Howard Dean pissed off a lot of people this week when he referred to Iraqi prime minister al-Maliki as "an anti-Semite" for his opposition to Israel's incursion into Lebanon.
Dean's use of the term anti-Semite prompted all sorts of hand wringing reactions. I'll leave others to parse the politics, but the dumbest reaction by far - and the most predictable - is the increasingly-expressed idea that someone like al-Maliki cannot possible be an anti-Semite because...ta da!...he's a Semite himself.
It may seem like a minor point, but any attempt to dilute the term anti-Semitism by linking it to all the peoples of the Mideast, and not just the Jews, is an insidious form of, well, anti-Semitism.
To understand why, a bit of background:
The term anti-Semitism is a relic of the late nineteenth century, when the mania for dressing up ancient prejudices and hatreds with "scientific" phraseology reached its height.
In this case, anti-Jewish agitators in Europe had a problem in the 1870s and 1880s: The general term for their ideology - Jew Hatred, or Judenhass - seemed so darn harsh. So in keeping with the modern, rationalist spirit of the age, anti-Jewish racists like the German Wilhelm Marr set out to popularize a new, "scientific" term for Jew Hatred.
He started with the fact that a century earlier, linguists had decided to classify a number of related Middle Eastern languages as "Semitic." Why Semitic? 19th century pundits believed that the Hebrews and their linguistic cousins who spoke Aramaic, Arabic and Syriac were all descended from Noah's son Shem (Greek: Sem). These Sem-descended populations should therefore be called "Semetic." Scientific, right?
But racists like Marr took the idea even further.
If Jews were, by definition, "Semites," then those who opposed them could be called "anti-Semites." It sounded so modern, rational and enlightened.
And hey, it got rid of the ugly (but accurate) "Jew Hatred."
It is not clear why anyone else went along with this linguistic sanitizing of one of mankind's oldest, ugliest prejudices. But it is clear that "anti-Semitism" was never, ever, meant to include opposition to other peoples of the Mideast.
European racists of the 19th century had zero communications with speakers of Syriac, Aramaic, Arabic, etc. They popularized Anti-Semitism exclusively to describe and sanitize their hatred of the Jews in their midst.
Flash forward to today, of course, and we have lots of relations with other "Semites." And one of the sorriest results of our adoption of the pseudo-scientific term anti-Semitic is that it now gives additional, unexpected cover to Jew haters.
Anti-Jewish Arabs, for instance, can prattle on about Jewish conspiracies and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and then turn around and say: Hey, we're not anti-Semitic. We're Semites ourselves!
And Howard Dean can - rightly or wrongly - accuse al-Maliki of anti-Semitism and face the usual cries of protest: How can al-Maliki be anti-Semitic? The man's a Semite, for god's sake!
I don't think Wilhelm Marr had this in mind when he worked to popularize the term in the 1870s. But I'm sure he'd be very pleased.
In the end, we can complain all we want about this perversion of an already perverted term. We can argue that anti-Semitism was never intended to cover any so-called "Semites" but Jews, and that arguments to the contrary are deliberate obfuscations.
But words are important. As long as we routinely utilize a pseudo-scientific term originally intended to demonize Jews and sanitize anti-Jewish hatred, we're fighting a losing battle.
My suggestion: Let's drop anti-Semitism and go back to Jew Hatred. It may be old fashioned, but it has the ugly ring of truth.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.