Volume 4 No 1 - Journal for the Study of Antisemitism

2012] PALESTINIAN RIGHTS AND ISRAELI WRONGS 123
not exist. They opposed an imaginary wrong and in so doing inflicted real
wrongs on those they falsely imagined as doing wrong. Today, antisemites
shy away from the term; it is instead the Jewish community that uses the
term to describe its victimizers. One can see this even in the shift of spelling
of the word from hyphenated to unhyphenated. The shift to the
unhyphenated is a recognition of the fact that the old antisemites no longer
exist.
There is a parallel between this original antisemitism and the claims of
Palestinian rights and Israeli wrongs. Anti-Zionism, even though conceptually
a particularized form of antisemitism—the denial to the Jewish people
of all the people in the world one particular human right, the right of
peoples to self-determination—has yet to assume the status of the more
general concept of antisemitism. Anti-Zionism has yet to become a concept
adopted by the victims and abandoned by the perpetrators.
Calling someone today an anti-Zionist is not as damning as calling
someone an antisemite. Indeed, like the original antisemites of the nineteenth
century, some people take pride in being called anti-Zionists. They
apply to themselves the label anti-Zionists. The claims of Palestinian rights
advocates today is akin to the claim of antisemites of the 19th century, a
claim of unsubstantiated rights and wrongs where the Jewish victim is portrayed
as the perpetrator and the advocate claims only to be urging protection
against this imaginary perpetrator.
Using the language of human rights and violations is not in itself a
defense to the charge of antisemitism. Take the classic antisemitic myth that
Jews kill Christian babies for their blood, to be used in the baking of
unleavened bread, matza, for the Jewish holiday of Passover. Those promoting
the myth might call themselves children’s rights advocates; yet, they
would still be antisemites.
A more modern definition of antisemitism throws some light on the
question. The European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia,
renamed the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, defines
antisemitism as:
Examples of ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to
the state of Israel, taking into account the overall context, could include:
• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g.,
by claiming that the existence of Israel is a racist endeavor.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not
expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
This formulation encompasses the phenomenon addressed here of particularized
rights, which only Israel is expected to respect, and particular-