The return of an insult

We are in suburban Oslo, among a group of teenagers outside a mall in Stovner. Here, it is claimed, anti-semitism is a growing force. Also here.

Willoch vs. Levin. The discussions about anti-semitism have flared up again. Mona Levin attacked Kåre Willoch (“he is a racist and an anti-semite). Stones have been thrown at the lodge of the Free Masons (and at McDonald’s), the Israeli embassy and shops in downtown Oslo.  A teacher refuses to take students to the Jewish Museum until “Palestine is free”. An e-mail containing juxtaposed pictures comparing the Warszawa-ghetto to the Gaza-jail, ended up on dagbladet.no. And suddenly Hallgrim Berg appeared to accuse USA-professor Ole O. Moen for being “worse than Willoch”.

Everything up and out of the bag, and on with the “anti-semite” tag. The pattern in the following newspaper debates was clear. The Yes – crowd and the No -crowd were butting their heads against each other. It was apparently impossible to agree on what anti-semitism was, and how much of it was around. Why?

Beneath the surface: One of those who have said that we in Norway must be on guard against a growing anti-semitism, is the editor for culture and debate in Aftenposten, Knut Olav Åmås. Which events, statements and debates does this viewpoint rest upon?

- I have for several years believed that anti-semitism lies just beneath the surface in Norwegian society, as a hidden phenomenon.

According to Åmås this is the result of  widespread lack of knowledge about Jewish Norway, and that the small Jewish minority in Norway has been very well integrated and successful, and therefore almost invisible.

- In addition we know that we find anti-Semitism among some moslems in Norway.

– When you say “just beneath the surface”, what is that you are aiming at?

– Lately it has been difficult to see where some people draw the line between criticism of Israel and a more or less unintentional harassment of Jews.

He refers to a letter to Aftenposten, where peace activist Fredrik Heffermehl writes: “To the extent that Jews across the world refrain from protesting against Israeli politics,they contribute to create ill-will against Jews”.

– Does he mean that the Jews of the world are responsible for anti-semitism if they refrain from criticizing Israel’s politics? If this is so, it is a remarkable and horrible thing to say, says Åmås.

– Is there any difference between Heffermehls statement and the demand made by Norwegian politicians and  the Norwegian public that “moslems” must demonstrate against “moslem” violence?

– No, it is exactly the same attitude, and it is unbearable.

Hidden. Åmås says that the pro-Palestinian lobby is incredibly strong in Norway, and that anyone who attempts to describe the Middle-East conflict from an other perspective has an incredibly difficult job.

– In one of your commentaries you write, with reference to Sidsel Levin, manager of the Jewish Museum in Oslo, that “most Norwegians are unable to recognize anti-semitism when they encounter it”. Do you believe that this statement contributes to fighting anti-semitism and to separate anti-semitism from legitimate criticism of Israel?

– I voiced that as a statement of fact. There is no doubt in my mind that it is correct. This is about a deep set Norwegian xenophobia and ignorance on Jewish matters.

Åmås also says that Isreali politics has more critics among Norwegian Jews than one notices. A side effect of this is an erroneous and far-reaching identification of the Jewish minority and the case of Israel as a state.

– Are you afraid of accusations of anti-semitism leading to an asphyxiation of the debate?

– Yes, that definitely worries me. It is very important to be aware of the fact that unjustifiable accusations of anti-semitism is used to intimidate, both in Norwegian and in international debate.

Kurdish youth. After the riots in Oslo the anti-Israeli slogans of the young demonstrators was seen in context of growing anti-semitism. Janic Heen (33) is a film director, and recently worked on an NRK project on kurdish boys who have fled to Norway. He describes a process where he through readings, preparations and late nights of work became familiar with the two boys who were playing the main roles in the tv-series.

– After a while I noticed that there was some prejudice there, against Jews. As we got to know eachother, they felt safe enough to voice these prejudices openly. I have never taken this kind of thing to heart, and couldn’t be bothered to argue with them. When we one day we were reading through our material, and I mentioned that I am Jewish, silence fell over the table. They couldn’t get it, they couldn’t believe that I was Jewish. I was such an Ok sort., so how could I be?

Heen chuckles as the tells the story.

– It never became problematic. During the filming we got to be close friends, and we could joke about it. This indicates that generalizations and prejudice don’t run so deep. They didn’t need that much in order for their perceptions to change.

Dangerous connections. At the same time he is aware that destructive forces are trying to reach out to young moslems.

– I got the impression that one of the boys had contacts with questionable views.

Heen tells us about religious discussions which indicated that this young actor had people in his environment who encourgaed an aggressive, religious mindset.

– Sometimes extreme dogma and conspiracy theories would surface, where antijewish prejudice was very near at hand. It felt like these were opinions he hadn’t reached by himself.

The Kurdish population, according to Heen, consists of many different fractions with varying degrees of religious association.

– It might appear as if there are extremist circles which appeal to certain disadvantaged immigrant groups. Personally I couldn’t care less about the bigotry of the actors I worked with on the TV series, but it worries me that these ideas originate from someplace far darker and more destructive.

He describes the concept of anti-semitism as “strange”.

– I have never liked the concept, nor the fashion in which it is used today.  I am almost equally worried over statements of the sort Mona Levin contributes with, where she accuses others of being anti-semitic just because they voice discontent with Isreal’s politics or point out that Obama’s chief of staff is Jewish. Soon enough, people will cringe from speaking their mind in fear   of being called an anti-semite. That’s when the discontent mixes up with prejudice, and starts to fester beneath the surface.

Lack of proof. Kari Vogt, historian of religion at the University of Oslo, says that no research has been carried out on the proliferation of extremist, moslem, anti-semittic circles in Norway.

– There are groups with extremist leanings throughout Norwegian society.  We might assume that the situation in Gaza strengthens extremist views on Jews in certain, very small groups of moslem youths. But allegations which have been made need to be researched before one can start talking about what actions which might need to be taken. We need facts in order to approach this in a reasonable manner, says Vogt.

Cora Alexa Døving at the Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities (HL-senteret) points to the same lack of factual findings. She also says that “new” anti-semitism among extremist moslems in France have proven to have the same characteristics as the old, european hatred of Jews. This means that anti-semitic expressions build upon a cultural and historical pattern created in Europe. But even if the stereotypes are identical, it is plausible to assume that the reason for anti-semittism in these environments are directly tied to Middle-eastern values.

– From what I know about the situation here in Norway, the only ones who have actively fought against anti-semitism among moslems, are the mosques themselves. They have among other things stopped the distribution of extremist publications. Additionally, the Islamic Council of Norway (Islamsk Råd Norge) participated in an event at Blindern (colloquial for the Univeristy of Oslo), with lectures and debates on the topic.

Eastside Oslo. We jump on the metro towards eastside Oslo, to talk to moslem youths about anti-semitism. In the highrises at Romsås we meet 16 year old Zaid Abideen, who is taking a break from his job at the borough center. He is a student at Sandaker high school.

– Oslo has changed after those things in Gaza. People have turned violent. You know what happened at Mc Donalds? People don’t think any more. It wasn’t like that before.

– Do many of your friends dislike Jews?

– Well, my mates from Palestine say that the people of Isreal aren’t human.

– That’s pretty hard to digest?

– No, you see, you misunderstand. They know they are human, obviously. What they mean is they aren’t good, sound people. That they do bad things.

– Do your friends have a problem with Norwegian Jews as well?

– Nonono. There’s a great difference. The ones here are completely normal, just like you and med. They are pleasant people, there’s no problem.

Holding cell. A couple of stops further east, outside the Stovner – centrum. It is after school hours, and in the swarm of students on their way home we meet Annass Bougrin (15) and malik Hussein (15). They would prefer to talk about the situation in Palestine, but understand our interest for teenager – slang.

– In today’s society we have something called kebab-Norwegian. Are you familiar with it? Jew as a swearword has become in. It is maybe even more of a swearword now, after what’s happening in Gaza.

Bougrin had to spend a night in a holding cell after the demonstrations in Oslo. He explains that he had done nothing besides participating in the demonstration. He has written about the events in the local newspaper in Groruddalen, and is elected to the students’ council at school. Bougrin speaks calmly and in a reflected manner, and is evidently eager to point out that most of the demonstrators did not desire to cause any trouble, and that nobody he knew were looking to target anyone. 

– What does it mean when one uses the word Jew as a swearword? 

– We hold nothing against Israelis or Jews. It has nothing to do with that. If people respect me, I respect them. If someone calls me a “damn moslem”, I’ll reply in kind. I said this to the police too. I have nothing against Jews, I’m against what’s going on in Gaza. Why hasn’t anyone written about the lawful demonstrations we have held whent there was no trouble, and everything was peaceful? 

A rhetorical glance. We remember Åmås’ second claim about anti-semitism lurking “just beneath the surface”. The debate over the last weeks reflects more than anything else than disagreement about what the term concretely refers too. Why is it so difficult to agree upon what anti-semitism really is?

– This is because for the first thing we are experiencing a shift of interpretation of the words “anti-semitism” and “anti-zionism”, where the last mentioned ought to refer to legitimate criticism of a Jewish national state, says Johan L.Tønnesson, orator and professor at the Institute of Linguistics and nordic studies at the University of Oslo. He says that also “anti-zionism” is a problematic word, since “zion” is tied up to old conspiracy theories and the falsification The protocols of the elders of Zion.

– Further confusion arrises during debate, when one displays the fact that “semite” refers to other peoples than Jews alone. The term dissolves.

– What happens to a word when it is constantly used, when at the same time there is no common agreement as to what that word refers to?

– Then the meaning of the word becomes conflicted. This can be beneficial, as one gets to illuminate the problem. I think we have achieved that over the last weeks. It is less beneficial when inflammatory concepts like these are intentionally misused. with very clear political intentions.

Tønnesson reminds us that words are constantly battled over, and says that is an misunderstanding to believe that words have a continuous meaning which may be looked up in the dictionary. 

– What can one do to clarify the debate? 

– I believe it is time to comment upon new words. When the concept of anti-semitism was first introduced, it was as a beautification of hatred against Jews. This beutification should be done away with, therefore it is my opinion that hatred against Jews is a more purposeful label.

History. Christhard Hoffmann is a professor of history at the University of Bergen, and has for several years researched anti-semitism from among others the univerities of Berlin and Berkeley. He believes Tønnessons proposal makes a valid point:

– Antisemittism was from the start hatred against Jews, but this was initially not expressed. If one had said hatred against Jews when the concept arose, it had not as favorably received. In that sense I agree. Jewhate is a clearer way of expressing one’s meaning.

Hoffmann has lived in Norway for ten years. He says the difference between the debate in Norway and in other countries is obvious.

– Polarization is much more prominent in Norway than in other places, where one holds greater knowledge about anti-semitism.

He also finds that the debate in Norway takes little notice of what experts and researchers have to say.

– Everyone talks about anti-semitism, often without historical knowledge about the phenomenon, and what its characteristics are. 

Vigilance. We ask Tønnesson to evaluate Åmås’ statement about how Norwegian rarely recognize anti – semitism when they encounter it.

– I don’t find that statement convincing. It may suggest that there is a general relationship where criticism of Israel slides over towards hatred of Jews. But the claim is not well founded. My children tell me that for their generation, expressions like “damn Jew” have become commonplace. It’s not difficult to recognize this as a symptom of hatred against Jews. It is certainly not about political anti-zionism.

Tønnessons views are not completely synchronized with the language analysis of the teenagers interviewed in this article.

– You are adamant about saying “hatred of Jews” and not “anti-semitism” ?

– That’s right. Right now I’m being consistent about it, because I find it hensiktsmessig. I want to add that it is important to keep the debate about the demarcation between hatred against Jews and anti -semitism alive. This will heighten perception of hatred against Jews.

– This thing about “the hate shining out of Willoch’s eyes when he talks about Israel, that was a weird thing to say. What is this sentence, really? An argument? Or something else?

– Go to the field of rhetoric and you find that a speaker at all times uses the tools ethos, logos and pathos simultaneously. If an onlooker believes to have seen hate in Willoch’s eyes, it’s a legitimate but weak argument, which to considerable extent is tied up to subjective perception. 

Tønnesson also believes that it is unfair to se Willoch’s statement as symptomatic of hatred against Jews.

– Many conclude too fast, connecting criticism of Israel with hatred of Jews, he says.

Stereotypes. On the other side, Christhard Hoffmann says that Willoch’s statement about the Jewish background of Barack Obama’s chief of staff is «unacceptable».

– This statement gives the impression that all Jews mean the same. My impression is that Willoch generally is responsible and conscious about what he says, but that statement is reminiscent of the old anti-Jewish conspiracy-theories, and explains Jewish actions by help of stereotypes. 

Hoffmann believes one can compare anti-Jewish conspiracy theories to conspiracy theories about moslems taking over Europe. An institute in Berlin has started a research project on this. The project met with great resistance in Isreal – friendly circles.

– Some structures are similar, while others are completely different, he remarks.

Spread. So we have teenagers who thoughtlessly use the word “Jew” as an insult. We have extremist groups which manipulate youth. Imprecise Norwegians who partake in debates. Lacking knowledge of Judaism. Connections between the two tales of suffering; Holocaust and Gaza. The racist party Vigrid which denies the Holocaust. It’s all serious, and it’s all anti-semitism.

It seems to be a good idea to pay more attention to the words we use. The problem lies in agreeing upon the connection between a word and a phenomenon. Said in a different way: When the children at the Jewish kindergarden in Oslo aren’t allowed to play outdoors, is it due to inflationary usage of the word “anti-semitism” in Norwegian society, or is it caused by the currents Åmås believe exist beneath the surface of society?

Fashion. We meet up, together with two hundred others, for the Holocaust-center’s Holocaust memorial (January 27th) at the Akershus quay. The atmosphere is solemn. The speaker is Samuel Steinmann, an Auschwitz survivor, who warns against how anti-semitism can advance again. At that very moment we catch a glimpse of a Kaffiyeh wrapped around the neck of one of the members of the audience. The Kaffiyeh is worn by Imrana Mahmood, a 12th grader from Sogn high school. She is attending the memorial together with her classmates Mewish Afzal and Shoira Kosoni. Their school has won the Benjamin-prize for it’s commitment against racism. The girls say it is an honor to be present.

– What do you think about young people using the word “Jew” as an insult?

– It’s mostly boys who call each other that. They don’t mean anything particular or evil with it, as opposed to other swearwords. I don’t really know how people feel when someone is called a Jew. But there has been more of it lately, says Afzal.

– You are wearing a kaffiyeh. Aren’t you afraid of how that could be misinterpreted here today?

Mahmood smiles, and answers without hesitation.

– Oh no. We support Palestine too. And it’s fashionable too.