America’s Universities Do Not Have an “Antisemitism” Problem. They have a Fascism Problem.

Trump’s charge that universities are hotbeds of antisemitism is absurd and is just a pretext to undermine America’s most import centers of liberal values. This assault is a vital piece of the overall fascist project we are witnessing today. 

American higher education has been anything but antisemitic for the last century. Indeed, Jews have been historically overrepresented as a percentage of the faculty and students. While Jews make up 2.2 percent of Americans, they comprised over 20 percent of the faculty at the top ten universities in the 1980s, and an astonishing 50% of the “top intellectuals” of that era. From the 1920s on, Jews have had among the highest rates of college-going of any ethnic group.

There are several reasons for the strong link between universities and Jews in the 20th Century. Certainly, elite universities discriminated against Jews in the early 1900s; Harvard famously placed a quota on Jewish admissions in that era. But, unlike anti-Black, Mexican, Asian and Native American discrimination of that time, antisemitism did not take the form of state-backed legal sanctions; it remained the private purview of colleges, housing developers, businesses and social clubs. That is, while Jews in that era indeed faced private discrimination, they also enjoyed the public recognition that they were white during the Jim Crow era. As a result, Jews were able to find new avenues for upward mobility that only whites could achieve, such as in the new public sector law firms (spawned by the New Deal), and the rapidly growing entertainment industry and fields of medicine of the 1930s. As Jews achieved success through these routes, private sector antisemitism diminished (Although it never disappeared, especially among the very same white Christian nationalists who now are leading the charge against antisemitism!),

Certainly, Jews quickly grasped that higher education was the road to upward mobility. But even more, there was and is an important connection between Jewish cultural identity and the values of modern higher education as well. As Steve Mintz explains in Inside Higher Education (2023):

…(I)t seems to me that one can speak of a secular American Jewish faith—which involves activism, the arts and culture, entrepreneurship, intellectualism and science, behavioral, physical, psychological and social—and an American Jewish legacy—that, at its best, is a commitment to cultural pluralism and social justice, to peshat (intensive study and exegesis of texts), tzedakah (charity as a moral obligation), and tikkum olam (the obligation to repair and improve the world).

These values are not just Jewish values, they are core values of modern liberal thought.  Liberalism itself evolved rapidly in the post-fascist world of the 1950s and 1960s, with the dawning recognition that individual liberty for all can only exist in the condition of political and economic democracy for all.

At their best, American universities embrace a commitment to these values. Of course, universities (and their academic disciplines) did NOT embrace these values before the 1970s. Universities claimed to embrace science and meritocracy even as they actively excluded the voices of people of color, women and queers. The deepening commitment to democratic values resulted from political action by graduate students and faculty in the 1970s-1990s, in which Jewish academics often played a central role. By the beginning of the 21st Century, virtually all universities understood that all academic/professional fields benefit from their commitment to inclusive hiring and culturally plural perspectives.

MAGA’s fascist project aims at remaking the United States into a white Christian nation. The values of American higher education run directly counter to MAGA, and so a vital part of the MAGA strategy is to take down the universities. And, like all fascist movements, their assault on higher education is legitimized by a white nationalist pretext, which in this case is to claim that antisemitism is running amok on American college campuses.

Their parlor trick was to force colleges to adopt a definition of antisemitism developed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) that states that criticisms of Israel are antisemitic. This absurd definition (see my previous posts on this topic) label all student and faculty support for Palestinians’ right to simply exist in the face of Israel’s genocidal assault as antisemitism. This definition made it possible for a gang of right-wing Zionists in Los Angeles (who were not UCLA affiliated) to physically attack the non-violent pro-Palestinian encampment of UCLA students and faculty in April 2024, injuring dozens, and get away with it with only one arrest while UCLA then dismantled the encampment. This definition made every Zionist student who said that pro-Palestinian activities “made them uncomfortable” into victims of antisemitism rather than people who were defending genocide. This definition demanded that pro-genocidal speech be given the same protections as all legitimate speech.  This parlor trick allowed universities to try to silence leading Jewish voices against Israel’s genocide, such as Judith Butler at UC Berkeley and Analise Orleck at Dartmouth.  

American colleges and universities have no future in Trump’s fascist state. Every academic field, all the sciences and all humanities, are based on ideas that run counter to MAGA’s belief system. Any attempt to conciliate the Trump administration, such as Berkeley turning in the names of 160 anti-Zionist students and faculty, is simply opening the doors to a political movement that seeks the total destruction of academia as we know it.

American universities must unite into a single voice rejecting the IHRA equation of anti-Zionism with antisemitism. It is a Trojan horse that opens the gates for fascism, and the utter destruction of higher education as we know it.

Distinguishing Anisemitism from Anti-Zionism Part II

In my two previous posts I argued that the failure of the pro-Palestinian left to denounce Hamas’ attack on Israel as antisemitic would come back to haunt them. And, indeed, right wing opportunists, Trump most notably, have positioned themselves as ‘the true defenders of Israel’ and are calling critics of Israel antisemitic.

Make no mistake about it: using this weapon, the rightwing is succeeding at intimidating universities to retract fifty years of racial justice efforts, and there is a real danger that many Jews, who have always been a bedrock of the Democratic Party coalition, will realign and vote for Trump.  Left-wing legislators, most notably Ilhan Omar and Jamaal Bowman, are facing well-funded challengers because of their opposition to Israel’s war.

We need a clear understanding on what is and what is not antisemitism in order to defend ourselves from this rightwing attack

There are three positions on the relationship between antisemitism and anti-Zionism. The first, held by the right wing of both the U.S. and Israel, is that any criticism of Israel, especially in the wake of October 7, is antisemitic. This position is simple: Israel is the home of the Jews, and any criticism of Israel is therefore an attack on Jews, i.e. it is antisemitic. 

The second position, held by many on the left (including, of course, some Jews in the U.S. and in Israel), is that Israel is an illegitimate settler state that was founded by dispossessing Palestinians of their land, and denying their national self-determination. To many who believe this, all attacks on Israel, including Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israeli civilians, are justified, and are not antisemitic. (To be fair, many who believe Israel is an illegitimate state react defensively to this criticism and say they ‘mourn the deaths of innocent lives on all sides of the conflict.’ But this is not sufficient: the concrete question is whether they directly condemn Hamas.)

The third position (which is barely being heard now) is that criticism of Israel and/or Zionism is not by itself antisemitic, but that there can be antisemitic critiques of Israel and Jews in general. This position has been well articulated by the  Nexus Task Force Statement on Antisemitism (LINK). Most importantly, this position maintains that it is antisemitic to lump all Jews together as collectively responsible for the state of Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people. Or the flip side of the same coin: it is antisemitic to hold (as Trump did on March24) that any Jew that does not support Israel’s war is anti-Jewish.) Distinguishing a critique of Israel from a critique of Jewish people is important because Hamas failed to do so. It targeted Jewish civilians (including women, children and elders) on the grounds that all Israelis are culpable for Israel’s aggression against Palestinians on the West Bank and in Gaza. (Those of us who have bothered to pay attention to the biographies of those killed and captured by Hamas learned that several of the kibbutzim targeted by Hamas consisted of Jews who were among the strongest opponents of Netanyahu’s fanatic rightwing vision of Greater Israel.)

The problem of equating all Jews with the current rightwing version of Zionism is a grave error because it renders invisible those Jews both in Israel and in the diaspora who oppose Zionism as it exists today.  Please remember that in 2023 Israel was literally torn to pieces by mostly Jewish protests against Netanyahu’s efforts to nullify important parts of the Israeli constitution. Indeed, it seems obvious to many observers that Netanyahu is waging the current Israeli war precisely to shore up support for his rightwing Zionist regime that was on the verge of collapse before October 7.

The problem with equating all Jews with modern Zionism is that it also cannot appreciate the significance of Senator Schumer’s speech denouncing Netanyahu and calling for regime change. Chuck Schumer built his entire political career on support for Zionism, but that Zionism is now gone. The left must learn how to make a popular front against rightwing Zionism that includes the Schumers of the world who are mourning the loss of their version of Zionism. Whatever one thinks of Israeli policies before 2018 (the year the Nation-State Law declared Israel to be a Jewish nation), the Zionism of the far right that now runs Israel is a far cry from that of the Zionists actively seeking a two-state solution, or the early Zionists willing to live in a secular, non-religious country on equal footing with Palestinians and other Muslims and Christians.

It is essential to understand that Netanyahu is trying to not only destroy Palestine but also to destroy earlier concepts of Israel/Zionism. Indeed, I would argue that the rightwing coup that produced Netanyahu and Israel’s genocidal war is pursuing a path that may well lead to the destruction not only of previous ideas of Zionism, but of Israel itself. But this is a topic for another day….

The critique of Zionism as it now exists is not antisemitic. The new extremist rightwing Zionism seeks to destroy Palestine and make claim to Gaza and the West Bank as part of Greater Israel (with future claims on Lebanon and Jordan certainly in the works). It is incumbent on the entire world to isolate and destroy this extremist regime. And, as the March 25 UN Security Council vote for an immediate cease fire (without a U.S. veto) shows, Israel is well on the way to becoming an international pariah.

The only claim to legitimacy that is propping up this regime is its claim that it is standing up to antisemitism. The clearer we become about what is and is not antisemitism, the more effective we will become on defending democracy against the rightwing of both Israel and the United States.

The Weaponization of Antisemitism

There is a ton of confusion about what is and what is not antisemitism, and right-wingers are making the most out of it.

MAGA Republicans, in the name of rooting out antisemitism, are launching McCarthy-like witch hunts aimed at dismantling DEI (Diversity, Inclusion and Equity) initiatives at some of America’s most prestigious and influential universities.  How is it possible that the new allies of the Jews are right-wing Christians—including open fascists– with their own history of virulent antisemitism?

Let’s start with the basics: antisemitism is a real thing. Ever since the Spanish Inquisition (1490s), nation-state builders in Europe targeted Jews as dangerous ‘outsiders’ in order to convince Christians that they shared a common identity as citizens of newly emerging nations. This antisemitism reached its peak during the late 19th and early 20th Century as European nation-states locked horns in imperialist conflicts. Rulers unleashed pogroms across Eastern Europe in order to whip up patriotic support for their wars.  Eventually the most powerful nation-state, Germany, undertook the systematic eradication of all Jews under its control. In the U.S., Jews were red-baited by anti-immigrant rightwing politicians throughout the first half of the 20th Century.

This dynamic abated, partly because of world revulsion at the Holocaust, partly because of the mass exodus of Jews out of Eastern Europe to Israel and the United States, and partly because of a re-configuration of nation-states themselves as economic globalization began to take hold after World War II.  In the U.S. and Western Europe, many Jews assimilated into a white middle class social order, often by changing their names, dropping Yiddish, and becoming religiously non-observant or embracing Reform Judaism.

But now the Western liberal social order is in a crisis. (See other posts on this site). As the middle class falls apart, a new generation of white Christian nationalists has begun a project to re-shape Western nation-states. And a new generation of ultra-nationalist Zionists have seized power in Israel.

The white Christian nationalist alliance with Zionism is of recent origin. Up until at least the 1980s, white evangelical Christians spouted virulent McCarthyist antisemitism, and earlier, had supported Hitler. Why are they rushing to defend Israel now?  It’s quite simple, really: Israel is now the white nationalist project of the Mideast. We could argue about whether it has always been so. (In Israel’s early days, left wing Zionists envisioned a socialist Israel in which Jews and non-Jews were equal citizens even while the Israeli state engaged in the systematic displacement of Palestinians from their land and homes). But certainly, since the 1980s, the self-defined ‘settler’ movement has sought to aggressively expand Jewish claims to land and to remove all Palestinians. The definition of Israel as a nation of Jews alone was not fully enshrined into law until the enactment of the Nation-State Law in 2018. Since then, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have experienced a qualitatively greater level of unrelenting aggression, and the Netanyahu government has systematically attacked democratic rights of Israeli Jews as well. The U.S. white Christian nationalist movement is supporting Israel because Israel is now the vanguard of the world’s rightwing revolution.

For these reasons, anti-Zionism is not antisemitic but is anti-fascist. Furthermore, Zionism does not represent the aspiration of Jews everywhere. As Shaul Magid argues LINK, the region now called Israel does indeed have special significance to many Jews. The problem, he points out, is not that Jews want to live in Judea/Zion/Palestine/Israel. The problem is that the state of Israel claims that Jews and Jews alone own that land, trampling on other people’s legitimate attachment to that area who are Muslim, Christian, Ba’hai, and secular people. To call Israel “the home of the Jews” is also problematic because most of the world’s Jewish population has no desire to live in Israel.

Hamas’ October 7 attack posed a real challenge: was it a legitimate defense against Zionist aggression? There can be no doubt that the Palestinian people have been experiencing a new level of Zionist aggression and expansion of Israel’s claims to land since the passage of the 2018 Nation-State Law.  It is also true that many Arab states were in the process of abandoning their commitment to Palestinian self-determination, leaving Palestinians’ feeling isolated and vulnerable. A military action aimed at stopping Israeli expansionism and galvanizing Arab solidarity for these reasons might have been warranted. But I would argue that Hamas’ attack was not anti-Zionist; it was antisemitic. It was not aimed at Israeli military or government targets: it was aimed at terrorizing Jewish civilians and included mass murders and sexual assaults on elderly people, women and children who were targeted because they were Jews.  This equation of all Jews as responsible for Israeli aggression against Palestinians played right into the hands of the rightwing Zionist project (Israel = the Jewish people). But this equation is empirically wrong. 27% of Israel is not Jewish. And Israelis’ politics is not monolithic. In 2023, millions of Israelis marched in the streets to stop Netanyahu’s attack on democratic rights. And today there are a sizable number of Israeli Jews as well as non-Jews protesting the Israeli war. Many Jews around the world oppose Zionism and support Palestinian self-determination. To equate all Jews as the enemy of all Palestinians is not anti-Zionism; it is antisemitism. 

This confusion about what is and is not antisemitism came to a head in the U.S. when some progressives defended Hamas’ October 7 attack. I was personally offended by online posts made by former comrades of mine who stated that the 1200 murdered Jews were legitimate targets because they were illegal occupiers of Palestinian land. At the time, I wrote a post warning progressives of the consequence of not calling out Hamas’ antisemitism. Sure enough, the rightwing quickly saw the opportunity to use this mistake and used it to whip up Jewish (and Christian nationalist) support for Zionist aggression as well as to attack progressive initiatives for diversity, equity and inclusion on college campuses.

The lesson to me is simple enough: we can ill-afford to excuse antisemitism on the grounds that Jews are white and privileged, and in the case of Israelis, occupiers. Jews are people and even people living in a nation based on an illegitimate claim (Zionism) can suffer egregious discrimination as Jews. And when people are attacked because they are Jews, they must be defended. But we cannot let the rightwing get away with their argument that anti-Zionism is antisemitic. Let us be clear what antisemitism is and is not. If we are not, the progressives’ gains of the last fifty years are in jeopardy.