NY governor calls vandalism at the homes of Jewish board members of the Brooklyn Museum ‘an abhorrent act of antisemitism’
NY governor calls vandalism at the homes of Jewish board members of the Brooklyn Museum ‘an abhorrent act of antisemitism’
www.cnn.com
NY governor calls vandalism at the homes of Jewish board members of the Brooklyn Museum ‘an abhorrent act of antisemitism’ | CNN
Funny thing:
The idea that protesting the slaughter of Palestinians equals antisemitism requires starting from the position that slaughtering Palestinians is a fundamental part of the Jewish identity.
There's really no alternative way to interpret that. If slaughtering Palestinians is not a fundamental part of the Jewish identity, then protesting such slaughter has nothing to do with Judaism, and thus cannot be antisemitic. It'd be like trying to claim that protesting cars is anti-Amish.
So all these people quoted here are essentially saying that slaughtering Palestinians is not just fundamental to being Jewish, but so deeply and uniquely fundamental - so much a part of Jewishness - that opposing such slaughter automatically equals opposing Jews.
Doesn't that sound sort of... antisemitic?
Actually, a bit of quick research reveals that Brooklyn Museum, and Anne Pasternak specifically, have been the targets of protests since at least 2016, when the museum, under her directorship, put on a show called "This Place" that purported to be an unbiased look at Israel and Palestine, but was backed by pro-occupation funders.
In fact, the group that was organized in response to that show, called "Decolonize This Place," still exists and is still active.
So it's exceedingly safe to assume that she wasn't targeted "just because (she's) Jewish" but because for at least the past eight years, she, and the museum more broadly, have been seen to be sympathetic to colonialism broadly, and zionism specifically - so much so that at least one organization was formed and still exists specifically to protest them.
Here's the most concise source for that - an interview with Pasternak from 2018
This is a very, very dangerous idea to perpetuate. Saying any act of protest against Jewish people, whether or not it’s related to their religion or heritage, is antisemitic means we cannot criticize Jewish people for valid reasons unrelated to their religion or heritage. Misguided or not, it does not seem that these protestors were attacking them because they are Jewish but rather because they are Zionist and just happen to be Jewish. A natural extension of this idea is that protesting the rampant fraud from previous Netanyahu terms would make me antisemitic which is patently false.
To quote you, I’m not sure we read the same article if you think the homes were vandalized because the occupants are Jewish.
This whole conversation is super fraught with nuance.
I’m not sure how hosting an art exhibit commemorating the deaths of people murdered by Hamas on October 7th automatically makes the board members Zionists endorsing the persecution of Palestinians. Perhaps there is some context this article doesn’t touch on
There is.
This is the most concise and complete summation I could find of the (early) history of the protests against Brooklyn Museum and Anne Pasternak.
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/anne-pasternak-brooklyn-museum-interview-part-2-1409434
Note too that there's another controversy - regarding the hiring of a white curator for African art - that likely provides the context for the "white supremacist" part of the graffito.
I can't even find any connection between the Boston Museum and that exhibit in Manhattan.
Why were they targeted?
Idk when vandalizing a unrelated persons property became protesting, but sure?
Next time some African Nation tortures someone, am I allowed to vandalize the House of a black Person in my Neighborhood?
It's not racism, because saying that would mean that torturing people is in black people's DNA, no?