Harvard adopts controversial IHRA antisemitism definition Harvard's acceptance of IHRA definition settles discrimination case brought by students who said pro-Palestine protests were antisemitic Students from MIT, Harvard University and others rally at a protest encampment on MIT's Kresge Lawn in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on 22 April 2024 (Scott Eisen/Getty Images via AFP) By MEE staff Published date: 22 January 2025 20:07 GMT | Last update: 2 weeks 6 days ago 329 Shares facebook sharing buttontwitter sharing buttonwhatsapp sharing buttonmessenger sharing buttonemail sharing buttonsharethis sharing button Harvard University has agreed to accept the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, after settling a lawsuit from Jewish students who accused other students of harassment during pro-Palestine protests on campus in 2024. The student group, Students Against Antisemitism, filed a complaint in January 2024 in a court in Boston, saying that Harvard was failing to protect them under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a law that prohibits any school from receiving federal funding from discriminating against anyone based on race, colour or national origin. The complaint cited last year's pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war on Gaza as the source of antisemitic rhetoric from other students. Middle East Eye has previously reported on these accusations of antisemitism against pro-Palestinian protesters at US universities, which often conflate support for Palestinian rights with antisemitism. As a part of Harvard's settlement of the case brought by Students Against Antisemitism, the university has agreed to use the IHRA definition of antisemitism when applying its non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Your email "This resolution includes specific, meaningful actions to combat antisemitism, hate and bias on college campuses that illustrate the University’s strong commitment to further protecting their Jewish and Israeli community," Marc Kasowitz of Kasowitz Benson Torres, LLP, from the counsel for Students Against Antisemitism said in a statement. The controversial IHRA definition was formulated in 2004 and published in 2005 by antisemitism expert Kenneth Stern in collaboration with other academics from the American Jewish Committee, a pro-Israel advocacy organisation founded at the beginning of the 20th century and based in New York. Critics say some of the examples provided in the definition conflate antisemitism with criticism of historical policies that led to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 - known to the Palestinians as the Nakba or "catastrophe". The Antisemitism Awareness Act is a full frontal assault on free speech Read More » During the Nakba, hundreds of thousands of indigenous Palestinians were expelled from their homes by Zionist paramilitaries. Critics also say the definition conflates antisemitism with criticism of current Israeli policies against Palestinians, such as human rights abuses and the occupation by Israel. The IHRA definition was adopted by the first Trump administration in 2019, and was reaffirmed by the Biden administration. Harvard also said it would provide training on "combating antisemitism" and that its Office for Community Conduct would incorporate the IHRA definition when reviewing complaints of discrimination. The move by Harvard follows other similar measures implemented by leading US universities to prevent any criticism of Zionism. In August 2024, New York University declared Zionists a "protected class". In response to Israel's war on Gaza that began after the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023, thousands of university students across the US began organising protests against the war. Many of those protests evolved into concerted efforts to call on their institutions to defund any financial stakes in companies profiting from Israel's war, which has killed more than 46,000 Palestinians. In many cases, the protests were met with harsh responses from university administrations, and in some cases police were called in to forcefully remove protesters. Over the past academic year, schools have adopted more forceful measures aimed at curbing any protests against Israel, including issuing new speech guidelines and incorporating surveillance tactics against student organisers.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Supporting Antifa in an educational context would amplify the anti-democratic nature of ideological capture to a dangerous degree. Antifa's core characteristics Antifa is a loose, decentralized far-left militant movement that explicitly rejects liberal democracy in favor of direct action, deplatforming, and sometimes violence to combat perceived fascism. It opposes free speech for opponents, views institutions (including schools) as tools for revolutionary change, and often aligns with anarchist or accelerationist tactics. Open support for it goes beyond standard left politics into endorsing extra-legal methods.Why educator or institutional support crosses a line Undermines the rule of law — Public schools are state institutions bound by democratic norms (elections, due process, free expression under the First Amendment). Teachers or curricula that fantasize, romanticize, excuse, or promote Antifa-style tactics (property destruction, no-platforming, "by any means necessary") teach contempt for democratic mechanisms. This is especially toxic for youth, who are still forming civic habits. Heightens indoctrination risk — In captured systems (e.g., activist factions within unions like Oakland Education Association), materials that frame Antifa sympathetically as heroic resisters fit the pattern of one-sided narratives. We've seen unauthorized "teach-ins" and "liberatory education" pushes in Oakland and similar districts that critics argue veer into political activism rather than balanced analysis. Glorifying militant groups adds an endorsement of violence to ideological skew. rethinkingschools.org Disproportionate harm — For less-educated or captive audiences (K-12 students), this normalizes extremism. It can desensitize youth to political violence, chill dissent in classrooms, and erode trust in democratic institutions. Post-2020 riots and campus disruptions showed real-world spillover. Anti-democratic double standard — Democracy allows debate over ideas, even radical ones. But state-funded educators actively supporting a movement that rejects debate itself (via doxxing, riots, or "punch a Nazi" rhetoric that expands "Nazi" to include mainstream conservatives) is viewpoint discrimination with state power behind it. It's the opposite of pluralism. Reality checkNot every progressive educator supports Antifa—many explicitly reject its violence. Direct endorsements in official curricula are rare and often opposed by districts when publicized. However, tolerance or soft-pedaling in activist teacher circles, reading lists that lionize radical left figures, or failure to condemn Antifa-linked tactics does occur in highly polarized blue-city environments and feeds the capture critique.This would make the problem not just bias, but incitement against democratic norms. Reforms emphasizing classical civics, viewpoint balance, and strict political neutrality in K-12 become even more urgent. Public education should prepare citizens for democracy, not recruit for its rejection..