Uncategorized
The White House intends to fight antisemitism. That starts with a sensible definition.
(JTA) — In the coming days, the White House is expected to release what President Joe Biden has called “the first-ever U.S. national strategy to counter antisemitism.” It will likely include calls to action by Congress, state and local governments, as well as guidance for technology and other companies, civil society and faith leaders.
In preparation, the Biden administration sought input from a wide range of Jewish community members and stakeholders, including the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which I lead. In addition to this engagement with the forthcoming report on antisemitism, I will travel to Cordoba, Spain, next month for the United Nations antisemitism summit, and then to the European Parliament in Brussels with parliamentarians from across the globe convening against antisemitism.
In both settings, the message of world Jewry remains unchanged: Adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, known as IHRA, is an essential and seminal tool to combat anti-Jewish hate
Support for adopting the IHRA definition is significant, as seen in a letter last week from over 175 Jewish community organizations around the world, a letter last week from over 600 rabbis from all four Jewish streams and dozens of letters from American Jewish organizations, all making the important case for adoption of the IHRA definition. Members of Congress have weighed in. Mayors have weighed in. Across the board, a strong and clear consensus of support exists for the definition.
The IHRA definition is the most authoritative and internationally accepted definition of antisemitism. Forty-one nations, as well as hundreds of local governments, academic institutions, NGOs and other entities have formally adopted in different ways the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Over half — 31 — American states also adopted it.
RELATED: The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and why people are fighting over it, explained (2021)
Since the Obama Administration, the U.S. Department of State has utilized and promoted the IHRA definition (and previously, its similarly-phrased predecessor from the European Union’s Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia). Both Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt are leaders in advocating for its usage around the globe. The U.S. Department of Education also employs the IHRA definition as a tool in determining antisemitism discrimination in Title VI discrimination cases.
The IHRA definition continues to gain significant attention and support among governments and civil society actors. Fifty-one of the 53 member organizations of the Conference of Presidents adopted the definition – a clear recognition from every corner of a disparate Jewish community that we are unified when it comes to applauding the comprehensive approach it provides for labeling and addressing antisemitism.
One particular aspect of the IHRA definition that draws attention — and criticism from some groups — is its treatment of the relationship between anti-Israel bias and antisemitism. For too long, definitions of antisemitism failed to account for how anti-Zionism often serves as a cover for antisemitism. Forms of antisemitism that are masked as “anti-Zionism” and that deny the right of the Jewish people to self-determination are among those most frequently encountered by many Jews today, whether or not they are Zionists, as documented in surveys by the Anti-Defamation League and by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights.
RELATED: A manufactured ‘mainstream’ wants the White House to define antisemitism on its own flawed terms (Opinion)
The IHRA definition addresses the relationship between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, while not conflating legitimate criticism with actual antisemitism. Critics fail to identify actual instances where the IHRA definition suppressed free speech. In fact, over the last 20 weeks, as debates raged around the world over Israel’s proposed judicial reform — with hundreds of thousands of Israelis of all political stripes expressing virulent criticism of the Israeli government’s proposed overhaul — I have yet to hear one individual accuse the critics of being antisemitic. Despite the fact that the IHRA definition is so ubiquitous, legitimate speech that is critical of Israeli government policy is not censored. When put to the test, the IHRA definition does not do what its critics say it does.
We at the Conference of Presidents steadily campaign for states, localities, international governments and organizations to adopt the IHRA definition. The Biden administration seems poised to reassert their ongoing endorsement of the IHRA definition, pushing back yet again against those who distort the nature of the definition’s treatment of legitimate criticism of Israel governmental policies.
In a time when antisemitism in the United States has become all too often lethal, this would mean a vital and praiseworthy evolution of policy.
—
The post The White House intends to fight antisemitism. That starts with a sensible definition. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
JD Vance Argues Against the Pope’s Calls for Peace As Iran’s LEGO AI Videos Stoke America’s Religious Divisions
An Iranian propaganda video attacks President Donald Trump in response to social media postings critical of the Pope and regarded as insensitive to Christians. Photo: Screenshot.
Vice President JD Vance, who converted to Catholicism in August 2019 at age 35 criticzed Pope Leo’s call for peace between the United States and Iran, another example of growing religious disagreements among Christians which Iranian propagandists have sought to exacerbate in new propaganda videos.
On Thursday at an event organized in Georgia by conservative activist group Turning Point USA, Vance said when asked about the head of his church disagreeing with President Donald Trump’s policies, “I do think we have to remember that each of us has our own role. I’m the Vice President of the United States. The fundamental way I understand my role is I’m trying to take the lessons, the moral truths that are rooted in Christianity and I’m trying to apply to a whole host of complicated real world scenarios.” Tepid applause broke out in response with Vance then thanking the crowd.
The Vice President’s comments came in the days following social media postings from Trump which included a broadside against Pope Leo and an AI-generated image depicting the Commander-in-Chief wearing white and red flowing robes as he placed one of his glowing hands on the head of a sick man. Trump later removed the image following the criticism of longtime Christian members of his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement.
Iran took advantage of the social media kerfuffle, on Wednesday the Iranian embassy in Tajikistan posted an AI animation which took the original image and modified it to mock Trump.
Another propaganda video released by a pro-Iran group this week also responded to Trump’s social media postings about the Pope and the Jesus image, again deploying the AI-generated animation style depicting the president and other American officials as LEGO characters while a soundtrack delivers rhyming insults.
The Occupy Democrats Facebook group which has 11 million followers celebrated another pro-Iran propaganda video that has started circulating online.
While the president’s opponents on the progressive left may enjoy Iran’s jabs at Trump, the video’s themes casting him as an enemy of Christianity seek to exacerbate pre-existing intra-theological conflicts among the MAGA base.
This year, other recent Catholic converts — notably far-right podcaster Candace Owens and her supporter Carrie Prejean Boller, the former beauty queen contestant ejected from a White House Religious Liberty Panel on antisemitism following her questioning about Christian Zionism — have also advanced positions counter to Catholic teachings.
Prejean Boller claims that Zionism and Catholicism are incompatible, writing on X after her dismissal from the panel that “I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy [sic]. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation.”
In response to her actions, the group Catholics for Catholics awarded Prejean Boller a “Catholic Champion” award at its gala, an event also featuring Owens and Joe Kent, the recently-resigned director of the National Counterterrorism Center who has suggested that Israel controls America’s foreign policy and may have have had a hand in the Sept. 10, 2025 assassination of Turning Point USA chief Charlie Kirk.
Uncategorized
Antisemitic Beliefs More Common Among Young Social Media Users, Yale Poll Reveals
Penn State graduate student Roua Daas, an organizer with Students for Justice in Palestine, speaks at a pro-Palestinian protest at the Allen Street gates in State College, Pa. on Monday, February 12, 2024. (Photo by Paul Weaver/Sipa USA)No Use Germany.
A new survey from Yale Youth Poll is raising fresh concerns about antisemitism among younger Americans, revealing a significant link between social media consumption and anti-Jewish sentiment.
The Spring 2026 poll, conducted by researchers affiliated with Yale University, finds that Americans aged 18 to 34 are more likely than older generations to agree with statements widely recognized as antisemitic even as many express uncertainty about what qualifies as antisemitism in the first place.
According to the survey, a significant share of young respondents agreed with longstanding antisemitic tropes. Roughly a quarter to a third of the youngest respondents expressed belief in ideas such as Jews having “too much power” or divided loyalty between the United States and Israel. The poll also found that about one in five young respondents supported boycotts of Jewish-owned businesses to express disapproval over Israel’s war in Gaza.
The poll reveals that roughly 10 percent of those 18-34 agreed with all three of these antisemitic sentiments. Conversely, only 2 percent of those above 65 agreed with all three.
While these views are not held by a majority, experts say the numbers are high enough to raise alarms.
Beyond attitudes themselves, the poll also indicates that youth who receive news from alternative media sources, such as social media, are more likely to harbor antisemitic sentiments.
Respondents who rely more heavily on social media platforms, including TikTok, Instagram, and X/Twitter, were significantly more likely to agree with antisemitic statements.
The survey also points to a striking divide based on how young Americans consume news. Respondents who rely primarily on social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and X were roughly 1.5 to 2 times more likely to agree with antisemitic statements than their peers who turn to traditional sources like television or newspapers. On measures such as beliefs about Jewish power or loyalty, gaps of 10 to 15 percentage points emerged between the two groups, with social media–heavy users consistently showing higher levels of agreement.
The pattern is striking enough to suggest that digital information ecosystems may be shaping perceptions in ways that traditional media does not. Further, the underlying pattern can give insight into why opinions on Israel and antisemitism substantially diverge among US youth compared to older generations.
Observers point to the nature of these platforms, where algorithm-driven feeds often elevate emotionally charged, highly simplified content. In that environment, complex geopolitical conflicts, such as the war in Gaza, can be reduced to slogans, viral clips, and narratives that blur the line between political criticism and longstanding antisemitic themes.
In the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7 slaughters in Israel, a bevy of left-leaning social media personalities immediately condemned Israel and accused the Jewish state of committing war crimes and genocide in Gaza. Several reports indicate that anti-Israel content performs especially well on youth-centric social media platforms such as TikTok and Instagram, incentivizing content creators to intensify public criticisms of the Jewish state. The Yale survey suggests that for many young Americans, views on Israel are increasingly intertwined with perceptions of Jewish people more broadly.
The poll also challenges attempts to place blame on a single political group. The data indicates that both “extremely conservative” and “extremely liberal” individuals are likely to express belief that antisemitism is a “serious problem” in the country. Moderate voters are more likely to express ambivalence, with a plurality indicating that they “neither agree nor disagree” that antisemitism is a significant issue in the US.
Importantly, the survey does not suggest that most young Americans hold antisemitic views.
But it does point to a rising level of acceptance, or at least tolerance, of ideas that were once more widely rejected. Moreover, the poll suggests that young people underestimate the level of antisemitism that persists in the country. For instance, among voters ages 18-34, 29 percent agree with the antisemitic conspiracy “Jews have an extremely organized international community that puts their own interests before those of their home countries” compared to only 17 percent of those age 65. Approximately 8 percent of the 18-34 age cohort believe “people exaggerate how bad the Holocaust actually was” compared to 2 percent of those above 65.
A mere 21 percent of voters aged 18-34 agreed with the notion that Jews experience the bulk of hate crimes in the US, compared to 40 percent of overall voters. Various surveys indicate that Jews have faced the greatest increase in hate crimes over the past two years.
Uncategorized
Columbia Graduate Students Amend Complaint Against Union Dominated by Anti-Zionist Bosses
Protesters gather at the gates of Columbia University, in support of student protesters who barricaded themselves in Hamilton Hall, in New York City, US, April 30, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/David Dee Delgado
Students at Columbia University are escalating their fight against a graduate workers union dominated by anti-Israel advocates, having recently updated a federal complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) last year to include new troubling accusations.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the students allege that the bosses who run Student Workers of Columbia (SWC), an affiliate of United Auto Workers (UAW), devote more energy and resources to pursuing “radical policy proposals” than improving occupational conditions. In collective bargaining negotiations, it allegedly pressures the university to adopt the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel and to enact other measures, such as ending its partnership with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and closing a dual-degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response, the students formed the Graduate Researchers Against Discrimination and Suppression (Columbia GRADS) organization and petitioned the NLRB to rein the SWC in.
The National Right to Work Foundation (NRTW), which represents the petitioning students has told The Algemeiner that the SWC subjects students to abuses which magnify problems inherent in compulsory union membership.
The amended complaint enumerates a slew of new examples, including that the SWC, under the threat of a strike, has demanded that the university dismantle CCTV security cameras, proclaim the campus a “sanctuary space” for illegal immigrants, and revoke the authority of public safety officers to detain and arrest students who pose a danger to themselves and others.
“The charges point out that many of these demands are so radical that even the SWC’s parent union, the UAW, has directed the SWC union to retract them,” the group said. “The UAW has also demanded, to no avail, that the SWC union drop its strike threats over these topics, as striking over such extraneous demands is a violation of federal labor law.”
It added, “The charges declare that these actions discriminate against Columbia GRADS and constitute bad-faith bargaining, all of which is prohibited under the National Labor Relations Act.”
“Under the National Labor Relations Act, the only bargaining that is required for a good faith sit down is over mandatory subjects of bargaining such as wages, hours, benefits, and the like,” NRTW staff attorney Glenn Taubman, told The Algemeiner during an interview on Wednesday.” Everything else is either a permissive subject, meaning the parties can choose to bargain or not…what is going on here is the union is trying to force Columbia to bargain over things that are permissive at best, and the items in dispute don’t really benefit the employees that they purport to represent. Instead the union is using bargaining to push an ideological agenda against Israel.”
He added, “All of this adds up to a union that is out of control, and I note that they don’t have an agenda against the Mullahs in Iran, against the dictator who runs Turkey, against the Chinese Communists who oppress their citizens or the North Koreans. But they have an agenda against Israel, the one democracy in the Middle East.”
The SWC is not the only higher education union sidelining important objectives to pursue politics and anti-Zionist policies which cross the line into antisemitism. In a letter sent to Congress in August, NRTW said the problem is also present in unions affiliated with United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE).
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.