Antisemitism

Re “Don’t conflate Jewishness with the state of Israel” (Other Views, Feb.

14): Rabbi Ellen Jaffe-Gill avoids the 800-pound gorilla in the room.

In opposing General Assembly legislation to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism — Jew-hatred — she alleges that IHRA language in Virginia law would stifle free speech. The IHRA definition has been endorsed by more than 30 countries, including the United States, and nearly 30 states. No censorship eruption has occurred.

The rabbi concedes the definition itself “is unobjectionable.” But she claims several of its examples, such as “‘denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavor,’ ” conflate Judaism and Zionism (the Jewish national liberation movement).

But the fact is anti-Zionism, fueled by the 1975 Soviet-inspired, Arab League-adopted U.N. General Assembly resolution equating Zionism with racism, became the gateway drug for resurgent antisemitism. Though the resolution was repealed in 1991, its poison — “Zionism is racism,” therefore Israel and its supporters are illegitimate — continues to spread. The suspect in the mass shooting of 11 Jews in a

Pittsburgh synagogue appears connected to white nationalism and the alt-right. On the left the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan has used “Zionist” as a euphemism for Jews.

The IHRA definition recognizes that “racist Zionist” has become the contemporary equivalent of “Christ-killer.” The latter led to, as the former leads to, the murder of Jews. Making Israel “the Jew among the nations,” and those who support it “racists,” is antisemitic. To fight Jew-hatred effectively we must define it accurately.

— Eric Rozenman, member of the Virginia Commission to Combat Antisemitism, Fairfax