Why doesn’t "anti-Semitism" mean what it says?

3/9/2019

Vince Dhimos

I was recently exchanging views with an Israeli over the word anti-Semitism and I contended that the word anti-Semitism is a misnomer because, based on the root word “Semitism,” it would have to apply to all Semites, not just Jews. But my opponent said that this is a very old word dating back to 1879 when it was coined in Germany by Wilhelm Marr, who started the tradition of Jew hating in that country. My interlocutor maintained that any word that is used in a certain sense for that long could no longer be changed (even thought it was coined by a Nazi?), since it was well entrenched in everyone’s mind, that books and articles had been written containing the word “anti-Semitism” in the currently accepted sense and so on.

He was right in a way because the word is certainly well established in its meaning of “anti-Jewish.” However, there are a lot of words in the English language that have several meanings because people realized the need to update the vocabulary and have added more-precise meanings to them. The meaning of “anti-Jewish” could co-exist alongside the more precise meaning of “antagonism toward all Semites, “ which would be true to the etymology of the word.

If anti-Semitism means specifically anti-Jewish sentiment, based on the contention that a misnomer should never be rectified because it is widely accepted and no longer a misnomer, then what about the American Indians? Why do we now say Native American and not Indian? For centuries, we had a name, ie, American Indian, that was perfectly unambiguous due to its common and widespread usage in the meaning that everyone clearly understood, but after all that time, we changed it to avoid offending the people to whom the name referred. It was a ridiculously politically correct change but semantics is politics in the US.

If we pursue this line of logic to its end, then we should not be using the word anti-Semitic to refer only to anti-Jewish sentiment because we thereby create confusion, suggesting that there is no such thing as anti-Arab sentiment when in fact I daresay this phenomenon is more prominent in the Israel-dominated Gaza strip and Jerusalem than anywhere else in the world, and if the usage of the word were true to its root “Semitism,” then the Israeli government would be one of the most anti-Semitic (in the unambiguous sense) in the world, although the US has also practiced the most grievous form of anti-Semitism of all, having slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Arabs with aerial bombs in the last 2 decades (though some put the number in the millions considering the effects of sanctions). Yet we are told that this grievous harm to Arabs is not a form of anti-Semitism, even though the Arabs – like the Jews – are properly called Semites, which no one denies. The refusal to open the meaning of “anti-Semitism” to include the rest of the Semites is purely political, and it is an affront to all Arabs, who also have a perfectly legitimate claim to victimhood as a result of senseless wars.

The fact is, whenever language is influenced for political reasons, we wind up with a winner and a loser, with one of two groups being harmed or slighted and the other benefitting at its expense.

To deny that abuse of Arabs is anti-Semitic is to deny that Arabs are Semites. But if they are not Semites, then what are they?

Further, if a person is anti-Arab and ant-Jewish at the same time, what is he if not anti-Semite?

Clearly, the reason Israelis and Zionists insist that we adhere to an artificial and rigid rule that effectively denies the Semitic character of Arabs is purely political and is a denial of the Arabs’ right to be properly denoted as Semites, with the Israelis and Zionists arrogating the stem “Semitic” exclusively to themselves, just as they arrogate part of the Golan Heights to themselves when in fact the Golan Heights are 100% Syrian.

Of course, anyone who dares to point out this abuse of the Arabs by denial of their identity as Semites is cynically called anti-Semitic, which is the height of absurdity. A defender of Arab rights is, by dint of mathematics, less anti-Semitic (in the sense clearly denoted by the root of the word) than a defender of Israeli apartheid. Yet by malicious manipulation of language, this person who uses language in a scrupulously correct manner is, absurdly, condemned as anti-Semitic.

So are the Jews to blame for this misappropriation of language?

No, not really. The biggest offenders are the US Evangelicals who blindly subscribe to the ideology of Zionism and blindly defend everything the Israeli government decrees, and support the Likud Party and all the heinous rules imposed on America, for example, by AIPAC (including, of course, the proposed clearly unconstitutional anti-BDS law forbidding participation in any boycott of products made illegally in Palestine), believing steadfastly that each Israeli politician is led by the spirit of the Almighty and never could do anything wrong. Their belief is motivated by the fear that if they should fail to properly adore Israel, they would be the recipients of the curse enshrined in Genesis, where God is speaking to Abram, but Evangelicals generally believe He means Israel:

Genesis 12:3 King James Version (KJV)

3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

The blind acceptance of modern secular Israel as the reborn Israel prophesied in Ezekiel 37 has shaped foreign policy in Washington and has made America a slave to Israel and to all the pronouncements of Zionists for decades. Indirectly, this blindness of the American people has led to eternal wars and continues to do so today.

Yet Ezekiel 37 is not foretelling the Israel of today. Verse 24 of that chapter says that the resurrected Israel will have David as its king and will be obedient to God’s decrees.

A poll shows that 65% of Israelis describe themselves as “irreligious.”

US Evangelicals will only kick to habit of worshipping Israel first and Jesus last when the US economy has fallen so far that everyone can see that the people who impose Israel worship on the entire US government and even foist it on the rest of the world are not being blessed as foretold in Genesis for a nation that no longer exists.

And that fall is just around the corner.

3 Comments

John McClain

3/9/2019 03:27:00 pm

I am the son of parents born and raised in "coal country", both second generation not in the mines, first generation in college in their families, and my mom pursued language arts precisely because there were so many illiterate adults around her as a child, and she spent most of her life, working "adult literacy".
My dad was a naval officer, and we lived in Barcelona, Spain, two years, (age one to three) and two in Naples, Italy.
Our mom took the opportunity to take my elder sister and myself to ever historic site reachable around the Med, by public transportation, and she translated every inscription everywhere, teaching us "feet on the ground" history, this from 58 to 63, so I spent my school years, arguing with teachers over lies taught as history, and linguistics.
Our mom knew Spanish, modern Latin, was teaching herself Greek, and ancient Greek, and Aramaic, so we learned them along with her.
I was born gifted mechanically, with an "analytical mind", and I consumed the word meanings, the way our own language pulled in bits of almost every other, it was the sole part of English I easily used, because I'm also dyslexic, to an extreme.
Although all my work has been focused on technology, I've always read enormously, and have always been determined regarding proper word usage, and have fought improper, all my life.
I am a metal smith, I do almost everything with metal, steel, iron, aluminum, gold, silver, I've done it since diapers, but I've always considered myself a "wordsmith", because I learned how to make words, as I was learning the very basics.
What you describe in the column is something I get extremely angry over. Words have actual meanings, when our representatives turned the "confederation conference" into a "constitution convention", Noah Webster was one of the members, precisely to ensure exacting word usage, and also to take out of it, all the new ideas and meanings, forged in the convention, to be used in "this new form of government".
I constantly argue the issue of "anti-Semitism", every time it's tossed out, precisely for the reasons you give. It's not right to abuse words, it is no less than a deliberate lie, or "words of a fool", and either way, correction needs be made.
For me, it's personal, because my work demands exactitude, I work to tenths of thousandths of an inch, and it's hard to be precise in one aspect of life, and not see it valuable elsewhere, particularly when getting into politics.
As far as I'm concerned, "talking politics" almost always means someone intends to lie, and expects to gain power or value from it. This is the venue when word meaning is most critical, because even the best purposed person, dealing in "politics" needs a "divining rod", even if it is relatively minor and not a big deal.
We, America, have allowed our Nation to fail, (I don't believe we qualify as such anymore, for lack of consanguinity,) primarily by letting our language be abused, and our government control its own choices, and by this, they have assumed power over us, rather than governing.
I am an evangelical Christian, I was raised to be atheist, but never could buy into it, learned too many fascinating things from the Spanish and Italian masons, as a toddler, and went to Beirut, in summer of 82, to prevent the IDF from waging war on the Palestinians, some 2500, they'd chased and cornered in Beirut.
I spent six months there, working on the choppers, and "eyes" for ground fire, when flying, and felt the presence of God all around me, the whole of the time, a convicting presence. I got saved when I returned stateside, after trying to drink away the time.
I've read the Bible many times, the first couple, as a boy, for history's sake, having read about a British archeologist, who took it for true, and ultimately, located half a dozen "mythical cities" exactly where the Bible said they were.
I never was able to deny God after my first reading, and ultimately, I've studied it no less than I study my machinery handbooks, and such, with the same "critical eye", because details matter.
I've just recently read Ezekiel, and as usual, I read the "Israel" God speaks of to Ezekiel, as one he will raise up "out of these dead, dry bones", He speaks of David, reining, and it's clear, to a reasoning person, He, God, will bring his children home.
I've always considered "Zionism" the effort of "diaspora Israel" doing their utmost to "push God's hand", and this kind of effort is throughout both old and new testament. I've found myself without a church, for lack of truth.
There is no excuse for any serious scholar of the Bible to err with regard to Ezekiel, it rings clear as a bell, God is speaking directly about "Israel's unfaithful ways", in His speaking of "these dry bones".
It's hard to ever get through to any pastor who is committed, and today, evangelicals are the driving power of America's Christian spirit, bu

Daniel Itse

3/11/2019 06:24:13 am

I take issue with your sequence of events esticalogically. I believe that the root of David on the throne is Messiah. That said, in Revelation Israel with restored Temple worship clearly exists prior to Messiah's return. So it has to exist prior to the return. As to the current juxtaposition of the middle east, remember that after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in WWI, "Palestine" was divided into two parts Palestine for the Jews and Trans Jordan (now Jordan) for the Arabs (Muslims). That the Arabs chose not to emigrate to Jordan and then Jordan refused to receive them is an underlying issue. The good news is that God rules, and his will shall be accomplished. I too have always been amused by the word anti-semitism coined by a people who had treaties with the Arabs and incorporated them into the SS.

Vince

3/11/2019 08:07:46 am

Hello Daniel,
Thanks for commenting. I did not know I had set a sequence of events. I did not intend to.

"That said, in Revelation Israel with restored Temple worship clearly exists prior to Messiah's return."

I agree. But I do not see this as a contradiction to anything I wrote.

And since you bring this up, I note that "Christian" Zionists like to use this mention of a temple in Israel to goad their followers into accepting the Zionist campaign to support the secular state of Israal. The problem is, neither Jesus nor the prophets ever even insinuated that believers, esp Christians, are required to assist God in making his prophecies come true. This is one of the biggest fallacies of "Christian" Zionism. The very expression Christian Zionism strongly implies that CHRIST has something to do with Zionism in the Evangelical faith. And yet, He NEVER once insinuated that He wants His followers to help with the founding of this state, which is now emerging as nothing more than a criminal enterprise, making war on its neighbors, gunning down unarmed protesters and stealing Gazan land and water -- all in violation of the levitican commandment to "love your neighbour as yourself." Leviticus 9:17
This is why I insist that Ezekiel was NOT talking about the modern secular state of Israel in chapter 17, which clearly says that the resurrected Israel will "obey God's commands." Calling today's Israel the Israel prophesied by Ezekiel is pure blasphemy.
Many US Evangelicals are doing nothing but misleading Israelis into believing that violating the commandments of their own God is somehow a righteous thing to do. They are also misleading their fellow Christians into committing sin in the name of Jesus.

Culture.

Why doesn’t "anti-Semitism" mean what it says?

Leave a Reply.