samedi 2 novembre 2013

Un antisioniste radical invité par le musée juif de Berlin à une conférence sur l'antisémitisme

"Le sionisme empêche les Juifs d'avoir une conception normale de leur vie", Brian Klug.

"The appearance of Brian Klug fits perfectly with the activities of the Center that down-play Antisemitism. The Center appears eager to surround itself with alibi-Jews and we-distance-ourself-Jews who uninhibitedly devote themselves to their 'criticism of Israel'", Samuel Laster, editor of, based in Vienna.

Faute de pouvoir éradiquer l'antisémitisme en Europe, les organisations juives européennes organisent régulièrement des conférences sur l'antisémitisme qui, disons-le franchement, ne servent pas à grand chose.  Non seulement elles se révèlent inutiles, mais de surcroît il arrive que de plus en plus souvent l'on invite des Juifs anti-israéliens qui minimisent la gravité de la situation en Europe et délégitiment Israël. C'est le cas d'une grande conférence internationale sur l'antisémitisme, organisée par le Musée Juif de Berlin, le Centre pour la recherche sur l'antisémitisme (ZfA) à l'Université Technique de Berlin et la Fondation Mémoire, responsabilité et avenir ( (EVZ) qui aura lieu à Berlin les 8 et 9 novembre.  L'invité d'honneur ("keynote speaker") est le professeur Brian Klug, connu pour ses positions controversées.  Mais il n'est pas le seul: "There are several troubling speakers invited to that event, known for distorting and downplaying contemporary antisemit-ism, including historian David Feldman from the Pears Institute in London, known for its kosher stamps for post- and anti-Zionism, and several German scholars like retired sociologist Detlef Claussen who endorsed the historian Tony Judt and his anti-Israel ideology".  Le Musée juif de Berlin s'était distingué il y a un an: Le Musée Juif de Berlin ou plutôt le 'Musée Anti-Juif de Berlin'? 

Le Dr. Clemens Heni, directeur du Centre International de Berlin pour l'Etude de l'Antisémitisme (BICSA), , a recueilli les réactions de plusieurs intellectuels opposés à la participation de Brian Klug à cette conférence, alors qu'aucun intellectuel israélien ou américain (deux pays où vivent la majorité des Juifs et où sont menées les recherches les plus avancées sur l'antisémitisme, notamment en Europe) n'a été invité: "It is particularly interesting that there is not one Israeli and/or American among the participants. This is interesting not only because Israel and the USA are, after all, the major centers of research on anti-semitism - in Europe and elsewhere - but also, and in particular, because the two main, by far the most important, Jewish communities are the Israeli and American communities", souligne le professeur Elhanan Yakira. Pour consulter le dossier, cliquer ICI. Nous reprenons ici quelques extraits:

Clemens Heni: Brian Klug is among the worst choices for a keynote speaker at an event dedicated to the question "What do we mean when we say "antisemitism"?" This is the title of the keynote lecture Klug is supposed to deliver in Berlin on November 8, 2013. He denies that there is a new antisemitism and he affirms anti-Israel positions. He rejects Israel‘s right to exist and collaborates with German anti-Israel agitators and activists (like participants on the Mavi Marmara). For Klug, antisemitism does not exist in our main-stream world. For him, antisemitism only exists in marginal neo-Nazi groups or among people who promote obvious antisemitic conspiracy myths. Brian Klug is particularly eager to use his "Jewishness" to fight the Jewish state of Israel. No surprise, then, that he has many allies in Germany, on ships, in the ivory tower of academia, on the streets, in journals, among activists in foundations, and even at the so-called Jewish museum in Berlin."

Professor Elhanan Yakira: "Dear Clemens,  Thank you for informing me about the up-coming conference in Berlin and of the participation of Brian Klug as a keynote speaker. Although apparently a professor of philosophy, I have never heard of him. From what I could learn about him, he holds typically anti-Israeli opinions (so-called "critical of Israeli politics"), which are neither particularly original nor very interesting. The only interesting thing here is that he was invited as a keynote speaker to a conference allegedly about the new European antisemitism. It is particularly interesting that there is not one Israeli and/or American among the participants. This is interesting not only because Israel and the USA are, after all, the major centers of research on anti-semitism - in Europe and elsewhere - but also, and in particular, because the two main, by far the most important, Jewish communities are the Israeli and American communities. Once again, it seems that for many European - apparently, regrettably, also for the Jewish Museum in Berlin – real Jewish life, feelings and thought is a source of embarrassment. Easier to speak of dead Jews and/or let the Brian Klug kind of Jews speak. Yours, Professor Elhanan Yakira, Department of Philosophy, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem"

Ben Cohen: "I want to state at the outset that I do not object to the invitation to Brian Klug to address this conference. What I do find manifestly objectionable is that Klug will have a privileged platform to express his views on the definition of anti-Semitism in a prestigious setting that will doubtless give his words extra, and likely undeserved, gravitas. When it comes to scholarly work on contemporary anti-Semitism, Brian Klug has made it his mission to immunize anti-Zionists from the charge of anti-Semitism, a classic example of making a case after one has reached a conclusion. This intellectual dishonesty necessarily closes off avenues of inquiry. It prevents us, for example, from critically examining the legacy of Soviet-era, state-sponsored anti-Semitism –– which dressed itself in the language of "progressive" anti-Zionism –– for leftist anti-Semitism in the west today. It cajoles us into closing our eyes to the obvious; for example, were the left-wing terrorists (and Klug's audience should be reminded that these were German left-wing terrorists) who hijacked an Air France plane from Tel Aviv in 1976, and who then separated the Jewish from the non-Jewish passengers at Entebbe airport in Uganda, anti-Semites or anti-Zionists? If our first concern in addressing a question like this is to protect the reputations of those who call themselves anti-Zionists today, then we are engaged in a propaganda exercise, and nothing more. At a time when openly Nazi parties are agitating in Hungary and Greece, when the precious religious rituals of both Jews and Muslims are being attacked in the name of human rights by European political parties and institutions, and when much of the European media persists in portraying Israel as a rogue state as Bashar al Assad, next door in Syria, unleashes chemical weapons on his own population, academics should be candidly asking what it is that they've got so badly wrong for more than a decade. Trotting out the same tired platitudes in defense of anti-Zionism displays a dogmatism that is unworthy of a serious conference like this one."

Sam Westrop: "[...] Klug is no objective academic; he is an agitator with a political agenda. In 2007, he helped establish Independent Jewish Voices, an international group that promotes anti-Zionist senti-ment. In 2009, Independent Jewish Voices sponsored the ten-minute play Seven Jewish Children by Caryl Churchill, in which Jews discuss how to use the Holocaust as justification for their wanton murder of Palestinians, an act in which they revel. One of the key arguments advocated by Klug is that "Zionism is most offensive to the Jewish people themselves. In 2006, Klug argued, during a debate at the Cambridge Union, that "Zionism must be toppled from its pedestal" and that the "Jewish thing" to do is to "subvert it". Writing in the Guardian for the launch of Independent Jewish Voices, Klug decreed that, "No one has the authority to speak for the Jewish people". And yet Klug, in proclaiming Zionism as the antipathy to Judaism, claimed that very privilege."

2 commentaires :

Anne juliette a dit…

Que vaut une conférence sur l'antisémitisme où ne sont pas représentés les 3/4 d'entre eux (juifs israëliens et juifs américains)? Rien.
Les allemands, qui n'ont décidément rien appris de leur passé nazi, ont choisi pour cette conférence d'inviter encore des juifs traîtres ou des faux juifs ou des juifs en phase terminale (comme vous voudrez) parmi lesquels une bonne partie d'européens (pas tous heureusement).
Ainsi, on ne fera pas la différence entre les kapos "juifs" de l'époque nazie et les kapos "juifs" antisionites d'aujourd'hui.
Nous, juifs, nous nous sommes habitués à cette fange plus que tout autre peuple : alors, ils peuvent baver; nous resterons fermes dans nos convictions, c'est-à-dire qu'Israël est la terre des vrais juifs et doit le rester par tous les moyens.
La solution pour ces faux juifs reste l'excommunication comme chez les catholiques (même quand ceux-ci ne sont pas pratiquants): on y viendra.

Philo a dit…

Vous avez raison, Anne Juliette. Ca devient une tendance. En Belgique le CCLJ et l'establishment juif belge francophone ont élu Mensch de l'année 2011 le rabbin David Meyer qui prône la fin d'Israël. Pas une voix ne s'est élevée pour protester.

Tout ça sans la moindre gêne.