Professor misquoted in Israel article
Criticism of Israel’s military action against Hamas, in Gaza, has unleashed vitriolic anti-Zionist rhetoric which many have characterized as anti-Semitic.
In a recent Daily Bruin article, I was quoted as saying: “anti-Semitic threats have escalated since Israel’s invasion of Gaza.” (“Protesters speak out against Israeli incursion into Gaza,” March 2). I did not make this statement, and it was properly corrected on the Daily Bruin’s Web site.
The statement was in fact taken from a grossly inaccurate CNN article published Feb. 27 in which I deplored the intimidation of pro-Israel faculty and students in American universities. The purpose of this letter is to set the record straight and to explain why I refrain from using allegations of anti-Semitism when it comes to the Middle East conflict.
Anti-Zionism rejects the notion that Jews are a nation ““ a collective bonded by a common history ““ and, accordingly, denies Jews the right to self-determination in their historical birthplace: Israel.
It is true that many anti-Zionists, especially in Europe and the Arab world, are motivated by classical anti-Semitic sentiments. But, although the potentially genocidal consequences of this ideology ““ the dismantling of the state of Israel ““ would be bourne primarily by Jews, I nevertheless believe that the term “anti-Semitic” is counterproductive, because it diverts attention from the discriminatory, immoral and more dangerous character of anti-Zionism vis-a-vis anti-Semitism.
Anti-Zionism earns its distinct discriminatory character from denying the Jewish people what it grants to other historically bonded collectives (e.g. French, Spanish, Palestinians), namely, the right to nationhood and self-determination. Whereas anti-Semitism rejects Jews as equal members of the human race, anti-Zionism rejects Israel as an equal member in the family of nations.
The reason anti-Zionism is more dangerous than anti-Semitism is because modern society has developed antibodies against the latter ““ not the former. Today, anti-Semitic stereotypes evoke revulsion in most people of conscience, while anti-Zionist slurs have become a mark of academic sophistication and social acceptance in certain vocal and increasingly fanatical circles on U.S. campuses.
Worse yet, anti-Zionism disguises itself in the cloak of political debate, exempt from sensitivities and rules of civility that govern interreligious discourse. Protected in this disguise, it attacks not only the physical safety of Israeli society, but also the vital, unsuspecting issues of Jewish identity everywhere ““ the inextricable bond of Jews to their historical homeland, and their collective pride in Israel’s achievements.
In conclusion, the reason we should distinguish between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not to exonerate the latter from the ills of the former, but to accentuate the distinct dangers that the latter poses to lives, fairness and the prospects of peace.
Judea Pearl
Professor, UCLA Department of Computer Science
Balanced reporting benefits readers
Thank you for your balanced reporting of the protest against the Batsheva Dance Company outside Royce Hall this last weekend (“Protesters speak out against Israeli incursion into Gaza,” March 2). The article accurately reflected the diversity of protestors present, and your reporter did a good job of putting the protesters’ concerns into the broader context of their opposition to human rights abuses by the Israeli government.
As this article and your previous reporting about the launch of a boycott and divestment campaign at UCLA make clear, Bruins from a wide variety of different national and religious backgrounds support taking a stand on campus against Israeli human rights abuses. I look forward to continued balanced reporting on the boycott and divestment campaign in the Daily Bruin as that campaign gains steam.
Monica Tarazi
Graduate student, UCLA School of Law