What do you think?
Rate this book
Περί αντισημιτισμού: Μια λέξη στην ιστορία
Τι εννοούμε σήμερα όταν μιλάμε για αντισημιτισμό; Παραδοσιακά ο όρος υποδήλωνε μια απειλή που εκπορευόταν από την πολιτική Δεξιά· από κύκλους εθνικιστικούς και ξενοφοβικούς που έχτιζαν πάνω στη μακραίωνη καχυποψία της Χριστιανοσύνης για τους Εβραίους με τα εργαλεία της ρατσιστικής ψευδοεπιστήμης. Στις αρχές του 20ού αιώνα, η συντριπτική πλειονότητα των Εβραίων ζούσε στην Ευρώπη. Και η προέλευση των αντισημιτικών μέτρων και πολιτικών ήταν ξεκάθαρη, με αποκορύφωμα τον εφιάλτη της ναζιστικής Γερμανίας και του Ολοκαυτώματος.
Τώρα το τοπίο είναι πολύ διαφορετικό, όπως δείχνει ο Μαρκ Μαζάουερ παρακολουθώντας την εξέλιξη του όρου από την επινόησή του τον 19ο αιώνα έως σήμερα. Το 80% του παγκόσμιου εβραϊσμού ζει σε δύο χώρες –το Ισραήλ και τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες–, με τη δεύτερη να εγγυάται τη στρατιωτική κυριαρχία της πρώτης στη Μέση Ανατολή. Πριν από τον Β΄ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο οι Εβραίοι ήταν μια ξεχωριστή μειονότητα που οδηγούνταν, από την αντίθεσή τους στο φασισμό, σε συμμαχία με άλλους κατατρεγμένους λαούς. Σήμερα αντιθέτως θεωρούνται «λευκοί» και, για τη σύγχρονη αντιαποικιοκρατική σκέψη, η μεταχείριση που επιφυλάσσει το Ισραήλ στους Παλαιστινίους έχει γίνει απολύτως κρίσιμο ζήτημα. Η παλιά αριστερή αλληλεγγύη είναι παρελθόν και οι πιο εκκωφαντικές καταγγελίες του αντισημιτισμού τον τοποθετούν στην Αριστερά, όχι στη Δεξιά.
Ο Μαζάουερ διατρέχει με προσοχή αυτό το ναρκοπέδιο μέσα από μια ιστορική ματιά που θέλει να φωτίσει τα πράγματα αντί να ρίξει απλώς κάπου το φταίξιμο. Όπως υποστηρίζει, η άνοδος μιας πεσιμιστικής ευαισθησίας μετά το Ολοκαύτωμα, καθώς και η αυξανόμενη διεθνής κριτική στο Ισραήλ, αίρουν το διαχωρισμό ανάμεσα στα συμφέροντα των Εβραίων και τα συμφέροντα του εβραϊκού κράτους. Πριν από μισό αιώνα λίγοι πίστευαν ότι ο αντισημιτισμός είχε κάποια σχέση με την εχθρότητα προς το Ισραήλ· σήμερα πολλές δεσπόζουσες εβραϊκές φωνές ταυτίζουν τα δύο. Η λέξη παραμένει ίδια, αλλά το νόημά της έχει αλλάξει.
Η τραγωδία, λέει ο Μαζάουερ, είναι ότι ο αντισημιτισμός επιμένει. Αν μπορεί να τον βρει κανείς και στην άκρα Αριστερά, παραμένει πολύ πιο επικίνδυνος όταν προέρχεται από δυνάμεις της ριζοσπαστικής Δεξιάς που διαδηλώνουν με το σύνθημα «Οι Εβραίοι δεν θα μας πάρουν τη θέση», όπως στο Σάρλοτσβιλ. Αφήνοντας την κατηγορία του αντισημιτισμού να εκτοξεύεται αδιακρίτως για να φιμώσει κάθε θεμιτή και νόμιμη κριτική, απονομιμοποιούμε τον όρο και υπονομεύουμε κάτι ουσιώδες για τη λειτουργία της δημοκρατίας. Το Περί αντισημιτισμού είναι μια θαρραλέα προσπάθεια να τραβήξουμε αυτή την απαραίτητη διαχωριστική γραμμή.
Τώρα το τοπίο είναι πολύ διαφορετικό, όπως δείχνει ο Μαρκ Μαζάουερ παρακολουθώντας την εξέλιξη του όρου από την επινόησή του τον 19ο αιώνα έως σήμερα. Το 80% του παγκόσμιου εβραϊσμού ζει σε δύο χώρες –το Ισραήλ και τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες–, με τη δεύτερη να εγγυάται τη στρατιωτική κυριαρχία της πρώτης στη Μέση Ανατολή. Πριν από τον Β΄ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο οι Εβραίοι ήταν μια ξεχωριστή μειονότητα που οδηγούνταν, από την αντίθεσή τους στο φασισμό, σε συμμαχία με άλλους κατατρεγμένους λαούς. Σήμερα αντιθέτως θεωρούνται «λευκοί» και, για τη σύγχρονη αντιαποικιοκρατική σκέψη, η μεταχείριση που επιφυλάσσει το Ισραήλ στους Παλαιστινίους έχει γίνει απολύτως κρίσιμο ζήτημα. Η παλιά αριστερή αλληλεγγύη είναι παρελθόν και οι πιο εκκωφαντικές καταγγελίες του αντισημιτισμού τον τοποθετούν στην Αριστερά, όχι στη Δεξιά.
Ο Μαζάουερ διατρέχει με προσοχή αυτό το ναρκοπέδιο μέσα από μια ιστορική ματιά που θέλει να φωτίσει τα πράγματα αντί να ρίξει απλώς κάπου το φταίξιμο. Όπως υποστηρίζει, η άνοδος μιας πεσιμιστικής ευαισθησίας μετά το Ολοκαύτωμα, καθώς και η αυξανόμενη διεθνής κριτική στο Ισραήλ, αίρουν το διαχωρισμό ανάμεσα στα συμφέροντα των Εβραίων και τα συμφέροντα του εβραϊκού κράτους. Πριν από μισό αιώνα λίγοι πίστευαν ότι ο αντισημιτισμός είχε κάποια σχέση με την εχθρότητα προς το Ισραήλ· σήμερα πολλές δεσπόζουσες εβραϊκές φωνές ταυτίζουν τα δύο. Η λέξη παραμένει ίδια, αλλά το νόημά της έχει αλλάξει.
Η τραγωδία, λέει ο Μαζάουερ, είναι ότι ο αντισημιτισμός επιμένει. Αν μπορεί να τον βρει κανείς και στην άκρα Αριστερά, παραμένει πολύ πιο επικίνδυνος όταν προέρχεται από δυνάμεις της ριζοσπαστικής Δεξιάς που διαδηλώνουν με το σύνθημα «Οι Εβραίοι δεν θα μας πάρουν τη θέση», όπως στο Σάρλοτσβιλ. Αφήνοντας την κατηγορία του αντισημιτισμού να εκτοξεύεται αδιακρίτως για να φιμώσει κάθε θεμιτή και νόμιμη κριτική, απονομιμοποιούμε τον όρο και υπονομεύουμε κάτι ουσιώδες για τη λειτουργία της δημοκρατίας. Το Περί αντισημιτισμού είναι μια θαρραλέα προσπάθεια να τραβήξουμε αυτή την απαραίτητη διαχωριστική γραμμή.
328 pages, Paperback
Published November 10, 2025
69 people are currently reading
735 people want to read
About the author
Mark Mazower
30 books413 followersMark Mazower is a historian and writer, specializing in modern Greece, twentieth-century Europe, and international history. His books include Salonica City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews, 1430–1950, winner of the Duff Cooper Prize; Hitler’s Empire: Nazi Rule in Occupied Europe, winner of the 2008 Los Angeles Times Book Prize for History; and Governing the World: The History of an Idea. He is currently the Ira D. Wallach Professor of History at Columbia University, and his articles and reviews on history and current affairs appear regularly in the Financial Times, the Guardian, London Review of Books, The Nation, and New Republic.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
November 15, 2025
A question: Are demonstrations against Israel’s actions in Gaza antisemitic? Can one criticize the self-defined "Jewish state" without indicting the "Jewish" part? Yes? No? Maybe?
It’s complicated, that's for sure. For one thing, does everyone even agree about exactly what antisemitism is? The IHRA Working Statement (May 2016) defines it as "a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.” Well. “A certain perception”? “May be expressed”? That's not terribly helpful. In fact the lead author of the Working Statement has disavowed it because of how badly it's being misused. And yet more than 40 countries (and several companies) around the world have adopted it, including the United States. The Trump Administration has used it to justify its punitive actions against American universities.
“On Antisemitism, a Word in History” is a timely and necessary examination: not of antisemitic acts and events per se (although the book does cover many of them) but of the term itself and how it’s been used since it was first coined in the late 19th century. The fundamental argument of the book is that the meaning of the word “antisemitism” can’t be determined in isolation from the contexts in which it was used. Its meaning has changed significantly over time, as has its usage in politics and culture. It can mean different things to different people and in different circumstances.
“The definition of antisemitism has always been a minefield," Mazower writes early in the book. "The concept, which derives its very name from a discredited racial theory, is routinely applied to everything from prejudices and stereotypes to feelings, attitudes, and forms of legislation, not to mention acts of violence ranging from petty abuse to massacre and genocide.”
These are provocative words, given the political landscape of the past decade, and it is likely that some readers will be angered by them. I think that anger is mistaken.
"It is very easy to label an individual or an institution as antisemitic," Mazower writes, "and this facilitates attention-grabbing tactics like the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s ‘Global Anti-Semitism Top Ten,’ a made-for-media list that once named the makers of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream alongside Hamas and Iran. And because donors often give more when anxiety about antisemitism rises, and hate crime data are notoriously liable to manipulation, campaigning groups are often tempted to paint conditions in the most terrifying colors.”
The book begins by looking at the late 19th century when the term was first coined. Mazower contends that was the period when animus toward Jews changed from "anti-Judaism" (which has a religious foundation) to what we know today as “antisemitism,” (which has a serious "scientific" rationale). The invention of “antisemitism” was intrinsically tied to the birth of the modern age, Mazower suggests. In fact it was at heart a reaction to modernity itself. Some groups, angry and threatened by the chaos they saw everywhere around them, saw the Jews as uniquely responsible for the sins of contemporary life: capitalism, social and demographic upheaval, economic recessions, nationalism, the Jewish Emancipation, spreading secularism.
Mazower examines the use of the word from the early years of Zionism in Europe and in the Arab Middle East, the Holocaust and how world’s response to it, Charlottesville, the BDM movement, the Free Palestine demonstrations, and on through today. Unsurprisingly, much of the history revolves around the creation of Israel, but not as we might expect it in 2025. Israel and the world's Jews were not synonymous. A 1967 article Mazower quotes, for example, read, “To attribute condemnation of Israel’s actions in the Sinai Campaign to anti-Semitism is stretching the term beyond recognition.”
Over the decades since that article was published, the word “antisemitism” has been linked, decoupled, and linked again to Israel, particularly in how the psychological relationship between American Jews and Israel has changed (and been manipulated -- I had no idea!) over the years. Did Israel speak for the entire Jewish People, as Ben-Gurion asserted in hopes that the identification would prompt Jews to move to the vulnerable young country? Or was such a claim politically, even cynically, motivated? Back in the 50's, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) deeply resented Ben-Gurion’s assertion. “American Jews were not in exile,” they angrily insisted. “America, not Israel, was their home, and their families, not Israeli politicians, were responsible for Jewish children.”
The argument went back and forth until 1952 when a bill was put before the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. The bill began with the statement, “The State of Israel regards itself as the creation of the entire Jewish people.” In the run-up to the submission of the bill, the AJC had bargained for the inclusion of a crucial clause: “The State of Israel, representing only its own inhabitants, regards itself as the creation of the entire Jewish people.” They believed they had an agreement on the matter but then the clause was dropped in the version passed by the Knesset. Need it be pointed out that the question lies at the heart of a lot (but by no means all) of what we’re still arguing about today. Are criticisms of Israel antisemitic? Do all Jews deserve blame for what the state of Israel does or doesn’t do?
There’s no way to summarize a work as thoughtful, ambitious, and well-reasoned as “On Antisemitism, a Word in History.” The book takes the reader from the “Jewish Emancipation” of the early 1800’s to campus protests in early 2025, pointing out how changes in the word’s meaning changed in response to world events (the Six Day War, for example, the Yom Kippur War), and not always naturally; often there were political forces deliberately shaping the discussion behind the scenes.
Does the definition of the word truly matter? In fact it does. It has real-world consequences in shaping domestic and international policy both here in the US and abroad. If the word antisemitism means so many different things, Mazower argues, it stops meaning anything — of at least anything useful. “At a time when Jewish communities around the world have had to become accustomed to having to study or pray under armed guard,” he writes, “there can be no question but that Jews continue to be among those group who are targeted these days for who they are. Anyone who takes antisemitism seriously as an ongoing problem must surely therefore be dismayed by the confusion that exists around term, not to mention the overuse that threatens to strip it of meaning.”
“On Antisemitism, a Word in History” is a rich, very readable examination of an important and vital question. I can’t recommend it more highly.
It’s complicated, that's for sure. For one thing, does everyone even agree about exactly what antisemitism is? The IHRA Working Statement (May 2016) defines it as "a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.” Well. “A certain perception”? “May be expressed”? That's not terribly helpful. In fact the lead author of the Working Statement has disavowed it because of how badly it's being misused. And yet more than 40 countries (and several companies) around the world have adopted it, including the United States. The Trump Administration has used it to justify its punitive actions against American universities.
“On Antisemitism, a Word in History” is a timely and necessary examination: not of antisemitic acts and events per se (although the book does cover many of them) but of the term itself and how it’s been used since it was first coined in the late 19th century. The fundamental argument of the book is that the meaning of the word “antisemitism” can’t be determined in isolation from the contexts in which it was used. Its meaning has changed significantly over time, as has its usage in politics and culture. It can mean different things to different people and in different circumstances.
“The definition of antisemitism has always been a minefield," Mazower writes early in the book. "The concept, which derives its very name from a discredited racial theory, is routinely applied to everything from prejudices and stereotypes to feelings, attitudes, and forms of legislation, not to mention acts of violence ranging from petty abuse to massacre and genocide.”
These are provocative words, given the political landscape of the past decade, and it is likely that some readers will be angered by them. I think that anger is mistaken.
"It is very easy to label an individual or an institution as antisemitic," Mazower writes, "and this facilitates attention-grabbing tactics like the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s ‘Global Anti-Semitism Top Ten,’ a made-for-media list that once named the makers of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream alongside Hamas and Iran. And because donors often give more when anxiety about antisemitism rises, and hate crime data are notoriously liable to manipulation, campaigning groups are often tempted to paint conditions in the most terrifying colors.”
The book begins by looking at the late 19th century when the term was first coined. Mazower contends that was the period when animus toward Jews changed from "anti-Judaism" (which has a religious foundation) to what we know today as “antisemitism,” (which has a serious "scientific" rationale). The invention of “antisemitism” was intrinsically tied to the birth of the modern age, Mazower suggests. In fact it was at heart a reaction to modernity itself. Some groups, angry and threatened by the chaos they saw everywhere around them, saw the Jews as uniquely responsible for the sins of contemporary life: capitalism, social and demographic upheaval, economic recessions, nationalism, the Jewish Emancipation, spreading secularism.
Mazower examines the use of the word from the early years of Zionism in Europe and in the Arab Middle East, the Holocaust and how world’s response to it, Charlottesville, the BDM movement, the Free Palestine demonstrations, and on through today. Unsurprisingly, much of the history revolves around the creation of Israel, but not as we might expect it in 2025. Israel and the world's Jews were not synonymous. A 1967 article Mazower quotes, for example, read, “To attribute condemnation of Israel’s actions in the Sinai Campaign to anti-Semitism is stretching the term beyond recognition.”
Over the decades since that article was published, the word “antisemitism” has been linked, decoupled, and linked again to Israel, particularly in how the psychological relationship between American Jews and Israel has changed (and been manipulated -- I had no idea!) over the years. Did Israel speak for the entire Jewish People, as Ben-Gurion asserted in hopes that the identification would prompt Jews to move to the vulnerable young country? Or was such a claim politically, even cynically, motivated? Back in the 50's, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) deeply resented Ben-Gurion’s assertion. “American Jews were not in exile,” they angrily insisted. “America, not Israel, was their home, and their families, not Israeli politicians, were responsible for Jewish children.”
The argument went back and forth until 1952 when a bill was put before the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. The bill began with the statement, “The State of Israel regards itself as the creation of the entire Jewish people.” In the run-up to the submission of the bill, the AJC had bargained for the inclusion of a crucial clause: “The State of Israel, representing only its own inhabitants, regards itself as the creation of the entire Jewish people.” They believed they had an agreement on the matter but then the clause was dropped in the version passed by the Knesset. Need it be pointed out that the question lies at the heart of a lot (but by no means all) of what we’re still arguing about today. Are criticisms of Israel antisemitic? Do all Jews deserve blame for what the state of Israel does or doesn’t do?
There’s no way to summarize a work as thoughtful, ambitious, and well-reasoned as “On Antisemitism, a Word in History.” The book takes the reader from the “Jewish Emancipation” of the early 1800’s to campus protests in early 2025, pointing out how changes in the word’s meaning changed in response to world events (the Six Day War, for example, the Yom Kippur War), and not always naturally; often there were political forces deliberately shaping the discussion behind the scenes.
Does the definition of the word truly matter? In fact it does. It has real-world consequences in shaping domestic and international policy both here in the US and abroad. If the word antisemitism means so many different things, Mazower argues, it stops meaning anything — of at least anything useful. “At a time when Jewish communities around the world have had to become accustomed to having to study or pray under armed guard,” he writes, “there can be no question but that Jews continue to be among those group who are targeted these days for who they are. Anyone who takes antisemitism seriously as an ongoing problem must surely therefore be dismayed by the confusion that exists around term, not to mention the overuse that threatens to strip it of meaning.”
“On Antisemitism, a Word in History” is a rich, very readable examination of an important and vital question. I can’t recommend it more highly.
November 1, 2025
This is a history of the term “antisemitism” by a distinguished historian of modern Europe who teaches at Columbia. The need for a book like this by such a distinguished and expert scholar should be clear to anyone who has been following the news since the attack by Hamas on Israel and for some time before that. It is clear to most people working in a university environment once the question is raised about whether it is possible to criticize the actions and policies of the Israeli state without at the same time being an antisemite. To many like myself, a non-Jew who has Jewish family, it had long seemed possible to separate criticism of the State of Israel from one’s feeling for Jews and the Jewish people. Mazower’s book - which is consistent with my own experiences - is that such a distinction is no longer possible.
This is a rich and well-documented history that is filled with insights of which I was not aware - even though I have studied history and avidly read European history for decades. Without given much away, Mazower’s punchline appears to be that for a variety of reasons, the meaning of “antisemitism” has so expanded beyond its initial historical meanings that it now encompasses an unmanageable range of meanings including clashing and contradictory senses. As a result, it has been adopted by a variety of actors, most recently the second Trump administration as a means of stifling free speech and dissent and a tool for imposing controls over major US universities such as Columbia, Northwestern, Harvard, and Penn, to name only a few. In this vein the word has become an active tool of state policy to restrict free expression and punish those on the other side.
Everyone interested in these issues should read and think about this thoughtful, informative, and well written book.
This is a rich and well-documented history that is filled with insights of which I was not aware - even though I have studied history and avidly read European history for decades. Without given much away, Mazower’s punchline appears to be that for a variety of reasons, the meaning of “antisemitism” has so expanded beyond its initial historical meanings that it now encompasses an unmanageable range of meanings including clashing and contradictory senses. As a result, it has been adopted by a variety of actors, most recently the second Trump administration as a means of stifling free speech and dissent and a tool for imposing controls over major US universities such as Columbia, Northwestern, Harvard, and Penn, to name only a few. In this vein the word has become an active tool of state policy to restrict free expression and punish those on the other side.
Everyone interested in these issues should read and think about this thoughtful, informative, and well written book.
July 22, 2025
Must-read voor iedereen die wil begrijpen hoe de betekenis van antisemitisme en zionisme door de tijd heen verschuift en wat dit betekent voor de kijk op de geschiedenis en het perspectief op het nu. Wetenschappelijk werk, voor iedereen toegankelijk.
December 23, 2025
comprehensive; some parts less relevant/interesting/obscure-to-me than others, but i was glad to have the material there to choose to skim. more history than analysis but that i suppose is what we have brains for.
October 31, 2025
Pretty good. Mazower, a respected historian of Europe, describes how antisemitism has occurred and been redefined throughout history. He is critical of the IHRA definition, and wants a definition that is more clear about what the difference between antizionism and antisemitism are, without dismissing the threat of antisemitism. I agree with the majority of his arguments in this book, antisemitism is real and is a problem, but it is also alleged to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. It is important to be precise about language. I recommend this book for both Jews and non Jews.
October 30, 2025
Very servicable overview of antisemitism with a firm emphasis on the last 2 centuries; the subject of zionism and the Israeli-Palestinin conflict in all its flare-ups; on the subject be sure to check out The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine: A History of Settler-Colonial Conquest and Resistance, 1917–2017 and Douglas Murray's On Democracies and Death Cults: Israel and the Future of Civilization.
October 15, 2025
Extremely educational. I think I'd probably, without thinking much about it, subscribed to the "timeless hatred" argument that treats anti-Semitism as essentially an unchanging constant through history, no doubt sustained less by active thought than by inference and intuition and implicit assumption. (And, you know, Hebrew school and generally being Jewish.)
The tenor of the first half is to treat the phenomenon as a political tendency whose roots lie in the 19th century in particular, as part of a larger resistance to modernity, as incarnated by Jewish emancipation, and thus not a timeless truth but rather a contingent political phenomenon that could be deployed in a multitude of ways (and was) by political actors, who constantly had to evaluate how useful and effective this one tactic was and when and how it might work. As he shows, its efficacy rose and fell multiple times, reaching its peak, obviously, in 1930s Germany, and of course also throughout Eastern Europe around this time, though not uniformly--he explains the unusual cases of Hungary and Bulgaria well, in a way that does not suggest that either country's leaders or people were exceptional humanitarians; rather, accepting Nazi anti-Semitic policies felt like an encroachment on nationalist prerogatives. More recently, it's become such a deadweight that contemporary European rightists like Marine Le Pen make sure to be seen discarding it. So this has hugely widened my understanding of this as a contingent, changeable political tactic.
Mazower's second, and surely more controversial, section covers the resurrection of the term in the past 50 or so years, taking us up through the last couple of years. His inciting incident is an early-70s ADL report that needed to explain why, though anti-Semitism was in retreat, actually the threat was worse than ever, and he notes the degree to which both the ancient-hatreds argument and the shaky IHRA definition (an essentially orphaned and discarded semi-idea given a new life it didn't deserve) rely on both essentialist simplifying and the collapse of any notion of a legitimate diasporic identity. As such, we lose the historical specificity of the term as well as erase the fairly consistent (much more so before 1967, of course) dissent and arguments within Judaism as to Israel's relevance to this concept. He has a particularly interesting section on Arab anti-Zionism that includes remarks from numerous Israeli government figures (the more you read in this period, the more of these you find) that admit that of course Palestinians have an entirely legitimate reaction, one borne out of normal nationalist feelings and not some wellspring of ancient resentment. He explores the PLO's studies of Jewish history and thought (need to get on reading that book) to show how some intellectuals, at least, pushed for an intelligent, learned account of Zionism as a political effort and mocked those who wanted to indulge in, say, the original Hamas charter's citation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as fact. (To be fair, he talks a very little, but not much, about that kind of rhetoric, and studying its prevalence might at least widen the case for the quantity of conspiracy thinking out there.)
Since he teaches at Columbia, he ends there, with a snapshot of what he saw (paraphrasing that excellent Joseph Roth book of reportage on 1920s Berlin), which is perhaps at this point not going to surprise anyone who's been paying attention, but which brings out the bad faith of all those right-wingers who've suddenly fallen in love with cancel culture (and, he points out for the racist fringe, with Israel but in fact not with Jews). Probably the book I'd recommend right now, should anyone ask me. Which does happen from time to time.
The tenor of the first half is to treat the phenomenon as a political tendency whose roots lie in the 19th century in particular, as part of a larger resistance to modernity, as incarnated by Jewish emancipation, and thus not a timeless truth but rather a contingent political phenomenon that could be deployed in a multitude of ways (and was) by political actors, who constantly had to evaluate how useful and effective this one tactic was and when and how it might work. As he shows, its efficacy rose and fell multiple times, reaching its peak, obviously, in 1930s Germany, and of course also throughout Eastern Europe around this time, though not uniformly--he explains the unusual cases of Hungary and Bulgaria well, in a way that does not suggest that either country's leaders or people were exceptional humanitarians; rather, accepting Nazi anti-Semitic policies felt like an encroachment on nationalist prerogatives. More recently, it's become such a deadweight that contemporary European rightists like Marine Le Pen make sure to be seen discarding it. So this has hugely widened my understanding of this as a contingent, changeable political tactic.
Mazower's second, and surely more controversial, section covers the resurrection of the term in the past 50 or so years, taking us up through the last couple of years. His inciting incident is an early-70s ADL report that needed to explain why, though anti-Semitism was in retreat, actually the threat was worse than ever, and he notes the degree to which both the ancient-hatreds argument and the shaky IHRA definition (an essentially orphaned and discarded semi-idea given a new life it didn't deserve) rely on both essentialist simplifying and the collapse of any notion of a legitimate diasporic identity. As such, we lose the historical specificity of the term as well as erase the fairly consistent (much more so before 1967, of course) dissent and arguments within Judaism as to Israel's relevance to this concept. He has a particularly interesting section on Arab anti-Zionism that includes remarks from numerous Israeli government figures (the more you read in this period, the more of these you find) that admit that of course Palestinians have an entirely legitimate reaction, one borne out of normal nationalist feelings and not some wellspring of ancient resentment. He explores the PLO's studies of Jewish history and thought (need to get on reading that book) to show how some intellectuals, at least, pushed for an intelligent, learned account of Zionism as a political effort and mocked those who wanted to indulge in, say, the original Hamas charter's citation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as fact. (To be fair, he talks a very little, but not much, about that kind of rhetoric, and studying its prevalence might at least widen the case for the quantity of conspiracy thinking out there.)
Since he teaches at Columbia, he ends there, with a snapshot of what he saw (paraphrasing that excellent Joseph Roth book of reportage on 1920s Berlin), which is perhaps at this point not going to surprise anyone who's been paying attention, but which brings out the bad faith of all those right-wingers who've suddenly fallen in love with cancel culture (and, he points out for the racist fringe, with Israel but in fact not with Jews). Probably the book I'd recommend right now, should anyone ask me. Which does happen from time to time.
November 15, 2025
Το βιβλίο του Mark Mazower είναι εξαιρετικό: σύντομο, καθαρό και βαθιά διαφωτιστικό. Μελετά την ιστορία και τη δύναμη της λέξης αντισημιτισμός και δείχνει πώς αυτή φορτίστηκε μέσα στους αιώνες. Είναι από εκείνα τα βιβλία που δεν προσφέρουν απλώς πληροφορίες, αλλά ανοίγουν δρόμο για στοχασμό.
Διαβάζοντάς το, μου γεννήθηκαν αρκετές σκέψεις γύρω από τρεις έννοιες που θεωρώ κεντρικές του βιβλίου.Αντισημιτισμός, Σιωνισμός και Λέξεις.
Ο αντισημιτισμός, όπως τον αντιλαμβάνομαι μέσα από τη μελέτη του Mazower αλλά και από άλλες ιστορικές πηγές, δεν είναι μόνο μια προκατάληψη. Είναι ένα σύνολο από αιώνιες διακρίσεις απέναντι σε μια θρησκευτική μειονότητα — την εβραϊκή — από την κυρίαρχη χριστιανική Ευρώπη. Μύθοι, θεωρίες συνωμοσίας, πολιτικές σκοπιμότητες και φανταστικές κατασκευές του ανθρώπινου νου οδήγησαν σε πογκρόμ, βία, φόνο και καταστροφές. Μια λέξη, ο αντισημιτισμός, έγινε όπλο.
Ο σιωνισμός, από την άλλη πλευρά, γεννήθηκε στα τέλη του 19ου αιώνα, στη δίνη των ευρωπαϊκών εθνικισμών. Μια εθνική ιδεολογία που στόχευε στη δημιουργία ενός εβραϊκού έθνους-κράτους, ακολουθώντας το ρεύμα της εποχής. Τον αντιλαμβάνομαι ως απόπειρα χειραφέτησης και προστασίας των Εβραίων από τις διώξεις, αλλά ταυτόχρονα ως μια ιδεολογική κατασκευή: τη μετατροπή μιας θρησκείας και ενός πολυεθνικού πληθυσμού σε λαό με κοινό παρελθόν και κοινό μέλλον.
Άλλωστε όλα τα έθνη κράτη είναι φανταστικά κατασκευάσματα.
Και στο κέντρο όλων αυτών βρίσκονται οι λέξεις. Εύπλαστες, ευμετάβλητες, δημιουργικές και καταστροφικές. Κάποιες αντέχουν στο χρόνο, άλλες αλλάζουν νόημα, άλλες θάβονται στα "νεκροταφεία των λέξεων". Κάθε μέρα γεννιούνται νέες. Με λέξεις χτίζονται ιδέες, ιδεολογίες, πολιτικές και θρησκείες — και με λέξεις μπορεί να γεννηθεί μίσος, πόλεμος, πογκρόμ, ακόμη και γενοκτονίες.
Το βιβλίο του Mazower έγινε η αφορμή για να σκεφτώ ξανά πόσο μεγάλη δύναμη έχουν οι έννοιες «αντισημιτισμός» και «σιωνισμός» και πώς οι λέξεις διαμορφώνουν τον τρόπο που αντιλαμβανόμαστε τον κόσμο.
Η λέξη αντισημιτισμός στα 130 χρόνια περίπου από τη γέννηση της άλλαξε πολλούς μανδύες και χρησιμοποιήθηκε
για διάφορους σκοπούς
Ένα βιβλίο θαυμαστό.Το προτείνω ανεπιφύλακτα.
Διαβάζοντάς το, μου γεννήθηκαν αρκετές σκέψεις γύρω από τρεις έννοιες που θεωρώ κεντρικές του βιβλίου.Αντισημιτισμός, Σιωνισμός και Λέξεις.
Ο αντισημιτισμός, όπως τον αντιλαμβάνομαι μέσα από τη μελέτη του Mazower αλλά και από άλλες ιστορικές πηγές, δεν είναι μόνο μια προκατάληψη. Είναι ένα σύνολο από αιώνιες διακρίσεις απέναντι σε μια θρησκευτική μειονότητα — την εβραϊκή — από την κυρίαρχη χριστιανική Ευρώπη. Μύθοι, θεωρίες συνωμοσίας, πολιτικές σκοπιμότητες και φανταστικές κατασκευές του ανθρώπινου νου οδήγησαν σε πογκρόμ, βία, φόνο και καταστροφές. Μια λέξη, ο αντισημιτισμός, έγινε όπλο.
Ο σιωνισμός, από την άλλη πλευρά, γεννήθηκε στα τέλη του 19ου αιώνα, στη δίνη των ευρωπαϊκών εθνικισμών. Μια εθνική ιδεολογία που στόχευε στη δημιουργία ενός εβραϊκού έθνους-κράτους, ακολουθώντας το ρεύμα της εποχής. Τον αντιλαμβάνομαι ως απόπειρα χειραφέτησης και προστασίας των Εβραίων από τις διώξεις, αλλά ταυτόχρονα ως μια ιδεολογική κατασκευή: τη μετατροπή μιας θρησκείας και ενός πολυεθνικού πληθυσμού σε λαό με κοινό παρελθόν και κοινό μέλλον.
Άλλωστε όλα τα έθνη κράτη είναι φανταστικά κατασκευάσματα.
Και στο κέντρο όλων αυτών βρίσκονται οι λέξεις. Εύπλαστες, ευμετάβλητες, δημιουργικές και καταστροφικές. Κάποιες αντέχουν στο χρόνο, άλλες αλλάζουν νόημα, άλλες θάβονται στα "νεκροταφεία των λέξεων". Κάθε μέρα γεννιούνται νέες. Με λέξεις χτίζονται ιδέες, ιδεολογίες, πολιτικές και θρησκείες — και με λέξεις μπορεί να γεννηθεί μίσος, πόλεμος, πογκρόμ, ακόμη και γενοκτονίες.
Το βιβλίο του Mazower έγινε η αφορμή για να σκεφτώ ξανά πόσο μεγάλη δύναμη έχουν οι έννοιες «αντισημιτισμός» και «σιωνισμός» και πώς οι λέξεις διαμορφώνουν τον τρόπο που αντιλαμβανόμαστε τον κόσμο.
Η λέξη αντισημιτισμός στα 130 χρόνια περίπου από τη γέννηση της άλλαξε πολλούς μανδύες και χρησιμοποιήθηκε
για διάφορους σκοπούς
Ένα βιβλίο θαυμαστό.Το προτείνω ανεπιφύλακτα.
December 16, 2025
A fantastic, even-handed and meticulously researched history of how the word "antisemitism" has been used, to both the detriment and the health of the worldwide Jewish community. Mazower, professor of history at Columbia University, traces the origin of the word itself to the creation of nationalism in the late 19th century (by a group determinedly against the legal emancipation of Jews). He then goes through the rise of antisemitism as a world power in Europe, culminating in the Third Reich, and ending with Cold War Europe. Part 2 of the book sees the sea change with the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state and the muddy tangling of antisemitism with legitimate criticism of the state of Israel.
Mazower is excellent at being honest about the dangers of antisemitism and the dangers of using the word overly broadly at the expense of its important meaning. He is especially rightfully critical of how the right-wing government of Israel has intentionally conflated antisemitism with the important criticism of any state that is enroaching on human rights and freedom - the very intention upon which Israel itself is based. Mazower also reminds us of the unremembered history of Jews who were cautious - or even against - the establishment of the State of Israel because of the temptations of violent nationalism and the fact that a Jewish state might increase incidences of antisemitism. Mazower offers two understandings of the Jewish people that have always been at odds with each other - Jews as a light to the nations, and Jews as an eternally hated and oppressed people that must fight to survive. In this dangerous days of authoritarianism, antisemitic violence, and genocide, may we all seek to be careful about our words and follow shalom in our actions. Mazower's book contributes to that discussion.
Mazower is excellent at being honest about the dangers of antisemitism and the dangers of using the word overly broadly at the expense of its important meaning. He is especially rightfully critical of how the right-wing government of Israel has intentionally conflated antisemitism with the important criticism of any state that is enroaching on human rights and freedom - the very intention upon which Israel itself is based. Mazower also reminds us of the unremembered history of Jews who were cautious - or even against - the establishment of the State of Israel because of the temptations of violent nationalism and the fact that a Jewish state might increase incidences of antisemitism. Mazower offers two understandings of the Jewish people that have always been at odds with each other - Jews as a light to the nations, and Jews as an eternally hated and oppressed people that must fight to survive. In this dangerous days of authoritarianism, antisemitic violence, and genocide, may we all seek to be careful about our words and follow shalom in our actions. Mazower's book contributes to that discussion.
January 7, 2026
the background was interesting but I'll be honest, the author lost an incredible number of points in terms of exhibiting his own bias and blind spots in his epimogue, "What I Saw," where he describes Columbia University after October 7th. "i didn't see violence, I didn't see this or that, campus was actually quiet...." are you, author, visibly Jewish? are you israeli? did students link arms against you entering campus buildings? did they disrupt your class while masking themselves in keffiyahs? was a mezuzuah ripped off of your room where you were living? All of this is captured on film and was livestreamed on social media, so the proof is out there. he shows his own bias in claiming that nothing happened, when Jewish students especially reporting all of these incidents as civil rights violations impeding their ability to access the education that they had paid for. *That* is antisemitism, which he had *just* written a book about, which I find the most frustrating. He claims it was all a cooling of free speech, that "primarily male Jewish billionaires conspired to send in the NYPD to break up the encampments on campus, which were primarily female in demographics," completely ignoring the fact that those encampments were infringing on the civil rights of visibly (and suspected) Jewish and zionist students to have free and equal access to campus as other students. based on this, unfortunately, I'd have to recommend some other book i have yet to find.
December 30, 2025
Good historical review, but the author fails miserably when discussing the recent outbreak of Antisemitism on the left, as well as Islamic Antisemitism (which is completely absent from the discussion).
Specific example:
He goes on a long rampage against the IHRA definition of Antisemitism, discussing post October 7th responses in US universities without even mentioning (let alone discussing...) the 2024 Congressional hearings regarding Antisemitism at Yale, Harvard etc., and the claim that "calling for genocide of Jews" does not violate schools' code of conduct and is "context-dependent"...
By ignoring this and other recent blatantly Antisemitic incidents, the author proves that it is indeed a slippery slope between being an Antizionist, and whitewashing Antisemitism.
Specific example:
He goes on a long rampage against the IHRA definition of Antisemitism, discussing post October 7th responses in US universities without even mentioning (let alone discussing...) the 2024 Congressional hearings regarding Antisemitism at Yale, Harvard etc., and the claim that "calling for genocide of Jews" does not violate schools' code of conduct and is "context-dependent"...
By ignoring this and other recent blatantly Antisemitic incidents, the author proves that it is indeed a slippery slope between being an Antizionist, and whitewashing Antisemitism.
September 6, 2025
Social constructivism teaches that language creates reality. Mazower wrote a remarkable and instructive study that demonstrates this in its ultimate consequences. How a word that didn't exist seemed to mean the same thing to everyone, but in this modern age (2025) can mean something to everyone.
October 20, 2025
A thorough examination of the historical meanings and political implications of antisemitism throughout history, culminating with the 2024 protests on the campus of Columbia University and the current administration's response.
November 26, 2025
Es más un ensayo sobre la evolución de la idea del antisemitismo que sobre los hechos en sí. Interesante para conocer cómo ha evolucionado el odio a los judíos en las sociedades modernas y contemporáneas, pero acaba siendo demasiado largo al no entrar en los episodios históricos clave.
December 29, 2025
Mazower provides a thorough overview of what antisemitism is and how its definition has grown broader in the past couple decades, and proves that criticism of Israel's policies is not the same as antisemitism. On Antisemitism provides necessary context for the modern political situation.
May 24, 2025
Heel belangrijk boek, zeker nu. Conclusie: we praten allemaal langs elkaar heen omdat we allemaal iets anders verstaan onder antisemitisme. En dat is ook een politieke strategie. Wel zware kost.
July 31, 2025
Zeer interessant. Ik kan dit boek iedereen aanraden.
October 11, 2025
My year of absolute banger books continues
October 20, 2025
Interesting history of antisemitism as a prejudice by right wing and left wing politics! Study of how the word has changed over the history.
October 24, 2025
Appears on the surface to be informative and rational, but arguments often miss important considerations which may be less obvious to readers less familiar with the subject.
November 27, 2025
yippee! a book about antisemitism i actually liked!
December 18, 2025
Essential reading.
January 20, 2026
Phenomenal.
Mazower has written a lucid, powerful history of the term "antisemitism", starting with the date of its coinage in (i think it was) 1879. He talks about the rise of many, many anti-isms in the turbulent wake of emancipation for various minority groups. Were it not for WWI, Judaism may have faded into the patchwork of ancient religious also-rans along with the Jains, the Zoroastrians, and so forth. The Nazis, in effect, created the world they feared and hated, where the "Jewish question" is of central international importance to everyone.
Mazower's text is clear and easy to read, but this is a historical text by a history professor (he teaches European history at Columbia), not a polemic or a political tract. His evenhandedness makes it all the more heartbreaking when he finally gets to the modern era, and the ways antisemitism is being used as a cudgel to silence any and all criticism of Israel, even the most legitimate and desperately moral pleas from their friends.
Mazower has written a lucid, powerful history of the term "antisemitism", starting with the date of its coinage in (i think it was) 1879. He talks about the rise of many, many anti-isms in the turbulent wake of emancipation for various minority groups. Were it not for WWI, Judaism may have faded into the patchwork of ancient religious also-rans along with the Jains, the Zoroastrians, and so forth. The Nazis, in effect, created the world they feared and hated, where the "Jewish question" is of central international importance to everyone.
Mazower's text is clear and easy to read, but this is a historical text by a history professor (he teaches European history at Columbia), not a polemic or a political tract. His evenhandedness makes it all the more heartbreaking when he finally gets to the modern era, and the ways antisemitism is being used as a cudgel to silence any and all criticism of Israel, even the most legitimate and desperately moral pleas from their friends.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews