Peter,
Thanks for your reply.

"Summary: Assimilationist Jews are (mostly) not anti-Semitic."
Yes.
"Non-Jewish defenders of Jewish rights are philosemites."
Yes.
"They could also simultaneously be anit-Semites."
No, not if you mean they could be antisemites and philosemites at the very same time. But a number of German intellectuals went through shifting phases on this score, and developed from philosemites into antisemites or vice-versa, at different times in their lives.

Daniel:
Ok. Thanks for the clarification. Let's see if I got it:
"Within the non-Jewish population (which is to say, the vast majority of Germans), there were many supporters and defenders of Jewish rights; these people are sometimes called philosemites. ... Along with these philosemites, there were of course also many antisemites... ... ...the range of general attitudes toward assimilation among non-Jewish Germans was spread more or less evenly across this ideological spectrum: some antisemites were in favor of assimilation, as they understood it, and others were opposed. Moreover, many philosemites also shared an emphatically pro-assimilationist perspective."
So nobody at that time was simultaneously a philosemite and an anti-Semite. (From elsewhere) A person's view of assimilation is not enough to determine philosemitism or anti-Semitism. If a person defends Jewish rights and is therefore a philosemite, whether or not their view of assimilation ends with the disappearance of a separate Jewish identity will not in itself cause them to be an anti-Semite. To be an anti-Semite they must be shown to have advocated unequal treatment of Jews and/or to have disparraged Jews as a group.

Now what of people who advocated Jewish rights out of principle, but disparraged Jews out of habit or cultural prejudice? Would they not be anti-Semetic philosemites?

------------------------------------------------------------
"Steiner was an anti-Semetic philosemite."
I think he had both antisemitic and philosemitic phases. I outlined them in my first post to this list.

Daniel:
So how would you describe Steiner overall?

----------------------------------------------------------
"Steiner was an anti-Semetic philosemite because his view of assimilation involved the loss of separate Jewish identity."
No, that criterion alone won't serve to distinguish philosemitic from antisemitic positions. Mommsen's view of assimilation was very similar to Steiner's and Treitschke's, for example, and Mommsen was a philosemite, not an antisemite. To discern the significant differences, we need to take a number of other contextual factors into account, as I've tried to explain before.

Daniel:
So you are arguing that Steiner fits the profile of someone who advocated Jewish rights out of principle, but disparraged Jews out of habit or cultural prejudice?

------------------------------------------------------------
"In the end, whether your view of assimilation is anti-Semetic or not depends entirely on whether or not your version of assimilation results in a loss of separate Jewish identity."
No, not in my view. This version of assimilation-as-disappearance could be incorporated into both philosemitic and antisemitic paradigms, as the debate between Treitschke and Mommsen shows.

Daniel:
Ok. I am glad we have established this.

---------------------------------------------------
"Steiner was an anti-Semetic philosemite because his view of assimilation involved the loss of separate Jewish identity."
He held this view of assimilation in both the philosemitic and the antisemitic phases. It is one of the unifying factors in Steiner's attitudes toward Jews overall throughout his life.

Daniel:
Ok. I am glad we have established this.

-------------------------------------------------------------
"In the end, whether your view of assimilation is anti-Semetic or not depends entirely on whether or not your version of assimilation results in a loss of separate Jewish identity."
No, that is not my argument. Here are some of the contributing factors that I discussed previously: Did the figures in question participate in existing antisemitic discourses about Jews? Did they publicly praise prominent antisemites and endorse their views on Jews? Did they defend anti-Jewish tracts against charges of antisemitism? Did they derive terminology or central concepts from sources in which antisemitic features played a prominent role? Did they express their views on Jews, Judaism, and Jewishness within contexts in which antisemitic themes were already conspicuous? Did they incorporate longstanding antisemitic tropes into their own doctrines? I think that Steiner did all of those things at various points in his life.

Ok. Thanks for the clarity. So, since you seem to be more up to date on the issue, I would appreciate it if you could perhaps provide the examples you have found in Steiner's writing that fit each of the categories:
Did Steiner participate in existing antisemitic discourses about Jews?
Did Steiner publicly praise prominent antisemites and endorse their views on Jews?
Did Steiner defend anti-Jewish tracts against charges of antisemitism?
Did Steiner derive terminology or central concepts from sources in which antisemitic features played a prominent role? (Isn't this a bit of a guilt-by-association argument?)
Did Steiner express his views on Jews, Judaism, and Jewishness within contexts in which antisemitic themes were already conspicuous? (Wouldn't this apply to anyone speaking of Jews or Jewishness in Austria or Germany between 1860 and 1945?)
Did Steiner incorporate longstanding antisemitic tropes into his own doctrines?

Daniel Hindes