Skip to content

How much antisemitism is there on university campuses?

Published on 52 Comments on How much antisemitism is there on university campuses?

First things first: maybe I'm an idiot. It's always a possibility.

But more and more I find myself wondering: Where is all the antisemitism on university campuses that we hear so much about? Are there examples? I'm very much not talking here about merely pro-Palestinian activities. Nor about "river to the sea" or any of that nonsense. Nor BDS or other mainstream anti-Israel activity. Nor a mere absence of statements condemning something or other.

I'm talking about ordinary antisemitism. Swastikas, "money grubbing Jews," that sort of thing. Violence against Jewish students, of course. Shouting down Jewish speakers who aren't even talking about the war. Explicit approval of Hamas would also count in my book.

I'm not asking about this because I doubt it's happened. I'd be shocked if it hasn't. What I want to know is whether it's widespread and of long standing. Is it?

52 thoughts on “How much antisemitism is there on university campuses?”

  1. Salamander

    Umm -- the pro--Palestine, anti-Bibi, and anti-zionist stuff IS what modern American antisemitism is mostly about. At least, among Lefties. By this new, improved standard, a huge proportion of Jews are anti-semites.

    Proving once again that words have no meaning.

    1. KenSchulz

      +1, sadly.
      Seriously, I take issue with Kevin labeling BDS as ‘anti-Israel’; it is anti-current-Israeli-government-policy. Boycotts and sanctions are nonviolent means of pressuring governments or businesses to change their policies.

      2. MarissaTipton

        I just got paid 7268 Dollars Working off my Laptop this month. And if you think that’s zc10 cool, My Divorced friend has twin toddlers and made 0ver $ 13892 her first m0nth. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to as30 work for so much less.

        This is what I do............................> > > https://dailyincome41.blogspot.com/

  2. Lawrence Sportello

    East Village NYCer here.

    I've asked some of my Jewish friends this question, and the responses have been (generally) (a) they had not personally experienced threats, violence or intimidation but (b) they had friends who had.

    I'd also like to know who is committing these offenses. Traditional anti-semites who feel newly empowered? I'm not seeing anti-semitism in this neighborhood.

    1. Joel

      Hmm. This reminds me of the claims that soldiers returning from Vietnam were being spat upon. Nobody personally witnessed it, but they had friends who had or had heard of it.

      I've been on one or another university campus continuously since I started college in 1973. I haven't seen any trend or uptick in antisemitism.

      BTW, any member of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs qualify as semites.

      2. Kalimac

        "...Arabs qualify as semites."

        You are confusing the word "anti-semites" with the thing it's intended to describe. That is at least naive and probably disingenuous.

          1. Kalimac

            This is the first time I've seen a projection of a claim of projection. You posted a definition of "semites" in the context of a discussion of anti-semitism, which you should know perfectly well is not about the technical definition of "semites" but is an old word referring to Jews. To pretend otherwise is at least naive and probably disingenuous.

    2. Austin

      “…they had friends who had.”

      Ugh. The internet and political discourse would be a lot better if discussions revolved exclusively around “things I directly experienced” vs “things someone I know experienced” and especially “things someone I know told me someone they know experienced.”

  3. lower-case

    this is just another attempt at 'both sides-ing' the issue

    trump praised the 'jews will not replace us' crowd, so now the right needs to find a few lefties to even the score

    and if they can shit on colleges in general (since you can't have any civic institution to the left of christian nationalists), that just sweetens the pot

    1. ProgressOne

      "so now the right needs to find a few lefties to even the score"

      At a RW blog, I have argued with others BEFORE the current Hamas-Israeli war about whether there is a problem with antisemitism on the left. I said there is not. They always say look at the "squad". I point out that they are just opposing certain Israeli policies, they are not hostile toward Jews. They completely reject this point of view. Supporting Palestinians in any way over Israelis is antisemitism to them. They take this as a matter of faith, so you can't argue with them.

      And they don't think it's just a few lefties who are antisemites. They think it's pervasive and normal on the left. And they see this belief as a shiny new Trumpian-style weapon for them.

      1. lower-case

        right wing extremists claim to believe democrats are communists and pedophiles too; they'll claim to believe anything that allows them to demonize liberals and shut down any sort of rational discussion

        about 10% of the right believes there's a moral justification for slaughtering the opposition and claiming the liberals 'gave us no choice but to shoot them'

        another 70% wouldn't actually shoot, they just wouldn't get in the way

        but the latter would say they did this 'more in sadness than in anger', which allows them to see themselves as good moral people

        what's really unknown is what would motivate that 10% to get up off their lazy boys and start shooting; given the vitriol i'm kinda surprised more of them didn't come in heavy on j6

        i suspect it was because deep inside their lizard brains there was a recognition that they didn't have an actual plan to implement or the numbers to pull it off, and they knew the penalties for committing a felony while armed are pretty severe

        so you got a half-assed clown car coup in support of the half-assed clown car presidency

        1. lower-case

          wrote the above then saw this:

          Fox News’ Jesse Watters reacts to the Colorado Supreme Court ruling: “The left wants violence”

          JESSE WATTERS (HOST): Every time Trump's arrested, he becomes more powerful in the eyes of the voters. What's going to happen when they take him off the ballot? They're turning Trump into the greatest political underdog America's ever witnessed. They're setting up the greatest comeback story in American political history.

          They say they're protecting us from danger, but Trump's not a danger to us, he's a danger to them. And Americans are starting to ask themselves why. It feels like the left wants violence, because that's where this is going. We're being baited so their actions are justified. That's how it feels. The more the left overplays their hand, the scarier this gets.

          https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-news-jesse-watters-reacts-colorado-supreme-court-ruling-left-wants-violence

        2. ProgressOne

          If Trump wins the presidency, I hope he has a "half-assed clown car presidency", because the competent version of what Trump wants for his presidency is off course extremely scary. Fortunately, Trump is an idiot, and he'll likely appoint far more idiots this time too. Generally, idiots aren’t very good at getting things done.

        3. Yehouda

          "..they didn't have an actual plan.."

          Lack of plan is what stopped it on j6. Trump thought he can pull off the elections using lies and intimidation of election officers and courts. When that failed he needed to improvise, and do it in short time, and it just didn't work.

          Next time they be ready before the elections.

    1. jemmy

      This wasn't hard to find. Drum "not seeing" it would be malpractice, if I didn't think he wasn't just intentionally pandering to progressive Antisemites.

      I am 100% sick of "Good Progressive" gentiles making excuses for other gentiles' Antisemitism. Absolutely disgusting people.

      I am confident people like Drum know better and are just indulging themselves and others in this low-cost bigotry.

      1. kahner

        This study doesn't seem to answer Kevin's questions because "Specific incidents within each category ranged from observing antisemitic graffiti or flyers on campus, to witnessing problematic online comments about Jews or Israel, to being physically threatened or assaulted", much of which could fall into categories Kevin's explicitly excluding. What do those reported flyers or online comments actually say?

    2. KenSchulz

      There likely has been an increase in antisemitic incidents since October 7, but this is not the study to show that; it is, as titled, about the 'climate' as perceived by Jewish and non-Jewish students. The 'unit of analysis' was individuals, not incidents. The difference is, a swastika spraypainted on a Hillel Center is one incident, but likely would be seen and reported by many students; it is the reports that the survey tallies. No doubt there is a correlation between incidents and reports, but it's a noisy measure.
      Much of the survey is about perceptions of personal safety and intimidation; it's likely press reports and other indirect influences play a part in the changes since 10/7.

      1. jemmy

        The American Left is so stained by this kind of conduct. A stain that will take years to wash off. It's like if liberals had continued to support Stalin after the show trials. Absolutely disgusting.

    3. mcdruid

      Note that the official ADL count of antisemitic incidents include pro-Palestine protests. This likely includes protests calling for a ceasefire.

  6. gibba-mang

    Who were the people calling for the genocide of Israel and Jewish Israelis that door stop impersonator Elise Stefanik was referring to when she grilled the university presidents? I've seen some tick tock and YT videos of college campuses calling out Zionists, which by the way, literally don't exist anymore. Is that calling for genocide? Is River to the Sea a call for genocide? I don't think so but regardless PENN didn't get their annual donation this year. I'm pro Israel, Pro Palestine, anti Bibi and anti Lukid.

    1. KawSunflower

      The phrase "from the river to the sea" is in the document some have referred to as the Hamas constitution, in which they state their intention to destroy Israel.

      I don't approve of Stefanik's behavior at all, because she was trying to equate antisemitism - actually a term invented by those who held a conference on it in Europe in the late 29th century because they approved of it - with outright calls for genocide. She should have been called out for asking questions to which she didn't intend to wait for an answer.

      1. KenSchulz

        The very similar formula appears in the founding platform of Likud: 'between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty'.

    2. Salamander

      Who were the people calling for the genocide of Israel and Jewish Israelis that door stop impersonator Elise Stefanik was referring to"

      I think she was actually referring to her own people: "Jews will not replace us" You know, the standard MAGA nuts. They hate all Jews but love Israel.

      It's a pity that none of the assembled Ivies had enough spunk or wit to tell her that, though.

    1. Solar

      That has to be one of the most biased propaganda spreading titles I've seen.

      One nearly every single question presented the responses were in support of Israel, in some cases overwhelmingly so, yet on one single question 51% said the land should be given to Hamas AND Palestinians(funny how the title left that last bit out), and now the title makes that into "Most young Americans". This despite that those same respondents also support removing Hamas from power and support a two-state solution as the best outcome.

  8. Goosedat

    Jeanine Molloff wrote an article posted at Nation of Change about harassment and assault of Jewish college students but only provided one example of assault - between two Jewish students at Harvard. The supposed person perpetrating the assault was a graduate divinity student and the 'victim' a business major, who was also Israeli. Protesters exclaiming Israel commits crimes was also used as an example of assault because some Jewish students experienced trauma. She explained speech that caused reasonable apprehension of imminent harm is assault. Decrying the imminent harm dropping bombs on civilians causes must not be tolerated when those who associate their religious/ethnic identity with Israel hear such speech. The law firm, Kasowitz Benson Torres plans on filing suits against several universities for their deliberate indifference to their Jewish students apprehension, according to The Gray Zone.

  9. Cycledoc

    I’m Jewish and old. I see a world awash in propaganda with both sides using social media to inflame. This is not to say that the Hamas attack in October and the Israeli response aren’t both horrible. On one side the Israelis maximize the Hamas attacks and hostage seizures and justify their response, but say nothing of the land seizures and the militarized subjugation of the West Bank and Gaza over the last 40 years or so. And Hamas does the inverse, it maximizes the horror of Israel’s Apartheid governance and the Israeli’s military response but minimize the inhumanity of their October attack.

    Here in the U.S. I’ve hear horrified reactions in the media and what appear to be more like psyops between supporters of the two sides than actual physical confrontations. And the suit about inaction to “apprehension” sounds like more propaganda. But then I’m an old guy and thankfully a little out of the mainstream.

    2. tango

      I get irked when people assume that younger people are the mainstream and older folks opinions are irrelevant. Older folks votes and opinions count just as much as younger folks and we should not cede the platform to them.

    3. ScentOfViolets

      Yeah, about that: Here's a little something on The Uses and Abuses of Language in Israel’s War on Palestinians. Lot's of good stuff there, for example:

      Until the 1960s and the first wave of successful anti-colonial independence movements, Zionists were not ashamed to call their project colonialism. Established with the aim of creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine, their institutions from 1897 onward included the Jewish Colonization Association, the Society for the Colonization of the Land of Israel, the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, and the Jewish Colonial Trust. Today, Zionists who resist the description of Israel as a settler colony invoke “complexity,” but before the founding of the Israeli state in 1948—which drove 750,000 Palestinians from their homes—the words “colonial” and “colonization” were the consensus terms used by European countries like Britain, France, Belgium, Spain, and Italy to describe their settlement and control of foreign territories, and they were the words Zionists used to describe theirs.

      "The Olds" as you call them, have either swallowed Israeli pysop propaganda hook, line, and sinker, or are complicit in spreading it. Is it any wonder that the younger set are contemptuous of your putting on airs and privileging your version over theirs? Indeed, we have more than a few useful idiots here ... although, given their history, it's just as probable that they think (explicititly) admitting they were wrong is a sign of weakness.

    4. joem

      Maybe it is an old guy thing. I see it much as you do. Don't remember 48, but have vivid recollections of 56, 67 and 73. Always saw Israel as the embattled little guy. But after the six day war and Israel's understandable desire to increase its safety margins through land expansion, my attitude started to change. Israel was empowered to set the agenda as the Arab states had exhausted military options. They had options: Right of return and a single state; A two state solution with new borders; Push the borders to the Jordan. They chose door number three and made the full turn from the oppressed to the oppressor. In retrospect, the single state solution was probably the only hope for peace as it would have forced coalitions to govern. Eventually they would have become a bit like Belgium or had a civil war. It seems a better outcome that what has actually occurred.

  11. ProbStat

    I very strongly suspect that the worst antisemitism on campuses is not at the elite universities whose presidents testified before Congress or their northeastern peers, but on southern and farm state universities, where anti-Black racism also lingers on.

  12. ey81

    There was a good discussion in the Volokh Conspiracy comments a few weeks back. Chanting "From the river to the sea" is basically the equivalent of displaying a Confederate flag. I'm willing to admit that many people who display a Confederate flag don't intend to express a racist sentiment: they mean to convey (i) pride in Southern culture and (ii) a generally rebellious attitude. (Think Dukes of Hazzard, if you're old enough.) But the flag is certainly experienced as racist. Similarly, there may be non-genocidal interpretations of "from the river to the sea" (i.e., support for a one-state solution), but it is certainly experienced as genocidal by those who hear it.

    OTOH, there is no way to defend the chant "There is only one solution . . . ."

    2. pjcamp1905

      You're clearly not from the South. I am. I've got news. After all, no one is ignorant of what it means in modern history and nevertheless they choose to associate themselves with it. People who display the Confederate flag are racists. And the reason is pretty plain.

      The flag was a musty, dusty half forgotten memory of interest primarily to historians until Strom Thurmond's campaign resurrected it for the Dixiecrats. I assume you know what they were in favor of. The people who say "It isn't about hate; it's about heritage" are the biggest racists. That includes my nephew, who displays that damn flag which is definitely does not have anything to do with slavery, but with heritage and state's rights and tariffs, and the last time I saw him talked about a fellow employee, a black man who "wants to be white" because he likes country music. That is who the Dukes of Hazzard appealed to then -- I was there -- and you can see John Schneider knew it too.

      That's my rant about that. But a postscript on country music: its dirty, shameful secret is that it has always been strongly influenced by and appreciated in the black community. It descends from Southern string band music, which developed alongside Piedmont blues. The musicians all knew each other and sang each others' songs.

    3. ProbStat

      I think the history points fairly inescapably to the conclusion that the creation of Israel was a crime: Britain trampled on the right of the people of Palestine to have a government that served their interests in order to sponsor Zionist immigration for thirty years; the founders of Israel committed ethnic cleansing in order to set solid foundations for their ethno-state.

      So "from the river to the sea" really is a call for the eradication of Israel ... AND it is grounded in facts, history, and a modern conception of human rights.

      What all but a very small fringe of Westerners assume is that, at the very most, the pre-1967 borders of Israel should be the starting point for any discussion of settlement, but that position basically endorses a campaign of thoroughly racist violations of the rights of the 1918 population of Palestine.

      And in the Arab world, that very reasonably is not considered acceptable. It would be a bit like America freeing the slaves after a couple centuries of people stealing the fruits of their labor, leaving them penniless, and considering that a fair starting point ... oh, wait.

      If there is to be a peaceful solution -- and I don't think there will be -- it will have to begin with the situation in 1918. If it includes the continued existence of Israel in roughly its existing borders, there should be compensation paid to the Palestinians based on their losses since 1918. The Jewish People clearly have a claim for damages against Europe, and -- rather than taking it in military aid to oppress the Palestinians -- they could take it as means to compensate the Palestinians for the territory they were driven from.

      Israel MIGHT have been formed legitimately by buying its territory from the resident population; it wasn't. But trying to implement that post facto is the only way I see for there to be a peaceful solution.

      What I expect instead is a second holocaust and the near destruction of the Jewish People, and along with that the destruction of Israel. Just to be clear, that's what I EXPECT to happen; I'd love to see it avoided, but I don't think that's in the cards.

      1. ey81

        Britain allowed immigration??! ! Of Jews from Nazi Germany?! Are there no limits to British perfidy? Although, now that I think about it, some people think that an administration that allows immigration to America contrary to the wishes of current inhabitants is criminal, even treasonous.

  13. pjcamp1905

    Oh come on! They're test driving it as this election's Immigrant Caravan. Expect it to vanish no later than the day after election day.

Comments are closed.