Since Oct. 7, 2023, the label "anti-Semite" has been readily applied to numerous college students, artists, journalists, scholars and even casual social media users who expressed criticism of the crimes against humanity occurring in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Despite the diverse identities of opponents and the wide variety of criticism of Israel's violence, the "anti-Semite" label appears to encompass each of them. The definition of an anti-Semite is surprisingly simplistic now: those who do not "unconditionally support" the crimes of the Israeli state, as the U.S. and some European countries do. No elaborate justification or fair reason is required. Frequent warnings about the global rise of anti-Semitism are prevalent, resembling a distressing announcement of an unexpected exacerbation of a chronic disease. It's as if nothing has happened in Palestine since Oct. 7. European governments, seemingly more tolerant of far-right extremist parties, do not hesitate to infringe upon the rights of those protesting genocide with the accusation of anti-Semitism, legitimizing state violence.

Anti-Semitism is a form of racism that remains unjustifiable both before and after Oct. 7. However, the misuse of this concept to shield the Israeli state from any dissent, opposition or critique is equally unjustifiable while diminishing the notion’s reliability. The word evokes the dark history of Europe, spanning from the Middle Ages to the Third Reich – lessons from which the global community, including the Israeli government, ought to consider. Nevertheless, the Israeli state's identification with the Jewish people who survived the Holocaust involves a significant betrayal of the memories of the victims and their loved ones.

The culture industry's highly publicized and mediated historical accounts of the Holocaust also elevate anti-Semitism to a position of primacy, often denying or overlooking the unwritten histories of other victims of racism. This is disrespectful and indecent to all victims of racism. Notably, the Republic of South Africa, which suffered from the apartheid regime for years, is the first country to present the Gaza genocide case to the International Court of Justice. Victims of the Apartheid regime press charges of genocidal crimes against the Israeli state, which identifies itself with the Holocaust victims. The symbolic meaning of South Africa's appeal is critical because it reminds us of other forms of racism, questioning the implicit presumption that antisemitism is the most perilous and predominant type of racism.

A good deal of anti-Semitism scholars present it as pervasive and omnipresent, so elevating it to a universal phenomenon. In those narratives embellished with historical facts, the tale of anti-Semitism commences in ancient Egypt with the birth of Judaism and persists worldwide, from Japan to South Africa. The issue at hand is the ahistorical portrayal of the issue, which tends to magnify it as ubiquitous animosity and aggression against the Jewish people. In this context, such discourses implicitly confer a transcendental position to anti-Semitism, adhering to the established trajectories of Eurocentrism. The stories and images disseminated through Eurocentric, U.S.-led cultural globalization, which represents Europe's history, do not mean that anti-Semitism is universal, ubiquitous and distinctly exceptional.

Hannah Arendt's differentiation between social and political anti-Semitism in her "Origins of Totalitarianism" emphasizes the contrast between social expressions of animosity, discrimination and violence toward the Jewish population and the political ideology structured around anti-Semitism. The Dreyfus affair is a sign of the inception of the transformation of the "Jewish question" into a comprehensive ideology manifested through political, economic and scientific authority, alongside social prejudice and violence. While societal expressions of anti-Semitism may be evident in other regions, the ideology originates in Europe.

However, the recognition of European history as the paramount paradigm for the "developing" world, together with the uncritical application of insights derived from the European experience, is familiar to us. The increasing prevalence and exploitation of the notion of anti-Semitism mirrors the rise in itself. The allegedly academic thesis, which implies that the contemporary manifestation of anti-Semitism is resistance to the Israeli state, stigmatizes not only political resistance to Israel's state terror but also those who question its violence. The primary injustice lies in conflating the entire Jewish people with the criminal Israeli state and associating resistance to the brutal aggression of political and military power with cruel, violent racism directed against Jewish individuals. The victims of this issue are not the aggressive Israeli state but the Jewish people. Linking them to Israel's murderous atrocities is exactly what an anti-Semite would desire. This is why Jewish individuals proclaim, "Not in my name!"