Ok let me start this post by noting two things up front:
- I am an unabashed supporter of Israel’s response to what Hamas has done and am horrified that anyone believes that
- Hamas’ attack on Oct 7th can be justified
- That Oct 7th was a false flag (yes there are some of those)
- Looking back at History over the last 75 years I conclude that other than the Jews there are no people the Arab/Muslim world hates more than the Palestinians. Consider:
- They have been used and exploited by the Arabs since the first day Israel existed
- They have been used as a wedge both by the eastern bloc during the cold war by Arab states against the Jews ever since.
- Their own leadership (and others) have used them as a cash cow to wealth & power while letting them stay poor.
- Countries like Iran have used them as expendable in order to advance their agenda
- In every Arab country they have settled in they are treated at best as 2nd class citizens at least when they’re not being slaughtered
- Any one of them who would actually be willing to make peace would have the life expectancy of a Jew in Gaza with no IDF.
Frankly if I was raised a Palestinian I’d be damn angry too.
Ok so let’s cut to the chase of this post. The word “anti-Semitic” has been out there a lot lately and if people want it to avoid it becoming as meaningless as the left has made the word “racism” it’s important to use it correctly and acknowledge that there is a difference between something or someone being “anti-Semitic’ and something or someone being “wrong” about something.
To this end I have made a small but likely not complete list:
- It is a legitimate opinion that Israel’s response to Hamas’ Oct 7th attack is the wrong one. Holding that opinion doesn’t make one either a Jew hater or anti-Semitic. Now I myself think such an opinion is about as idiotic as the no cash bail business in US cities which reward bad behavior and create more of it, but that doesn’t make one anti-Semitic, it makes one, in my opinion a fool, but not anti-Semitic.
- It is a legitimate thing to hold a march in favor of the Palestinians and rallies in support of same with speeches and signs both on campus and in large cities provided said marchers:
- Obey local laws
- Do not commit vandalism
- Do not commit violence
- Do not call for the extermination of Jews or the destruction of Israel
(If anyone sees the supports of the Palestinians manage these four things please let me know as that would be breaking news).
- It is a perfectly legitimate opinion to argue that the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 was either a bad idea or caused more problems for the world then it solved. To argue that the Jews had no more right to a Jewish state in the land they were practically erased from 2000 years ago then the Aztecs have a claim to Mexico city because they had an empire there till the 1500’s is not anti-Semitic.
I don’t hold that opinion and one can no more predict an alternate past then one can predict the future. I can only note that for the Jewish people having a homeland in their ancestral lands has been a plus in terms of racial and cultural identity and given the horrors of the holocaust it has given them the power to ensure their survival as a race. That seems like a pretty strong case for the state of Israel, particularly when you consider how Arab Israeli’s have done, seemingly a lot better than those around them (at least those who don’t have oil).
That opinion btw crosses the line into antisemitism when it becomes an excuse to attempt to wipe out a firmly established internationally recognized state and slaughter the people in it.
- It is not anti-Semitic to argue that the Arabs who have been in the land that is now Israel were there for hundreds or even thousands of years and while there have been multiple empires ruling over them from the Romans to the Byzantines to the Ottomans to the Brits to even the Crusaders for a time that their attachment to the land is just as legitimate as anyone else.
This frankly is the strongest point in favor of the Palestinians and one that I believe is not resolvable without their consent because they can argue that the UN mandate was carried out without their consent. It’s basically an eminent domain case.
- It is not anti-Semitic to note that because the Muslim Arabs in the middle east have a different culture than the west it is perfectly legitimate for them to look Israel in general and all of these thing in particular in a different light than a person with a western culture and a part of western civilization does. That in itself is no more anti-Semitic or evil then a Hindu in India circa 1845 looking at the British rule differently than the west did.
Now once that cultural difference becomes an excuse to slaughter Jews in their sleep or murder them with impunity then I would argue that not only does it become anti-Semitic but both the west in General and Israel in particular have the right, indeed the obligation to treat such actions in the same way that Sir Charles James Napier treated the practitioners of Suttee in India.
- It is certainly not anti-semitic to call for a Palestinian state not named “Jordan” which was to be the original Arab state established by the UN mandate. In fact given the way the Palestinians have been treated by all the Arabs in the area a state separate from both Israel and the Arab states that surround it might be the only solution for them to get a fair shake, provided those in charge of such a state are not either kleptocrats who rob their own people blind or killers who want to use such a state as a staging ground for attempt to destroy Israel or both
If you can explain any way to avoid having such people in charge let me know.
- Finally it is not anti-Semitic to deny the existence of the God of the Jews or consider the Jewish religion as bunk. In fact there are plenty of Jews who think this is the case (the old Joke goes “Jews are a people who believe in one God or less”) Now as a Christian in general and a Catholic in particular I say such a denial is not only bunk but a great danger to the soul but having that opinion is no more anti-Semitic then saying that Mohammad is no more a prophet of God than my older brothers are is anti Arab.
Well this is my list, if you want an easier guide to if someone is anti-Semitic or someone just holds a different opinion I have a really simple rule of thumb.
If someone is lying to your face about things like:
- Jews are colonizers and were never in Israel
- there was never a Jewish temple in the holy land
- There are no hostages being held by Hamas
- The Jews are committing genocide against the Palestinians
Odds are you won’t go too wrong thinking “anti-Semite” although given what I’ve seen of students today if you want to go with “ignorance” you likely aren’t doing bad either.
Finally the discloser bit. I’m not a Jew, I’ve never considered becoming Jewish and my only connections to Judaism are:
- 1/8th of my nieces and nephews both from blood and marriage are married to Jews (both nephews who married Jewish women).
- My Catholic faith is completely derivative of Judaism. My God is the Jewish God and I state that his son is the Messiah of the Jews. Or as I like to joke: The difference between Christians & Jews is:
- Jews think we’ve jumped the gun
- We think they’ve missed the boat.
So if you are Jewish and think I’m wrong about these evaluations of what is anti-Semitic and what isn’t feel free to leave your opinion in comments or write a post rebutting me at your site.



[…] right’s general lack of unity and support CDR Salamander: A Tale Of Three Frigates Da Tech Guy: What’s Anti-Semitic and What’s Not Dana Loesch: We Had A Speaker Revolt Over Nothing Don Surber: Illegals Vamoose & Self-Deport […]
Putting aside the Inside-Job angle, what would you say about LIHOP? These are related, but not the same. Let It Happen On Purpose does not mean that the Hamas is all a bunch of Mossad-stooges, the way that an Inside-Job argument might claim. But some of the statements by Jonathan Pollard and such do seem to suggest a kind of LIHOP-scenario, with a deliberate standdown allowing the attack to occur in places where it was preventable.
You use the name Palestine without understanding it origin and falsness ..
Not sure if double posting or not due to WordPress interface, but if what posted got lost – As a Jew (and American), the one quibble I would have be on the issue of whether the partition needed to occur with “consent.”
Did the local Arabs “consent” to the Arabian peninsula based Hashemite minority being put in charge of Jordan? Did the Sunni majority in Syria consent to the tiny minority Shi’ite Allawaites being put in charge? Keep in mind that the lines around “Palestine” were just as arbitrary as the lines the Brits and French drew elsewhere in the Middle East – and different from the preceding Ottoman political subdivision lines.
There are reportedly 2.3 millions Arabs in Gaza right now. By the time of the partition, there were still less than 2 million people in all of what is now Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. At the time of the Balfour declaration, less than 700,000. So there was room for more population, and for partition. Meanwhile, Muslims emigrated to the area too – often in equal number if not equal proportion to the Jews – for example the Chechen town and mosque near Jerusalem.
Anyway, why would the British need consent to apportion the land so that the areas with a Jewish majority are one division, and the areas with a Muslim majority another? Particularly when Jews purchased a bunch of the land where they were the majority?
In 1948, Jews were there. Why would they have less right to a state of their own than the other non-prior-sovereign ethnicity or religious groups? Why would the default be to subjugate the Jews of this sparsely populated land to rule by another, genocidally hostile, set of sometimes rather disparate clans and ethnic groups, some long term residents, many not (that evolved into the more coherent “Palestinians” with events over time)? Rather than just redrawing already arbitrary lines to allow the Jews a land that they would be majority and sovereign in?
The notion that Palestinians get self rule, but Jews don’t – that IS Anti-Semitism.
Yes, Jews changed the demographic balance in the general area with immigration, going from 1/10th in the late 1800s to 40% in 1948 – with non-Jewish immigration equal or greater in numbers but the impact on proportion changing…. but the land was still relatively empty, with no true sovereign – and Jews had as much claim as any.
Also, when do we draw the line for demographic changes due to migration? Do all white people need to move back to Europe from the Americas, north and south? Do neighborhoods that go from one ethnicity to another – does the new one have to leave, and what about the prior one, and the one before that? Does old one have to return from where they were. It is all Bull. If non-Native American (or, are we drawing the line at when European whites rules, so just non-Western European white?) leftist “anti-colonialists” in the US believed their garbage – they should be the first to leave colonized American soil.
Jews are no lesser than any other people. To hold the, to a different standard – different rule – that is one of the core types of (often subtle) Jew hate.
I for myself have no problem with the partition but what I’m noting is having a different opinion on the subject is not anti-Semitic.
There is such a thing as just being wrong
I’m actually aware of it’s falseness but that’s not the question I was playing with.
And frankly it’s kind of mute point because even if the “Palestinians” were actually Arabs rules by either Egypt or Jordan to the people of Israel and to the other Arabs and to themselves, they’re Palestinians.
In fact it’s the fact that the arabs consider them “different” and treated them like dirt that really made them Palestinians in their own minds.
The Arab world may hate the Jews but in my opinion they hate the Palestinians only slightly less.
Even with Israel one should not attribute to conspiracy what can easily be attributed to hubris or idiocy
oh fyi for some reason your 1st comment ended up in the spam and the 2nd didn’t so the double posting is fine