RSS
‘Antizionism’ is the Most Lethal Form of Antisemitism Out There
A placard equating Zionism with Nazism is displayed at an Oct. 23 pro-Hamas demonstration in the Place de la Republique in Paris. Photo: Reuters/ Valerie Dubois
JNS.org – Nearly five years ago, I wrote a piece for this column in which I argued that the term “anti-Zionism” would be better rendered as “antizionism.”
My thinking on this subject was heavily influenced by a similar debate over whether to include a hyphen in the word “antisemitism.” At the time, I argued that “anti-Semites are not people who are opposed to ‘Semitism,’ a non-existent word, and nor are they opposed to a race of ‘Semites’ since there isn’t such a race in the first place, just a language group. If you include the hyphen, the argument goes, then you are boosting antisemitism’s self-image as a revelatory, liberating and compelling explanation of why the world is such a rotten place. Leave the hyphen out and you see ‘antisemitism’ for what it really is: a malicious conspiracy theory about Jews that carries genocidal intentions towards them.”
Much the same point can be made about anti-Zionism.
The people who define themselves as “anti-Zionists” these days—from the thugs tearing down posters advertising the plight of hostages seized by Hamas during its Oct. 7 pogrom to the Hamas rapists and murderers themselves—are not opposed to Zionism as most Jews understand it, nor are they representative of the currents opposing Zionism that existed within Jewish communities prior to World War II, which argued upon tragically mistaken grounds that a sovereign Jewish state would not provide Jews with the security they so desperately needed.
The anti-Zionists of the 21st century are not simply rejecting the idea of a Jewish state; they are depicting the Jewish state as the root of the world’s evil, dedicated to the murder of children and the carpet-bombing of civilian areas as it pursues its nefarious goal of colonizing Palestine and permanently displacing its indigenous Arab inhabitants. What we are dealing with here is not “criticism” of Israel’s policies, but outrage that Jews are even in a position where they can make policy! To illustrate this without any ambiguity requires the removal of the hyphen from the term “anti-Zionism,” so as to show that what is being pushed is not merely an objection to the program of the World Zionist Organization, but a full-blown conspiracy theory that transfers traditional antisemitic tropes about Jews to the Jewish state.
Like antisemitism, “antizionism” is genocidal in intent. And in the wake of the atrocities of Oct. 7, one can argue that it is the most lethal form of antisemitism in existence today.
The reason is that unlike other forms of antisemitism, antizionism is an open, generously proportioned tent. Anyone is welcome to stroll inside so long as they subscribe to a set of basic principles: that nowhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea should there be a place called Israel, that anyone complaining about antisemitism is engaged in a ruse to divert attention from the Palestinians, and that there isn’t a single place on earth—not Sudan, not Ukraine, not Kurdistan, not Burma, not China—where people have suffered as the Palestinians have simply for being who they are.
Sign up to those principles, and it doesn’t matter if you are black or white, Asian or Native American, a woman or a man or someone of fluid gender, young or old, gay or straight. You can even be Jewish, albeit within strictly defined parameters that will require you to hang your head in shame every time Israel is mentioned. No other form of antisemitism—the most obvious example being the Jew-hatred espoused by white supremacists and other far-right groups—is this accessible.
The fact that a rainbow coalition is promoting antizionism these days is also a smart move, creating a set of optics that make it much harder to discern genocidal intent. By contrast, a muscled white male skinhead wearing a swastika and a pair of street-fighting boots doesn’t present the same problem. But when uninitiated members of the public look at images of the pro-Hamas demonstrations that have mushroomed globally over the last six weeks, seeing women in hijabs marching alongside transgender activists, they can be forgiven for concluding that what is in the spotlight is an alliance of diverse constituencies coming together in the name of human rights—and not a movement for the elimination of all Jews, everywhere.
Yet as Jewish communities, we have to admit that we have not made the case that antizionism is an insidious form of hatred, rather than a legitimate political position within the framework of the Middle East conflict. Jewish organizations and the Israeli government have been delighted in recent years by the widespread endorsement of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, which includes several examples of anti-Israel invective. However, the terms “Zionism,” “anti-Zionism” and “antizionism” are all absent from the definition, which means, much as I don’t like saying so, that it is very weak on this crucial point.
By adding a clarification that Zionism is a Jewish national movement with left-wing, right-wing and centrist varieties, as well as religious and secular adherents, the definition would act as a counterweight to the more ghoulish interpretations—for example, that Zionism is a form of racism or a conspiracy of the powerful. The sentence in the definition that identifies as antisemitic “[D]enying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g. by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” might be rewritten to say, “Depicting Zionism, the Jewish national movement, as inherently racist and the State of Israel as an illegitimate entity.”
This isn’t a matter of pedantry. If we have learned anything from the debates around antisemitism over the last two decades, it is that words matter and definitions matter, particularly when it comes to the application of the law. In countries where there are no First Amendment-style guarantees of free speech (and that’s most of them), it is already a crime to deny the Holocaust or to traffic in traditional antisemitic memes. Advocating Israel’s elimination and bullying Jews into accepting permanent minority status—second-class, at best—should be seen in a similar light. The protection of our increasingly vulnerable communities demands nothing less.
The post ‘Antizionism’ is the Most Lethal Form of Antisemitism Out There first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence
McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]
The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel
US Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) at a press conference in Bergenfield, New Jersey, US on June 5, 2023. Photo: Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect
US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.
The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state.
“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement.
Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members.
“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”
The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas.
Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.
The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident
Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.
The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.
As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.
Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.
“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”
It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”
Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.
“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”
Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s scholarship.
Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.
During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.
Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”
The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.
Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.
Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”
During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login