Crossing The Line?
Terps for Israel partners with Stand With Us for a discussion on anti-Semitism in political discourse surrounding Israel
Political engagement on topics surrounding Israel and Zionism are oftentimes controversial, but are usually worth having. This past Monday, Terps For Israel decided, for this reason, to have just such a conversation about Israel, focusing on defining the parameters of legitimate criticism of Israel and discussing when criticizing Israel crosses the line into anti-semitism. The event, cosponsored by Maryland Hillel, was led by Ben Brownstein of Stand With Us, a pro-Israel organization with the mission of educating both Jewish and non-Jewish people around the world about Israel.
The conversation was entitled “Crossing the Line: A Discussion of Anti-Semitism Versus Legitimate Criticism of Israel”. The conversation began by examining many of the common criticisms of Israel seen in the media. The attendees compiled a list of some of these common accusations: “Israel is an apartheid state,” “The IDF acts with brutality against Palestinians,” and “Israel is colonizing Palestinian land.” All were similar in that they attacked the Israeli relationship with the Palestinians. With a promise of looking back at this list later in the evening, Brownstein talked about what he called “the three D’s” that differentiate criticism and anti-Semitism.
“Demonization, Delegitimizing and Double Standards,” said Brownstein, “represent the three main goals of the criticism we see.” As he explained the three concepts he gave the group hints for recognizing the differences and understanding the purpose behind certain kinds of attacks. In identifying attacks that constitute demonization, Brownstein suggested that comparisons of Israel to entities known for their cruelty are a good place to start. He shared a quote comparing Israel to the American Jim Crow laws to demonstrate this point. Similarly, he gave an example of a quote saying Israel was taking over land that didn’t belong to them, and presented strong reasoning as to why this kind of criticism was a form of delegitimization of Israel, saying that it essentially denies Israel’s right to exist. Finally, Brownstein discussed the concept of a double standard against Israel. His central example was the bias against Israel in the United Nations, specifically in the Human Right Council, exemplified by consistent motions against Israel compared to the rarity of motions against countries such as Syria and Iran.
Brownstein recommended that the attendees view accusations that they had brought up earlier about Israel through the prism of the “three D’s” to analyze the intention behind them. The attendees agreed that although some criticism of Israel is legitimate, there is also a fair amount of criticism based in anti-Semitism and ignorance as well. Brownstein ended by expressing hope that the students in attendance would be able to more clearly identify instances of anti-Semitism when engaging in political discourse on topics surrounding Israel.
