 |
| Pic courtesy www.counterfire.org |
On November 28, Prof Marc Lamont Hill of Temple University delivered a speech at the United Nations International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. It is reported that he used the phrase ‘from the river to the sea,’ in his speech. This phrase, apparently, has been used by anti-Israel terror groups and is perceived by some as ‘language that threatens the existence of the State of Israel.’ Temple University issued a statement a few days later, condemning Professor Hill’s remarks, noting that they ‘have been broadly criticized as, among other things, “virulent anti-Semitism” and “hate speech,” and have ignited a public furore.’
Anti Semitism. Interesting term. It is a wrought from anti (against) and Semite (a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language. What are the Semitic languages? The Semitic language family is said to consist of dozens of distinct languages and modern day dialects. The main ones are Arabic, Amharic (spoken in Ethiopia), Tigrinya (spoken in Ethiopia and Eritrea), Hebrew, Tigre (spoken in Sudan), Aramaic (spoken in Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Iraq and Iran) and Maltese.
‘Semite’ then is a term that is not contained within the boundaries of Israel or the imagination of Jewish people. Antisemitism would be a doctrine, statements or actions against those speaking Arabic, Amharic, Tigrinya, Hebrew, Tigre, Aramaic or Maltese. And yet, it seems that antisemitism can only be about Israel, rather being ‘against Israel.’ It would appear that Israel or the larger Jewish community have appropriated the word ‘Semite.’
The
concern here is Palestine. The world knows (and doesn’t talk about) the
innumerable ways in which the State of Israel harasses Palestinians on a
daily basis. Nevertheless, given that Israel seems to think that her
existence is dependent on unleashing violence on Palestinians, speaking
about that violence and objecting to it becomes ipso facto antisemitic.
Let’s
get to Zionism now. It is derived from Zion, a place name in the Hebrew
Bible used as a synonym for Jerusalem as well as for the Land of Israel
as a whole. Zionism is a Jewish nationalist movement originating in
Eastern and Central Europe in the late 19th Century that sought to
establish a Jewish state in Palestine, which, Zionists claim, was the
ancient homeland of the Jews. This is not the place for a history lesson
on the establishment of Israel. Suffice to say that the entire process
was unholy and that subsequently, Israel, backed by the military and
financial backing of the USA, has settled close to a million Jews in
occupied Palestine, appropriated over 100,000 hectares from
Palestinians, demolished tens of thousands of homes and other structures
and subjected millions of Palestinians to all manner of humiliation and
violence.
That’s Zionist Anti Semitism, friends. Big. Bold. In
your face. All by divine right, they would have us believe.
‘Existentialist threat’ is a useful alibi to wade in, kill, maim,
destroy and dispossess, obviously. And if you protest in any way, you
are silenced with the antisemitic charge.
Prof Marc Lamont Hill is in the news again. He has been invited to speak at the Palestine Writes Literature Festival scheduled to be held later this week at the University of Pennsylvania. It has caused another furore. Fifteen students representing Jewish groups across the campus have written to the President expressing concerns that ‘the students will be exposed to anti-Jewish propaganda, harm Jewish students who take Arabic, and open the Jewish community at Penn to discrimination.’ Some have mentioned Prof Hill being invited to support this claim.
What is this festival about, though? Jenan Abu Shtaya, one of the organisers, said it is ‘a rare opportunity to celebrate our [Palestinian] heritage through literature and the arts.’ For Tara Tarawneh, an undergraduate, it is about writers and other artists coming together to share their work and narratives, and celebrate Palestinian culture and resilience.
Resilience? Resilient to what, though? Israeli occupation? Oh no! You can’t have that. Israeli Occupation is part of Israel dealing with Israel's very existence, ergo any resilience on the part of the occupied, any resistance and any narrative of lived truths would be Anti Semitic!
See how it works? Zionist Anti Semitism in full force at the mere hint of Zionist narratives being challenged.
The mention of anti-Jewish propaganda is interesting since Zionism is about pro-Jewish propaganda the application of which not only rubbishes other narratives, but brutally attacks those who express them in one form or another. In other words, if a Palestinian wrote about ‘The condition of being a Palestinian under Jewish Occupation,’ that individual would be a threat to Israel, a threat to Hebrew speakers, an antisemite.
What we are seeing in Philadelphia is a deliberate and forceful attempt to silence Palestinian voices and voices that speak of the social, economic and culture of Palestine which of course cannot but avoid mention and critique of what the State of Israel has been doing and still keeps doing in the occupied territories. The savagery cannot be footnoted or deleted. It is in the heart of the text. Unavoidable.
That’s not being antisemitic. It is, in fact, being semitic, speaking the language of the land without glossing over the wounds, scars, blood-letting and voices that will never be spoken again. Anyone who objects would be an antisemite, to use the language of the oppressor here. To be blunt, a Zionist Anti Semite.
malindadocs@gmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment