Definições de antissemitismo

Origem: Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre.

O uso do termo antissemitismo e correlatos tem sido inconsistente ao longo da literatura acadêmica.[1]

Definições[editar | editar código-fonte]

Segundo a Aliança Internacional de Recordação do Holocausto

Segundo a AIRH, antissemitismo é “fazer alegações mentirosas, desumanizantes, demonizadoras ou estereotipadas sobre os judeus em si ou o poder dos judeus como grupo” e também é "culpar os judeus por as ‘coisas darem errado’”.

Segundo Bernie Sanders

Segundo ele, “Criticar o governo de Israel não é antissemitismo”.[2]

Segundo Olavo de Carvalho

Segundo ele, antissemitismo é "uma vaga antipatia que não se traduza em atos discriminatórios, mas sim uma ideologia que, formal e explicitamente, combata a nação judaica como tal, visando ao seu enfraquecimento ou mesmo à sua extinção".[3]

Segundo Bruno Souza

Segundo ele, antissemitismo é “o mito sobre uma conspiração judaica mundial ou sobre judeus controlando a mídia, a economia, o governo ou outras instituições sociais”.[3]

Segundo a Academia russa

Segundo esta definição de 1806, antissemitismo é qualquer reação a ocupção estrangeira contra os traidores tradicionais da pátria russa.[4]

Segundo John Klier

Segundo ele, o antissemitismo é um termo inicialmente usando não apenas contra judeus mas contra os povos semitas em geral, especialmente os árabes.[5]

Segundo o Setor Direito e nacionais-socialistas

Segundo o partido político Svoboda e o movimento Setor Direito, ambos ultranacionalistas da Ucrânia, as três características do antissemitismo são:[6]

  1. Racismo acima da cultura para definir a nação ucraniana em vistas de uma utopia reacionária para liderar os europeus contra combater os semitas e as subraças que supostamente os primeiros usariam
  2. Socialismo no sentido da igualdade dentro do estamento hierárquico rejeitando qualquer forma de democracia e de liberalismo clássico
  3. Imperialismo racial e biológico com vistas de se criar um 3º Reich ucraniano.
Segundo o dicionário Merrian Webster da década de 50

Segundo ele, antissemitismo é Antissionismo.[7]

Segundo Bernard Lewis

Segundo ele, antissemitismo se refere a todo preconceito contra povos de língua semita, sejam eles judeus ou árabes.[8][9]

Segundo Hans Morgenthau

O termo antissemitismo como pogrom[10] é criticado por ele por ser elástico demais.[11]

Segundo David Engel

Segundo ele, o antissemitismo se baseia na perseguição a uma elite minoritária de uma dada região.[12]

Segundo a Enciclopédia Judaica

Segundo ela, o antissemitismo é um ato de violência perpetrado contra judeus e por parte dos cristãos de origem exclusivamente caucasiana.[13]

Segundo a Definição operária de antissemitismo

Segundo a maior parte das associações sindicais da União Europeia, antissemitismo é "...uma certa percepção dos judeus, que pode ser expressa como ódio contra os judeus. As manifestações retóricas e físicas do anti-semitismo são direcionadas a indivíduos judeus ou não-judeus e/ou suas propriedades, a instituições comunitárias judaicas e instalações religiosas."[14]

Ver também[editar | editar código-fonte]

Notas[editar | editar código-fonte]

  1. Bergmann 2005, p. 352: "use of the term... is inconsistent in the literature"
  2. “Criticar o governo de Israel não é antissemitismo”, afirma Bernie Sanders
  3. a b Magalhães, João Carlos MagalhãesBruno SousaJoão Carlos; de 2019, Bruno Sousa22 de Novembro; 20h10. «O estranho ódio de Olavo de Carvalho aos judeus». The Intercept Brasil. Consultado em 29 de maio de 2022 
  4. Klier 2004.
  5. John Klier writes that "To determine what pogroms were, it is essential to consider what they were not. The following events have all been characterized as "pogroms" by historians: the Kiev "pogrom" of 1113, the Cossack uprising under Bohdan Khmelnytsky in 1648; the Koliivshchnyna of 1768; riotous attacks on Jews in Odessa in 1821, 1859 and 1871, and in Akkerman, Bessarabia province, in 1865; the waves of violence in 1881-2; the Kishinev and Gomel riots of 1903; the anti-Jewish violence during the revolutionary years 1905-6; the "military pogroms" in 1914-16; the attacks on Jews by military units and irregulars during the Russian Civil War of 1919-21; and attacks on Jews amidst the national struggles between Poles and Ukrainians in 1920. Virtually the only common feature of these events was that Jews were among the victims, although they were not always the primary target. To begin with the earliest events, Alexander Pereswetoff-Morath has advanced a strong argument against considering the Kiev riots of 1113 an anti-Jewish pogrom. During the Cossack Uprising of 1648 and the Koliivschyna of the following century, which loom so prominently in the Jewish collective memory, Jews were neither the initial nor the principal targets. Rather, they fell victim because of their economic links to the main target, the Polish feudal system, which created an antagonism exacerbated in 1768 by religious antipathy between Catholics and Greek Orthodox Christians. The loyalist violence of 1905-6 occurred within the context of a much broader social and political movement, and featured attacks against other "revolutionary" elements, such as students and teachers, in addition to the Jews. Amidst the chaos of revolution, moreover, the presence of organized Jewish self-defense sponsored by revolutionary parties, complicated the picture, since some self-defense activities were intentionally provocative. The "military pogroms" of 1914-16" have the dubious distinction of being the first events in which agents of the Russian state - in this case military commanders in the field who were unaccountable to the civilian government - designated the Jews as a target and directed violence against them. In 1919-21, the suffering of East European Jews occurred amidst a complete breakdown of public order. The widespread atrocities carried out by all combatants fell upon many different segments of the population."
  6. The Ideology Of The New Ukraine
  7. Nunberg, Geoffrey (11 de abril de 2004). «Lexical Lessons; What the Good Book Says: Anti-Semitism, Loosely Defined». The New York Times (em inglês). ISSN 0362-4331 
  8. From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East
  9. Nguyen, Trung (29 de setembro de 2015). Is There a God? (em inglês). [S.l.]: EnCognitive.com 
  10. Diangrama de Venn
  11. Ideology, Politics, and Diplomacy in East Central Europe, Chapter by Neal Pease, "This Troublesome Question", p 60, "Blatant and brutal attacks against Jews emphatically did occur, but opinions differed then, and continue to differ now, about the applicability of the term "pogrom" to these incidents... [footnote] For example, Ezra Mendelsohn, The Jews of East Central Europe Between the World Wars, describes these actions as pogroms, while Norman Davies says flatly that they were no such thing, God's Playground: A History of Poland, and Europe: A History. Jerzy Tomaszewski, ed. Najnowsze dziejow Zydow w Polsce, labels the Lwow riots of November 1918 a pogrom, but not the Pinsk affair. The disagreement does not so much concern the facts of what happened, but how to characterize them. For its part, the Morgenthau report consciously strove to limit usage of the word "pogrom" as an elastic and imprecise term applied indiscriminately to a broad range of actions, from individual muggings to concerted mob attacks, instead employing the more general, less emotive "excesses"."
  12. Anti-Jewish Violence. Rethinking the Pogrom in East European History. Edited by Jonathan Dekel-Chen, David Gaunt, Natan M. Meir, and Israel Bartal, Chapter 1 "What's in a pogrom?", pp 23-24 "As it turns out, the large majority of the events or sets of events listed in the previous paragraphs, though manifestly dissimilar in detail, appear to display a surprising number of shared characteristics. To begin with, all took place in divided societies in which ethnicity or religion (or both) served as significant definers of both social boundaries and social rank. Moreover, all involved collective violent applications of force by members of what perpetrators believed to be a higher-ranking ethnic or religious group against members of what they considered a lower-ranking or subaltern group. Indeed, those against whom such force was applied were identified primarily on the basis of their group membership, not because of anything they might have said or done as ethnically or religiously unlabeled individuals; at most it can be said that the appliers of the decisive force tended to interpret the behavior of victims according to stereotypes commonly applied to the groups to which they belonged. Either during or following violence, perpetrators expressed some complaint about the victims’ group, claiming collective injury or violation of one or more of their own group’s cardinal values or legitimate prerogatives as a result of some action allegedly taken on behalf of the lower-ranking group by one or more of its members, or by that group as a whole. And, according to the perpetrators, the injured, higher-ranking group could be made whole only through violent action unmediated by the mechanisms that the state normally provided for resolution of disputes or redress of grievances. In other words, the episodes in question all seem to have embodied a fundamental lack of confidence on the part of those who purveyed decisive violence in the adequacy of the impersonal rule of law to deliver true justice in the event of a heinous wrong. In the perpetrators’ hierarchy of values the transgressions of the lower-ranking group were of such magnitude that the legitimate order of things could be restored only when either they themselves took the law into their own hands or--as in Pinsk in 1919, Ukraine during the Russian Civil War, Kristallnacht, or Iasi in 1941--instruments of the state or claimants to state power bypassed normal political and legal channels in favor of direct action against the offenders. Such a moral balance made perpetrators believe that what they had done was right, even where, as in the majority of the cases at hand, state authorities representing the community whose integrity they sought to defend told them the opposite by trying them for their misdeeds. Please note: I do not claim that these features, taken together, constitute the essential defining characteristics of a 'pogrom.' My claim is merely that it is possible to identify a set of historical incidents that display all of those characteristics."
  13. Berenbaum & Skolnik 2007.
  14. IHRA, Working Definition press release (PDF), consultado em 4 de agosto de 2018, arquivado do original (PDF) em 25 de agosto de 2018 

Referências[editar | editar código-fonte]

Wikcionário
O Wikcionário tem o verbete antissemitismo.