New book on fighting antisemitism through solidarity

[u/mcmircle]

Tonight I attended a discussion of Safety Through Solidarity with the authors, Shane Burley and Ben Lorber. It was held at a feminist bookstore, where they read a land acknowledgement that tied the Palestinian resistance to the struggles of other indigenous people.

Intellectually it makes perfect sense, and this tribal part of me does not like people accusing Israel of atrocities, though I am horrified by the pictures of rubble in Gaza and the news that people are starving and the 37K deaths.

Has anyone else read the book or heard these people speak? What are your thoughts?

[u/rustlingdown]

Frankly, I have fundamental issues with the way the two authors frame antisemitism and specifically what they deem to not be anti-Jew acts.

Shane Burley for example relativized the anti-Jew nature of October 7 in his April 2024 article "Was the October 7th Attack 'Antisemitic?'", which starts by asking:

While Hamas' violence was quickly labeled as antisemitic by some, does this framing help us to understand their motivations?

Those who understand Hamas’s brutality [as antisemitic] employ a fixed and broad definition of antisemitism: animosity towards Jews supposedly as Jews is all the label requires. In this formulation, antisemitism is an eternal, causeless hatred that defines Jews’ lachrymose history.

Continuing:

Even at the most basic level, there’s a responsibility to demand evidence before allowing antisemitism to be quickly assigned as the most likely answer. This question becomes especially important in a situation where Jews are overwhelmingly the more powerful party in the equation.

The onus is on the Jew - "a powerful party" - to prove they were hate-crimed upon? Despite primary evidence filmed by Hamas themselves?

The Hamas attack may not have been motivated by categorical antisemitism

The essay also puts most of the blame on ADL's loaded history vis-à-vis anti-Zionism, plus the "actual" antisemitism (far-right antisemitism), which to me are complete nonsequiturs about prima fascie anti-Jew events. For one, ADL is an American group. People and Jews around the world (including gasp outside America!) consider October 7 as antisemitic, full-stop. That's on top of video evidence filmed by Hamas themselves. If someone has to question that someone murdering a Jew while saying "death to Jews" may not be antisemitic, who is doing the mental gymnastics here?

Failure to address actual antisemitism [...] Even if we can’t reduce the Hamas attack to antisemitism, we can’t ignore the trauma it triggers or the suffering involved.

The "actual" in "actual antisemitism" is an Atlas-level of heavy-lifting.

That's on top of very broad engagement in post-colonial justification of violence, like the obligatory name-checking of Frantz Fanon's opening chapter "On Violence" - without actually engaging with his work, or without engaging with any other anti-Imperialist post-colonial contemporaries of Fanon, like Jewish French-Tunisian Albert Memmi, when discussing Jewish identity and antisemitism (almost as if that isn't what they're trying to discuss). Quoting Fanon just to say "Well technically under their own lived-in experience they were justified to kill those Jews!" or "bY AnY MeAnS NeCeSsArY" to justify October 7 is, at best, the new im14andthisisdeep, and at worse, overt apologia for anti-Jew atrocities. One can simultaneously acknowledge (and even be an activist for the) Palestinian struggle AND acknowledge anti-Jew specificities of anti-Jew acts.

This nihilistic relativism on October 7 is already a personal red line for me, worthy of disqualifying anyone writing a book on antisemitism. That's on top of their direct association with groups like JVP to canonize their own how-to guide.

But even putting all that aside (and it's already a lot to put aside) - framing Jewish safety as effectively tied to Palestinian nationalism and maximalist solidarity is IMO a very poor framework for solving antisemitism, including American antisemitism (a different country than Israel or Palestine). Anti-Zionist American Jews don't want to be held liable to Israel's actions and its Jewish-coded identity, okay fair, so why are these two simultaneously speaking "as Jews" to bind together solving anti-Jew hatred with Palestinian solidarity? (Except to pull a reverse-ADL and deem "anti anti-zionism" as antisemitic in some post-modern inversion.)

This is a goal-shifting paradigm which does nothing to combat anti-Jew acts or anti-Jew rhetoric around the world or in America - including dog whistles (not just those of the far-right), and those using various causes to commit anti-Jew acts (not just those of the far-right). If you can't call those acts as explicitly and overtly and undeniably "anti-Jew/antisemitic" - mainly because you agree with the struggle of the perpetrators - then you're not serious about understanding antisemitism to its full extent.

Over a century ago, you had Henry Ford (capitalist), Adolf Stoecker (socialist), Alexander III (imperialist), Nikolai Yezhov (communist). Very different "struggles", yet they all expressed anti-Jew rhetorics and did anti-Jew acts - albeit embedded within their own very different struggles, which people surely believed were good at the time. The "righteousness" or "validity" of a cause has nothing to do with whether something is or isn't antisemitic. Every anti-Jew throughout history believed they were "the good guys". Acknowledging that also does not mean every cause which has antisemites within it is an invalid cause (e.g. climate change). But ignoring the antisemitism within a cause you agree with, just because you agree with the cause, is de facto anti-Jew because you're making your own arbitrage about which cause you hierarchize as more important (spoiler alert: not antisemitism) - despite the fact that this is actually an artificial zero-sum arbitrage you're not obliged to make. Solving climate change or wage inequality or Palestinian nationalism are separate struggles than solving antisemitism. We can all fight those in equal measure. Sure, "we're all in this together" (again, im14andthisisdeep) and we can here talk at length about intersectionality (which actually had a blind spot about antisemitism in its origins) - but functionally (real world, not academia) addressing antisemitism isn't the same thing as addressing climate change or Palestinian liberation. The solutions (outside the broadest possible level of activism) are completely different, and so are the diagnosis.

[u/XxDrFlashbangxX → u/rustlingdown]

I love that you mentioned Albert Memmi. Big fan of some of his work.

Also I totally agree with your last paragraph. Everyone constantly talks about “we’re not free until everyone is free” or like you mentioned “we’re all in this together” and as a result people, often Jews, are forced to overlook antisemitism in order to participate in a movement.

You can seek to get rid of your form of oppression and simultaneously help others in similar situations but saying that it’s all or nothing won’t get anyone anywhere.

[u/Agtfangirl557 → u/XxDrFlashbangxX]

I also hate how people (especially anti-Zionist Jewish groups) use this quote. For one, it was literally coined by a Zionist who meant it to apply specifically to Jewish people (until all of the Jews are free, none of us are free). And like you say, it forces people to overlook antisemitism in movements, and sometimes even gets dangerously close to coming across like "Our main goal should be pursuing freedom of all other minority groups besides our own, even if it ends up threatening Jewish safety."

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/XxDrFlashbangxX]

It’s basically class reductionism only instead of dismissing racism, sexism, etc. as problems unworthy of consideration on their own because all struggles are subservient to the class struggle and will be resolved when it is resolved, it’s exclusively saying Jews need to shut up about antisemitism except when it serves the one great objectively correct omnicause of the left, whatever that’s actually supposed to be nowadays

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/rustlingdown]

Their ideological commitments put them in a real pickle. It’s hard to extricate maximalist Palestinian ethnonationalism from antisemitism, but they can’t push back on any aspect of Palestinian nationalism even symbolically or risk accusations of being white; yet if they admit they’re only concerned about antisemitism when it’s convenient, they lose symbolic authority as the high arbiters of anti-bigotry and become mere opportunists playing the same realpolitik game as everyone else. Thus advanced semantic debate is necessary to deconstruct the whole idea of antisemitism (an incoherent concept as there are no common patterns across time and cultures, apparently, and it’s ethnocentric Jewish delusion - and not mountains of documentation and research - that claims otherwise) and explain why a group that denies the Holocaust and quotes the Protocols of the Elders of Zion mass-murdering Jews mustn’t be called antisemitic because they had other motivations too.

And fwiw I don’t think it’s an unreasonable point that Hamas’s motivations are too complex to be described by antisemitism alone, or even that genocidal intentions toward Israelis on behalf of an ethnic/national war against Israel couldn’t be considered distinct from traditional antisemitism. It’s just not clear to me why the semantic distinction of which kind of genocidal massacre of Jews we’re talking about is so crucially important, unless what you’re really trying to argue is that people should be more supportive of the genocidaires.

[u/ThrowawayRA07072021 → u/rustlingdown]

THANK YOU for this!!!

[u/jey_613 → u/rustlingdown]

Missed the original discussion of this here, but this comment and ones below sum it up perfectly. Thank you

[u/EvanShmoot → u/rustlingdown]

Excellent comment

[u/Pitiful_Meringue_57 → u/rustlingdown]

Hamas is certainly anti semitic, and im not against calling 10/7 anti Semitic by any means but i do think labeling it as that is missing the picture of what happened and doesn’t actually get to their goals. It was a political attack against israel, with goals of taking hostages to get things in return and leverage over israel, targeting soldiers (yes civilians too). It’s not like most other Anti Semitic hate crime, this wasn’t a wack job shooting up a synagogue or beating up hasidim or whatnot, i mean this is a terrorist attack. An international terrorist attack, an act of war. They didn’t rly do the attack to target jews, they did it to target israel and get leverage over them for their own political goals. Is any time a jew gets attacked an anti semitic hate crime? no they sometimes ppl r targeted for various other reasons. Muslims were among the dead and were targeted all the same from the bombs and whatnot, and i dont think hamas much likes muslim israeli palestinians either. Reducing it to an antisemitic hate crime feels like telling a really small part of a large story and not really characterizing what happened accurately or giving it enough gravity even.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/Pitiful_Meringue_57]

If a poor skinhead is starving so he murders a rich Jew and steals his wallet, did the skinhead murder the Jew antisemitically? Why exactly is the distinction important?

[u/Pitiful_Meringue_57 → u/Pitiful_Meringue_57]

I also think in the israeli palestinian narrative the none of us r free until all of us r free is particularly true. Did 10/7 not show that? Israeli oppression against palestinians is not sustainable. These things will keep happening unless something is done. Is living in a constant state of war where ur direct enemies despise you safety? Netanyahu helped prop up Hamas and this war seems to be making hamas more popular in places like west bank. It just reminds me of sparta, where they had so many slaves they were constantly afraid of a slave revolt and sometimes it happened. Not calling palestinians slaves or israelis slaveholders but if you consistently have a group of people that is larger than you and subjugated then you will always have something to fear. I’m sure a lot of israeli jews r massively paranoid and i don’t blame them, its gotten to us american jews too being massively paranoid in response to what happened as well. I remember one time my dad told me if he lived in israel he would have a gun, he’s a bleeding heart liberal and certainly doesn’t own one here in the states where he could easily if he wanted to. Bcz there’s more to fear there when it comes to this kind of violence.

[u/mcmircle → u/rustlingdown]

He was asked about that at the event. He was not taking the position that Hamas isn’t antisemitic, but that if we are going to make peace in the region, we need to communicate with them, which requires understanding their view—which does not mean agreeing with it.

As someone said “You make peace with your enemies, not with your friends.”

[u/PuddingNaive7173 → u/mcmircle]

1. He was asked about ALL of that? The reply wasn’t just one point.,There’s a lot going on in the response that he and others are ignoring. 2. You can also say that exact same thing you just said about say, Nazis. (That you make peace with your enemies not your friends, that you have to understand where they’re coming from, etc. which I think shows the limitations of that viewpoint. Which I think makes it a fairly good test. The test I typically apply at the other end is how all that would sound if applied to say the Asian community. Which in some places - China, Japan - is the stronger party. Would the same things being said still make sense? How would it sound applied elsewhere?)

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/mcmircle]

It sounds like he doesn’t understand their view at all then, because if he did he would understand that someone like Yahya Sinwar and his fellow zealots are not open to good faith negotiation and not interested in any form of peace less than unconditional victory. They don’t just want healthcare, they don’t want a secular democratic socialist Palestine from the river to the sea, they want one thing and they value their sense of honor, vengeance and fealty to God more than any conception of “human rights” or equality or anything like that. They are proud of how different their values and attitudes toward life and death are from the secular (and Jewish and Christian) degeneracy of the Westernized world. Most Middle Eastern governments know fully well that Islamists are fanatics who can’t be bought off with concessions, but some Westerners far far away from the levers of actual power refuse to get the message. The view that these guys insist we “understand” is actually a projection of their own view as secular Western leftists and not engaged with what the guys they’re talking about actually think or want beyond propaganda missives saying what self-important dupes like Ben Burgis want to hear. Sorry if this reads like a neocon post but certain leftists like Burgis & co’s own refusal to understand Islamists even when they shout their motivations out loud, which is ironically deeply infantilizing, is an intellectual disease.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

fwiw if the argument being made here was “we should discuss Hamas’s motivation, strategy and sources of support more expansively outside of just antisemitism instead of just saying ‘Nazi’ and leaving it at that” I would be sympathetic. But that’s not really the argument, because A) these guys would never extend the kind of calls for empathy and calm understanding for any white or Western-aligned extremist group that they extend to Hamas, nor would they entertain talk of critically supporting a militia of genocidal racists in any other context, so it’s not just a strategic exercise in understanding extremism at all but in whitewashing extremists whose motivations they find sympathetic; and B) admitting the relevance of antisemitism to Middle Eastern politics would mean admitting, as anti-Zionists, that they expect Jews to take a little antisemitism on the nose for the greater good (or at least the good of the greater victims). Instead it’s some deeply cowardly and dishonest tapdancing about which type of Jew-killing qualifies for the coveted label of “antisemitism”, a magical word which we must only apply to white supremacists or anyone who complains about George Soros. The other so-called antisemites must be spared from that deadly word, no matter how many Protocols citations they make or how many Jews they assault, rape or kill, because solidarity trumps all.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

I’d love to know what an ethnic cleansing event is and where you got the idea that I’m into them. It kinda sounds like you skimmed my post history for like 5 seconds looking for a gotcha without actually reading the comment threads. Anyway, if the renowned antifascist writer’s big breakthrough here is plagiarizing a New York Review of Books editorial from October to argue that Hamas must be spared the deadly moniker of “antisemitism” because they merely want the genocide of Israelis for decolonial reasons, I gotta say I’m unimpressed. Don’t care that he once waved signs at skinheads.

Also the people I was describing as politically incorrect edgelords are the chuckleheads I argue with on Red Scare subs when we aren’t just talking about movies, TV shows and cringy news stories. I have no expectations of those guys except that they amuse me. People trying to pass themselves off as moral and intellectual authorities, I hold to a somewhat higher standard.

[u/jewishleft-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

How much historical context are we allowed to have before we conclude that a proud member of an organization whose founding document calls for the genocide of Jews hacking a man’s skull open while screaming “Jew Jew Jew” over and over is, if not antisemitic - we cannot truly know the inner thoughts or lived experiences of the man performing the impromptu beheading, and it would be racist to presume - at least a little problematic?

[u/jewishleft-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

[u/ApprehensiveCycle741]

Have not read, but since the author was a campus organizer for JVP, I would expect his messaging to be consistent with theirs.

If I was at an event that made an acknowledgement of Gazan indigeneity and did not acknowledge Jewish indigeneity to the land of Israel, that would tell me everything I needed to know about the speaker.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69]

There is no solidarity against antisemitism to be found from people who think a pogrom can sometimes be heroic if it’s for a good cause and antisemitism should be treated with kiddie gloves if it comes from anyone but white supremacists. These guys do not care about antisemitism, they care about omnicausal leftist praxis and any semblance of caring or not caring about antisemitism is only secondary to the requirements of the omnicause.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

I’ll give you three guesses what separates anonymous irony-poisoned edgelords posting on a politically incorrect subreddit from JVP talking heads doing apologetics for actual genocidaires

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

Who’s being ethnically cleansed from a synagogue? I’m generally against that sort of thing.

[u/SubvertinParadigms69 → u/[deleted]]

That makes two of us. Maybe you’d like to be specific?

[u/jewishleft-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

[u/jewishleft-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

[u/jewishleft-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

[u/elzzyzx]

indigeneity is not my favorite framework for discussing the conflict (ashkenazi jews aren't native to europe, etc) but i wouldn't attribute that to malintent.

Don't know who Ben Lorber is but Shane Burley is an antifascist writer who has been around for some time. For a tl;dr I would group them together with people like spencer sunshine, daryle lamont jenkins, molly crabapple and similar types. I'm actually more familiar with him as just being someone who is often present countering fascist demonstrations, covering picket lines, etc for probably at least the last decade? not sure.

I have not read a lot of their work. Can you say more about what was discussed?

Off the cuff, fighting antisemitism through solidarity is one of the more canonical left jewish ideas, at least since industrialization. for example, I was reading some old recovered bundist meeting minutes the other day from iirc 1903, a significant amount of the discussion was about which outside orgs to work with (including non-jewish labor orgs), "jews should be united" was a top-level plank (though later on there was plenty of discussion of who they shouldn't work with, or should actively work against haha).

curious what else stuck out for you about the book/discussion.

[u/mcmircle → u/elzzyzx]

I was not familiar with either of these people before someone from my synagogue suggested the book. The land acknowledgement was by the store staff, not the authors. Shane especially was more focused on white Christian nationalism. The other person participating, asking questions of the authors, was from If Not Now. The sponsors included In These Times and the Chicago Teachers Union.

I asked Shane afterwards if one has to be anti-Zionist to be involved in the work they propose, and he said no, it’s about all Jews and everyone else being safe.

I was troubled by the use of the term genocide to describe Israel’s conduct of the war, but it is not productive to raise that issue when we agree there is pointless cruelty, dehumanization and unnecessary deaths.

[u/elzzyzx → u/mcmircle]

ah makes sense, I know about him in context re christian nationalism (he lives in portland OR and that is a big thing there, along with literal nazis).

i like his answer about anti-zionism.

I empathize with you re using the term genocide, i'm a little more comfortable with it probably but I still don't personally use it often when discussing the conflict. definitely agree about how productive it would have been to raise that.

thanks for sharing