Re: Is America a racist nation?
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:50 pm
OPINION
As antisemitism spikes in US, Presidents’ Day reminds us of our nation’s values
A Jew, George Washington proclaimed, would be able to ‘sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree … [with] none to make him afraid.’
By Leonard Saxe February 19, 2024
In 1790, President George Washington visited the Jewish community of Newport, R.I., and in his thank-you letter he assured them that the federal government would sanction neither bigotry nor persecution. A Jew, he proclaimed, would be able to “sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree … [with] none to make him afraid.” At a moment when anti-Jewish hatred has reappeared in American society with newfound ugliness, Presidents’ Day is a reminder of our country’s founding values.
These values have particular resonance for those of us concerned with the recent rise of antisemitic incidents on college campuses. There is fierce debate about where to draw the line between acts, including speech, which are hateful and harmful versus speech that should be protected. Jewish students are the current focus of this clash of values, but the issues are important for all of us, especially for members of other ethnic, racial, and religious groups.
Antisemitism is perhaps one of the world’s oldest and most persistent hatreds. Centuries of persecution and oppression culminated in the Nazi genocide that claimed 6 million Jewish lives. In the decades following World War II, the virus of antisemitism appeared to be dormant. In recent years, however, many classic antisemitic trope and conspiracy theories about Jewish control of the media and plans for world domination have reappeared with the word “Zionist” in place of “Jews.”
The antisemitism virus has survived for so long because it has been able to adapt to new situations. Its mutations make it harder to identify and more difficult to address. These mutations were on display during the eruption of protests that have taken place on many campuses since Hamas brutally attacked Israel on Oct. 7, killing more than 1,200 people and capturing more than 240.
The brutality of Oct. 7 was the worst expression of antisemitism since the Holocaust. However, many students on US college campuses did not seem to recognize it as such. Instead, some students, often at protests led by Students for Justice in Palestine, hailed Hamas fighters as individuals engaged in justified acts of resistance. Acts of terrorism and violations of international law were treated as legitimate political actions.
Several definitions are used to describe contemporary antisemitism. The most progressive one, developed and supported by a broad coalition of academics, is the “Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.” Published in 2021, it was crafted to strengthen efforts to combat antisemitism by clarifying ambiguities present in earlier definitions of antisemitism and providing guidelines that could help ensure that an open debate about political issues concerning “Israel/Palestine” could take place without being framed as antisemitic.
The JDA notes that antisemitism “can be manifested in words, images and deeds,” and illustrated its principles by offering a set of statements about Israel that were identified as “on [their] face” antisemitic or not. Thus, for example, “Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish” was characterized as on its face antisemitic. At the same time, statements “giving full equality to all inhabitants ‘between the river and sea’ ” were not prima facie considered antisemitic. The authors of the JDA argued that the statements “should be read in the light of the others and always with a view to context.”
What is interesting about these examples from the JDA is that, after Oct. 7, they take on different meanings. In the context of the Hamas terrorist attacks, and the group’s own rhetoric, there seems no question that antisemitism was the driving force behind Hamas’s actions. The slogan, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” in context of Hamas’s self-declared holy war against Zionists, is not a statement in support of full equality for Jews and Palestinians.
An empirical question is how the statement is viewed, in particular by Jewish students. My colleagues and I have been interviewing and surveying thousands of Jewish students on campuses since early November. Our recent study is an extension of work we have been doing for many years to understand the experiences of Jewish students on campus and the relationships between them and other student groups. What stands out about their experiences in the aftermath of the Hamas attack is how many perceive their campuses to be hostile to Jews and Israel. The picture is markedly different than a similar study we conducted in 2016.
Many of the recent respondents are concerned about their own safety. Virtually all are concerned about the lives of Israelis, and almost all of them share a concern about the lives of Palestinians. For most of our respondents, who are predominantly liberal, perceptions of hostility toward Jews and Israel are closely associated with concerns about antisemitism on their campus. In particular, the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which might have been considered by many as politically respectable rhetoric prior to Oct. 7, was widely perceived to be antisemitic, particularly by Jewish students who felt that their campuses were hostile to Jews and Israel.
Antisemitism on campus is not limited to speech. On many campuses, Jewish students have experienced acts of violence and harassment. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act obligates colleges and universities to ensure that all students have equitable opportunities to pursue their education. The same rules that protect students from race-based hate also protect Jewish students. Washington’s promise to a Jewish community at the birth of the nation has an expression in present-day law.
Colleges and universities should be sacred spaces for creating and sharing knowledge. But this mission is compromised in environments where students are uncomfortable expressing their religious, racial, or ethnic identities. Addressing the harm done by a hostile environment is not a zero-sum game: what one group gains, another loses. Concern for Jewish students, many of whom are deeply affected by the Hamas-Israel war, should not be an exception to how we treat students but a model for how universities carry out their ethical and legal obligations.
As we mark President Washington’s birthday and the founding of our constitutional democracy, it is a time to remember that liberty comes with a responsibility that we share together.
Leonard Saxe is the director of the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies and the Steinhardt Social Research Institute at Brandeis University.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/02/19/ ... ntentQuery
As antisemitism spikes in US, Presidents’ Day reminds us of our nation’s values
A Jew, George Washington proclaimed, would be able to ‘sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree … [with] none to make him afraid.’
By Leonard Saxe February 19, 2024
In 1790, President George Washington visited the Jewish community of Newport, R.I., and in his thank-you letter he assured them that the federal government would sanction neither bigotry nor persecution. A Jew, he proclaimed, would be able to “sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree … [with] none to make him afraid.” At a moment when anti-Jewish hatred has reappeared in American society with newfound ugliness, Presidents’ Day is a reminder of our country’s founding values.
These values have particular resonance for those of us concerned with the recent rise of antisemitic incidents on college campuses. There is fierce debate about where to draw the line between acts, including speech, which are hateful and harmful versus speech that should be protected. Jewish students are the current focus of this clash of values, but the issues are important for all of us, especially for members of other ethnic, racial, and religious groups.
Antisemitism is perhaps one of the world’s oldest and most persistent hatreds. Centuries of persecution and oppression culminated in the Nazi genocide that claimed 6 million Jewish lives. In the decades following World War II, the virus of antisemitism appeared to be dormant. In recent years, however, many classic antisemitic trope and conspiracy theories about Jewish control of the media and plans for world domination have reappeared with the word “Zionist” in place of “Jews.”
The antisemitism virus has survived for so long because it has been able to adapt to new situations. Its mutations make it harder to identify and more difficult to address. These mutations were on display during the eruption of protests that have taken place on many campuses since Hamas brutally attacked Israel on Oct. 7, killing more than 1,200 people and capturing more than 240.
The brutality of Oct. 7 was the worst expression of antisemitism since the Holocaust. However, many students on US college campuses did not seem to recognize it as such. Instead, some students, often at protests led by Students for Justice in Palestine, hailed Hamas fighters as individuals engaged in justified acts of resistance. Acts of terrorism and violations of international law were treated as legitimate political actions.
Several definitions are used to describe contemporary antisemitism. The most progressive one, developed and supported by a broad coalition of academics, is the “Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.” Published in 2021, it was crafted to strengthen efforts to combat antisemitism by clarifying ambiguities present in earlier definitions of antisemitism and providing guidelines that could help ensure that an open debate about political issues concerning “Israel/Palestine” could take place without being framed as antisemitic.
The JDA notes that antisemitism “can be manifested in words, images and deeds,” and illustrated its principles by offering a set of statements about Israel that were identified as “on [their] face” antisemitic or not. Thus, for example, “Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish” was characterized as on its face antisemitic. At the same time, statements “giving full equality to all inhabitants ‘between the river and sea’ ” were not prima facie considered antisemitic. The authors of the JDA argued that the statements “should be read in the light of the others and always with a view to context.”
What is interesting about these examples from the JDA is that, after Oct. 7, they take on different meanings. In the context of the Hamas terrorist attacks, and the group’s own rhetoric, there seems no question that antisemitism was the driving force behind Hamas’s actions. The slogan, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” in context of Hamas’s self-declared holy war against Zionists, is not a statement in support of full equality for Jews and Palestinians.
An empirical question is how the statement is viewed, in particular by Jewish students. My colleagues and I have been interviewing and surveying thousands of Jewish students on campuses since early November. Our recent study is an extension of work we have been doing for many years to understand the experiences of Jewish students on campus and the relationships between them and other student groups. What stands out about their experiences in the aftermath of the Hamas attack is how many perceive their campuses to be hostile to Jews and Israel. The picture is markedly different than a similar study we conducted in 2016.
Many of the recent respondents are concerned about their own safety. Virtually all are concerned about the lives of Israelis, and almost all of them share a concern about the lives of Palestinians. For most of our respondents, who are predominantly liberal, perceptions of hostility toward Jews and Israel are closely associated with concerns about antisemitism on their campus. In particular, the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which might have been considered by many as politically respectable rhetoric prior to Oct. 7, was widely perceived to be antisemitic, particularly by Jewish students who felt that their campuses were hostile to Jews and Israel.
Antisemitism on campus is not limited to speech. On many campuses, Jewish students have experienced acts of violence and harassment. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act obligates colleges and universities to ensure that all students have equitable opportunities to pursue their education. The same rules that protect students from race-based hate also protect Jewish students. Washington’s promise to a Jewish community at the birth of the nation has an expression in present-day law.
Colleges and universities should be sacred spaces for creating and sharing knowledge. But this mission is compromised in environments where students are uncomfortable expressing their religious, racial, or ethnic identities. Addressing the harm done by a hostile environment is not a zero-sum game: what one group gains, another loses. Concern for Jewish students, many of whom are deeply affected by the Hamas-Israel war, should not be an exception to how we treat students but a model for how universities carry out their ethical and legal obligations.
As we mark President Washington’s birthday and the founding of our constitutional democracy, it is a time to remember that liberty comes with a responsibility that we share together.
Leonard Saxe is the director of the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies and the Steinhardt Social Research Institute at Brandeis University.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/02/19/ ... ntentQuery