The point of modern Jew hatred is not to sound like the 1930s. It is to sound like politics.
Today the slur is semantic. “Zio.” “Zionazi.” “Genocide apologist.” “Baby killer.” The move is to take the oldest accusation in the book, that Jews are uniquely malignant, and dress it up as political critique or commentary. Then you insist it is “just anti-Zionism,” and anyone who hears the continuity is accused of bad faith.
That is why antizionism so often functions like a permission structure. It authorizes institutional and social exclusion and reputational violence while preserving the speaker’s self-image as righteous. You can target Jews as Jews, as long as you use the approved vocabulary.
This is also why I reject the marketing instinct to portray Jews as fragile, trembling, pleading to be seen as human. It misreads the moment and it misstates the reality. Jews are not powerless objects of pity. We are organized, legally literate, institutionally engaged, and increasingly unwilling to accept the demand that we must translate ourselves into someone else’s moral language or political discourse to earn safety.
Call it what it is. Antizionism, as a movement in practice, is a contemporary vehicle for Jew hatred. And the sooner institutions stop romanticizing, for lack of a better term, yesterday’s antisemitism while ignoring or normalizing today’s, the better.
Ad here.
Mick Hartley 
Leave a comment