Palestinians are Semites. If you weren't aware, consider why.
Israeli, Jewish, and zionist are not all different words for the same thing.
Israeli, Jewish, and zionist are not all different words for the same thing.
The problem is that the lines between many of these words are confusing and often intentionally blurred by people on various sides.
While the definition of Semite includes Arabs and other people[1], anti-Semite is specifically defined as hostility towards Jews.[2]
Also not all Jews are Israelis, not all Israelis are Jews, not all Israelis or Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews or Israelis.
It therefore is anti-Semitic when Jews are blamed for the actions of either Israelis or Zionists the same way it would be anti-Muslim to blame any random Muslim person for the actions of the Saudi government or any other specific group of Arab people.
[1] - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Semite
[2] - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-Semite
Generally from the start the word meant hating Jews (not Semitic peoples as in those that speak Semitic languages - Jews specifically). If it didn't originally, it certainly came to mean that over time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Etymology
Maybe people that speak Semitic languages are Semitic (I don't know - feels like pseudoscience, though there could be a lot of commonality in different ways). That being said, "Antisemitism" means hating Jews. It's not a special prize or anything. More than anything, the terminology is an unhelpful distraction from the more important things around when it comes up. I wish they stuck with "Judenhass".
We can certainly agree on that point. If nothing else, it makes much clearer the implications of characterizing Israeli–Palestinian enmity as a matter of Jew-hatred: no less than the invocation of Godwin's law as a thought-terminating cliche.
You are basically doing the exact same thing in the opposite direction.
Equating all Jews with Israel is anti-Semitic because Israel does not represent all Jews and isn't exclusively populated by Jews.
Insinuating all anti-Semitism is related to Israel is anti-Semitic because it ignores the hostility and violence that has been directed towards Jews that has nothing to do with either historic or modern politics of The Holy Land.
> Equating all Jews with Israel is anti-Semitic because Israel does not represent all Jews and isn't exclusively populated by Jews.
I think I agree with at least the letter of this claim, but I'm very puzzled at what you mean to say by it. I'm not sure whether we have a real disagreement or are talking past each other.
Throwing the word "anti-Semitism" around in the context of the politics of the Holy Land robs it of meaning. The present Israeli–Palestinian enmity has fundamentally different bases, only tenuously connected to the Western tradition culminating in "anti-Semitism". To call one by the other's name is a rhetorical trick to point at an outward similarity (hostility directed toward a majority-Jewish group) to equate Palestinian grievances with a more familiar form of Jew-hatred, to paint them as illegitimate and thereby dismiss them out of hand. And this has never been such a simple black-and-white conflict.
- 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.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
This simply isn't true though. The line is intentionally blurred by one side in order to suppress any valid criticism of Israel or Zionism by labelling (libelling) that critique as a criticism of Jews. There is no "various sides" to this blurring of lines.
> It therefore is anti-Semitic when Jews are blamed for the actions of either Israelis or Zionists
Hypothetically it would be but does it happen? This myth that blaming of Jews is happening broadly (not just Israel/Zionists) is exactly the misinformation that's being discussed. Your comment only perpetuates this.
Linking to dictionary definitions is a bit of a strawman; everyone knows the difference, that's not evidence that conflation is actually widespread at all. I've certainly not seen any criticism of Jews.
The conflict is with Israeli Jews which is the largest ethnic group in Israel.
Even aside from the fact that Israel is typically rated a "flawed democracy" in most indices due to the lack of press freedom, even it were a so-called "full democracy", no democracy even claims to be representative of constituents in any direct way (even those with relatively broad suffrage like NZ). Their goal is to be a best-of-alternatives approach in contrast to more regressive systems, along with known limitations such as majoritarianism, plutocratic platform access issues, etc.
So yes, it's the government. Some subset of the population may agree with them yes, but they are still very separate entities.
By the way Israel has normalized relations with three Arab countries, the last agreement made in 2020. Unfortunately the palistinean peace effort is now close to 20 years, with no real progress there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_Arab_E...
[0] https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/total-u-s-foreign-aid-t...
Yeah, I wonder why is that. It's not like they have any valid reason to be against Israel, like having their land being taken away from them in what is basically a lebensraum, so it's surely has to be just some kind of irrational hatred towards Jews.
I will concede that this is a common framing of the facts from the Palestinian side. It's not nearly as easy to describe it as 'neutral' however, or to ascertain with any certainty what counts as any "valid reason" as opposed to "irrational hate".
But you have neglected to describe those other perspectives.
Do they exist? What other way could one possibly frame this?
>> According to a 2017 survey by University of Haifa professor Sammy Smooha, 16% of the Arab population prefers the term "Israeli Arab", while the largest and fastest growing proportion prefers "Palestinian in Israel", and 17% prefer "Palestinian Arab"
All cultural and ethnic identities are synthetic. Whether we choose to accept a definition of Palestinian identity "in opposition to Israel" or not, we are not simply reading off a list, but creating new language. The area that became Israel and Palestine was partitioned between the Sanjuk of Jerusalem and the Vilayet of Beirut under the Ottomans, and the local and regional cultures and identities formed then were not in opposition to anything. To build a future, we are better off taking the good things from the past, rather than the bad ones.
This is a situation prior generations of Israelis created in the midst of Palestinians who preferred not to be evicted and harassed from their homeland. This isn't some impossible situation in which Palestinians instinctively hate Israelis with no specific grievances. Moreover, Israel's idea of "durable peace" as proposed in agreements seems to be highly conditional on keeping the land they occupy, in excess of what is recognized by the Palestinians or even by international agreements.