Now you can say you’re not anti-Semitic—only against some of the policies of the state of Israel—but it makes much less sense to say that you’re not anti-Semitic but are anti-Zionist. That is saying, “I have nothing against Jews, but I think their country, recognized by the UN in 1949, should be abolished.”
You can confect fine distinctions here (Regressive Leftists are good at that), but watching the behavior of student organizations like SJP, it’s hard to deny that they’re largely anti-Semitic. This is supported by a new post on the SJP Facebook page from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UI).
Last Tuesday some student groups, including the SJP, sponsored a “smash Fascism” rally on the UI campus, and on that day, in response to criticism from Jewish and other groups, the SJP issued the statement below (indented).
Note that it lumps Zionism with white supremacy and fascism as movements that “destroy intersectional movements for mass liberation,” and then goes on to justify physical violence against the latter two groups (and, I claim, implicitly the first) as a response. Bolding is mine, as are comments flush left.
**For Immediate Release: Organizers’ Statement on Attacks Against Anti-Fascist Demonstration
We, the collective organizers of the “Smashing Fascism: Radical Resistance to White Supremacy” rally, are disgusted with the preemptive backlash our event has received. This opposition highlights the unholy union of American fascists, white supremacists, and Zionists which seeks to weaken and destroy intersectional movements for mass liberation. While we know these criticisms are destructive or rhetorical, we find it necessary to address them and center our narrative.
Do these people not know that the white supremacists, with Nazis among them, despise Jews and Zionists, and vice versa?That if white supremacists got their way they’d persecute Jews mercilessly—maybe even worse than SJP does now? It’s just like these uneducated students to stuff such diverse and mutually antipathetic groups into one “basket of deplorables.”
And here follows the obligatory and familiar argument why Nazis and fascists (and Zionists by implication) shouldn’t have free speech. Because speech = violence! (Along with “racism = power + prejudice”, that’s one of the two great Doublespeak Equations of our time.) Here’s what the kids and the Regressives are now espousing:
We are told that all people deserve a right to freedom of speech and expression. We are told that all have equal say in our society. This, obviously, is not the case. The white liberal establishment barely bats an eye when anti-fascist protesters are attacked by Nazis and white supremacists. The establishment is silent when it comes to the murder of black, brown, and Indigenous folks–especially queers of color, women, and femmes. The suppression and blacklisting of Palestinian voices and activism are inevitable results of the pro-Israel status quo in the West. But just as oppressed and marginalized voices are made oppressed and marginalized by unjust systems of governance and societal organization, so too do these forces seek to protect the rights and speech of literal Nazis, of white supremacists all along the political spectrum, and those who seek to implement and continue all manner of ethnic cleansing or indigenous genocide. This speech is not just expression but violence. If given the opportunity, American fascists and white supremacists would complete the settler-colonial project which enabled the founding of this country centuries ago.
No free speech for Nazis! And probably not for Zionists, either.
To begin with, I don’t see a pervasive and systematic silencing of black, Palestinian, and other marginalized voices; those voices are in fact is much of what you hear in the mainstream media these days. If you don’t believe me, read the New York Times, which had a big osculatory article about “Brooklyn homegirl in a hijab” Linda Sarsour, and just yesterday published a pro-BDS editorial by Roger Waters. On college campuses, it is pro-Palestinians, not Jews, who dominate student discourse about Israel. And it is the pro-Palestinians like SJP who shut down talks by Israeli speakers, not the other way around.
Further, the turning of “speech” into “violence” is a deliberate alteration of language designed to do two things: shut up those whose speech you don’t like, and justify your own physical violence against such people, which SJP is attempting to do in advance. To wit:
We have been attacked for “advocating violence”. Apparently the language of “smashing fascism” has connotations too severe for those who believe that being nice to Nazis may curry their favor. We do not believe there is any other option when it comes to dealing with fascists and white supremacists. Granting them any platform will only lead to further normalization of their violent ideologies. Granted, violent resistance is not always the best option. Nonviolence and peaceful civil disobedience have their places and have achieved great change throughout history. However, violent resistance–whether it is a black bloc or full-scale armed conflict–also has its place. The struggle for liberation must exist on multiple levels and scales–it cannot, and will not, be confined.
The only answer to the claim that “violent resistance to speech has its place”, at least when it comes to campus demonstrations, is “no it doesn’t, you thugs.” The statement above is part of SJP’s a priori “philosophical” attempt to justify attacks on white supremacists, Zionists, and fascists. (Note that who is a “fascist” isn’t defined: does that include all Trump supporters?)
And here we go with SJP trying desperately to show that they are not anti-Semitic:
Possibly the largest and most disingenuous charge against us is that of anti-semitism. We, the organizers of this rally, abhor anti-semitism. We see it as both an evil unto itself and another manifestation of white supremacy. Anti-semitism and Nazism have clear present and historical links. These charges of anti-semitism are toothless and based in a conflation of anti-semitism and anti-zionism. Criticism of the state of Israel and its practices is totally separate from attacks on people of the Jewish faith and heritage. The former is a political position based in opposition to state sponsored violence, apartheid, and settler-colonialism; the latter is a form of hatred that has no place in any movement for liberation.
Well, that sounds good, doesn’t it? Except that “anti-Zionism” is not the same thing as “criticism of the state of Israel and its practices.” It’s almost a cottage industry in Israel for its Jewish residents to criticize the government, but that doesn’t mean they want their country to disappear. What the SJP is saying above, which is reminiscent of what people said about segregation in the deep South, is “We abhor any mistreatment of Mr. Goldberg or Ms. Finkelstein; we just don’t think they should have their own country, which of course should be abolished, with Palestine extending ‘from the river to the sea.'” If being against the existence of Israel isn’t anti-Semitism, is being against the existence of France not “anti-French”?
This finely mendacious parsing is a patronizingn and unconvincing way for SJP to look liberal and empathic. But let’s be clear: anti-Zionism, no matter what the mealymouthed students say, is anti-Semitism.
And so the SJP shows its hand in the next paragraph:
Additionally, pro-Israel campus groups have maintained contact with and may have requested an increased presence of campus and area police. This was not at the request of rally organizers and in reality runs counter to our ideals. The police, at all levels, represent white supremacy and the preservation of a racist, classist, and sexist society. Increased levels of policing at events like this present a clear danger to black, brown, poor, and queer and trans members of our community. Such actions show that Zionist campus groups do not have a commitment to fighting for justice and have no problem siding with and introducing oppressive forces within radical spaces.
Oh dear: how dare those fascistic Jews ask for police protection from SJP members who’ve expressed their willingness to physically attack people? Further, the notion that all cops are enforcing white supremacy and preserving inequality is ridiculous. (Tell that to Chicago’s black Superintendant of Police.) Yes, some cops may be racist, but remember who protected both Antifa and the alt-right during recent demonstrations. The cops, of course. Would the SJP prefer to run amok and have no police around at all? It would seem so, for then they’d be able to beat up anyone they wanted.
The SJP’s screed ends this way:
We will continue to defend our communities and fight for our liberation. Our struggles are linked through shared histories and experiences of oppression. Today’s rally is not a culmination of our activism, but a beginning. We will continue to resist injustices which surround us, whether it be at the hands of the US government or this University. We will fight and we will win, by any means necessary.
In solidarity,
The Co-Organizers and Sponsors of “Smashing Fascism: Radical Resistance to White Supremacy”