Question:

Anti-Semitism v. Anti-Jewism: Why the blanket use of the FIRST term and the total ABSENCE of the second?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

Whenever a critic or dissident of anything Jewish is perceived to be bigoted or prejudiced, he gets labelled as "anti-semitic". The same does not happen to critics of ARABS, who comprise almost all of the Semitic race. The obvious conclusion (IMO) in the first case would be that the person is "anti-Jewish", yet this seems to have been leap-frogged as a possibilty at some point in the past, and universally adopted as a truth.

My question is: What reasoning was/is used to preclude the possibility that (X) is anti-Jewish, and so therefore MUST be anti-semitic? Is there a reason, or does it just sound better?

Incidentally, my dictionary defines "Semite" as Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians and Assyrians. It defines ANTI-semite as someone who dislikes Jews. There's a glaring mismatch. Also, the term "anti-Jew(ish)" is ABSENT from the same dictionary.

This is a second attempt--I'm not looking for definitions of anti-semitism: I'm asking WHY the more obvious conclusion (anti-Jewism) has been EXCLUDED as a possibility.

In other words, IT CAN'T BE ANTI-JEWISM BECAUSE...what?

 Tags:

   Report

6 ANSWERS


  1. Because ...

    The holocaust was so appalling an atrocity and has yet to have anything even come close in terms of the deliberate extermination of an entire race.  The term 'anti-semitic' was already in use and so this was taken up when anti-Jewish words or actions were being discussed.

    Also, language is an evolving and ever-changing thing, and words change their meanings over time.  So yes, you are right that 'anti-semitic' has come to mean 'anti-Jewish' but at the end of the day does it really matter what we call it, bigoted racist hate-mongers are evil, whatever label we use.


  2. Why look for logic in English terminology.   Just accept it.

    Why is inflammable not the opposite of flammable?

  3. People who are Jewish, have spent the last sixty years trying to heal and recover from a severe atrocity beyond explanation.

    To discuss persons of Jewish faith would certainly require a complete understanding ( if that is at all possible ) of their beliefs and experiences.

    Therefore; the concept however framed, as you choose to explore--is extremely delicate.

    To me, the concept is completely offensive.


  4. Heard that explanation before, but not schooled on different 'tribes' in the Mideast. Seems like calling someone anti-American because they support Hatfield over McCoys or the reverse.      

  5. It's too late to try to redefine a term that has been in use for so long. The term 'anti-semitic' has a specific thrust to its meaning. It means hatred towards Jews as a group and all that's Jewish. While the Arabs are semitic people, they are not Jewish. Jewishness is very much tied to the religion of the Jews (Judaism today), and the Arabs do not belong to that religion. If one is anti-Jewish in the sense that one harbours hatred or prejudice towards Jewish people, then, yes, one has to be anti-Semitic.  

  6. I think it is because the jews picked up on the term and used it frequently without most people knowing exactly what the term really means.  

    Yours is a logical question.  

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 6 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.
Unanswered Questions