Anti Zionism is Antisemitism - and Harvard

UK Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis (Jerusalem Post)

There is a common belief - though I would characterize it more accurately as an excuse - that being anti-Zionist does not equate to being antisemitic. The reasoning often goes that one can criticize the policies of a Zionist government without hating the Jewish people. While that might make sense to some, I have concluded that, in its current usage, being anti-Zionist is functionally equivalent to being antisemitic. Those who try to make that distinction are often using it as cover for their ancient, deep-seated hatred of the Jewish people.

I am not alone in this view. The Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, Ephraim Mirvis, expressed a similar sentiment in the Jerusalem Post, stating:

"I am a Zionist because I am a Jew. If you are anti-Zionist, you are anti-Jews and anti-Judaism," he said, adding, "Israel is not just the geo-political endeavor of the Jewish people - it is the center of Judaism."

As far as I'm concerned, this is an unalterable fact. And is in part why Harvard University deserves the harsh scrutiny it is getting from the federal government. Harvard has a long, unfortunate history of antisemitism dating back to its founding over 400 years ago. During which Jews were systematically denied entry. When Jews were finally admitted based on merit, quotas were instituted because Harvard saw ‘too many’ of us being accepted. Eventually, those quotas were dropped, but the right-wing antisemitism that once permeated Harvard’s halls have since been replaced by a left-wing antisemitism disguised as anti-Zionism - now deeply embedded in its faculty and administration.

Lest anyone think Harvard is innocent, even its current president, Alan Garber (who is Jewish), has acknowledged it as a serious problem publicly. More than once. Antisemitism at Harvard manifests in an anti-Zionist student government, a student newspaper that regularly vilifies Israel as an Apartheid state; equates Zionism with racism; demands that the administration support BDS, and allows protests that and call for the destruction of the Jewish state and the people in it.

For me, Harvard has lost its luster as a prestigious institution long ago. It now prioritizes diversity (much of which is based on left wing extremism) over academic excellence. As such they recruit a student body based on diversity first and merit second. Which includes a faculty whose lectures are increasingly driven by left wing political agendas. The further to the left a faculty member leans, the more likely they are to be anti-Zionist, influencing students in the same direction. Jewish students are consistently harassed by peers. Often without their ever-mentioning Israel or Zionism. But simply because they are Jews.

One might think that seeking a diverse international student body (one third of which is currently foreign) is a good thing that exposes their students to a multitude of cultures and value systems. That may be true up to a point. But when international diversity produces a lopsided number of foreign students and faculty members that are hard core anti-Zionist, it turns that notion on its head.

Let’s not pretend the war in Gaza is the origin of this hatred. The BDS movement infiltrated student governments at elite universities long before the events of October 7^th  and Israel’s subsequent response. I would also remind everyone that the United Nations General Assembly passed the infamous "Zionism is racism" resolution in 1975 - 50 years ago! These days Harvard and the UN are of a piece with each other on this issue.

Many argue that withholding federal funds for Harvard's medical research only harms the public good and does little to combat antisemitism. I disagree. First because hitting Harvard where it hurts is the most effective way to generate change. Secondly, Harvard is the most well-endowed university in the world, with an endowment worth over $50 billion.

There's no reason it can’t allocate some of its own resources toward beneficial research, instead of relying on taxpayer money. Money it frankly does not deserve. And if a technicality prevents this, then change the rule that generates that technicality. Why should the world be denied life-saving research because of bureaucratic red tape? If Harvard’s endowment donors object, let the public know. Let them explain why some of their contributions can’t be diverted to support something as universally important as medical research.

The federal government has proposed redirecting their grant money to trade schools - a long-underfunded but essential component of the education system. I think that’s a great idea.

Harvard and its so-called academic freedom warriors claim the government is trying to stifle intellectual liberty.

No. The government is asking Harvard to uphold one of the most fundamental tenets of the American creed: not to discriminate based on religion. And that is a principle Harvard has honored mostly in the breach when it comes to the Jewish people. The only Jews they seem to approve of are those who despise their own Judaism. Jews who agree with the false and dangerous narrative that Zionism is racism.

If I were the government, I would go even further and not hesitate to revoke Harvard’s accreditation. They are not the only game in town. There are a lot of fine universities that are just as prestigious as Harvard is supposed to be. Besides, I would sooner grant accreditation to the ‘Close Cover Before Striking’ Institute of Technology than continue validating an institution that confuses antisemitism with academic freedom. The more Harvard promotes anti-Zionism as a scholarly stance, the more it undermines the legitimacy of its own argument and reveals the antisemitism beneath the surface.