A year has passed, a new year is upon us. The page has turned, one chapter complete, another begun. But as we travel the arc of time, one thing appears to be perpetual – antisemitism. Last year’s violence, rhetoric, attitudes and malaise about Jews should not be ignored, for ignoring the shifts in world and US society on this topic can only be done at our own peril. Many Jews mark the time before October 7th, 2023 and after that day as a turning point, an awakening both for them and for the bigots that would deny them civil rights. I would argue that the noise is louder and angrier but the sentiment was always there, the oldest hate.

The violent character of antisemitism in the US is jarring for Jews in America, many who come from families who emigrated to the US to escape violence elsewhere. A governor and his family firebombed in their home in Pennsylvania. A couple slain outside a reception at the Capitol Jewish Museum. A fire bombing attack in Boulder, CO that injures over a dozen and kills a Holocaust survivor. An assault on a woman in Miami Beach who wore a Star of David, with antisemitic slurs shouted at her in the process. This doesn’t include the attacks on businesses owned by Jews or the epithets shouted at Jews as they walk down the street. The Hanukkah displays at people’s homes that are vandalized. The mezuzahs removed from university student dorms. It is not episodic or rare – the attacks are persistent and aggressive.

Attitudes towards Jews in the US have shifted, both with the Oct 7th attack and with the millions of dollars invested in the campaign by foreign actors. Some of those investments come from Qatar (ironically the US’s partner in negotiating peace between Hamas and Israel) into US educational institutions. The biases have spread to K-12 education settings, with teachers and school administrations promoting anti-Jewish bias and turning a blind eye to the harm being caused.. And in the age of social media, the cost of ‘information’ campaigns and publicity have fallen dramatically. This is being magnified by antisemitic biases in AI large language models. Surveys have shown that attacks against Jews are ‘understandable’ (24%) and ‘justified’ (13%). Imagine these results in a survey regarding Black people, or Asian people, or Catholics – this is a degradation of the American ethos.

Some activists and even politicians have focused on Israel as the culprit. And debates about the Israeli government and policy are legitimate fodder, particularly within the Jewish community. But the equivalency of Israel and Jews would be tantamount to blaming all followers of Islam for Islamic extremist terrorism or all Catholics for the murderous rampages of the Crusades. Activists in the US (and elsewhere) wish to use beliefs as a litmus test for acceptance in ways foreseen in Orwell’s 1984, and more typical of authoritarian regimes than pluralistic democracies. The violent actors who attack synagogues, menorah lightings, or gatherings where Jews are present are skipping the concocted litmus test (“it’s because Israel…”) and are simply moving to their underlying belief – they hate Jews.

And so we enter the new year with a clear and present threat to the comity of peoples here – rampant antisemitism. And a new mayor is inaugurated in New York City – the city with the largest population of Jews in the US (in fact, anywhere in the world other than Israel). And one of the very first acts of Mayor Mamdani was to revoke the city’s definition of antisemitism, a definition proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) and viewed as the gold standard. It goes as follows: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” What is particularly objectionable about this definition to the new Mayor? How would he like to define antisemitism (and what expertise does he bring to the table in coming up with a new definition)? He won’t say. I would suppose that we are to believe that he and his administration will know it when they see it.

And the national disgrace continues…