Posted by Eugene Volokh:
The Effects of Modest Amounts of Anti-Semitic Speech and Unfair Anti-Israel 
Sentiment on American Jews and Israel:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_05_27-2007_06_02.shtml#1180717872


   American Jews naturally worry about anti-Semitic speech, for the
   obvious reason that it could lead to [1]anti-Semitic murder, other
   crimes, job discrimination, and more. They also worry about unfair
   criticism of Israel, because it could undermine American help for
   Israel, American trade and professional exchanges with Israel, and the
   like.

   But it seems to me there are also contrary effects. American help for
   Israel -- especially private help -- is also undermined by any decline
   in American Jews' emotional connection to Israel, a decline that can
   stem from (1) growing assimilation, (2) a declining sense that Israel
   is unfairly embattled, and (3) a declining sense that Jews are
   unfairly embattled and need Israel as a defender and retreat of last
   resort. Likewise, what most undermines these days the welfare of the
   American Jewish community as an independent community (rather than
   just as individual people)? My sense is that the answer is
   assimilation and declining sense of common fate, rather than an
   unwillingness to identify as Jews for fear of ostracism or violent
   reprisal (a fear that was more serious some decades ago).

   Modest amounts of anti-Semitic speech and unfair criticism of Israel,
   it seems to me, can strengthen American Jews' self-identity as Jews,
   and thus indirectly support both the preservation of the American
   Jewish community as a community, and strengthen support for Israel.
   Feeling embattled as a group tends to strengthen group solidarity.
   Hearing unfair criticisms for Israel tends to strengthen the sense
   that Israel is unfairly embattled and deserves more support. Feeling
   some fear of anti-Semitism reminds American Jews of the value of
   preserving American Jewish institutions. And it reminds American Jews
   of the value of protecting Israel, in case one day American Jews may
   need refuge somewhere just like European Jews once did. ("[2]Home is
   the place where, when you have to go there, They have to take you
   in.")

   If anti-Semitic speech became too common, these
   community-strengthening effects may be decreased (for instance, if
   American Jews became afraid to be publicly identified as Jews) or
   might be swamped by harmful effects (again, such as violence,
   ostracism, discrimination, or fear suffered by individual Jews). But
   my sense is that at modest levels, the existence of this speech in
   America is a net positive (not an unalloyed positive, but a net
   positive) both for Israel and for the American Jewish community. And
   we are talking these days about such modest levels, if one looks at
   the big picture of Jewish existence in America today.

   So far I have tried to be purely descriptive: I have tried to describe
   what I think is an existing phenomenon, a phenomenon that is positive
   for Israel and for the American Jewish community as a community. (I
   should say that I'm a relatively assimilated Jew who doesn't care as
   much about the American Jewish community as a community as some do;
   I'm much more concerned with the welfare of individuals, Jewish or
   not, than with the welfare of the community. Still, even I see some
   value, so long as anti-Semitism does exist, in America and elsewhere,
   in protecting Israel and preserving American Jewish institutions.)

   Now, though, let me shift to the prescriptive: I think that this
   phenomenon ought to further strengthen American Jews' support for free
   speech, including for free speech by anti-Semites and unfair, bigoted
   critics of Israel. (I think we should support such free speech even
   without this phenomenon, but I hope this phenomenon strengthens such
   supprot in others.)

   Anti-Semitism, whether Muslim, white nationalist, or otherwise, is out
   there. Suppressing such speech might diminish anti-Semitism in some
   ways (for instance, if the suppression is effective and stops the
   persuasive or attitude-reinforcing effect of such speech), or it might
   increase anti-Semitism in some ways (for instance, for making the
   anti-Semites look sympathetic in some people's eyes, or making people
   who are from the same community as anti-Semites feel embattled and
   hostile to those who are seen as persecuting them). But on balance,
   the main effect of such suppression, if it is effective, will be to
   make American Jews feel more complacent. And publicly identifying and
   condemning such speech will remind American Jews that there is
   anti-Semitism out there, that it must be fought -- and that fighting
   such anti-Semitism and protecting against its most harmful effects is
   one reason that both Israel and American Jewish institutions need
   support.

   Naturally, there are limits to this. Certainly no-one should foment
   anti-Semitic speech or conduct, or blow it out of proportion, or
   tolerate leaving actual anti-Semitic violence unpunished. Increasing
   group solidarity is not the most important thing.

   But if you think that increasing group solidarity is on balance one
   important thing (either as an end or as a means), the First Amendment
   rights of American anti-Semites help you rather than hurt you. You
   shouldn't be demanding speech codes; you should be shipping in more
   video cameras (and of course demanding protection from violence for
   those who use them), and publicizing the bad speech that you find.

   Free speech is valuable because it informs people -- and it informs
   people not just when the listener hears and believes the facts the
   speaker says, but also when the public learns more about the speakers.
   Publicly visible anti-Semitic advocacy is, at least in America today,
   an important informational tool: It informs American Jews of the value
   of Jewish institutions, and it presents this information in an
   especially emotionally effective way. Again, not in my view the best
   reason to support free speech, or even close to it. But those who
   don't share my views about the broader moral and instrumental value of
   free speech should, I think, consider this more immediate instrumental
   value.

References

   1. http://www.cnn.com/US/9908/12/california.shooting.03/
   2. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/robertfros100246.html

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to