What do you think?
Rate this book
Strange Hate: Antisemitism, Racism and the Limits of Diversity
Keith Kahn-Harris argues that the controversy over antisemitism today is a symptom of a growing "selectivity" in anti-racism caused by a failure to engage with the challenges that diverse societies pose.
How did antisemitism get so strange? How did hate become so clouded in controversy? And what does the strange hate of antisemitism tell us about racism and the politics of diversity today?
Life-long anti-racists accused of antisemitism, life-long Jew haters declaring their love of Israel... Today, antisemitism has become selective. Non-Jews celebrate the "good Jews" and reject the "bad Jews". And its not just antisemitism that's becoming selective, racists and anti-racists alike are starting to choose the minorities they love and hate.
In this passionate yet closely-argued polemic from a writer with an intimate knowledge of the antisemitism controversy, Keith Kahn-Harris argues that the emergence of strange hatreds shows how far we are from understanding what living in diverse societies really means.
Strange Hate calls for us to abandon selective anti-racism and rethink how we view not just Jews and antisemitism, but the challenge of living with diversity.
How did antisemitism get so strange? How did hate become so clouded in controversy? And what does the strange hate of antisemitism tell us about racism and the politics of diversity today?
Life-long anti-racists accused of antisemitism, life-long Jew haters declaring their love of Israel... Today, antisemitism has become selective. Non-Jews celebrate the "good Jews" and reject the "bad Jews". And its not just antisemitism that's becoming selective, racists and anti-racists alike are starting to choose the minorities they love and hate.
In this passionate yet closely-argued polemic from a writer with an intimate knowledge of the antisemitism controversy, Keith Kahn-Harris argues that the emergence of strange hatreds shows how far we are from understanding what living in diverse societies really means.
Strange Hate calls for us to abandon selective anti-racism and rethink how we view not just Jews and antisemitism, but the challenge of living with diversity.
256 pages, Paperback
First published June 11, 2019
4 people are currently reading
74 people want to read
About the author
Keith Kahn-Harris
28 books54 followersI am a sociologist and writer, based in London. An author of seven books, editor of several collections and many articles and reviews, my career bridges academia and multiple other worlds. I've written about denial, Jews, antisemitism, metal - and the multilingual warning messages inside Kinder Surprise Eggs.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
July 11, 2019
At one point Keith Kahn-Harris thought of calling his book How to Hate a Jew (Without Being Antisemitic). The final, less startling title indicates that he will not ignore general issues of racism, and indeed he doesn’t; nevertheless his main focus remains that of antisemitism and in particular the antisemitism of the political left. Here he locates much of the problem in what he calls ‘philosemitism’ – that is, the selective approval of ‘the good kind of Jew’. On the right this means the State of Israel and those conservative Jews who support it; on the left, preference is given to secular anti-Zionists, or at least those critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It’s a tangled and emotive issue, and in the end he comes up with what might seem an unrealistic cop-out: that we should practise ‘sullen solidarity’. If I read him correctly, this means accepting that there will be people whose opinions you loathe, and some of them will be Jews (or Muslims, or black, or white). They’re not going to change their minds and neither are you, so put up with them:
He adds:
He knows he will be criticized for this conclusion, for failing to reach ‘an inspiring or exciting vision’, but hopes if we can control ourselves within the bounds of civility, ‘then maybe we can create the basis for an anti-racism that is truly worthy of the name’. And we are left to ask ourselves the uncomfortable question as to whether we have a better and more workable solution of our own.
I am arguing that there is no way to disentangle the knot and allow politics and anti-racism to proceed simultaneously, one unimpeded by the other, I am suggesting, rather, that the only way to preserve both politics and anti-racism is to practise both in a restrained, calculating and even cynical manner.
He adds:
I wish it were otherwise. I really do.
He knows he will be criticized for this conclusion, for failing to reach ‘an inspiring or exciting vision’, but hopes if we can control ourselves within the bounds of civility, ‘then maybe we can create the basis for an anti-racism that is truly worthy of the name’. And we are left to ask ourselves the uncomfortable question as to whether we have a better and more workable solution of our own.
January 9, 2020
A timely book that sets out to map the contours of antisemitism in the modern world. It makes the valuable point that racism can no longer be viewed as a relatively simple phenomenon that can be expressed as antipathy towards a group because of perceptions about their standing in a supposed racial hierarchy. It has now acquired another dimension which hinges on what a given people is seen as doing. Just as Muslims have come to be viewed negatively because of, for the example, the attire of their womenfolk, so Jews arouse continue to arouse hostility because of the perception that they are connected to the workings of financial capitalism and/or support Israel in its conflicts with the Palestinians.
This multi-layered racism produces some paradoxical outcomes which particularly pertain to the position of the Jews. Kahn-Harris points out that they no longer register very highly as a group which suffers from the types of discrimination that produce social and economic disadvantage but they are still the object of a hatred which emanates across a broad spectrum of society. This hate no longer checks career progression or upward social mobility and general influence but it has taken deep root across the new social media. From that place alone it will not produce outcomes that can be measured in terms of social or economic disadvantage but it does have the power to cause deep hurt and increase the frequency of acts of violence against individuals and places of importance to their communities.
A further complication arises from the fact that the intensified interest in what the people who are the objects of concern do, rather than merely what they are, means that it becomes easier to divide prospects for vilification into good Jews and bad Jews (and likewise one presumes, into good Muslims/bad Muslims, Jamaicans, Indians, and so on). It is at this point it becomes salient, in Kahn-Harris’s opinion, to talk about right wing and left wing antisemitism. The right wing stuff has more in common with the Jew hatred of old and centres on the identities which even the most secular of Jews maintain that sets them apart from the majorities they live among. The wish to be acknowledged at some level as being Jewish is taken by people from the majority communities who use race as the pivot of their own identity as an explicit criticism of what they are, and therefore as a perennially hostile fifth column in society.
Left wing antisemitism is supposedly based on Jews and their relationship to capitalism, and, more to the forefront, the affinity that many in that community have with the state of Israel. Kahn-Harris gives less consideration to the capitalism side of the argument which in actuality reveals itself much less frequently in any output that can seriously be considered left wing. But the entanglement with Zionism moves us closer to the hub or the issue and the book spends most time working through its implications.
Good Jews/bad Jews produces mirror opposite outcomes for rightist and leftists. The right wing likes Zionism because it validates its view that nations acquire vitality as a consequence of the homogeneity of their racial stock. The flag of Israel is often waved in the places right wingers manifest themselves, from the ranks of the Conservative party to the street level thugs of Britain First and its associates. The left on the other hand excoriates the Zionists and gives a place of honour in its ranks to Jews who declare themselves for the Palestinians.
Kahn-Harris makes the correct point that an attitude towards Israel should not be made the sole defining point as to who or what is left wing. The reality of persecution across generations and the magnitude of the Holocaust has led to the formation of a consensus across Jewish communities that the establishment of the state of Israel is a positive development that requires continuing support. This should not surprise anyone capable of judging the matter objectively. The discussion that needs to be had has less to do with whether this identification is correct or not, but rather what does this actuality-existing Israel mean in the context of the dispossession of the Palestinian people and the configurations of imperialist and national-democratic forces across the Middle East region. By these standards the left will be justified in deploring the Israel-right-or-wrong stance that exists at across a wide swathe of Zionist views, but would be acting unwisely to refuse dialogue with those who still hold out hope for an Israel that has made peace with the Palestinians on the basis of a just and equitable settlement. By this measure sympathy with Zionism is not the dividing point which cannot be healed, but the start of a principled discussion between those with different opinions.
After much interesting consideration of these issues Kahn-Harris’s argument dwindles to the rather weak point that fighting antisemitism means upholding the right of Jews to hold opinions with which one disagrees, with the fact of the Jewishness of the proponent of error being excluded from the subsequent dispute. Obviously true, but the fight against this particular manifestation of racism has to mean more than the liberal cliché of possibly deploring what is being said but defending the right to say it.
This multi-layered racism produces some paradoxical outcomes which particularly pertain to the position of the Jews. Kahn-Harris points out that they no longer register very highly as a group which suffers from the types of discrimination that produce social and economic disadvantage but they are still the object of a hatred which emanates across a broad spectrum of society. This hate no longer checks career progression or upward social mobility and general influence but it has taken deep root across the new social media. From that place alone it will not produce outcomes that can be measured in terms of social or economic disadvantage but it does have the power to cause deep hurt and increase the frequency of acts of violence against individuals and places of importance to their communities.
A further complication arises from the fact that the intensified interest in what the people who are the objects of concern do, rather than merely what they are, means that it becomes easier to divide prospects for vilification into good Jews and bad Jews (and likewise one presumes, into good Muslims/bad Muslims, Jamaicans, Indians, and so on). It is at this point it becomes salient, in Kahn-Harris’s opinion, to talk about right wing and left wing antisemitism. The right wing stuff has more in common with the Jew hatred of old and centres on the identities which even the most secular of Jews maintain that sets them apart from the majorities they live among. The wish to be acknowledged at some level as being Jewish is taken by people from the majority communities who use race as the pivot of their own identity as an explicit criticism of what they are, and therefore as a perennially hostile fifth column in society.
Left wing antisemitism is supposedly based on Jews and their relationship to capitalism, and, more to the forefront, the affinity that many in that community have with the state of Israel. Kahn-Harris gives less consideration to the capitalism side of the argument which in actuality reveals itself much less frequently in any output that can seriously be considered left wing. But the entanglement with Zionism moves us closer to the hub or the issue and the book spends most time working through its implications.
Good Jews/bad Jews produces mirror opposite outcomes for rightist and leftists. The right wing likes Zionism because it validates its view that nations acquire vitality as a consequence of the homogeneity of their racial stock. The flag of Israel is often waved in the places right wingers manifest themselves, from the ranks of the Conservative party to the street level thugs of Britain First and its associates. The left on the other hand excoriates the Zionists and gives a place of honour in its ranks to Jews who declare themselves for the Palestinians.
Kahn-Harris makes the correct point that an attitude towards Israel should not be made the sole defining point as to who or what is left wing. The reality of persecution across generations and the magnitude of the Holocaust has led to the formation of a consensus across Jewish communities that the establishment of the state of Israel is a positive development that requires continuing support. This should not surprise anyone capable of judging the matter objectively. The discussion that needs to be had has less to do with whether this identification is correct or not, but rather what does this actuality-existing Israel mean in the context of the dispossession of the Palestinian people and the configurations of imperialist and national-democratic forces across the Middle East region. By these standards the left will be justified in deploring the Israel-right-or-wrong stance that exists at across a wide swathe of Zionist views, but would be acting unwisely to refuse dialogue with those who still hold out hope for an Israel that has made peace with the Palestinians on the basis of a just and equitable settlement. By this measure sympathy with Zionism is not the dividing point which cannot be healed, but the start of a principled discussion between those with different opinions.
After much interesting consideration of these issues Kahn-Harris’s argument dwindles to the rather weak point that fighting antisemitism means upholding the right of Jews to hold opinions with which one disagrees, with the fact of the Jewishness of the proponent of error being excluded from the subsequent dispute. Obviously true, but the fight against this particular manifestation of racism has to mean more than the liberal cliché of possibly deploring what is being said but defending the right to say it.
December 3, 2019
Keith Kahn-Harris uses the current impasse between mainstream British Jewry and the UK Labour Party as a case study for his concept of ‘selective anti-racism’, through which he outlines the complexities of the entanglement of politics and group identity.
Why is it that many diaspora Jews become so angry and defensive over criticism of Israel? Why are anti-Zionist’s often bewildered at being accused of anti-semitism? Why does the Labour Party align itself with the views of a tiny group of British Jews whilst dismissing the concerns of the majority? Is this an appropriate way for a party hoping to govern to approach the fears of a historically persecuted minority?
Written from a psycho-social perspective, Keith Kahn Harris tackles these questions, whilst not being shy to point fingers in all directions. His theory of ‘selective anti-racism’ challenges the complications and contradictions of a universalist anti-racism, and also the moral purity of victimhood, whilst also speaking some inconvenient truths about what it really means to live in a diverse society.
Amidst the mud slinging of Zionist discourse, Kahn-Harris restores the dignity and humanity of both Jews and Palestinians, as both are forced to shoulder the unrealistic burdens of Western left expectations, having both become ‘a focus of the worlds fear and hopes.’
Khan is not in any way shy to criticise Israel and the unfortunate alignments of present day Zionism, nor the sometimes unrealistic expectations of diaspora Jews in being defended against anti-semitism. Still, his is a welcome work of criticism from a Jewish leftist that takes a more nuanced, empathic and less dismissive approach toward the feelings and concerns of his own people than some other Jewish leftists who have preceded him.
When it comes to protecting minorities, Kahn Harris clearly realises that what he proposes for the left - the need to sometimes show solidarity with people whose way of life it hates - is a tall order, yet in making such a proposal he compels us all to dig deeper, and to re-examine our own prejudices, especially at a time when the far-right is reestablishing itself and minorities across the Western world are increasingly endangered.
Why is it that many diaspora Jews become so angry and defensive over criticism of Israel? Why are anti-Zionist’s often bewildered at being accused of anti-semitism? Why does the Labour Party align itself with the views of a tiny group of British Jews whilst dismissing the concerns of the majority? Is this an appropriate way for a party hoping to govern to approach the fears of a historically persecuted minority?
Written from a psycho-social perspective, Keith Kahn Harris tackles these questions, whilst not being shy to point fingers in all directions. His theory of ‘selective anti-racism’ challenges the complications and contradictions of a universalist anti-racism, and also the moral purity of victimhood, whilst also speaking some inconvenient truths about what it really means to live in a diverse society.
Amidst the mud slinging of Zionist discourse, Kahn-Harris restores the dignity and humanity of both Jews and Palestinians, as both are forced to shoulder the unrealistic burdens of Western left expectations, having both become ‘a focus of the worlds fear and hopes.’
Khan is not in any way shy to criticise Israel and the unfortunate alignments of present day Zionism, nor the sometimes unrealistic expectations of diaspora Jews in being defended against anti-semitism. Still, his is a welcome work of criticism from a Jewish leftist that takes a more nuanced, empathic and less dismissive approach toward the feelings and concerns of his own people than some other Jewish leftists who have preceded him.
When it comes to protecting minorities, Kahn Harris clearly realises that what he proposes for the left - the need to sometimes show solidarity with people whose way of life it hates - is a tall order, yet in making such a proposal he compels us all to dig deeper, and to re-examine our own prejudices, especially at a time when the far-right is reestablishing itself and minorities across the Western world are increasingly endangered.
May 16, 2022
This is a very frustrating book, but not for the reasons the author would like it to be.
He either mis-characterises the mechanisms behind racism, stereotypes the many ways racism plays out externally, or engages in broad and superficial generalisations of specific political positions that blunt or trivialise his argument. His prescription of minimal civility toward those we find politically detestable is already practiced by many on the left, and by those on the right (although usually for the sake of political expediency).
For a review of the recent anti-Semitism controversy there are neater, more comprehensive works out there. But "Strange Hate" feels like a rough draft of an idea yet to be fleshed out, made only worse by frequent and absolutely clanging typos that should not be present in a published text.
This is tricky ground to navigate, and the author is rightly cautious and qualified in their language. But toward the end they should have the courage to place their trust in the reader's good faith and ability to engage with some ambitious calls to action, as it stands this is a gentle slap on the wrist for the left, an apologist piece for the right, and a rather flat and trivial recipe for navigating our way out of racism within multi cultural societies.
He either mis-characterises the mechanisms behind racism, stereotypes the many ways racism plays out externally, or engages in broad and superficial generalisations of specific political positions that blunt or trivialise his argument. His prescription of minimal civility toward those we find politically detestable is already practiced by many on the left, and by those on the right (although usually for the sake of political expediency).
For a review of the recent anti-Semitism controversy there are neater, more comprehensive works out there. But "Strange Hate" feels like a rough draft of an idea yet to be fleshed out, made only worse by frequent and absolutely clanging typos that should not be present in a published text.
This is tricky ground to navigate, and the author is rightly cautious and qualified in their language. But toward the end they should have the courage to place their trust in the reader's good faith and ability to engage with some ambitious calls to action, as it stands this is a gentle slap on the wrist for the left, an apologist piece for the right, and a rather flat and trivial recipe for navigating our way out of racism within multi cultural societies.
August 5, 2019
The aim of this book is to change the conversation around antisemitism in England.
Keith Kahn Harris believes that tokenism is a serious problem. The Right has its favorite kind of Jews (ultra zionists) and the Left too (the antiZionists). None of these fringes are representatives of the majority of the Jewish community. Keith Kahn Harris believes the conversation should include also those sectors of the Jewish community one disagrees with.
But while it is clear that Keith Kahn Harris would love to give voice to those Jews who, from the Left, see the Nakbah as equivalent to the Shoah, supports the Two States Solution, or entertains some form of post-Zionism, he is not equally balanced to the Right. The book never mentions those voices that are perceived to be on the Right (Mizrahi refugees, Herut) and critical of Anglo Jewish institutions.
Almost all the Jewish thinkers mentioned in this book are critics of Israel and of its democratically elected government!
Another serious problem with this book is that the author ignores entire chapters in the history of antisemitism. Keith Kahn Harris believes that "a change of Jewish behavior could result in the change in the level of antisemitism", which is a bold assumption (would you ask the LGBT community to give up the Gay Pride, because by doing so the level of homophobia would drop?).
It is also a common belief, in some sectors of the Left, where Zionism is perceived as the main obstacle in the relations between the Jews and the (Marxist) Left. But antisemitism is common in places where Jews are no more, such as Early Modern Spain, Eastern Europe during the Cold War, and in many Muslim Countries. Antisemitism without Jews is a serious phenomenon that cannot be ignored by anyone willing to study racism and intolerance against Jews.
To agree with this book one must be prepared to believe that only the Left is underrepresented in the Jewish community, and that antisemitism is somehow related to "Jewish behavior". If you do not, probably the author thinks you are not entitled to take part to the conversation which he claims he wants to enlarge.
Keith Kahn Harris believes that tokenism is a serious problem. The Right has its favorite kind of Jews (ultra zionists) and the Left too (the antiZionists). None of these fringes are representatives of the majority of the Jewish community. Keith Kahn Harris believes the conversation should include also those sectors of the Jewish community one disagrees with.
But while it is clear that Keith Kahn Harris would love to give voice to those Jews who, from the Left, see the Nakbah as equivalent to the Shoah, supports the Two States Solution, or entertains some form of post-Zionism, he is not equally balanced to the Right. The book never mentions those voices that are perceived to be on the Right (Mizrahi refugees, Herut) and critical of Anglo Jewish institutions.
Almost all the Jewish thinkers mentioned in this book are critics of Israel and of its democratically elected government!
Another serious problem with this book is that the author ignores entire chapters in the history of antisemitism. Keith Kahn Harris believes that "a change of Jewish behavior could result in the change in the level of antisemitism", which is a bold assumption (would you ask the LGBT community to give up the Gay Pride, because by doing so the level of homophobia would drop?).
It is also a common belief, in some sectors of the Left, where Zionism is perceived as the main obstacle in the relations between the Jews and the (Marxist) Left. But antisemitism is common in places where Jews are no more, such as Early Modern Spain, Eastern Europe during the Cold War, and in many Muslim Countries. Antisemitism without Jews is a serious phenomenon that cannot be ignored by anyone willing to study racism and intolerance against Jews.
To agree with this book one must be prepared to believe that only the Left is underrepresented in the Jewish community, and that antisemitism is somehow related to "Jewish behavior". If you do not, probably the author thinks you are not entitled to take part to the conversation which he claims he wants to enlarge.
November 6, 2019
Mostly solid, but Kahn-Harris needs to expand on the chapter where he suggests Jews bear some responsibility for antisemitism and make it clear exactly what that means.
July 27, 2020
Great book overall, a little disjointed at some places, but a really insightful discussion.
October 24, 2022
As a piece of rhetoric, I've gotta give it up for Strange Hate. It's a quick and absorbing read, one of the more page-turning theory books I've read in some time. It feels not edited, but tested - as if Kahn-Harris gave early drafts of the book to detractors and focus-tested his arguments so that they address the reader's dissenting points just as they become unbearable. I have to assume he did not actually do this, and that he is simply a good rhetorician.
So I was disappointed when I got to the end and simply disagreed with his conclusion. I spent a lot of this book nodding along. I absolutely understand how he gets to the point of minimal civility, of personal/political entanglement being irreconcilable with universal ideals of anti-racism, of shrugging at public attempts at such a thing, and of a "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy towards personal identity expression. What I don't understand is his framing of this approach as pragmatic. There is simply not much in this book that, as a leftist, can be applied to daily living, because the only way this approach is pragmatic is if both "sides" (if you want to treat it as binary, and I don't) are equally interested in doing this method of anti-racist work. The issue lies in practicality - I am pretty sure that conservatives are not browsing the Repeater Books catalogue and are not selecting Strange Hate to purchase. In lieu of that, the solution proposed in the book simply allows the conservative status quo to be maintained. I'm not sure what the solution to the very real problems noted here is - they're complicated problems, to say the least. But I'm pretty sure it's not the one proposed here.
So I was disappointed when I got to the end and simply disagreed with his conclusion. I spent a lot of this book nodding along. I absolutely understand how he gets to the point of minimal civility, of personal/political entanglement being irreconcilable with universal ideals of anti-racism, of shrugging at public attempts at such a thing, and of a "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy towards personal identity expression. What I don't understand is his framing of this approach as pragmatic. There is simply not much in this book that, as a leftist, can be applied to daily living, because the only way this approach is pragmatic is if both "sides" (if you want to treat it as binary, and I don't) are equally interested in doing this method of anti-racist work. The issue lies in practicality - I am pretty sure that conservatives are not browsing the Repeater Books catalogue and are not selecting Strange Hate to purchase. In lieu of that, the solution proposed in the book simply allows the conservative status quo to be maintained. I'm not sure what the solution to the very real problems noted here is - they're complicated problems, to say the least. But I'm pretty sure it's not the one proposed here.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews