Anti-Semites now convince themselves that Israel should die but they have nothing against Jews.
To counter the anti-Semitism of today, one must understand that it differs from the anti-Semitism of the medieval period or 20th-century Europe.
“Know your enemy.”
It is not enough to decry the murder of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington and the firebombing of 12 marchers in Boulder.
It is not enough to “harden” Jewish institutions’ security.
It is not enough to appeal to the conscience of well meaning politicians and others.
It is not enough to “fight back” by teaching Jews how to use weapons.
To win this new battle against anti-Semitism it is necessary to understand its new emphasis. It is new not just because it is more widespread than in previous decades.
It is new because it is a mutation on the old virus, to use the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks’ metaphor.
Sheer hate is irrational. Jews were vermin, said the Nazis. Jews were killers of Jesus, said the Crusaders. Jews were subversives, said the Communists. The common theme was sheer animus. The reasons for the hate did not need to make sense. Fundamentally, there didn’t need to be reasons at all.
By contrast, in America today — from the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion last Passover to the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC two weeks ago to the Pearl Street Mall in Boulder on June 1 — anti-Semitism has taken on a new hue. There is animus aplenty, to be sure, but it is not irrational, strictly speaking. It purports to be the conclusion of a reasoned arguments. It is as uninformed and ignorant as always, but it presents differently.
It is, mostly, a focus on Israel and Jews who support Israel, based on lies about Israel. But not necessarily intentional lies. The new anti-Semitism is grounded in a massive distortion of history.
The new anti-Semitism is the kind of reasoning that allows contemporary anti-Semites to convince themselves that they can wish Israel and Israelis dead but do not have a thing against Jews.
A defender of the murderer of the two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington justified the killing while also saying is is ridiculous to regard him as an anti-Semite.
This is a new animal. No Nazi, Crusader or Communist would say he has nothing against Jews.
The origin of the Israel-based, argument-based anti-Semitism is, perhaps, the founding document of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). It is replete with denials of any Jewish rights in Palestine, alongside affirmations of the right of Jews to be Jews. The PLO says that Judaism is only a religion and the claim of Jews to Palestinian is a distortion of Judaism by Zionists.
This kind of lie animates the new anti-Semite.
Israel is integral to Judaism biblically, theologically, geographically, historically and archaeologically.
What is required to counter the new lie? It was summed up perfectly by David Wolpe after Harvard’s president couldn’t tell Congress that, as a matter of morality and policy, the advocacy on the Harvard campus of genocide against Jews “depended on the context.” Wolpe said: There is a need for a “a great unlearning.”
Among the items in the anti-Semitic playbook of today that need to be unlearned are these:
• Jews are not native to Palestine; Jews in Palestine are no different from Europeans who settled North America; Jews have no history in Palestine. An absurd variation on this lie: Jews are not even Jews, not descendants of the ancient Israelites, but of some mythical mass conversion in Asia.
• Zionism is a political movement whose goal is to build a Jewish society by displacing a native population.
• Israel is inherently an “occupation.”
• Most Palestinians in Israel today are native to the land.
From these major lies flow an endless supply of corollaries, among them: the murder, rape and kidnapping of Jews on Oct. 7, 2023, werenot only legitimate acts of self-defense but cause for celebration. The “occupiers” “deserved” it.
To be sure, the lies told by the new anti-Semitism do share characteristics with the old anti-Semitism, that is, they are irrational in being contrary to fact. Examples of this type of lie: Israel Defense Force soldiers are cruel; it is irrelevant (if even acknowledged) that the IDF informs civilian in advance of intended attacks on terrorists in their midst; and the perpetrators of horrific terrorist attacks on Israelis bear no moral responsibility.
• • •
“Know your enemy.”
Let the great unlearning begin.
1. Free speech. To yell fire in a theater — the classic exception to free speech — seems mild in comparison to the violent anti-Semitic rhetoric afloat today. It should not have taken the murder of two innocent Israeli staffers to realize that “Free Palestine” and “Globalize the Intifada” are not affirmative political slogans. They are not “free speech.” They are calls for the death of Jews and Israelis.
The Jewish people and all people of good will must stimulate this “great unlearning” of tolerance for violent anti-Israel rhetoric on the grounds that it is free speech.
Calls to violence against Jews — such as “Globalize the Intifada,” “from the River to the Sea” and now, “Free Palestine” — must be identified as such and appropriately stigmatized.
2. Jew-free zones. Whether formal, as on a college campus, or informal, as in social, political or educational circles, exclusion of Jews should be openly confronted, as some courageous parents of Jewish children, discriminated in public school, have done.
3. More speech. The home of a Jewish governor was firebombed last Passover. Who was talking about it? Who was outraged? Where was the inquiry? When was the last time you heard about it? It faded into the background before the Boulder attack last Sunday. This kind of incident — undreamt of in the USA a short decade ago — cannot be “moved on” from.
4. “Pro-Palestinian.” Drop the phrase. It is a lie in the sense that there is nothing affirmative to be achieved for Palestinians by casting Israel as the devil, by ignoring its right to self-defense, by “understanding” Palestinian terrorists. Call the phrase out for what it is: Anti-Israel.
5. Say it like it is. “Post-moral” is an oxymoron. Sinwar, Deif, Haniyeh, not such bad guys? United Healthcare CEO, deserved it? Murder at an event celebrating American Jewish heritage, different from an attack on a Charleston church? Say it like it is. Murder is murder. Rape is rape. Hezbollah is terrorist; ditto, Hamas; ditto, the Boulder flamethrower. It doesn’t matter who the victim is.
Let the great unlearning begin.
© IJN 2025
