A husband tells his wife he doesn’t see why Israel should exist.
A teacher wants to know why a colleague’s presentation on Gaza is announced in the school bulletin, but doesn’t know how to speak up.
A man critical of Israel’s politics detests the label “self-hating Jew.”
Israel. Anti-Semitism. Topics that push everyone’s buttons.
And topics that were at the forefront of “Finding Our Voice,” a Sunday, Jan. 28 conference organized by the Anti-Defamation League to help Bay Area Jews constructively address anti-Semitism within progressive organizations.
Participants discussed the three aforementioned and inflammatory scenarios during a workshop entitled “Let’s Talk: When There are Differing Perspectives on Zionism and Israel,” one of 30 sessions offered Sunday. Workshops ranged in topic from the history of anti-Semitism to Israel’s social justice climate to talking about Mideast politics.
The small lecture hall that housed “Let’s Talk” was a hotbed of debate, role-playing and even some tears.
“This is very close to the bone for most of us, wherever we stand on the political spectrum,” said Eryn Kalish, workshop moderator and conflict resolution specialist.
“Finding Our Voice,” held at Jewish Community High School of the Bay in San Francisco, brought together 350 people — primarily Jews — to discuss a re-emergence of anti-Semitism locally and nationally.
This anti-Semitism, which panelists and speakers repeatedly referred to as “the new anti-Semitism,” is closely tied to extreme criticism of Israel. In the past, most anti-Semitism came from the political right; today it comes from the left — a movement that prides itself on inclusiveness and liberalism and yet increasingly allows anti-Semitic language at events and political rallies.
“Thinking this is ‘more of the same’ has disastrous results,” said David Hirsh, a University of London sociology professor. “These are different phenomena, different contexts. We’re living in a different world. We shouldn’t think of this like it’s Hungary in 1941.”
Workshop lectures and discussions were often intense and brutally honest.
During his workshop about the surfacing of contemporary anti-Semitism, Hirsh showed his standing-room only audience a cartoon depicting Ehud Olmert and Uncle Sam swimming in a pool of blood shaped like the Gaza Strip, and a poster calling for a boycott of Israeli goods featuring an orange dripping with blood.
“Israel does kill children. That is not made up,” Hirsh said. “But to label Israel a child-killing state … is myth, created out of truth.”
He said anti-Semitism differs from racism in that the latter is often thought of as an institutional problem, deeply embedded in a nation or city’s psyche. Anti-Semitism, however, is said to be “unintentional,” as the person who said or created something anti-Semitic claims that was never the intention. It allows for anti-Semitism to be labeled as something perceived, and not real, which is untrue, he said.
Hirsh’s colleague, respected British lawyer and researcher Anthony Julius, delivered the keynote address.
“Our failure to take anti-Semitism seriously is more of a problem than anti-Semitism itself,” he said.
He rejected the claim that all critics of Israel are labeled as anti-Semites.
“I’ve never heard AIPAC or Abe Foxman [national director of the ADL] say that. No one is so stupid to say that,” Julius said. “You only have to read Ha’aretz everyday to see that criticism is like a project within Israel and for Jews.”
Sarah Church, 24, said she enjoyed the historical and factual context within which Julius spoke. She found the conference interesting, she said, and learned new ways to frame the conversation about Israel and anti-Semitism.
She was disappointed, though, that there were so few of her peers in attendance. She couldn’t pinpoint why.
“Young people are interested and engaged with this issue. They really care about Israel and are struggling to form their own opinions, like everyone else,” she said.
Julius concluded his speech by saying that “no bumper sticker-response will address anti-Semitism.” Rather, there must be a collective, communal effort to reason, debate and discuss a difficult topic.
Absent from the discussion Sunday were three leftist Jewish groups: Tikkun, Jewish Voice for Peace and the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace. Representatives for JVP said they were not invited to co-sponsor or help plan the conference.
“Part of the Jewish tradition is having many voices at the table, a diversity of opinions — it’s a great tradition of critical thinking,” said Penny Rosenwasser, a board member for Jewish Voice for Peace. She ended up serving on a conference panel about anti-Semitism in the LGBT community, but was invited by another panelist, not the ADL.
Without JVP or Tikkun, she added, the conference’s scope was limited and incomplete.
However, Jonathan Bernstein, director of the ADL, said there must have been a misunderstanding. “Everyone who wanted to come to the conference was there,” he said. “No one was excluded.”
He added that the intended audience for “Finding Our Voice” was not mainstream Jewish groups or leftist Jewish groups.
“The focus was on Jewish progressives who had been feeling ostracized and excluded, and felt they no longer had a home because their progressive causes were pushing them out,” Bernstein said.
This conference is only a beginning, he added. Presenters and attendants expressed interest in planning another conference, perhaps even committing to an annual event.
“Being Jewish means we don’t just kvetch — we act. It’s part of our responsibly as Jews,” said Steve Rothman, director of the New Israel Fund and a presenter at the conference. “We have an obligation to be involved in social justice.”