His temple was targeted by arsonist. Now, a rabbi reflects on how to define antisemitism
In January, Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield had a dangerous encounter with antisemitism when a man in a ski mask flung a Molotov cocktail at the front door. The bottle did not break through the door of the temple, which had installed a shatterproof barrier over the glass as a security measure.
Even as the congregation grapples with the aftermath of the arson attempt, Rabbi Marc Katz said he is hesitant to embrace a definition of antisemitism touted by some prominent Jewish organizations as a tool to fight hate. Developed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, the definition offers guidance to identify incidents of bias when it’s directed at Jews or at Israel.
“Part of the challenge of defining anything is that people can read definitions in different ways and that, more than anything else, what the Jewish community is looking for is for antisemitism to be taken seriously,” said Katz.
A dozen towns in New Jersey have adopted the definition of antisemitism, often in the wake of troubling anti-Jewish incidents like swastika graffiti. In Clifton, where adopting the definition was expected to be discussed at a meeting Tuesday evening, the Palestinian community is urging the council to halt the measure or to consider an alternative, saying it gives a license for people to malign or target them for speaking up for Palestinian rights. Supporters say it clarifies the ways that bias can manifest against Jews.
Now, as Clifton weighs adopting the definition, Katz is concerned about how it could impact the community, home to Jews and Palestinians.
“If finding the perfect definition is going to stir up divisions within the community," he said, "then we should table the definition, have a conversation and work on creating bonds and making a plan of action.”
What's in the definition?
The IHRA definition describes antisemitism as calling for violence against Jews, demonizing or making stereotypical allegations about Jews and denying the Holocaust.
It also states that it is antisemitic to apply double standards to Israel not demanded of other nations or to deny the Jewish people "their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
Supporters say it is the most comprehensive of several definitions, outlining types of bias at a time when antisemitic incidents and anti-Israel sentiment is on the rise. They say it's not intended to infringe on free speech.
Still, the IHRA measure has been cited in lawsuits and complaints where people describe Israel as racist or support a boycott or other sanctions. Some liberal Jewish groups have also opposed adopting it as official policy or law, as has Kenneth Stern, the lead author of the definition, who worried it had been “weaponized” to silence critics of Israel.
'I didn’t feel protected at all': Students worry about bill to police speech critical of Israel
A national debate
The U.S. State Department under the Trump administration adopted the IHRA definition, as have about 30 states, either by a legislative vote or a governor’s executive action.
In May, the White House released a sweeping plan to combat antisemitism amid a national debate over how to define anti-Jewish hatred, and how it relates to Israel. The White House plan did not formally adopt IHRA guidance, but noted that it embraced it as one of several existing definitions, such as the Nexus Document and Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.
On this issue, emotions have run high. In Clifton, residents made a impassioned plea at the last council meeting in favor of IHRA's approach, describing incidents of bias they had faced over years. Palestinian Americans, though, said they should be able to talk openly about their difficult experiences under Israeli occupation and their points of view without fear.
Katz is hoping for a middle ground, a way for people to come together and understand each other's perspectives.
Our view: These brave students are facing down antisemitism. NJ and US can do better
“I can say that the definition is controversial even with the liberal Jewish world. There are lots of organizations that I respect that don’t like the definition. Personally, I feel the definition is a good one, but it all hinges on how you read a few clauses and if you read them narrowly or broadly," said Katz, whose congregation includes residents of neighboring Clifton.
"I understand the thinking, that you can’t respond to something you don’t define. However, defining this is very difficult. Responding to things are easier sometimes. All I care about is that antisemitism is taken seriously and responded to, and if this isn't the right way to do that, as long as Clifton rises to and responds to antisemitism in a thoughtful manner, then it will have been done right."
This article originally appeared on NorthJersey.com: Antisemitism definition a national debate, comes to Clifton NJ
