Footer Pages

stencil_graffiti_palestine

The One-Sided View of Hate in Hate Studies

hate_studies_Israel_security_barrier

The following paper was submitted to The Journal of Hate Studies at Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA, on March 14, 2012. It was rejected without explanation. My paper criticizes the approach the discipline of Hate Studies had taken hitherto. It argues that Hate Studies has over-estimated the extent of white racism in the USA, and neglected Zionism as a source of hate. It backs up these criticisms with evidence, and a rigorous approach to evaluating it.

 

Abstract

The Journal of Hate Studies asks for “cutting-edge essays, theory, and research that deepens the understanding of the development and expression of hate”. The following submission for the 2012 issue of the journal (Call for Papers, Tsai, R.L., 2012) is all of the above. It argues that Zionism  generates hate, and that hate studies writers have neglected it. Further, it produces evidence that hate studies researchers have exaggerated the amount of racism in white gentile America. In the process, it examines the methodologies which have led to this miscalculation, and suggests a more balanced approach.

 

I. Introduction

In his paper Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style, (2004), one of the founders of hate studies, Chip Berlet, defines the field as “inquiries into the human capacity to define, and then dehumanize or demonize, an ‘other,’ and the processes which inform and give expression to, or can curtail or combat, that capacity”. The current paper argues that Zionism includes examples of the above “human capacity”, but that no contributor to hate studies, until now, has noticed them.

Noel Ignatiev’s contribution to the Encyclopedia of Race and Racism, (2007, pp. 240–244), describes the Zionist state of Israel as a “racial state, where rights are assigned on the basis of ascribed descent or the approval of the superior race”. Ilan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, (2006), shows how Israel was initiated by the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from their homeland, because they were not Jewish. I therefore argue that Zionism is a valid subject of hate studies.

However, a survey of the current publications of hate studies reveals a lack of concern with Zionism, in contrast to an emphasis on anti-Semitism and white racism. I illustrate this below with citations from the major works of hate studies, analyzing examples of alleged hate incidents to suggest a more scientific approach to the evaluation of hate. I cite the recommended works which allege there is an “epidemic” of hate crimes, and the one book currently in print which directly falsifies this hypothesis, Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., 1998). I make use of Steven Pinker’s recent work on the decline of violence, including hate crimes, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (Pinker, S., 2011), and a number of newspaper and online reports of alleged hate crimes.

 

II. Inadequate attention to Zionism

The Zionist justification for expelling Palestinians has included expressions of “the human capacity to define, and then dehumanize or demonize, an ‘other,’” (Berlet, C., 2004). When Zionist leaders  recognize the Palestinians’ existence, they sometimes refer to them as “devil’s spawn” (Rachel Abrams’ weblog; 2011). Other representative epithets include “drugged cockroaches”, “two-legged animals” and “Arab scum” (according to the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, 14 January 2002, citing The New Statesman, June 25, 1982). Some Zionists go so far as to say it would be justified to kill gentile babies “if they would grow up to harm us” – Rabbi Shapira, reported by Roi Sharon in Maariv, 2009. The evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers, in a book about self-deception, The Folly of Fools, the logic of deceit and self-deception in human life, (2011), in a section entitled “False Historical Narratives”, contrasts the Zionist myth with the reality:

a racialist (and then racist) country was shoehorned into the Middle East, so that Jewish people (half and quarter also) from around the world can immediately claim citizenship to this land but none of those who were so recently expelled could do so. (p. 236).

Nevertheless, only one of the papers for hate studies’ most recent conference mentions Zionism, and not to criticize it for racism, but to ask at what point criticism of it becomes racist – “Not every criticism of Israel and Zionism was viewed as antisemitic, but on many occasions such comment served to mask antisemitism” – Michael Whine, The Community Security Trust – Best Practice in Combating Antisemitic Hate, (2011), Journal of Hate Studies (vol. 9, p. 114).

Kenneth Stern, a founder of the discipline of hate studies, vigorously defends Zionism against the “racism” charge. In his first pamphlet on anti-Semitism for the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Zionism, the Sophisticated Anti-Semitism, (1990), Stern wrote: “This anti-Semitic slander – that Zionism was racism – first appeared at the United Nations in the early 1960s” (p. 6). Even the Jewish Agency for Israel says, of the right of return for Jews, “It has been suggested that an immigration policy which explicitly gives priority to one ethnic or religious group cannot be justified in liberal democratic terms” (2004). But Stern has consistently argued that describing the Law of Return as racist, is itself racist (Stern 2006). In an extensive survey of the literature, I have been unable to find anything recommended by the hate studies department at Gonzaga University’s Bibliography of Hate Studies Materials (Thweatt, E., 2002), which agrees with the United Nations that Zionism as a form of racism.

As well as the United Nations, Stern’s complaints about “anti-Semitism” are directed at rural political movements, known as “militias”, in the USA. In 1996, Stern wrote an article for USA Today entitled Militia Mania, a Growing Danger, and published a book called A Force Upon the Plain, subtitled The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate, claiming that anti-Jewish attitudes are central to these movements’ ideologies (p. 246). Concern about militias is a recurrent theme in the hate studies literature (Dees, M., 1997; Berlet, C. & Lyons, M, 2000; Thweatt, E., 2002).

An example is Public Eye journal – “Researching the Right for Progressive Changemakers” – edited by hate studies pundit Chip Berlet. In her article for the journal, The Montana Human Rights Network, (2005), Abby Scher claims the following statement, from a leaflet produced by a militia in Montana, is an example of an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory: “George Bush… cynically used the tragedy of September 11th to silence dissent and to launch the war for Israel his Zionist neocon handlers wanted.” Arguments for the claims that the neoconservative movement is overwhelming Zionist, and that it was instrumental in persuading the US government to attack Iraq in 2003, include scholarly ones such as those of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt (The Israel Lobby; 2007). Deciding how much truth there is in this view is beyond the scope of the present essay – my point is simply that classifying this analysis as “anti-Semitic” may tend to discourage us from asking legitimate questions.

 

III. The influence of pseudo-science

The field of hate studies has made use of the evolutionary approach in understanding ethnic conflict, for example in publishing Harold Fishbein’s The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred (2004), and James Waller’s Our Ancestral Shadow: Hate and Human Nature in Evolutionary Psychology (2004). However, less scientific ideas have also been given credit. For example Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt’s Hate Crimes, (1993), which is recommended in hate studies’ bibliography (Thweatt, E., 2002), and referenced in several papers in the field, relied on a 1950 treatise on hate and prejudice, The Authoritarian Personality (Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., & Stanford, R.N., 1950): “Decades ago, the authors of The Authoritarian Personality recognized that prejudice satisfies a deep-rooted psychological need to protect or enhance self-esteem” (p. 48).

In The Authoritarian Personality, Theodor Adorno and his colleagues claimed to have found “quantifiable relations” between conservatism and anti-Semitism via the “Politico-Economic Conservatism” scale, the “Ethnocentrism” scale and the “Anti-Semitism” scale (p. 49).

The above diagram illustrates the general principle. If person A believes P and Q, and person B believes P, the likelihood that person B also believes Q is greater than the occurrence of belief Q in the general population. This is as true of any one class of beliefs as of any other. Yet the Frankfurt School believed it could derive “the determination of the potential fascist in childhood” (Adorno et al. 1950, p. 56) from this statistical banality.

The authors claimed that a German who joined the Nazis “can apparently never quite establish his personal and masculine identity; he thus has to look for it in a collective system where there is opportunity both for submission to the powerful and for retaliation against the powerless” (page 370); they did not apply this psychological explanation to Communist Party recruits of the same period.

The Frankfurt School’s approach still has influence. As a contemporary example of the use of psychoanalysis to reinforce political, and possibly racial, bias, consider Naomi Klein’s recent article about climate change for The Nation, Capitalism vs. the Climate (2011). She argued that “conservative white men” tend to disbelieve the theory of unprecedented anthropogenic global warming “because it threatens to upend their dominance-based worldview”.

Though work such as The Authoritarian Personality is taken seriously by some contributors, hate studies has also made some use of a truly scientific approach, such as the papers by Harold Fishbein and James Waller in The Journal of Hate Studies, (2004), which rely on evolutionary psychology. But no contributor so far has referenced Professor Kevin MacDonald, whose Separation and its Discontents – toward an evolutionary theory of anti-Semitism, (2004) locates the genesis of anti-Semitism in genetic interests:

An evolutionary perspective is also highly compatible with the falsity and contradictory nature of many anti-Semitic beliefs. Evolution is only concerned with ensuring accuracy of beliefs and attitudes when the truth is in the interests of those having those beliefs and attitudes. (pp. 18-19).

Steven Jacobs may be right to say, in The Last Uncomfortable “Religious Question”? in The Journal of Hate Studies, (2008), that MacDonald’s work has “been almost universally condemned”, but, since science is not a democracy, this is hardly relevant to a scholarly evaluation of his work.

 

IV. An unscientific approach to hate crime claims

At the hate studies founding conference, in his paper Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style, (2004), Chip Berlet claimed there was “chronic underreporting” of hate crimes. There is evidence for this hypothesis. As The Leadership Conference states in the introduction to its Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America, (2009), some victims fail to report hate crimes. For example, illegal immigrants are concerned about deportation. People of color may not trust the police. Lesbian and gay victims may not want to “come out” to family members and co-workers by publicizing a homophobic hate crime.

But the scientific approach looks for refutation as well as confirmation. There is also over-reporting of hate crimes, which, if uncritically accepted, exaggerates the amount of hate in our society. I identify five variants of this phenomenon, and give examples below:

1. protected speech is sometimes listed with violent crimes under the broad label “hate incidents”;

2. the degree of hate involved in some actual crimes is exaggerated;

3. there are claims of hate crimes which didn’t happen;

4. there are “hate crimes” committed by the alleged victims themselves;

5. there are unsubstantiated assertions that hate crimes are on the increase.

As an illustration of type 1. above, consider Oregon’s Coalition Against Hate Crimes. This organization claims, on its website, to support the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, which declares that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression”. But the Coalition contradicts itself immediately; its list of “hate incidents” equates real crimes like the murder of an Ethiopian immigrant, with a talk by a “holocaust denier” (2010). In Hate Crimes (chapter 4; 1998), James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter found that the term “hate incidents” has been used by a number of organizations interchangeably with “hate crimes” to exaggerate the incidence of the latter.

Hate crimes happen. For example, in Texas in 1998, African-American James Byrd was dragged behind a truck by three white men, motivated by racial hatred, until his head came off.

Other notorious cases, such as the murder of Ethiopian Mulugeta Seraw by neo-Nazi skinheads in Portland, Oregon in 1988, and of gay student Matthew Shepard in Wyoming in 1998, were not quite what subsequent political campaigns made of them. According to Elinor Langer’s book, A Hundred Little Hitlers, (2003), the Seraw case was not a premeditated lynching. Had the skinheads murdered Seraw in Florida rather than Oregon, it would not have been a hate crime: the Florida Supreme Court explicitly excluded from that category “arguments over a parking space, which escalate into fist fights accompanied by racial or other slurs” – which is exactly what the Portland case was, except a baseball bat was used (Hate Crimes, Jacobs, J.B., & Potter, K., 1998; p. 32). An investigation by Elizabeth Vargas for the ABC News program “20/20″ on December 3, 2004, described by Virginia Heffernan in the New York Times, found the assumption that the murder of Matthew Shepard was homophobic to be unsubstantiated.

Another illustration of type 2., exaggerating the amount of hate in real crimes, is the 1996 panic about “black churches” being set on fire. President Clinton said “racial hostility” was behind the crimes. But according to statistical analysis in an article about the scare by Michael Fumento in Commentary magazine, (1996), confirmed in Hate Crimes (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., chapter 4; 1998),

1. the number of torched churches nationally was below average,

2. the ethnicity of the buildings had no effect on their risk of arson, and

3. there was no inverse correlation between convicted arsonists’ race and that of the churchgoers.

Type 2 is also illustrated by the one alleged anti-Semitic lynching in US history, which occurred in Georgia in 1915. It resulted in a boost in membership for the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which had been founded two years earlier. The victim, Leo Frank, had been convicted of child-murder, but his death sentence had been commuted to life imprisonment; a mob abducted him from prison and hanged him from a tree. His conviction allowed the other suspect, who was black, to walk. The Anti-Defamation League’s evidence for the theory that it was an anti-Semitic lynching, in its People v. Leo Frank Teacher’s Guide, (2009), such as shouts of “Hang the Jew” from the mob, is necessary, but insufficient, to prove it. If a convicted child-killer who was not Jewish would also have been murdered, anti-Semitism had no part to play.

The Anti-Defamation League is consulted by the federal Departments of Education and Justice, the California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association, and other government bodies, according to Hate Crimes (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., chapter 4; 1998). An example can be found on the Department of Justice’s web page about the Sacramento “Hate Crimes Task Force” (2010). Some years ago, the ADL was found by the San Francisco DA to have spied illegally on dozens of people and organizations, fed information about South African dissidents to the apartheid regime, and committed numerous other violations of trust (Blankfort, J., 2002).

A comprehensive survey of examples of type 3. above, completely invented hate crimes, would be beyond the scope of this paper. A small sample can be found in the appendix, Hate Crime Hoaxes, along with some examples of type 4., fake hate crimes committed by pseudo-victims.

Type 4. was discussed by Gabriel Winant in an article for Salon.com, Fake hate crimes: not just for liberals anymore, (2008). She argued that the majority of fake hate crimes consist of minority persons manipulating sympathy for personal and political gain. She suggests this is why there is an epidemic on college campuses – in this milieu, a fake hate crime victim may find sympathy even after her hoax is exposed. In San Diego, a program was announced to “address diversity issues” after a “minority student” admitted hanging up a noose and a white hood in the library at the University of California in February 2010, an example of type 4. The program, entitled Racism – Not In Our Community, includes statements like “hurtful incidents” and “ensuring diversity”. The hypothesis that racism is a problem was so strongly entrenched that evidence known to be fabricated was used to attempt to confirm it (University of California at San Diego, 2010).

Some hate studies research falls into type 5. above, the allegation that hate crimes are increasing. Mari Matsuda wrote that “a marked rise of racial harassment, hate speech, and racially-motivated violence marks the beginning of the 1990’s” in Words That Wound (1993; page 44). Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt’s Hate Crimes complained of “a rising tide of bigotry and bloodshed” at that time (1993; p. xi). Morris Dees, co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote a book entitled Gathering Storm: America’s Militia Threat, in 1997. Kenneth Stern’s article Militia Mania, a Growing Danger, (1996), claimed that local officials in rural America were being intimidated by right-wing terrorists – “According to the Rural Organizing Committee, elected officials on the local level have been forced by armed militia members who pack their meetings to enact ordinances they know are illegal, under threat of death”. The National Institute Against Prejudice and Violence alleges there is an epidemic of “ethnoviolence” in higher education facilities, but its definition of the term includes any “perceived expression of insensitivity”, including denial of tenure to an Asian-American academic, and a piece critical of affirmative action in a campus newsletter (Hate Crimes, Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., 1998; p. 49).

In fact, the incidence of hate crimes in the USA declined during the 1990s, continuing a century-long trend. Steven Pinker’s history of violence, The Better Angels of Our Nature, (2011; p. 385) used a chart from James Payne’s A history of force, (2004), which shows how racist lynchings declined steadily from 150 per annum in the 1880s to close to zero by the end of the 1960s. Another graph in his book covers racist murders, 1996-2008 (p. 386), using statistics from the FBI. Most of these murders were of African-Americans. The chart shows a decline from five victims per annum in 1996, to one in 2008. One is less than 0.006 percent of the total number of murders in the country per annum, approximately 17,000. James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter, in Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics, (chapter 4, Social Construction of a Hate Crime Epidemic; 1998) also studied the evidence, and analyzed the politics, of the “rising tide” hypothesis:

This chapter explains how the hate crime epidemic has been socially constructed. We identify the leading proponents of the epidemic claim – advocacy groups, the media, politicians, and academic commentators – and show that this claim lacks any empirical basis. (p. 46).

The alarmist claims of Levin, McDevitt, Stern, Matsuda, et. al. (Levin, J. & McDevitt, J., 1993; Stern, K., 1996; Matsuda, M., et. al., 1993), cannot survive the gauntlet of attempted falsification by scientific methods. Examining why they are part of the hate studies canon is beyond the scope of the current paper, but I intend to return to that question in further research.

An opportunity to subject the beliefs of some hate studies writers to scientific scrutiny occurred at Duke University in North Carolina in 2006. When a black woman accused three white students of rape, the DA said it was a “hate crime”. Stuart Taylor Jr. and K.C. Johnson’s Until Proven Innocent: political correctness and the shameful injustices of the Duke lacrosse rape case, (2007), explains the political assumptions behind the credulity which greeted the woman’s claim. As the article Duke’s Reign of Terror by local journalist Arch T. Allen, in Metro magazine, (2007), explains, with few exceptions, the local and national media were biased against the accused. The rush to judgement of some of the faculty, students and outside activists, based on nothing more than the accused students’ sex, race, and alleged class, is a valid subject of hate studies research.

Angela J. Hattery and Earl Smith, in African American Families, (2007), said the case was about how “the class and race dynamics of the individuals involved (affluent white men and a low-income African American woman) shaped this incident differently from how it would have been shaped had they been absent”. The case does reinforce that view, but in the opposite direction to the one these theorists believe. Instead of doing empirical research into the difference between how the Duke three, and black students accused of similar crimes, were treated, they assumed that “members of the team are almost perfect offenders in the sense that Kimberlé Crenshaw writes about – the exemplars of the upper end of the class hierarchy, the politically dominant race and ethnicity, the dominant gender, the dominant sexuality, and the dominant social group on campus”. Inspired by these words, and similar analyses (Matsuda et. al. 1993; Fish, S., 1994; Crenshaw et. al. 1996; Berlet C., & Lyons, M., 2000), eighty-eight academics signed a statement implying the students’ guilt by saying something “happened to this young woman”, but carefully avoiding saying what it was. The document in which they made this allegation subsequently disappeared, without explanation, from the African and African-American Studies website.

After the students’ lawyers uncovered the truth, the DA was dismissed, and his replacement said the students were “innocent”, rather than just “not guilty”, their academic accusers had an opportunity to reflect on the flaws in their methodology which led to their mistake. Instead, after the case, “I am less interested in trafficking through declarations of guilt and innocence in the case”, wrote one of the eighty-eight professors who had “trafficked” in the declaration of guilt (Taylor & Johnson, 2007).

I argue that hate studies should insist that a theory’s claims are subject to testing and reevaluation, and changing its predictions when they are falsified ought not to be acceptable.

 

V. Conclusion: a consistent and rigorous approach to understanding hate

“Whenever an ideology justifies baby-killing – even at the fringes of the fringes – that is an especially strong danger signal” – Kenneth Stern, A Force Upon the Plain. (1996, p. 249).

“There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us” – “The complete guide to killing non-Jews” – Yitzhak Shapira and Yossi Elitzur, rabbis in the Od Yosef Hai yeshiva, Yitzhar, near Nablus, reported by Roi Sharon in Maariv (2009).

The influence of Zionism extends beyond Israel. Consider Rachel Abrams, who is married to Elliot Abrams, an influential advisor to the US government, who served under presidents George Bush Senior and Ronald Reagan, describing, in her weblog, the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from captivity by Hamas in October 2011:

Celebrate, Israel, with all the joyous gratitude that fills your hearts, as we all do along with you. Then round up his captors, the slaughtering, death-worshipping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women — those who aren’t strapping bombs to their own devils’ spawn and sending them out to meet their seventy-two virgins by taking the lives of the school-bus-riding, heart-drawing, Transformer-doodling, homework-losing children of Others — and their offspring — those who haven’t already been pimped out by their mothers to the murder god — as shields, hiding behind their burkas and cradles like the unmanned animals they are, and throw them not into your prisons, where they can bide until they’re traded by the thousands for another child of Israel, but into the sea, to float there, food for sharks, stargazers, and whatever other oceanic carnivores God has put there for the purpose. (2011).

Hate studies would be enriched by studying how the influence of Zionism can produce this kind of hate. It would have more credibility if claims of the prevalence of white racism were evaluated more scientifically. It would also benefit by examining examples of hoaxes by which resentful members of minorities, encouraged by academic exaggerations of the extent of white privilege, contributed to a positive feedback loop, which appeared to confirm the hypothesis that the USA is suffering from a rising tide of bigotry and hate.

 

Appendix – Hate Crime Hoaxes

Associated Press (1998, November 22). Conviction in Phony Hate Mail Case. Sunday Star-News. NC: Wilmington.

Associated Press. (2004, April 20). Colleges perfect milieu for hate crime hoaxes. San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved  2012, January 29. http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20040420-0247-ca-hatecrimehoaxes.html

Bensen, Jackie. (2010). Jewish student caught painting swastikas on her own door then claiming anti-Semitic attack. NBC News4. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLt5U7VcHw8

Boyd, C. (2001, June 12). Woman Who Claimed to be Victim of Hate Crime Accused of Stealing Van. MN: St. Paul Pioneer Press.

Delgado, R. (1999, May 8). Man Admits Inventing Racist Assault in San Francisco. San Francisco Examiner.

Eskenazi, J. (2004, May 21). Arson at Chabad House. Jewish Weekly. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/22706/arson-at-chabad-house

Kansas City Star. (2001, December 12). Linda Man, Woman Pleads Guilty to Harassing Other Black School Bus Drivers.

Leinwand, D. & Alexander, A. (1993, December 30). Swastika scrawling thieves staged insurance scam, police allege. Highbeam Business News. Retrieved March 12, 2012. http://business.highbeam.com/4331/article-1G1-14690014/crime-swastikascrawling-thieves-staged-insurance-scam

Perez, M. (2003, November 20). Fake hate crimes not new: colleges experience recent rash of bogus hate incidents. Golden Gate Express.  Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/news/000424.html

Register-Guard. (2003, May 27). Coast Guardsman Admits False Report of Racism. OR: Eugene.

WBAL. (2008, October 7). Police ID 3 Charged in Synagogue Vandalism. WBAL TV. MD: Baltimore. http://www.wbaltv.com/news/17646190/detail.html

 

References

Abrams, Rachel. (2011). Rachel Abram’s webblog. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://badrachel.blogspot.com/2011/10/gilad.html

Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., and Stanford, R.N., (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Allen, Arch T. (2007). Duke’s Reign of Terror. Metro magazine, Raleigh, NC, 2007, November. Retrieved  2012, January 29. http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=1448

Anti-Defamation League. (2009). People v. Leo Frank Teacher’s Guide. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.adl.org/leofrank/The-People-v-Leo-Frank-Teachers-Guide_ADL.pdf

Berlet, C. & Lyons, M. (2000). Right-wing populism in America: too close for comfort. New York: Guilford Press, 2000

Berlet, C. (2004, March). Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style. Chip Berlet. Paper presented at the Conference to Establish the Field of Hate Studies. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.

Blankfort, J., Poirier, A. & Zeltzer, S. (2002, February 25). The ADL Spying Case Is Over, But The Struggle Continues. Counterpunch. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.counterpunch.org/2002/02/25/the-adl-spying-case-is-over-but-the-struggle-continues

Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies. (2002, January 14). Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and all Forms of Discrimination, citing The New Statesman, London. (1982, June 25). Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/d96d50d790ad4a47c1256b760047dac7

Crenshaw, K., (Author), Gotanda, N. (Author), Peller, G. (Author), Thomas, K. (Editor) (1996). Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement. New York: The New Press.

Dees, M. (1997). Gathering Storm: America’s Militia Threat. New York: Harper Perennial

Department of Justice. (2010). Hate Crimes Task Force. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.justice.gov/usao/cae/hate_crimes/index.html

Fish. S. (1994). There’s No Such Thing As Free Speech: And It’s a Good Thing, Too. Oxford University Press.

Fishbein, H. (2004, March). The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.

Fumento, M. (1996, October). Politics and Church Burnings. Commentary magazine.

Group of 88. (2006). The “Listening” Statement. Duke University, Department of African and African-American Studies. Retrieved 2006, November 10, but no longer available: http://www.duke.edu/web/africanameric/listening.pdf

Hattery, A.J., and Smith, E.. (2007). African American Families. Sage Publications.

Heffernan, V. (2004, November 27). ‘20/20′ investigation challenges Shepard murder’s hate-crime label. New York Times, reprinted in the San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/27/DDGUEA1PVL1.DTL

Ignatiev, N. (2007). Zionism. The Encyclopedia of Race and Racism. Macmillan Press.

Jacobs, James B., and Potter, Kimberly. (1998). Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics. NY: Oxford University Press.

Jacobs, S. (2004). The Last Uncomfortable “Religious Question”? Monotheistic Exclusivism and Textual Superiority in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as Sources of Hate and Genocide. The Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.

Journal of Hate Studies. (2011). Table of Contents. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://journals.gonzaga.edu/index.php/johs/issue/view/18/showToc

Klein, N. (2011, November). Capitalism vs. the Climate. Naomi Klein. The Nation. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=full

Langer, E. (2003). A Hundred Little Hitlers. Elinor Langer. St Martins Press.

Leadership Conference. (2009). Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America, 2009. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes

Levin. J. & McDevitt. J. (1993). Hate Crimes. De Capo Press.

MacDonald, K. (2004). Separation and its Discontents: toward an evolutionary theory of anti-Semitism. Praeger Publishers.

Matsuda, M.J., Lawrence III, C.R., Delgado, R., Crenshaw K. (1993, June 4). Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment. Westview Press

Mearsheimer, J. & Walt, S. (2007). The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Oregon Coalition Against Hate Crimes. (2010). Portland State University. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.againsthate.pdx.edu

Pappe, I. (2006). The ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Oneworld publishing.

Payne, J.L. (2004). A history of force: Exploring the worldwide movement against habits of coercion, bloodshed, and mayhem. ID: Sandpoint. Lytton publishers.

Pinker, S. (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Viking Publishers.

Scher, A. (2005). The Montana Human Rights Network. Public Eye Magazine. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v19n2/scher_montana.html

Sharon, R. (2009, November 9). Israel: Maariv.

Stern, K. (1990). Anti-Zionism, the Sophisticated Anti-Semitism. American Jewish Committee

Stern, K. (1996). A Force Upon the Plain. OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Stern, K. (1996, January). Militia Mania, a Growing Danger. USA Today.

Stern, K. (2006). Antisemitism Today. American Jewish Committee.

The Jewish Agency for Israel. (2004). The Law of Return. The Constitution for Israel Project. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.cfisrael.org/a608.html

Taylor, S. Jr. & Johnson, K.C. (2007). Until Proven Innocent: political correctness and the shameful injustices of the Duke lacrosse rape case. St. Martins Press.

Thweatt, E. (2002). Bibliography of Hate Studies Materials. Gonzaga University Institute for Action Against Hate.

Trivers, R. (2011). The Folly of Fools. the Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life. Basic Books, 2011

Tsai, R.L. (2012). Call for Papers “Hate and Political Discourse”. Robert L. Tsai, J.D. (guest editor). Journal of Hate Studies. WA: Spokane. Retrieved March 6, 2012. http://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/againsthate/journal.html

University of California at San Diego. (2010). Join The Battle Against Hate. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://battlehate.ucsd.edu

Waller, J. (2004, December). Our Ancestral Shadow: Hate and Human Nature in Evolutionary Psychology. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.

Whine, M. (2011). The Community Security Trust. Best Practice in Combating Antisemitic Hate. WA: Spokane. Journal of Hate Studies, 9.

Winant, G. (2008, October 24). Fake hate crimes: not just for liberals anymore. Salon.com. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2008/10/24/crime_hoax

Share Button

,

10 Responses to The One-Sided View of Hate in Hate Studies

  1. Jonathon Blakeley July 3, 2012 at 11:11 pm #

    Great lucid logcial finishes well. I caught the Rachel Abrams online rant via twitter >> M J Rosenberg (nice guy too). It was stunning and prooves your point so very well. She herself as I remember was rather proud of her hateful words as well.

    Cool

  2. Ariadna Theokopoulos July 3, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    Interesting, well presented and convincing for what it purports to prove.

    The category called hate crimes is a worthwhile topic for sociologists and psychologists but I have a problem with it as legal concept.
    Like “hate studies” it is another example of “special” categories promoted by the jewish left and used to make any “anti-semitic” manifestation the queen of ‘special’ hate. In that regard, to argue that hate studies neglect zionism is to argue that the field is a good idea that needs improvement.

    I see no reason why a murder should be punished less than one declared “hate murder.” The law has available (in the US) such a thing as “aggravating circumstances” (e.g., a heinous and cruel murder, like that of the black man dragged behind a car) to differentiate between one murder and another and, if the murder was committed by accomplices–more than one person–there is the additional charge of “conspiracy to commit murder.” Those are distinctions worth making.
    To set aside a special category — hate crimes– based on the victim’s race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation is to imply that some lives are more worth protecting than others and/or that it is possible to ascertain with any degree of certainty a murderer’s true.

    The newly create discipline of hate studies is in the same category as ‘women studies,’ ‘women literature,’ black history,’ and ‘gay whatever.’
    They are academic disciplines created with an agenda to manipulate public perception, increase fragmentation, deflect attention (as Jay indicated) and present “hate” as an almost self-standing phenomenon, a weed that grows on its own, a CAUSE of societal conflict, not a REACTION.

    [Yes, yes, I know "numbers don't prove anything," and "maybe jews are better at it than gentiles, just like in banking, and "this is binary thinking" but the filed of hate stuiodes is so thoroughly kosher as to make a gentile timid..]

    Within the much larger and legitimate field of ethnic identity studies (see MacDonald) it is understandably necessary to study conflicts and mutual perceptions between ethnic an other groups, but to set aside a discipline to study “hate” is tendentious and deceiving.

  3. who_me July 5, 2012 at 8:38 pm #

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alabama-pastor-hold-whites-only-conference-162845760.html

    “Christian Identity Ministries is holding a three-day conference for so-called “white Christians” who contend they have been treated unfairly, the Rev. Mel Lewis told local TV station WSFA. Lewis, the organizer and keynote speaker, says they have the right, like any other Americans, to worship how they wish.

    Ku Klux Klan flags and white supremacy slogans surround the conference, which will conclude with a cross being set on fire Friday night. Organizers say it’s not a cross-burning, but rather sacred Christian cross lighting.”

  4. Deadbeat July 6, 2012 at 12:56 am #

    Jay Knott writes …
    [Frank's] conviction allowed the other suspect, who was black, to walk.

    This is misleading. There were several suspects, black and white, in the murder of Mary Phagan. Obviously all of the other suspects “walked”. Also, I would have liked to have seen you site a reference more neutral then the ADL.

    Ariadna Theokopoulos writes …
    Like “hate studies” it is another example of “special” categories promoted by the jewish left and used to make any “anti-semitic” manifestation the queen of ‘special’ hate. In that regard, to argue that hate studies neglect zionism is to argue that the field is a good idea that needs improvement.

    I totally agree with you. Rather than wasting cycles in a pseudo-scientific attempt to disprove “hate crimes” and thereby legitimize the whole canard, the whole rhetoric of “hate crime” should be discredit.

    This is all B.S. with a “left-wing” veneer to gain support for laws that will strip away the 1st Amendment and regard any confrontation against Jewish supremacy to be a “hate crime”.

    Chip Berlet should be outed as the fraud that he his. He’s made a career attacking the Right and labeling recklessly labeling white gentiles as “racists”.

    I understand what Jay is doing by pointing out a “contradiction” because it is clear that the pseudo-Left will work hard to defend Zionism against charges of racism but in the end they control the media and academia and will continue to promote “hate crime” rhetoric that will eventually lead to legislation.

    This rhetoric is dangerous and not be giving legitimacy. That is why the pseudo-Left jumped onto the whole Trayvon Martin tragedy and identify George Zimmerman as “white” or “Hispanic” but not “Jewish”.

  5. Jay Knott July 6, 2012 at 10:06 am #

    Chip Berlet responds here: http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/07/hate-studies-ignores-certain-types-of-hate/

    BTW, Deadbeat, I’m not sure I follow you. The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white, and Martin was black, though there is no evidence of racial intent in the shooting. I hope you’re not suggesting that society should make the same assumption of guilt, but label Zimmerman Jewish instead of white.

    • who_me July 17, 2012 at 5:56 am #

      Jay Knott

      July 6, 2012 at 10:06 am

      “The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white”

      a “white guy” does a crime against a black person and everybody (ie: them “ni**er lovers”, commies and libberels) is out to “git ‘im” because he’s white. that is standard neo-nazi, white supremacist bigotry.

      but like most of the white supremacist’s heroes of the far right:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/george-zimmerman_n_1676729.html

      the out of the ordinary thing here is it wasn’t a young boy who was molested by the great white hope.

  6. who_me July 6, 2012 at 10:29 am #

    Jay Knott

    “The left, the media, the president, other politicians, etc. turned against Zimmerman because he’s white, and Martin was black”

    and you know that for a fact… :D

  7. Jay Knott July 6, 2012 at 2:49 pm #

    When president Obama said “if I had a son, he would look like Trayvon”, he wasn’t making a statement about genetics.

    The police initially let Zimmerman go. Then a trial by Facebook started, and Obama, Clinton, Sharpton and the media joined the mob. The word ‘racism’ has been thrown around like confetti, despite a lack of evidence of it.

    Prosecutor Corey said “We do not prosecute by public pressure”, but congresswoman Wilson was more truthful: “The outcry helped bring the case to justice. This case would never have been brought without that outcry. It was a case that almost slipped through the system without the public ever knowing about it”.

  8. Ariadna Theokopoulos July 6, 2012 at 4:05 pm #

    Another case of being Jewish = being twice blessed: you can be special but also when necessary you can fall back on being just… white.

    “Hate crime” — the potent multiplicative result of racial hate and “mere” crime is one of the many granddaughters in the large family of Special Suffering.
    The matriarch is Anti-semitism and she taught them all the basic principles:
    Jews who died in concentration camps represented, not the “innocenticide” Irving talked about, but a much worse crime than the deaths of all others who perished there because “only they were KILLED FOR BEING JEWS.”
    Victimhood is not an equalizer, on the contrary, there is general, undifferentiated victimhood and then there is special victimhood.
    Nevertheless regular victimhood has its uses for special victimhood, provided the applicants understand their second-class status:
    Blacks must be not only defended by selfless, progressive jews, but LED by them (see NAAACP) like the inexperienced victims they are, understanding that their slavery and suffering of a couple of centuries is trifling compared to the jews’ millenary suffering.
    As is the case with the Palestinian movement, the blacks are also lucky to have jews guide them because that “kosherizes” them against accusations of anti-white racism. It is a great formula because it works in all cases.

Leave a Reply