Who is an antisemite: Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice vs Marx's Jewish Question

One of the curious things about both The Merchant of Venice (1597) and On the Jewish Question (1843), both of them seminal texts of Western civilization, is the number of people who insist that they aren't antisemitic. 

The introductions to their Wikipedia articles end with a reference to debates but imply that this is of marginal significance: 

• "Debate exists on whether the play is anti-Semitic..." (Merchant of Venice) 
• "A number of scholars and commentators regard On the Jewish Question... ...as antisemitic, although others do not [I cut the long prevarication in middle]. 

In both cases, the arguments are the same: That the antisemitism is debatable or is a claim made by [some] oversensitive Jews. 

Shakespeare, it is said, was keen to portray Jews as fellow humans, but then Shakespeare always provided deep insights into his characters' psychology: However bad they are, they always have human motivations. The fact is though, that Shylock is an unpleasant, antisemitic, vengeful caricature and the "pound of flesh" metaphor has often been used against Jews, both as individuals and as a group. Just because Shakespeare also shows Shylock's motivations, doesn't stop it being a caricature. I am not suggesting that the play should be banned, but pretending it has no antisemitic characteristics is ridiculous.

As for Karl Marx, the point made by his defenders is that the article seeks to argue that Jews should be given equal rights. Yet the article is just as bad as the Merchant of Venice: "Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money[...] An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible" [quote copied from Wikipedia, this is not the only quoted text].

There are a couple of points to be made about the Wikipedia articles that reflect British attitudes to these texts: 

• The complete denial of obvious antisemitism by claiming positive intention.
• The insistence that the antisemitism claims are debatable and therefore suspect.
• The assumption that evidence of antisemitism invalidates the text.

In contrast, the article on Geofrey Chaucer's "The Prioress's Tale" is very explicit about its antisemitism, but that story has no redeeming features. The article about Chaucer makes no mention of this tale or the antisemitism.

I think it is a feature of what is currently being called "Woke culture" that if a text contains racism, then the author is completely invalid. So if we describe Marx or Shakespeare as antisemites, the implication is that all their texts are antisemitism. 

I found a Universities UK document "Tackling racial harassment in November 2020" (written by Professor David Richardson,  Chair, UUK Advisory Group on tackling racial harassment in  higher education). The text is very persuasive and aggressive in its nature: 

"In a university, institutional racism is not just the problem of those suffering from the injustices that result from it. It is a problem of the whole university community, and so the whole community must own the challenge together, led by the vicechancellor or principal. University leaders and governing bodies must recognise addressing racism as a strategic priority. This will benefit students and staff, but also society as a whole as we shape the minds and attitudes of the next generation. Some have argued that we need patience, and that cultural change takes time. However, it is clear that people have run out of patience – and rightly so. The sector demonstrated how quickly change is possible when it adapted its entire delivery model within a few days in March and April this year in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. My challenge will be to see similar fast progress in turning words into action on tackling racial harassment in our institutions. We cannot afford not to."

He never uses the word "Jew" (I searched for it), just "students and staff from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds". 

Antisemitism in the UK is deeply embedded in the fabric of society and, as Chaucer shows, goes back to the very origins of the English language. In effect, it cannot really be removed from British culture. It can, however, be acknowledged.