I haven’t thought about this in a long while so I thought I would bring them up here. I remember an Arab friend responding to charges of anti-semitism by saying (I’m paraphrasing), “I’m a semite too! I am not prejudiced towards semites. I am opposed to the policies of a government and a racist movement.” My friend did not formulate his opposition based on their religious views or ethnicity but being an Arab criticizing Israel he receives the charge of being an anti-semite quite often. So I looked up the two definitions and was amazed.
Okay, I am sure many here are concious on the differences between anti-semitic and anti-jewry (if not, then yes, there IS a difference) just as much as you probably are aware that they are both different from anti-Israel (whatever that means).
What I am getting at is the odd discrepancy that is generally found in dictionaries in regards to anti-semitism. Now, considering definitions generally consist of mutiple definitions. I will also assume that most of us recognize that the first definition is generally the most common one.
For example: the word fall has literally dozens of applications but the first is the most common use.
Now if we take the first discription of semite we get this:
A member of any of various ancient and modern peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including the Akkadians, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs.
But if we do the same for anti-semite we get just one:
A person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews.
Do you feel the term is improperly defined since it omits non-Jews? If not, then why would it not be anti-semitic to discriminate against or be prejudiced or hostile to Arabs and others who are semitic but not Hebrew?