Why do they hate us? What is our response to Jew hatred?

Ahad Ha'am, Selective Writings, p. 203 – The rampant acceptance of the blood libel proves that the majority of the world may be mistaken.

This accusation is the solitary case in which the general acceptance of an idea about ourselves does not make us doubt whether all the world can be wrong, and we right, because it is based on an absolute lie. Every Jew who has been brought up among Jews knows as an indisputable fact that throughout the length and breadth of Jewry there is not a single individual who drinks human blood for religious purposes…”But,” you ask, “is it possible that everybody can be wrong, and the Jews right?” Yes, it is possible: the blood accusation proves it possible.

• Do money and economic factors explain anti-Semitism?
• Does anti-Semitism stem from the Jews’ being labeled the “Chosen People”?
• How valid are other theories explaining anti-Semitism?
• Is anti-Semitism related to religion or to race?
• Is there any one theory that fully explains the historic phenomenon, anti- Semitism?

Future Tense: The New Antisemitism- What is it & how do we deal with it?

Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks

Today’s antisemitism is a new phenomenon, continuous with, yet significantly different from the past. To fathom the transformation, we must first define what antisemitism is. In the past Jews were hated because they were rich and because they were poor; because they were capitalists (Marx) and because they were communists (Hitler); because they kept to themselves and because they infiltrated everywhere; because they held tenaciously to a superstitious faith (Voltaire) and because they were rootless cosmopolitans who believed nothing (Stalin).

Antisemitism is not an ideology, a coherent set of beliefs. It is, in fact, an endless stream of contradictions. The best way of understanding it is to see it as a virus. Viruses attack the human body, but the body itself has an immensely sophisticated defence, the human immune system. How then do viruses survive and flourish? By mutating. Antisemitism mutates, and in so doing, defeats the immune systems set up by cultures to protect themselves against hatred. There have been three such mutations in the past two thousand years, and we are living through the fourth.

The first took place with the birth of Christianity. Before then there had been many Hellenistic writers who were hostile to Jews. But they were also dismissive of other non-Hellenistic peoples. The Greeks called them barbarians. There was nothing personal in their attacks on Jews. This was not antisemitism. It was xenophobia.

This changed with Christianity. As was later to happen with Islam, the founders of the new faith, largely based on Judaism itself, believed that Jews would join the new dispensation and were scandalised when they did not. Jews were held guilty of not recognising – worst still, of being complicit in the death of – the messiah. A strand of Judeophobia entered Christianity in some of its earliest texts, and became a fully-fledged genre, the ‘Adversos Judaeos’ literature, in the days of the Church Fathers. From here on, Jews – not non-Christians in general – became the target of what Jules Isaac called the ‘teaching of contempt’.

The second mutation began in 1096 when the Crusaders, on their way to conquer Jerusalem, stopped to massacre Jewish communities in Worms, Speyer and Mainz, the first major European pogrom. In 1144 in Norwich there was the first Blood Libel, a myth that still exists today in parts of the Middle East. Religious Judeophobia became demonic. Jews were no longer just the people who rejected Christianity. They began to be seen as a malevolent force, killing children, desecrating the host, poisoning wells and spreading the plague. There were forced conversions, inquisitions, burnings at the stake, staged public disputations, book burnings and expulsions. Europe had become a ‘persecuting society’.

We can date the third mutation to 1879 when the German journalist Wilhelm Marr coined a new word: anti-Semitism. The fact that he needed to do so tells us that this was a new phenomenon. It emerged in an age of Enlightenment, the secular nation state, liberalism and emancipation. Religious prejudice was deemed to be a thing of the past. The new hatred had therefore to justify itself on quite different grounds, namely race. This was a fateful development, because you can change your religion. You cannot change your race. Christians could work for the conversion of the Jews. Racists could only work for the extermination of the Jews. So the Holocaust was born. Sixty years after the word came the deed.

Today we are living through the fourth mutation. Unlike its predecessors, the new antisemitism focuses not on Judaism as a religion, nor on Jews as a race, but on Jews as a nation. It consists of three propositions. First, alone of the 192 nations making up the United Nations, Jews are not entitled to a state of their own. As Amos Oz noted: in the 1930s, antisemites declared, ‘Jews to Palestine’. Today they shout, ‘Jews out of Palestine’. He said: they don’t want us to be there; they don’t want us to be here; they don’t want us to be.

The second is that Jews or the State of Israel (the terms are often used interchangeably) are responsible for the evils of the world, from AIDS to global warming. All the old anti-Semitic myths have been recycled, from the Blood Libel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, still a best-seller in many parts of the world. The third is that all Jews are Zionists and therefore legitimate objects of attack. The bomb attacks on synagogues in Istanbul and Djerba, the arson attacks on Jewish schools in Europe, and the almost fatal stabbing of a young yeshiva student on a bus in North London in October 2000, were on Jewish targets, not Israeli ones. The new antisemitism is an attack on Jews as a nation seeking to exist as a nation like every other on the face of the earth, with rights of self-governance and self-defence.

How did it penetrate the most sophisticated immune system ever constructed – the entire panoply of international measures designed to ensure that nothing like the Holocaust would ever happen again, from the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) to the Stockholm declaration of 2000? The answer lies in the mode of self-justification. Most people at most times feel a residual guilt at hating the innocent. Therefore antisemitism has always had to find legitimation in the most prestigious source of authority at any given time.

In the first centuries of the Common Era, and again in the Middle Ages, this was religion. That is why Judeophobia took the form of religious doctrine. In the nineteenth century, religion had lost prestige, and the supreme authority was now science. Racial antisemitism was duly based on two pseudo-sciences, social Darwinism (the idea that in society, as in nature, the strong survive by eliminating the weak) and the so-called scientific study of race. By the late twentieth century, science had lost its prestige, having given us the power to destroy life on earth. Today the supreme source of legitimacy is human rights. That is why Jews (or the Jewish state) are accused of the five primal sins against human rights: racism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, attempted genocide and crimes against humanity.

Passover Haggada

This is what has stood by our fathers and us! For not just one alone has risen against us to destroy us, but in every generation they rise against us to destroy us; and the Holy One, blessed be He, saves us from their hand!

Go forth and learn what Laban the Aramean wanted to do to our father Jacob. Pharaoh had issued a decree against the male children only, but Laban wanted to uproot everyone - as it is said: "The Aramean wished to destroy my father...

Letter to Yemen by Moses Maimonides

The divine assurance was given to Jacob our father, that his descendants would survive the people who degraded and discomfited them as it is written: "And thy seed shall be like the dust of the earth." (Genesis 28:14). That is to say, although his offspring will be abased like dust that is trodden under foot, they will ultimately emerge triumphant and victorious, and as the simile implies, just as the dust settles finally upon him who tramples upon it, and remains after him, so shall Israel outlive its persecutors.

The prophet Isaiah has long ago predicted that various peoples will succeed in vanquishing Israel and lording over them for some time. But that ultimately God will come to Israel's assistance and will put a stop to their woes and affliction as is suggested in the following verse:

"A grievous vision is declared unto me; the treacherous one will deal treacherously, and the spoiler will spoil; Go up O Elam, besiege O Media! but ultimately the sighing thereof I shall make to cease." (Isaiah 21:2).

We are in possession of the divine assurance that Israel is indestructible and imperishable, and will always continue to be a pre-eminent community. As it is impossible for God to cease to exist, so is Israel's destruction and disappearance from the world unthinkable, as we read, "For I the Lord change not, and ye, O sons of Jacob, will not be consumed." (Malachi 3:6). Similarly He has avowed and assured us that it is unimaginable that He will reject us entirely even if we disobey Him, and disregard His behests, as the prophet Jeremiah avers, "Thus saith the Lord: If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, Then will I also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord" (Jeremiah 31:36). Indeed this very promise has already been given before through Moses our Teacher who says, "And yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break My covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God." (Leviticus 26:44).

Put your trust in the true promises of Scripture, brethren, and be not dismayed at the series of persecutions or the enemy's ascendency over us, or the weakness of our people. These trials are designed to test and purify us so that only the saints and the pious ones of the pure and undefiled lineage of Jacob will adhere to our religion and remain within the fold, as it is written, "And among the remnant are those whom the Lord shall call." (Joel 3:5).

Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 12:2

Here is the God of my salvation, I shall trust and not fear; for the strength and praise of the Eternal the Lord was my salvation."

Letter from the Rebbe

By the Grace of G‑d
7th of Adar, 5713 [1953]
Brooklyn, N.Y.

…The story of Purim, as related in the Book of Esther, gives us a clear analysis of the "Jewish problem."

Being dispersed over 127 provinces and lands, their own still in ruins, the Jews undoubtedly differed from one another in custom, garment and tongue according to the place of their dispersal, very much in the same way as Jews in different lands differ nowadays. Yet, though there were Jews who would conceal their Jewishness, Haman, the enemy of the Jews, recognized the essential qualities and characteristics of the Jews which made all of them, with or without their consent, into "one people," namely, "their laws are different from those of any other people" (Book of Esther 3:8).

Hence, in his wicked desire to annihilate the Jews, Haman seeks to destroy "all the Jews, young and old, children and women." Although there were in those days, too, Jews who strictly adhered to the Torah and Mitzvoth, and Jews whose religious ties with their people were weak, or who sought to assimilate themselves, yet none could escape the classification of belonging to that "one people," and every one was included in Haman's cruel decree.

In all ages there were Hamans, yet we have outlived them, thank G‑d. Wherein lies the secret of our survival?

The answer will be evident from the following illustration. When a scientist seeks to ascertain the laws governing a certain phenomenon, or to discover the essential properties of a certain element in nature, he must undertake a series of experiments under the most varied conditions in order to discover those properties or laws which pertain under all conditions alike. No true scientific law can be deduced from a minimum number of experiments, or from experiments under similar or only slightly varied conditions, for the results as to what is essential and what is secondary or quite unimportant would then not be conclusive.

The same principle should be applied to our people. It is one of the oldest in the world, beginning its national history from the Revelation at Mount Sinai, some 3300 years ago. In the course of these long centuries our people has lived under extremely varied conditions, in most different times and different places all over the world. If we wish to discover the essential elements making up the cause and very basis of the existence of our people and its unique strength, we must conclude that it is not its peculiar physical or intrinsic mental characteristics, not its tongue, manners and customs (in a wider sense), nor even its racial purity (for there were times in the early history of our people, as well as during the Middle Ages and even recent times, when whole ethnic groups and tribes have become proselytes and part of our people).

The essential element which unites our "dispersed and scattered people" and makes it "one people" throughout its dispersion and regardless of time, is the Torah and Mitzvoth, the Jewish way of life which has remained basically the same throughout the ages and in all places. The conclusion is clear and beyond doubt: It is the Torah and Mitzvoth which made our people indestructible on the world scene in the face of massacres and pogroms aiming at our physical destruction, and in the face of ideological onslaughts of foreign cultures aiming at our spiritual destruction.

Purim teaches us the age-old lesson, which has been verified even most recently, to our sorrow, that no manner of assimilationism, not even such which is extended over several generations, provides an escape from the Hamans and Hitlers; nor can any Jew sever his ties with his people by attempting such an escape.

On the contrary: Our salvation and our existence depend precisely upon the fact that "their laws are different from those of any other people."

Purim reminds us that the strength of our people as a whole, and of each individual Jew and Jewess, lies in a closer adherence to our ancient spiritual heritage which contains the secret of harmonious life, hence of a healthy and happy life. All other things in our spiritual and temporal life must be free from any contradiction to the basis and essence of our existence, and must be attuned accordingly in order to make for the utmost harmony, and add to our physical and spiritual strength, both of which go hand in hand in Jewish life.

With best wishes for a joyous Purim, and may we live to see a world free of Hamans and all types of Amalekites, the enemies of the Jews, of their body, soul and faith,

Cordially yours,

[Signed: Menachem Schneerson]

Future Tense: The New Antisemitism- What is it & how do we deal with it?

Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks

European Jews in the nineteenth and early twentieth century made one of the most tragic mistakes in history. They said: Jews cause antisemitism, therefore they can cure it. They did everything possible. They said, ‘People hate us because we are different. So we will stop being different.’ They gave up item after item of Judaism. They integrated, they assimilated, they married out, they hid their identity. This failed to diminish antisemitism by one iota. All it did was to debilitate and demoralise Jews...

...The most important thing Jews can do to fight antisemitism is never, ever to internalise it. That is what is wrong in making the history of persecution the basis of Jewish identity. For three thousand years Jews defined themselves as a people loved by God. Only in the nineteenth century did they begin to define themselves as the people hated by gentiles. There is no sane future along that road. The best psychological defence against antisemitism is the saying of Rav Nachman of Bratslav: ‘The whole world is a very narrow bridge; the main thing is never to be afraid.’

Rambam laws of Kings 12:1
Although Isaiah 11:6 states: "The wolf will dwell with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the young goat," these words are a metaphor and a parable. The interpretation of the prophecy is as follows: Israel will dwell securely together with the wicked gentiles who are likened to a wolf and a leopard, as in the prophecy Jeremiah 5:6: "A wolf from the wilderness shall spoil them and a leopard will stalk their cities." They will all return to the true faith and no longer steal or destroy. Rather, they will eat permitted food at peace with Israel as Isaiah 11:7 states: "The lion will eat straw like an ox."

Midrash, Kohelet Rabah 2:21
Imikantron wrote to Emperor Hadrian, “If it is circumcision that you hate, Arabian tribes also circumcise. “If it is Shabbat observance that you despise, the Cutheans similarly observe Shabbat. “Clearly, then, you simply hate the Jewish people. “Their G-d will exact punishment from you.”

The 3D Test Natan Sharansky,

“3D Test of Anti-Semitism: Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization,” Jewish Political Studies Review 16:3–4, Fall 2004

I believe that we can apply a simple test—I call it the “3D” test—to help us distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.

The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz— this is anti-Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross—this is anti-Semitism.

The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: When Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied—alone among all peoples in the world—this too is anti-Semitism.

The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Igrot Kodesh 26, p. 167

I have received complaints: Why do I invoke “the biblical Land of Israel,” “the Holy Land,” and the Covenant with Abraham [in connection with modern Israel]? Why do I mix G-d into the picture? After all, they say, those who fought for the creation of the state, those who led it, those who currently direct it, and its authorized representatives—they all proclaim and take pains to emphasize that Israel is a state founded in 1948. . . .

My answer, put frankly, is that their narrative is false. No new entity was created in 1948. Rather, that was the year in which a large part of the Land of Israel was liberated. . . . An entity established in 1948 based on the agreement or authorization of the nations of the world has no strength or justification in terms of an authentic response to the claim, “You are thieves for having conquered lands belonging to others,” etc., a claim raised by the Arabs, the Vatican, the United Nations, and some Jews as well. [This is why it is so crucial to underscore that it is our G-d-given homeland.]

Now, I do not delude myself into imagining that these just and honest arguments will prevail in the United Nations, the Vatican, etc. Nevertheless, transmitting this truth is critical for the morale of Jewish youth [living in the Holy Land], including those serving in the IDF, for Jewish American students, and for the Jewish youth of other countries as well.

The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Igrot Kodesh 15, pp. 446–449

An objective, unprejudiced survey of the long history of our people will at once bring to light the reality that our survival as a nation was not the result of material wealth or physical strength. Even during the most prosperous times under the united monarchy of King Solomon, the Jewish people, as well as its country, were materially insignificant by comparison with contemporary world empires such as Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia.

Nor was it our active statehood or the control of our geographic homeland that secured our existence, as is evidenced from the reality that for the vast majority of our history, our people have lived in exile—without a kingdom and without a homeland. Similarly, our Hebrew language did not play a vital role in our perpetuation, for even in biblical times, Aramaic supplanted the Holy Tongue as the spoken language, to the extent that parts of the Scripture, almost all of our Babylonian Talmud, the Zohar, and other key works were composed in Aramaic instead of Hebrew. Later, in the times of Rabbi Saadya Ga’on and Maimonides, most of the Jewish masses spoke Arabic, and further down the line, it was Yiddish and other languages.

It is also impossible to ascribe any common secular culture or contemporary scientific knowledge as a major preservation factor for our people, since such matters morphed radically from one era to another. The only remaining consideration, which is the sole factor that has remained consistent throughout the ages, in all lands, and under the fullest diversity of circumstance, is the Torah and mitzvot that the Jews have observed in their daily life with great self-sacrifice.

The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Likutei Sichot, vol. 30, pp. 250–251

The response to this is that . . . the relationship between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel is unique. It is not comparable to the relationship between any other nation and its homeland. Rather, the Jewish land is an integral part of the Jewish people’s spiritual mission. The ultimate goal of the Jewish people’s divine service is to turn this tangible world into a home for G-dly revelation, to the point that G-d’s holiness dwells specifically in the physical reality of this world. For this reason, the majority of the Torah’s commandments involve physical activities, so that the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvot installs sanctity into tangible materials. . . . It was therefore critical to provide the Jews with the Land of Israel, a physical land, and to provide them with an abundance of mitzvot that can be performed exclusively with this Land. . . . For this expresses the entire goal of the Jewish people and the purpose of the Torah—to “conquer” the physical dimension of the world and transform it into a home for G-d.

Rashi

and kissed him: Heb. וֹיֹשֹקֹהֹוּ. There are dots over the word. There is controversy concerning this matter in a Baraitha of Sifrei (Beha’alothecha 69). Some interpret the dots to mean that he did not kiss him wholeheartedly. Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai said: It is a well known tradition (Halacha/Law) that Esau hated Jacob, but his compassion was moved at that time, and he kissed him wholeheartedly.

In 1970, France, now under de Gaulle’s successor, Georges Pompidou, suddenly announced the sale to Libya of 50 Mirage ground-attack aircraft, and later another 30 Mirage III‐E interceptors and 20 trainer reconnaissance planes. This constituted a major threat to Israel, as these could easily be resold to Egypt or Syria (and in fact, that, precisely, was the plan). When President Pompidou visited the United States, there were a series of strident demonstrations organized by Jews in Washington, DC, New York and Chicago.

The Rebbe

Officially there was an "embargo," but France was, in fact, selling weapons to Israel. But only small arms, items that could be shipped without publicity. But after the protests, he cancelled small arms sales, as well.

After some time, when the protests quieted down, Israel once again began dealing quiety with him, and Pompideou managed to extract three hundred Jews from Egypt! No protests, no publicity, no issues!

The Israeli government asked the newspapers not to write about it [in order to protect Pompidou from pressure by foreign governments and his French constituents]. We know about this only from non-Jewish newspapers.

This demonstrates clearly that the only way to deal with an antisemite is not by coming to him every day and shouting: Listen here, you are an antisemite! Listen here, you are a thief, a murderer, etc.! Rather, speak to him in a diplomatic way.

He knows well what they think of him, but he is a human being after all and behaves like a human being.

Once Pompudou was treated this way, 300 Jews were extracted from Egypt and Israel once again began recieving arms from France.

For the duration of his first two terms in the Senate, 1972-1984, US Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) was a staunch opponent of Israel’s cause. In 1973, he proposed a resolution demanding that Israel return the West Bank to Jordan. During Israel’s 1982 war with Palestinian terrorists in Lebanon, he demanded that the United States sever diplomatic relations with Israel. A year or so later, circa 1983, Senator Helms took part in a Friends of Lubavitch event in Washington

Letter from Rebbe in response to Alan Dershowitz Regarding Jesse Helms

P S. I wish to refer to your characterization of the person as described in your letter.

I trust you will agree that in regard to persons of influence, whether in Washington or elsewhere, the first objective should be to persuade and encourage such e person to use his influence in a positive way in behalf of any and all good causes which are important to us. We should welcome every public appearance which lends public support to the cause, especially when there is likelihood that it may be the forerunner of similar pronouncements in the future. A case in point is the public stance of the very person who is the subject of your letter on a matter which is surely close to your heart. I believe it is not the first of its kind, nor I hope, the last.

My experience with such people – though I have never personally met the said person – has convinced me that politicians are generally motivated more by expediency than by conviction. In other words, their public pronouncements on various issues do not stem from categorical principles or religious imperatives. Hence, most of them, if not all, are subject to change in their positions, depending on time, place, and other factors.

I believe, therefore, that the proper approach to such persons by Jewish leaders should not be rigid. As a rule, it does no good to engage in a cold war, which may often turn into a hot war; nor does it serve any useful purpose to brand one as an “enemy” or an “anti-Semite,” however tempting it is to do so even if that person vehemently denies it. It can only be counter-productive. On the contrary, ways and means should be found to persuade such a person to take a favorable stance, at least publicly. We haven’t too many friends, and attaching labels, etc. will not gain us any.

Instances abound where the approach advocated above produced good results. To cite one well-known case – the leader of the Moral Majority has at times made highly unfavorable pronouncements, especially the one about missionary activities a few weeks ago. Yet the government of Eretz Yisrael made special efforts to gain his support, etc., etc.

There is surely no need to point out to you that responsible Jewish leaders consistently cultivated good public relations, indeed even cordial relations, with Pres. Carter and his predecessors going back to FDR, regardless of their sometimes openly negative feelings towards Jews and Jewish causes.

The wisdom of the said approach is borne out also by the experience in regard to helping Jews behind the Iron Curtain. There are those who claim that anti-Soviet demonstrations and similar actions will induce the Kremlin to change its policy. Others, myself included, are convinced that “quiet diplomacy” has been effective, and certainly not counterproductive. I urged and pleaded – behind the scenes, of course – for such an approach by Jewish leaders. Unfortunately, my pleadings were unheeded.

This is one of the reasons why I write in reply to your correspondence this P.S., which has nothing to do with the person about whom you wrote – in hope that you may use your influence with your friends who are active in Jewish concerns, in the direction indicated above.

Key directives from the Rebbe’s responses:

• We need to realize that G‑d protects us and will continue to do so.

• Do engage in practical security, the natural means through which we protect ourselves.

• Exert your influence through quiet diplomacy, but don’t lose your backbone. Maintain pride in yourself as a Jew, and in your Jewish observance.

• It’s not effective to confront someone by proving that he or she is an antisemite. On the contrary, where possible, do your best to engage them.

• Concentrate on building relationships with leaders rather than chasing down the misdeeds of the followers.

• Don’t spend your energy answering specific individual complaints against the Jews.

• Emphasize how we’re all in the image of G‑d; the things that all human beings share.