Speak Now

An average of seven antisemitic incidents occurred each day in the United States in 2021, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)—the highest this figure has been since 1979. Unfortunately, these blatant acts of hate and violence toward Jews have become increasingly politicized in the 21st century. At the risk of overgeneralizing, non-Jews on the left often believe that antisemitism largely comes from the fringe far-right in the form of neo-Nazism, while non-Jews on the right hold that antisemitism is synonymous with the anti-Zionist beliefs common on the American left.

Their differing views on the origins of antisemitism aside, both parties fail to address the rise of antisemitism on college campuses. According to the ADL, 15 percent of American Jewish college students report that they have felt the need to hide their Jewish identity from others on campus, and 12 percent said they had been blamed for the actions of the Israeli government solely because of their Jewish identity. College campuses, particularly those that are considered elite, are professedly bastions of liberal thought and tolerance. Yet most universities overlook concerns of antisemitism, neglecting Jewish students in need of support. Brown University and Duke University, each with their own recent history of antisemitism on campus, point to this pattern of apathy among student leaders and administrations.

Brown is known as arguably the most progressive and tolerant school in the Ivy League. Nonetheless, our campus played host to three public acts of antisemitism in four short months. On July 13, 2022, a swastika was found carved into a tree that sits between the two main centers for Jewish life on campus, the Brown-RISD Hillel and the Rohr Chabad House. This was the first swastika drawn on campus since 2020. The University administration failed to respond to the incident, with only a short note provided by the Brown University Department of Public Safety (DPS). DPS provided this note in compliance with the Clery Act, which requires colleges to report on-campus crime data in a timely manner. Fast forward a mere four weeks later, and another swastika was found carved on a wall panel in the university’s School of Engineering. Surely, as Jewish students made final preparations to return to campus for the fall semester, a statement reaffirming that the university would take all acts necessary to ensure Jewish students’ safety on campus and to formally investigate these acts of antisemitism should have been a relatively simple task for the administration. However, the university devoted none of their attention—let alone resources—to addressing the hateful incident. Jewish students were left with an identical compliance note from DPS.

On October 31, a notification from the Brown RISD Hillel was emailed to any student who had attended a Hillel event. The email stated that “an antisemitic note had been left in the reception area of BRH’s Weiner Center” on October 30. The note read “I would never give the rich stuck up entitled Jews any money. F—k you all. Hail Hitler. Gas the f—king Jews and hope you die.”

The university administration not only remained silent in the immediate aftermath of this incident, but also seemed to work to keep the incident silent. Violating the Clery Act, Brown DPS did not even notify the student body of the crime at the Hillel. Hours ticked by, and the silence from student leadership and administration was deafening. The University Council of Students (UCS)—Brown’s student government—broke its own de facto policy of releasing statements in the wake of bias incidents. The same UCS that published an eloquent note of support for reproductive rights after the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade failed to even acknowledge an atrocious display of hate that occurred on its own campus. This was despite several pleas from students to UCS leadership.

After 60 hours of silence, university administrators finally released a statement. It condemned antisemitism along with “anti-Black racism, anti-Asian discrimination, Islamophobia, anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination, acts against undocumented/DACA individuals and immigrants, and other forms of discrimination and hate.” This language stands in sharp contrast to previous university statements condemning hate against other marginalized groups, which have not included statements condemning antisemitism and other forms of hate. By neglecting to give “the condemnation of antisemitism its own moment (or even its own sentence),” the statement failed to center Jewish students. While this culture of apathy is not unique to Brown, it is particularly striking given the activist nature of the campus: If the “activist Ivy” refused to stand up for Jewish students, it is hard to imagine other colleges doing so.

"While this culture of apathy is not unique to Brown, it is particularly striking given the activist nature of the campus: If the “activist Ivy” refused to stand up for Jewish students, it is hard to imagine other colleges doing so."

After investigation, the horrifying note found outside of the Brown-RISD Hillel was discovered to be written by an individual unaffiliated with either school. The administration at Duke, on the other hand, indirectly supported recent antisemitism on the university’s campus. Mohammed El-Kurd, a writer and poet who recently spoke at Duke, believes that Jewish Zionists (95 percent of Jews have some sort of a favorable view of the Jewish state) have “completely internalized the ways of the Nazis.” El-Kurd has also stated that Jewish Zionists have “an unquenchable thirst for Palestinian blood,” a clear reference to the ancient blood libel narrative that Jewish people use blood from Christian children to bake Matzah. Put simply, El-Kurd spews hate. Alarmingly, Duke’s student government voted to appropriate $16,000 in speaking fees to bring the group to campus.

The Duke University case exposes an upsetting truth: hate speech is often tolerated when it is directed toward Jewish students. Duke’s administration failed to release a statement condemning the speaker, an individual whose offensive sentiment they had furthered. Once again, University administration and college students failed together in supporting their Jewish community members.

The recent hateful occurrences at Brown and Duke are far from isolated. UC Berkeley, UW-Madison, Vanderbilt, Tufts, UNC, and Ohio State have all played host to similar events in the past couple months. Proactive measures addressing antisemitism are long overdue. Administrators around the nation need to adequately respond to instances of hate on campuses, and work toward ensuring that these events do not repeat themselves. Easy measures include appointing Jewish chaplains, adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, and including Jewish bias training within general diversity and inclusion training. It is not only incumbent on Jewish students and alumni to pressure administration and student organizations to adequately address antisemitism, but also on non-Jewish students to welcome the Jewish cause and Jewish peers in their activism.

[Editor’s Note: This article was published in the Fall 2022 issue of the BPR magazine.]

#americancolleges #antisemitism #BrownUniversity #judaism