What are some contemporary excuses for anti-Semitism

First-person discourses in Maxim Biller's prose

3. Between the attributions: the narration of Jewish identity in The used Jew

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter I examine how Biller works in and with his text The used Jew (2009) creates his autobiographical discourse by letting his first-person narrator recapitulate those texts and encounters by and with Jews and Germans that the latter considers, in retrospect, to be constitutive for his identity as a German-Jewish writer: for example, his time as a literary writer. Journalism student, his reception of German, Jewish and American-Jewish authors, his contacts with other Jews from Germany, the USA and Israel or his German work environment as a journalist. As in most of his earlier lyrics, Biller also plays in The used Jew with the pronounced biographical parallels between his first-person narrator and himself and confuses his readers with an 'ironized author figure [...]' as well as with the encounters with real personalities that he literary.268

I claim that Biller reflects on, subverts and as being the norms and categories of the discourses on Jewish and German identity and literature, which shape his self-perception as a Jewish writer in the German diaspora, in the border area between fact and fiction Self portrait (so the subtitle of the book) restructured.269 In the previous chapter I explained that we act according to Judith Butler through language. We create identity through them.270 Biller deals with his text. By telling his story, he writes down the meaning that a German-Jewish writer has for him and thus creates his identity as a German-Jewish writer.

I show that for this purpose he distances himself from so-called 'out-groups' and in a 'third space' between the stereotypical categories ← 81 | 82 → Jewish and German identity and literature positioned.271 He gives his readers a precise impression of who he wants to be or who he doesn't want to be and stylizes himself as an outsider.

The term 'out-group' and its counterpart, the 'in-group', go back to Tajfels and Turner's theory of social identity from 1986.272 Tajfel and Turner regard those social groups as 'out-groups' to which an individual (or a group) does not believe they belong and which therefore usually assess it negatively and indifferently. 'In-Groups', on the other hand, are those groups with which individuals identify positively. On the basis of belonging or not belonging to those “in” and “out groups” that the individual considers relevant for himself, he forms his social identity.273

I start my analysis from The used Jew with Biller's critical reflection on the German literary scene (3.2). For this purpose, based on Manuel Gogo's Harold Bloom's theory of fear of influence (1973), I contextualize it with Gilles Deleuzes and Félix Guattari's reflections on 'small literatures' (1976).274 In addition to the German literature business, Biller identified in The used Jew the following 'out-groups', which I examine in this order: other Jewish authors of the second generation, the Jewish emigrants, the tempo-Editorial staff, the Frankfurt Jews and those Jews who, in his opinion, identify exclusively with Israel or who already live there.

By describing his encounters and experiences with the members of these groups and their definitions of Jewish and German identity and literature from his perspective and evaluating them retrospectively, Biller breaks away from ← 82 | 83 → their alleged ideas about what a German Jew or German-Jewish writer should be like and how he should be seen against this background.275

Biller refuses to identify with either the Jews or the Germans or to allow himself to be categorized by them and instead writes his German-Jewish identity in the 'Third Space'. In his text The Location of Culture from 1994, Homi Bhabha proposes an alternative, third space ('Third Space') in order to characterize the reality of life in post-colonial existences without unequivocal (national) attributions.276 It is the space between the stereotypical ascriptions of 'we' and 'you', a space that allows contradictions and conflicts, negotiates the positions of the majority and the minority, and in which the discourses on identity interpenetrate.

By occupying this 'third space' literarily and critically reflecting its limits, Biller creates his identity. He describes his being a Jew as an alternative concept of identity to discursive, also national, obligations and expresses his self-perception as a German-Jewish writer primarily as a self-determined attitude:

I'm Jewish because I don't want to be Russian, Czech or German. I am a Jew because I was already telling Jewish jokes when I was twenty, because I am more afraid of a cold than of a war, and I think sex is more important than literature. I am Jewish because one day I realized how much I like to confuse others that I am Jewish. (12)

With this quote, Biller makes it clear that he is in The used Jew consciously reproduces and plays with stereotypical positions in the discourse on Jewish and German identity and literature. From the contradictions that he creates with this game, Biller draws his eclectic self-image. Through his autobiographical discourse, he claims a space that enables him to emancipate himself from the stereotypical categorizations of others and to establish new, self-determined connections.

Biller locates his creative role models predominantly in the USA and claims that he has a Jewish literature similar to that of contemporary literature, ← 83 | 84 → Written by American-Jewish authors: contemporary literature by and about Jews and their everyday life, which goes beyond the reproduction of stereotypical social roles.277 Biller consciously places himself in a transnational context and expands the spatial and temporal boundaries of the category of German-Jewish writers.278 I show that in 3.2 and 3.3.

With The used Jew does Biller not document the exact circumstances of his personal maturation process as a Jew and writer in Germany. Rather, he gives his recipients an extremely constructed analysis of how he understands his process of emancipation and individuation as a German-Jewish writer. In this way, he not only tries to establish his own self-perception with his recipients, but also reacts to his critical reception by Jews and Germans.

Biller's meeting with the prominent German-Jewish literary critic and Holocaust survivor Marcel Reich-Ranicki - an avowed critic of Billers - which I analyze in 3.4, plays a key role here.279 Biller projects his evolving views on being a Jew onto him. Biller suggests that Reich-Ranicki's pragmatic self-perception as a Jew and his self-determined perspective on German literature inspired him to understand his own German-Jewish identity in the diaspora and not to locate it in the non-Galut, as is the case with encounters with others Jews and Germans, whom I discuss in 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7, suggested. So Biller comes to the conclusion that a German Jew can only be at home in writing. Here, too, he could overcome the limits of the discourse on Jewish and German identity and literature and create his own discourse on the self. Biller borrows from the meaning of the Torah, the book as the home of the Jews in exile, and despite all doubters stylizes himself as an exemplary Jew.280The used Jew serves as his evidence. ← 84 | 85 →

Henryk Broder noted in his review of The used Jew for the magazine The mirror from 2009 that the title of Biller's text is ambiguous. Is he, Biller, the Jew, 'needed' and if so, by whom? Or is he a 'second hand' Jew? Perhaps, according to Broder, Biller also feels 'abused' - by the Germans, the Jews, the literary business.281 And what exactly does Biller mean when he says 'Jew'? Broder gives an interesting stimulus for thought on the latter question. Because the title of Billers 'Self-Portrait' reminds him of Alain Finkielkraut's autobiographical essay The conceited Jew (1980).282 In The conceited Jew Using his own example, Finkielkraut describes how second-generation Jews shape their Jewish identity with the help of their parents' biography and narratives and thus deliberately differentiate themselves from their (non-Jewish) environment.283 He himself staged and celebrated his self-image as a Jew, inherited from the generation of Holocaust survivors, as morally inviolable otherness:

The Eternal Jew, that's me. The shaven prisoner on the way to the gas chamber, the victim and crammed into the ghetto […], all of that is me. This is the novel I grew up in. I, the different one […]: I carried this picture of myself for years in front of me and enjoyed it. From my Judaism I only took the title that entitled me to use and the narcissistic use that I could make of it. In my origins I looked for the moments of greatness and fame that the smooth course of my good [...] existence denied me. So I was seamlessly a real and at the same time an imaginary Jew.284

In connection with The used Jew it is remarkable that Finkielkraut describes his self-perception as a Jew as a 'novel' ('I am all of that. This is the novel I grew up in.'). Because Biller is also writing the novel of his life with the help of the autobiography genre.

Not for nothing does Broder mock that the title of Biller's book could be an alternative and based on Goethe's famous epistolary novel The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774) too Young Maxim's sufferings - if Biller weren't that old already.285 Goethe's novel is one of the most important texts of the Sturm und Drang - an extremely adolescent period in literary history that was also dominated by German, non-Jewish authors. Broder not only makes fun of Biller's supposedly delayed becoming a man, ← 85 | 86 → but also about the fact that he is in The used Jew claims to occupy a unique special position in the German literary landscape and to be an exemplary Jew. 'Maxim is a man of letters who lives in a world that he has made for himself,' says Broder.286 It is precisely for this reason that Biller is actually 'conceited', namely 'in the double sense of the word': imaginary and arrogant.287 I only partially agree with that. Because in his world, Biller is almost naturally the protagonist. He is the hero of the story.

3.2 The German literary canon: from German to Jewish author

Biller begins The used Jew with the description of its literary beginnings. As a literature student in Munich he wrote his first novel manuscript and gave it to his sister in Israel, Joachim Kaiser, a critic of the Süddeutsche Zeitung, and to read the Jewish journalist and bookseller Rachel Salamander. Biller's sister, his first reader, criticized the influence of his Thomas Mann reading on the book. At this time, Biller was intensively concerned with this author, about whom he also wrote his master's thesis (27).288 His sister says of the manuscript: 'I thought Thomas Mann is already dead. And anyway, I think he's not a good role model.' (9) Rachel Salamander also reacts negatively to Biller's text. Biller interprets her reaction as follows:

Why didn't Rachel Salamander like my novel? Because there were no Jews in it? She didn't say it, and maybe she didn't even think so. But if someone explains to you that they don't know why you are telling them a story in which you do not appear, then that is clear. (15)

Biller admits that he attributes his own analysis to Rachel Salamander ('She didn't say it, and she may not even have thought it'). Because he describes to the reader the process of his personal awareness of what Jewish literature should be to him. A contemporary literature by and about Jews that did not exist in Germany and that he now wants to write. In fact, Biller appears in one way or another in almost all of his texts. Be it as a subjectivist commentator, autobiographical narrator and / or protagonist. He appears explicitly as a Jew ← 86 | 87 → and writes about or expresses himself on topics that are relevant to the presence of German Jews.

With his first German critic, Joachim Kaiser, Biller anticipates the effects that his presence as a Jew can have on his professional development in his opinion. Biller also inscribes his reaction in the process of his becoming a German-Jewish writer. Emperor's daughter Henriette, who is Biller's fellow student, forwards Biller's manuscript to her father. He agrees to read it. Biller imagines the conversation between the two:

“Do you want to read something from a friend of mine, papa? I don't know his stuff, but he's a Jew. ”It must have been something like that. Why else would Henriette say to me one day that her father wanted to read my novel? My novel? Joachim Kaiser? Why nothing from Böll or Handke? (11)

After Kaiser reads the text, Biller speculates that his interest in his novel was not a father's favor for his daughter, but a result of the Germans' obsession with Jewish subjects.289 According to him, this is the only way to explain the interest of a German critic in an as yet unknown author like himself. Against this background, Biller interprets Kaiser's neutral reaction, which is expressed in benevolent, polite phrases such as '[…] [Keep me up to date' (13) and the remark 'Read a little less Thomas Mann' (13) exhausted - feedback that any non-Jewish author could have received:

I don't know which book the famous Joachim Kaiser expected from me when he opened the first page of my novel. But there was not a single Jew in it. (13)

Biller measures with unequal standards. He evaluates the same reaction from Jewish readers (his sister and Salamander) differently than that from German readers (Kaiser). At this point he caricatures how he braces himself against criticism from Germans with the accusation of anti-Semitism and philosemitism and demonstrates that the importance of his work for him is closely linked to the respective recipient.290 If a German like Kaiser criticizes his text, Biller understands ← 87 | 88 → this feedback as a reaction to his Jewish identity. With the references to Thomas Mann, Biller also marks his own examination of the German literary canon. Biller portrays Mann not only as an iconic German author, but also as the epitome of canonized German literature. He analyzes the attitude of Germans towards men as an example of the discourse on the German literary canon. Jews played no role in this. When Biller attended a seminar on a man as a student, none of his German fellow students wanted to address the topic of 'Thomas Mann and the Jews' dedicate:

I was one of a hundred and twenty unsuspecting students whom he [the professor, BAC] would tell stories about Thomas Mann in the largest lecture hall at Munich University as if he were a fairy tale character and then a list of subjects went around and when it got to me it was all away except Thomas Mann and the Jews. (42)

Biller chooses the topic 'Thomas Mann and the Jews ‘ not voluntary, it is the remnant of the German discourse about man in its presentation, as it is led here by way of example by prospective and established German academics. It is the subject that the Germans do not want to deal with and that the Jews therefore have to deal with themselves. Biller does not present his choice of the topic of Jewish identity (or literary-historical varieties of anti-Semitism) as free or not resulting from his own interests or his own conflict, but claims that he was thrown back on it by the Germans. He outlines his starting position as a Jew in the discourse on (German) literature as a commitment to a certain way of speaking about Jewish identity - namely from a perspective that illuminates this identity in its relationship to the Germans - from which he wants to emancipate himself.

His analysis of Mann's work shows that he only occasionally includes Jews in his texts and also portrays them in an anti-Semitic way: 'Names like those of Richard Wagner, but sneaky like the rats in Veit Harlan' (43), is how Biller sums up the portrayal of the Jewish people Protagonists in Mann's novella Wälsung blood (1921) together. Indeed, the question of Jewish identity is the protagonist of Wälsungenblut in scientific ← 88 | 89 → Discussion of the text has been relatively brief for a long time and has only recently come to the fore, although Mann clearly makes the assimilated Jewish bourgeoisie of the Wilhelmine era the subject of his text, or rather problematizes the limits of this assimilation, and thus racist interpretations of Wälsungenblut made possible.291 Mann is described by Biller as an original German, canonized author hero and as a romantic racial theorist who is blindly revered by his German recipients because 'Jewish concerns' played no role in their perspective on German literature:

Thomas Mann is the new Goethe, and the Germans don't care that almost all of his books have a dark back exit through which one can get straight into the dirty fantasy world of the race theorists of the 19th century. (42)

Man belongs to Germany and he belongs to the Germans, states Biller. He also concludes that both are anti-Semitic. In retrospect, Biller claims that this is why he consciously distanced himself from Mann as his creative role model. At this point the act of parricide becomes clear as a kind of adolescent self-discovery, as Manuel Gogos analyzed and applied to the second generation based on the American literary scholar Harold Bloom.292

In The Anxiety of Influence from 1973, Bloom explains how a younger generation of authors can critically emancipate themselves from the influence of their creative predecessors, which weakens the independence of their literature:293

As the son wishes newcomer to step out of the shadows. For this purpose, the younger generation [...] develop special strategies, which include the trick of involuntarily "misreading" the previous ones. The writer adept begins as a reader.294

By working off their predecessors literarily, the descendants created these predecessors as fictional characters and thus themselves as authors.295 That's exactly what Biller does with Mann. At the same time, the successors or sons created their own creative genealogy by connecting with selected role models or fathers, according to Gogos.296 On this point ← 89 | 90 → I'll come back later. For the second generation, this task is particularly complex, since the Holocaust caused a break in the generations and the 'aesthetic line of development'.297 The (literary) confrontation with the fathers is made more difficult.298

To apply this model on The used Jew there are two things to consider: First, Biller's creative influences (at this point in the text), like Mann, are German. His work on these influences is at the same time an analysis of the anti-Semitic discourse, which is why Biller emancipates himself from these influences. Second, Biller uses his autobiographical discourse to create a new genealogy with which he subverts the boundaries of space and time and thus expands his possibilities as a Jewish writer in the German diaspora.

So Biller must first emancipate himself from his creative influence and father, Thomas Mann, who is all the less related to him since he is not only not Jewish, but also anti-Semitic. Biller uses The used Jewin order to publicly inform both himself and his readers about how he perceives himself as a Jew and how he perceives the German literary canon.

In the same context, Biller mentions another icon of German art: the composer Richard Wagner. Wagner, whom Mann had admired for a long time and from whom, like Biller von Mann, he only distanced himself later in his life, wrote a notorious anti-Semitic pamphlet with his text 'Judaism in Music'.299 Biller takes in The used Jew reference to this writing, which, in his opinion, has had a lasting impact on the German view of Jewish cultural products, namely to this day (138ff.). In his text, Wagner generally ascribes 'un-German' characteristics to the Jews and thus assesses their participation in the German art and music scene of his time as alien and hostile.300 Anti-Semitism is marked here by Biller as a means of exclusion in the artistic canon. Competitors, in this case Felix Mendelssohn-Barthóldy, are denied participation in this canon by representatives of the majority, whose spokesman Wagner appears, as ← 90 | 91 → they stigmatize their work from the outset as inadequate and as 'alien to the Germans':

Richard Wagner, number one in modern anti-Semitism, distrusted […] [the Jews, BAC] more than his own good conscience. He believed that Jews are strangers all the time and everywhere. That is why, he said, they speak the language of the nation to whose breast they press, like foreigners, no matter how well they master it. That is why they can never create a real, authentic work of art in a language that is foreign to them, because they do not feel what the locals feel. And that is why they use the word, written and spoken, only as a weapon - because whoever cannot be an artist will destroy art out of envy and bitterness. (138)

Biller then states: 'Heine, Tucholsky and Broder have to listen to this shit invented by Wagner to this day.' (138) Biller compares his situation with that of German-Jewish artists and intellectuals since the nineteenth century and arranges himself in a historical discourse a. His own situation as a Jewish author in Germany is practically no different from that of Broder - or Heine and Tucholsky, as Biller suggests. He argues that it is traditional, modern, German anti-Semitism that also prevents contemporary Jewish authors from belonging to the German literary discourse, since their (German) participants categorize them as alien and unrelated. Biller indirectly and across the board assumes that his German recipients have deeply rooted anti-Semitism immanent in German culture and puts himself on a par with important German-Jewish artists such as Felix Mendelssohn-Barthóldy or Heinrich Heine, who despite their conversion to Christianity by the majority of their anti-Semitic Germans Contemporaries spurned and perceived as inappropriate to them.301 On the one hand, Biller glorifies his own work, on the other hand he protests against criticism from Germans, whom he denies being able to read his literature without anti-Semitic ulterior motives.

Biller's reception of the German literary canon is selective. He confirms his assumptions about German literature and its readers and stylizes himself as a reluctant outsider. He has a positive attitude towards this outsider position. Since German critics, media personalities, academics and teachers reproduced who and what belongs to the German literary canon, they influenced ← 91 | 92 → they the common assumptions of the German recipients about the legitimate authors of German literature, so Biller's conclusion. In 1995, Biller claimed in an interview that it was impossible for an outsider like him to be fully recognized by the German literary scene: 'Those who do not belong to the system will not be canonized.'302 Only those who follow the influential participants in the discourse on German literature, the editors, academics, teachers and fellow writers, will, according to Biller, be allocated a place in the center of German literature, in and with articles, lectures, and school lessons.303 In Biller's eyes, the discourse on German literature assigns the Jews their place outside the center of German literature:

My problem is that I decided to become a writer in a country where number one is not Babel or Camus, but the author of the Considerations of an apoliticalwho suspected modernity as a Jewish invention until his death. (43f.)

At the center of German literature is the anti-Semite Thomas Mann, identified as such by his Considerations of an apolitical (1918) - a text that is central to the ideology of the so-called Conservative Revolution, a nationalist, anti-democratic counter-movement to the Weimar Republic, the protagonists of which were invoked by numerous National Socialists.304 Mann later, for the first time in his speech 'Von deutscher Republik' (1922), distanced himself from this stance.305 For his own self-positioning, Biller chooses to reduce Mann to this phase of his life, i.e. to 'misread' him in the sense of Bloom and Gogos, and to describe the (current) center of German literature as conservative, anti-Semitic and anti-democratic, or rather it to be constructed as such, and therefore to be excluded for his self-positioning as a writer.306 Accordingly, Wagner's intellectual legacy would also be located in this center (138f.). On the periphery are Jewish authors, including Biller himself, who repeatedly talks about important authors such as ← 92 | 93 → compares the Russian-Jewish writer and journalist Isaak Babel and Albert Camus, and thus claims that he should be accorded a similarly high honor as the Franco-Algerian Nobel Prize for Literature, Camus - after all, he belongs in the same context. Biller attributes his outsider position to himself as a conscious starting point for his literary work and connects - here still hinted at - with his self-chosen role models and fathers. Even before he made a name for himself as a Jewish author, namely at the time when his work was still influenced by his student reading of Thomas Mann and Biller, at least as a reader, was part of the German literary discourse, his own positioning outside of the German literary canon dominated his experience of the German literary landscape, from which he felt excluded as a Jew.

In addition to this distancing from his German literary father, Biller, as a Jewish author, has to find a place outside of canonized German literature. So he has to orient himself towards authors other than Thomas Mann if he wants, as Biller analyzes in retrospect, to write a self-determined, 'authentic' Jewish literature with Jewish protagonists and on Jewish topics. Such literature, which had not yet existed in Germany in the early 1980s, would correspond to his experience and the expectations of his readers.307

I agree with Biller and use Gilles Guattaris and Félix Deleuze's reflections on 'small literatures', which I contextualize with my remarks on discourse theory from chapter two, in order to justify my agreement. These considerations form the basis of Biller's creative genealogy that he is in and with The used Jew he writes. Guattari and Deleuze analyze in their text Kafka. For a little literature (1976) Franz Kafka's special position within German literature.308 They show what conditions the literary production of social minorities amidst the majority is subject to and how minority authors can creatively use these conditions.309 Biller also connects himself with Kafka, whom he chooses as one of his creative role models. With the help of his Jewish recipient Rachel Salamander, Biller has ← 93 | 94 → determined to affirm outsider status. Both identify Kafka as representatives of Jewish minority literature:

When I left Rachel didn't tell me to keep her informed. She handed my manuscript back to me, smiled ironically and unironically and said that she had put the slip of paper with her notes in it, maybe I would like to read it. At home I only skimmed it quickly because I was still mad at her, but there was one sentence I couldn't ignore: “If it's paranoia, then really fat. Think of Kafka! ”Kafka, not Thomas Mann. I made progress. (15)

Biller's self-comparison with Kafka, a Jewish author from Prague who writes in German, is obvious. Kafka too found himself in a persistent identity conflict with regard to his Jewish identity, his national affiliation and his importance as a writer, and he addresses this in his work.310 Kafka felt out of place in several respects, since he neither belonged to the Czech majority nor to the German-speaking minority. He also remained an outsider in his professional environment.311

Like Kafka as a Jew in Prague and in the German language, Biller is also part of a minority in Germany. His literature, like Guattari and Deleuze, cannot therefore belong to the German literary canon, a discourse dominated by the German majority.312 As the first characteristic of a 'small literature', Guattari and Deleuze state that their language has a high coefficient of deterritorialization. Minority authors like Kafka would have to write to ensure their identity. The languages ​​available to such authors, however, are not suitable for adequately expressing their thoughts. They are shaped by their use by the majority.313 Because this determines via the unequal power relationship in discourses which positions are to be occupied by whom and how and thus which meanings potentially exist. Second, 'small literatures' are always political, since their authors, unlike those of the majority, cannot separate the individual, private sphere from the generally representative, public sphere. The literature of the majority does not have this representative function of 'small literatures', since it is neither the literature of the viewed nor, ← 94 | 95 → because of their relative rarity, are under special observation.314 It does not need any political impetus, as the majority of its authors agree with the positions available to them. Minority authors, on the other hand, must first create adequate positions for them. The inevitable exclusion from the majority discourse based on this leads Guattari and Deleuze to the third characteristic of 'small literatures': They are located on the periphery. Because they do not speak for the majority, but for the minority. In 'Small Literatures', therefore, everything takes on a collective value.315 'Small literatures' would thus have a revolutionary potential and could create new meanings emancipated from the views of the majority.316 Their authors can produce new positions that may be available to others belonging to their minority.317 In order to develop this potential, its authors would have to overcome the deterritorialization of language. They would have to use their own supposed flaw, which excludes them from the literature of the majority, for themselves.318 So they would have to undermine the norms of the discourses that limit them.

Biller assesses the reception of his first manuscript as well as his accompanying insights into which literature he should and can write as a German Jew, under these circumstances. He does not consider Thomas Mann's influence on his text, criticized by his recipients, to be the result of a writing style that has not yet been established, which would not be astonishing for a first novel. Instead, he retrospectively dramatizes his initial situation while writing and elevates it to a creative stimulus. Biller first has to create his own discourse and literally create his own language by turning his supposed flaw into a positive.319 And that flaw is its position on the periphery of the German literary discourse.

However, this position poses a dilemma for Biller. Because his literature is mostly read and published by Germans. He is therefore dependent on these readers understanding and appreciating his texts, which Biller later problematized when German readers received other earlier texts from himself. As a biller time-Editor ← 95 | 96 → presents his short stories, the latter dismisses the stories as unsuitable for the German literary scene. He complains that Biller's stories are not based on reality:

"This Jew who collects money for Palestinian children from old Nazis - there are no such people."

"Yes." (142f.)

From the editor's reaction, Biller concludes that the German readership lacks an understanding of the diverse and often contradicting biographies of German Jews. This meant that the literary representation of German Jews should be based on the simplest possible categories, e.g. B.Jews as victims or, as in this example, Jews as declared enemies of the Palestinians, if it should come across as realistic to German readers. Apparently he overwhelmed the German readers with his reference to anti-Semitism disguised as anti-Zionism.320← 96 | 97 →