I read above;
“Other religions are frequently criticized – but anyone criticizing Judaism risks the dreaded accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’.”
I seriously doubt the origins of this word, and the dread that has been created following it.

You talk about solutions, but actually you are being blind to the second side of this conflict by rendering bogus the facts that have been in front of both of us. Unfortunately, we both are reasons for not finding solution to this conflict by letting our egos fight this war. I think something can be done, if we let a little humanity in.

I do not know who you are Nick, I recently discovered this blog of Syd Walker, and I respect his posts.

I agree with you about ‘Israel’ – and the term itself has very curious origins. I would like references on when it first came to be used as the preferred term for the Zionist State. I think it was under wraps until quite late.

In The Controversy of Zion, Douglas Reed discussed the topic a little, especially in Chapter Two. He argues it’s a highly inappropriate word.

Many alternatives have been suggested. I came up with another in a recent article: how about SLASOUPT (Shitty Little Apartheid State on Usurped Palestinian Territory)?

Thank you for your well-considered, well- argued response. It is a refreshing change from unwarranted name-calling.I will re-read it with attention, when time allows it.

I might not agree with you on some of these issues, but respect your views and your right to express them.

It’s correct that i haven’t set this site up primarily as a debating forum over the rights and wrongs of Zionism – or anything else, for that matter. For one thing, had that been my primary intent, I’d have used dedicated forum software.

It’s a fact that there are many places on the web where views such as yours can be expressed. Options available to people with differing views on Zionism, such as myself, are much more limited.

One of the tasks I’ve set myself, in this blog, is to explain my view (a view I haven’t always held) that Zionism is an exceptionally dangerous ideology – the most serious ‘ideological disease’ in the world today. I’m quite happy to have that view tested and criticized. I welcome it when readers land a serious punch against any of the statements I make, facts I adduce or arguments I mount. It makes my thinking sharper and helps clarify things. If readers point out genuine mistakes or weaknesses in the cases that I make, it’s useful to me.

Turning now to the initial comment you made on this thread that relates directly to the subject matter of the post… you wrote that “A word’s etymology is not a word’s definition. “Anti-Semitic” specifically means anti-Jewish, but I am sure that a better term could be used.”

I agree. But what you’ve written misses my point. Why is it that a nonsense term ‘anti-Semitic’ gained such widespread usage just over 100 years ago? Why has it become the standard term for ‘anti-Jewish’ in our era? Is this mere accident?

I don’t think it is. The term ‘anti-Semitism’ and its variants seems to me to be a deliberately categorical mistake (I hope I’ve used the philosophical term correctly). It sets up a false equation between ‘Jews’ as a category and ‘Semites’ as a category.

I suggest this has had several major consequences.

First, it has helped develop a subliminal connection between ‘Jews’ and the middle east, reinforced every time this term is used to both provide an rationale for a Jewish separatist State.
Considering Jews to be ‘Semites’ makes it seem reasonable that the Jewish State is established in a ‘Semitic’ part of the world (i.e. a place where Semitic languages are predominant).

Second, the accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’ is effectively impossible to deny, as the precise semantic content of the nonsense term ‘anti-Semitism’ is left to the discretion of the accuser.

Third, it creates an impression of irrationality. One may have reasonable grounds to be ‘anti-Jewish’ – just as one may have reasonable grounds to be ‘anti-Welsh’ or ‘anti-Australian’. It depends on past experiences, the views of one’s peers etc. But whereas one can express ‘anti-American’, ‘anti-Chinese’, ‘anti-Muslim’ or ‘anti-Christian’ views without there being an automatic assumption of spiteful, irrational hatred, this is effectively not allowed in the case of ‘anti-Semitism’.

Fourth, it provides an exceptional and unwarranted amount of ideological protection to the Jewish religion. Other religions are frequently criticized – but anyone criticizing Judaism risks the dreaded accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’.

Around this nonse category, an industry has devloped. There’s an extensive quasi-psychological rubbish literature that’s sprung up around the topic. We now have many academics and organisations, in many different countries, dedicated to the ‘study of anti-Semitism’ – and to combating so-called ‘anti-Semitism’.

Having observed their behaviour for some time, I’ve concluded they are primarily exercising ideological power to quash unwelcome criticism of Jews (especially organised Jewry), the Jewish religion and/or the State of Israel. In order to secure a dominant position for their preferred narrative, they are willing to sacrifice the free speech of the entire community.

Not surprisingly, such a grab of power is likely to attract resistance. This blog is one small part of that resistance.

I might just check that out, Davidd (sorry Daoud) and leave this one to narrow-minded people like yourself, who resort to name-calling, when you can’t answer questions.

And talking about having “fixed views” .It sounds like you have undergone some severe indoctrination and can’t think for yourself anymore. And while you are living on stolen land, why not worry about the dispossed people living on your doorstep ?

Or maybe you should volunteer to work in a Palestinian refugee camp. An aunt of mine worked there for years and she was very compassionate about the plight of the Palestinians. So am I. That does not mean automatically that I have to hate Israel. It’s called lateral thinking. You should try it one day.

Anyway, I won’t bother with ‘spoiling” this blog anymore. You guys just keep telling each other how clever and informed you all are. Doesn’t seem like to many others are posting here either, or maybe they are censured ?

Enjoy !

Your mission is that of a spoiler, Nick. You have fixed, right-wing, pro-Israel, pro-conservative views but you pretend to be an intellectual who wants to solve problems.

There are plenty of blogs that would welcome folk like you. Have you tried Tim Blair?

You have exposed nothing and are a typical one-eyed fanatic,quick to jump to conclusion and incapable to look at two sides of a story.

Have you considered changing your Hebrew name to Daoud ? It seems kind of contradictory.

By the way, you lost your bet and cheers to you too. This blog is obviously not intended for rational debate, but only for Syd’s cheer squad !

Bet you’re an American-apologist too! Cheers.

Non-Aboriginal Australians never had a legitimate claim on this country.

Will you return to the land of your ancestors and vacate the stolen land you are currently living on ?

Or maybe you could funnel your hatred and frustration into something closer to home, like the many disadvantaged and dispossessed people that live right on your doorstep.

But that would mean actually doing something, rather than yelling meaningless slogans. Your grasp of history is shaky at best.