The Royal Commission on antisemitism is rapidly becoming a mechanism to police dissent, shield Israel from criticism, and redefine the limits of political speech in Australia.
“Your experiences as a child had more to do with kids can be cruel as most of us experienced for being poor, rich, fat, thin, freckled, redhaired, bad at school, good at school, bad at sport, good at sport etc.”
No, these are grown adults hurling abuse as I played in the front yard with siblings, including a daily offering from old racist Mr Robinson. Best not to tell other people what their experiences were, based on your own, because there’s a chance the wrong assumptions will be made.
Anti-semitism or criticism of Israeli atrocities as the State which claims to represent all Jews cannot be racial hatred because Jews are a religion, not a race and Israel is not a race and it claims to represent a religion. The original meaning of anti-semitism was hatred of Judaism, the religion, and its followers, Jews. Yes, Zionists and Israelis, often atheists and so not Jewish, have conflated it all to claim valid condemnation of the crimes of the Israeli state represents a hatred of Jews and Judaism but it does not. The real anti-semitism is the fascist, supremacist, apartheid, colonial, military, occupation, genocidal state of Israel claiming it represents Judaism and Jews.
It appears that the Antisemitism Envoy essentially demonizes, defunds, and criminalizes dissent to Israel's g3n0c1de. It appears that the Royal Commission on antisemitism is essentially a kangaroo court constituted to frame everything as the Envoy and her fellow Israel g3n0c1de lobbyists want it. What Hasbara McCarthyism will Labor governments (and their complicit Libs, Nats, and OneNats) gift Aussies next, and will they drop it before or after the NSW election?
(Neo)'Liberal' Party? I haven't seen any fight to preserve Civil Liberty from them this century.
ALP the 'Party of Workers'? Maybe 10%, but the other 90% is more like Another (Neo)Liberal Party.
OneNation? Of & by the duped racist imperialists, for the fossil fuel investors (like the Nationals).
At least we have Greens NSW, which have actively resisted this McCarthyism.
I'm very glad I did - I think we should all read it - because it brings nuance and context into the definition of antisemitism.
It's a shame we can't separate a debate about geo-political issues from personal hurt and abuse. We do need to be considered in how we express ideas because imprecise language does not aid communication and that's the whole point of debate.
I can't help but think there's a connection here between individualism in society versus collectivism. Definitely requires further thought.
Magnificently well said 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Imagine if Indigenous Australians had the eye watering levels of money and power over
governments in Australia , as does a minority of Zionist lobby groups and our “antisemitism envoy “. What if
Presbyterians suddenly decided they needed a nation state of their own and used money and power to gain it , in the way that Zionist Israelis have been doing for decades ?? It is well known that many people of Jewish faith are vehemently
opposed to the genocide being committed by the Zionist Israeli government . I think of the superb poetry and songs
composed by the legendary Leonard Cohen . Imagine what he would be writing today . (Just one example).
It appears all too clear that this Royal Commission will be merely a performative measure to reduce free speech and shrivel
democracy . I wonder how much Commissioner Bell concerns herself about this political shroud being held over
Australians , and whether she has any power at all to DO Her Job .
The Voice Referendum demonstrated just how racist this country is . That the Albanese government appears content to foment even more racism and social unrest rest is despicable. The PM has been quoted as wanting “the temperature of
social commentary to be turned down “ because Australians are appalled by his refusal to tax gas companies. Now comes this Royal Commission , seemingly aiming to further “shut the mouths “ of decent , reasonable Australians who prefer democracy to authoritarianism . For shame .
You said: None of this is to deny the existence of antisemitism in Australia. As a child growing up in a working class migrant family in a dysfunctional, predominantly white-Anglo lower socio-economic and angry outer suburb in Perth, I’m not going to deny whatever people might be feeling, because I’ve felt it myself, and so many times.
Australia has a long history of intermarriage with aboriginal peoples and some of the highest rates of immigrant intermarriage of any nation. There is very little racism in Australia and I have lived in Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney as well as two country towns, Port Pirie and Wagga Wagga.
Your experiences as a child had more to do with kids can be cruel as most of us experienced for being poor, rich, fat, thin, freckled, redhaired, bad at school, good at school, bad at sport, good at sport etc.
I grew up in a working class family surrounded by migrant families and the only criticisms ever made were of how people lived i.e. messy yards, violence, drinking etc. No-one cared where they came from. Our parents chatted over the fence to Greek, Italian, Turkish, Vietnamese and more migrants and we all went to school together. Perhaps Adelaide was better but having lived in Perth for 20 years, off and on from 1980 to 2019 I doubt it.
When you criminalize dissent, you merely drive it underground, or at least encourage skirting the letter of the law, especially with the cancel culture pre-built into democracies. Lately I've been considering comparing Zionists to Nazis, and various legal responses such as in the UK (https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/not-improper-for-barrister-to-compare-israel-with-nazi-germany) and even Israel (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16488042). But there's no reason to compare Nazis with Zionists (or Jews, or Palestinians) in a critical or emotive way, when you can make useful points in entirely different ways.
Example: one sensibly can compare a current prime minister of Israel with a former chancellor of Germany. Both self-identified Zionists; both mass murderers; both prima facie antisemitic. It's the differences, however, that tell a more interesting story, but you have to be prepared to look more closely.
The Chancellor killed 14 million in his concentration / death camps, of which apparently "only" six million were semites. The evidence thus suggests he was an equal opportunity mass murderer (I don't argue he was woke as well, despite what DIE stands for), especially from 1939 when his unpopular formal alliance with the Zionist Federation of Germany was dissolved as a result of UK naval power. Though mutually beneficial Zionist-freeing arrangements by his SS underlings apparently continued in the camps during the war, such as evidenced by Eichman's subsequent testimony.
The Prime Minister, in contrast, has focused his own mass murders almost exclusively on semites, thus prima facie he's more determinedly antisemitic than the Chancellor. He's murdered only a few thousand non-semites, mostly journalists, UN aid workers, etc. Drilling down a little, it seems that he also discriminates on the subtype of semite: Jews on the one hand, versus Christians and Muslims on the other. He'll enthusiastically and indiscriminately kill the latter subtypes of semite, but he targets (as distinct from kills) only individual members of the former subtype (regardless of collateral damage against other semites of the same subtype), directly by way of approved assassination rather than indirectly by way of policy.
Two iconic events suffice to illustrate the Prime Ministerial ironies: the shooting-execution of a prime minister of Israel (a semite); and the recent obliteration of a Tehran synagogue (during Passover!) with the specific aim of killing an Iranian general who apparently is (or was, the success being unclear) to be a devout non-semitic Jew (which piles on more ironies). The mass murder of all other devout Jews in the synagogue (by Israeli Jews arguably self-identifying as non-devout by way of working/killing observant Jews on Passover?) is, by inference, unimportant to the prime minister: as "collateral damage", they simply don't matter.
Where the ironies make all the necessary points, direct or emotive criticism becomes almost silly.
Another application: everyone seems to be banning specific phrases and organizations (much as communist parties used to be banned). For example, in the UK it's apparently illegal to march for or in any way support "Palestine Action", or wave the Palestinian flag. So we should take down such malicious systems by the weight of their own stupidity. By malicious compliance, like the Good Soldier Svejk (recommended reading!), or The Revolt of Gunner Asch (ditto), or many corporate business and process models. So, instead, march under the slogan "I Support Palestine INaction - Because I Love Genocide", while enthusiastically waving a skull and crossbones pirate flag. Etc. Eventually it becomes an increasingly idiocratic whack-a-mole, and the legislators will come to be seen as exactly what they are: stupid, authoritarian, and venal (all mutually reinforcing).
A continued thankyou for your consistently new-context re-framing fresh-insights new-evidence explorations, grounded in lived experience as much as political analysis and cultural deep-reads. And for nonetheless being a bulwark against despair/paralysis.
“Your experiences as a child had more to do with kids can be cruel as most of us experienced for being poor, rich, fat, thin, freckled, redhaired, bad at school, good at school, bad at sport, good at sport etc.”
No, these are grown adults hurling abuse as I played in the front yard with siblings, including a daily offering from old racist Mr Robinson. Best not to tell other people what their experiences were, based on your own, because there’s a chance the wrong assumptions will be made.
Anti-semitism or criticism of Israeli atrocities as the State which claims to represent all Jews cannot be racial hatred because Jews are a religion, not a race and Israel is not a race and it claims to represent a religion. The original meaning of anti-semitism was hatred of Judaism, the religion, and its followers, Jews. Yes, Zionists and Israelis, often atheists and so not Jewish, have conflated it all to claim valid condemnation of the crimes of the Israeli state represents a hatred of Jews and Judaism but it does not. The real anti-semitism is the fascist, supremacist, apartheid, colonial, military, occupation, genocidal state of Israel claiming it represents Judaism and Jews.
It appears that the Antisemitism Envoy essentially demonizes, defunds, and criminalizes dissent to Israel's g3n0c1de. It appears that the Royal Commission on antisemitism is essentially a kangaroo court constituted to frame everything as the Envoy and her fellow Israel g3n0c1de lobbyists want it. What Hasbara McCarthyism will Labor governments (and their complicit Libs, Nats, and OneNats) gift Aussies next, and will they drop it before or after the NSW election?
(Neo)'Liberal' Party? I haven't seen any fight to preserve Civil Liberty from them this century.
ALP the 'Party of Workers'? Maybe 10%, but the other 90% is more like Another (Neo)Liberal Party.
OneNation? Of & by the duped racist imperialists, for the fossil fuel investors (like the Nationals).
At least we have Greens NSW, which have actively resisted this McCarthyism.
Judaist Aussies also have the JCA batting for justice, even if the match is fixed to oppose them: https://www.jewishcouncil.com.au/2026/05/jewish-council-to-appear-at-royal-commission-hearings-this-week-on-definitions-and-drivers-of-antisemitism
This is a very informative article - thank you Eddy.
I didn't know about the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, so I looked it up:
https://jerusalemdeclaration.org/
https://jerusalemdeclaration.org/wp-content/uploads/JDA-English.pdf
I'm very glad I did - I think we should all read it - because it brings nuance and context into the definition of antisemitism.
It's a shame we can't separate a debate about geo-political issues from personal hurt and abuse. We do need to be considered in how we express ideas because imprecise language does not aid communication and that's the whole point of debate.
I can't help but think there's a connection here between individualism in society versus collectivism. Definitely requires further thought.
Every time an Israeli kills a Palestinian, that causes more people to hate Israelis.
Israelis gave been killing Palestinians since 1948.
That is the cause of antisemitism.
Magnificently well said 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Imagine if Indigenous Australians had the eye watering levels of money and power over
governments in Australia , as does a minority of Zionist lobby groups and our “antisemitism envoy “. What if
Presbyterians suddenly decided they needed a nation state of their own and used money and power to gain it , in the way that Zionist Israelis have been doing for decades ?? It is well known that many people of Jewish faith are vehemently
opposed to the genocide being committed by the Zionist Israeli government . I think of the superb poetry and songs
composed by the legendary Leonard Cohen . Imagine what he would be writing today . (Just one example).
It appears all too clear that this Royal Commission will be merely a performative measure to reduce free speech and shrivel
democracy . I wonder how much Commissioner Bell concerns herself about this political shroud being held over
Australians , and whether she has any power at all to DO Her Job .
The Voice Referendum demonstrated just how racist this country is . That the Albanese government appears content to foment even more racism and social unrest rest is despicable. The PM has been quoted as wanting “the temperature of
social commentary to be turned down “ because Australians are appalled by his refusal to tax gas companies. Now comes this Royal Commission , seemingly aiming to further “shut the mouths “ of decent , reasonable Australians who prefer democracy to authoritarianism . For shame .
You said: None of this is to deny the existence of antisemitism in Australia. As a child growing up in a working class migrant family in a dysfunctional, predominantly white-Anglo lower socio-economic and angry outer suburb in Perth, I’m not going to deny whatever people might be feeling, because I’ve felt it myself, and so many times.
Australia has a long history of intermarriage with aboriginal peoples and some of the highest rates of immigrant intermarriage of any nation. There is very little racism in Australia and I have lived in Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney as well as two country towns, Port Pirie and Wagga Wagga.
Your experiences as a child had more to do with kids can be cruel as most of us experienced for being poor, rich, fat, thin, freckled, redhaired, bad at school, good at school, bad at sport, good at sport etc.
I grew up in a working class family surrounded by migrant families and the only criticisms ever made were of how people lived i.e. messy yards, violence, drinking etc. No-one cared where they came from. Our parents chatted over the fence to Greek, Italian, Turkish, Vietnamese and more migrants and we all went to school together. Perhaps Adelaide was better but having lived in Perth for 20 years, off and on from 1980 to 2019 I doubt it.
Who decides who can speak at the commission? Is it Virginia Bell? Or the government?
When you criminalize dissent, you merely drive it underground, or at least encourage skirting the letter of the law, especially with the cancel culture pre-built into democracies. Lately I've been considering comparing Zionists to Nazis, and various legal responses such as in the UK (https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/not-improper-for-barrister-to-compare-israel-with-nazi-germany) and even Israel (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16488042). But there's no reason to compare Nazis with Zionists (or Jews, or Palestinians) in a critical or emotive way, when you can make useful points in entirely different ways.
Example: one sensibly can compare a current prime minister of Israel with a former chancellor of Germany. Both self-identified Zionists; both mass murderers; both prima facie antisemitic. It's the differences, however, that tell a more interesting story, but you have to be prepared to look more closely.
The Chancellor killed 14 million in his concentration / death camps, of which apparently "only" six million were semites. The evidence thus suggests he was an equal opportunity mass murderer (I don't argue he was woke as well, despite what DIE stands for), especially from 1939 when his unpopular formal alliance with the Zionist Federation of Germany was dissolved as a result of UK naval power. Though mutually beneficial Zionist-freeing arrangements by his SS underlings apparently continued in the camps during the war, such as evidenced by Eichman's subsequent testimony.
The Prime Minister, in contrast, has focused his own mass murders almost exclusively on semites, thus prima facie he's more determinedly antisemitic than the Chancellor. He's murdered only a few thousand non-semites, mostly journalists, UN aid workers, etc. Drilling down a little, it seems that he also discriminates on the subtype of semite: Jews on the one hand, versus Christians and Muslims on the other. He'll enthusiastically and indiscriminately kill the latter subtypes of semite, but he targets (as distinct from kills) only individual members of the former subtype (regardless of collateral damage against other semites of the same subtype), directly by way of approved assassination rather than indirectly by way of policy.
Two iconic events suffice to illustrate the Prime Ministerial ironies: the shooting-execution of a prime minister of Israel (a semite); and the recent obliteration of a Tehran synagogue (during Passover!) with the specific aim of killing an Iranian general who apparently is (or was, the success being unclear) to be a devout non-semitic Jew (which piles on more ironies). The mass murder of all other devout Jews in the synagogue (by Israeli Jews arguably self-identifying as non-devout by way of working/killing observant Jews on Passover?) is, by inference, unimportant to the prime minister: as "collateral damage", they simply don't matter.
Where the ironies make all the necessary points, direct or emotive criticism becomes almost silly.
Another application: everyone seems to be banning specific phrases and organizations (much as communist parties used to be banned). For example, in the UK it's apparently illegal to march for or in any way support "Palestine Action", or wave the Palestinian flag. So we should take down such malicious systems by the weight of their own stupidity. By malicious compliance, like the Good Soldier Svejk (recommended reading!), or The Revolt of Gunner Asch (ditto), or many corporate business and process models. So, instead, march under the slogan "I Support Palestine INaction - Because I Love Genocide", while enthusiastically waving a skull and crossbones pirate flag. Etc. Eventually it becomes an increasingly idiocratic whack-a-mole, and the legislators will come to be seen as exactly what they are: stupid, authoritarian, and venal (all mutually reinforcing).
A continued thankyou for your consistently new-context re-framing fresh-insights new-evidence explorations, grounded in lived experience as much as political analysis and cultural deep-reads. And for nonetheless being a bulwark against despair/paralysis.