Alarming Trends in Anti-Jewish attitudes.
Apr. 4th, 2004 08:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
richardf8I present two articles here
The First, from Adbusters:
Adbusters Article discussing the Jewishness of Neo-Conservatives
The second, from the Washington Post:
Ideas About Christ's Death Surveyed
Growing Minority: Jews Responsible
By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
The percentage of Americans who say Jews were responsible for Christ's death is rising, particularly among blacks and young people, according to a nationwide poll taken since the release of Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ."
The poll released yesterday by the Pew Research Center in Washington is the first statistical evidence that the movie's box-office success may be associated with an increase in anti-Jewish feeling, although social scientists cautioned that cause and effect are not clear.
In the March 17 to 21 telephone survey of 1,703 randomly selected adults, 26 percent said Jews were responsible for Christ's death, up from 19 percent in an ABC News poll that asked the same question in 1997.
The increase was especially pronounced among two groups. The portion of people younger than 30 who say Jews were responsible for killing Jesus has approximately tripled, from 10 percent in 1997 to 34 percent today. The portion of African Americans who hold that view has doubled, from 21 percent to 42 percent.
Pew pollster Andrew Kohut noted that the survey's question -- "Do you feel the Jews were responsible for Christ's death or not?" -- is a potential indicator or "marker" of anti-Jewish sentiment but not a clear demonstration of it.
Many Christians believe that Jewish leaders in Jerusalem urged Roman authorities to crucify Jesus but that all of humanity, not today's Jewish population, carries enduring guilt. An ABC News/Prime Time poll, released Feb. 15, found that 8 percent of Americans thought that "all Jews today" bear responsibility for Christ's death, while 80 percent rejected that view.
"Does this poll necessarily mean there is a rise in anti-Semitism, or will be?" Kohut asked. "Those are different issues, but it's certainly not a good sign that a growing number of people think this. How bad it is and what it will grow into are still things to be found out."
Pew research director Michael Dimock said there are several possible reasons why African Americans and people younger than 30 are more likely to say Jews were responsible.
"Historically, you often find that blacks and young people give somewhat higher 'unfavorable' ratings to Jews than the general public does. In addition, blacks tend to be more religious and more likely to say the Bible should be taken literally," Dimock said. "So I wouldn't attribute it all to anti-Semitism. I think there are a lot of other factors there."
The Pew poll found a statistical link between Gibson's movie and belief that Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. But the correlation is not simply that a relatively large proportion of those who have seen the movie -- 36 percent -- hold Jews responsible. That view is also somewhat more common among those who plan to see the movie -- 29 percent -- than in the general public.
Thus, researchers said, it is unclear whether the movie and its attendant publicity are causing a change in attitudes, reflecting a change, or both.
Despite predictions that the movie would spark violence against Jews, the Anti-Defamation League reported in March that the number of anti-Semitic incidents across the country in 2003 remained the same as in 2002.
Moreover, some previous opinion surveys have indicated that "The Passion of the Christ" is improving, not harming, Christian-Jewish relations. In a March 5 to March 9 survey of 1,003 adults nationwide, San Francisco-based pollster Gary Tobin found that 83 percent said the film had no impact on their view of contemporary Jews. Two percent said the movie had made them "more likely" to blame Jews, but 9 percent said it had made them less likely to do so.
"The film and, perhaps even more, the discussions about the film are having something of a positive effect, which is good news," Tobin concluded.
While attitudes toward Jewish responsibility are changing, the Pew poll found that Americans' views of the Crucifixion generally are not. Forty percent say the Bible is the literal word of God, about the same proportion as in 1996. Ninety-two percent believe that Jesus died on the cross, and 83 percent believe that Jesus rose from the dead -- both essentially unchanged since 1997.
In truth, I am more concerned about the "Jewish Conspiracy" libel than the "Christ-Killer" thing, but whenever the two come together things do not go well. It is one thing to hate Paul Wolfowitz because he is an ass; but quite another to suggest that his Jewishness should be raised as an issue. This is a further example of the the growing neo-liberal anti-semitism that has kept me from peace marches against even wars I oppose. I cannot bring myself to stand beside someone who equates the Israeli (over)reaction to a constant barrage of terrorism with Nazism, a not infrequent practice of neo-liberals.
[Edited to clarify the separateness of the two articles.]
The First, from Adbusters:
Adbusters Article discussing the Jewishness of Neo-Conservatives
The second, from the Washington Post:
Ideas About Christ's Death Surveyed
Growing Minority: Jews Responsible
By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
The percentage of Americans who say Jews were responsible for Christ's death is rising, particularly among blacks and young people, according to a nationwide poll taken since the release of Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ."
The poll released yesterday by the Pew Research Center in Washington is the first statistical evidence that the movie's box-office success may be associated with an increase in anti-Jewish feeling, although social scientists cautioned that cause and effect are not clear.
In the March 17 to 21 telephone survey of 1,703 randomly selected adults, 26 percent said Jews were responsible for Christ's death, up from 19 percent in an ABC News poll that asked the same question in 1997.
The increase was especially pronounced among two groups. The portion of people younger than 30 who say Jews were responsible for killing Jesus has approximately tripled, from 10 percent in 1997 to 34 percent today. The portion of African Americans who hold that view has doubled, from 21 percent to 42 percent.
Pew pollster Andrew Kohut noted that the survey's question -- "Do you feel the Jews were responsible for Christ's death or not?" -- is a potential indicator or "marker" of anti-Jewish sentiment but not a clear demonstration of it.
Many Christians believe that Jewish leaders in Jerusalem urged Roman authorities to crucify Jesus but that all of humanity, not today's Jewish population, carries enduring guilt. An ABC News/Prime Time poll, released Feb. 15, found that 8 percent of Americans thought that "all Jews today" bear responsibility for Christ's death, while 80 percent rejected that view.
"Does this poll necessarily mean there is a rise in anti-Semitism, or will be?" Kohut asked. "Those are different issues, but it's certainly not a good sign that a growing number of people think this. How bad it is and what it will grow into are still things to be found out."
Pew research director Michael Dimock said there are several possible reasons why African Americans and people younger than 30 are more likely to say Jews were responsible.
"Historically, you often find that blacks and young people give somewhat higher 'unfavorable' ratings to Jews than the general public does. In addition, blacks tend to be more religious and more likely to say the Bible should be taken literally," Dimock said. "So I wouldn't attribute it all to anti-Semitism. I think there are a lot of other factors there."
The Pew poll found a statistical link between Gibson's movie and belief that Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. But the correlation is not simply that a relatively large proportion of those who have seen the movie -- 36 percent -- hold Jews responsible. That view is also somewhat more common among those who plan to see the movie -- 29 percent -- than in the general public.
Thus, researchers said, it is unclear whether the movie and its attendant publicity are causing a change in attitudes, reflecting a change, or both.
Despite predictions that the movie would spark violence against Jews, the Anti-Defamation League reported in March that the number of anti-Semitic incidents across the country in 2003 remained the same as in 2002.
Moreover, some previous opinion surveys have indicated that "The Passion of the Christ" is improving, not harming, Christian-Jewish relations. In a March 5 to March 9 survey of 1,003 adults nationwide, San Francisco-based pollster Gary Tobin found that 83 percent said the film had no impact on their view of contemporary Jews. Two percent said the movie had made them "more likely" to blame Jews, but 9 percent said it had made them less likely to do so.
"The film and, perhaps even more, the discussions about the film are having something of a positive effect, which is good news," Tobin concluded.
While attitudes toward Jewish responsibility are changing, the Pew poll found that Americans' views of the Crucifixion generally are not. Forty percent say the Bible is the literal word of God, about the same proportion as in 1996. Ninety-two percent believe that Jesus died on the cross, and 83 percent believe that Jesus rose from the dead -- both essentially unchanged since 1997.
In truth, I am more concerned about the "Jewish Conspiracy" libel than the "Christ-Killer" thing, but whenever the two come together things do not go well. It is one thing to hate Paul Wolfowitz because he is an ass; but quite another to suggest that his Jewishness should be raised as an issue. This is a further example of the the growing neo-liberal anti-semitism that has kept me from peace marches against even wars I oppose. I cannot bring myself to stand beside someone who equates the Israeli (over)reaction to a constant barrage of terrorism with Nazism, a not infrequent practice of neo-liberals.
[Edited to clarify the separateness of the two articles.]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-04-03 06:32 pm (UTC)From kevinjdog
Date: 2004-04-03 07:36 pm (UTC)[First Post]
Two things... first, I'm missing the part in the article that talks about a Jewish conspiracy, and I've gone over it several times.
Secondly, I do not equate disagreeing with Israeli domestic and foreign policy with anti-Semitism. While the comparison of the Israeli government with Hitler's is reprehensible hyperbole, I have objected to policies such as the encroachment of settlers at the expense of the Palestinian civilian population. I believe that both sides could easily be doing more to speed the peace process, and certainly the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and other terrorist groups aren't helping anything with their senseless violence. But there is a danger when either side falls back on visceral, oversimplified generalizations to justify any kind of violence or oppression. Using religion to justify violence is deplorable no matter who does it.
[Second Post]
Well, I posted something here, but it didn't show up. If it ever does, I wasn't aware that the survey wasn't part of the linked article. I thought they were the same. Shows that I should read these things more clearly.
Re: From kevinjdog
Date: 2004-04-03 08:27 pm (UTC)As for your general view on the I/P situation, I pretty much agree with you completely. The two sides have dug in their heels in ways that are reprehensible and inexplicable (though I do have an explanation, which I will get to shortly). The biggest problem with the peace process is that the will is not there among the leaders to bring about peace. This is understandable -- as the deaths of Sadat and Rabin have shown, to sign a peace accord is to sign your own death warrant. Neither Arafat nor Sharon have gotten as old as they are by placing noble goals like the good of the many ahead of their respective wretched existences.
Now to the question of whether or not disagreement with Israel's policies constitutes anti-semitism. This is a truly sticky question. The problem boils down to Israel's status as THE Jewish State. There are many Islamic states in the region, and because the one religion is distributed across multiple states it is possible to contrast Syrian policy with Jordanian policy. One cannot, thus, generalize from the actions of one of those states to the Islamic faith in general. However, because of Israel's definition as a Jewish state there is a tendency to transfer disgust with the actions of the state of Israel to Jews more generally. It is precisely this transference which has resulted in Synagogue bombings and harassment of Jews in France. This transference should not take place. There is no reason to hold a French Jew personally responsible for the fact that Sharon thinks every problem can be solved with a bulldozer. But it happens.
It's an issue I wrestle with. As a Jew of conscience who finds Sharon's policies reprehensible (when he had the Church of the Nativity surrounded, I sent him a howler that made my letter to Coleman on the FMA seem positively tame), I regularly condemn Israel's policy. Sharon's brand of collective punishment is precisely the sort of behavior, we should shun. I wish people could better distinguish between the actions of Israel and Jews in general, because, although condemning Israel's actions is not inherently anti-semitic, it has tended to form the basis for a swelling anti-semitism on the left.
Now, I earlier promised and explanation for the stubborness of both sides. What is going on there is a proxy war. With Arab nations pumping money and Materiel into Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and the US pumping money and Materiel into Israel, there is no incentive to make peace. I say, if you follow the money, you'll find people on both sides making huge profits off this conflict.
Re: From kevinjdog
Date: 2004-04-03 09:41 pm (UTC)And that's just plain wrong, the same way that it's wrong to blame a third generation Palestinian-American for a Palestinian suicide bombing. I just hate that kind of overgeneralization, and I think it stems from ignorance.
I wish people could better distinguish between the actions of Israel and Jews in general
Well, according to that article, it says that the majority of Jews in America are doing just that. And pretty much all my life I've always disassociated governmental practices from spiritual beliefs. Spirituality by nature is an individual way of life... government, by definition, is not.
Again, I'm sorry to have deleted the original comments. I still don't think I'm an eloquent speaker, which is why I have funny animals do it for me. Your response is excellent, however.
Re: From kevinjdog
Date: 2004-04-03 09:49 pm (UTC)Yeah, but you put the words in their mouths. ;)
no subject
Date: 2004-04-03 07:49 pm (UTC)Then there's always when people start to assimilate the flavor of the month, at the expense of national identity (ie, Japanese Anime).
As for Gibson, to quote Goethe:
"there is something terrifying about a man of genius of whom stupid people are proud."
no subject
Date: 2004-04-03 08:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-04 09:54 am (UTC)I'm ever so glad not to have seen anyone bring up Lieberman's faith during the latest race for nomination.