More Antisemitic Photo Fun

February 8, 2009 at 16:46 4 comments

I’ve already written on this blog about amusing and intellectually challenged antisemites caught on camera here and here. Apparently, antisemites are an never-ending source of merriment, because I’ve just come across another photographic gem, this time of a demonstrator at an event where the Israeli ambassador to Sweden, Benny Dagan, spoke.

(Judging by recent events where Mr. Dagan has addressed Swedish audiences, I guess he should be happy he didn’t get the sign thrown at him.)


Please note the swastikas printed behind the word “Israel”. Even though the comparison between Israel and Nazi Germany is starting to sound more and more like a tired cliché, this particular young man should — however — get creativity points for throwing Dracula into the equation.

I originally found this image on Svansbo’s blog.


Entry filed under: Allosemitism.

Diabolic Criteria The Day before…

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Fredrik  |  February 10, 2009 at 17:54

    So, what’s anti-Semitic about it?

    I’m not saying I agree that Israel equals Dracula to infinity, but still…

  • 2. Mikael Tossavainen  |  February 10, 2009 at 18:14

    Dracula may not appear in the Working Definition of Antisemitism, but equating Israel with Nazi-Germany most certainly does. And I would say that replacing the Star of David for a swastika in the Israeli flag, as in this case, would qualify for such an equation.

  • 3. Fredrik  |  February 10, 2009 at 20:22

    ok, but why does equating israel with nazi-germany qualify as antisemitism?

    let me tell you why i think it doesn’t.

    the holocaust is the story of the ultimate expression of evil and suffering in human history. the afflicted are history’s ultimate victims, the perpetrators history’s ultimate victimisers.

    jews were the victims of the holocaust. israel, the world’s only jewish state, was formed soon thereafter and immediately endeavoured, understandably, to lay a moral claim on the holocaust. in addition, israel has always presumed to speak and act in the name not only of their tiny little state in the middle east, but for world jewry.

    then there’s suffering today. few people would deny that in terms of media exposure, the no 1 suffering today is endured by the palestinians. it is covered by the media to an unprecedented extent.

    now, if you agree with what i wrote above, there are a number of ways a person might think to compare the ultimate suffering to contemporary suffering.

    for instance, confronted with daily stories on the news of palestinian suffering, a moderatly educated man who isn’t familiar with the finer points of nazi ideology or the history anti-semitism might not be able to pick up on the difference. he does, however, know enough to have this train of thought: palestinian suffering-israel-jewish state-jewish suffering-holocaust-nazism.

    does that make him an anti-semite?

    but even if it’s not done out of ignorance, i don’t think it necessarily qualifies as anti-semitism. say, for instance, that you are an activist and in order for you to make your voice heard when you’re speaking up against israel’s treatment of the palestinians, you utilise past jewish suffering to get attention. he has been led to think that way by way of the same train of thought as i described above. he might sincerely believe it, he might be entirely instrumental about it, or anywhere in between. i still don’t see how that makes him anti-semitic.

    rather, the way i see it, saying that what israel is doing to the palestinians is comparable to what the nazis did to the jews, is the pro-palestinian equivalent of the pro-israeli slur of equating any criticism of israel to anti-semitism. it’s the same logical fallacy, and it breeds the same polarised discourse.

  • 4. Mikael Tossavainen  |  February 11, 2009 at 09:49

    I don’t think that anyone who’s “moderately educated” would seriously claim that what the Palestinians are going through is anything like the Holocaust. Anyone who reflects for about 30 seconds would see the absurdity in such a parallel (no forced labor, no starvation, no concentration camps, no gas chambers, no 10,000 deaths per day, just to mention a few glaring differences).

    If someone, despite this, chooses to dump the crimes of the Nazis on Israel, this is antisemitic demonization at least in my book (and that of the Working Definition). And from my point of view it doesn’t really matter if he or she does it out of conviction or in order to make a cheap political point by spreading racial hatred.

    Now, the question of what makes someone an antisemite — is it what you think, or what you say and do, and do you need to be aware of it yourself — is definitely interesting from a philosophical perspective. But it’s the topic of a blog post of its own, I think.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


February 2009
« Jan   Mar »

Most Recent Posts

%d bloggers like this: