When Criticism Crosses a Line

Image for illustration purposes only (Slate Magazine)

Is Criticism of Israel's ultra-Orthodox Jews 'Antisemitism'? So reads the headline of a recent Ha’aretz editorial. Their answer is that it is in fact absurd to say it is. That legitimate criticism of them cannot be deemed antisemitic by any measure.  And yet as noted in that article: 

In a preliminary vote Wednesday the Knesset advanced a bill expanding the law against incitement to racism to include “incitement against the Haredi population.” The amendment, proposed by Moshe Gafni and Yakov Asher of the United Torah Judaism party… 

A similar, well-funded public-relations campaign is currently being waged in the United States,where a series of investigative pieces in The New York Times last year brought to the surface the issue of the lack of general studies (as well as the prevalence of corporal punishment and embezzlement of public funds) at independent Haredi schools. 

I have actually made the same argument. Legitimate criticsm cannot and should not be considered antisemetic. The issue that sparked my own criticism of these communities is near and dear to my heart.  Which is the fact that in both here and Israel - the schools that fail to provide a Limudei Chol (secular studies) curriculum are short changing their students. In fact one might even argue that if anyone should be called antisemitic it’s the people that want to perpetuate the right of an entire large and growing community of religious Jews to remain  ignorant of those subjects. 

I am not going to re-hash why I believe that to be the case. But to call me an antisemite because I would like to raise their standards of education is about absurd as it gets. 

One can argue - as they and their defenders do, that they have the right to educate their children as they see fit. And that their people are no less productive than those who did receive such an education. Whether that is true or not is a legitimate debate. But neither side should be considered antiemitic because each side believes they are trying to help them, Not hurt them 

Obvioulsy, the idea of Jews criticizing Jews cannot by definition be called antisemitic. That being said, I think it is fair to say that there is a fair amount of anti Charedi rhetoric that crosses the line from legitimate criticism into Charedi bashing. Which can be seen as form of antisemtism if it were being used by actual antisemities. Sometimes that rhetoric turns into violence. It is an irrational hatred even though it might be generated by legitimate concerns. The name calling  and venom spewed at Charedim crosses a line and ceases to be criticism at that point. 

One would be hard pressed to see that kind of venom as anything else. The Charedi community is therefor justified in saying that at least some of the opposition is based on anti Charedi sentiment that is equivalent to antisemitism. 

But what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. 

It should not be overlooked that charges of antisemitism by one segment of Jewry against another - works both ways. The rhetoric used by Charedi politicians (and even some Charedi leaders) against secular politicians can be seen the same way. Rhetoric that has referred to secular  politicians as Amalek.  Amalek - for those who don’t know - is an entire people so evil that they were designated by God  to be wiped off the face of the earth. And even erased from our memory. If calling a fellow Jew Amalek  isn’t antisemitic, I don’t know what is.

This of course does not mean that criticism should never be made, That too would be absurd. Legitimate criticism should be valued as a means of trying to change things for the better. But when it crosses the line – as it so often does on both sides then, Yes! It is a form of antisemitism and it ought to stop.