How to improve university EDI policies so they address Jewish identity and antisemitism

2025/07/31 Leave a comment

Thoughtful reflections and suggestions how EDI policies can be inclusive of Jewish identities:

According to Statistics Canada, police-reported hate crimes against Jews rose by 82 per cent in 2023.

In the months following Oct. 7, 2023 and the subsequent war in Gaza, university campuses across Canada became sites of tension, protest and divisions.

Jewish students and faculty increasingly reported feeling alone, excluded and targeted.

As our research has examined, despite these urgent realities, Jewish identity and antisemitism remain largely invisible in the equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) frameworks of Canadian higher education.

These frameworks are meant to address the ongoing effects of historical and structural marginalization. Emerging from the four designated categories in Canada’s Employment Equity Act, EDI policies in Canadian universities tend to centre race, Indigeneity as well as gender, with limited attention to religious affiliation.

Canadian higher education’s primary EDI focus on racism and decolonization is important, given the history of exclusion and marginalization of Black people, Indigenous Peoples and people of colour in Canada. Yet, this framing inadequately addresses the historical and ongoing antisemitism in Canada.

A cross-university study of EDI policies

To understand this oversight, we conducted a content and discourse analysis of the most recent (at the time of the study) EDI policies and Canada Research Chair EDI documents from 28 Canadian universities.

Our sample included English-speaking research universities of more than 15,000 students and a few smaller universities to ensure regional representation.

We focused on how these documents referred to Jewish identity, antisemitism and related terms, as well as how they situated these within broader EDI discourses. We found that, in most cases, antisemitism and Jewish identity were either completely absent or mentioned only superficially.

Three patterns emerged from our analysis:

1. Antisemitism is marginalized as a systemic issue: Where it appears, antisemitism is generally folded into long lists of forms of discrimination, alongside racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia and other “isms.” Unlike anti-Black racism or Indigenous-based racism, which often have dedicated sections and careful unpacking, antisemitism is rarely examined. While EDI policies can be performative, they still represent institutional commitment and orientation. Not specifically considering antisemitism renders it peripheral and unimportant, even though it remains a pressing issue on campuses.

2. Jewish identity is reduced to religion: When Jewishness is acknowledged in EDI frameworks, it is almost always under the category of religious affiliation, appearing as part of the demographic sections. This framing erases the ethnic and cultural dimensions of Jewish identity and peoplehood and disregards the ways in which many Canadian Jews understand themselves. The lack of understanding of Jewishness as an intersectional identity also erases the experiences of Jews of colour, LGBTQ+ Jews, and Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews.

While some Jews may identify as white, some do not, and even those who benefit from white privilege may still experience antisemitism and exclusion.

The recent scholarly study, “Jews and Israel 2024: A Survey of Canadian Attitudes and Jewish Perceptions” by sociologist Robert Brym, finds that 91 per cent of 414 Jewish respondents in the overall study believe that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state — a response Brym believes indicates that the respondent is a Zionist, echoing a broad definition of the term. (Three per cent of Jewish respondents opposed the view that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state, and six per cent said they didn’t know).

For most Canadian Jews in the study, Brym writes, “support for the existence of a Jewish state in Israel is a central component of their identity.”

But Zionism presents a challenge for EDI for several reasons. Firstly, Zionism enters into a tension with (mis)conceptions of Jews as non-racialized people within anti-racism discourses.

Secondly, some scholars and activist movements address Zionism largely as a form of settler colonialism.

While debates over the historical sources of Zionism and their political implications are legitimate and evolving, the danger arises when debates shift to embodying and targeting Jews as individuals. Furthermore, “anti-Zionist” discourses, often amplified in student protests, risk flattening the diversity that exists under the Zionist identification.

3. Pairing antisemitism and Islamophobia: In the EDI policies we examined, antisemitism is rhetorically paired with Islamophobia: In nearly every case where antisemitism was mentioned, it was coupled with Islamophobia. This rhetorical symmetry may be driven by institutional anxiety over appearing biased or by attempts to balance political sensitivities. Yet it falsely implies that antisemitism and Islamophobia are similar or are inherently connected.

While intersectional analysis of antisemitism and Islamophobia can yield insight, this pairing functions as an avoidance mechanism and a shortcut.

Failure to name, analyze Jewish identity

The erasure of antisemitism from EDI policies affects how Jewish students and faculty experience campus life. Jews may not be marginalized in the same way as other equity-seeking groups, yet they are still deserving of protection and inclusion.

The EDI principle of listening to lived experiences cannot be applied selectivity. Jewish identity is complex, and framing it narrowly contributes to undercounting Jewish people in institutional data and EDI policies. Simplistic classifications erase differences, silence lived experiences and reinforce assimilation.

By failing to name and analyze Jewish identity and antisemitism, universities leave Jewish members of the academic community without appropriate mechanisms of support. The lack of EDI recognition reflects and reproduces the perceptions of Jews as powerful and privileged, resulting in a paradox: Jewish people are often treated as outside the bounds of EDI, even as antisemitism intensifies.

The question of Jewish connection to Israel or Zionism introduces another layer of complexity that most EDI policies avoid entirely. While criticism of Israeli state policies is not antisemitic, many Jews experience exclusion based on real or perceived Zionist identification. Universities cannot afford to ignore this dynamic, even when it proves uncomfortable or politically fraught.

What needs to change

If Canadian universities are to build truly inclusive campuses, then their EDI frameworks must evolve in both language and structure.

First, antisemitism must be recognized as a form of racism, not merely religious intolerance. This shift would reflect how antisemitism has historically operated and continues to manifest through racialized tropes, conspiracy theories and scapegoating.

Second, institutions must expand their data collection and demographic frameworks to reflect the full dimensions of Jewish identity: religious, ethnic and cultural. Without this inclusion, the understanding of Jewish identity will remain essentialized and unacknowledged.

Third, Jewish voices, including those of Jews of colour, LGBTQ+ Jews and Jews with diverse relationships to Zionism, must be included in EDI consultation processes. These perspectives are critical to understanding how antisemitism intersects with other forms of marginalization.

Fourth, the rhetorical pairing of antisemitism and Islamophobia, while perhaps intended to promote balance, should be replaced with a deep unpacking of both phenomena and their intersections.

Finally, universities must resist the urge to treat difficult conversations as too controversial to include. Complex dialogue should not be a barrier to equity work. The gaps we identified reveal how current EDI frameworks can exclude any group whose identities fall outside established categories.

In a time of polarization and disinformation, universities must model how to hold space for complexity and foster real inclusion.

Source: How to improve university EDI policies so they address Jewish identity and antisemitism

Filed under Antisemitism, DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Casey Babb: Canada doesn’t need an antisemitism or Islamophobia czar

2025/07/31 Leave a comment

Very one sided but one does have to ask whether these special rapporteurs are effective in improving cross community relations or not or just assuaging and reflecting the concerns of their particular groups.

Former antisemitism envoy Lyons and current islamophobia envoy Elghawaby apparently did try some joint events and initiatives but Lyons, in any case, was frustrated that neither group wished to listen to the concerns of the other.

No easy way to have such dialogues but clearly, current approach not effective:

All told, this disconnect between the positions of Canada’s special envoy on preserving Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism and its special representative on combating Islamophobia has rendered them not just futile, but problematic. Never in our nation’s history have we so desperately needed moral fortitude, truth tellers and courageous religious and community leaders to come together and face hard truths in unison. Yet for the last two years, this need has been met not just with inefficiencies and obstacles, but what feels like deliberate attempts to undermine relations not just between Jews and Muslims, but between Jews and everyone else.

Canada is at an inflection point — socially, culturally, politically and economically. Major issues could improve in these spheres — or gradually worsen over time as they have been now for many years. It is therefore imperative that every dollar and initiative be spent and developed with prosperity and unity in mind — not the indulgence of endless grievances, the infantilization of entire peoples and the notion that our country can only be unburdened of our sins by relentlessly confirming our guilt.

Step 1 in achieving these things: get rid of useless and divisive positions.

Source: Casey Babb: Canada doesn’t need an antisemitism or Islamophobia czar

Filed under Antisemitism, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Michael Geist: When it comes to antisemitism, the sound of silence is loud in Canada 

2025/07/28 Leave a comment

Valid comments on lack of consistency in approaches:

…In response, there have been some notable efforts to address the antisemitism scourge. Both the federal government and some local municipalities have enacted or proposed bubble zone legislation designed to create a safe perimeter around places of worship, schools, hospitals, and other vulnerable institutions. Some universities and governments have adopted much-needed guidelines to combat antisemitism and promised to enforce them more aggressively.

More is required, but those responses appear to have shifted the discourse from disbelief to efforts to silence and thwart initiatives to protect the community. It often starts by insisting that the Jewish community is not only unable to judge what constitutes antisemitism, but that it actively engages in its weaponization. It is hard to think of any other group that is not only denied its own ability to identify harms but is painted as acting nefariously when it does so.

When the issue does break through, the efforts to protect the Jewish community are then silenced by framing them as undermining the rights of others. For example, bubble zone initiatives are frequently criticized as an affront to freedom of expression, despite being carefully drafted and modelled on similar laws that have been upheld by Canadian courts as constitutional.

Similarly, antisemitism guidelines on campus have been derided as chilling freedom of expression. These institutions have long histories of adopting extensive regulations to protect women, visible minorities and Indigenous groups, even going so far as to identify and guard against micro-aggressions. But the same approach seemingly does not apply to the Jewish community, who instead face charges that protecting their rights would come at the expense of the rights of others.

In fact, even political views on the founding of the State of Israel or expressions of support for Zionism, which as former prime minister Justin Trudeau noted “is the belief, at its simplest, that Jewish people, like all peoples, have the right to determine their own future” runs the risk of being labelled as “racist” in today’s educational environment, thereby silencing the perspectives.

As the rise in antisemitism has become too pronounced to ignore, there have been some important efforts to chronicle it and call for action. But what has been missing is an examination of its day-to-day effects, which has placed the safety and well-being of an entire community, from grade school to seniors’ homes, at risk. Those effects will become less visible if all that is left is the sound of silence.

Source: Michael Geist: When it comes to antisemitism, the sound of silence is loud in Canada

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

A Columbia genocide scholar says she may leave over university’s new definition of antisemitism

2025/07/26 Leave a comment

Of note:

For years, Marianne Hirsch, a prominent genocide scholar at ColumbiaUniversity, has used Hannah Arendt’s book about the trial of a Nazi war criminal, “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil,” to spark discussion among her students about the Holocaust and its lingering traumas. 

But after Columbia’s recent adoption of a new definition of antisemitism, which casts certain criticism of Israel as hate speech, Hirsch fears she may face official sanction for even mentioning the landmark text by Arendt, a philosopher who criticized Israel’s founding. 

For the first time since she started teaching five decades ago, Hirsch, the daughter of two Holocaust survivors, is now thinking of leaving the classroom altogether.

“A university that treats criticism of Israel as antisemitic and threatens sanctions for those who disobey is no longer a place of open inquiry,” she told The Associated Press. “I just don’t see how I can teach about genocide in that environment.”

Hirsch is not alone. At universities across the country, academics have raised alarm about growing efforts to define antisemitism on terms pushed by the Trump administration, often under the threat of federal funding cuts. 

Promoted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, the definition lists 11 examples of antisemitic conduct, such as applying “double standards” to Israel, comparing the country’s policies to Nazism or describing its existence as “a racist endeavor.”

Ahead of a $220 million settlement with the Trump administration announced Wednesday, Columbia agreed to incorporate the IHRA definition and its examples into its disciplinary process. It has been endorsed in some form by Harvard, Yale and dozens of other universities. 

While supporters say the semantic shift is necessary to combat evolving forms of Jewish hate, civil liberties groups warn it will further suppress pro-Palestinian speech already under attack by President Donald Trump. …

Source: A Columbia genocide scholar says she may leave over university’s new definition of antisemitism

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Antisemitism envoy says resignation prompted by frustration over ‘not connecting’ with anti-hate message

2025/07/25 Leave a comment

Dispiriting. But kudos for Lyons for opening sharing her frustrations and critiques regarding the silence of business and faith leaders. Most despairing comment to me was this reference to silos:

“Lyons told The Canadian Jewish News that Amira Elghawaby, the federal government’s special representative on combating Islamophobia, tried to work with Lyons on fighting hate, citing an apparently shelved plan to visit provincial education ministers together.

“Neither my community, nor her community, were happy all the time to see us in pictures together,” Lyons said. “There were often people who just simply didn’t want me participating in respectful dialogues, or wouldn’t come into the room.””

Ottawa’s outgoing envoy for tackling antisemitism is accusing Canada’s business sector and civil society of failing to call out a rising tide of hate against Jews and other minorities.

In an extensive interview with The Canadian Jewish News, Deborah Lyons also said she could not get a meeting with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre during her nearly two-year term.

In a statement sent to The Canadian Press, the Conservatives said that Lyons was “powerless” in her job.

Lyons resigned early in her term as Canada’s special envoy on preserving Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism. She said her decision reflected her “despair” over the growing gulf in society over violence in the Middle East and the failure of many Canadians to find common ground against hate.

“People were listening and hearing on different frequencies, and so we just were not connecting,” said Lyons. “That was where the big despair comes from.”

She said her work wasn’t made any easier by the silence of corporate leaders “whom I asked many times to stand up,” and by faith leaders who seemed to keep quiet on the suffering of people from other religions.

“I was incredibly disappointed with business leaders,” she said.

“We have a tendency to want to blame politicians all the time, but where have the faith leaders been? Where have the priests and ministers and rabbis and imams and so forth (been)?”

Lyons said that some community leaders did ask for her help in finding the right words to speak out against hate — because they feared that they would offend one community if they stood up for another.

“I’ve been really quite amazed — and often become quite despondent and despairing — about the fact that it was hard to get people to speak up. To speak with clarity, to speak with conviction,” she said.

“The mark of a country is not the courage of its military. It is the courage of its bystanders.”

The Canadian Press has requested an interview with Lyons but has not yet had a response.

Lyons told The Canadian Jewish News that Amira Elghawaby, the federal government’s special representative on combating Islamophobia, tried to work with Lyons on fighting hate, citing an apparently shelved plan to visit provincial education ministers together.

“Neither my community, nor her community, were happy all the time to see us in pictures together,” Lyons said. “There were often people who just simply didn’t want me participating in respectful dialogues, or wouldn’t come into the room.”

She said that indicates a “weakening” in the ability of both Canadian society and the broader western world to stand for common human values.

Lyons said she lacked the energy at times to bridge that gap.

“I held back from having some discussions, because I knew there was going to be animosity, or I wasn’t going to be welcome in the room. It disappoints me,” she said.

Lyons said she could not get a meeting with Poilievre despite requesting one and having a cordial chat with him during an event.

“I tried to meet with Mr. Poilievre when I was in the job, and in the end I got a response that he was too busy to meet with me,” she said.

In a statement attributed to Conservative deputy leader Melissa Lantsman, the party did not dispute Lyons’ version of events.

“While communities face increasing threats, vandalism, intimidation and violence over the last 20 months, the Liberals deflected responsibility to a powerless envoy,” says the statement.

“We are ready to meet with the government at any point, because they’re the only ones with the power, the tools and the responsibility to do something — and they have done absolutely nothing to date.”

Statistics Canada reported this week a slight increase in police-reported hate crimes in 2024 compared with a year prior, and a very slight drop in those against Jewish people, who remain the most targeted group in Canada.

Lyons accused all three levels of government of failing to adequately co-ordinate their responses to hate, saying that issues like car theft or tariffs are seen as more tangible.

She said Prime Minister Mark Carney seemed engaged and requested a meeting with her, though she added it was not possible to meet with him before the July 8 date of her departure.

Lyons said she is leaving her job three months early not for health reasons but rather to restore “a little bit of the joy back into life” through retirement.

She said she would have liked to continue, but described the envoy role as more difficult than her stints as ambassador to Afghanistan and Israel.

“It was without question the toughest job I ever did.”

Source: Antisemitism envoy says resignation prompted by frustration over ‘not connecting’ with anti-hate message

Filed under Antisemitism, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Federal envoy urges Ontario to act on antisemitism in its public schools

2025/07/16 Leave a comment

Of note:

Canada’s special envoy on antisemitism says Ontario school boards need to take seriously incidents of anti-Jewish bigotry targeted at students in public schools.

Deborah Lyons commissioned a survey of nearly 600 Jewish parents in the province, and found hundreds of children were subjected to incidents including antisemitic bullying and blame for the carnage of Israel’s military conduct in the Gaza Strip.

The survey logged 781 incidents between October 2023 and January 2025 that Jewish families reported as antisemitic, such as children chanting Nazi slogans and giving salutes, and teachers telling students that Israel does not exist.

Of the reported incidents, 60 per cent involved what the survey deemed “extreme anti-Israel sentiments,” such as describing Israel as “fundamentally a racist state, that it is committing genocide in Gaza.”

The other 40 per cent involved anti-Jewish attitudes writ large, such as denying the Holocaust, or describing Jews as cheap or having control over the media.

Lyons’ office approached various Jewish groups to promote the survey to their members and ask them to complete it.

Some parents reported moving their children to different schools, or having their children remove things that identified them as Jewish while attending school.

The report marks a rare move of federal rapporteurs singling out issues outside of Ottawa’s jurisdiction.

The Ontario government said antisemitism is unacceptable in its schools.

“We expect school boards across the province to focus on student achievement and creating supportive classrooms,” wrote Emma Testani, press secretary for provincial education minister Paul Calandra.

“We will continue working with our education partners to keep politics out of the classroom and ensure schools remain focused on helping students succeed.”

Michael Levitt, a former Liberal MP who runs a Jewish advocacy group, called the survey “a searing indictment” of how the education system treats Jewish students.

“While the Ontario government and some school boards are making an effort to bring antisemitism training and Holocaust education to staff and students, our education system must do more to root out antisemitism and hold perpetrators accountable,” wrote Levitt, head of the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Canada has endorsed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which has attracted controversy among academics and free-speech advocates.

The IHRA definition says it is anti-Jewish to single out Israel for criticism not levelled at other countries, to deem the creation of Israel “a racist endeavour” or to compare Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Pro-Palestinian groups have said the definition could be used against those who accuse Israel of implementing an apartheid system and intentionally starving people in Gaza.

Source: Federal envoy urges Ontario to act on antisemitism in its public schools

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Lederman: We need to talk about antisemitism

2025/07/12 Leave a comment

Comments highlight need:

…What is happening in Gaza is catastrophic. But comparisons to the Holocaust are inaccurate, unnecessary and damaging. And, arguably, antisemitic.

Would any of this be okay if it was directed at any other minority group? 

One could argue it’s Zionists being targeted, not Jews. But most Jews are Zionists, believing a State of Israel has a right to exist. Further, too often, “Zionist” is a convenient substitute for “Jew.”

Criticism of the Israeli government is absolutely fair. But veering into antisemitism does nothing for the worthy Palestinian cause. If anything, it taints it. It is distracting, divisive and counterproductive. 

The same “fixed it” social-media crowd might write, about this column, “I’m not reading all that. Free Palestine.”

Yes, Palestinians deserve to be free. And Jews in Canada deserve to feel safe in their own country.

Source: We need to talk about antisemitism

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

Musk’s A.I. tool has a hate problem

2025/07/10 Leave a comment

Not all that surprising, unfortunately:

Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence chatbot, Grok, has been spreading antisemitic conspiracies — including that Jews promote hatred toward white people and control Hollywood. It also praised Adolf Hitler.

The posts came days after Musk boasted that Grok had improved “significantly.”
How it works: “Chatbots like Grok are based on large language models that comb through massive databases of online content to produce written answers to questions or prompts based on common responses it finds,” explains our Arno Rosenfeld. “But their creators can also instruct the models to respond in specific ways.”

Context: Musk performed what appeared to be a Nazi salute during an inaugural rally for Trump, and followed the incident with a series of Holocaust jokes on X, the social media platform he owns. In response to the rise in antisemitic and hateful content, many major Jewish organizations have left the site.

Fallout: The Anti-Defamation League called the posts — some of which have now been deleted — “irresponsible, dangerous and antisemitic.”

Source: Musk’s A.I. tool has a hate problem

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Gessen: Antisemitism Isn’t What People Think It Is

2025/06/25 1 Comment

Good piece on the risks of “conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Zionism and anti-Zionism with antisemitism:”

What makes these conflations powerful and long lasting is fear. I heard an extraordinary description of how this fear operates in a podcast interview with the Columbia University professor Shai Davidai. If you are familiar with his name, it’s probably because he has been a lightning rod, a hero to those who believe that American universities have become hotbeds of antisemitism. Columbia, for its part, suspended his campus access, saying he had harassed and intimidated other university employees.

Before any of this happened, Davidai identified as left wing, an opponent of the Israeli occupation and a critic of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A couple of days after Oct. 7, someone showed him an open letter issued by the Columbia chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. It was the kind of strident, tone-deaf letter that student organizations were putting out at the time. It talked about the inevitability of armed resistance as a response to systemic oppression. It did not talk about Jews.

And then Davidai found himself on campus, looking at several hundred students wearing kaffiyeh and, at least as he understood it, celebrating the Hamas attack. A colleague leaned over to him, he said, “and says, ‘This is the antisemitism that our parents and grandparents warned us about, and we didn’t listen.’ And the moment he said that, everything changed for me.” Davidai started speaking out on social media and attracted a great deal of attention.

Davidai described his experience as an epiphany. For many people living in Israel — a nation founded by Jews for Jews — and many American Jews as well, antisemitism is an abstraction, the stuff of stories. (I have to give credit for this observation to my daughter, who moved from a very antisemitic society to New York City at the age of 12.) These stories come from great tragedy, especially for Jews of European origin, many of whom represent the lucky-survivor branches of their families. Seeing something you have only read about suddenly, at least seemingly, come to life is a kind of awakening — the kind that a person in grief and trauma is perhaps particularly open to.

Two recent brutal attacks in the United States have sent more fear through Jewish communities here and elsewhere: the shooting of two Israeli Embassy staff members outside of the Capital Jewish Museum, in Washington, D.C., on May 21 and the firebombing of a rally in support of Israeli hostages 11 days later, in Boulder, Colo. Both attacks have been widely denounced as antisemitic.

That’s no surprise — both were visible and deliberate attacks on public events with a high concentration of Jews. But that isn’t necessarily the end of the story. Daniel May, the publisher of the magazine Jewish Currents (I serve on its board), has argued in a powerful article that neither attacker made any obviously antisemitic statements — unless one considers “Free Palestine” an antisemitic slogan. The D.C. shooter’s 900-word purported manifesto didn’t contain the word “Jew” or even “Zionist.” Of course, someone could still act out of hatred even if he doesn’t shout it in a manifesto, but the absence in that document of any explicit mention does open the possibility that he had a different motive.

Neither of these events was exclusive to Jews, as a synagogue service might be. Both events were inextricable from the war in Gaza. And though the violence in Boulder was wide ranging, the shooting in Washington seems to have been very specifically targeted — at two representatives of the Israeli government.

None of this makes the attacks any less horrific. And none of it should offer any comfort to the victims or their families. The terrible human toll is the same no matter what the attackers’ motivation. But if we are looking to draw larger lessons from this brutality, it’s worth considering that violence that looks antisemitic may — even when it very effectively serves to scare a great many Jews — be something else.

What these attacks can be understood as is, undoubtedly, acts of terrorism. There is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, but scholars agree on some basics: It’s violence committed for political reasons, against noncombatants, with the goal of sowing fear. It’s notable that “terrorism,” a term that in this country has been used and misused to crack down on civil liberties, especially those of brown and Muslim immigrants, has been joined and even supplanted by the term “antisemitism,” wielded in similar ways, for the same purposes.

Terrorists aim to provoke a reaction. A violent and disproportionate response, because it amplifies their message that whatever they have targeted is absolute evil. They got that response in Israel’s devastation of Gaza following the Hamas attack on Oct. 7.

Terrified people tend to support disproportionate violence. Terrified people make perfect constituencies for politicians like Netanyahu because they can be convinced that the unrelenting massacre and starvation of Gazans is necessary to keep Israel safe, and for President Trump, because they may not question the justification for pre-emptively bombing a sovereign country.

My thoughts keep returning to that conversation with the historian of Stalinism. She studied an era of political terrorism carried out on the premise — crazy yet widely accepted — that the U.S.S.R. was full of people who wanted to kill their leader. Today, we may live in an even more cynical era, when political leaders, instead of acting on their own fears of violence, instrumentalize other people’s fear.

The conflations that underlie most political conversations about antisemitism make it seem as if everyone wants to kill Jews — that antisemitism is not just common but omnipresent. If you believe that the whole world wants you dead, then you are much less likely to stand up for human rights or civil liberties, other people’s or your own.

A casualty of this cynical era is our understanding of the actual scale of antisemitism, defined as animus against Jews as Jews. There are many reasons to think that antisemitic attitudes and attacks are on the rise, but the keepers of statistics often thwart the effort to get hard information, because they insist on conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Zionism and anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

New York City is home to the largest number of Jews outside of Israel. But for all the noise mayoral candidates and their supporters have made about antisemitism, Mamdani is the only one I have heard so movingly acknowledge the emotional toll that the real and imagined threats of antisemitism have been taking on Jewish New Yorkers. I wonder how many people can hear him through all the din.

Source: Antisemitism Isn’t What People Think It Is

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

David Polansky: Kind, tolerant Canada is failing the antisemitism test

2025/06/21 Leave a comment

Captures some of the dynamics at play:

…To explain: though antisemitism is frequently referred to as the “oldest hatred,” these latest developments are, if not wholly new, at least a new variation, for which prior instances offer minimal guidance. The classic problem is that of the persecuted and supposedly unassimilable minority, exemplified in Canada by the notorious “None is too many” policy or Duplessis’ campaign for the premiership of Quebec during the Second World War. But Jews are no longer a unique minority in a country that has prioritized global immigration and multiculturalism for many decades, and in which “visible minorities” are expected to approach half the population by the middle of this century.

At the same time, Jews remain very much a minority unto themselves, with just under 400,000 total across the country. What makes the present dilemma distinctive is that it stems not from a hostile majority population but from other minority populations that view Canadian Jews as convenient extensions of Israel (and thus as legitimate targets), along with assorted radicals operating under the same logic.i

It is thus the perfect moral shell game: you can harass and even harm Jews under the belief that you are functionally fighting Nazis. All of the fun of antisemitism (venting one’s anger and resentment upon a minority group) with none of the burdens of conscience that might otherwise come with it (because you are in fact venting your anger and resentment upon a minority group). More broadly, the prevailing liberal institutions have removed many of the safeguards that might have once checked these tendencies.

Consequently, this sort of vandalism—much like the idiot yelling antisemitic slurs at (the admittedly irritating) Dave Portnoy the other week—is both unprecedented and precedented. It is in a broad sense unprecedented in a country like Canada known for its mild political culture with a tradition of hospitableness for its Jewish communities. But it is in a narrower sense preceded by 18 months and more of fraying civic threads and the suspension of ordinary laws and norms for the champions of politically favoured causes.

For example, prior to the vandalism of the Holocaust Memorial, Mohamed Fakih, a highly successful entrepreneur and recipient of the Order of Canada, posted on X that, given their affiliations with the state of Israel, synagogues were perfectly legitimate targets of protest—a sentiment echoed by left-leaning academics. That is to say, unless they satisfy certain political and ideological conditions, Jews can continue to expect to be targeted in their neighbourhoods and places of worship. This was remarkable in its own right, but also for what it signified: a willingness to dispense with the modern liberal agreement concerning tolerance and coexistence, exchanging it for a new model of increasingly comprehensive politicization.

Now, it should be noted that Canada has already seen a disturbing spate of church-burnings over the past several years, seemingly triggered by the false reports of mass murder at residential schools. This itself was a highly worrisome development, though the public response to this on the part of both media and elected officials was to downplay it rather than excuse it, though that was really bad enough. What we are seeing now, however, is something new: the attempt to legitimize behaviour that was once completely outside the boundaries of political order in liberal societies. This is a matter of concern not just for Canada’s Jews, then, but for everybody.

None of this is to suggest that Jews should be entitled to special protections; but contemporary liberalism has largely abandoned traditional notions of political legitimacy in favour of offering precisely such protections to preferred groups under its coalition. It is particularly in light of its own record, then, that the present situation of Jews stands out.

The reality is that the world is not always such a nice place, and nasty things are bound to happen from time to time, even in “nice” countries. Any one of these incidents could have been chalked up to that same inevitability, but taken together, it is increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion: these things didn’t use to happen here; now they do. The inability to properly respond to—or even recognize—this development is yet another test that Canada’s governments at all levels are presently failing.

Source: David Polansky: Kind, tolerant Canada is failing the antisemitism test

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →