Campus Crackdown May Fan Flames of Antisemitism

How should someone who is distressed at the ongoing surge in antisemitism view the recent demands made by the Trump Administration of several top universities, which purport to be aimed in part at combating antisemitism?

It is tempting to just enjoy the reprieve that the onslaught has provided on campuses against the relentless hateful anti-Zionism and antisemitism of the last eighteen months, but both Jewish values and a pragmatic view towards the longer-term impact on the Jewish people demand that we face this question seriously.

Antisemitism is soaring across the globe, to levels not seen since the rise of the Nazis almost a century ago. Criticism of Israel’s actions or policies is not antisemitism, and there is a legitimate debate as to when anti-Israel activity crosses the line and becomes antisemitic, but wherever this  line is drawn, there is clearly a problem. While antisemitism most directly impacts members of the Jewish faith, it is not only a Jewish issue, but a chronic condition that history has shown weakens and undermines societies where it is allowed to fester.

The heavy hand that the Trump Administration is applying to American universities may lead to a terrible backlash when they are no longer in power. If you point a gun at someone’s head and force them to “do the right thing,” they will probably do what you demand, but once the gun is removed, they will likely not only stop doing it but will probably be even more convinced that it was not the right thing. Because antisemitism has been used as one of the justifications for this crackdown, it is likely that the Jewish people will again be blamed when the pendulum (or, rather, wrecking ball) swings back.

Admittedly many universities, my own Columbia included, have not handled the outpouring of antisemitism at all well. The seeds of this hateful dynamic – delegitimizing and demonizing the right of the Jewish people to self-determination – were sown many years ago, with many universities either recklessly ignorant or actually complicit, and their handling of the eruption of hate in the aftermath of October 7 has been feckless at best. However, with pressure from alumni and donors, some course correction was already in the works. In recent months, the Trump Administration has, by withdrawing and threatening to withdraw government funding (generally entirely unrelated to the sources of the antisemitism), and even threatening the charitable legal status of the targeted universities, sought to force these institutions to agree to major changes in the way they operate, and in who, what and how they teach. Some of these changes may be laudable (universities should have sensible rules and apply them even-handedly), but some impinge on academic freedom and fundamental constitutional rights and protections.

It is important to understand that the primary objective of the Administration’s moves against these universities is not to fight antisemitism but is to unravel affirmative action (euphemistically called DEI) programs. These practices and policies have gone some way towards addressing the historical injustices that were an undeniable part of our country’s history. They have, however, also had some more controversial impacts, including the undermining of pride in our country in favor of an emphasis on the darker elements of its past (such as slavery and the Jim Crow era), and a growing distain by the elite liberal intelligentsia for more conservative values and the people who hold them. This is obviously a gross oversimplification, but if one reads the Administration’s letters to the universities, it is clear that this is their main objective.

The rampant antisemitism on display at many universities gives the government a useful pretext to intervene aggressively. The sight of masked mobs spewing hate speech and incitement while cheering on murderous terrorist groups like Hamas, often crossing the line into antisemitism, is an easy target.  (There are those who would disagree with the characterization that the anti-Israel movement supports Hamas, but the facts are clear: many in this camp, especially among their leaders, do so overtly, while admittedly many of the followers are just, to use the term attributed to Lenin “useful idiots.”)

How should someone who is truly concerned about antisemitism, and who deplores the hideous perversion of traditional liberal values on display at our most prestigious institutions, view these developments?

While somewhat reductive, one could think of the options as a matrix in which one either supports or opposes the Administration’s harsh tactics, and does so either silently or noisily.

This article does not speak to the MAGA crowd who loudly support the hard line approach. In part, they do so because they support anything Trump does. But to give them some credit, they presumably also see the problems and have felt the disdain by America’s elite institutions. In their world view, the decline of America’s top universities would be a good thing.

There are, however, many who are not MAGA supporters and who are discomfited by the heavy-handed approach, but who are pleased that at least someone is finally getting serious about antisemitism. Many of these are silent supporters of the Administration’s aggressive stratagem, believing that it should be allowed to run its course. Perhaps, they calculate, sufficient damage can be inflicted on the anti-Israel (and in many cases antisemitic) infrastructure that has metastasized on American campuses over decades, to make a meaningful change that will survive even when power shifts.  Others deplore the attack on academia but stay silent, fearing to speak out both for their own personal interests in the face of such unconstrained power, and because voicing objections might undermine the efforts to oppose antisemitism, or be seen as ingratitude. The Jewish people have heard from far too few allies in responding to the October 7 massacre and the antisemitic tsunami it perversely unleashed; it is not easy to take sides against those who say they are trying to help. Many stay silent because they are simply confused between these two options.

And then there are those who are speaking out. In recent days and weeks, scores of professors and other university leaders – many Jewish and on record with their opposition to antisemitism, as well as many Jewish religious leaders, have come out publicly against the Trump Administration’s attacks.  They do so to support the values we hold dear, including academic freedom and the rule of law, and they do so sometimes at great risk to themselves and their institutions. They are to be commended and supported. Antisemitism must be called out and opposed whenever and wherever it raises its ugly head, but its appropriation in support of other political objectives will only be counterproductive. The rule of law is not only vital for the survival of a tiny minority like the Jewish people, it is the essence of who we are.  It is not clear that the voices of those opposing the recent overreach will be enough to inoculate against the antisemitic accusations that will surely follow, but it is important that such opposition be registered.

Antisemitism is much too dangerous a toxin – for the Jewish people and society in general – to be used as a political football or fig leaf.