3 December 2024

How antisemitism has complemented Zionism

 The Irony of Zionist Accusations of Anti-Semitism Against Anti-Zionists is that Historically it is the Zionists who Worked With and Had Most in Common with Anti-Semites

Webinar on How Anti-Semitism Complemented Zionism

Please Register Here

https://tinyurl.com/4hedue7k

Speakers

Tony Lerman, author of the book, Whatever Happened to Antisemitism? Redefinition and the Myth of the 'Collective Jew', Pluto Books, https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745338774/whatever-happened-to-antisemitism/

 Barnaby Raine, PhD candidate, Columbia University. Author of several articles, e.g. ‘Jewphobia’ in the journal Salvagehttps://www.versobooks.com/en-gb/blogs/news/4059-jewophobia 

 Michael Richmond, independent writer, author ofPhilosemitism: an instrumental kind of love’, New Socialist, 2022, https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/philosemitism-instrumental-kind-love/; also co-author of Fractured: Race, Class, Gender and the Hatred of Identity Politics

 Tony Greenstein, author, Zionism During the Holocaust: The Weaponisation of Memory in the Service of State and Nation

There is probably no Palestine solidarity supporter who hasn’t been accused of anti-Semitism. We know, because Netanyahu has told us, that the International Criminal Court decision to issue a warrant for his arrest was because of anti-Semitism! Any criticism of Israel today is automatically a form of 'antisemitism'. Antisemitism is no longer hatred or hostility to Jews as Jews, it is criticism of the 'Jewish state'.

Zionism arose as a reaction to anti-Semitism but it was a reaction of a special kind. Zionism accepted that Jews did not belong in their own countries, that they were a nation apart. For Zionism anti-Semitism could not be fought because it was inherent in the non-Jew.

As Leon Pinsker, the founder of the Lovers of Zionism wrote in his 1882 pamphlet Autoemancipation

Judeophobia is then a mental disease, and as a mental disease it is hereditary, and having been inherited for 2,000 years, it is incurable.’

Theodor Herzl

And if anti-Semitism was incurable, then there was no point opposing it. Theodor Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism drew the same conclusion from the Dreyfus Trial:

In Paris... I achieved a freer attitude towards anti-Semitism, which I now began to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognise the emptiness and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism.

Edouard Drumont

The leading anti-Semite and leader of the anti-Dreyfusards in France was Edouard Drumont whose book La France Juive sold 100,000 on its first edition. He published the anti-Semitic paper La Libre Parole and argued for the exclusion of Jews from society.

Yet this didn’t stop Herzl from admiring him. Herzl wrote that ‘I owe to Drumont a great deal of the present freedom of my concepts, because he is an artist.’ Herzl shared Drumont’s antagonism to French Jewry writing that:

I took a look at the Paris Jews and saw a family likeness in their faces: bold, misshapen noses, furtive and cunning eyes.

After Herzl had badgered his friend Alphonse Daudet, a well-known anti-Semite, Drumont favourably reviewed The Jewish State, in an article ‘Solution de la Question Juive’ published in La Libre Parole on 16 January 1897. Herzl expressed his delight with the review in his Diary.

It was little wonder that Herzl wrote that

‘the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.’

Chaim Weizmann

So it has proved. Others went even further. Chaim Weizmann, the long-standing President of the Zionist Organisation and Israel’s first President, expressed his understanding and sympathy with the leader of the anti-Semitic British Brothers League, William Evans-Gordon MP. Weizmann wrote in his autobiography, Trial and Error, that:

our people were rather hard on him. The Aliens Bill in England and the movement which grew around it were natural phenomenon which might have been foreseen... Sir William Evans-Gordon had no particular anti-Jewish prejudices... He acted as he thought, according to his best lights and in the most kindly way, in the interests of his country… he was sincerely ready to encourage any settlement of Jews almost anywhere in the British Empire, but he failed to see why the ghettos of London or Leeds or Whitechapel should be made into a branch of the ghettos of Warsaw and Pinsk.

Arthur Balfour & Winston Churchill

Evans-Gordon was a strong supporter of Zionism as was another anti-Semite, Arthur James Balfour. As Prime Minister Balfour introduced the 1905 Aliens Act aimed at keeping Russian Jews out of Britain. In 1917 Balfour wrote a letter, which became known as the Balfour Declaration, to Lord Walter Rothschild pledging the land of the Palestinians to the Zionist movement. The only member of the Lloyd George Cabinet who opposed the BD was its only Jewish member, Sir Edwin Montagu.

As Zionist novelist A B Yehoshua said, in a lecture to the Union of Jewish Students (Jewish Chronicle 22.1.82)

‘Anti-Zionism is not the product of the non-Jews. On the contrary, the Gentiles have always encouraged Zionism, hoping that it would help to rid them of the Jews in their midst. Even today, in a perverse way, a real anti-Semite must be a Zionist.’

The Zionists aimed to create the ‘new Jew’ in Palestine and they despised the gutter ghetto Jew who lived in Eastern Europe plying their trades and living at the margins of society. 

Jacob Klatzkin, the editor of the Zionist Organisation paper Die Welt and co-founder of Encyclopedia Judaica , held that the Jews in the diaspora or ‘exile’ (Galut) were:

a people disfigured in both body and soul – in a word, of a horror. At the very most it can maintain us in a state of national impurity and breed some sort of outlandish creature… The result will be something neither Jew nor gentile - in any case, not a pure national type... some sort of oddity among the peoples going by the name - Jew.

Pinhas Rosenbluth, Israel’s first Justice Minister described Palestine as ‘an institute for the fumigation of Jewish vermin’. So damning were these elite Zionists for their Jewish brothers and sisters that Israeli political scientist, Joachim Doron wrote in an article ‘Classic Zionism and Modern Anti-Semitism’ in the Journal of Israeli History No. 8 that

‘a perusal of the Zionist sources reveals a wealth of charges against the Diaspora Jew, some of which are so scathing that the generation that witnessed Auschwitz has difficulty comprehending them.’

Arthur Ruppin

The most important figure in pre-state Palestine, Arthur Ruppin was an avid supporter of the racial sciences, eugenics and Social Darwinism. He considered Arab Jews as an inferior dysgenic element among Jews.

When a friend of Ruppin called him an anti-Semite he retorted ‘I have already established here [in his diary] that I despise the cancers of Judaism more than does the worst anti-Semite.’

Ruppin was not alone in his support for anti-Semitism. Jacob Klatzkin wrote that

If we do not admit the rightfulness of anti-Semitism we deny the rightfulness of our own nationalism... Instead of establishing societies for defence against the anti-Semites who want to reduce our rights, we should establish societies for defence against our friends, who desire to defend our rights.

Although Zionists today call anti-Zionists ‘self-haters’ if anyone hated themselves, it was the Zionists. It is little wonder that when Zionism arose amongst Jews it was seen as a form of Jewish anti-Semitism.

That is why in nearly all the Jewish communities prior to 1945, Zionism was a distinct minority.  In Germany in 1933 they constituted just 2% of the Jewish population.

During the Nazi era, 1933-9, the Zionists were the favoured children of the Nazis whereas the ‘assimilationists’, those Jews who asserted that they were Germans as well as Jewish, were subject to restrictions.

On 28 January 1935 Reinhard Heydrich, the real engineer of the final solution  issued a directive stating that:

The activity of the Zionist-oriented youth organisations that are engaged in the occupational restructuring of the Jews … lies in the interest of the National Socialist state’s leadership. (These organizations) are not to be treated with that strictness that it is necessary to apply to the members of the so-called German-Jewish organizations (assimilationists).

In May 1935 Schwarze Korps, paper of the SS, wrote that:

the Zionists adhere to a strict racial position and by emigrating to Palestine they are helping to build their own Jewish state.... The assimilation-minded Jews deny their race and insist on their loyalty to Germany or claim to be Christians because they have been baptized, in order to subvert National Socialist principles.

When the Nazis came to power the only group amongst Jews who welcomed them were the Zionist leaders.  That was why they were so opposed to the Boycott of Nazi Germany. They wished to profit from them not fight them.

Berl Katznelson, a founder of Mapai (the Israeli Labour Party  and editor of Davar as well as Ben-Gurion’s effective deputy, saw the rise of Hitler as ‘an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have.’ Ben-Gurion was even more optimistic. ‘The Nazis’ victory would become “a fertile force for Zionism.” Joachim Prinz, one of the leaders of German Zionism and later Deputy President of the World Jewish Congress, admitted that:

It was morally disturbing to seem to be considered as the favored children of the Nazi Government, particularly when it dissolved the anti-Zionist youth groups, and seemed in other ways to prefer the Zionists. The Nazis asked for a ‘more Zionist behaviour’.


Ben-Gurion on Saving Jewish Refugees

Eitan Bloom quoted Emil Ludwig (1881-1948), the world-famous biographer, ‘who expressed the general attitude of the Zionist movement’:

Hitler will be forgotten in a few years, but he will have a beautiful monument in Palestine. You know, the coming of the Nazis was rather a welcome thing. … Thousands who seemed to be completely lost to Judaism were brought back to the fold by Hitler, and for that I am personally very grateful to him.

Nahman Bialik

Nahman Bialik, the national Zionist poet, volunteered that ‘Hitlerism has perhaps saved German Jewry, which was being assimilated into annihilation.’ Germany’s remaining Jews were of course annihilated, but not by assimilation.

So it should not be any surprise today that the best friends of Israel – Trump, Orban, Tommy Robinson, Richard Spencer, are all fascists and anti-Semites.

This webinar has 4 speakers on anti-Semitism, all them experts in their field. Register and join us.

1 December 2024

Open Letter to Brighton Argus Editor Arron Hendy

When the Police Arrest People for their Opinions It’s Not Terrorism they are attacking but Freedom of Speech 

Unlike Hendy & Wadsworth’s rag the Jersey Evening Post DeclaredWe should be defending our freedoms, not abandoning them’



Freedom of Speech in Britain, which is enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, was not handed down on a plate. It was fought for and people died fighting for it.


William Tyndale, the Father of the English Bible, was strangled and burnt at the stake. The Oxford Martyrs, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley and Thomas Cranmer were burnt at the stake for heresy.  Today the new heresy is to support the Palestinians and in particular to support their right to resist the genocide they are undergoing.

There was a time when the Argus had a vigorous correspondence column - not least about Free Speech and its limits

Anyone who dares to raise a voice in support of the right of Palestinians to defend themselves is guilty of supporting Hamas, a crime that is worse than rape or child abuse. No one has charged Justin Welby with covering up child abuse. He was allowed to resign in disgrace from the Church of England.

Arron Hendy - the Argus's Invisible Man

The ‘offence’ for which I have been charged, under s.12(1A) of the Terrorism Act 2000 states that it is an offence if someone:

a)      expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and

(b)     in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.

The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment though I have been told that the Sentencing Guidelines recommend 4 years for a first offence.  If like Hugh Edwards I had merely been found guilty of downloading hardcore child pornography I could expect a 6 months suspended sentence.

One would expect the press to stand up for freedom of speech and the rights of journalists, at least 3 of whom have been arrested or raided so far for supporting a proscribed organisation. In Jersey where Natalie Strecker, a long standing Palestine solidarity activist was raided and arrested, the local paper the Jersey Evening Post has been magnificent.



Genocide Supporter and rabid Zionist Jo Wadsworth took offence when I said she delighted in Palestinian children's deaths - so disappointed was she with the Comments section under the article about my charges, most people were outraged by what  had happened, that she deleted all of them!

However the Brighton & Hove papers – the Argus and the rancid Brighton & Hove News run by presstitute Jo Wadsworth, reported that I had been arrested for ‘terror offences’.

I therefore wrote an Open Letter to the Editor of The Argus (there is no point writing to Starmer groupie Wadsworth as her mind is as closed as a tin of sardines (& intellectually on about the same level!).

Arron Hendy is the invisible editor of The Argus. He once asked me to write a comment column for the paper but it became a little too radical for him and I gave up trying to say anything about Palestine. However I was the only person in the local press to oppose the scandal of the Council spending over £30 million on the now bankrupt i360.

The Argus prefers to forget when I was a columnist - and alone criticised a project that is now crippling the Council's finances


Hendy is the kind of person who can walk into a room without anyone noticing or even remembering whether he was there. He has edited the Argus for 7 years and ensured that in that time it has become little more than a vehicle for press releases.

Long gone is the time when the Argus had investigative or even court journalists. I can remember conducting employment tribunal cases where an Argus journalist sat in for the whole 3 or 6 days.

There was a time when the Argus was a campaigning paper.  Most notably it waged a fierce campaign in support of the repatriation back to Britain of Omar Degayes who had been held in America’s Gulag, Guantanamo.

Terrorism is about people planting bombs in tube stations, buses or opening fire on concert goers such as the Bataclan in Paris or the knife attacks on London Bridge. Terrorism is not advocating support for the right of the colonised to resist their occupiers. It isn’t about resistance to either Israel’s occupation of Gaza or the Turkish state’s occupation of Kurdistan.

Of course Hamas and the Palestinian Resistance are called ‘terrorists’. The British always called their colonial opponents ‘terrorists’ from the IRA to the Mau Mau in Kenya but the truth was, of course, that it was the British who terrorised the local population.

Thatcher and Reagan called the ANC 'terrorist' when it was fighting the Apartheid South African state.  Always the opponents of apartheid are the 'terrorists', never the racists.

However even Thatcher resisted the temptation to proscribe Sinn Fein knowing full well that it would close the door to any peace settlement. Not so the war criminal Tony Blair, who should have been locked up for an illegal  war in Iraq. Instead he introduced legislation that enabled the proscription of resistance organisations that were now called ‘terrorist’ organisations. It was however Priti Patel in 2021 who decided to proscribe, not just the military wing but the political wing of Hamas. The justification, if that is what it can be called merely stated that:

At the time [March 2001] it was HM government’s assessment that there was a sufficient distinction between the so called political and military wings of Hamas, such that they should be treated as different organisations, and that only the military wing was concerned in terrorism. The government now assess that the approach of distinguishing between the various parts of Hamas is artificial. Hamas is a complex but single terrorist organisation.

However we are not told why the Government’s assessment changed. In reality it was because Zionist lobby groups had been pressing for the change. It was political expediency that led to the proscription.

As we can see with the raid on the Kurdish community centre in Haringey, over support for the PKK, this legislation is very much part of the police and government’s racist attack on Black and migrant groups in this country.

We can also expect the billionaire press in Britain, both local and national, to support this attack on those who support liberation and resistance movements such as the PKK and Hamas.

Tony Greenstein