(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Ervin Kohn knows The Mosaic Faith Society has stated to the magazine Kampanje (26.07.2019) that «there is some touch anxiety associated with anti-Semitism in Norwegian society, where one does not recognize or recognize anti-Semitism». Kohn's statement was a comment on a specific entertainment program on NRK which he found distasteful and anti-Semitic – and which after extensive criticism was removed and apologized by NRK.
We will follow up with this appendix Kohns reaction and address this touching fear of anti-Semitism. We therefore call this theme issue off ORIENTERING for "What we should talk about when we talk about anti-Semitism."
In Norway, there is apparently a large consensus on what anti-Semitism is. The Norwegian government's action plan against anti-Semitism understands anti-Semitism "as hostile attitudes and actions against Jews, or what is perceived as Jewish, based on specific ideas about Jews". And the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA), in which Norway has been active, describes anti-Semitism as "A certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews". And in the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) from 2020, it says that "Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish)".
We go into particular detail on these last two statements, but also on the British politician Jeremy Corbyn and the Israeli journalist Gideon Levy and their attitudes towards anti-Semitism. What links these together is in the underlying field "Israel versus Palestine". Jeremy Corbyn then also gave us the title for this edition of Orientering: "What we should talk about..." More about that in our own interview with him on pages 4–5.
Not surprisingly, there is little disagreement that the frequency of reported cases of anti-Semitism varies in line with conflict and war in this area. When the conflict flares up, the cases of reported anti-Semitism also increase.
We have not come across attempts to justify or downplay the significance of the hideous and historically heavy form of racism that anti-Semitism is. Nor have we come across anyone who openly "understands" or "supports" anti-Semitic outbursts, statements or actions. But we have also not sought out self-proclaimed anti-Jewish communities, holocaust deniers or neo-Nazi communities. On the other hand, there is reason to take seriously the concern of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz (Michael Colborn, in Sam Sokol article 19.02.22) for what is going on in Ukraine's post-Nazi communities. In environments with Nazi-related Wolfangel-
bracelets build ultra-right soldiers trademarks that show that there is substance in the accusations of the Nazi heritage in the country.
The closest thing we have come across of a dubious nature, in the Norwegian media, is a, fortunately, almost 150-year-old quote from Aftenposten, which in the very first occurrence of the word "anti-Semites" in the newspaper comments that "the Jewish moneymen's power is broken in Berlin, and that the Germanic population begins to recognize the legitimacy of the Anti-Semites' Strife". Then only 32 years had passed since the so-called Jewish paragraph was removed from Norway's constitution: "Jesuits and Monk Orders must not be tolerated. Jews are still excluded from Access to the Kingdom."
What we have found particularly interesting are two sides of anti-Semitism which we can call "opportune ignoring of anti-Semitism" and "opportune characterization as anti-Semitism". What these two variants have in common is that they derail the work against gross racism and reduce the seriousness of anti-Semitism and its history – and therefore must be said to be racist and anti-Semitic themselves.
To "look away" when one should look, and to "see" where there is nothing to see, is something that needs to be addressed. Both are expressions of abuse of, and mockery of, ugly racism – in the face of millions of dead and enormous suffering.
