Forum debate: Jewish expulsions and European tolerance

Europe and Antisemitism: The History of Expulsions That Divides

There was a time when European cities competed to expel their religious minorities and then claimed credit for the civilization built by others. The assertion that "if you are European, you must be antisemitic, as Europe has been throughout its history" has peine a historical debate where expulsion data intersects with lists of places where such communities were not ousted. Far from being settled, the discussion is stuck on an uncomfortable question: was Europe antisemitic by default, or only in specific episodes?

Documented Expulsions Cited in the Debate

The trail of decrees and hostile preaching against Jewish communities in Europe is extensive and documented. **Expulsions in Venice in 1394, 1478, 1492, 1497, 1498, 1516, and 1550** are mentioned, with references to Fra Bernardino's preaching and usury as triggers. **1582 in the Netherlands** is also cited, relying on works by Grosser and Halperin on the causes and effects of antisemitism. The list of expulsions of Muslim communities, it is argued, is shorter and offers less material.

Against this chronology, another school of thought holds that the Jewish presence in Venice was not an expulsion but **residential restriction**, with communities settled in Mestre and rules that were never fully enforced. This discrepancy is significant: depending on it, one speaks either of continuous harassment or of isolated episodes within a more or less tolerated coexistence.

Where Were Jews Not Expelled?

According to one viewpoint, the list of places without formal expulsion includes **medieval Venice, Renaissance Holland, Paris, London, Vienna, Switzerland, and the United States**. From this, the thesis is drawn that these were the sites where everything we call civilization was achieved, and that antisemitism and economic backwardness go hand in hand. The direct response is: **there were also expulsions in Venice and Holland**, and the United States lacks sufficient historical trajectory to determine if the community would fare better in the long term.

The most cited counterargument points out that **the only place where Jews were never expelled was the Ottoman Empire**, which is attributed with having invented little in terms of material pogre. The comparison serves to dismantle the correlation between tolerance and flourishing, although it leaves open the question of what is meant by tolerance.

The Spanish Case: Neither Paradise Nor Exception

Two narratives intersect regarding Spain. One argues that **there was never antisemitism** and that the conversion and expulsion of 1492 responded to economic calculation: taking advantage of the departure of Jovenlandeses to loot Jewish quarters, with nobility and bishops validating conversions that did not exist in practice. Another reminds us that **Quevedo used Góngora's converso origin to discredit him** and that the insult "Jewish dog" was part of common vocabulary, evidence of a hostile past that should not be whitewashed.

The most curious detail comes from an observation about popular festivals: **public consumption of pork** served to certify that a neighbor was not a crypto-Jew or crypto-Muslim. Seeing everyone eat pork guaranteed, according to this reading, mental software compatible with the dominant faith. The anecdote illustrates how far social pressure operated beyond decrees.

Antisemitism as Pathology or Response

The discussion shifts to the personal realm when those holding these theses are accused of having a mental illness or glorifying "incivil scum." The response is immediate: **"the victims of your mental illness are all of us, starting with yourselves."** In parallel, it is asserted that contempt for Jews without knowing any Jew stems from ignorance, and it is recalled that in Spain during the unity of faith, a Calvinist would be viewed worse than a Jew.

Another intervention introduces a class nuance: **a globalist of Jewish origin in Los Angeles would be culturally closer to a left-wing voter than to a Jew in Jerusalem**. The idea, repeated in various formats, is that ethnicity does not determine political position and that the real conflict is between globalist and sovereigntist projects, not between peoples.

What Is at Stake for Europe in This Discussion

The debate has a contemporary derivative. It is claimed that **Spain is going downhill without brakes** due to living under what is described as control by foreign elites, while others respond that this type of diagnosis is precisely the symptom of the disease being denounced. The discussion about the past thus becomes a dispute about the present: what can be said, what can be criticized, and what is the cost of doing so.

The underlying question—whether Europe was structurally antisemitic or only in specific episodes—remains unanswered. The data on expulsions are there, but their interpretation depends on what counts as an expulsion, what as a restriction, and what as mere bad neighborliness.