[lg policy] US: GPRC statement on the use of antisemitic language

Tue Oct 26 15:04:52 UTC 2010

GPRC statement on the use of antisemitic language

Update – we have just been notified that the copy of the statement we
have is subject to some minor corrections and other amendments. We
will post these once they are completed.

The Green Party is an anti-racist party. At our Autumn 2008
conference, the Green Party passed policy to oppose antisemitism.
Policy has continued to improve since. This week, the Green Party
Regional Committee (GPRC) approved a Statement on the Usage of
Antisemitic Language. The guidelines do not forestall robust criticism
of the policies and actions of the Israeli government, but do serve to
draw lines beyond which this ceases to be criticism. We feel that
these guidelines are sufficiently sensitive and specific to serve the
Green Party well.

We reproduce the statement below.
GPRC statement on the use of antisemitic language

16th October 2010

The Green Party places equality and lack of discrimination at the
heart of all its policies. Within the Green Party everyone should
engage in discourse with others in a language of mutual respect.

Following an investigation of antisemitism by GPRC in early 2009 it
was agreed that a working party should prepare guidance on the use of
antisemitic language. The specific recommendation from the report of
13th March 2009 is set out below.

2. A working party should be set up to establish guidelines on
appropriate  and inappropriate language for use in online and other
discussions, so  that unintentional racism and antisemitism is
avoided.

Following some difficulties in the working group at its meeting in
June 2010 GPRC asked two members to look at existing guidelines with a
view to producing guidelines for the next GPRC meeting. These
guidelines are intended to inform the party for the future.

It must be realised that even top academics disagree about what
constitutes antisemitic language and it is clear that the issues have
become more complicated and nuanced, in particular in relation to
criticisms of Israel’s actions and the so-called ‘new antisemitism’.

The Green Party uses the precautionary principle in general to respect
people and the planet. In applying the precautionary principle the
definition of racism most applicable is that of the MacPherson report
of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry.

It is not acceptable for an individual to say ‘I am not a racist’ if
his or her words or acts are perceived to be racist.

However in the area of antisemitism one of the most difficult and
contentious areas is the dividing line between antisemitism and
criticism of Israel and whether accusations of antisemitism are used
to stifle criticism. Any guidelines must enable robust criticism of
Israel, in the same way as if it were applied to any other country.
More careful use of language has the potential to produce a much
better quality of debate on the genuine issues of concern.

Considerable research has demonstrated there is no perfect definition.
A suitable definition should be able to be applied to any country or
cultural group. This holds true of the EUMC definition. Like all
definitions it has its limitations however it is a practical document
which if used throughout Green Party discussion will enable good
quality debate without giving rise to unnecessary offense. We
recognise that it may need to be revised in light of the recent
Citizen Act/Nationality Act in Israel. The Green Party holds itself to
the highest standards of fairness and must do everything it can to
avoid offensive and discriminatory language.

European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC)

WORKING DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM

The purpose of this document is to provide a practical guide for
identifying  incidents, collecting data, and supporting the
implementation and enforcement of legislation dealing with
antisemitism.

Working definition: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews,
which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical
manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or
non-Jewish individuals and/or their  property, toward Jewish community
institutions and religious facilities.”

In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of
Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently
charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to
blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech,
writing, visual forms and action, and  employs sinister stereotypes
and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media,
schools, the  workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking
into account the overall  context, include, but are not limited to:

    * Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of
Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of
religion.
    * Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical
allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective —
such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish
conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or
other societal institutions.
    * Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or
imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or
even for acts committed by non-Jews.
    * Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or
intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of
National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during
World War II (the Holocaust).
    * Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of
inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
    * Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to
the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of
their own nations.

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with
regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context
could include:

    * Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination,
e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist
endeavor.
    * Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not
expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
    * Using the symbols and images associated with classic
antisemitism (e.g. claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to
characterize Israel or Israelis.
    * Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
    * Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other
country  cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

http://greensengage.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/gprc-statement-on-the-use-of-antisemitic-language/

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list