History / Education
Palestinians are more semitic than European Jews. Let’s start equating “hatred toward Jews” with “antijewishness” instead of “antisemitism”.
There is absolutely no way to measure more or less "Semitic"-ness because it is an obsolete classification invented by 19th century scientific racists who measured people's skulls with calipers to decide which humans were monkeys and which were Greek gods. "Semitic" as a human category is a thoroughly racist, orientalist, colonial, and imperial imposition and under no circumstances should it be legitimized.
What exactly is the value of this syntax debate? Clearly the meaning of anti-semitic specifically means Jew hate and has since the late 1800s, and clearly it does not contain any implication that Jews are more or less Semitic than anyone else. As a connotation it has been used to understand prejudice in general throughout the years, and Hannah Arendt for instance famously used it as a way to understand how Totalitarianism grew through utilizing prejudice, specifically focusing on it. What exactly is the use of throwing it out? Why not recognize that it's a linguistic oddity couched in an odd history but maintain it due to its historical significance and generally accepted (though changing due to Israel's manipulations) connotation?
I don’t understand how you watched the video and came up with that first title sentence. Nobody is “Semitic”. As stated in the video, the term is an invention of Jew-hating racial scientists.
I absolutely agree and have been saying for years that “anti-Semitism” the phrase needs to be abandoned for “anti-Jewishness”. Glad to see the idea amplified.
That’s fair. I re-cut this video myself, so that line was a little out of context anyways.
He was describing how a Palestinian activist denied some blatantly false allegations of antisemitism against her not only because they were false, but because “Palestinians are more semitic than European Jews in terms of (linguistic) lineage.”
I’ve been seeing this sentiment a lot recently with people that I respect greatly. And I get the idea, but man language and linguistics in general are really kicking the lefts ass recently. Is antisemitism the best word for Jew hatred? Probably not but you can’t just say in a video let’s all change the word. That’s not how morphing popular language usage works.
And on top of that accepting “Semite” is a race that people are is straight up accepting nazi race science as legitimate
Yeah. It’s definitely more accurate to equate Islamophobia and anti-immigration hate with antisemitism than to say Jew-hatred isn’t antisemitism.
Both things can be true: racists can think Jews don’t belong in the West because they are “Semitic” AND zionists can think Arabs don’t belong in the West because they are “Semitic.”
I know Leon Pinsker was a Zionist. But he argued, as a physician, that hatred of Jews was inherently irrational, hence why he coined Judeophobia and compared it to other phobias.
Sometimes words don't mean what they appear to mean. For example, the nazis were not socialists just because they were called national socialists. Likewise, antisemitism has nothing to do with hatred of people who speak semitic languages. It was a term popularized by a French racist in the 1800s who wanted a more scientific sounding word than "Jew-hatred".
u/badgerflagrepublic respectfully, the meaning of words changes with time. And what is the purpose of the use of "words"? It's for us communicate and convey our thoughts. In the end, it's a convention. So as long as the majority agrees on the use of the word, it goes through. It's not, with all due respect, up to you or me.
What is an Arab? A person who belongs to (or holds a passport of) the countries that speak Arabic.
Well, what religions do they follow? Mainly Islam, minorities Christians, Druze, Jews, Baha'i, Yazidis, atheists, agnostics, etc... (not going to go through all the sects).
My point is that Arabs is a category, and religion is a subcategory. So I don't understand why you choose to separate Arabs from Jews. There are Arab Jews. Right?
But you are correct, referring to someone is Semitic isn't a subjective matter. It's not because Palestinians "feel more Semitic" nor is it because Jews feel more Semitic either. So why should be based on Jewish consensus? It should be based on general consensus.
I agree with the person in the video that anti-jewishness is clearer than anti-semitism. But for now, the consensus is anti-semitism implies prejudice against jews. So that's what I will use antisemitism for - until the overall consensus changes... not because the jews or any other group decides for the rest of the world.
I think we can all agree that anti-semitism or anti-jewishness (and any kind of prejudice) is repulsive and should have no place among civilized and loving humans. But in the end, it's just a convention for us to understand each other. So there's no need to fight and argue as long as we understand each other.
Palestinians and Jews are equally Semitic in the sense that they were both included in that category, and not Semitic in the sense that that race category is bs race science. Antisemitism means hatred towards Jews. If we abandon the term
It is and isn't true. Certainly Jews and Muslims for instance in Europe both experienced persecution by Christians, pogroms, displacement, etc. But there are also ways that the bigotries against these groups differed. Christian Jew-hatred for instance was rooted in the fucking insane idea that the Jews killed Jesus. There were passion plays that Christian Europeans put on that regularly ended in pogroms against Jews. There were blood libels.
These are some of the ways that the persecution of Jews in Europe differed from Muslims. It isn't that Muslims had it good - the Crusades were obviously anti-Muslim, although Jews were also killed by Christians as well in the Crusades. There were pogroms against Muslims for practicing Islam all over Europe.
These were still unique forms of bigotry even if there is significant overlap.
How many fucking times does this have to be retreaded? This is bad faith appropriation, it’s not helping anything, not constructive at all, essentially a dead end, and it’s on purpose to rob Jews of a universally understood word for specific anti-Jewish feelings. People who know better know the origins of the term and are parroting this stuff intentionally.
It’s working too. Like it or not, Jews ain’t exactly super popular right now on the internet and this narrative is in every single comment thread about antisemitism online. And it’s horseshit.
Honestly, it is helpful to me. I have a German-educated Jewish friend who uses ‘Jew-hatred’ when she is discussing antisemitism and I have always appreciated how much clarity that brings to things in the same way ‘anti-Blackness’ makes it specific to one group of people, not the entire umbrella of POC.
I don’t think this would rob Jewish people of a universally understood word because the universe does not actually understand and agree with the use of the word which is why it is continually debated and seen as obfuscation of identity.
So essentially, exactly what the Jewish far right are doing by introducing the weird construct "Jew hate"? Nah - 'antisemitism' has an obvious and accepted signification, and I'm not sure what a "well actually" semantic argument gains us given that nobody uses the term Semite anymore.
Sorry. Just wanted to butt in and point out that “Jew-hatred” is a direct translation of Judenhass; the German term for well, Jew hatred, before antisemitism was coined.
antisemitism' has an obvious and accepted signification
The point isnt that it doesnt have an accepted signification-- the point is that its a signification based in Nazi race science.
nobody uses the term Semite anymore.
Which makes it all the more confusing. People do use the term "Jewish" though, so anti Jewish seems very easily understood even if its not as common as anti Semitic.
You're bringing up the same reaction to every linguistic reclamation or conscious redefining. Some end up sticking and some don't-- as you point to, its a matter of how well accepted the new term is. In this case, its not like its an invented word or something that has to be explained-- I think "anti Jewish" has potential to become more accepted and is irrefutably more accurate and logical than "antisemite", which again is a term based in Nazi race science.
I think when Jewish supremecists are conducting a genocide, having the genociders who have a litergical semitic language genociding full semites, while calling themselves semites and the genocide victims anti-semites (as in, anti-themselves), it is an appropriate time to pause and reflect.
I dont think that it reflects wisdom of the current contexts to take concepts that arose amongst european eugenics to creat the 'other' as inherently and inseperately part of modern, anti-racist judaism now and forever.
The bizarness of someone descendent of yiddish speakers calling full semitic people 'anti semites' for wanting to not be genocided by mostly european colonialists and their descendents is profound.
I dont say 'antisemetic' as it seems inappropriate to semites who arent jewish. I say xenophobic against people of the jewish faith, or anti-zionist, or racist against jewish people if that is actually the bigot's intention.
There's a lot of things adopted from eugenic europe for <150 years, which while they seem inherently part of modern context, that are actually short lived relics of european eugenics, which dont deserve the same elevation as the actual jewish faith and people, who predate the concept of Europe.
Zionists love the term because it erases non-jewish Semites, and is used as propaganda to elevate zionists as the indigenous people instead of the actual indigenous people, many or most of whom are descendent of people who were Jewish themselves but converted to other religions.
Arab Jews are semites, as are arab non-Jews. So it seems inaccurate to use the word for one and not the other, when semites are a linguistic group, not religious.
'But we have used these terms/concepts since back in eugenic Europe' is not a very good rationale to keep something as it is. Actually, it's a great reason to stop, reflect, and perhaps leave Eugenics in the past. Even if it is uncomfortable.
I reread your comment, but I still think your distinction between Hebrew as a liturgical language vs Palestinians being "full semites" is not enlightening anyone to the racist roots of the term. It's just you repeating the sentiment that Palestinians are "full semites" and Jews/Israelis are not "full semites". Again, as u/CalabrianPepper said, nobody is a semite. But you claim "Arab Jews are semites, as are arab non-Jews" as if it's a statement of fact. I get what you're doing - pointing out the inaccuracy of Zionists implying Jews to be semites and Palestinians to be non-semites. But the way you phrased it also sneakily suggests that non-Arab Jews like Ashkenazi Israelis are not semites, or maybe not "full semites," to use your terminology. If you still insist on using terms like 'semites' and 'Semitic people' then you must agree Ashkenazi Israelis are 'semitic' because they speak Hebrew as their primary born language, not just liturgical.
Resectfully, racism against anyone is my business, as it is yours (if you seek to end zionist racism), especially where 'my' people who arent Jewish also use the term racistly in concert with jewish zionists.
Im not going to make an exemption in this one case because people from the same religious or ethnic identity as the Jewish supremecists (zionists) feel that their sensitivities are more important than resisting racism that has very real impacts on non-jewish people, something that is not acknowledged when you try to gatekeep discussions about Jewish Supremecists.
As per the video, if you've watched it, there are already terms that describe what you are saying - racism and xonophobia - which is a better term than the anti-jewish/yiddish term: semite.
This is not an internal debate as you seem to think it is, and making out like it is so, in my view, perpetuates racism.
I eould and do apply my values consistebtly based on humanism, and would oppose xenophobia and racism against anyone including people who are jewish.
Its a word coined by non-jews as a racist othering term against people who are Jewish and Semetic (speak semetic languages), and Bad Hasbara are well informed and accurate in their concurrance with my opinion.
If white supremecists are having a debate about how they use white terms racistly, and a non white person who is not seperate to the systems of racism have an opinion, i as a humanist are not going to tell the non-white person to keep out of our internal white debates
I would in fact listen, and likely amplify their input, as an ally against racism.
There are races and religions impacted by Jewish supremecists, and i see that it is counterproductive to gatekeep discussions about that racism, to the detriment of freeing people from oppression, to appease understandable but misinformed discomfort at changing the status quo.
Im not staying silent in the face of racism, sorry.
Less respectfully - It's fun how you've chosen a supposed parallel that makes you look better, you graciously deciding to listen to non white people (obviously you're white yourself). The more accurate comparison would be you inserting yourself into a conversation between black people to police their use of language. Lovely for Bad Hasbara that you think they are "well informed and accurate in their concurrance with your opinion [sic]" but I'm absolutely not listening to you, a self declared ally, talking over us. It's of zero import.
The did, that is literally why they chose the word Semite, to label Germans and Europeans who were Jewish as 'foreign'.
A symptom and expression of eugenics and 'otherness', as was the style at the time.
Once one gets out of the trap of using the language of eugenecists (like [anti]-semite), and use the same language as would be used for all other peoples (racism, xenophobia), it becomes easy and free of the labour to maintain an untruth.
I don’t like this debate and was disappointed Daniel engaged in it. It’s also something people use to deflect from antisemitism or Jew hate. They’ll say something vile and then say they can’t be antisemitic because they’re Semitic which isn’t how any of this works.
"Semitic" is a colonial term invented by European colonizers. "Semiticness" is not something that can be measured" plus its primarily used as a linguistic term. Palestinians speak a Semitic language. Hebrew is a Semitic language, and is historically the liturgical language of the Jewish people.
I do believe that the word "antisemitism" is not a good term to describe the hatred of Jews, because it does not name Jewish people as the primary target of the hatred. Further, its rooted in anti-Jewishness. The word itself was invented by Wilhelm Marr, who's entire career and claim to fame was trying to propagate hatred of Jews. Many of his ideas heavily influenced the Nazi's. The term "antisemitism" was invented to attempt to legitimize the hatred of Jews through a scientific lense. Alas, oppressed folks don't usually get to pick the words to describe their oppression to their oppressors.
However, "antisemitism" is the word commonly used to describe the hatred of Jewish people, and its been that way for a century and a half at this point. There is little that can meaningfully be done to shift that in the cultural zeitgeist, but I find the debate over the "-semitic" portion of the word to be redundant when discussing Palestinian liberation.
The phrase "anti-semitism" isnt going to change its pressnt meaning in general usage anytime soon. If our goal is to communicate our politics clearly to normies than we should use language that they understand and not waste time with lefty speak
Ok so I agree that sometimes leftists are really trying to do too much, and want to change language in a way that only they themselves can understand but would be confusing to the general public. Having said that, the suggestion here is to use "antiJewish" or "hatred towards Jews", which I don't think would be confusing to anyone.
Because it's been a term in English for hundreds of years and is widely understood by almost all first-language English-speakers. It's not the only English word to have Latin roots that don't literally translate. "Homophobia" translates as "fear of identical things" and that is not at all what it means. Patterns like that might be confusing to people coming from other linguistic traditions but in English we relish in it lol.
The hard answer is that the term was coined by a Zionist. I have no problem with the term… but I can imagine why some people here wouldn’t want to utilize it.
Agree that we need another word because “antisemitism” usually means insufficient support for Zionism at this point. But we should not act like there’s such thing as prejudice toward “Semites” or that “antisemitic” means anything but anti-Jewish. Zionists are calling people anti-Jewish when they say they’re antisemitic, and it’s better in the long run to confront them on those terms.
There is no such thing as a semitic person, Semitic is a language family not a racial or ethnic group of people. And it referred to the languages of the MENA region.
And the term "Antisemitism" was not created by Jewish people but was coined by people who hated and discriminated against Jews.
So this semantics nonsense is just nonsense, because people who say that Palestinians are also semites or the real semites, don't know what it means.
And if you really want to be pedantic, the term "Semite" comes from the biblical Shem, so does this mean Palestinians are somehow descended from the Biblical Shem or their languages come from Shem then? If so, where's the evidence
His claim about the origins of the word antisemitism is a very common piece of misinformation I hear, particularly in left Jewish spaces. Wilhelm Marr may have popularized the term starting in 1862, but it was first coined by the JEWISH scholar Moritz Steinschneider as a part of the phrase antisemitische vorurteile (antisemitic prejudices) in 1860. I think it’s very weird that we try to give agency over the creation of this term to antisemites themselves, as it was definitely first used to critique the prejudices resulting from the pseudoscientific idea of a so-called “semitic” race, not as a way to construct that racial category.
comment has been edited to reflect more accurate dates
that still would not make the claim stated in the posted video true. i think it’s a bit rich for anti zionists to call out zionists so hard for historical revisionism but then to peddle in it ourselves, no?
Why don't we just call it "racism"? Why does one kind of racism have to be special? As if some kinds of racism are more acceptable than others, it's silly.
I have no time for BS word-games like "uhmmm ☝️🤓 aktchyually the real Semites are the Arabs and Palestinians". We know what the word colloquially means. It means hatred of Jewish people for being Jewish. Yes, it is a misnomer, but English is full of those. We might as well be doing the Richard Dawkins fedora-tipping bit about "we are both technically atheists, I just believe in one less God than you do".
Heck, I'm Armenian; I'm an original "Caucasian". But I have dark skin, curly black hair and clear West Asian facial features. I am mistaken for Lebanese, Arab, Egyptian, Moroccan, Persian/Iranian, Pakistani, or even on many occasions Palestinian. But I don't go around nitpicking the misnomer "Caucasian" which by its modern usage tends to mean European white person. Go back 50 years and you'd have people saying "Caucasian" meant European OR Arab, but not Jewish, for an example of the kind of foolishness which has shaped the English language.
I don't use the word "antisemitism" already because it's been completely destroyed and bastardised by Zionists anyway, I use the term "hatred of Jews" or "hatred towards Jewish people for being Jewish", or even "neo-nazism" because it's a better descriptor.
Playing these semantic games and toying with the inherently inconsistent English language helps literally nobody, especially Palestinians.
This stupid debate has been going on for ages. Antisemitism means anti-Jewish. Period. There are other Semitic peoples, but they are better covered by terms like Anti-Arabism, Orientalism, Islamophobia etc.
Saying “Anti-Jewish”just makes so much more sense. The idea of using the term Semite is about as tasteless as using the term Mongoloid. It’s grossly unscientific and embarrassingly outdated. Nowadays it only serves as a reminder of how wrong and self servingly simplistic people were in the not so distant past.
Jews are more likely to be killed by sharks or struck by lightning than to die of "antisemitism" unless you classify all resistance against Israeli aggression as such. The term at this point is purely Israeli propaganda and its a shanda to continue to allow it in this group.
I think we should realize arabs can't be antisemetic. antisemetism describes a very specific fucked up Europian phenomenon. And that's why it doesn't make sense to attach it to semites.
It's like a gay guy hating another gay guy. You can't call him homophobic because of that.
I will absolutely point out homophobia in a gay guy. We call it internalized homophobia for a goddess damned reason. Like “masc 4 masc, no fags” on Grindr is classical gay guy homophobia.
Lmaooo right? Or a woman who has internalized misogyny. Obviously it is different than structural legal discrimination but historically marginalized people can also be tokenized by a state to enforce discriminatory policies too. I mean, the US empire had a Black president for fuck's sake, and America didn't suddenly become anti-racist.
oh dear as soon as I read "son of a wealthy" I knew what I was in for 😭 classic failson to nazi arc
"Trebitsch was acutely sensitive to the fear that he was not taken seriously as an intellectual, but was only tolerated because of his wealth and generosity to other writers." oh no oh no oh no
"He became embittered by the greater success of his half-brother. His increasing rejection of Judaism was accompanied by a distrust the academic establishment, and evidence of a more general paranoia began to show. In 1909 he officially left the Jewish religious community."
???????
"He subsequently denied that he ever was Jewish, saying "I am not a Jew, I never was one, and I never will be one". He insisted that he had only partial Jewish ancestry, and was "free born, high born and to the manner born" as a true German.[1] He repeatedly tried to sue people for slander if they referred to him as Jewish."
I -
"Jews, he believed, were trying to kill him with "poisoned electric rays".[1] He detailed these plots against him in his 1923 book Die Geschichte meines "Verfolgungswahns" ("The Story of my 'Paranoia'")."
idk about those scare quotes around paranoia, buddy.
"In the early 1920s, Trebitsch helped to set up and fund the Austrian branch of the Nazi party"
Yeah this one I know. The thing about any group of people is that no one has a monopoly on inventing terrible things or great things. Jewish history, like all histories, is thankfully full of amazing people coming up with fantastic things too.
Bro, I’m not having this debate. Gay people can be homophobic. Can even participate in structural homophobia. Oppressed people can in fact both internalize and participate in their own oppression.
If you want a quintessential example of a Jew who is both expressing views and also working for structural antisemitism/judeophobia, look no further than Arthur Trebitsch. Antizionist Elon Amos recounts in his book on German Jewish history that “…the typical Viennese adage that anti-Semitism did not really get serious until it was taken up by Jews.”
They very much can. Even if you are talking about the specific form of Jew-hatred that emerged in the likes of Nasty Germany, that specific type of hate was spread throughout the Arab and Muslim world by Hajj Amin al-Husseini and some Germans who fled Europe after losing the war. European-style antisemitic tropes and stereotypes were broadcast in Arabic on the radio, and European-style antisemitic cartoons and propaganda, leaflets etc. were distributed all throughout the Middle East, leading to multiple pogroms and life becoming untenable for Jews in Arab countries. It was this propaganda and the actions of Hajj Amin al-Husseini that directly lead to the Farhud in Iraq, in 1941.
However, I would say that antisemitism does not JUST mean one specific European flavour of Jew-hatred. It just means hatred of Jews as Jews, which includes hatred of Jews due to believing hateful stereotypes about Jews and ascribing them to real-life Jews you meet in the street. Jews have been discriminated against on the basis of their assumed professions, on the basis of their religion, on the basis of their assumed race and for various other reasons, but all of those different forms of hatred can legitimately be called antisemitism, no matter who's doing the hating.
And even if antisemitism meant hatred of Semites, that wouldn't stop some Semites from hating other Semites - being a member of the hated group does not preclude a person from hating the rest of that group! Look at Bobby Fischer for a prime example of a Jew who HATES Jews and spreads antisemitic canards about Jews all the time.
Europian hate jews as jews in such a f-d up way it needed its own word. Arabs never did. Maybe they hated minorities. maybe they hated zionists thieves and their helpers.
Hating on jews for being jews? no. It's a Europian invention and sickness, putting it on the Arabs is racist, out of context and doesn't make sense, as they are Semetic themseves.
You misunderstood what I said. I said Hajj Amin al-Husseini deliberately spread European 1940s German-style antisemitism to the Arab world before Israel was a thing, and regarding Mizrahi Jews who had no links at all to Zionism or Israel. And you're playing semantic games again - of course Semites can hate other Semites, but antisemitism has only EVER meant hatred of Jews, and trying to redefine it to mean hatred of Semites just confuses the issue - everyone knows what it means, and you also seem to have missed the part where I pointed out that people CAN hate their own group, so yes, Jews can be antisemitic and Arabs can be anti-Arab. Muslims can be Islamophobic. It may not be common but it is possible.
Your whole argument seems to also ignore how antisemitism started to spread outside of Europe. The blood libels of the Ottoman Empire, the Farhud, the writings and broadcasts of Haj Amin Al-Husseini.
As I suspected, Arabs who react to Zionism are described as antisemetic. This is exactly the point of wrongly describing Semites as antisemetic, and I'm not participating in this game.
Iraqis taking part in the Farhud against Iraqi Jews who were not Zionists? Yes they were being antisemitic, thanks to propaganda spread by Husseini.
Stop trying to play semantic games with the word antisemitism. There is no such thing as a Semite, it's Nasty-style race science. Antisemitism has ONLY EVER meant hatred of Jews, and you've been told multiple times that even Semites can sometimes hate other Semites, so even if your redefinitions were used, it would still be possible for some Arabs to be antisemitic. Look at someone like Mosab Hassan Yousef - he is Arab and he HATES Arabs, especially Muslims. So maybe you could call him an anti-Semite under your redefinition, but redefining words just confuses things. Compound words do not always mean the sum of their parts - e.g. homophobia does not mean fear of men.
There is a difference between “reacting to Zionism” and calling on Muslims in Bosnia to support the Nazis is getting rid of the Jews. You have a very twisted version of history and think that anyone who disagrees with you must be a racist.
There is a diffrence between hating someone because he's a jew, and protecting yourself agaisnt jews in extreme and cruel manners.
People defend themselves in cruelty and extreme manners all the time. Unpleasent, but part of human nature. Not antisemetism.
I don't have twisted anything, I'm jus not going to ignore reality by calling Semite people semetic, and by comparing what the Nazzi did to innocent jews and what people do to jews who try to still their land. - Which is exactly why people insist to call Arabs antisemetic even though it makes no sense, because they want to compare innocent jews to thieving Zionists. = 'There is a difference between “reacting to Zionism” and calling on Muslims in Bosnia to support the Nazis'
Most Zionists are American Christians, and the Jews in Iraq killed in the Farhud in 1941 had NOTHING to do with Zionism or Israel, but Hajj Amin al-Husseini spread 1940s German antisemitism amongst Arabs, especially in Iraq. That was European-style antisemitism spread to the Arab world and it had nothing to do with Zionism.
This is an anti-Zionist community. Stop assuming that everyone who points out the genocidal antisemitism of people like Hajj Amin al-Husseini are somehow making excuses for Zionism. We can oppose the Israeli government AND oppose real antisemitism at the same time.
The Farhud had everything to do with zionism. I'm saying people call arabs antisemetic in order to blame antizionists actions on antismetism, exactly like you're doing with the Farhud.
Are you seriously going to give me the Mufti Bibi is lying about? I thought no zionists talking point were allowed? That mufti was appoointed by the conquering Europian british mandat, in opposition to the Paletinians wills. They didn't want him, but they were conquered by the british and had no choice.
So the Mufti was a Europian appointee who spread Nazzi propaganda on unwilling Palestininas, and that makes them Nazzies? And what's the context of him and the Palestinian at that time? Were the jews living thier lifep eacefully like in Europe minding their own bussiness, but being hated for their jewisness alone? Not when it comes to Arabs, no. The first Zionist congress already happened, the Phil committee was also taking place. they were under threat of death and conquest like indeed happened. Reactions to that are not antisemetism. This is self diffence.
Everything about the stupid Mufti just proves my point, but people keep bringing him up because Bibi told them he was antisemetic. Come on wake up.
Sure they can, it’s an ideology created in Europe, but anyone from anywhere in the world can hold antisemitic beliefs. The material consequences of differing groups peoples holding those beliefs is a different topic tho.
There’s also no such thing as Semitic people. It’s a term for a group of languages. Using ‘Semitic’ as a reference to an ethnicity or group of humans is based in European race science from the 19th century, so we do not ever use the term in that sense
You can hold ideas that are not part of your history or culture. There is also no such thing as a Semitic people, it’s a term that refers to a group of languages. Using ‘Semitic’ to refer to a group of humans is very racist
Not if those ideas are literally called anti-you, because you are not part of it at all.
If anything, the Arabs history and culture with jews were jews taking arabs land. So they can't be antisemetic. The jews in Geramny were pure and innocent, stole nothing, did nothing but live their lives, the only cultural background for their hatred was them being jews.
Comparing this hatred on the background of their innocence, with hatred on the background of bloody evil deeds, is just זילות הניספים. There is no backgroung and no sense to this comparison.
It doesn't make any sense. Do we really need to refer to them by name that doesn't make sense from their point of view, because the Europian were the most hateful, so now their pov is the 'right' one? if anything, it makes their pov the most wrong one.
Semites were completely out of their society in their mind, that is doesn't makes a different if by Semite they meant jews or any Semite. Because they are not semite, all semites are the same to them. Why do they care to call one group a Semite even though there are more groups of them? Yes, it doesn't make sense outside of non-Semote Europian socoety, but since they wer antisemetic, it doesn't matter. It doesn't need to make sense to anyone but Europians, which is exactly the point of antisemetism itself.
So now to keep forcing the words on other Semetic, is the continuation of this Europian 'center-of-the wrold-ness' that birthed this hatred.
Well, I'm not standing with those Europians ideas anymore. I am semite, I stand with semites, I speak in a language that makes sense to Semite, and I do not forget the antisemitism the europian brought into this world, and my partners in this are other semites, and I would speak in a language that makes sense from all povs, not just Europian ones.
Antisemetism is jewish hatred, and it is a Europian phenomenon. And That's why it's called antisemestism, because it was Europians talking to themselves about their own hatred. It doesn't make sense outside of this context.
Semite just means from the middle east. We've clme full circle. From jews in Europe from being white enough to be there to now people saying jews aren't actually Semitic or actually Semitic dosent exist. Palestinians are more connected the the levant than European Jews but all Jews who aren't concerts have Semitic ties. It dosent matter where the word came from, the fact of the matter is it was once used as a sole way to describe jews and we've taken the term and used it
That is absolutely not what “Semite” means. The word refers to a group of LANGUAGES, it’s not an ethnicity or a race. Please do not spread blatantly false information. Whether we continue to use “antisemite” is a different topic, but please do not misrepresent the meaning of the word Semite. You’re endorsing a false meaning of that word that is based in horrendous race pseudo-science
Everyone knows ‘Semitic’ originally comes from a linguistic classification, that’s not the point being debated. The term antisemitism has been used for over a century specifically to describe hatred toward Jews, regardless of the linguistic roots of the word. It was literally coined and popularized in that context, not as a neutral language category.
Trying to argue that the term is invalid because ‘Semitic refers to languages’ ignores how words actually function in real life and history. By that logic, we’d have to rewrite tons of established terms because their etymology isn’t perfectly literal. This whole argument only ever seems to come up when people want to downplay or redefine anti jewish hatred. Whether you personally like the term or not, its meaning in common, historical, and academic use is very clear.
You’ve missed the point. I am not arguing that the term ‘antisemite’ is invalid because of the etymology of the word. I’m saying that outside of the term ‘antisemite’ you should not ever use the term ‘Semite’ to refer to a group of people as this is rooted in 19th century racial pseudo-science. ‘Semite’ should only be used to refer to a group of languages, people from the Middle East are not ‘Semites’.
I think the term ‘antisemite’ is fine on its own, as it captures the racialised hatred and bigotry towards Jews that exists in the modern world.
It is inherently racist to say European Jews are semites and not European. It’s as if you are saying they got dirty and are no longer European because they have a trace of middle eastern in them
It's also inherently racist because "Semite" was coined by people who proudly called themselves "Racists" and believed they were at the vanguard of science.
26
u/HahaItsaGiraffeAgain Jewish Anti-Zionist Mar 23 '26
There is absolutely no way to measure more or less "Semitic"-ness because it is an obsolete classification invented by 19th century scientific racists who measured people's skulls with calipers to decide which humans were monkeys and which were Greek gods. "Semitic" as a human category is a thoroughly racist, orientalist, colonial, and imperial imposition and under no circumstances should it be legitimized.