For many, they will see the headline below and not understand its context. For the vast majority, they will not see this headline at all. However, for those who are interested, “Schnorrer” is the Yiddish word for beggar and scrounger. It was part of the lingua franca of the early twentieth century and before. Why is Boris Johnson appropriating it to describe someone whose wife is Jewish? This is especially true when he says, “If Schnorrer gets in, he will immediately begin the process of robbing this country of its new-found independence and make the UK the punk of the EU”.
This is an antisemitic trope, and Boris Johnson must know this.
Antisemitic Connotations of the Term “Schnorrer”
While “schnorrer” has been assimilated into British English with various connotations, it is essential to recognise and address its antisemitic undertones. The term, when misused or taken out of its cultural context, can perpetuate harmful stereotypes about Jewish people.
Historically, antisemitism has manifested through various stereotypes that paint Jewish people in a negative light. One persistent stereotype is that of the “greedy Jew,” often depicted as someone who is excessively frugal, manipulative, or exploitative in financial matters. The term “schnorrer,” which describes someone who begs or freeloads, can be misappropriated to reinforce these prejudiced views.
When “schnorrer” is used outside its original, nuanced context, it can contribute to the stigmatisation of Jewish individuals as scheming or parasitic. Such usage is particularly insidious because it taps into broader antisemitic tropes that have been used for centuries to marginalize and persecute Jewish communities. For example, in casual or derogatory speech, calling someone a “schnorrer” might implicitly invoke these stereotypes, suggesting that Jewish people are inherently predisposed to such behavior.
The appropriation of “schnorrer” into general English, particularly when used pejoratively, often strips away its cultural specificity and the context that might mitigate its offensiveness. In Jewish culture, a “schnorrer” might be a well-known figure in the community, sometimes viewed with a mix of exasperation and affection. However, when used by those outside the culture, especially in a negative or mocking manner, it can come across as an insensitive and offensive label.
Media portrayals play a significant role in shaping public perceptions. When characters in literature, film, or television are depicted as “schnorrers,” these representations can either perpetuate harmful stereotypes or offer a more nuanced view. Unfortunately, the former is more common, with Jewish characters sometimes reduced to caricatures that embody the “schnorrer” stereotype. This not only reinforces negative perceptions but also desensitizes audiences to the real-world impact of such portrayals.
The casual or derogatory use of “schnorrer” can contribute to a hostile environment for Jewish people, reinforcing feelings of exclusion and discrimination. It can also impact self-perception within Jewish communities, where internalised antisemitism might lead individuals to distance themselves from aspects of their culture that are unfairly stigmatised. Moreover, it undermines the legitimate struggles of those who might need assistance, framing their needs as character flaws rather than societal issues.
The term “schnorrer,” while carrying specific cultural meanings within Jewish communities, has antisemitic connotations when misused or decontextualised. Recognising and addressing these implications is crucial to combating prejudice and fostering a more inclusive society. Language is powerful, and the way we use terms like “schnorrer” can either perpetuate harmful stereotypes or contribute to a deeper understanding and respect for cultural diversity.
With all the uproar about antisemitism over the last six years, it is very telling that when Boris Johnson used an antisemitic trope aimed at a man with a Jewish wife, the corporate media merely walk on by. If Jeremy Corbyn or other politicians, who genuinely want to make the UK a fairer and better place for all, used it (which of course they wouldn’t), the roof must fall in.
The above is a clear example of the sickness in this country. One rule for one and another rule for another. Just as long as you work for and do not upset the billionaire landlords of UK PLC, you can do and say pretty much what you like.
KEEP US ALIVE and join us in helping to bring reality and decency back by SUBSCRIBING to our Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ1Ll1ylCg8U19AhNl-NoTg AND SUPPORTING US where you can: Award Winning Independent Citizen Media Needs Your Help. PLEASE SUPPORT US FOR JUST £2 A MONTH https://dorseteye.com/donate/
