Weaponization of antisemitism
As a daughter of Holocaust survivors and a progressive Jew, I am extremely alarmed by the weaponization of antisemitism by President Donald Trump to clamp down on left-wing protesters or anyone with whom he does not agree. Not only is the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil a violation of his free-speech rights, but arresting and detaining someone who did not commit a crime resembles the actions of an authoritarian government. (“As ICE targets a Palestinian activist, some Jews are asking if this is the fight against antisemitism they signed up for,” March 12)
If Trump really cared about antisemitism, why not arrest Elon Musk for his Nazi salutes? The facts are that Musk and Vice President J.D. Vance went to Germany last month to support the neo-Nazi AfD party in the election and that Trump applauded their efforts. In addition, Trump pardoned hundreds of neo-Nazi white nationalists from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. He also called the neo-Nazis who marched in Charlottesville “very fine people” and has reportedly expressed admiration of Hitler.
It should be obvious that he is simply using the guise of antisemitism as a way to silence and deter activists who criticize Israel and exercise their free-speech rights to protest the bombings and other violations in Gaza. It should be clear to everyone that Trump’s behavior these last two months has been akin to that of a fascist dictator. We all need to fight for this democracy and not allow these vile intimidation tactics to silence us.
Rhonda Findling
Sebastopol
Trump’s hypocrisy on antisemitism
I don’t know if Mahmoud Khalil is an antisemite, but the Trump administration’s attempt to deport him on grounds that he is antisemitic is beyond hypocritical. (“As ICE targets a Palestinian activist, some Jews are asking if this is the fight against antisemitism they signed up for,” online March 12)
President Donald Trump has coddled avowed neo-Nazis and antisemites his entire political career, starting when he retweeted an antisemitic meme during his first campaign. After the Charlottesville rally, where white supremacists chanted “Jews will not replace us!,” Trump said that there were good people on both sides. Some of the insurgents on that “beautiful day,” Jan. 6, 2021, wore shirts that read “6MWE,” which stands for “6 million wasn’t enough.” Nick Fuentes, an avowed neo-Nazi, dined with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in November 2022.
It is no surprise that Trump has called for ethnic cleansing in Gaza. He may not be a neo-Nazi, but he certainly talks like one.
Danny Yanow
San Francisco
Hyperfocus on ‘Jewish safety’
Leo Pfeffer of the American Jewish Congress, one of the key lawyers behind the Supreme Court’s midcentury religious freedom cases, explained that “American Judaism is perhaps the most vigorous, articulate, and unyielding champion” of pluralism. Pluralism finally gave American Jews real security and equality. This was not only idealism, but self-interest.
One could have imagined a Pfeffer-style response to the campus protests of the last year, one that prioritized the safety and free-speech rights of students of all faiths and political persuasions. Instead, many American Jewish organizations aimed lower, with a hyperfocus on “Jewish safety.”
Although college campuses surely host some antisemitism, many framed the protests themselves as a threat to the safety of Jews on campus — notwithstanding that many protesters were Jewish and faced sporadic violence. They conflated discomfort over political views with physical threats, and criticism of Israel with material support for terrorism.
This strategy may have yielded success with the Trump administration’s withholding of funding to Columbia and with ICE’s arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia protester with a green card. Khalil’s arrest was urged or applauded by some Jewish groups, including the Anti-Defamation League. (“ICE detains Palestinian protest leader with green card at Columbia,” March 10) Although we don’t know all the facts yet, if Khalil is ultimately deported merely for engaging in disfavored speech, it will be in part due to American Jews’ political advocacy.
Midcentury liberals like Pfeffer knew that Jewish safety was better achieved through pluralism than through special pleading. Jews may live to regret ditching the pluralism of Pfeffer for the ethnocentrism and illiberalism of Trump.
Simon Jacobs
Berkeley
Destruction of higher learning
On March 7, the Trump administration canceled $400 million in grants and contracts to Columbia University designed to punish the institution for its handling of the student demonstrations against Israel and its lack of protection of Jewish students.
UC Berkeley and nine other universities may well be next. Many in the Jewish community are celebrating these steps as justified to hold universities accountable. This single-minded focus that turns Jews into victims serves to distract from the more frightening process of the destruction of free speech, academic freedom and the teaching of critical thinking that is the imperative of a university. (“As ICE targets a Palestinian activist, some Jews are asking if this is the fight against antisemitism they signed up for,” online March 12)
While I deplore the antisemitism that the protests revealed, there is another dimension that is not being addressed: the wholesale attack on higher education that the White House is undertaking. The effects of these cuts coupled with the freezing of overhead costs that sustain research in the United States will have major repercussions in medical research, health, socioeconomic innovation and the knowledge economy.
American universities have been world leaders in so many fields contributing to the well-being of all. The destruction of the so-called “elite” schools, a small number in the 6,000 U.S. colleges and universities, will precipitate the decline of American leadership. The only people who benefit from a poorly educated populace are those who wield power.
It is stunning that the “people of the book,” the Jewish community, which has placed a very high value on education, would tolerate, indeed support, the destruction of the very institutions that have contributed to the progress of humankind. There has been little response to this insidious process from our Jewish leaders, media or the rabbinate. Jews are being used again, and it is time to take a stand for democracy and freedom.
Harvey M. Weinstein
Walnut Creek
Don’t shoot the messenger
In his March 7 article (“Israeli officials are criticizing Oscar-winner ‘No Other Land.’ So are Palestinian activists”), JTA’s Ben Sales provided a balanced overview of the various opinions of the film “No Other Land.” He gave an extensive overview of the strange alignment between critics of the film on the pro-Israel side and the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) supporters on the pro-Palestinian side.
As American Jews, we should not lose focus of the moral problem this debate represents on the Israeli side. Most of the critics of the film in Israel prefer to shoot the messengers — the creators of the film — and avoid dealing with the message. Many use the massacre of Oct. 7, 2023, as a fig leaf to cover immoral actions by the Israel Defense Forces that have been going on for two decades and to object to any criticism of Israel.
Eran Halperin, a Hebrew University psychology professor, describes in a March 4 Facebook post the psychology behind the criticism of the movie and the fact that most Israeli critics haven’t seen and don’t want to see it. He describes the cognitive dissonance mechanisms that we use to protect the Israeli narrative. He also discusses the perception that since we are good and moral people, it cannot be true that we do bad and immoral things.
The moral problem is that Israel does many immoral and bad things to protect its narrative.
The real problem the movie brings to the surface is Israel’s policy of forcing Palestinians in Area C of the West Bank to move to the main cities in Area A and to vacate parts of the West Bank, thus creating continuity of Palestinian-free land. This happens extensively in the Jordan Valley, too, in attacks against Palestinians by settlers backed by the IDF.
“No Other Land” is an important movie for every Jew and Israeli to watch. It is important for us to ask ourselves if this is the moral standard we want history to judge us by.
Itzik Goldberger
Lafayette
A better Jewish response to refugees
I empathize and sympathize with Analucía Lopezrevoredo, who wrote asking “Where is the robust Jewish response to the immigrant crisis?” (Feb. 21)
I agree that such a response is desirable and very much needed. My parents were Holocaust survivors from Poland, and I was born in Germany after the war. Following a traumatic Atlantic crossing, my parents and I were unwanted, unwelcome and unsupported in the U.S. — trauma piled onto my already highly traumatized parents. I wish that the positive image we’d like to have of the Jewish response to refugees had been true for our group, but it wasn’t.
I hope that maybe someday our Jewish response will better reflect the higher ideal cited in this op-ed.
Esther Erman
Mountain View
Modern-day blood libels
I’m highly disappointed in the article, “Protesters call for ‘intifada’ outside Israeli dance performances at UC Berkeley.” (Feb. 24)
The printed quotations were shamefully unbalanced and just parroted the modern-day blood libels targeting Israel and the Jewish people. There was not one quote from an attendee criticizing the ludicrous canards the demonstrators aimed at Israel. I am a proud Zionist and, contrary to what one quoted demonstrator shouted, that is not a crime.
Mark Rudow
Santa Rosa
Bias of Liberated Ethnic Studies
Laura Einhorn’s recent letter (“Fight for ethnic studies,” March 6) is so off target it deserves an immediate response. Liberated Ethnic Studies not only eliminates the teaching of Jewish history in the United States, but when it does talk about Jews, it is to portray them as oppressors. The creators of Liberated Ethnic Studies endorse the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement and insist on inserting the plight of the Palestinians as a core part of their curriculum in a biased and anti-Israeli narrative.
Holocaust studies are required, but according to a J. article, 74% of school districts in our state ignore that. (“State study on K-12 Holocaust education finds much is left to teachers’ ‘individual initiative,’” Jan. 31)
Liberated Ethnic Studies is the study of power and oppression based on an anti-capitalist ideology. There are other approaches to ethnic studies that promote diversity and understanding of the various ethnic groups in our state.
I urge Einhorn and others to look at the horrific comments made by some members of the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium about Jewish organizations and Zionism both before and after Oct. 7, 2023. I have, and that’s why I am responding to her letter.
Gil Stein
Aptos