 'not a man of the people', 'not one of us', etc.

Don't know if you saw my post upthread, but I'm not sure how many 'ordinary voters' (hard working or otherwise) are even aware he's Jewish, same when Howard was Tory leader. But, for sure, the media certainly are.

I think being Jewish is way down the list of reasons the GBP will not vote for him.

I agree but in a tight election with a populist press using implicit antisemitism against him, it could be a factor.

Most British Jewish people I know (yes, the fairly secular/'cultural' ones) are bacon sandwich consumers where their American counterparts probably wouldn't be. I blame the high quality of the average British bacon butty.

One of my close friends from childhood was Jewish and is now a fairly successful food blogger. I never thought about it before but I just went and checked her blog and there are tons of bacon and pork recipes on there.

There's also Jay Rayner, the best-known example, shotgunning barbecued ribs like there's no tomorrow.

I grew up in a US suburb where c. 40 per cent of the residents were Jewish. Maybe a quarter of those families were strict kosher people, half were 'eh, I'll have a cheeseburger, then' types who didn't eat pork or shellfish and did participate in Passover, with the others being as RIBS RIBS SAUSAGES as their gentile neighbours.

anyone clicking on www.alshabab.org.uk can probably expect GCHQ to track them until they're 97 years old, etc.

not sure how many 'ordinary voters' (hard working or otherwise) are even aware he's Jewish, same when Howard was Tory leader. But, for sure, the media certainly are.

Is this anti-semitism?

Just kidding. I have no idea how one determines this, but my guess that the number of people who identify as Jewish and the number of Jews who keep kosher, don't eat bacon, don't eat pork.shellfish, are widely divergent. Growing up outside Philadelphia, I didn't know a single family that kept kosher, and even now, it's usually just a symbolic gesture I come across. Ie, don't cook pork at home, but bacon is OK, and everything out of the house is up for grabs or whatever.

YouGov polls are inherently unreliable but the results are plausible in the context of similar polls in other countries and, even if they're 5% or 10% out, it's pretty clear that antisemitism, like other forms of racism, is widespread across all groups. Highlighting the risk of bodily harm from radicals is valid but not at the expense of acknowledging that the majority of minor things that make the lives of British Jews marginally harder than they should be are not from that world. I genuinely think that 'mainstream' antisemitism could be a factor in determining the next Prime Minister.

― Wristy Hurlington (ShariVari), Friday, 23 January 2015 08:31 (10 hours ago)

though mostly i would rate you at the top of the list of posters writing on british public life, this sort of constant via media statement of the obvious is as good as you have to a flaw

'highlighting the risk of bodily harm from radicals is valid' that's reassuring to know, although people visiting jewish municipal buildings surrounded by cops with mp5s probably don't feel it needs highlighting

'at the expense of acknowledging that the majority of minor things' idk if anyone has spent more time here noting all of these than i have in relation to eg the paedophile scandals etc, so why bother saying this?

these homiletic checks and balances are just a way of always ensuring that censure is distributed, so that clearly any reference to jihadism has to be balanced with a daily mail editorial slyly undermining ed miliband, nevermind if that has been amply documented here

'socially reinforcing the idea that antisemitism is racism and racism is unacceptable' this is presumably in response to the common policy position that racism is unacceptable but nobody should do anything about it

nevermind that the appeal of racism for a lot of people is that it is unacceptable, this is clearly not what i was talking about, that is the work of everyone ever in private life, it is not an instrumental response, not anything that pertains to the particular lethal threats to a particular group that i was discussing

it does not follow that consideration of that means the accretion of small hatreds that corrupt civil society are forgotten, nor does it represent a 'compartmentalization' to detail a particular and recent threat that exists in addition to all the extant, ancient and local antisemitisms

and wrt ed miliband -- antisemitism quite clearly will affect the election because if one assumes at least 5-10% of people are acitively antisemitic, with a larger cohort subject to largely unknowing antisemitic biases, it is enough to make a difference in a very tight race