There are two kinds of antisemitism, the bad kind and the good kind. The bad kind seeks harm to Jews just for being Jews. The good kind criticizes and opposes the wrongdoing of Judaism conducted by its political leaders and supported by its followers.
The bad kind of antisemitism is similar to the other kinds of bigotry and racism inflicted on other groups of people and is universally condemned by virtually all of the world. It's a well-defined behavior that should probably be called simply, "anti-Jew."
The good kind is the kind that Jewish political leaders/writers are desperately trying to stop, because it's directed primarily at them for their wrongdoings. Thus, criticism of the wrongdoing of Israel and the fascist, Zionist principles on which it's based is clearly antisemitism because it’s critical of the source of this wrongdoing, which is Judaism. Criticism of Judaism for the crimes of Judaism is clearly antisemitism, and we should all aspire to it, especially Jews. I say especially Jews because the current activity is an example of when leaders of a group throw the group under the bus in order to maintain an immoral status quo they benefit from. Besides, it’s always good to criticize the wrongdoing of any group of people.
The good kind of antisemitism is akin to the criticism of USA, Russia, China, Republicans, Democrats, the fossil fuel industry, big pharma, white supremacists, and any other political group that does wrong. With any such criticism, there are always complications. Thus, we must distinguish between legality and morality. Many lobbying activities are legal, but they are also immoral, and here, we focus on the latter. It’s also a fact that not every single member of an errant group is a miscreant. Finally, a group can have many commendable features apart from the political feature by which it does wrong. In spite of such complications, most of us are candid about condemning such groups when they do wrong, relying on the context to communicate who we’re talking about. Except when it comes to Jews, because Jewish leaders have gotten most the western world to believe that when the above complications are applied to Jewish groups, such complications render the existence of any kind of organized Jewish group impossible, and of course criticism of such an imaginary group is antisemitic.
In other words, these Jewish leaders declare the usage of the noun “Jew” and its variations unlike to be unlike the usage of any other noun in the English language. As example, we can freely say, “The Republicans want to reduce taxes on the rich,” but we cannot say, “The Jews want to ethnically cleans Palestine for their beloved Jewish state.” This example illustrates that, according to Jewish leaders, the noun “Jews” must have different rules of English usage than does the noun, “Republicans.”
Back in the day, when the German Nazis were making great economic strides for their country, but then began to act on their dark side, there were undoubtedly German citizens arguing something like, "We should all conduct the good kind of anti-Nazism." Reports from that period tell us that people who made such comments were severely punished and even murdered. We thus see here an example of history repeating itself.
The wrongdoings at issue here are the wrongdoing of Israeli Jews and also the wrongdoing of the Jewish political activity in the diaspora that has corrupted western governments, particularly the USA. Such political activity has gone a long way in corrupting both politicians and citizens into thinking that Israel is defending itself, when in truth, Israeli Jews are committing genocide. For many decades now, the majority of western peoples have believed that these indigenous peoples are rotten, war mongering people who prey on their Jewish victims and that these victims could never do wrong themselves.
Thus, the wrongdoing of Israeli Jews cannot be separated from the wrongdoing of diaspora Jews because the former would not be possible if it weren't for the political activity of the latter. The Israeli Jews could never get away with their atrocities if it weren't for the unconditional political and military support of the USA, and the latter would not be possible without the political activity of the US Jewish Lobby, one of the largest political interest groups in the country. This group consists of the US Jewish leaders of some 400 US Jewish political organizations dedicated to the political concerns of Judaism, which go far beyond the issues of Zionism/Israel. This Lobby is funded by the diaspora Jewish community and Israel to the level of billions of dollars. The link below lists many of these organizations, with some of the funding levels, and it explains some of these Jewish political concerns that go beyond Israel. These latter concerns expose the lie and deception from Jewish leaders that demand this Lobby be called the “Israel Lobby.”
The Jewish Lobby
https://iwasathought.substack.com/p/the-jewish-lobby
The Jewish Lobby has successfully enrolled many powerful politicians and citizens who do not identify with Judaism. It’s impossible to sort out how much responsibility for the US and EU wrongdoing regarding Palestinians should be ascribed to the latter. A convincing argument however is that, if it weren’t for the political activity of the Jewish Lobby, which goes back a hundred years, we would not have witnessed such a despicable treatment of the indigenous peoples of Palestine. Their fate would still perhaps be horrid at the hands of White Christian bigots, but it’s hard for me to believe it would be as bad as it is. In fact, every leader of the Jewish State, throughout its history, has been influential to western powers, while being among the most despicable bigots that have ever walked the earth. Most all these leaders are revered by both Jews and non-Jews, thanks to the Lobby.
Importantly, the good kind of antisemitism described here has nothing to do with the bad kind. We humans are always criticizing political groups such as the ones mentioned above without hating individual members of those groups. When I criticize the USA for being complicit in the crimes committed by Israeli Jews, I’m not hating my fellow citizens, my American friends, my American family. I’m only trying to wise them up.
It is the Jewish leaders that barter with hate. They want to see people hating Jews, because it validates their Antisemite Card and their Jewish Victim Card. That’s why they erroneously preach that criticism directed towards them is hate for Jews for being Jews
This brings us to another wrongdoing by Jewish political leaders. They are preaching that criticism of Zionism is antisemitism because we are showing opposition to the self determination of Jews, of Judaism itself. It’s incredible how bold such teaching is. They try to convince us that even the most obvious crimes must be allowed if Jews commit them, and there are multiple levels of absurdity associated with this nonsense. First, as explained above, it’s logically correct that criticism of Zionism/Israel is (the good kind of) antisemitism, and so the argument given by these Jewish leaders relies on their belief that critics could never suspect that antisemitism could be a good thing. They are so confident in their propaganda that they are willing to hide a fact in plain sight and not expect the public to catch on and declare, “Hey, the emperor has no clothes!” Second, for Jewish leaders to say that criticism of Zionist Israel is “against Judaism” admits that Judaism itself is enmeshed with the crimes of the Israeli Jews. If it were true that the Israel Jews were the only miscreant Jews, virtually all diaspora Jews would rise up to condemn their atrocities. These latter facts demolish the Jewish claim that Judaism cannot be held responsible for the crimes of Zionism/Israel. They want us to believe that all of Judaism benefits from, and is expressed, via Zionist Israel, but the Goyim better not say that all of Judaism is assisting with the crimes of Zionist Israel.
It seems that the Jewish leaders are only “shooting themselves in the foot” by adopting such desperate propaganda in order to keep the world convinced that their act of genocide is the moral thing to do.
The following link elaborates on the nonsensical arguments that Jewish leaders use to exonerate themselves from their crimes.
The IHRA Leaders Insult our Intelligence
(Not just human intelligence, but AI as well)
https://iwasathought.substack.com/p/the-ihra-jewish-leaders-insult-our
The bad kind of antisemitism explained here is a rare occurrence in the world. Jewish leaders are desperately trying to conflate the good kind of antisemitism with the bad kind, trying to convince us that there’s only one kind of antisemitism, that it’s bad, and that it’s exponentially increasing in the world.
But have you noticed that, in their mass media appearances, these Jews rarely give documented support for their claim that the bad kind of antisemitism is increasing to the levels they claim. In virtually all the news reports I see, the issue involves the good kind of antisemitism and there’s rarely a factual report of the actual events that they complain about. I’ve seen testimonies by Jewish students who feel threatened because they see a sign on campus saying, “Gaza is an open air concentration camp.” Herein lies the key reason Jewish leaders purposely conflate good antisemitism with bad antisemitism. They cite examples of good antisemitism and try to make us believe it’s the bad kind, as if this is a greater moral crime than is the genocide they are committing. Once we understand this dual nature of antisemitism, we are able to sort out the bad kind and know that the whole story is primarily Jewish propaganda.
The lame - though successful - tactics of Jewish leaders keep much of the western world convinced that their genocide against Palestinians is morally sound, thus divorcing themselves from accountability for their crimes. Many of them probably didn’t like the fact that Netanyahu removed the fig leaf and accelerated the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in such a brutal way. They perhaps would’ve much preferred the decades’ old slow burn approach, where they whittle at Palestinian land and maintain attrition of the Palestinian population by murdering some of them at a smaller rate and making life so miserable for others that they are forced to vacate the land – like what they are still doing in the West Bank. These leaders must be gleeful with their successful destruction of Gaza and with their current plans for ethnic cleansing there. They must be at least as happy as Hitler would’ve been had he won his war.
Given the historical fact of Netanyahu’s fast-forward genocidal approach, Jewish leaders must now conduct a blitzkrieg propaganda campaign to justify it and save Judaism from losing face. It’s not easy to get the western world on your side when conducting such obvious genocide. Not even Hitler could do that. But so far, these Jewish leaders have been mostly successful. The success itself is astonishing, and the convoluted and dishonest twisting of the concept of “antisemitism” as describe here has been a masterstroke of propaganda genius and very much an integral part of this success. But the story isn’t over yet.


Julius, thanks for the attention to detail on this difficult topic. One of the main reasons it is so difficult is that it involves "forbidden" writings, thoughts, and analysis - even the most factual, rational analysis. When we are forbidden to think and to use our intelligence to analyze objectively, we have major social problems. And I'm talking about those of us who are being honest and candid and completely compassionate, not about those of us with agendas to spread hate, condemnation, and demonization, or to originate and repeat lies and maintain control over others. I believe the latter are the ones who dominate the former.
In our society, Hitler has been stripped of his humanity. He's not human and thus he has nothing to say as a human. Of course that's because of all his condemnable behavior. But at the same time, such dehumanization is false; Hitler cannot be made nonhuman, and I'm sure some people will condemn me for pointing out such a fact. The lesson I see here only teaches us what human beings are capable of - both with Hitler and with those who condemn rational, fact-based analysis. This is the same lesson I derive from others, for instance, Netanyahu. I don't see much moral difference between Hitler and Netanyahu.
But getting to your main comment: "Then we can definitely say that Hitler was a Good ‘anti-semite’," I don't quite agree because humans are not usually only one thing or another. The passages you quoted above show us that Hitler went through different attitudes at different times. So it is possible that Hitler sometimes demonstrated a justified criticism of Jews, which conforms to the definition of "good antisemitism," though that in no way explains everything about him, nor in particular his atrocities to Jews and many others later in life.
I haven't read "Mein Kampf," and thanks for the excerpts which show a human side of Hitler, so I cannot make a simplified conclusion that he was a "good antisemite," even in his later years. (I must say that some of the passages were not clear to me.) He often comes up in these discussions, and such reference often only adds to the confusion, censorship, and difficulties we have in discussing these topics. But even if he did sometimes express some good antisemitic behavior, his decision to harm individual Jews and others goes far beyond that, being completely indefensible and condemnable. In the terminology of my essay, no amount of the good kind of antisemitism can justify the bad kind of antisemitism. In some people both kinds can exist, and maybe this was the case with Hitler.
Notwithstanding, just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that the (pseudo) term ‘anti-semitism’ has some meaning. Then we can definitely say that Hitler was a Good ‘anti-semite’.
Mein Kampf Chapter 2 (Stalag edition):
“It was not until I was fourteen or fifteen years old that I frequently ran up against the word ‘Jew,’ partly in connection with political controversies.
These references aroused a slight aversion in me, and I could not avoid an uncomfortable feeling which always came over me when I had to listen to religious disputes. But, at that time, I did not see the Jewish question in any other light.
There were very few Jews in Linz. In the course of centuries the Jews who lived there had become Europeanized and so civilised in appearance that I even looked upon them as Germans. The reason why I did not then perceive the absurdity of such an illusion was that the only thing which I recognised as distinguishing them from us was the practice of their strange religion. As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of horror. I did not in the least suspect that there could be such a thing as systematic anti-Semitism.”
[…]
“Although Vienna then had about two hundred thousand Jews among its population of two millions, I did not notice them.
[…]
I will not say that the manner in which I first became acquainted with it was particularly pleasant. In the Jew I still saw a man who was of a different religion, and, therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I was against the idea that he should be attacked because he had a different faith.”
Only later did Adolf Hitler develop an aversion to [those who call themselves] ‘jews’ as a direct result of their anti-human behaviour. ’Jews’ maintain that they are a separate race, and Hitler developed no such aversion to any other ‘race’.
continuing with Adolf Hitler:
"My ideas about anti-Semitism changed also in the course of time, but that was the change which I found most difficult. It cost me a great internal conflict with myself, and it was only after months of struggle between reason and sentiment that the former gained the victory."