Understanding Antisemitism

Defining antisemitism has been met with challenges because, depending on the definition, it can be interpreted as characterizing the legitimate critique of the state of Israel as antisemitic, and thus limiting the free speech of those advocating for changes to the policies and practices of Israel.

At Butler, we have used an excellent short video produced by the Berkeley Center for Jewish Studies, which is titled “Antisemitism Education” and defines antisemitism as Discrimination against Jews; a perception, belief, or behavior towards Jews simply because they are Jewish.

The video provides tropes of antisemitism visible today, which include:

  • Conspiracy theories about Jews
  • Images of Jews as dehumanized creatures
  • Blood libel – claims that Jews murder people and use their blood for Jewish ritual
  • Accusations of dual loyalty
  • Jews having enormous power
  • Connecting Jews to wealth, materialism and greed
  • These tropes are active today, especially on social media platforms. Like many discourses on social media, the language and imagery is actively changing.  This article from The Institute of Strategic Dialogue published in December of 2023 highlights the evolving way antisemitism is deployed on social media and the way in which there is potential for folks of many opposing political views to enable and promote antisemitic discourse.

Other Common Definitions of Antisemitism

Other common definitions of antisemitism that are important to be aware of for campus conversations include the following.

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance adopted the following working definition of antisemitism in 2016:

  • Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.
  • This definition uses several examples as part of the document, some of which have been heavily scrutinized as creating a chilling effect on the free speech necessary to critique the state of Israel.

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism was written as an effort to directly address the concerns presented by the IHRA definition’s examples, and says the following:

  • Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish).
  • This definition has a more permissive approach to free speech critiquing Israel, and for that reason has also been met with critique by some who prefer the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance approach.

What Antisemitism is Not

Antisemitism is not:

  • Critical questions about, constructive criticisms of, and scholarly analysis of Judaism and Jews
  • Denouncing crimes by individuals who may identify as Jewish
  • Criticizing the actions of Jewish politicians, or the state of Israel as a Jewish-majority country. It is not antisemitic so long as the criticisms focus on the actions and policies of political officials in their capacity as government agents, and not on their presumed religious affiliation or motivations. 

From Echoes and Reflections resources titled “The New Antisemitism and the Three D’s”: “Israel, as a democracy, can and should be receptive to fair and legitimate criticism, whether the criticism is from its own citizens or from members of the larger global community.”

That said, concerns to watch for when critique of Israel moves towards antisemitism are:

  • Demonization – when Israel and its leaders are framed as evil
  • Double Standards – when criticism of Israel is applied selectively
  • Deligitimization – when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied

Strategies for Countering Antisemitism

Find opportunities to learn about the centuries-long tropes of antisemitism, which can be quickly seen here: Antisemitism Education (youtube.com)

The Antidefamation League Midwest provides “Six Simple Strategies to Counter Antisemitic Stereotyping”:

  • Assume good intentions and explain the concern
  • Ask questions – be curious about the assumptions others may have
  • Interrupt and redirect if it is clear harm is being caused
  • Point out that assumptions about Jewish people apply to a wider range of people in general
  • Name where harm or offense has occurred
  • For non-Jewish people, reach out to diverse communities and form relationships with Jewish-identifying people; get to know Jews and make Jewish friends.
  • For Jewish people, build coalitions with other impacted marginalized communities.

How Discrimination and Prejudice are Deployed Systemically

Systems produce what they are designed to. A failure to address the core issues within a system will inevitably result in a continuation of the intended outcomes. Here are three players at work in systemic discrimination and prejudice:

Promoters – Individuals and institutions who opportunistically use Antisemitism, Islamophobia, and other forms of systemic discrimination to advance an agenda, e.g., seeking office, justifying policies, for-profit media outlets, etc.

Enablers – Individuals and institutions adopting or amplifying discriminatory rhetoric from Promoters, e.g., news outlets, influencers, and social media networks. Receivers may be genuinely open-minded with questions but overcome by propaganda. Others are close-minded, validating their preconceived biases. 

Receivers – Individuals and institutions who can push back against systemic discrimination but choose not to, e.g., political figures fearing the electoral consequences of being perceived as too close to Muslims, Jews, etc.