"Anti-Black racism is that set of ideas stemming from the notion that having Black skin and being of subSaharan African descent suits one to slavery; Jewbaiting is that set of ideas stemming from the notion that being Jewish or having Jewish ancestors suits one to being slaughtered.
The latter really starts with the Christ killer charge and associated anti-Jewish teachings.
Do you agree that uttering the Christ killer charge is a murderous thing to do?"
My response:
No, I do not agree. There is sufficient distance between the utterance and any causative connection to any violence against anyone who is Jewish. It's freedom of speech. Freedom of expressing what you feel. Hatred is a real and genuine human passion, and you don't eliminate it from reality by suppressing its expression. And if a feeling of hatred stems from outrage at offenses committed by the object of that hatred -- anti-communism, anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-thugee, anti-terrorist, anti-Islam, anti-etc -- then it serves as a logical reaction and justified expression of outrage at unjust acts. Of course, regarding anti-semitism, the natural rebuttal to this argument in support of free speech/free expression is that Jew hatred is fundamentally unjust because it is a form of ethnic identity hatred, a "collective guilt/collective animus/collective punishment" sort of thing not based in any actual unjust acts. But I contend that anti-Semitism gets a free pass on any fair-minded examination regarding the question of underlying bad acts. Put in its simplest form, while we can ask and answer "Why are (Nazis, Commies, Islamists, Thugees, Iranians,... fill in your favorite hated group...) hated?" We are ***NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO ASK***, much less answer, the "Why?" behind anti-Semitism. Yet this animus has been manifested in every age and every place where the Jews have settled. And the answer to "Why?" --- this is so --- is not satisfied by the tautology "Because the are Jews." Mark Twain attempted to answer the "Why?" in his 1899 piece in Harper's Magazine, "Concerning the Jews". It is available full-text online. I recommend it. [Up until the last few sentences, I thought my fair-minded treatment of a sensitive issue might avoid deletion by "moderation". But those last two may have crossed the line. So I delay posting this in AW.C comments in favor of first simply directing you to my blog, "whimsical dog" where I will cross-post it.]
No, I do not agree. There is sufficient distance between the utterance and any causative connection to any violence against anyone who is Jewish. It's freedom of speech. Freedom of expressing what you feel. Hatred is a real and genuine human passion, and you don't eliminate it from reality by suppressing its expression. And if a feeling of hatred stems from outrage at offenses committed by the object of that hatred -- anti-communism, anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-thugee, anti-terrorist, anti-Islam, anti-etc -- then it serves as a logical reaction and justified expression of outrage at unjust acts. Of course, regarding anti-semitism, the natural rebuttal to this argument in support of free speech/free expression is that Jew hatred is fundamentally unjust because it is a form of ethnic identity hatred, a "collective guilt/collective animus/collective punishment" sort of thing not based in any actual unjust acts. But I contend that anti-Semitism gets a free pass on any fair-minded examination regarding the question of underlying bad acts. Put in its simplest form, while we can ask and answer "Why are (Nazis, Commies, Islamists, Thugees, Iranians,... fill in your favorite hated group...) hated?" We are ***NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO ASK***, much less answer, the "Why?" behind anti-Semitism. Yet this animus has been manifested in every age and every place where the Jews have settled. And the answer to "Why?" --- this is so --- is not satisfied by the tautology "Because the are Jews." Mark Twain attempted to answer the "Why?" in his 1899 piece in Harper's Magazine, "Concerning the Jews". It is available full-text online. I recommend it. [Up until the last few sentences, I thought my fair-minded treatment of a sensitive issue might avoid deletion by "moderation". But those last two may have crossed the line. So I delay posting this in AW.C comments in favor of first simply directing you to my blog, "whimsical dog" where I will cross-post it.]
Comments