"You must be an anti-semite"

If you think free speech is a really good thing

If you fear the future that censorship may bring

If you think Mark Zuckerberg is a pawn of the CIA

If you don’t believe whatever the western leaders say

If you march and chant “from the river to the sea”

If you say you’ll keep fighting until Palestine is free

There’s just one explanation, right there in black and white

You must be an antisemite, you must be an antisemite

These lyrics to a song by the brilliant David Rovics, from his new album Notes from a Holocaust, really put their finger on the way that a certain term has been instrumentalised to the point of utter absurdity in the interests of silencing dissent.

Over the last few months we have all got used to hearing that it is “anti-semitic” to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, that being anti-Zionist is the same thing as being “anti-semitic“, that “false equivalence” between murders of Jews and by Jews risks “anti-semitic effect“.

David Rovics is Jewish and, while that doesn’t stop him from being accused of being “anti-semitic“, it does at least help him to see through the fraudulent nature of the insult.

As reported previously, the smear has for many years been wielded as a weapon to stifle criticism not just of Israel, but of the global criminocracy in general.

And it’s about time that we all took a leaf out of the Rovics songbook and, while remaining alert to the toxic threat of actual anti-semitism and other prejudiced attitudes, called out this blatant gaslighting.

Is it really “anti-semitic” to write a booklet exploring the power and activities of the Rothschilds, while carefully stressing that this is being done despite rather than because of their Jewish identity?

Is it really “anti-semitic” to write about the enormous influence wielded by globalist financier George Soros, given that he is Jewish?

Is it really “anti-semitic” to criticise the financial excesses of Goldman Sachs in the light of the fact that it is “a Jewish firm founded by Jews”?

Is it really “anti-semitic” to continue to investigate the “transgender” industry, even when several prominent funders turn out to be Jewish?

Is it really “anti-semitic” to write and stage “a morality tale about modern capitalism, a story of greed and financial trickery that left countless ordinary people impoverished or homeless” if the central characters, the Lehman Brothers, are Jewish?

Is it really “anti-semitic” to paint a mural declaring that “The New World Order is the enemy of humanity”, in which some of the depicted criminocrats are Jewish – and is it really “anti-semitic” to defend that mural from attack?

Is it “anti-semitic” to suggest that if the definition of what is “anti-semitic” is expanded way beyond most people’s understanding of the term, it is hardly surprising that a “rise in anti-semitism” can subsequently be identified and further instrumentalised?

Is it “anti-semitic” to point out that the victims of this instrumentalisation will not only be the non-Jews whose honest opinions will be criminalised and silenced, but the Jews who will be frightened into clinging to the gaslighters for protection against a majority outside world that they have been tricked into imagining is opposed to them as individuals and communities, rather than to the global mafia that oppresses and manipulates Jews and non-Jews alike?

[Audio version]

This piece is part of the latest Acorn bulletin on the Winter Oak site.

Thanks for reading Paul Cudenec! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Article courtesy of Paul Cudenac. https://paulcudenec.substack.com/

Author: Paul Cudenac

Leave a Reply