Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Who is damaged more by anti-Semitism ?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/articles/suicidal-passion_608014.html
 
 
Anti-Semitism, or the organization of politics against the Jews, is at
once the most protean and the most misunderstood force in modern
politics. Because it works through misdirection, most people associate
it with Jews who are its target, rather than with anti-Semites who are
its perpetrators. But whether aimed at the Jews in their dispersion or
in their homeland, anti-Semitism and its offshoot anti-Zionism are
about the Jews only in the way that fox hunting is about foxes. Those
who organize their hunt around the fox consider it the best animal to
hunt. Important as it may be to identify those features in the swift
little animal that make it the chosen target of those giving chase,
any analysis of fox hunting must concentrate on the hunters—their
motivations, strategies, implements, goals, and perceived gains. Fox
hunting stops when there is a change in hunters, not in foxes. So,
too, with anti-Semitism. Only changes in the implicated countries can
arrest the political process their leadership promotes.
 
[...]
 
Anti-Semitism releases aggression against a familiar target and offers
a simple explanation for complex and occasionally intractable problems
(Unemployed? Jews have your jobs. Destitute? Rothschilds have your
money. Losing confidence in your country? Jews control your press, the
arts, the courts, education, medicine .  .  . ). It uses negative
campaigning that provokes no response in kind. Since Jews seek
acceptance from those who agitate against them, they have no incentive
to wage the kind of countercampaign that we see between rival
political parties.
 
Anti-Semitism drew its demonic images from religious sources, further
magnifying suspicion of an already suspect people. And it united
otherwise antagonistic or even warring constituencies. Marx singled
out the Jews as the evil embodiment of capitalism. Internationalists
identified Jewish separatism as the chief impediment to their
universal ideals. Nationalists targeted Jews as corrupting aliens.
Conservative Christians and, later, Muslims continued to see them as
challengers of their faith. Atheists and secularists condemned their
retrograde religion. Racial theorists called them agents of impurity.
An equal-opportunity instrument of blame, anti-Semitism had as one of
its chief advantages the ability to unite political forces that had
nothing else in common.
 
Last but hardly least, folks could anticipate the acquisition of
Jewish property, goods, or positions as a tangible by-product of
Jewish expulsion or annihilation. The prospect of acquiring Jewish
property and possessions was something Nazism offered to all the
countries it conquered. Similarly, when Arabs draw their map of
“Palestine” to include all of Israel, they especially have their eye
on the bounty that Israelis have created as a result of their open,
democratic ways. Rather than compete with the Jews, anti-Semitism
tries to have it both ways—organizing political resistance to the
liberal democracy that profits the Jews, and doing so confident that
it can exploit the weakness of those who value individual life too
highly to squander it on defensive war. The Jews of Europe, who had
never developed independent means of self-defense, never had a chance
against their destroyers. Modern Israel is the current test case.
 
[...]
 
It was Arab, not Jewish, leadership that urged all Arabs to flee from
Haifa and Jaffa, warning that those who remained in a Jewish state
would be treated as renegades. The exploitation of the Palestinians by
their fellow Arabs has been noted repeatedly, including in 1976 by
Mahmoud Abbas, currently head of the Palestinian Authority: “The Arab
armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from Zionist
tyranny, but instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and
to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological
blockade, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which
the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe.” In sum, Arab leaders did not
oppose Israel because it displaced the Palestinians; they displaced
Palestinian Arabs in order to sustain opposition to Israel.
 
Despite their vast expanses of land, natural resources, financial
capacities, and so forth, Arab League members created a refugee time
bomb to justify their “resistance” to what the U.N. had wrought.
 
Had the U.N. lived up to its charter, it would have expelled the
belligerents from membership or placed them on probation for
contravening its terms. But here is the logic of aggression against
Jews: The secretariat and supporting nations would not risk the U.N.’s
coherence to protect one of its smallest members against antagonists
with huge demographic, market, resource, and political advantages on
their side. Ignored as a parochial issue, the Arab war against Israel
safely violated the liberal ideals of the United Nations by appearing
to oppose only Jews. Arab leaders gained traction domestically by
flexing their power against an enemy they knew had no incentive for
war and every incentive for accommodation. And opposition to Israel
shored up pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism by flaunting contempt for the
liberal democratic culture of the West that Israel embodied.
 
The perpetual Arab war against Israel worked like a charm. In 1949,
the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in
the Near East (UNRWA) was established as a temporary measure to help
resettle a relatively small group of displaced persons in a century
notorious for its many millions of refugees. Only in this single case
was a refugee agency made permanent. At Arab insistence, the U.N.
cultivated, not an infrastructure for self-government, but a network
of refugee institutions and an industry of welfare workers with a
stake in maintaining refugee dependency, feeding the grievance of
generations by insisting on their “right” of return—as if the
Displaced Persons at the end of World War II had been continually
maintained as such in the heart of Europe. Scholars Asaf Romirowsky
and Nicole Brackman have rightly called UNRWA an “anomaly within the
world of refugee relief” for the way it prolonged suffering and anger
to become “a weapon to encourage [generations] toward terrorism and
intransigence.” The Arab League used the U.N. agency to evade its
responsibilities for fellow Arabs, and to foster an Arab protostate
that would replace the Jewish one in time.
 

 Anti-Semitism, or the organization of politics against the Jews
 
e questa definizione da dove salta fuori, da "rabbinate for dummies"?

 e questa definizione da dove salta fuori
 
sei capace di leggere oltre la prima riga?