"Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism" - Canada's immigration minister

Well, I'm sorry but telling people not to elect Bob Rae as Liberal leader because we can't let Canada have a "Zionist Prime Minister" sounds awfully close to being a "coded" way of saying "Don't vote for Rae because his wife is a Jewess" or "Beware - Bob Rae is a secret agent of ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government)". What would people say if a Jewish group put out a leaflet saying "Don't vote for Gerard Kennedy - we can't let Canada have an Islamist Al-Qaeda supporting PM"??? We would all call it racist (and I agree)...ditto if someone said "Obama must be stopped because we can't let the next President of the US be a black power Mau-Mau (sic.)".

I think that if people actually want to advance the Palestinian cause at all - they should realize that shrieking the word "Zionist" as some sort of insulting epithet is totally counter-productive and will only make people dismiss the source of those comments.

Ironically, in December, Gerard Kennedy - the guy that the pro-Palestinian group was urging people to support - threw his support to..."Zionist (sic.)" Bob Rae. And, Ignatieff has now become leader and he seems to be even more pro-Israel than Rae is!

Indeed, there is no difference between the Liberals and Tories on Israel anymore. 

Yes we'd call it racist but who said something like that?  Do you have a link?

No it doesn't, except perhaps in your excited imagination. 

I know some like to equate Zionism with Paul Newman in Exodus, "making deserts bloom," or other such fairy tales, but for others, supporting Zionism equals supporting the continuing massacre, theft and dispossession of Palestinians.

I agree with Stockholm. While I may dislike what present day Zionism stands for, the CAF erred terribly in its demand that Rae not be elected leader because his wife was an officer of the Jewish Congress. I just think this is another way to say don't vote for Rae because he has a jewish wife who supports Israel. That is improper.

Winnifred and Stockholm, what you are saying is tautological.

"I just think this is another way to say don't vote for Rae because he has a jewish wife who supports Israel."

The CAF has said it is because Bob Rae and his wife are vocal Zionists.

Now I personally think that is not wise politics. But that isn't the point. The point is that the CAF said that they were oppossed to Bob Rae because he and his wife are vocal Zionists.

You say that really amounts to saying don't support him because his wife is a Jew. It would appear you buy into the equating of anti-zionism as anti-semitism.

If you choose to define "Zionist" as anyone who thinks Israel has a right to exist than I guess that makes about 95% of all Canadians "part of the global Zionist conspiracy". Gerard Kennedy was and is just as much a Zionist as Bob Rae is and for that matter I guess Jack Layton is also a Zionist. Oh and I guess anyone Palestinian who supports a two-state solution is also a Zionist - Mr. Abbas - step right up!!

 It just seems a little - shall we say - coincidental that you had 9 people running for the Liberal leadership and all with virtually identical policies on the Middle East, but the one candidate out of nine who has a family connection to Judaism is the only one that gets labelled a potential "Zionist Prime Minister"

Rae has also written a few articles about Sri Lanka that seem rather sympathetic to the Tamil cause. Oh my God he must be a TAMILIST or a "Hinduist" stop him before its too late!!!!  Just imagine if Rae's wife were a Tamil from Sri Lanka. Or better yet, imagine if his wife was Muslim and wore a hijab - I can bet you that people on the far right would be spreading vicious gossip that he was some sort of a Trojan horse for an Islamist takeover of Canada.

As has been explained a thousand times before, "Zionism" is a very specific ideology that came into existence in central and eastern Europe at the turn of the century in the wake of a series of bloody pogroms and in the wake of an out break of anti-semitism in France as a result of the Dreyfus case. It called for a Jewish homeland - period. To this day there are many Zionists who want either want to return every square inch of the occupied territories to the Palestinians including Jerusalem and there are Zionists who want a single bi-ethnic state exactly as some on this board advocate. The issue is not with "zionism" per se - its with the way that the far right in Israel has appropriated it to advance their own ends.

I don't spit out "Islamist" under my breath at anyone who supports a Palestinian state and I also wouldn't call people who supported the Catholic side in Northern Ireland "papists". 

Ken, you are debating with vocal supporters of Israel and vocal "critics" of the Palestinian people and their rights. Except that, being defenders of an unjust cause and knowing it, they play the anti-Semitic card.

Associating the Jewish people with the crimes of Israel is the height of anti-Semitism. And because some low-lifes around the world are bound to be influenced by such propaganda, Jewish lives are endangered, in Israel and elsewhere, by this blood libel.

The salvation of the Jewish people, now as in the past, is to identify with and be one with the struggles of people for liberation, wherever they are. For Jews in Canada, it means being one with all progressive causes here in Canada, and never accepting the neo-Nazi lies of a Jason Kenney that our "homeland" is somewhere else. It also means solidarity with the cause of people worldwide fighting for freedom - and, for the purpose of this subject, solidarity with the struggle of the Palestinian people.

Well said, Stockholm. We can only imagine the outcry if anyone raised a candidate's wife being Muslim or Sikh as a reason not to vote for them.

I agree that the term Zionist is thrown around in a manner that is not helpful. I tend to use more descriptive terms like pro-Israeli, rabidly pro-Israeli or 'Israeli apologist' if we are specifically referring to someone who virtually always chooses to defend or rationalize whatever Israel is doing [which often takes the form of "I do not support _____ that Israel has done / everything Israel does, but....]

I also admitt that I have never read everytng that the CFA said around the Rae incident. I'm going on what has been said here.

And here it was pointed out that the CFA said that it was not because Rae's wife is Jewish, that it is because he and she are strong Zionists.

You are putting up a reductionist straw man saying that eveyone who supports Israel's right to exist gets called a Zionist, so isn't it supicious Bob Rae is singled out. Its only some people who call everyone even supportive of Israel's right to exist a Zionist.

It is misleading to merely describe Bob Rae's wife as just another someone who supports the right of Israel to exist. She's a leading member of the CJC. We can quibble about whether Zionist is the right thing to call her [and its not the term I would choose], but the CJC is more than just another group supporting Israel's right to exist.

And that is you showing your colours. Maybe I missed something, but I don't remember the CFA criticizing Rae because his wife is Jewish. 

Right. They just call her a "Zionist" because "kike" has become politically incorrect.

My first reaction is to ignore you because you seem to be deliberately assinine.

But just to be sure:

I just said that the CFA said the objection was because Rae's wife is a Zionist. That it was never said it was because she is Jewish.

You have not given any evidence to the contrary.

But you keep repeating this canard. So do I take it that for you calling someone a Zionist makes them in fact anti-semitic? Or, what is just as bad: that you reserve the right to say without any evidence that someone in particular who says Zionist is in fact anti-semitic?

Calling someone a kike is clearly anti-semitic. So your intent here is clear.

While I may be careful about who I call a Zionist. I'm clearly anti-Zionist.

You going to call me an anti-semite while you are at it?

And while we are at it, where do anti-zionist Jews like unionist fit in?

 Which brings us back to the opening post: that equating anti-zionism as anti-semitism IS an attempt to marginalize and silence people.

And, by its proper definition, I am a Zionist.

As Stockholm pointed out, EIGHT other candidates in that race were ALL zionists. I'd say that Joe Volpe was probably the most hawkish on Israel. So why single out the ONE "zionist" with a Jewish wife?

And you all have a perfect right to be Zionists. Further, your beliefs deserve respect that admittedly you don't always get around here.

But that does not excuse equating anti-zionism and anti-semitism. Let alone people here defending or rationalizing that.

Like Stockholm you are trying to softpeddle "zionist" by saying that is just anyone who supports the right of Israel to exist. I unequivocally support the right of Israel to exist.

I don't know about Joe Volpe, and you don't have the credibility for me to accept your say-so that he is the most hawkish on Israel. But even if he was, having the most reservations about the candidate whose wife is a leading member of a group that actively and vociferously promotes Israeli positions in Canada is not, as you keep trying to pretend, singling her out simply "because she is Jewish".

His family should be off-limits in the first place!

You and your scummy remarks do not belong here.

I, and the mushrooming numbers of Jews like me, are the worst nightmare of the Star Spangled Americans. We represent the best in Judaism, the traditions of enlightenment, progress, solidarity - the traditions of the "Diaspora", of living among the nations. We are an accusing presence against the ethnocentric anti-Arab "me, myself, mine" of the B'nai Brith, the Israeli government, and the provocateurs who show their face on this board. We have suffered for our stand of principle, but it's so frigging insignificant compared to the suffering of the victims of U.S. imperialism and its Zionist Israeli handservant. We are the world, and we shall overcome.

Trust your first reaction, Ken.

What you have said in this thread SCC is blatant testimony to how pervasive has been this equating of anti-zionism with anti-semitism.

[Not that you have been alone.]

Not at all. I'd hardly call the Satmar hasidic sect "anti-Semitic" despite their being vehemently anti-Zionist since long before 1948.

At the same time, there's no doubt in my mind that some people do use "zionist" as a more socially acceptable substitute for "kike" just like I think some people use terms like "Islamist" as a more socially acceptable substitute for "raghead."

And i DO get suspicious when in a race between 8 people - ALL of whom could be labelled 'zionists" - the ONE guy who gets signled out for abuse is the same one guy who is married to a Jew. And i DO also get suspicious when, in a world overflowing with states that abuse human rights, certain people seem obsessed with singling out the ONE state with a majority Jewish citizenship.

I'm sure your suspicions are very convenient for you.

When people offer no evidence except their suspicions...

And no one said that you think every anti-zionist is an anti-semite, just that you are using the canard.

Im sure im not the only one that got confused reading your comments : zionism, judaism, pro-israeli, left, right...

What these words used to stand for and what the situation is today i presume is different.

Israeli govt is condemned as zionist and anti-judaic, anti-palestinian... but at the same time the govt members are religious, they celebrate shabbat and other judaic holidays. So don't we have here zinoists that are religious? or should we say zionist policies instead of zionist govt members ?

my question may sound naive, but imagine most of the voters that are miles away to make the difference... people here are only maybe 10% of voters

Probably? You have no idea do you? I know because I've read the writings of early Zionist thinkers like Moses Hess, Borochov, Herzl, Gordon etc and also read books on them and yes, with few exceptions they were secular and either areligious or anti-religious. Conversely, most religious Jews, with very few exceptions such as Rabbi Kook, were anti-Zionist.

Pino (or anyone else), if you want the single best resource in understanding the zionist movement, the best book I could recommend is an anthology called The Zionist Idea, which is edited by and features a great (lengthy and detailed) introduction by Arthur Hertzberg, one of the best scholars of contemporary Jewish thought of the last century.

Also, if you don't ahve the time or energy for that, jsut go to your local video store and pick up a copy of The Chosen, based on Chaim Potok's novel, as this dramatizes some of the conflict between religious and more secular Jews over the issue of zionism in the lead-up to the 1948 creation of Israel.

Why is it so difficult for people to label public figures who they deem to be "too uncritically pro-Israel" as "too uncritically pro-Israel" - instead of getting sidetracked with this red-herring of using the term Zionist as an ad hominem coded attack that smacks of calling people "communist fellow travelers" or "Islamists" or "papists"?

I'm sure that Tamils in Canada don't like politicians who they feel are too pro-Sinhalese. I don't here them calling such people "Sinhalists" or "Buddhist supremacists" etc...

 There is a long, long history in the later part of the 20th century of people "talking in code" and using "dog whistles" when they want to appeal to racist sentiments (before that no one cared and would openly be racist) and whether you like it or not saying that someone's political ambitions need to stopped because their Jewish wife is a "Zionist" or because we can let Canada have a "Zionist PM" is clearly non-so-subtle dog whistle for "stop this guy because his wife is a kike".

I agree that being "anti-Zionist" doesnt necessarily make a person an anti-semite (Can someone explain what it means to be anti-zionist and yet to also support Israel's right to exist?) - I think the issue is the tone and the way in which the term is being used. When people start hissing "stop the guy with Zionist wife" there is not the slightest doubt in my mind that it is just coded anti-semitism. 

Similarly when rightwing freaks in the US would go out of their way to speak of Barack HUSSEIN Obama with the middle name being said at triple the volume of the first and last name - it was clearly a coded appeal to anti-Muslim prejudice. It doesn't matter that Hussein is Obama's legal middle name - its the way in which it is being manipulated. 

Why this diversionary bullshit? Because Jason Kenney said the CAF is anti-Semitic and he will cut off their funds. So instead of saying "I agree with Kenney", the cowardly Israel fans here pile on the CAF. Support for Harper's politics, support for Israel - and calling themselves Jews. I guess it takes all types to make a world, but our people have survived far greater adversities than these.

I'm not sure who you're referring to. I oppose Harper's politics and I am very critical of a lot of policies of the current Israeli government. But I do think that ad hominem attacks on "Zionists" can and often are a code way of pandering to anti-semitism and does nothing to help the Palestinian cause. If anything it only helps people like Kenney to peddle their crap.

Actually, by equating "anti-Zionism" with "antisemitism," you're helping Kenney peddle his crap.

This just in from the CAF:

"Actually, by equating "anti-Zionism" with "antisemitism," you're helping Kenney peddle his crap."

If you would actually bother reading what I wrote you would see that I just said that I do NOT equate so-called anti-zionism with anti-semitism. (I'd still like to hear someone explain what you call someone who says they are anti-zionist, but who also thinks Israel has a right to exist). But I think that when people use the word "Zionist" as an ad hominem insult that they hiss at people who are Jewish or who are married to Jews then THAT is thinly veiled anti-semitism - and you can't deny it.

Do you equate "anti-Islamism" with "Islamaphobia" or do you think its A-OK to point fingers and shriek "Islamist" at anyone who is pro-Palestinian.

Let's have less name calling and more discussion of the ISSUES. 

"Bother" is putting the experience rather lightly.

 Your example makes no sense, since not all Palestinians are Muslims.

 Zionism is a hyper-Nationalist ideology that grew out of similar movements in 19th-century Europe.  It's basically a school of thought. 

One can be critical of Zionists and not be critical of Jews in the same manner that one can be critical of supply-side economists, Stalinists and Nazis without being critical of greedy white people, Russians and Germans.

That's true. But if Ignatieff had a German wife and people started hissing "Nazi" at her and started murmuring that we had to stop the "Nazi-lover" from being PM - I would call that anti-German bigotry.

As I have said before - there is a HUGE difference between being "critical of Zionism" and singling out someone who happens to have a Jewish wife and hissing "Zionist" at him as if believing that Israel should exist is to be equating with supporting child pornography.

The kinds of people who go around shrieking "Zionist" as an ad hominem insult are about as brain dead about what Zionism actually is as are people who call anyone who supports a Palestinian state an "Islamofascist".

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

Since I'm the one who said that I'll answer.

Labels are not timeless. There are a number of you who hold to a bygone view of Zionism- from its origins. You are enititled to do so. But you are not entitled in a discussion with others to treat the definition convenient to you as if it is the only one.

In todays world- and in practice for some decades now, more than half of Israel's exostence- real world Zionism is not a homeland for Jewish people. But a project that invites anyone who is Jewish to settle in a de facto ever expanding Israel, directly  and unequivocally at the expense of the land, resources, and livelihoods of Palestinians.

 You are entitled to the belief that is not what Zionism is about to you. But you are not entitled to act as if really living Zionism is not what it is about. [Let alone, please show me this Zionism of old today.]

 The fact that Zionism gets used as an all encompassing toss off epithet does not mean it does not richly deserve to be used in the critical way it is typically used on this board and many other places.

So it is very easy for me, and many other people, to be anti-Zionist and to unequivocally affirm the right of Israel to exist.

 It is bad faith reductionism to reduce Zionism simply to an affirmation of Israel's right to exist.

 You "think". Star Spangled Canadian "suspects". Convenient  'evidence'.

And once again, sufficiently on the basis alone that she is a leading member of the CJC, I am calling Bob Rae's wife a Zionist. So are you calling me a 'thinly veiled anti-semite'?

I do agree with you that it is better not to use labels like Zionist and to use more unambiguously descriptive terms such as you suggested. And this is what I do.

But I'm also going to defend people from the smearing because they 'dare' to use the term.

So would pretty well anyone.

But if Ignatieff's wife was a prominent member of the Bund and Iggy was actively promoting lebensraum, you might become suspicious about their political sympathies.

And you'd hissssssss, Sssstockholm, you'd hisssssss. 

I don't understand this. what "more" is CJC? I have known it to fight hate-mongers and racists. Is that what you mean?

Oh yes, the CJC also kisses children, they're so sweet. Just like you.

If being active in the CJC means you can be denounced as a "Zionist", I guess that means that anyone who's a member of the Canadian Arab Federation should also be denounced as an "Islamofascist".

"But you are not entitled in a discussion with others to treat the definition (of Zionism) convenient to you as if it is the only one."

Yeah, well I think we also have to say that the anti-Israel freaks are also not entitled to treat the definition of Zionism convenient to them as if it is the only one either.

The issue is the policies of the Israeli government - not what Herzl stood for a hundred years ago. The only way that Israeli government policies are ever going to change is when the current rightwing nationalist perversion of Zionism is ended and Zionism goes back to the socialist humanistic values that it had in its first phase.  

Can you actually be so ignorant as to believe that the CAF is a Muslim organization - or that Arabs are Muslims? Or are you just ranting?

Excuse me, oh well-mannered and deeply sensitive friend of Israel, for my boorishness. But you said the CJC fights racists -- and you're calling ME sarcastic!!??

I like boorish.  Might even look it up.

tomtoronto  "Anti-zionism is anti-semitism."  Jason Kenney's statement is the sort of thing that I find revolting. And no matter who wrote it for him, Maysie, he said it (and he will wear it in Canada for many years). I believe Mr. Kenney's statement is not as simple as ignorance, but it is an example of the willful ignoring of the goodness possible in the world in favor of a hateful political stance, a nihilism in human affairs,  one that is being taken by our government without notice or press coverage, and one that is locking Canada more closely to the machinations of the neoconservative wing of American politics. 

According to what I have read - here's the link: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8530   

Stockwell Day went to Israel in order to sign a public safety and security agreement with the state of Israel; it was signed on 23 March 2008.  "Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff was also in Israel on official business, as guest of Israel's Minister of Public Security, Avi Dicter." The article reports that Dick Cheney was also in Israel at that time...Evidently, the governments of Canada and Israel will collaborate in counter-terrorism and homeland security. Canada signed a Declaration of Intent, which is an agreement at the ministerial level.  I see Mr. Kenney's statement as first evidence of the agreement's impact on Canada's immigration policy. 

It is possible that the effects of this agreement, made so secretively, will have a continuous negative effect on our immigration policy and on the country at  large; it may negatively effect our freedoms if it continues to suppurate throughout our country.  Will our personal information be shared with Israel? With Mossad? Etc.

It means Dutch peasant (as in the South African Boers), and it got its English connotation from the British colonial rulers. Quite appropriate for our dear friend who used it above.

"Can you actually be so ignorant as to believe that the CAF is a Muslim organization - or that Arabs are Muslims?"

...and the vast majority of Canadian Jews are not Israeli either.

As much as I hate to give Stockholm the last word, I'm going to close this for length.