I think we all agree that the label "antisemitism" is widely used by Israel to shut down any criticism etc. For a long time, I always thought "anti-semitism", insofar as it is real and not just used to silence critics, is just another form of racism/tribalism and so on. But I do wonder if anti-semitism isn't something a bit different. I mean, those who are "racist" against blacks or Muslims, for example, often have this image of the poor, primitive people in mind that are less civilized, less intelligent, more "animal-like" and so on. So they sit on their high horse and feel superior. Interestingly, I think this condescending tone can also be present in those that are "anti-racist" - you know, these are such poor and helpless people, we need to save them and fight for their rights etc.
But with anti-semitism, the picture looks different. Obviously, Ashkenazi Jews are widely succesful in Western societies. So maybe what makes anti-semitism special is that there can be a lot of resentment there, which makes it much more pernicious? Indeed, I wonder if the picture regarding Israel and anti-semitism is not so black and white - that those who associate criticism of Israel with anti-semitism do have a certain point - because some people seem really zealous and obsessed with the whole Palestinian issue. I wonder - would they be less obsessed if all of this had nothing to do with Jews and was just about some country occupying and oppressing the natives? Is there some Jew-hatred out of resentment, envy etc. going on - because, as Peterson put it, "the left likes its minorities powerless and helpless"?
It's a complicated subject for sure - probably enough for an entire show, or more. Just a few thoughts for now, because I'm sure I don't have all the answers. First, I'm not sure if people would be less obsessed if the groups were different. For example, imagine if the situation between the Israelis and Palestinians were reversed. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people would be horrified if an entire Jewish population were under blockade and if peaceful Jewish protesters were being shot in cold blood - probably even more horrified, given the history of the Holocaust. Also, I don't think most people have any problem with the success of Jewish individuals, just like the don't have problem with the success of Asian individuals in Western society.
Yeah, I think the real anti-Semites probably have a lot of resentment and even envy. But I'm not sure if this is much different than any majority population that resents a powerful minority that wields a lot of power, triggering a tribalistic response. For example, there's a history of such power dynamics in the Muslim-majority regions of Russia where one minority ethnicity is in control, breeding resentment from the other more numerous ethnicities. And if the Saudi lobby were as effective as the Israel lobby in the US, I think we'd see something similar (in fact, we already do - and ironically the Saudis get more public criticism).
I think the question is whether anti-Semitism is something fundamentally unique, or if it has an explanation that can apply to other situations too. I don't see how it can be the former - contra what many Jewish commentators say - from a scientific perspective. It's not as if there could be some anti-Jewish module of the brain, for example. There are only tendencies and potentials that are activated for particular reasons.
And I think that viewpoint largely explains why many people are so obsessed with the Israel-Palestine issue. (Of course, some anti-Semites will be in there too, because the circumstances confirm their confirmation bias.) People DO have "fairness" and "care" moral taste buds - liberals and conservatives. And when they see a particularly egregious violation of those deeply entrenched values, they feel strongly about them. And that's what inspired anti-racism more generally - actual examples of legitimate grievances. The problem with most leftist causes is that the alleged discrimination and oppression either doesn't exist in the form they allege, or if it does exist to some degree, then it doesn't actually explain the disparity in question. (Tom Sowell explains this in his latest book. For example, discrimination does not explain black unemployment levels.)
It's also the reason why humanitarian intervention has been so "successful". If you can convince people that Gaddafi is "killing his own people", they will support taking him out, even if they couldn't previously find Libya on a map. And that leads another issue: public exposure. Would other, similar, examples of "some country occupying and oppressing the natives" get less interest simply because it wasn't a Jewish issue, or just because it didn't have the publicity? And what explains the publicity surrounding the Israel-Palestine conflict? Is it anti-Semitism? Or is it the fact that because Israel is a Western "ally", their narrative gets more airtime, leaving it more open to scrutiny?
