I will just add one more post here, not directed at anyone in particular but posted in the hope that anyone will read it as I am quite concerned by the general lack of understanding around antisemitism in the UK.
The Jerusalem Declaration on antisemitism, widely considered the most generous on the side of Pro Palestinian voices, states:
"Antisemitism can be direct or indirect, explicit or coded. For example, “The Rothschilds control the world” is a coded statement about the alleged power of “the Jews” over banks and international finance. Similarly, portraying Israel as the ultimate evil or grossly exaggerating its actual influence can be a coded way of racializing and stigmatizing Jews"
I
t goes onto clarify that this is antisemitic:
"Applying the symbols, images and negative stereotypes of classical antisemitism (see guidelines 2 and 3) to the State of Israel"
The guidelines 2 as described above states:
"What is particular in classic antisemitism is the idea that Jews are linked to the forces of evil. This stands at the core of many anti-Jewish fantasies, such as the idea of a Jewish conspiracy in which “the Jews” possess hidden power that they use to promote their own collective agenda at the expense of other people"
I have frequently come across people who do this, and then respond that the person offended by it is equating Israel with Jewish and saying that in fact the offended person is the antisemite for "conflating the two".
I am not sure how this logic became so common but it's untrue and does not even makes sense. There is no definition anywhere that support this, and it would not make sense for it to do so.
Of course Israel is associated with Jews. Of course zionism is associated with Jews. Of course the Rothschilds are associated with Jews.
In a post-Holocaust world, it's no longer socially acceptable to say “the Jews secretly control our government” or “the Jews are conspiring to spread lies” - most people would immediately recognise those as lines out of a Hitler speech. So instead, the word “Jews” gets quietly swapped for “Israel” or another Jewish-coded term, as if that somehow sanitises the accusation.
That’s exactly why the official definitions of antisemitism go out of their way -twice - to flag this tactic. It’s not antisemitic to criticise Israeli government policy based on facts. But if you're accusing random people of being paid agents or part of some conspiracy of disinformation without any evidence, you're not reacting to what they’ve done - you’re revealing something about your own biases.
To put it in perspective: if a Muslim boards a plane with a bomb, calling them a terrorist is based on their actions. But assuming any Muslim on a plane is a terrorist -that’s your prejudice talking. If a Black person steals your bike, call the police. But if you call the police on an innocent Black passerby, that’s racial profiling.
That is not to say Black people don't sometimes steal bikes - all types of people do. That is not to say Muslims aren't sometimes terrorists -all people are sometimes. That is not to say Jewish people, their governments and organisations do not sometimes pay people to post online in their favour - many countries do.
It just means it's not right to make accusations that draw on tropes of a group unless you have evidence what you are saying has occurred.
This isn’t meant as an attack. But antisemitism often flies under the radar in the UK because it disguises itself so well. It deserves to be called out just like any other form of bigotry. If you're against all racism, this shouldn't be the exception.
Wishing you all a lovely day