JOURNALfor the STUDYof ANTISEMITISM

268 JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF ANTISEMITISM [ VOL. 3:267
Journal or the author, but whatever the case, it is a good representation of
how the antisemitic aspects of contemporary anti-Zionist hysteria are airbrushed—as
if the old antisemitic conspiracy theories would have been
entirely accurate had they only coined their own linguistic obfuscation of
the word “Jew.”
Clairmont’s only point of contention with the Zionist Fifth Column
book is that he believes Petras should not have used the terms “Zionist Fifth
Column in America” and “Zionist Power Configuration,” but should rather
have called it the “Zio-fascist complex,” “so as to throw into sharper relief
the horrors of its being.” Clairmont’s contemplation resembles a 2009 posting
by ex-Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke on Stormfront, the
leading American neo-Nazi Web site, in which Duke asked his readers:
Maybe one of you might have an idea to describe the matrix of power in
America.
Perhaps, the political, financial, media-Zionist matrix
Or
Just the Zionist media, political and financial matrix
Or just the Zionist matrix,
Or just the Zionist complex
Any suggestions?
Let’s work on this; we can create a whole new powerful term that sums
up the core of Jewish extremist power in America and the world.
It is most unlikely that this review will propel Journal readers to
urgently warn their peers and students that the dangers of Zionism and
Zionists are even worse than they had previously believed. Nevertheless, it
is the insidious nature of such arguments, repeated time and again with
varying degrees of extremism, that is the biggest danger. Over time, such
incitement is increasingly able to masquerade as academic theory, especially
when it is not simply unchallenged, but approved by an academic
editorial board.
Nevertheless, the similarity in belief and language between Stormfront
and the Journal is more likely a reflection of David Duke having been
seduced by James Petras et al.—by what they get away with saying—rather
than the other way around. At any rate, both ideologies have reached the
same point, inexorably borne by what is, at root, an antisemitic conspiracy
narrative.
The Routledge version seems at least (implicitly) cognizant of the dangers
of sounding outwardly antisemitic. For example, it states, “. . . [Israeli]
‘settlements’ are being funded by the ‘donations’ of Zionist finance,”
whereas Clairmont’s original says, “. . . [Israeli] ‘settlements’ are being
funded by the big money bags of Zionist finance capital . . .” Perhaps an