Fighting Antisemitism Means Hearing What Jews Are Actually Saying

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani deserves credit for putting resources behind his new strategy to combat antisemitism. Security funding for Jewish institutions matters. So do education, support for victims, and an effort to celebrate Jewish life rather than speaking about Jews only when we are threatened.

Those are meaningful commitments. I hope they succeed.

But I also understand why some Jewish leaders are disappointed. A plan to confront antisemitism should be willing to address the ways hostility toward Israel can spill over into hostility toward Jews. That does not mean treating every criticism of Israel as antisemitic. It means recognizing a problem that many Jews have been trying to describe, sometimes to people who consider themselves our allies.

I say that as a liberal Jew. I believe Palestinians deserve freedom, dignity, and a state of their own. I oppose the occupation and believe Israel’s government should be held accountable for its actions. None of those convictions requires me to ignore antisemitism when it appears in conversations about Israel.

Sometimes the line is obvious. A Jewish student is blamed for a government’s decisions. A synagogue becomes the site of a protest about a war thousands of miles away. Someone demands that a Jewish person condemn Israel before being allowed into a progressive space.

Other times, the line is less obvious. An old conspiracy theory about Jewish power gets dressed up as a comment about “Zionist control.” People reach for images of money, secret influence, or divided loyalties without considering the history those images carry. A slogan may mean one thing to the person chanting it and something more frightening to the Jewish neighbor hearing it.

We should be able to talk about those moments without demanding proof that every speaker intended harm. Intent matters, but it is not the only thing that matters. When someone tells us that language echoes a racist or anti-Muslim trope, progressives generally understand that the response should begin with listening. Jewish people deserve the same consideration.

This is where I want more from Mamdani and from the broader left. Acknowledging this overlap would not require him to abandon his criticism of Israel. It would require him to say plainly that legitimate advocacy for Palestinians can coexist with antisemitic rhetoric, and that his political allies have a responsibility to challenge it when it appears.

That responsibility belongs to me, too. Calling out people on my own side can be uncomfortable, particularly when I share their anger over Palestinian suffering. But agreement on one issue does not give anyone a pass on prejudice. If our solidarity depends on overlooking antisemitism, we have built something too fragile to call solidarity.

At the same time, we should be careful and specific. “Anti-Zionist” does not automatically mean “antisemite,” and Jewish people themselves hold a wide range of views about Zionism and Israel. Calling every fierce critic of Israel a bigot makes it harder to identify the moments when a real antisemitic trope is doing the work. We need to explain what is wrong with a particular statement or action, rather than assume we know every speaker’s motives.

The mayor’s plan can help protect Jewish New Yorkers. Its funding and programs deserve to be judged by what they accomplish. But protecting a community also means taking seriously what its members say about the hostility they encounter, including when that conversation is politically inconvenient.

I want a left that can defend Palestinian rights without asking Jews to swallow coded prejudice for the sake of the cause. I want Jewish concerns heard without shutting down honest debate about Israel. Neither goal should be beyond us. The first step is being willing to correct our friends.