The Resurgence of Anti-semitism: Jews, Israel and Liberal Opinion (Philosophy and the Global Context) [Hardcover]

In this absorbing book, Harrison examines the New Antisemitism as it manifests today on the Left Liberal side of the political spectrum, with special reference to the BBC and publications like The New Statesman, The Guardian and The Independent. In the opening chapter, he defines the meaning, differentiating between "social" and "political" Antisemitism. The political variety is that in which Jewish people collectively are viewed as being involved in a conspiracy to promote political agendas objectionable to those on the Liberal Left. They are moreover seen as an obstacle to world peace because of the existence of the State of Israel.

In the second chapter he dissects the January 14, 2002 issue of The New Statesman with its infamous cover art and articles by Dennis Sewell and John Pilger, as well as the faux apology by editor Peter Wilby that followed reader complaints. The brilliance of this chapter lies in the understated and tactful way that Harrison exposes the rhetorical techniques employed to slander the Jewish people under the guise of criticizing Israeli actions. In the same cautious manner he reveals the lies, inconsistencies and contradictions of people like Robert Fisk and others.

Chapter 3: Jews Against Israel, demonstrates the absurdity of the notion that all Jews support Israel. Harrison calls it "diversity denial", which is nothing else but an aspect of racism that has always been a feature of political Antisemitism. He deals not only with the overwhelming evidence of Jewish sympathy with the plight of the Palestinian Arabs versus the lack of such by Arabs towards Jews, but also with those vicious Jewish enemies of the Jewish people and the state of Israel like Karl Marx, Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein, with reference to the work of Sartre, Alan Dershowitz and French author Daniel Lindenberg amongst others.

The next chapter explores the ways in which moral hyperbole and deliberate disinformation are used to demonize Israel. Quoting Thomas Friedman, he queries why this stance, which draws upon a phony humanitarian justification, is so universal amongst the liberal elites in the arts, academia and media. Criticism of Israel is not Antisemitism, but singling out Israel out of all proportion to the situation in the Middle East and the world at large definitely is. In the rest of this chapter he refutes many of the smears against Israel based on concepts like colonialism and the single state solution, the proponents of which ignore the massacres, acts of terror and statements of Arab leaders before and after 1948. Also discussed is the 1919 agreement between Emir Faisal and Chaim Weitzmann.

Next, Harrison looks at definitions of fascism. The phenomenon is not confined to the political Right, since the USSR was as fascist as the Third Reich. Nor is it absent in the Third World. The inability to distinguish between people and their leaders is a fallacy often made by patronising Western intellectuals. As for the accusation that Israel is a "racist, apartheid" state, the author argues that it is instead a nearly textbook example of a multicultural society. There are Black Israelis and Arab Jews and anyone can convert to Judaism. In Israel the holy places and right to worship of all religions are respected, which is not the case over vast areas of the planet.

One reason for the hysterical criticism is that the Left has abandoned economics and history for morality. Chapter 8 deals with the notion of guilt and shows how extravagant the Left has become in its moral condemnation and accusation. The grotesqueries of inter alia Orla Guerin of the BBC and Robert Fisk of The Independent are examined here. In this view, all Jewish Israelis are "guilty" while the Arab World bears no responsibility whatever for the plight of the Palestinian Arabs. See also Can We Trust the BBC? by Robin Aitken.

The concluding chapter attempts to find the reason for this state of affairs. Harrison believes that a longing for simple answers and instant moral conviction - the easy soundbite - is part of the problem. But he also shows that much of the nature of the criticism resembles the "old" Antisemitism - same assumptions, imagery and concepts are employed. The fad of Moral Relativism is not applied to both sides; it is used for justifying suicide/homicide bombings but never to the measures taken by Israel to defend itself. Some victims are more equal than others.

The Appendix is a bibliography of books and articles devoted to carefully documented examples of the New Antisemitism, including La Nouvelle Judeophobie by Pierre-Andre Taguieff, The Return of Anti-Semitism by Gabriel Schoenfeld, The New Anti-Semitism by Phyllis Chesler and Occidentalism by Ian Buruma and Avishai Margalit. On the subject of Jews opposed to Israel, Jewish Divide Over Israel, edited by Edward Alexander and Paul Bogdanor and Those Who Forget the Past by Ron Rosenbaum and Cynthia Ozick are excellent books. UK government sources and the relevant website addresses of the two main political parties in the UK are also provided. The book concludes with an index.

Despite the disturbing subject matter, The Resurgence Of Anti-Semitism is a gripping read on account of its eloquence. As a polemic, it perhaps treads too softly, trying to persuade by reason. I agree with Andre Glucksmann that the concept of a contagion of hatred must be taken literally as a mental disorder that invades minds, bodies and society. Such an outbreak inoculates itself against those who oppose it and is immune to reason.

It is interesting to compare Harrison's approach with that of Nick Cohen in What's Left?. In my opinion, the most valuable book on Antisemitism, exploring all its shape-shifting manifestations down the ages and across the political-religious spectrum, is Why the Jews? by Dennis Prager, as it engages with the neglected spiritual dimension of this mental disease. For information on the modern Christian variety, see Christian Attitudes Towards the State of Israel by Paul Merkley. I recommend The Dawn: Political Teachings of the Book of Esther by Yoram Hazony, to learn how to deal with it.

This is a careful work on the nature of the resurgence of anti-Semitism. We see the ill will, the falsehoods, and lack of logic displayed by the anti-Semites, and there's some speculation on what gets some folks to behave in such a manner.

Bernard Harrison starts by discussing some of the properties of political anti-Semitism. He says that it generally includes, as a minimum, the proposition that Jews are a mysterious, depraved, and conspiratorial society which threatens the well-being of any nation which harbors them. And he reminds us that many of the accusations made against "the Jews" are simply self-inconsistent or incoherent. For example, the blood libel accusations are generally of the form that observant Jews commit ritual murder for religious reasons, something which is, of course, expressly forbidden by their religion. We also generally see anti-Semites simultaneously claim (or imply) that Jews are so powerful as to be responsible for the bulk of the evil in today's society yet are so powerless that they can be attacked with impunity (I tend to believe that those who make such claims are more serious about the latter one).

We also see discussions of the preposterous claim that mere criticism of Israel is sufficient to get one automatically branded as an anti-Semite. As well as another ridiculous claim that almost anyone who finds anything about Israel that is worthy of support is Jewish, and that pretty much anyone who is Jewish supports Israel. And the even more absurd claim that Israel is basically a colonial enterprise is also quickly refuted.

Harrison also is careful to distinguish between explaining why Israel exists and justifying Israel's existence. I agree. The fact that Jerusalem had been (and still was) the Jewish capital city in the 19th century helps explain why many Jews tried moving to the region once they had the opportunity to do so. The White Paper of 1939 helps explain why the number of Jews who demanded a Jewish state quickly became a majority once World War Two broke out. But these facts, by themselves do not "justify" what happened, nor do they "establish" Israel's "right to exist."

The author does write about fascism and the concept of "total war," including war against civilians. Here, he makes an excellent point, namely that claims about the "guilt" of such civilians make no sense. As he explains, even if one assents to the idea of capital punishment, "punishment" makes no sense without the concept of desert, desert makes no sense without a practicable and practiced system of laws, laws require some general acquiescence in their operation, acquiescence requires reconciliation, and reconciliation requires all sides to admit their own errors and as a minimum the right of their adversaries to exist. Obviously, any bunch of gangsters can go around murdering people, but we ought to remind ourselves that they are not necessarily "punishing" those who "deserve it."

There is a discussion about whether or not there ought to be a "Holocaust Day" for remembering that societies can make some terrible moral mistakes. Here, Harrison is careful to explain that the emphasis on the suffering of the victims is probably misplaced, as plenty of people have suffered in all sorts of tragedies. No, the emphasis ought to be on the terrible results, systematic annihilation of groups of people, of a certain kind of corruption which springs from a philosophy of racial superiority. Again, I agree. I'm not so sure we need a Holocaust Day, but I certainly do not buy the argument that such a day makes the Jews special, or makes Jewish blood worth more (or less) than the blood of non-Jews. The author makes the point that some people are envious of the sympathy that they think some Jews receive for the Holocaust and wish to use that word (often without its actual meaning) to get some sympathy for themselves. I find such an idea doubly misguided, as I tend to agree with Herzl that even appeals for sympathy by the genuinely oppressed are futile and dishonorable.

Some folks do insist on "dismantling" Israel, and Harrison discusses this at length. Here, he makes another good point, namely that the would-be dismantlers do not seem to worry much about how to protect the rights of the Jews in the region after the "dismantling." Instead, we see one anti-Israeli claim to be worried about the "fate" of the Jews, as if the Jews ought not have rights and as if whatever happens to the Jews is not only the fault of the Jews, but something the rest of us can't possibly prevent or be responsible for.

The lack of logic of some anti-Semitic claims does get exposed. We see the "mysteriousness" of the Jews used as a means to explain how the Jews can accomplish vast crimes even when they lack both motive and opportunity. Of course, when it gets to claims that "the Jewish lobby" has managed to reduce "the entire American political establishment to a state of bemused sleepwalking" for the past forty years, Harrison explains that we're not only talking about Jews doing the impossible, but about the American people being quite a bit stupider than they really are.

Near the end of the book, the author asks if anti-Semitism matters. Does it matter that the Guardian spouts a fair amount of it? Well, yes, it does. The terror we see is not helping Arabs, Jews, or anyone else. And responsible people ought to feel bound by a duty to support truth and facts. Harrison says that while one can live without understanding world affairs, one can't "live perfectly well on a diet of murderous lies. Europe tried that in the 1930s. It would do well not to try it again."

I highly recommend this book.

I write as a long-time leftist, writer on Marxist theory, and charter member of the New Left.

Harrison brings a precise philosopher's intelligence to the vexing, frightening, and at times disgusting phenomenon of left-wing anti-semitism. If his history is at times one-sided and his account of the left simplistic, he has nailed the many failures of left moral clarity and intellectual imagination. If you've ever wondered why and how seemingly liberal, left, anti-racist, nice people can hold such distorted views on Israel, this is an excellent book for you. If you think of yourself as progressive and think Israel has no right to exist, or is the sole cause of the conflict, you'd better read it immediately.