The Antisemitism Cudgel: How a Sacred Word Was Hijacked to Silence Dissent
Antisemitism is real. It is a vile, ancient hatred that culminated in the industrial-scale slaughter of six million Jews. Its history is written in blood and ash, a solemn testament to humanity’s capacity for monstrous evil. To forget that history, or to diminish its horror, is a profound moral failing. It is precisely because of this sacred weight that the word’s modern usage has become a grotesque political scandal. The term has been hijacked, hollowed out, and reforged into a crude political cudgel, wielded not in defense of Jewish people, but in defense of state power, political agendas, and the impunity of an occupying military force.
What was once a shield for the persecuted has become a sword for the powerful. It is the go-to weapon to silence critics, shut down debate, and shield the state of Israel from any meaningful accountability for its actions. This isn't a fringe conspiracy theory anymore; it's a mainstream tactic unfolding in plain sight. Watch as hostile media, like Mondoweiss, now openly and correctly accuses establishment pillars like The New York Times of weaponizing the charge of antisemitism to engage in what can only be described as 'pro-Israel advocacy'. The playbook is simple and brutally effective: when confronted with inconvenient facts about occupation, apartheid, or war crimes, don't address the facts. Instead, attack the character of the person speaking them. Label them an antisemite. The debate ends, the critic is ostracized, and the state's actions are sanitized.
The most potent new front in this war of definitions is the cultural arena. Look no further than the recent furor at the Glastonbury Festival. Chants of 'Death to the IDF'—a military organization currently under investigation for war crimes by the world's highest courts—were broadcast by the BBC and immediately seized upon as a flashpoint of 'rampant antisemitism'. Let's be perfectly clear: the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) is a state military. It is not a synagogue. It is not a school. It is not a collection of civilians. It is an army. Criticizing it, even with harsh, aggressive language, is political speech. Conflating opposition to a military force with hatred for an entire ethnicity and religion is a deliberate, cynical, and dangerous act of intellectual dishonesty. Yet this is the new standard. This incident has become a powerful, globally visible template for how the definition of antisemitism is being stretched to the point of absurdity, all to protect a state's military from condemnation. By this logic, chanting 'Death to the Gestapo' in 1943 would have been an act of anti-German bigotry.
To make this political maneuver stick, you need a villain. For decades, the unambiguous face of antisemitism was the far-right—the neo-Nazis, the white supremacists, the torchbearers of genocidal ideologies. But these allies are often politically inconvenient for the modern pro-Israel right. And so, a new enemy has been nominated: the political left. Suddenly, we are inundated with a narrative that the primary source of modern antisemitism comes from progressive and leftist circles. This narrative was given a huge boost recently by the direct testimony of a European Jewish community leader in Milan, whose words were immediately amplified as definitive proof. It's a strategic masterstroke. The political left is the most vocal and organized source of criticism against Israeli policy. By painting the entire movement as antisemitic, you neutralize your most effective political opponents. The focus shifts from the actions of the state to the supposed bigotry of its critics. It is a classic smear campaign, elevated to the level of international discourse.
And here is where the entire cynical project collapses under the weight of its own hypocrisy. While the establishment media and political class wring their hands over protest chants at a music festival, they turn a blind eye to the very real, historical source of Jew-hatred. A far-right party in Europe, one with a documented Nazi past, recently offered a laughable, pre-election 'apology' for its history. Where was the outrage? Where were the front-page condemnations from the same voices who clutch their pearls over a student protest? The silence is deafening, and it is telling. They are willing to ignore, and in some cases form alliances with, the political descendants of the very movements that built the gas chambers, because those groups are often aligned with them on other issues, including their staunch nationalism and Islamophobia. This exposes the entire 'left-wing antisemitism' narrative for the fraud it is. It's not about protecting Jewish people. It has never been about that. It is about protecting a specific, right-wing political project. They will ignore the wolf at the door to scream about the mouse in the field, because the mouse is nibbling at their political foundations, while the wolf promises to bite their other enemies.
The word 'antisemitism' has been poisoned. It has been diluted and abused by bad-faith actors who deploy it as a tool to stifle dissent. This cynical weaponization does not protect Jewish communities; it endangers them. It trivializes the memory of the Holocaust and weakens our ability to identify and fight real antisemitism when we see it—the antisemitism of the far-right, which is stirring once more. To truly honor the victims of antisemitism, we must first reclaim the word from the clutches of the state apologists who use it as a shield for injustice. We must refuse to be silenced. We must call out the hypocrisy. We must insist on the distinction between hatred of a people and criticism of a state. The fight against real antisemitism depends on it.
