Digital Library
Understanding Campus Antisemitism in 2019 and Its Lessons for Pandemic and Post-Pandemic U.S. Campuses
Topic:
Antisemitism & Antizionism, Israel & Regional Politics
Principal Investigators:
Leila Beckwith, Tammi Rossman-Benjamin
Study Date:
2020
Source:
AMCHA
Key Findings:
This report analyzes antisemitic activity on U.S. campuses in 2019. Though at this point, campus antisemitism was often taking place in the school quad, residence halls and classrooms, the findings nevertheless provide important insight into the kinds of antisemitic behavior found on pandemic and post-pandemic “virtual campuses” — which can help anticipate those that will occur in the future. The authors also offer practical and innovative solutions for ensuring the safety and wellbeing of Jewish students on whatever kind of campuses they will find themselves.
The following emerging and continuing trends in antisemitic activity found on U.S. campuses in 2019 are believed to continue in virtual or physical campus spaces into the second half of 2020 and beyond:
1. Continuing decrease in classical antisemitic harassment (down 49% from 203 incidents in 2018 to 104 in 2019), continuing increase in anti-Zionist harassment (up 60% from 121 incidents in 2018 to 192 in 2019).
2. Israel-related incidents of antisemitic harassment far more likely to occur online or be adaptable to online campuses (72% in 2019) than classical antisemitism (12% in 2019).
3. Strong correlation between academic BDS and harassment of Jewish students through: Boycotting of Educational Programs (up by 100% in 2019); Denigrating (up by 67% in 2019); Suppression of Expression (up by 69% in 2019); Discrimination (up by 51% in 2019).
4. Dramatic increase in challenges to IHRA Definition of Antisemitism. The vast majority of incidents (94%) were expressed by students affiliated with anti-Zionist student groups or faculty who support academic boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against Israel. Schools with incidents of challenging the IHRA definition of Antisemitism (to which Jewish Voice for Peace was strongly linked) were more likely to have acts of Israel-related behavior targeting students for harm.
Methodology:
Data collected in 2019 by AMCHA’s Antisemitism Tracker (a tool which analyzes submitted incident reports, campus police logs, media accounts, social media postings and on-line recordings from 2015 to the present that both: occurred on U.S. college or university campuses; and contain antisemitic content identified by AMCHA researchers) was pulled for this study.
Incidents identified as “Targeting Jewish Students and Staff for Harm” involve one or more of the following behaviors: Physical Assault, Discrimination, Destruction of Property, Genocidal Expression, Bullying, Denigrating, Suppression of Speech/Movement/Assembly. Language or imagery identified as “Antisemitic Expression” involves one or more of the following types of expression: Historical Antisemitism, Condoning Terrorism against Israel or Jews, Denying Jews Self-Determination, Demonization of Israel.
“Incidents of classic antisemitism” are those that demonstrate anti-Jewish animus on the part of the perpetrators, either through use of language or imagery containing anti-Jewish messages, or through actions targeting identifiably Jewish individuals or objects. “Israel-related incidents,” are those that demonstrate anti-Israel animus on the part of the perpetrators, either through use of language or imagery containing anti-Israel messages, or through actions targeting identifiably pro-Israel individuals or objects. Incidents can be identified as having both classic antisemitic and anti-Israel aspects, as in the example of a voicemail message that included both classic Holocaust denial and accusations of Jews "extorting Palestine for a century.”
Incidents of antisemitic targeting were identified as Online if they occurred via email, text or on the internet (including on social media) in online campus news media (e.g. student newspapers), on organizational or individual websites or blogs, in webinars, etc. Incidents were identified as Online-Adaptable if they occurred on a physical campus, but in forums that are now routinely held via online platforms such as Zoom.
Behavior was identified as having implemented (or attempted to implement) the academic boycott of Israel when it met one of two sets of criteria stated in the official guidelines of the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI).
Rhetoric including one or more of the following arguments was identified as a challenge to the IHRA definition of antisemitism: (1) Zionism is not an inherent part of Judaism or Jewish identity (2) Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism (3) Zionism is itself antisemitic (4) Anti-Zionism is opposition to antisemitism.