Assuming that “attempted homicide” is determined by an external 3rd party, I expect it not to be skewed by the victim’s own perceptions or beliefs so it makes sense to also consider attempted homicide when you can’t separate it from homicide.
Also keep in mind that you’re not supposed to be looking specifically for murders deemed “anti-semitic killing”, just killings in general of any person, per-capita and killings of people who are Jewish in relation to the number of Jewish people in that country, independently of the motive having been determined as being anti-semitism.
Going after murders specifically labelled as anti-semitic would just be getting us back to the problem of the legal classification of anti-semitism - in other words, countries with a broader definition of anti-semitism (such as the ones deeming criticism of Israel as being anti-semitism) having a bias would be more likely to label as “anti-semitic” murders of Jewish people which were not in fact committed due to the ethnicity of the victim, than other countries. Further, only looking at murders for which the motive had been determined would reduce the total of cases considered to just those murders which were successfully prosecuted (which depending on the country can be quite a low fraction of the total), since (I believe) a death can be officially counted as a murder purely based on the autopsy even if the killer has not been found, tried and convicted and his or her motive confirmed during a trial. Also the “how serious are the authorities at investigating a murder depending on the ethnicity of the victim” factor might skew the results if you’re limiting your numbers to tried and convicted cases. (Whilst not so in life, we’re all equal in death and a corpse is a corpse, so I expect that a coroner’s determination after examining a corpse that the person was killed should independent of the ethnicity of the victim).
By just looking at all murders without looking at anything else but the ethnicity of the victim, my expectation is that anti-semitic murders will appear in the numbers as more Jewish people getting murdered as a proportion of all Jewish people than the rate for the overall population - with this method any judgment passed saying the motivation of the murder is not at all examined, hence any possible “inflation” in the use of the “anti-semitic” classification makes no difference whatsoever for the results, and equally any bias the authorities might have in terms of how much resources they dedicate to investigating a murder depending on the victim’s ethnicity does not impact the numbers since they’re based on the coroner’s determination alone.
If in aggregate Jews are getting killed more often than the population in general, the obvious conclusion is that the excess of Jewish people being victims of murder above the general population is because of them being killed due to their ethnicity, which would confirm your point that Jewish people are less safe than the rest (not merely feel less safe, which you already proved and I never disputed, but objectively are less safe).
For 2 and 3, i don’t believe any ethnicity is exempt.
All that statistic will show is that it’s far more dangerous to be a criminal wifebeating drunk than the average population and i haven’t heard of many jew-gangs.
Example- a gang fight causes 100 people to die. One jew is killed from an antisemitic crime.
Now, if the jewish population is 1% of the total population, we would have an equal amount of jewish deaths as the average population, but criminals mostly kill eachother so it’s still obviously more dangerous to be a criminal than a jew but the antisemitic crime weighs more compared to the non-criminal population. So we would have to exclude a whole bunch of murder causes to get a reasonable result
and define those, or you know, just use the antisemitic deaths as a factor from the start.
Were did you get a that list of categories for most murders which doesn’t have non-gang-related crime? Because most crime doesn’t involve gangs.
Are you classifying all organised crime as being gangs (i.e. classifying the Mafia as a “gang”) and all non-gang related but crime related murder under “spontaneous”? Because that’s the only way you’ll end up with with that list of top categories for murders and in that case since those “gangs” aren’t just bands of teenagers from poor backgrounds, I’m pretty sure there are Jewish people in “gangs”.
Further, your entire point rests on the assumption that Jews are less likely to be involved in or with violent criminals than other people - in other words that Jews are different from other people in something which is unrelated to one’s religion, which is pretty straightforward racial prejudice and easily disproven by there being Jews committing crimes, including murder, in Israel (in fact if there is once thing the Genocide in Gaza proves beyond doubt is that some Jews have the capacity of the most horrific behavior - same as everybody else).
Without that prejudiced assumption, then as Jews are equally involved in crime as everybody else the fraction of Jews that end up dead due to that should be the same as everybody else and thus have equal impact on both the rate of Jews being victims of murder and that of the general population, leaving us once again with only anti-semitic violence to explain any higher rate of Jews being murdered.
Frankly, the only thing that I would expect would impact the number to yield a lower rate of Jewish victims of murder compared to the broader population would be that in Europe Jews tend to be Middle Class or above - mainly because they’re well established, compared with for example immigrants from poorer countries - and the probability of being murdered is affected by one’s social status (basically poorer people tend to be murdered more than middle-class people) and even then, if Jews in Europe tend to die less than average because they’re well established and prosperous, that de facto means they’re safe in Europe (certainly safer than the average person), which disproves your original statement - my whole point has always been that Jews can in fact be safe elsewhere than Israel, not that anti-semitism does not exist.
Being a criminal is also affected by ones social status so you’re pretty much contradicting youself here. I know what gang-related crime looks like as i was raised in a suburb with majority mena-immigrants along with having worked as a correctional officer to pay for my living situation while studying for my university degree. Jews were not part of that culture, because frankly they were quite hated in those parts of society. My statistics from the crime-prehentetive counsil in sweden mentions that it amounts for about a third of violent deaths, while the larger part of the rest is the second and third category. It might be lower in some areas in europe like portugal and maybe portugal don’t have many killed jews at all. I don’t agree with the metric because you can still be unsafe even if your life is not on the line consistently, but you might still be approached on the street, assaulted and fear terrorist attacks, which definitely have happened. Perhaps that is where our points of view differ to much to come to a common conclusion.
Keep in mind that being a criminal and being a victim of crime are not at all the same thing. To ascertain the safety of Jews in Europe being victims of violent crime is all that needs to be measured, quite independently of how many of them are criminals themselves.
Yeah, I openly admitted that social status changes ones likelihood of being a victim of crime (because it does and it was only fair to mention it since it might skew your results against the point you were making), and that has to do with living environments with high criminality even if not a criminal oneself: people from poor backgrounds are simply more likely to be victims of crime (the strong tend to prey on the weak).
You’re way over-extrapolating from your own experience, understandable since living in the environment that you describe would have left an indelible mark on a teenager and young adult. The situation you describe in Sweden is quiet different from, for example, The Netherlands or Italy were Organised Crime is far bigger and more dangerous than mere gang crime, and then again they’re all different from Portugal were there is very little in the way of murders other than the so-called “crimes of passion” (I doubt any Jew has been murderer in Portugal in decades, probably more than a century, purely because they’re such a small fraction of the population in a country which in terms of violent crime is the 4th safest in the World, so using Portugal for those numbers I asked from you would’ve yielded Statistically invalid results).
All of it is none the less irrelevant because, if Jews in Europe are dying at lesser rates than the rest of the population, no matter what the reason, they are de facto safe to live in Europe which disproves your statement that Jews are not safe to live anywhere [but Israel]. In the big maths of safety what counts is in how much danger one is, not the reason for that danger.
(Large amounts of anti-semitist violence would none the less in those number more than offset the safety enhancing factors for Jews in Europe such as, due to being well established, tending to be Middle class and hence safer than working class and poor people, whilst small amounts of anti-semitist violent would be hidden in the death toll by those other safety enhancing factors. The point is that the levels of anti-semitic violence - which I have no doubt exist in many if not most countries in Europe especially with large mena immigrant communities since those amongst them who are Racists will confuse Jews with Israel and blame the former as a group for the actions of the latter - seem to be very low and hence not enough to make Jews be less safe than the rest of the population).
In your last couple of posts you seem to have been trying to come up with excuses, so I can only conclude that the numbers you managed to gather following my suggestion of a, IMHO, reasonably independent metric do not show a higher rate of Jewish deaths than the rest of the population. None the less, your mind is set, understandable given the story you just shared of your experience as a Jew in Sweden of growing up in a neighborhood of mostly Middle Eastern and Northern African immigrants as my mind is set because I have only ever known Jews from Middle-class backgrounds in the countries I lived in, whose experiences were very different from yours and hence whose safety was far less at risk than yours seems to have been, plus as I said in those same countries I’ve had friends from many origins whose experiences were worse (in some cases far worse) than the experiences of my Jewish friends.
Lets agree to disagree, and I thank you for engaging with me on this in good faith.
I appreciated your well articulated responses. I was merely in my last posts trying to find something measureable and a definition of safe we can both agree on but as you say, lets agree to disagree. Lets hope everyone keeps safe in these times. Best of luck to you.
Assuming that “attempted homicide” is determined by an external 3rd party, I expect it not to be skewed by the victim’s own perceptions or beliefs so it makes sense to also consider attempted homicide when you can’t separate it from homicide.
Also keep in mind that you’re not supposed to be looking specifically for murders deemed “anti-semitic killing”, just killings in general of any person, per-capita and killings of people who are Jewish in relation to the number of Jewish people in that country, independently of the motive having been determined as being anti-semitism.
Going after murders specifically labelled as anti-semitic would just be getting us back to the problem of the legal classification of anti-semitism - in other words, countries with a broader definition of anti-semitism (such as the ones deeming criticism of Israel as being anti-semitism) having a bias would be more likely to label as “anti-semitic” murders of Jewish people which were not in fact committed due to the ethnicity of the victim, than other countries. Further, only looking at murders for which the motive had been determined would reduce the total of cases considered to just those murders which were successfully prosecuted (which depending on the country can be quite a low fraction of the total), since (I believe) a death can be officially counted as a murder purely based on the autopsy even if the killer has not been found, tried and convicted and his or her motive confirmed during a trial. Also the “how serious are the authorities at investigating a murder depending on the ethnicity of the victim” factor might skew the results if you’re limiting your numbers to tried and convicted cases. (Whilst not so in life, we’re all equal in death and a corpse is a corpse, so I expect that a coroner’s determination after examining a corpse that the person was killed should independent of the ethnicity of the victim).
By just looking at all murders without looking at anything else but the ethnicity of the victim, my expectation is that anti-semitic murders will appear in the numbers as more Jewish people getting murdered as a proportion of all Jewish people than the rate for the overall population - with this method any judgment passed saying the motivation of the murder is not at all examined, hence any possible “inflation” in the use of the “anti-semitic” classification makes no difference whatsoever for the results, and equally any bias the authorities might have in terms of how much resources they dedicate to investigating a murder depending on the victim’s ethnicity does not impact the numbers since they’re based on the coroner’s determination alone.
If in aggregate Jews are getting killed more often than the population in general, the obvious conclusion is that the excess of Jewish people being victims of murder above the general population is because of them being killed due to their ethnicity, which would confirm your point that Jewish people are less safe than the rest (not merely feel less safe, which you already proved and I never disputed, but objectively are less safe).
I honestly think that might be a pretty bad metric because most murders belong to three categories.
For 2 and 3, i don’t believe any ethnicity is exempt.
All that statistic will show is that it’s far more dangerous to be a criminal wifebeating drunk than the average population and i haven’t heard of many jew-gangs.
Example- a gang fight causes 100 people to die. One jew is killed from an antisemitic crime. Now, if the jewish population is 1% of the total population, we would have an equal amount of jewish deaths as the average population, but criminals mostly kill eachother so it’s still obviously more dangerous to be a criminal than a jew but the antisemitic crime weighs more compared to the non-criminal population. So we would have to exclude a whole bunch of murder causes to get a reasonable result and define those, or you know, just use the antisemitic deaths as a factor from the start.
Were did you get a that list of categories for most murders which doesn’t have non-gang-related crime? Because most crime doesn’t involve gangs.
Are you classifying all organised crime as being gangs (i.e. classifying the Mafia as a “gang”) and all non-gang related but crime related murder under “spontaneous”? Because that’s the only way you’ll end up with with that list of top categories for murders and in that case since those “gangs” aren’t just bands of teenagers from poor backgrounds, I’m pretty sure there are Jewish people in “gangs”.
Further, your entire point rests on the assumption that Jews are less likely to be involved in or with violent criminals than other people - in other words that Jews are different from other people in something which is unrelated to one’s religion, which is pretty straightforward racial prejudice and easily disproven by there being Jews committing crimes, including murder, in Israel (in fact if there is once thing the Genocide in Gaza proves beyond doubt is that some Jews have the capacity of the most horrific behavior - same as everybody else).
Without that prejudiced assumption, then as Jews are equally involved in crime as everybody else the fraction of Jews that end up dead due to that should be the same as everybody else and thus have equal impact on both the rate of Jews being victims of murder and that of the general population, leaving us once again with only anti-semitic violence to explain any higher rate of Jews being murdered.
Frankly, the only thing that I would expect would impact the number to yield a lower rate of Jewish victims of murder compared to the broader population would be that in Europe Jews tend to be Middle Class or above - mainly because they’re well established, compared with for example immigrants from poorer countries - and the probability of being murdered is affected by one’s social status (basically poorer people tend to be murdered more than middle-class people) and even then, if Jews in Europe tend to die less than average because they’re well established and prosperous, that de facto means they’re safe in Europe (certainly safer than the average person), which disproves your original statement - my whole point has always been that Jews can in fact be safe elsewhere than Israel, not that anti-semitism does not exist.
Being a criminal is also affected by ones social status so you’re pretty much contradicting youself here. I know what gang-related crime looks like as i was raised in a suburb with majority mena-immigrants along with having worked as a correctional officer to pay for my living situation while studying for my university degree. Jews were not part of that culture, because frankly they were quite hated in those parts of society. My statistics from the crime-prehentetive counsil in sweden mentions that it amounts for about a third of violent deaths, while the larger part of the rest is the second and third category. It might be lower in some areas in europe like portugal and maybe portugal don’t have many killed jews at all. I don’t agree with the metric because you can still be unsafe even if your life is not on the line consistently, but you might still be approached on the street, assaulted and fear terrorist attacks, which definitely have happened. Perhaps that is where our points of view differ to much to come to a common conclusion.
A few points:
All of it is none the less irrelevant because, if Jews in Europe are dying at lesser rates than the rest of the population, no matter what the reason, they are de facto safe to live in Europe which disproves your statement that Jews are not safe to live anywhere [but Israel]. In the big maths of safety what counts is in how much danger one is, not the reason for that danger.
(Large amounts of anti-semitist violence would none the less in those number more than offset the safety enhancing factors for Jews in Europe such as, due to being well established, tending to be Middle class and hence safer than working class and poor people, whilst small amounts of anti-semitist violent would be hidden in the death toll by those other safety enhancing factors. The point is that the levels of anti-semitic violence - which I have no doubt exist in many if not most countries in Europe especially with large mena immigrant communities since those amongst them who are Racists will confuse Jews with Israel and blame the former as a group for the actions of the latter - seem to be very low and hence not enough to make Jews be less safe than the rest of the population).
In your last couple of posts you seem to have been trying to come up with excuses, so I can only conclude that the numbers you managed to gather following my suggestion of a, IMHO, reasonably independent metric do not show a higher rate of Jewish deaths than the rest of the population. None the less, your mind is set, understandable given the story you just shared of your experience as a Jew in Sweden of growing up in a neighborhood of mostly Middle Eastern and Northern African immigrants as my mind is set because I have only ever known Jews from Middle-class backgrounds in the countries I lived in, whose experiences were very different from yours and hence whose safety was far less at risk than yours seems to have been, plus as I said in those same countries I’ve had friends from many origins whose experiences were worse (in some cases far worse) than the experiences of my Jewish friends.
Lets agree to disagree, and I thank you for engaging with me on this in good faith.
I appreciated your well articulated responses. I was merely in my last posts trying to find something measureable and a definition of safe we can both agree on but as you say, lets agree to disagree. Lets hope everyone keeps safe in these times. Best of luck to you.