Three Falsehoods about Antisemitism -- And One Truth

Key Findings:

Three widely held conceptions regarding antisemitism are discussed and debunked. The author suggests a rethink of mainstream ideas around what antisemitism looks like in Western society, and offers an alternate path forward. 

The first falsehood is that antisemitism appears to be a mysterious form of hatred chalked up to senseless bigotry. Understanding antisemitism in a true sense means ceasing to underestimate its origins and driving intentions. Historically, antisemitism came into play in a very deliberate way, and continues to in the present day:

“Before we think of antisemitism as mere bigotry, then, it’s worth also thinking about it as the expression of its own set of ideas: anti-freedom, anti-particularity, anti–universal morality, anti- nonconformity — in all, the ideas of anti-Judaism” 

The second falsehood is it can be equated to racism and ethnic bigotry.  Though it is true that antisemitism has been expressed through explicit racism in the past, it is not to be fully equated with it, as this is only one element of several that characterize it. The author states that antisemitism is also a political hatred, a religious hatred, and due to its paradoxical nature, often positions the antisemite as the underdog. No other form of racism puts the oppressor in this position.

The third falsehood is that education is the antidote to antisemitism, particularly Holocaust education. The author argues that antisemitism in the 21st century rests on a lack of critical thinking skills and the ability of an individual to discern between fact and opinion, not necessarily the content that the individual is presented with in an academic setting. For example, Holocaust education on its own in elementary school, middle school, or high school will not prepare the individual for the anti-Zionist rhetoric experienced on college campuses nationwide. 

The one truth the author concludes his essay with is a simple one: “The Jews aren’t going to solve it.” One of the reasons why is that it is not the Jewish people’s issue to solve. The author goes on to suggest that defining antisemitism in a sharper way will pave a path forward, replacing it with its current definition and labeling it as what it truly is— a conspiracy theory against Jews. The author’s final statement is that, in the face of this, the best response would be for Jews to focus on thriving as community and as a united people.