Category: Magazine

U.S. Woman Turns Anti-Semitic Graffiti into Art

Last week, a U.S. woman discovered a swastika spray-painted on her garbage can. Esther Cohen-Eskin, a resident of Havertown, a small neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania reported feeling shocked and hurt after finding the symbol. Cohen-Eskin believes she was targeted specifically for being Jewish since no other neighbors found similiar signs on their properties.

After reporting the anti-Semitic graffiti to police, Cohen-Eskin decided to turn the trauamtic experience into something which proclaimed the exact opposite. The Philadelphian woman, who works as an artist painted over the swastika with the image of a flower and started a campaign asking her neighbors to paint swatsikas on their garbage cans and then subsequently paint over them with images of flowers, birds, or signs of unity, love and tolerance.

“It’s not like someone wrote some obscenity on my trash can or gave me the finger,” she said. “The swastika is such a deep-rooted sign of hatred for everyone, especially Judaism, that I felt so targeted.”

The idea cites Cohen-Eskin is to turn symbols of hate into ones of love.”We decided that painting something over this … it kind of made the swastika completely meaningless,” she said.

Cohen-Eskin’s story quickly spread across town and she received multiple letters of support worldwide, from countries as far off as Canada, Germany and Ireland. Many people decided to join her cause and paint similiar images of tolerance or the word “unity” in show of support.

“It gave me a whole new reassurance in humanity,” she said. “I feel invigorated by all the love. It’s exciting. It makes you feel there’s so much good out there.”

Source: Fox News, Israel Hayom

By: Yafit Ovadia

Anti-Semitism on U.S. Campuses Reaches New High

Anti-Semitism on U.S. college campuses is reaching a new high, according to new statistics reported by the Anti-defamation League (ADL).

The Israeli Knesset held a meeting yesterday drawing attention to the growing trend of the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS) Movement against Israel, which many note leads to increased hostilities and anti-Semitic attacks against Jewish college students on campus. Jewish college students at several prominent U.S. universities reported being harassed by BDS activists and Pro-Palestinian groups. The schools mentioned included New York University, the University of Pennsylvania, Connecticut College, the University of Oklahoma, Harvard, Claremont College in Los Angeles, Vassar College in New York, and several University of California schools.

Some students reported finding mock eviction notices attached to their doors and expressed shock over Palestinian students forcibly threatening them to leave campus dormitories and reside elsewhere. Students who were victims of such harrassment accused colleges of doing little to combat this growing wave of anti-Semitism, despite schools firmly stating their opposition to any anti-Israel activities.

“BDS is a wave of anti-Semitism against Jews, which unfortunately has been taking place on so-called enlightened campuses [in the U.S.],” Knesset Member Avi Dichter (Likud) said. “Many of the actions taken by BDS activists stem from their frustration over the loss of interest [concerning] the Palestinian issue. We will not tolerate [attacks] against Jews or Israelis. The Knesset…[is] committed to all Jews, regardless of where they are, especially when they come under attack simply for being Jewish,” Dichter said. The committee promised to strateigize new ways to combat this growing phenonmena and allot Israeli taxpayer funds towards the project.

An Israeli-based NGO, Reservists on Duty, which advocates supporting IDF operations in Israel and the Palestinian territories noted that 90 of 941 total incidents of anti-Semitism in the U.S. during the previous year took place on college campuses. “Jewish college students in the U.S. are a persecuted minority,” founder, Amnon Goldstof remarked.

Source: Israel Hayom

By: Yafit Ovadia

Anti-Semitism at French embassy

An employee of France’s embassy in Tunisia, Selim Dakhlaoui found himself under fire over anti-Semitic comments posted under his name on social media site, Facebook.

“Watch out, my account has been hijacked,” Dakhlaoui wrote on his Facbook account claiming previous comments expressing anti-Semitic remarks were written by hackers. The comment “finish the job”, about Adolf Hitler’s failure was written on Dakhlaoui’s page. Dakhlaoui works as a consulting agent for the embassy and was responding to an outrage following the publication on a French-language blog of multiple copies of anti-Israel messages made under his name.

Even though Dakhlaoui believes his account had been hacked, the subject is still under debate. This past October, the comment “Soon it will be the end of Israel” appeared under Dakhlaoui’s name, which was followed by an icon of a missile. A week later the same account displayed the message, “Go to hell, Israel.” Earlier this year it featured a comment reading, “Hitler didn’t finish the job” in a discussion about Israel’s alleged involvement in Islamist terrorism.

However, the embassy called the statements attributed to Dakhlaoui “unacceptable” adding he was summoned to talks with his superiors. The Foreign Ministry will decide how to handle the affair once it determines whether Dakhlaoui wrote the offensive remarks, the embassy’s statement said.

The act is considered a crime against humanity, which is forbidden under French law and holds a five years in prison penalty and $50,000 in fines. The comments have been removed, and Dakhlaoui’s  account was taken down.

Anti-Semitism has been on the rise in France during recent years. Last year, a report on the same blog over anti-Semitic statements on Facebook by a Kuwaiti woman interning at the French consulate in New York led to her dismissal.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls has expressed his “solidarity” toward French Jews and has strongly condemned anti-Semitism.

Source: Arutz Sheva

By: Inbal Zlotnik

Anti-Semitic Incidents Rise 11% in the U.K.

A strong increase in anti-Semitic incidents was recorded in the first six months of 2016 in the U.K., which was in part due to numerous anti-Semitic statements made by the Labour party, according to the Jewish charity Community Security Trust.

Several are puzzled as to the nature of the increase. Two years ago Israel’s excursion into Gaza led to a big rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the U.K., however the biggest increase was recorded in April, May and June, when anti-Semitism in the Labour party was the subject of widespread media coverage. Racism and xenophobia were part of the campaign discourse in the run-up to the EU referendum on June 23, 2016.

The anti-Semitic attacks come in graffiti remarks, verbal abuse, abuse via social media, and more. There were 41 violent anti-Semitic assaults among the 557 incidents, a 13% drop compared to those recorded in 2015. Most of the attacks were in London, which noted an increase in number of incidents, and Manchester which listed a fall of 54%.

“This is a worrying rise in incidents set against a backdrop of increasing hate crimes across the country,” said John Mann, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Anti-Semitism, “The message should go out to everyone that we will not stand for anti-Semitism, perpetrators of hate crimes against Jews will be caught and prosecuted and the bystanders must be educated. Britain should expect better than this,” Mann said.

Source: The Guardian

By: Inbal Zlotnik

Raising Anti-Semitism in the U.S.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL ) recorded a total of 941 incidents in the U.S. in 2015, showing an increase of 3% compared to anti-Semitic acts in 2014.

The annual Audit of Anti-Semitic Incidents was presented by the director of the ADL office in the Israel earlier this month, at a committee meeting of the Immigration and Absorption Ministry.

A new and surprising statistic is the growing number of anti-Semitic incidents on American college campuses, which almost doubled and accounts for 10% of the total incidents reported in the U.S. in 2015.

Experts estimate that in addition to statistics, on average there is at least one anti-Semitic assault reported in the US per week and at least two anti-Jewish incidents per day. Since the incidents are widespread they are difficult to quantify and remain uncounted.

Despite the pessimistic figures, there is also good news as Marvin D. Nathan, ADL Chairman reported that the “number of anti-Semitic incidents overall are much lower than we witnessed in the mid-2000s.”

Conference participants admitted they were more worried about the Jews in Europe, particularly France, and agreed that the situation in the U.S. was far less daunting. “We can’t look at the whole world through the prism of ADL numbers. The US is not France, the Jews there do not live in fear,” said Parliament Member Yehuda Glik (Likud).

Source: The Jerusalem Post

By: Inbal Zlotnik

Anti-Semitism Plagued Young Jewish Candidate Running for Congress

A young Jewish woman, Erin Schrode, 25 was the youngest woman to have run for U.S. Congress in the previous California, June 5 primary. Schrode ran on the Democratic ticket for California’s 2nd Congressional district while having lost the election this past month, during her campaign she was a victim of multiple anti-Semitic attacks.

Several Neo-Nazi websites published Schrode’s personal information along with various photo-shopped pictures depicting her wearing the yellow “Jude” star, which Jews were forced to wear in Nazi Europe during the Holocaust.

Schrode received several anti-Semitic threats including violent ones, which alleged voters to “Fire up the Oven!”, still others referred to her as “America’s first evil retarded teen [in] Congress…kike!”, and “All would laugh with glee as they gang raped her and then bashed her bagel eating brains in.”

Schrode responded strongly on her Facebook page by calling out the haters and their attacks as going “far beyond anti-Semitism,” and representing “indiscriminate hatred. Pure evil.”

Subsequently Schrode contacted the FBI among other authorities to handle the threats. In addition, police patrolled the area prior to the elections.

In the wake of these anti-Semitic outbursts, Schrode said, “I cannot and will not remain silent. I have never been much good at standing idly by in the face of injustice…We must not stand silent in the face of hatred, violence, attacks, bullying, or oppression; we cannot recoil in fear; we cannot lose our sense of human dignity and respect.”

Source: JTA; Jpost

By: Yafit Ovadia

Recommendations to stop online antisemitism

On 19 April, the first-ever International Conference on Online Antisemitism was hosted in Jerusalem, Israel, with the Israeli Students Combating Antisemitism (ISCA) playing a lead role, along with the International Network Against Cyber hate (INACH). It included officials, lay-leaders, non-governmental organizations and professionals from the European Union and a total of 21 countries.

We are proud to present the official and complete findings and recomendations of the conference:

Preamble:
The conference notes that antisemitism is not a Jewish problem; it is a global problem which should be
dealt with globally. Furthermore, the conference agrees that antisemitism is a direct threat to Western
values and democracy and online antisemitism is a major contributor to contemporary anti-Jewish
violence.

The conference, gathered together in Jerusalem, adopted the following recommendations, which are
supported by representatives from 21 countries:

Recommendations to National Governments, International and Intergovernmental bodies, NGOs and
Internet Industry actors. The conference calls upon all actors to:

  1. Endorse and implement the Working Definition on Antisemitism, which is a guideline for
    understanding contemporary antisemitism and also the most practical guide for identifying
    incidents, collecting data, and for supporting the implementation and enforcement of legislation
    dealing with antisemitism.
  2. Establish, identify and develop the capacity of national, regional and local legal units responsible
    for combating cyberhate/antisemitism, to make stronger use of existing laws to prosecute
    cyberhate and online antisemitism and to propose to legislatures, consistent with the free
    speech constraints of each country, enactment of the legal basis for prosecution of cyberhate
    and online antisemitism where such laws are absent.
  3. Promote and support coalition building on an inter-governmental level to apply and enforce
    existing legislation against Hate Speech.
  4. Promote and support coalitions, alliances and partnerships that work on antisemitism and other
    subjects.
  5. Promote and support student-based targeted activism like ISCA (and others).
  6. Promote, lobby for and support funding for NGOs and/or student programs like ISCA.
  7. Foster, Promote and support awareness-raising programs incorporating core components on
    antisemitism, hate speech, and the Holocaust targeting many specific audiences including the
    wider public.
  8. Promote and encourage the intertwining of antisemitism and holocaust education, since it is not
    possible to educate about the Holocaust without talking about antisemitism.
  9. Promote and support training on counter-speech.
  10. Promote the use humor and irony as powerful weapons in counter-speech, e.g. memes.
  11. Address racism in migrant communities and refugee groups by, amongst other measures,
    education about Holocaust and antisemitism.
  12. Make use of positive references of Muslim-Jewish shared common ground using Jewish and
    Islamic sources.
  13. Increase coalition building with the Social Media industry working on shared goals.
  14. Request and promote precise definitions and terms of service from social media, e.g. on
    terrorism and antisemitism, and at the same time urge the social media Industry to condemn
    terrorist exploitation of their services.
  15. Call upon the Internet Industry to uphold and enforce terms of service which preclude hate
    speech.
  16. Encourage the Internet Industry to use technological means to prevent online hate speech,
    racism, antisemitism.
  17. Research those Human Rights organizations and the BDS movement who pervert the universal
    ideals of human rights by promoting online hatred of Jews.
    Research Governmental and EU funding of anti-Israel campaigns and the creation of open
    guidelines for the funding of human rights organizations that rely on public funds

Jerusalem, ISCA, host confab to combat online antisemitism

On 19 April, the first-ever International Conference on Online Antisemitism was hosted in Jerusalem, Israel, with the Israeli Students Combating Antisemitism (ISCA) playing a lead role, along with the International Network Against Cyber hate (INACH). It included officials, lay-leaders, non-governmental organizations and professionals from the European Union and a total of 21 countries.

“The fight against antisemitism must not be left to the Jews, it is the responsibility of society at large,” Ms. Katharina von Schnurbein, the EU’s special commisionor on antisemitism told the crowd, adressing the legal aspect of the online fight. “As for the Social media, we need more transparency about the criteria that they use. When content is visible within Europe they need to apply European legislation.”

IN@CH16_4

She also talked about the internal process done by various social networks, saying “They also need to improve their network of flagging platforms. Internet is a virtual world but there is a direct link to the real world and so we must deal with it in the real world. We need to have more willingness from the states in addressing the issues of holocaust education and antisemitism.”

ISCA President Ido Daniel highlighted her point, noting the Israeli student group “has dealt recently with more than 29,000 cases of antisemitism in social media.” The group doesn’t only find antisemitic writings or images. Daniel expalined they “monitor and take action,” not only on Facebook or Yahoo! Answers, but also on shopping sites and Wikipedia.

IN@CH16_2

 

The Psychology of Nazism

Holocaust Scholars and historians are asking the question: How did the German people choose consciously to support an anti-democratic regime that was against humanity at the dawn of WWII?

This question was particularly relevant during the Nuremberg trials after WWII. People heard about the horrific acts that occurred in the holocaust and wanted to know how so many people could murder so many innocent people in cold blood. What kind of personality did these people have and is it pathological?

In order to answer these questions, a number of leading psychiatrists and psychologists interviewed and psychologically tested a group of captured Nazi leaders. Using the Rorschach test, they wanted to explore the core of the Nazi personality in order to find out if it was pathological or normal. They also wanted to find out if there were similarities among the Nazi leaders and if they felt regret for the monstrous acts that they committed?

Another important matter during and after the war was the psychology of Adolf Hitler who was a fascination for a lot of psychologists and psychiatrists. They wanted to understand how the vision of one man brought the world into chaos. They wanted to know if he was normal or mad, and most importantly, if there’s some Hitler in each and every one of us?

In this article I will answer these questions using the data and findings of the Nuremberg psychologists and psychiatrists together with the psychological profile of Adolf Hitler. I will discuss the question whether the Nazis had personality disorders, or were they mentally sane, and only responded to command.

The Psychology of Evil Adolf Hitler

One of the most common beliefs about Hitler is that he was a mad genius who started the holocaust for personal vendetta against the Jewish people. There are a lot of references (mostly in the non-academic world) that claim that Hitler was pure evil and simply cannot be understood because he wasn’t a human. Contrary to this belief, especially in the historic research of WWII and the holocaust, there is a moral importance to study Hitler’s psychology, mind and behavior. The reason for this research is to understand how this one man brought chaos to Europe and most of the western world.

One of the first profiles about Hitler was published in 1939 by the famous psychiatrist Carl Jung who had met Hitler and Mussolini in 1930. Jung described Mussolini as a passionate man full of energy. On the other hand, Hitler frightened Jung because he was unfriendly, un-sexual and almost un-human. There was something different about Hitler. There was something about his personality that wasn’t recognized by Jung.

The second profile, published in 1972, was written by the psychiatrist Langer during WWII. The psychiatrist psychoanalyzed Hitler’s personality after reading Mein Kampf.  Hitler was diagnosed as neurotic and psychotic combined with messiah complex. Hitler had extreme sexual perversions and homosexual masochistic tendencies. Langer believed that Hitler would one day commit suicide.

Hitler and WWI

Langer believed that the traumatic event Hitler experienced during WWI as a soldier was the starting point of his mental illness. Hitler was 29 years old when his unit was attacked by chlorine gas in 1918.  Hitler’s sight was damaged which, as a result, ended his art career.

The loss of his sight together with unbearable pain, caused Hitler to blame the Jewish people for deserting Germany. His hatred grew and turned into an obsession and eventually into pathology. Hitler’s mind connected the physical pain and loss of his art career to the Jewish people. Langer argued that Hitler fabricated his injury to justify his murderous actions by saying that he was the victim rather than the attacker. This fabrication is a symptom of hysteric personality and schizophrenia.

Hitler and Oedipus complex

The famous psychoanalytic Erich Fromm published his diagnostic of Hitler’s personality in 1973 using Mein Kampf and Hitler’s personal history. According to Fromm’s diagnosis, Hitler was an anal narcissistic with self-destructive personality. Fromm argued that Hitler had Oedipus complex which projected into Germany and his hatred towards the Jews. His love for his mother reflected his love for Germany and the hatred for his abusive father reflected his hatred towards the Jewish people.

Should we know his psychology?

There are some holocaust researchers who believe there is no need to research Hitler’s history and personality. Even though he was the direct cause for the holocaust, they believe that Hitler shouldn’t be explained, and that every attempt at an explanation is  un-moral.

Psychopathology of the Nazi leaders

Several psychologists examined a group of Nazi leaders at the Nuremberg trials. Their tests showed that the leaders didn’t have personality pathology and were mentally sane. The only personality feature that they had in common was high intelligence.

The mental experts were looking for an anti-Semitic mental gene but couldn’t find one. The reason for Nazism in not in pathological personality. It derives from something else. In the next few paragraphs, I will write about the psychological tests and search for a Nazi etiology if there is one.

After WWII, the united forces captured most of the Nazi leaders who were all put to trial. Before they were brought to punishment for their crimes, they were psychologically profiled. The profiles were made for mapping and understanding the criminals’ minds. One psychiatrist and two psychologists (all American) used interviews and the Rorschach personality test in 1949.

The interviewers wanted to know if the Nazi leaders (and Nazis in general) were evil people, or just regular people who were forced to do horrible things?

During the trials, two out of three of the interviewers came to the conclusion that the leaders’ personality were not pathological but normative. These men were sane and chose to commit those horrible and horrific acts.

German Culture

German society during WWII was a society that had cultural principal, without judgment or critical thinking. Understanding this, another interviewer came to the conclusion that even no signs of personality pathology were discovered in the Nazi leaders, and therefore, the perspective must be social rather than psychological.

According to the interviewer, Western society during the times of WWII was sick. Germany was one of many with high levels of conformity and obedience to authority. This finding was politically dangerous because the Western world wanted the pathology of the leaders, not of the global society. People were looking for someone to blame for the wrongs of WWII. That’s why these findings were published 30 years later.

 

Discussion

Looking back, knowing all the horrible acts of the holocaust, we allow ourselves to ask how it happened. How did so many people allow this nightmare to come true? How could people be so cruel?

These questions were asked at the Nuremberg trials. People couldn’t accept any answer rather than pathology. They didn’t want to hear any other answer, other than the sickness of the Nazi mind. They wanted to believe that only the sickest mind could commit these monstrous acts. But the truth was that psychologically, the leaders were sane and chose to follow horrible orders. The Nazi leaders said that they didn’t have any choice, and that they had to follow these orders or else they would have been killed. Furthermore, the leaders said that they weren’t acting as individuals but as a group.

Even though the psychological tests showed that the leaders were sane, they were punished for their evil acts. They chose to take innocent lives, and got what they deserved. We must not forget the power of conformity and authority. We must not forget how, for our own survival, and the survival of the ones we love, we will do whatever it takes to keep them safe. I hope that we never have to ask these questions ever again.

 

Written by: Mager Ynon

 

Society, Fashion and John Galliano’s Anti-Semitic Case

Fashion is a unique way to express yourself, a way to tell a story about yourself. A symbol of your place in society. Through fashion we can signal what is special in our personality or tell other people who we really are, or what we want to be. Clothing serves a significant role in the social construction of one’s self. Simply put, through fashion we can discover the nature of society. Examining clothes, helps understand the culture of a given society, as well as the social norms of how a citizen should look at a given time and how these norms vary across different periods.

Clothing is one of the most prominent manifestations of social status, gender and conditions of the body at the social field. Dress in past centuries was the main principle and symbol of social characteristics such as religion, gender, culture and profession were categorized using unique clothing for that feature. Clothing affects the experience of reality through the way it’s placed on the body and limits movement. For example, medieval fashion of aristocratic society did not allow range of motion for women.
As the garment allows movement, the society that the garment belongs to, is permissive and liberal.

In our postmodern era, there is a breakage of axioms like social dimensions, gender, race and sexuality. There is no strong binary of what clothes belongs to men or women as it used to be, but there is a meeting between the sexes, androgyny that is reflected in fashion.
Fashion is a way to recognize, norms, culture, social class and gender of a society. Fashion has a decisive influence on the opinions and perceptions of people. Fashion is an agent of socialization that influences opinion and perception of people on a particular topic. This kind of impact can be really positive and promote solidarity between people, but can also incite prejudice and racism. In this article I will discuss the case of the famous fashion designer John Galliano and his relationship with Judaism, alcohol and freedom of expression.

John Galliano is a British fashion designer who was the chief designer of the fashion company Christian Dior and Givenchy. These days John is the head editor of Paris fashion house “Masion margiela”.
Galliano’s fashion style is romantic, escapist, and very unique. His innovative style is combined with theatrical touches. His style includes unique narratives, such as forests, snow, fairy tales and much more. His authenticity and uniqueness give him high status in the fashion world.

Galliano was fired from his role as Chief Designer of Dior after a video was uploaded to the web where he was documented making anti-Semitic statements when he was drunk at a bar in Paris in 2011. Galliano justified his actions by saying he has a drinking problem. In February of that year, a French journalist received a video by email where Galliano is recorded cursing a group of Italian women. He was yelling “I love Hitler, people like you should die, your mothers, your fathers has to die in the fucking gas chambers”.

This happened a week before Paris fashion week in 2011-2012, and caused a shock in the fashion world. Thousands of people accused Galliano of anti-Semitism and racism, calling for boycotts against his. The video caused a worldwide communication storm which resulted in firing the designer.

Dior claimed it would not legitimize anti-Semitism and racism which is why they fired Galliano. After the media mayhem, Galliano admitted that he was wrong and didn’t mean what he said, mainly because he was drunk and had no control over his words. There is a law in France that forbids anti-Semitic statements in public and the punishment for it is a 6000 euro fine. Galliano broke this law and was required to pay the fine.

In my opinion, this case is very unique because of the moral dilemma. Was it moral to accuse Galliano of anti-Semitism and racism? Especially because he was drunk and didn’t have any control of his words. Is it ethical to fire and punish someone for drunk, racist, public statements? Did we take it too far?

Socially speaking, we usually aren’t fond of people who have different opinions than us. We want to exclude ourselves from these opinions and the holders of these opinions. We want justice to be served, and these people punished.

The most important question is which kind of material should be censored and which should be expressed?

By the constitution of freedom of speech, any material that leads to violence in any form, should be banned, and the beholder of the material should by sentenced.

There is a moral question regarding what should be censored and what should be expressed. How do we know if something really leads towards violence? There is a common belief that the government is very light on the trigger of censoring, and not letting people express themselves.
Regarding the Galliano case, is it moral to punish a man when he was drunk and had no control over his words? Would it be easier to judge him if he wasn’t drunk?

In my opinion, John Galliano is a provocative person. We see it in his fashion style. However, permission for uniqueness in not permission for racism. Even though he was drunk, every adult has the responsibility to decide when to stop drinking. Galliano had a history with Jewish people, and the bar incident was not the first anti-Semitic case. He once appeared on vogue magazine wearing traditional Jewish clothes, and on the cover, the word “smock” was written. So hearing him say these anti-Semitic remarks is not so surprising. Galliano broke the law and therefore he was punished. Letting everyone know that no matter how famous you are, whether you’re drunk or sober, if you choose to express hatred publicly you will be punished.
Written by: Ynon Mager