Connect with us

Uncategorized

Conflict over Mamdani is a reminder: We still can’t agree on the line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism

With antisemitism on the rise while Israeli-Palestinian relations remain at an historic low, one question that continues to dog public discourse is whether anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism.

The stakes within the Jewish community have recently increased, with the issuing of a letter signed by more than 1,000 American rabbis and cantors opposing New York City mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani due to his opposition to Zionism. The letter argues that anti-Zionism “encourage[s] and exacerbate[s] hostility toward Judaism and Jews.”

Why does the distinction matter?

If anti-Zionism is understood to be antisemitism, then those protesting or otherwise articulating deep opposition to the governing ideology of the state of Israel could find themselves on the receiving end of public opprobrium — harsh criticism and disgrace.

A global debate with deep roots

People in Canada and the United States have lost employment offers and jobs for seeming anti-Zionist.

This debate is not new, however. In 2022, Jonathan Greenblatt, head of the Anti-Defamation League, stated that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism” and that anti-Zionism is “an ideology rooted in rage.” A year later, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution stating that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism.”

In 2017, French President Emmanuel Macron called anti-Zionism a “reinvented form of antisemitism.” And perhaps most importantly, against this backdrop is the definition of antisemitism adopted by many countries, including the U.S. and Canada, which brings the two concepts very close together, if not outright equating them.

Specifically, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance defines antisemitism, among other things, as “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination (e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour).”

What data reveals about Zionism

But is anti-Zionism really antisemitism?

To determine whether anti-Zionism is antisemitic, we first need to think about how we define Zionism. As a Canadian Jewish political scientist, my own research has found that the term Zionism is understood in wildly different ways.

In 2022, I surveyed American Jews with a weighted sample to account for various demographics. I found that while 58% identified as Zionist, 70% identified as such when I defined Zionism as “a feeling of attachment to Israel.” When I defined Zionism as a “belief in a Jewish and democratic state,” the number rose slightly, to 72 per cent.

But a very different picture emerged when I presented a vastly alternate definition of Zionism. If Zionism, I offered, “means the belief in privileging Jewish rights over non-Jewish rights in Israel, are you a Zionist?” Here, respondents’ support for the kind of Zionism experienced by Palestinians plummeted: only 10 per cent of respondents said they were “definitely” (three per cent) or “probably” (seven per cent) Zionist, according to this definition, with a full 69 per cent saying they were “probably not” or “definitely not.”

A lifetime of analysis of Zionism, and adopting various labels at different phases of life for myself — I have at times identified as progressive Zionist, liberal Zionist, anti-Zionist, non-Zionist and none of the above — leads me to conclude that anti-Zionism and antisemitism should be considered distinct concepts.

Identity, nationalism and belonging

Those who see anti-Zionism as antisemitic deploy various arguments.

One is that self-determination is a right, and denying that right to Jews — and sometimes seemingly only to Jews — is discriminatory and prejudicial. But while everyone has the right to self-determination, no one has the right to determine themselves by denying the rights of others to do the same.

Another is that given that the majority of Jews by most accounts embrace some form of Zionism, denying a part of their identity is hateful. But unlike most other markers and symbols of ethnic or religious identity, Zionism has historically, and continues to, directly affect another ethnic group: namely, Palestinians.

Contrast this kind of identity with dietary laws, clothing restrictions, modes of prayer and one’s relationship to sacred texts: none of these aspects of identity necessarily affect another group. By contrast, the historical record of how Zionism has affected Palestinians is vast.

A third argument concerns antisemitism in general — that every other group gets to define the terminology around their own oppression, and therefore so should Jews. But again, when a state — which by definition interacts with others within and outside its borders — is brought into the equation, the debate about antisemitism ceases to be about only Jews.

At its core, Zionism is a political ideology. A cornerstone of liberal society is political debate, including subjecting ideologies to the stress test of critique. These ideologies include capitalism, socialism, social democracy, communism, ethno-nationalism, settler colonialism, theocracy, Islamism, Hindu nationalism and so on.

In the right of others to support, oppose, analyze or criticize it, Zionism is — or at least should be — be no different.

The personal and the political

I understand why many Jews feel that anti-Zionist actions or statements are hateful to their identity. Most Jews have grown up believing that to be Jewish is to feel a deep connection to the state of Israel.

I grew up singing Hatikvah, Israel’s national anthem, every evening at Hebrew summer camp in Manitoba as we lowered the two flags hanging from the flagpole: one the flag of Canada, the other, of course, of Israel.

And in many synagogues across Canada, it is typical to hear the Prayer for Israel recited, and it is not uncommon for the Israeli flag to be displayed prominently. At one synagogue I attended last year for a family celebration, there were even depictions of Israel Defense Forces soldiers etched into the stained-glass windows above the sanctuary.

But to feel connected to Israel — the land, the people, the safe refuge it has served for Jews in crisis, especially but not only after the Holocaust — one doesn’t necessarily need to embrace its governing ideology.

One can seek to understand the harm Zionism has caused to Palestinians. One can try to consider alternative framings, ideologies or governing structures that would enable Israelis to thrive along with Palestinians.

As Zionist founder Theodor Herzl famously said, “If you will it, it is no dream.”The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Conflict over Mamdani is a reminder: We still can’t agree on the line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

NYC’s Eric Adams condemns anti-Israel art exhibit: ‘Activism is not an excuse for antisemitism’

New York City Mayor Eric Adams used his podium in City Hall Thursday to take aim at an anti-Israel art installation that appeared on Governors Island over the weekend.

In a virtual address, Adams also took thinly veiled aim at Zohran Mamdani, the frontrunner to replace him after next week’s election, suggesting that the kind of antisemitism that he said had festered even under his leadership would explode under Mamdani’s.

Adams’ address centered on an installation, housed in the House 11 cabin owned by the Trust for Governors Island and occupied by Swale, a floating food forest nonprofit, that featured paintings that included the words “F—k Israel Ln” and “Hamas Lover.”

The exhibit, which was displayed on Sunday, was “unsanctioned by Governor’s Island” and was taken down a few hours after it was installed, Adams said.

“This incident disturbs me, and it should disturb anyone with a conscience,” said Adams in a virtual address from City Hall on Thursday. “I’ve talked a lot about how we’ve seen these incidents erode the fabric of cities across the globe, but in New York City, we must never tolerate this type of prejudice.”

Swale denounced the exhibit in a post on Instagram, writing that it was “devastated that someone would use a restorative project for their own personal platform for sowing discord.”

“The individual responsible was not part of our programming and not an artist-in-residence,” the post read. “The unapproved artist was invited into an empty back studio by a current artist-in-residence during seasonal wind-down without authorization to display work. We view this as a deliberate and malicious act by the artist.”

The artist allegedly behind the installation, Rebecca Goyette, who was identified by the New York Post, authored an op-ed in Hyperallergic where she described developing a relationship with a Palestinian dentist after working on a pro-Palestinian protest at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Adams, who dropped out of the mayoral race last month and last week endorsed Mamdani’s rival, Andrew Cuomo, used his address to decry what he described as the normalization of antisemitism in New York City.

“We are now watching as antisemitism is institutionalized right before our very eyes,” said Adams. “Before we know it, hate moves to the mainstream, and once it is in the mainstream, it becomes much harder to mobilize against. We saw that with apartheid. We saw that with the Holocaust, and I would be lying if I said I didn’t see seeds of it planted within our own city government.”

Later, Adams took aim at “those who want to say they want to globalize the intifada,” an apparent reference to mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani who caught fire from Jewish leaders after he declined to condemn the pro-Palestinian slogan during a podcast appearance in June.

A month later, Mamdani told business leaders at a closed-door meeting that he would discourage the use of the phrase.

“I know it is not too late for New York,” said Adams. “We will never surrender our city to hate or to those who want to say they want to ‘globalize the intifada,’ or to choose and believe and not refuse to condemn it, because it’s literally a phrase that means death to Jews all over the world.”


The post NYC’s Eric Adams condemns anti-Israel art exhibit: ‘Activism is not an excuse for antisemitism’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Heritage Foundation president stands by Tucker Carlson after host platforms antisemitism

The president of the Heritage Foundation, the leading conservative think tank, defended right-wing pundit Tucker Carlson and said the group would not cut ties with him days after Carlson hosted an interview with antisemitic influencer Nick Fuentes.

Kevin Roberts also said in a video on the social network X that Christians should reject calls not to criticize Israel, which he said were coming from a “venomous coalition” of “bad actors,” and that conservatives should further refrain from “canceling” Fuentes.

“We will always defend truth, we will always defend America and we will always defend our friends against the slander of bad actors who serve someone else’s agenda,” Roberts said. “That includes Tucker Carlson, who remains, and, as I have said before, always will be, a close friend of the Heritage Foundation.”

He warned Carlson’s critics: “Their attempt to cancel him will fail.”

It was a striking show of support from the influential conservative organization, which previously put out “Project Esther,” a right-wing plan to counter antisemitism post-Oct. 7. The Heritage Foundation was also behind Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for President Donald Trump’s second term in office that has been closely adhered to on a policy level, and has farmed many of Trump’s closest associates.

Fuentes has mounted an outside bid for influence within the larger right-wing movement, using overt antisemitism as his main flank. His chummy conversation with Carlson, who agreed with the provocateur on many issues including Israel, was seen as a further mainstreaming of antisemitic views within the right.

Roberts, however, saw it as embodying the conservative ideals of free debate.

“I disagree with, and even abhor, things that Nick Fuentes says,” Roberts said, without elaborating. “But canceling him is not the answer, either. When we disagree with a person’s thoughts and opinions, we challenge those ideas in debate. And we have seen success in this approach as we continue to dismantle the vile ideas of the left.”

Framing Carlson’s critics as dissatisfied online, Roberts continued, “The Heritage Foundation didn’t become the intellectual backbone of the conservative movement by canceling our own people or policing the consciences of Christians. And we won’t start doing that now. We don’t take direction from comments on X.”

Elsewhere, the Heritage head staked out a position that was critical of Israel, at a time when once-sacrosanct support for the country on the right is diminishing.

“Christians can critique the state of Israel without being antisemitic. And of course, antisemitism should be condemned,” he said. “My loyalty as a Christian and as an American is to Christ first, and America always. When it serves the interests of the United States to cooperate with Israel and other allies, we should do so, with partnerships on security, intelligence and technology. But when it doesn’t, conservatives should feel no obligation to reflexively support any foreign government, no matter how loud the pressure becomes from the globalist class or from their mouthpieces in Washington.”

(The term “globalist” has a history of being used as an antisemitic dog whistle.)

Roberts’s remarks on only supporting Israel when it suits the United States echoed similar statements made by Vice President JD Vance in Mississippi Wednesday evening — at an event in which Vance, too, was criticized for failing to condemn a question laced with antisemitism. In his video, Roberts also called Vance a friend and positively referenced his comments.

On X, some conservative Jews criticized Roberts.

“There can be no respectful debate with people who have said the things that Fuentes and Tucker have said about Jews,” replied Mike Ginsberg, a Jewish Virginia Republican. “Regarding Jews, neither Tucker nor Fuentes have taken rational political positions one can debate honestly … Choosing to associate with them — consciously, knowing what they have said about Jews — is a choice.”

One person thankful for Roberts’s remarks was Fuentes himself.

“Thank you for your courage in standing up for open discourse and defending Tucker against the Israel First Woke Right,” he wrote to Roberts on X.


The post Heritage Foundation president stands by Tucker Carlson after host platforms antisemitism appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Islamic Group CAIR Protests Expected Sale of TikTok to ‘Anti-Palestinian Billionaires’

CAIR officials give press conference on the Israel-Hamas war

CAIR officials give press conference on the Israel-Hamas war. Photo: Kyle Mazza / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a prominent Muslim advocacy group linked to extremist organizations, has sent a letter to US lawmakers claiming that the expected sale of the social media platform TikTok’s US operations to a group of investors that includes Jewish and pro-Israel businessmen could suppress online criticism of Israel.

In the letter, dated Oct. 28, CAIR claimed that some of the rumored buyers — Oracle co-founder and board chair Larry Ellison, Fox Corporation CEO Lachlan Murdoch, and Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell — are “anti-Palestinian billionaires” seeking to silence TikTok users critical of Israel’s defensive military campaign in Gaza. The group urged lawmakers to oppose any sale that, in its words, would replace “Chinese disinformation” with “anti-Palestinian disinformation.”

The letter comes as the Trump administration is reportedly finalizing a deal with China to transfer majority ownership of the popular video-sharing platform TikTok from the Chinese company ByteDance to a group of US investors. The move follows the 2024 passage of the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which required ByteDance to divest TikTok or face a US ban.

CAIR warned that Oracle could play a central role in the new ownership structure, potentially controlling TikTok’s powerful recommendation algorithm. The organization alleged that such control could be used to downrank content critical of Israel while promoting pro-Israel narratives.

Jewish content creators and employees of TikTok have warned over the past two years, amid the war in Gaza, that the platform promotes antisemitism and has pushed an anti-Israel and anti-Western bias among its young base of users. Specifically, many activists have argued that the algorithm systemically peddles anti-Israel content and disinformation and has become a main vehicle driving antisemitism among the youth.

Ellison, a longtime supporter of Israel, has donated tens of millions of dollars to the Friends of the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] nonprofit organization and maintained a personal relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. CAIR also pointed to the Ellison family’s recent media acquisition of CBS News through Skydance Media, calling it evidence of growing influence by “anti-Palestinian ideologues.”

The letter further accused Dell of supporting the Israeli military through his company’s technology subsidiaries, while citing the Murdoch family’s record of “anti-Palestinian propaganda” via Fox News. Venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and private equity firm Silver Lake, also rumored to be part of the deal, were criticized for investing in Israeli defense technology firms.

CAIR said TikTok had already begun limiting pro-Palestinian expression, referencing the company’s July 2025 hiring of a former Israeli soldier to monitor user speech. The group claimed this reflected a troubling pattern that could worsen under the new ownership.

While CAIR framed the sale as a threat to free speech, supporters of the divestment argue that US ownership would better safeguard data privacy and national security. The Trump administration has not publicly addressed CAIR’s allegations, and negotiations with China reportedly remain ongoing.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Thursday that China has approved the transfer agreement for TikTok, adding that he expects it to move forward in the coming weeks or months but giving no other details.

 CAIR has long portrayed itself as a Muslim civil rights organization but has faced bipartisan criticism for controversial statements about Israel and for defending individuals tied to extremist movements. Israeli officials and Jewish advocacy groups have frequently accused CAIR of spreading anti-Israel propaganda under the guise of civil rights advocacy.

In the 2000s, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing casePolitico noted in 2010 that “US District Court Judge Jorge Solis found that the government presented ‘ample evidence to establish the association’” of CAIR with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.

According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), “some of CAIR’s current leadership had early connections with organizations that are or were affiliated with Hamas.” CAIR has disputed the accuracy of the ADL’s claim and asserted that it “unequivocally condemn[s] all acts of terrorism, whether carried out by al-Qa’ida, the Real IRA, FARC, Hamas, ETA, or any other group designated by the US Department of State as a ‘Foreign Terrorist Organization.’”

CAIR leaders have also found themselves embroiled in further controversy since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.

The head of CAIR, for example, said he was “happy” to witness Hamas’s rampage of rape, murder, and kidnapping of Israelis in what was the largest single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

“The people of Gaza only decided to break the siege — the walls of the concentration camp — on Oct. 7,” CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad said in a speech during the American Muslims for Palestine convention in Chicago in November 2023. “And yes, I was happy to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land, and walk free into their land, which they were not allowed to walk in.”

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News