Is the penny finally starting to drop about anti semitism and hate marches?

[mids2019]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/04/starmer-c al l-society-response-rising-antisemitism

I think we are now seeing the cumulative impact of the anti senitism that has built up over the last 3 years where there has been a permissive environment with politicians hesitant to intervene in events in the streets that have incubated anti Jew sentiment.

All political parties apart from the hate apologist Greens are now waking up to the fact we need better policing and perhaps legislation. I for one will acting a vote for a party that recognises hate marches for what they are and also willing to tackle the vile posts appearing on social media (and Labour have reacted too late too little). Enough is enough for a Jewish community that lives in perpetual fear.

Genuine question - how would you define anti- Semitism?

I think I'm a decent human and would think that I understand what it is but tbh I'm confused.

I've seen ppl criticise Israel for their political/ military actions and that's labelled as anti Semitism. Religion is never mentioned in these statements/ discussions so I don't understand it.
Id like to think I live in a world where I can criticise any government of any country. We do it all the time with our own !

Here's the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's working definition:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. 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:

1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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).
5. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
9. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
10. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
11. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

To add, @FatterthanBarbie , antisemites obviously hate the world's only Jewish state, Israel, so there's a tendency for antisemites to obsess over it and pick over everything it does. So if Israel does something bad, that is amplified and vilified where other countries doing the same thing may be overlooked.

Being appalled at Israel's actions in Gaza or the West Bank isn't antisemitism. But being utterly obsessed with them in a way that you aren't following other horrific news stories could be a sign of antisemitism because Israel is the world's only Jewish state and why are you obsessed with them in particular?

Criticism of Israel isn't by definition antisemitic. It's very possible to criticize Israel without being antisemitic.

However, its also common for the criticism to veer into antisemitism.

How far you want to take your understanding is up to you. Theres an absolute ton of literature to wade through.

A handy shortcut is to swap 'Jews / Israelis' for 'Black' and see if that feels ok. Or 'Israel' for 'Nigeria' and see if that feels ok.

@noblegiraffe thanks for that! I was expecting a couple of sentences. Didn't realise there literally was a list of Don'ts. I agree with all the points, however some of it very specific!

Is there a similar thing for the definition of racism to black people. Things about their historical persecution, slavery etc. if there isn't, I think it would be good to have one.

So looking at the definition you gave, it appears that the ppl who I've seen being called out as anti-Semitic aren't actually that at all as they criticised Israel's military actions.

Could you please direct me to some books on the subject. Id like to learn about this as I honestly know very little on the subject. I don't even know anyone who is Jewish that I can speak to and see from their perspective and obviously anti Semitism isn't something I really think about or come across in my day to day life.

I don't know of such a resource for other forms of racism but agree it would be useful.

Racism against Jews is a tricky one as it manifests itself in very different ways to other forms of racism. Racism against black people, for example, suggests that black people are not as good as white people. Racism against Jews suggests that they are more powerful than non-Jews. There are lots of conspiracy theories around that.

Criticising Israel's military actions is perfectly reasonable, but also sometimes can invoke antisemitic imagery - for example suggesting that Israel is acting like the Nazis, conducting a Holocaust and running Gaza like a concentration camp would be antisemitic as it is deliberately using Holocaust vocabulary against Jews because they're Jews.

Military exports is not the same as arms and no one denied that the UK don't send any, but it's important to keep into context what a small proportion Israel do receive from the UK (less than 1% of the arms they import)

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the US accounted for 69% of Israel's imports of major conventional arms between 2019 and 2023.

Germany is the next biggest arms exporter to Israel, accounting for almost 30% of imports between 2019 and 2023, according to SIPRI.

Italy is the third-biggest arms exporter to Israel, but it accounted for only 0.9% of Israeli imports between 2019 and 2023, according to SIPRI. We export a smaller percentage even than that.

In December 2023, the UK government said British exports of military goods to Israel were "relatively small", amounting to £42m ($55m) in 2022.

That figure fell to £18.2m in 2023, according to the Department for Business and Trade's records.

Between 7 October 2023 and 31 May 2024, 42 export licences were issued for military goods while there were 345 extant licences. The Department for Business and Trade said the military equipment covered under the licences included components for military aircraft, military vehicles and combat naval vessels.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68737412

I am using the term ‘military exports’ / arms for clarity - they are the same. I can understand why you would prefer to call arms ‘military exports’ as you previously said that ‘we know’ the UK isn’t ‘arming ‘ Israel, which was incorrect.

You claim to find it interesting that the BBC ‘debunks’ Oxfam but

a} BBC predates Oxfam’s statement so that would be impossible
and b) even if it were later, it verifies that the UK is sending arms so that would not be ‘debunking’ .

You could simply try googling to get a basic idea of what is happening if you can’t believe Oxfam’s statement. There are even links to gov websites:

Yes, British military trains personnel from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on UK soil as part of routine defense engagement.

Yes, the UK supplies components and materials used in Israeli military drones, though the extent of this trade has been heavily restricted by recent government actions. 1, 2]
Recent Policy Changes
In September 2024, the UK government suspended around 30 arms export licenses to Israel. This specifically included components for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs/drones), targeting equipment, and F-16 fighter aircraft. The government stated this decision was made due to a "clear risk" that certain UK arms might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law. 1]
Industry Supply Chains and Components
Despite the suspensions, investigations and supply chain data indicate that UK-linked firms and facilities continue to play a role in the global aerospace components supply chain: 1, 2]

You claim to find it interesting that the BBC ‘debunks’ Oxfam but

a} BBC predates Oxfam’s statement so that would be impossible
and b) even if it were later, it verifies that the UK is sending arms so that would not be ‘debunking’.

Exactly. The BBC article predates Oxfam's statement so why were they repeating claims it had debunked already? Did they not do any proper research? Clearly they were aiming for the worst possible interpretation of everything.

Military exports could be arms or they could be the export of dual use items (that could be used for military or civilian use) to other nations.

Yeah? Like those tent poles?

Despite the suspensions, investigations and supply chain data indicate that UK-linked firms and facilities continue to play a role in the global aerospace components supply chain

I guess if you squeeze your eyes and concentrate really hard you could turn this into 'Britain sells arms to Israel'? But you'd have to really want it.

So much special pleading going on. I think British marchers would love to be in the US where they could really lay into the government for selling arms to Israel, but they have to make do with this sort of thing.

Military exports is not the same as arms and no one denied that the UK don't send any - Twiglets

We know that the UK government has stopped selling arms to Israel’ -noble

Getting silly isn’t it.

Misinformation presented as axiom gets us nowhere/is time wasting

Can’t help you any more. Try that Google

I don't count selling bits of planes to the US as selling arms to Israel.

I would use the more normal sense of 'selling arms to Israel'.

I don't need google, I know the answer.

Why do you think they were using claims that had already been debunked and putting the worst possible spin on things?

Prosthetic limbs are deemed dual purpose and therefore blocked.

Drone and jet components are allowed.

Crazy eh?

Why is it misinformation if what Noble and I say doesn't align? No one else's posts are expected to say exactly the same thing - we are individuals.

Jet components (which seems to be what people mainly object to) are sold via a global supply pool. This has been challenged by a Rights group in the UK but found to be lawful by a high court.

From the Guardian (June 2025)

Britain’s decision to allow the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, despite accepting they could be used in breach of international humanitarian law in Gaza, was lawful, London’s high court has ruled.

In a 72-page comprehensive ruling Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said they had rejected all the grounds of challenge to a Labour government decision in September to suspend 30 arms export licences to Israel but to continue to sell F-35 parts to Israel via a global supply pool.

The government argued that disruption to the F-35 supply chain would weaken the west and Nato at an acutely sensitive moment. The UK provides about 16% of the parts for the F-35s, and the court was told in closed session that the Lockheed Martin global pool was not structured to permit the UK to insist its parts were withheld from Israel F-35s.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jun/30/uk-sale-f-35-fighter-jet-parts-israel-lawful-high-court

There has been a court case about the jet components that go into a global pool as I outlined above and the court was told in closed session that the Lockheed Martin global pool was not structured to permit the UK to insist its parts were withheld from Israel F-35s.

In my heart I don't really count selling jet components to a global pool really "selling arms to Israel" either (but it is a grey area).

And the high court determined that UK doesn't have a choice about where the components go anyway, so people getting outraged about it is pointless.

I wonder what it is that your heart doesn’t recognise about the term ‘arms’? Would ‘‘targeting systems for killing people’ be more acceptable?

Presumably you prefer the term ‘global pool’ to ‘enormous loophole’ referred to in the piece by Professor Anna Stavrianakis, an expert in UK Arms Export.

I recognise the term arms. Whether component parts of jets can be considered arms is a grey area, but I respect the high court ruling.

I can understand the British government argument that disruption to the F-35 supply chain would weaken the West and Nato. You might not care about that but those that want the West and Nato to be strong do care about it.

And I can understand that the global pool was not structured to permit the UK to insist its parts were withheld from Israel F-35s. So they wouldn't have been able to even if they wanted to.

What do you not understand about these things?

@Twiglets I understand bbc verify perfectly and thank you for posting it. I’m just not sure why you did? You have issues with the vocab used and don’t want to acknowledge the salient points made - that the UK is supplying Israel with arms and the exemption of the F 35 parts from the export ban is a ‘loophole’ as stated by Prof Anna Stavrianakis, an arms expert.

AS is a really interesting woman btw and I’d recommend reading more from her here:
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-arms-trade-a-trifecta-of-everything-thats-wrong/