Anti-ZionISTism and Anti-Palestinianism

The growth of anti-ZionISTism and Anti-Palestinianism is troublesome

6/5/25: Oh my, I forgot to add Jo Ann Mort’s important essay in the Guardian.

5/25/26: 5/26/25: This beat, a stub for a future essay and op-ed, has not developed further mainly because I felt the focus had to be on ending the war on Gaza and the way it also involves repression within Israel of opponents of the war and continued fear among Israelis of the resumption of large scale attacks from several directions on Israel itself. But I want to draw attention to The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, an approach to understanding antisemitism that is seen as an alternative to the IHRA definition. Three elements of the Jerusalem declaration are very consistent with what I call anti-ZionISTism:

6. Requiring people, because they are Jewish, publicly to condemn Israel or Zionism (for example, at a political meeting).

7. Assuming that non-Israeli Jews, simply because they are Jews, are necessarily more loyal to Israel than to their own countries.

8. Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish, collectively and individually, as Jews, in accordance with the principle of equality.

6 and 7 are directly related to anti-ZionISTism, a growing form of left antisemitism globally and on the US left. People on the left often frequently inquire of their friends and others in progressive spaces if they are “anti-Zionist,” although it is unclear what they mean by that. Furthermore, I’ve found, many young Jews especially have undertaken that identity, “I am an anti-Zionist,” without thinking it through very much. In fact, it was almost a non-existent mass identity until after 10/07/23.

Prior to that, even ardent supporters of BDS would point to the fact that it takes no position on a two-state solution. Yet, as #8 above shows, to deny “the right of Jews in the State of Israel” to live in such a state with full equality with non-Jews in that state is itself antisemitic. Anyone who supports the continued existence of a State of Israelis in some accounts is a Zionist, but one can also be a non-Zionist who supports the existence of Israel. Neither mean that you support the ideology of Zionism, but in both cases it means you support the formation of Israel following WWII as a world-historical decision to recognize the need for a state which had priority preference for immigration from Jews and Jewish refugees of the Shoah.

True, Israel may become—if it has not already become—a pariah state, if a majority of Israelis do not come to their senses and reject the right-wing drift, accompanied by growing militarism, anti-Arab prejudice, and anti-Palestinianism, which produces more and more settler violence, IDF repression in the West Bank and so forth.

Now, however, especially over the last year, there has been a massive growth in the number of primarily younger Jews who proudly declare they are “anti-Zionist.” Now they can feel comfortable in progressive spaces or even on campus, without worry they will be hated and excluded as rotten Zionists or even worse, “liberal Zionists,” but feminist Zionists, progressive Zionists, socialist Zionists are all unwelcome in growing numbers of progressive spaces, in DSA (whose NPC passed an declaration that DSA is an anti-Zionist organization in July 2024).

Many chapters passed resolutions saying that Zionists could be disciplined, required to undergo re-education, or even expelled. Who decides who are Zionists? The fearless leaders, who apparently have no fear that their acts are fundamentally antisemitic and contrary to every known principle of antiracism and anti-oppression. Perhaps they should read the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and ask: is their blithe support for DSA being an “anti-Zionist” organization (a “whereas” in a current DSA convention resolution about countering the influence of the IHRA definition) an example in and of itself of antisemitism per that definition? Yes, in my view.

6/3/25: The NYTimes analyzes recent attacks on Jews in the US: “simply existing in public as a Jewish person is increasingly dangerous.” The Forward also comments: “Those crackdowns do not appear to be leading people to take antisemitism more seriously. In fact, per a Brookings report from earlier this year, people instead increasingly see the label of “antisemitism” as a term used to delegitimize political opponents and critics of Israel — not one that refers to a real and present threat to Jews. A poll from last month suggests that most American Jews think that deporting people for pro-Palestinian speech increases antisemitism. I agree with them. On top of that, evidence suggests that antisemitic attitudes increase with Israeli hostility toward Palestinians, and Israel’s war is ongoing; every day, we read headlines like “Young girl escapes burning Gaza school after Israeli attack.And the risk of copycat attacks — further acts of violence, inspired by those that have already taken place — feels alarmingly high. In just the last two months, we have seen an arson attack target Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro on the first night of Passover; a shooting that killed two Israeli Embassy staffers outside an event for young Jewish professionals at the Capital Jewish Museum; and now this firebomb attack in Boulder. ”

Alas, at first I almost re-read the above to say, “Those attacks do not appear to be leading people to take antisemitism more seriously. Attack rhymes with crackdown, but you see, the fact is, I am not seeing the left take these attacks seriously and no left organization is taking left antisemitism seriouslys. It is always one excuse after another about how it is just fringe elements who are responsible.

See also this piece in the NYTimes by Sheila Katz about the impact of irresponsible rhetoric. What does Free, Free Palestine mean, after all? It is purposefully vague. At its best, it could mean a demand for a Palestinian state; ok, I’ve publicly called for recognizing Palestine. At its worse, it means attack and kill and remove all Jews from Israel on the grounds Israel is illegitimate and all of historic Palestine must be freed. Yet hundreds of thousands reflexitively chant that slogan and have been since fall 2023. And now it has been uttered by the perpetrators of two antisemitic attacks.

According, a piece in The Forward proposes both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine groups have failed in their strategies and need to find commonalities. How about a real movement for peace and justice in the Middle East, one which unifies rather than divided, much like how the June 1981 Central Park rally united anti-nuke power and anti-nuke weapons advocates.

5/25/25: Rabbi Sharon Brous gives moral clarity to the murders and is important to hear. Thank you to Leo Casey for bringing this to the attention of many.

5/22/25: Unfortunately and in the case of the murder of two Israeli Embassy staffers yesterday, the logic of anti-ZionISTism can lead to the justification of antisemitic violence, just as hatred of pro-Palestinian protesters has lead to violence against them on several occasions by Jewish extremists, at UCLA, in Brooklyn, and elsewhere. This act is just the tip of the iceberg, if we can’t better conceptualize and educate about this logic of blaming individual Jews for the actions of Israel’s government, in the name of an anti-Zionism run amuck. For another account, see The Guardian. Some have criticized this MSNBC account for focusing on the anti-Israel, pro-Gaza details rather than the antisemitic nature of the murders. The NYTIMES detailed the cold-blooded nature of the murders and suggested that the murderer knew nothing about the victims than that they were likely Jewish. However, Daniel Edelson reported in New York, “DC terrorist stalked embassy workers before attack, that Israel’s Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiiter has stated that the murderer mingled with participants and identifed Yaron and Sarah as embassy employees prior the ambush from behind which the Times reported. I do not want to comment further on this in this thread other than to say it is important, as I said below, not to engage in the invalidation of the individual and collective trauma of Jews and Palestinians historically or in the present.

5/21/25: One form in which anti-semitism is experienced is what is known as traumatic invalidation. No doubt many Gazans and Palestinians in general likely experience this at individual and institutional levels as well. “While acknowledging that their suffering cannot compare to the suffering of Israelis and Palestinians who’ve been impacted more directly, they conclude: “And yet, our pain is real, and the inability of our closest friends to accept the legitimacy of our pain only adds more heartbreak” (Davidai & Greenspan, Citation2024).”

5/7/25: The debate in the Senate over the Antisemitism Awareness Act continues, with efforts to amend it. Such a bill passed the House, although apparently if there are changes in the Senate they would have to be reconciled. In my view, some kind of legislation must address the rise of what I define as anti-ZionIST and anti-Pro-Palestinian and anti-Palestinianist discriminination and harassment and harassment, which often fall outside the protections of existing law.

5/2/25: As efforts proceed to debate legislation on antisemitism, I wanted to look back on the Biden administration’s approach. For an explanation from the Southern Poverty Law Center of Trumps flawed approach to antisemitism, see this. However, there is an 84 page GAO Full Report just released to Congress which seeks to relate a 2021 antiterrorism report to the 2023 strategy agains antisemitism, which had bipartisan support but was still criticized for too heavily relying on the IHRA definition, although Biden made clear that would be merely one set of guidelines. Here is a one page summary of the April 25 GAO Report.

This is an effort to completely replace the 2023 final Biden administration U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism Strategy and related strategies. Most links to the Strategy are now bad but Thinking from the Heart archived it here. Here is a summary of that report’s implications and a piece from National Council of Jewish Women on its implementation. Here is a full analysis of the strategy.

Here is also a link to the 2024 Biden Administration National Strategy to Counter Islamophobia and anti-Arab Hate, which Speaking from the Heart found it in the US Archives. Here was also a Biden administration document on ALLIED AGAINST HATE: A TOOLKIT FOR FAITH COMMUNITIES. I am looking for any accounts that evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to actually carry out that strategy under President Biden but I do not think any actually legislation was signed into law.

5/2/25 More news about US Jewish rabbinical opposition Trump’s cynical attempts to exploit concern about antisemitism to crack down on civil liberties: See this from an Israeli website with free subscriptions. A list of the signatories of the letter is now available here:

Hundreds of Rabbis Condemn President Trump’s Exploitation of Genuine Fears of Antisemitism

April 28, 2025

Washington, DC – Over 550 rabbis and cantors across the United States have signed a statement condemning the Trump Administration’s continued assault on democratic protections, American universities, and pro-Palestinian students under the guise of combating antisemitism.

The statement, backed by J Street and T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, calls out the Trump administration’s cynical attempt to exploit legitimate fears of antisemitism as a pretext to “divide Americans, undermine democracy, and harm other vulnerable communities.”

Read the statement and see the signatories here.

“It’s incredibly meaningful to see so many leaders in our community speaking out. As Jewish Americans who have been such great beneficiaries of America’s liberal democratic values, we have a special responsibility to sound the alarm, especially when the administration is claiming to do this on our behalf,” said J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami. “Our history and our values compel us to act in this moment of crisis, and together we must stiffen the spines of everyone in our community to stand up and fight back. We only win if we’re all in this together. ”

“Our community has endured a very real spike in antisemitism in recent years. We’ve seen bomb threats, vandalism and attacks on our schools and synagogues,” said Rabbi Jill Jacobs, CEO of T’ruah. “It’s precisely because tackling this issue is so important that we can’t allow it to be hijacked by this administration to pursue an authoritarian agenda that puts us all at risk.”

“We cannot allow the fight against antisemitism to be twisted into a wedge issue, used to justify policies that target immigrants and other minorities, suppress free speech, or erode democratic norms,” the statement reads. “We reject these cynical attacks on higher education – institutions that have long been strongholds of Jewish academic and cultural life – under the pretense of protecting Jewish students.”

5/1/25: The Times of Israel discusses the opposition of progressive US Jewish groups to the IHRA-based anti-antisemitism bill now in Congress: Here is the text, shared by New Jewish Narrative:

Joint Letter to US Senators Regarding the Antisemitism Awareness Act

We, the undersigned Jewish organizations, write to express our opposition to the Antisemitism Awareness Act (S. 558 / H.R. 1007). We encourage you to oppose this bill. Voting in favor of this legislation in this current political climate would represent an endorsement of the Trump Administration’s escalating efforts to weaponize antisemitism as a pretext for undermining civil rights, deporting political dissidents, and attacking the fundamental pillars of our democracy, making the Jewish community and others less safe.

We remain deeply concerned about the escalating antisemitism here in the United States and globally, particularly following the horrific October 7, 2023 terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas. At the same time, we are alarmed to see how the Trump Administration has cynically deployed the fight against antisemitism as cover to attack other groups, political rivals, due process, and civil society. History teaches us that Jews and other minority groups are the safest in robust democracies, and this authoritarian backsliding raises alarm bells across the political spectrum of the Jewish community.

Antisemitism is a serious and growing problem that demands a legitimate and action-oriented response. However, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Non-Legally Binding Working Definition of Antisemitism and its contemporary examples – while dismissing all other definitions as counterproductive – falls far short of the complex response required to fight antisemitism. In fact, this bill does nothing to advance the hundreds of steps outlined in the 2023 National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism – a much more holistic approach that was supported by Republicans, Democrats, and a wide range of Jewish communal stakeholders. It is worth noting that the National Strategy deliberately did not endorse the IHRA definition, given the significant disagreement in the Jewish community about the definition.

We are concerned that the bill requires the Department of Education to use the IHRA definition and its examples, which broadly and problematically characterizes criticism of Israel as antisemitism, in determining the intent of potentially antisemitic incidents on campus. We vehemently reject any tool that can be misappropriated to suppress criticism of the Israeli government or stifle legitimate discussions about Israeli policies. Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the definition, warned of its potential misuses – specifically its weaponization to suppress free speech – and now we are seeing the Trump administration investigate and deport students and activists for their speech based on this very definition. Codifying the IHRA definition into law would only bless these efforts.

Even if you have supported the Antisemitism Awareness Act or the implementation of the IHRA definition in the past, it is essential to consider how this bill, if enacted into law, would be abused by the Trump Administration. President Trump has made his intentions to expand deportations clear. It would effectively be a greenlight from Congress for the detention and deportation of those who express political dissent, the criminalization of speech, and for massive funding cuts to the Department of Education and the Office of Civil Rights – which we additionally fear would lead to a backlash steeped in antisemitism.

At a time when so many protections for Jewish students and the Jewish community are being eliminated by this Administration, a bill that does nothing to restore or increase tangible protections is not only hypocritical, but actually fails the Jewish community. It is precisely because of our shared commitment to countering antisemitism in all forms, that we must oppose the Antisemitism Awareness Act. It is imperative to address the rise in antisemitism effectively while upholding the democratic principles of free speech and open dialogue – something that this bill clearly fails to achieve.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to engaging in further discussions to ensure a comprehensive and fair approach in countering antisemitism.

Sincerely,

Bend the Arc: Jewish Action
Habonim Dror North America
Hashomer Hatzair USA
J Street
Jewish Community Action
New Israel Fund
New Jewish Narrative
New York Jewish Agenda
The Nexus Project
T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights

4/30/25: The two Harvard reports are now out, per Harvard Magazine. The NYTimes reports on them.

4/28/25: Rabbis speak out in opposition to Trump’s version of fighting antisemitism. For more info on this see the JTA account. I see no public list of the signatories.

4/25/2025: Ilan Goldenberg speaks out on the relationship of (critical) support of Israel’s policies and the question of effective opposition to antisemitism. He made a good point: "In many ways, appealing to Israelis on cultural issues, while actually harming their national interests is pretty similar to his ability to appeal to working class voters even as he pursues policies that line the pockets of his billionaire cronies." I commented: “But as you know, the best way to be Pro-Israel is to also criticize the growing influence of far-right politicians, the continued attacks that are killing disproportionate numbers of non-combatants, and to oppose the occupation. We could do a better job helping people to understand that those who are critical of Israel's conduct of the war with Gaza and who are opposed to the occupation are not necessarily antisemitic.”

4/19/25: Leila Atassi of Cleveland Plain Dealer/Cleveland.com has written an important column about antisemitism and how not to fight it, opposing the latest Republican efforts on the grounds they will stifle free speech. Biden’s policy on antisemitism properly mentioned the IHRA definition but did not make it definitive due to some of those very concerns.

The definition itself is: ““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.” The concern many have is that these two examples, when included in legislarioon such as that proposed in Ohio last year—apparently they have been removed from the current proposed legislation, I will need to check—would stifle crticism of Israel’s policies and pratices:

1. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

2. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

In #2, “it” means Israel. So when you ask, say, that Israel as a state be disbanded and re-configured as a binational state covering all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, a sort of revanchist demand really, as opposed, say, to calling for negotiated solutions where there is a new Palestinian state with negotiated borders with Israel, advocating for this would according to this definition be antisemitic. Since many Jews advocate for this, by the way, that would mean they are being antisemitic.

Here is the problem: once you start down this slippery slope, on the grounds of opposing antisemitism, you soon will be opposing free speech itself. Now, as this beat has tried to suggest, there is no doubt that some of criticism of Zionists and of Israel especially since 10/07/23 has involved real hatred towards Zionists that is absolutely antisemitic in nature.

I do not buy, oh, it is just anger at Israel’s bombardments and so forth. What we need to do, if we want effectively public policy, is somehow codify institutional regulations that sanction hateful speech and discrimination based on anti-ZionIST ism and Anti-Palestinianism and also political hate speech and acts thare exceed merely argumentativeness and disagreement. The “in-your face” kind of behavior, pointing fingers, semi-violent approaches, etc, is what I’m talking about. Not being an attorney, I’m not sure how this can done, legally, within an institutional setting such as an HR policy for employees or in a university or school environment, but we should be talking about it. But bringing into public legislation or regulations would be even harder. But we need to discuss this further.

Let’s take a look at the new bill now in the General Assembly, SB 87. It still says this: (26) "Antisemitism" means the working definition of antisemitism adopted by the international holocaust remembrance alliance on May 26, 2016. But it now also adds:

(C) The definition of "antisemitism" in this section shall not be construed to diminish or infringe on any right protected by the first amendment to the United States Constitution or the Ohio Constitution. This division shall not be construed to conflict with this chapter or any other federal, state, or local antidiscrimination law.

And this:

(B) In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of any relevant policy, law, or regulation prohibiting discriminatory acts, a state agency shall take into consideration the definition of antisemitism for purposes of determining whether an alleged act was motivated by discriminatory antisemitic intent.

Since the ACLU still has concerns, I would tend to agree with them; but this is beginning to come closer, actually, to the Biden policy. In general, I would still oppose any efforts that do not adress both antisemitism and find a way to include Islamophobia (although one could argue it is covered by religion) and anti-Arab chauvinism generally and anti-Palestinianism specific, and try to better define “national origin” so that it deals with family of origin not just the place of birth; not easy, but we as a society need to try to do this somehow.

4/14/25: This is still a beat, not an essay, but the intention is an op-ed and an essay, going forward. It will be informed by this valuable essay in Jewish Currents. One response here: in arguing for a way of thinking that allows “imagining a world outside of Zionism’s claim that the state of Israel and Jews everywhere are inherently connected.” Given the age-oldhttps://www.cleveland.com/opinion/2025/04/ohio-is-building-the-machinery-to-punish-dissent-leila-atassi.html origins of both antisemitism, anti-Arab chauvinism and Islamophbia, it seems to me that there is an argument for the existence of a nation with special immigration/resettlement rights for Jews without having to pass typical nation-state requirements for refugee status. And the same goes for Palestinians surely. I will not comment on a refuge for Muslims, given the Shia/Sunni divide.

4/13/25: Protester(s) chanted Go Back to Europe at Bennett, who himself, however, outrageously suggested that the protestors be given pagers. See my lastest post on Academic Freedom and Jeremy Ben-Ami’s latest post about Princeton.

4/12/25: Tim Snyder on Anti-Semitism. The instigators, the target (American universities), the history, the “provocation,” and so forth. Hear the video, read the text.

4/3/2025: Today, ADL took this action, but this is just one of the many reasons, related to ADL’s ineffectiveness in combating anti-semitism, which motivated me to agree to sign the Not in our Name petition (see The Arrest of Mahmoud Khalil), which calls for non-cooperation with ADL. They are basically targeting Jewish Voice for Peace, which as an organization that does not take antisemitic positions, unless one agrees BDS itself is anti-Semitic (which is arguable, actually). It has, however, co-sponsored events which allowed discourse whose anti-Israelism comes very close to antisemitism in my veiw, including this one coming up Saturday.

At the last such march in DC, I listened to all of the video of the speakers and with one or two exceptions there were all very disciplined in avoiding antisemitism. But the larger question here is the ADL is supposed to be a civil rights organization, and free speech is part of that! ADL risks missing the boat which I feel is going to sail soon a grassroots movement on campuses to combine education and training on antisemitism (including what I call anti-ZionISTism) and anti-Palestinianism, anti-Arab chauvinism, and Islamophobia.

3/28/25 The Guardian: critique of the IHRA definition.

3/27/25 To upsetting to even do more than read the Haaretz articles on the Israeli “antisemitism” conference to which they invited far right European politicians. Here is the good news from the Bend the Arc here in the US. They have done training on antisemitism to many groups. I’m hopeful for new models that cover both antisemitism and anti-Palestinianism and anti-Islamophobia.

3/19/25: Important to read is Haaretz (gift) on Trump’s plan: “As Trump threatens to cut funding to the college over pro-Palestinian protests, investigates the University of California and holds a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on antisemitism, Democrats accuse the GOP of politicizing the issue. Their actions 'erode the freedoms that've allowed American Jews to flourish,' said one student.

Meanwhile, Jewish Columbia alums are speaking our as well as a coalition of Jewish groups including J Street, per Haaretz (Gift). But parallel to that another alumni group is practicing anti-Palestinianism. This is a time, sadly, once again, to regularly read the Columbia Spectator. The Coalition of Jewish groups’ letter is here. I actively support J Street, Fund for a Progressive Israel, and New Jewish Narrative.

3/18/2025: Here is an important letter from James Zogby on how not to fight antisemitism.

3/18/2025: Here is a letter from Mahmoud dictated on phone from detention in Louisiana. It is very sad and infuriating to read this, but of course there is one outrage after another emanating from Trump and his new ICE leader. He speaks eloquently of anti-Palestinian racism: “I have always believed that my duty is not only to liberate myself from the oppressor but to liberate my oppressors from their hatred and fear. My unjust detention is indicative of the anti-Palestinian racism is indicative of the anti Palestinian racism that both the Biden and Trump administrations have demonstrated over the past 16 months as the US has continued to supply Israel with weapons to kill Palestinians and prevented international intervention. For decades, anti Palestinian racism has driven efforts to expand US laws and practices that are used to violently repress Palestinians, Arab Americans and other communities. That is precisely why I am being targeted.”

I very much agree with this. Now let me say, I doubt very much I agree with the bulk of the perhaps less apparent political perspectives he holds. The purpose of hearing him is not to make him some kind of hero, but to understand his expressed perspective and take him at his own words. The fact is that within the US left and Palestine solidarity movement and within the US Jewish community, each of these respective communities has failed to adequately confront growing left anti-ZionISTism and growing anti-Palestinianism, respectively. When they do so, it often seems rather tactical in nature: you can feel it, but don’t say it; you might want to do it, but don’t do it.

Meanwhile, over the years and since 10/07/23, ADL and other major Jewish groups and local Jewish Federations have been asleep at the wheel, engaging in its typical “diversity training” exercises about microaggressions or token efforts inter-community relations, but without ever truly confronting the palpable anti-Palestinianism within our community. Emphasizing the fight against antisemitism without recognizing as the left long knew and preached but seems to have by and large stopped down since the advent of the BDS boycott, you can’t fight antisemitism without simultaneously fighting racism. And in this instance, you can’t fight anti-ZionISTism without simultaneosly fighting anti-Palestinianism.

Once, in Bexley circa 1999, the Federation hosted an talk by a retired IDF official who outlined the problems and pitfalls of achieving a peaceful resolution of the Israel/Palestine question. It was not a reactionary presentation really, but it did blame the Palestinians for rejecting Israeli proposals. Suddenly, to my right, several seats down, a man stood, and shouted, “I say, if they don’t want peace, kill them all!” and sat down. Most of the audience was shocked; they was certainly no applause. He had interrupted the guest speaker. I have blocked out my own reaction, other than horror, and some fear. This was what the political scientist James Rosenau calls a “just noticeable event,” one which may barely be recognized but may be a harbinger of future events (Rosenau, J. N. (1990). Turbulence in world politics : a theory of change and continuity. Princeton University Press.)

Likewise within the organized left and Palestine solidarity movement, there has been outright denial of growing left-antisemitism in general and anti-ZionISTism in particular. Until we face up to this, there will be more and more incidents. We will see more and more extremist incidents emanating from the far-right Zionist movement and mentally disturbed individuals influenced by it and ones emanating from the far-left and mentally disturbed individuals influenced by it.

Both movements will blame the incidents on random individuals and deny there is anything fundamentally problematic with their own politics. Institutional leaders, if they themselves to not face up to these issues, will sway with the political winds, overreact, and make things worse, as it was clear to me was happening at the outset of the Palestinian solidarity movement at Columbia, as manifested by events at the School of Social Work, my alma mater. Or just as bad, they will no very little, discourage open dialogue out of fear of conflict, and hope for the best.

As always, I tend to feel that it is theoretical weaknesses which are very much at the heart of the matter. In my own published academic work,I have concluded that in the final analysis, as much as I might typologize that oppression, exploitation and mechanistic dehumanization socially structure microaggressions and macroaggressions and the institutional, interpersonal and intrapersonal manifestations generated and fuels by such social forces are at fault, they are all at the very same time examples of manifestations of broken human relations skills, the loss of civility, and so forth.

As I argued: “..human relations that uses an epistemological perspective to understand the significance of results for social theory. He [Columbia University Teacher’s College professor Paul Byers, with whom I took a course on nonverbal communication] distinguished between findings that stress what people do and those that help us think about who people are. This distinction between does and is, between doing and being, is not a trivial one. Byers felt that research should help us expand the horizons of our research domain.” (Dover, M. A. (2016). The moment of microaggression: The experience of acts of oppression, dehumanization and exploitation. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 26(7-8), 575-586, https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2016.1237920 (open acess).

Or, as the late social work and political activist Verne Weed, who lived across the street from the school warned me, when I became Student Union President,“Be political, not politicized.”

Pro-Israel and Pro-Palestine activists clearly became politicized very quickly and many acted in despicable manners. I do try to avoid any assertion of quanitative similarity in terms of extent and seriousness; that is an empirical question.

Enter an administration whose actions will go down in history as among the worst examples of crisis management in academic history. Meanwhile, we now see the result: a loss of our fundamental understanding of the meaning of basic civil liberties, a lesson which Columbia’s own Institute is trying to deliver in the statement quoted by the Not In Our Name letter from thousands of Jewish faculty across the country (200 more since I signed).

3/18/2025: It is with great sadness and no little anger that I writing in my beat on Middle East Peace with Justice of the outrageous resumption by Israel of massive bombing of Gaza. But will this lead to a mass peace movement, as it should, and to responsible action. Now, it will also no doubt lead to a resumption of actions which are relevant to this topic: a resurgence of both Anti-ZionISTism and of anti-Palestinianism, especially on soft targets like students on the campuses of public universities, whose every utterance and action will begin to be investigated by the thought police from the left and from the right.

From the right, look for more Canary Mission and other groups who will accuse anyone who objects to Israel’s resumed bombing of being antisemitic. From the far left, including Jews on the far left or hardline BDSers, we will see pressure on Jews to declare they too are anti-Zionist and if not, accuse them of being genocide deniers. I’ve warned that last accusation before but thankfully, so far, the number of instances has been minimal. I hope it does not increase.

Here is the BDS called for today: “Israeli forces, fully supported and armed by the US and other western powers, have massacred within hours over 400 Palestinians–most murdered while sleeping. In a grave escalation of their genocide against 2.3 million Palestinians, they have shattered the recent, already fragile ceasefire, carpet bombing the illegally occupied and besieged Gaza Strip. Entire families have been wiped out. Hospitals are overwhelmed. Gaza is burning once again. The humanitarian situation is dire. People of conscience around the world must act NOW! All across the West Bank, as well as in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, the US-Israeli genocidal axis is escalating its crimes and its simultaneous destruction of international law. Mass Mobilizations and Pressure Campaigns. Organize now!”

Will that produce any actual meaningful results? No; perhaps another student government somewhere will call for divestment, but the worst failed boycott campaign in the history of boycott campaigns will continue to pressure people to join, claiming they have “no position” on a two state solution, while the rest of the world tries, somehow, desperately, to insist on the only position solution to this fratricide, because that is what it really is, fratricide two peoples bound to the same land. ­

3/17/2025: Alex Kane’s piece in Jewish Currents on Students for Justice in Palestine suggests the need for a more fearless examination of the divide between “solidarity” with Palestine and US-based students and others who claim to be “part of” the “the resistance,” meaning the five groups which carried out the 10/07/23 attack, of which several are declared by the US or othe nations to be terrorist groups, material support for which can have legal consequences. Almost immediately after 10/07/23, on private listservs on the democratic left, I referred to it as a “miltary and terrorist attack,” and began familiarizing myself with international law that under certain circumstances justifies armed resistance against an occupation. But two things on that: it depends on the type of occupation and its origin, and it does not justify committing war crimes in the name of resistance. It seems no one wants to really discuss this.

I called it that immediately, albeing not publicly, not to justify any of it but to clarify its nature. Many have sought to defend 10/07 on the specious grounds that international law does includes the right of armed resistance to occupation. That is true, but it fails to recognize a couple of things. First, the West Bank and Gaza were relinquished by Jordan and Egypt very soon, and thus the nature of the occupation was not like the kinds of occupation that that provision of international law was originally intended for (a nation whose territory was occupied by another without cause.

At some point (fact check), the UN itself made Israel the occupying power, a responsibility which continued, even after it removed all settlements in Gaza. Here is something from The Atlantic Council on that, to which I will return soon.

That special assigned responsibility didn’t make it immune to responsibility for the conditions of life in Gaza and the West Bank, but may have removed it from the applicability of the right of armed resistance. It would be valuable to ascertain if that is the case.

Second, resistance acts can’t be war crimes themselves, as was every unguided rocket, every taking hostage taking of individuals not in active military service and on-duty at the time, at an actual military facility (no, police stations do not count). Just saying what must be said. My focus is and has been on car crimes by both Israel and the Gaza paramilitary forces and to not week to “equalize” or even compare them and certainly not to apply to them absolutist terms or reified rhetoric.

3/13/2025: Must reading from Tim Snyder on “Antisemitism” and Anti-Semitism, which has inspired me to change the name of the title of my piece below to Anti-Zionism, Anti-ZionISTism, and Anti-Palestinianism. See my new Tinyurl to the latest version of this essay: https://tinyurl.com/AntiZionISTism which is still here in Beats abut may soon be an essay published here or elsewhere and under Essays.

3/12/2025 See my post/beat on the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil.

3/10/25

From the start, however, I have been studying both Anti-ZionISTism and Anti-Palestinianism, both of which are dangerous. There has been an upsure of these two phenomena just when there is a ceasefire in Gaza and there are hopeful signs of a long-term truce based on an offer from Hamas (see my beat on Middle East Peace with Justice). The origins of these two phenomena is not just angry pro-Palestinian individuals and Pro-Israel individuals but in vile and extremist groups which whip up harassment and discrimination on campus and in our communities. This reminds me of 1973 when the Paris Peace negotiations were underway. The far “left” in the US (mainly a key Trotskyist group) literally protested the process and tried to disrupt it. I predicted in fall 2023 that if a settlement got near in the Middle East, there would be efforts to disrupt it and now we are seeing this happen.

See this AP report on the revocation of the visa and green card of Mahmoud Khalil, former Palestininian grad student at Columbia. According to JTS: “J Street U, the liberal Israel lobby’s college arm, said it “does not endorse Khalil’s actions or positions,” but added, “We are appalled by the dangerous precedent set by his arrest. Our community can and must stand up for constitutional rights for all, even those with whom we may strongly disagree.”

Here is a report from WAPO on the intensification of pro-Hamas rhetoric on campus. This version of anti-Zionism has time and again turned into anti-ZionISTism aimed at Jewish students; to deny this is naive and even a dangerous surrender to growing antisemitism on campus. Yes, there is mass petition in support of the arrested studentand permanent resident Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student. It refers to “zionist harassment campaigns” including by Canary Mission. That may be true, but I’m not about to sign a petition with that phrase zionist harassment, as opposed to one that is concerned about civil liberties. I would sign a petition defending his right to due process. The substance of the matter should be a matter of the equal protection of the law on persons who are permanent residents. But this one case, from what I can see, has all of the elements of anti-ZionISTism and anti-Palestinianism all wrapped up into one situation: the larger situation at my MSSW alma mater, Columbia University.

My notion of anti-ZionISTism, in your face discrmination against people mainly for supporting the right of the State of Israel to exist, even those of us strongly critical of the occupation of Palestine, is a concept that is essential to understand. The substack of Max Sawitsky has borrowed my concept, but I haven’t written about it publicly. Yes, there is a database, and I will link to it here, but I have work to do. I’ll speak out when I can. (To refer to my motto, something once said by Harry Belafonte.) My plan was not to do so until after a permanent ceasefire in the Israel/Gaza war. But this article prompted to say something. Stay tuned. Write me for a draft of my essage.