The History of Antizionism
a trail of harm
Antizionism is not a benign philosophical disagreement or abstract intellectual debate. It is a coherent, organized hate movement with a century-long history. It is fueled by state-sponsored propaganda, sustained by obsessively repeated libels and tropes fixated on the mythical, all-powerful “Zionist,” financed by powerful institutional backers and authoritarian regimes, and—most importantly—has produced millions of human victims.
Wherever antizionism has taken hold, it has produced displacement, erasure, and violence: families torn from their homes, communities dismantled, and individuals silenced, imprisoned, or killed. In the Soviet Union, antizionism powered state campaigns to extinguish Jewish identity and culture. In the Middle East and North Africa, antizionism fueled expulsions, pogroms, and the near-total destruction of ancient Jewish communities. In the West, antizionism has produced social and professional purges, widespread harassment and abuse, and stochastic violence.
This harm has never been confined to Jews and Israelis. Antizionism has trapped Iranians, Yemenis, Lebanese, and Palestinians in endless cycles of war and suffering, subordinating their genuine needs and aspirations to the racist fantasy of Israel’s elimination. It has also hijacked other progressive causes — climate justice, labor rights, feminism, LGBTQ+ equality, and more — diverting them from universal principles of dignity and liberation toward obsessive, relentless Israel-hatred.
We must speak plainly about antizionism — its history, its victims, and the direct line connecting that history to the contemporary antizionism now consuming our institutions, campuses, and public discourse. What follows is a brief but essential summary of its Soviet, MENA, and Western chapters — key events, figures, and recurring patterns. Learn it. Teach it. Share it. Raising consciousness of the history we are living in is how we build a more honest and just future.
soviet antizionism
Lenin’s antiZionism (from 1903)
At the beginning of the 20th century, long before the State of Israel existed, Vladimir Lenin launched a vicious ideological campaign against Jewish peoplehood itself. In writings from 1903 to 1916, particularly in his fierce attacks on the Jewish Bund, Lenin categorically rejected the idea that Jews had any legitimate right to collective identity, national culture, or territorial aspirations. Echoing Kautsky, he declared that Jews had “ceased to be a nation” and denounced all expressions of Jewish national consciousness as reactionary, ghettoized separatism that divided the working class and served bourgeois interests. He pathologized Jewish identity as a dangerous, backward force that had to be crushed in the name of proletarian universalism. This racist framework stripped Jews of the right to define themselves and demanded their complete assimilation and erasure as a people. Lenin’s antizionism was a foundational attack on Jewish national existence that would shape later Soviet ideology.
Sources:
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1903): The Position of the Bund in the Party
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1913): Critical Remarks on the National Question
Key quote:
“Jewish national culture is the slogan of the rabbis and the bourgeoisie, the slogan of our enemies. Whoever, directly or indirectly, puts forward the slogan of Jewish ‘national culture’ is (whatever his good intentions may be) an enemy of the proletariat, a supporter of all that is outmoded and connected with caste among the Jewish people; he is an accomplice of the rabbis and the bourgeoisie.”
Der Emes & Moshe Litvakov (1918-1920s)
Der Emes ("The Truth") was the leading Yiddish-language communist newspaper in the Soviet Union, established in 1918 as an organ of the Jewish Commissariat and later closely tied to the Yevsektsiya. Moshe (Moyshe) Litvakov, a former Bundist who turned communist, served as its influential editor-in-chief from the early 1920s, using the paper to promote Marxist ideology among Yiddish-speaking Jews, attack traditional Jewish institutions and Zionism, and enforce proletarian literary standards. Litvakov was a sharp critic who engaged in fierce ideological battles with Yiddish writers, pushing for "proletarian" culture aligned with Soviet atheism and anti-nationalism. He fell out of favor in the 1930s purges and was executed in 1937, reflecting the volatile fate of many early Jewish communists.
Source:
The Yevsektsiya (1918)
The Yevsektsiya (Jewish Section) was the Jewish branch of the Communist Party’s propaganda apparatus, founded in 1918 with Lenin’s approval to spread Bolshevik ideology and Marxist atheism among Soviet Jews. Staffed largely by former Bundists and other Jewish socialists eager to prove their revolutionary credentials, these “cool Jews” were tasked with persecuting the “uncool” ones. They carried out a ruthless cultural genocide against their own people, working with ferocious zeal to dismantle traditional Jewish communal structures, burn synagogues, shut down Hebrew schools, arrest Zionists, and eradicate Jewish national and religious life, all while promoting a Sovietized Yiddish as the only acceptable secular language. As Dara Horn notes, they staged show trials on the High Holy Days, invented grotesque libels against rabbis, and turned on their own with a self-righteous fury that went beyond even general Bolshevik antireligious campaigns. The Yevsektsiya played a central role in this assault on Jewish identity, but was itself dissolved in 1930 as “Jewish separatism” became suspect. Many of its leaders were purged, imprisoned, or executed — a cautionary end that revealed the deadly trap of becoming the regime’s token Jews.
Source:
night of the murdered poets (1952)
The Night of the Murdered Poets refers to the secret execution on August 12, 1952, of thirteen prominent Soviet Jewish writers, poets, actors, and intellectuals in the basement of Moscow’s Lubyanka Prison. The victims, including Peretz Markish, Dovid Bergelson, Itzik Fefer, and Leyb Kvitko, were leading figures in the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee (JAC), originally established during World War II to mobilize international Jewish support for the Soviet war effort. Arrested in 1948–1949 amid the rising anti-cosmopolitan campaign, they were tortured and convicted in a closed military trial on fabricated charges of treason, espionage, bourgeois nationalism, and ties to Israel and the United States. The executions, kept secret for years, effectively destroyed the remnants of Soviet Yiddish literary and cultural life.
Source:
The soviet Doctor’s Plot (1952-3)
The Doctors’ Plot was a fabricated antizionist conspiracy announced by Soviet authorities in early 1953. It accused a group of mostly Jewish Kremlin doctors of plotting to assassinate top Soviet leaders through poisoning, on behalf of Western intelligence and “international Zionism.” The accused were explicitly marked as “Zionists” and agents of the “Zionist underground.” The campaign occurred amid Stalin’s late-career anti-cosmopolitan drive and built on earlier purges of Jewish intellectuals. It led to mass arrests, dismissals, and an atmosphere of terror, with plans for even broader purges and possible deportations of Jews. Stalin’s death in March 1953 halted the plot; the charges were later denounced as fabricated. The affair exemplified how the Soviet regime used antizionism as the primary vehicle for state-sponsored persecution of Jews in the postwar period.
The Slansky Trial (1952)
The Slánský Trial was a show trial in Czechoslovakia in November–December 1952, in which Rudolf Slánský, the Jewish secretary-general of the Communist Party, and 13 other mostly Jewish defendants were convicted of "Trotskyite-Titoist-Zionist" conspiracy, espionage for the West, and economic sabotage. Orchestrated under Stalinist influence, it featured forced confessions undertones, linking defendants to “Zionism” and Israel despite their communist loyalty. Eleven were executed. Part of a broader wave of purges in the Eastern Bloc following the Doctors' Plot, it reflected Soviet export of antizionist campaigns and served as a vehicle for internal power struggles and the scapegoating of Jews as "Zionists."
Source:
Operation SIG (1967-1980s)
Operation SIG (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva, or "Zionist Governments") was a KGB disinformation and propaganda campaign initiated around the late 1960s–early 1970s, intensifying after the 1967 Six-Day War. Led by Yuri Andropov, it aimed to incite anti-Jewish sentiment globally, particularly in the Arab and Muslim world, by disseminating materials portraying "Zionism” as racism, imperialism, and a tool of U.S. domination. It involved agents of influence, forged documents (including revivals of anti-Jewish texts like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion), and support for antizionist narratives in international forums. The operation sought to isolate Israel, undermine U.S. alliances, and fuel broader anti-Western chaos, with lasting effects on global perception.
Sources:
The antizionist purges of poland (1968)
In 1968, Polish communist authorities cynically exploited an antizionist campaign—launched after Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six-Day War—to distract the public and crush dissent while students were protesting the banning of a play by Adam Mickiewicz. Although classical antisemitism was officially banned under communist ideology as a reactionary evil, the regime under Władysław Gomułka and security chief Mieczysław Moczar weaponized antizionism as its own permission structure, allowing them to brand Jews as “Zionists” and a disloyal "fifth column." This enabled a vicious purge across the party, army, academia, and professions: thousands were fired, harassed, publicly humiliated in staged rallies, and pressured to emigrate (around 13,000 fled between 1968 and 1972), effectively completing the postwar ethnic cleansing of Poland’s remaining Jewish population.
Source:
Yuri Ivanov’s Book Caution! Zionism (1969)
Yuri Ivanov’s Caution: Zionism! (Ostorozhno: Sionizm!), published in 1969, served as a cornerstone of the Soviet Union’s antizionist propaganda machinery. Presented in the language of Marxist-Leninist scholarship, the text methodically depicted Israel as the aggressive vanguard of a reactionary Jewish bourgeois alliance with Western imperialism — an inherently expansionist, racist, and anti-communist project threatening progressive forces worldwide. By weaving selective distortions and pseudo-historical narratives, it provided intellectual legitimacy to the KGB's broader antizionist campaign, a state-sponsored enterprise designed to systematically delegitimize Israel and Jewish nationalism on the global stage. Mass-produced and distributed in hundreds of thousands of copies, the book functioned as potent ideological ammunition during the height of Cold War tensions, revealing the Soviet regime’s sinister strategy of intellectual subversion: disguising political warfare and subversion as objective academic critique.
Source:
“Zionism is Racism” UN resolution (1975)
Adopted on November 10, 1975, UN General Assembly Resolution 3379 declared that “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination,” cynically weaponizing anti-racist and anti-colonial language to demonize Israel. Sponsored by the Arab League and strongly backed by the Soviet bloc and authoritarian regimes, it exemplified the Cold War hijacking of progressive ideals for geopolitical gain—equating Jewish national liberation with imperialism while shielding its sponsors’ own expansionism and abuses. Passed amid post-1973 war alignments (72 in favor, 35 against), the resolution drew a fierce moral stand from U.S. Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who denounced it as a betrayal of the UN’s principles. It represented a sinister triumph of geopolitical maneuvering over moral consistency, transforming the United Nations into a platform for state-sponsored antizionist propaganda that betrayed genuine internationalist and anti-racist values. Though rightly repealed in 1991 (Resolution 46/86) as an embarrassing relic of totalitarianism, its legacy endures as a stark reminder of how antizionism is deployed to isolate and demonize Israel while advancing authoritarian agendas on the global stage.
Source:
The Refuseniks (1970s-1980s)
Refuseniks were Soviet Jews who were brutally denied exit visas when they attempted to flee systemic oppression and emigrate, primarily to Israel, even after the limited allowances of the 1970s. Branded as traitors for simply wanting to escape state-sponsored antizionism, cultural erasure, and totalitarian control, they endured job loss, constant harassment, surveillance, KGB intimidation, and imprisonment. Figures such as Natan Sharansky, Ida Nudel, and the Slepak family became international symbols of the human rights struggle, courageously resisting through activism, hunger strikes, samizdat publications, and open appeals to the West. Their movement laid bare the Kremlin's suppression of Jewish identity and emigration rights, a policy that only began to crumble under Gorbachev’s reforms in the late 1980s.
Source:
Middle East & North Africa (MENA) Antizionism
The Nabi Musa Pogrom (1920)
The Nabi Musa pogrom of April 1920 marked the beginning of organized antizionist violence in Mandatory Palestine. During the annual Nabi Musa festival, Arab nationalist leaders mobilized crowds against Jewish national revival, portraying Zionism as an existential threat to Palestine. Over several days, Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem were attacked, Jews were murdered and injured, homes and businesses were looted, and British authorities largely failed to intervene. The violence established a pattern in which attacks on Jews were justified as resistance to Jewish peoplehood and return to the land.
Source:
Hillel Cohen (2015): Year Zero of the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1929
The Jaffa Pogrom (1921)
In May 1921, antizionist violence erupted in Jaffa and spread to neighboring Jewish communities. Dozens of Jews were murdered and hundreds wounded as mobs attacked Jewish neighborhoods, immigrants, workers, and settlements identified with the Zionist project. Like the Nabi Musa pogrom the previous year, the violence treated Jewish return to the land as a political and civilizational threat that could legitimately be answered through attacks on Jewish civilians.
Source:
Howard Sachar (2007): A History of Israel
The Hebron and SAFed Pogroms (1929)
The Palestine pogroms of 1929 marked a decisive escalation in antizionist violence. Following sustained incitement surrounding the Western Wall, coordinated attacks swept Jewish communities across the country. In Hebron, sixty-seven Jews were massacred and the ancient Jewish community was effectively destroyed. Similar attacks devastated Safed and numerous other communities. The violence made clear that antizionism did not distinguish between recent immigrants and centuries-old Jewish populations: Jewish presence in the land itself had become the target.
Source:
Yardena Schwartz (2024), Ghosts of a Holy War: The 1929 Massacre in Palestine That Ignited the Arab-Israeli Conflict
The Arab Revolt (1936–1939)
The Arab Revolt transformed antizionist violence into a sustained campaign against Jewish national life in Mandatory Palestine. Jewish civilians, settlements, transportation networks, agricultural communities, and economic institutions became systematic targets of assassination, sabotage, and armed attack. The revolt consolidated antizionism as the organizing ideology of Palestinian Arab nationalism and normalized violence against Jewish collective existence as the principal means of opposing Zionism.
Source: Oren Kessler, Palestine 1936: The Great Revolt and the Roots of the Middle East Conflict
The Constantine Pogrom (Algeria, 1934)
In August 1934, a pogrom swept through the Jewish quarter of Constantine in French Algeria. Jewish homes and businesses were attacked and looted, and twenty-five Jews were murdered. The violence anticipated the broader transformation of Middle Eastern and North African Jews into a collective political enemy. Jews were no longer attacked only through older religious hierarchies or local disputes, but increasingly as representatives of a transnational Jewish power imagined to threaten the Arab and Muslim world.
Sources:
Joshua Cole (2019): Lethal Provocation: The Constantine Murders and the Politics of French Algeria
Robert Attal (2002): Les émeutes de Constantine: 5 août 1934
The Farhud (Iraq, 1941)
The Farhud of June 1941 was a major antizionist pogrom against the Jews of Baghdad. Following the collapse of Rashid Ali al-Gaylani’s pro-Axis government, soldiers, police officers, and civilian mobs descended on Jewish neighborhoods, murdering Jews, raping women, mutilating bodies, and looting homes and businesses. Official investigations recorded approximately 180 Jews murdered and hundreds injured, although some estimates are higher.
The pogrom emerged from an ideological environment in which Iraqi Jews had been relentlessly portrayed as collaborators with Britain, agents of Zionism, and enemies of the Arab nation. Nazi propaganda, Palestinian Arab nationalist agitation, and the political activity of Haj Amin al-Husseini converged in Baghdad, transforming an ancient Jewish community into the internal representative of the Zionist enemy. The Farhud demonstrated the central antizionist principle that Jews anywhere could be punished for Jewish national aspirations in Palestine.
Sources:
Orit Bashkin (2012): New Babylonians: A History of Jews in Modern Iraq
Zvi Yehuda and Shmuel Moreh, eds. (1992): Al-Farhud: The 1941 Pogrom in Iraq
Edwin Black (2010): The Farhud
The Cairo and Alexandria Pogroms (Egypt, 1945)
On November 2, 1945, mass antizionist demonstrations were organized in Cairo and Alexandria to mark the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration. Mobilized by the Muslim Brotherhood, Young Egypt, and other nationalist organizations, the demonstrations became a direct assault on Egyptian Jewish life. Jewish homes and businesses were attacked, synagogues were burned, Jews were murdered, and hundreds were injured.
Sources:
Michael M. Laskier (1989): “Egyptian Jewry in the Post-World War II Period: 1945–1948”
Gudrun Krämer (1989): The Jews in Modern Egypt, 1914–1952
The Tripoli Pogrom (Libya, 1945)
In November 1945, an antizionist pogrom lasting three days devastated the Jewish community of Tripoli and spread into surrounding towns. More than 120 Jews were murdered, hundreds were wounded, and synagogues, homes, shops, and communal institutions were destroyed. Entire families were killed, and Jewish neighborhoods that had existed for centuries were left in ruins.
The pogrom extended the war against Zionism into Libya by treating Libyan Jews as part of the same Jewish collectivity struggling for national restoration in Palestine. The geographic distance between Tripoli and Palestine offered no protection. Antizionism supplied a regional framework through which any Jewish community could be converted into a local target of the struggle against Zionism.
Sources:
Harvey E. Goldberg (1990): Jewish Life in Muslim Libya
Maurice Roumani (2008): The Jews of Libya: Coexistence, Persecution, Resettlement
The Aleppo Pogrom (Syria, 1947)
Following the United Nations vote to partition Mandatory Palestine in November 1947, antizionist mobs attacked the ancient Jewish community of Aleppo. Synagogues were burned, Torah scrolls were destroyed, homes and businesses were looted, and Jewish communal institutions were devastated. The Great Synagogue of Aleppo, one of the oldest and most important Jewish religious sites in the region, was set on fire.
Sources:
Walter P. Zenner (2000): A Global Community: The Jews from Aleppo, Syria
Norman A. Stillman (1991): The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times
The Manama Pogrom (Bahrain, 1947)
In December 1947, antizionist mobs attacked the small Jewish community of Manama. Jewish homes and shops were looted, Jews were assaulted, the synagogue was destroyed, Torah scrolls were desecrated, and a Jewish woman was killed. Much of the community fled in the aftermath.
Source:
Eirik Kvindesland (2024): “The Manama Riots 1947: Bahraini Jews Between Palestine and Gulf Labour Politics”
The Second Tripoli Pogrom (Libya, 1948)
In June 1948, a second antizionist pogrom struck the Jews of Tripoli. Jewish homes and businesses were attacked, Jews were murdered, and property was looted and burned. Jewish self-defense organizations prevented the massacre from reaching the scale of 1945, but the renewed violence confirmed that the establishment of Israel had placed Libyan Jewry under continuing collective threat.
Sources:
Harvey E. Goldberg (1990): Jewish Life in Muslim Libya
Maurice Roumani (2008): The Jews of Libya: Coexistence, Persecution, Resettlement
The Oujda and Jerada Pogroms (Morocco, 1948)
On June 7 and 8, 1948, antizionist violence struck the Moroccan cities of Oujda and Jerada. In Oujda, Jewish homes and businesses were attacked and Jews were murdered. The violence then spread to the mining town of Jerada, where much of the small Jewish community was massacred. Altogether, forty-four Jews were killed according to the most commonly cited count, while other tallies place the number slightly higher. Women, children, and elderly Jews were among the victims.
Sources:
Michael M. Laskier (1994): North African Jewry in the Twentieth Century
Maud S. Mandel (2014): Muslims and Jews in France: History of a Conflict
The Cairo Bombings and Pogroms (Egypt, 1948)
During 1948, Egyptian Jews were subjected to a succession of bombings, murders, arrests, property seizures, and mob attacks. Bombs were detonated in Jewish neighborhoods and commercial districts, killing and injuring Jewish civilians. Jewish businesses were attacked, communal institutions were placed under surveillance, and hundreds of Jews were detained as Zionists or alleged supporters of Israel.
Sources:
Gudrun Krämer (1989): The Jews in Modern Egypt, 1914–1952
Michael M. Laskier (1989): “Egyptian Jewry in the Post-World War II Period: 1945–1948”
Arab League Wars Against Israel (1948, 1967, 1973)
After Israel’s establishment, antizionism became a regional military project aimed at annihilating Israel. Arab armies invaded the new state in 1948, while subsequent confrontations in 1967 and 1973 kept Israel’s existence at the center of regional war. Across changing governments and strategic circumstances, the larger antizionist horizon remained the same: Israel was treated not as a permanent nation-state to be accommodated, but as an illegitimate Zionist entity to destroy through mass violence.
International Terrorism: PLO, PFLP & Armed Struggle (1960s–)
From the 1960s onward, Palestinian revolutionary organizations transformed antizionism into a global campaign of “armed struggle.” The PLO Charter rejected Israel’s legitimacy and called for the “elimination of Zionism in Palestine,” while groups such as the PFLP internationalized the campaign through hijackings, bombings, assassinations, and hostage-taking. Israelis and Jews could be targeted far beyond Israel’s borders because antizionism cast them as representatives of a collective Zionist enemy rather than as people entitled to human rights.
Fayez Sayegh & the Globalization of Antizionism (1965–1975)
Palestinian intellectual Fayez Sayegh gave eliminationist antizionism a language capable of traveling globally. His 1965 Zionist Colonialism in Palestine, published by the PLO Research Center, recast Jewish national liberation as colonialism, racial domination, and imperialism. Sayegh later helped advance the diplomatic campaign that culminated in the UN’s 1975 declaration that “Zionism is a form of racism.” The military demand to eliminate Israel was thereby translated into the progressive vocabulary of anticolonialism and racial justice.
Iran & the Axis of Resistance (1979–)
After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran made the elimination of Israel a central revolutionary objective and built a transnational military network around it. Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Houthis, and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria became parts of what Iran calls the “Axis of Resistance.” Despite major ideological and sectarian differences, these movements were united by a common antizionist horizon: permanent armed struggle against Israel and genocide of its inhabitants and culture.
Proxy Wars & October 7 (2023–)
October 7 represented the culmination of this regional eliminationist tradition. Antizionist militias committed a genocide and launched a global hate movement. They massacred civilians, destroyed communities, and abducted more than 250 people into Gaza. The attack was followed by assaults from Hezbollah, the Houthis, Iranian-backed militias, and eventually Iran itself, turning the conflict into a multi-front regional war. The “Axis of Resistance” made visible what antizionism had become: a transnational military system organized around the continuing proposition that Israel’s existence must remain violently contestable.
Western Antizionism
From the emptied streets of Baghdad and Cairo, the current of antizionism swept westward, carried by Soviet propaganda and Arab nationalist rhetoric until it lodged in the bloodstream of universities, media, and governments. After 1967, Moscow poured resources into casting Zionism as racism, and in 1975 the United Nations ratified that lie with a resolution equating Jewish sovereignty with apartheid. What began as propaganda hardened into global common sense. In lecture halls, NGOs, and newsrooms, antizionism simmered—wrapped in the language of decolonization and human rights, presented as progressive virtue rather than recycled hate.
By the early 2000s, the script had taken deep root. Durban’s 2001 World Conference Against Racism turned into a stage for branding Israel a pariah state, while NGOs and cultural elites polished the vocabulary of apartheid and settler colonialism. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch eventually adopted these charges, proof of how thoroughly decades of ideological labor had normalized them. What seemed like marginal rhetoric was, in fact, a patient project: to recode Jew-hatred as anticolonial virtue.
Antizionism in Western Postcolonial Theory (1970s–)
Western postcolonial theory gave antizionism a powerful new intellectual home. Edward Said situated Zionism within the history of European imperialism, while later settler-colonial scholarship increasingly classified Israel through a binary of colonizer and native. Jewish peoplehood, historical attachment to the land, and national self-determination could thereby disappear: “Zionists” became extensions of a European colonialism to be opposed. The old political project of eliminating Israel was translated into an academic proposition — decolonization — that could make advocating for the elimination of Israel a token of intellectual credibility.
United Nations & NGO Antizionism (1975–)
Antizionism also migrated from revolutionary movements and authoritarian states into the institutions of international civil society. The UN’s 1975 declaration that “Zionism is a form of racism” gave the campaign international legitimacy. At the 2001 Durban NGO Forum, Israel was branded a racist and apartheid state and activists called for its “complete and total isolation.” In subsequent decades, major Western NGOs increasingly adopted apartheid and other frameworks originally developed within antizionist political campaigns. Eliminationist antizionism had acquired the language and institutional authority of universal human rights.
Pseudo-Activism: BDS & Anti-Normalization (2005–)
The BDS movement transformed antizionism into a program of everyday social, cultural, and economic exclusion. Israeli academics, artists, businesses, universities, and cultural institutions became legitimate boycott targets because of their association with Israel. “Anti-normalization” went further, treating ordinary dialogue and coexistence between Palestinians and Israeli Jews as objectionable unless conducted on antizionist political terms. What presents itself as human-rights activism thus reproduces a central antizionist principle: association with the Jewish state itself becomes grounds for exclusion, while separation from “Zionists” becomes a moral duty.
Antizionism in the Western Press (2000s–)
As antizionism migrated from activist and academic subcultures into mainstream Western media, its conceptual vocabulary increasingly became ordinary political language. Terms such as “settler colonialism,” “apartheid,” and eventually “genocide” moved from ideological campaigns into opinion pages, cultural coverage, and explanatory journalism. Obsessive antizionist libels of child-killing, targeting journalists, starvation, and every possible crime splattered the pages of Western newspapers, producing a complex of systematic disinformation around Israel. This normalization also obscured the genealogy of broader antizionist claims: arguments developed to justify terroristic and genocidal violence increasingly appeared simply as neutral descriptions of Israel.
Antizionist Terror in the West (1972–)
Black September murdered eleven Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. In 1994, Hezbollah bombed the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing eighty-five people. In Toulouse in 2012, Mohammed Merah murdered a rabbi and three Jewish children while invoking Palestinian suffering; subsequent jihadist attacks targeted the Jewish Museum in Brussels and the Hyper Cacher supermarket in Paris. In Washington, D.C., in 2025, two Israeli Embassy employees were murdered outside the Capital Jewish Museum by an attacker who allegedly declared, “I did it for Palestine”; days later in Boulder, Colorado, an attacker searching for a “Zionist” event threw Molotov cocktails at Jews campaigning for the Israeli hostages. In Michigan, a Hezbollah-connected antizionist attempted to carry out a mass casualty event against Jewish children, while Democratic senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed rationalized the attack, claiming it was a mere response to the evils of Israel.
WATCH: Students Testify on Campus Antisemitism Before House Judiciary Committee – April 2024
Threats and Harassment at the University of Pennsylvania
“During a unity rally held by Jewish students, we chanted, ‘Rape is not resistance,’ while the encampment chanted, ‘Resistance is justified.’ … They’re met with masked individuals screaming at them: ‘Go die. You are Hitler’s children and Nazis.’ … A student walking on his own campus was surrounded by four masked figures flashing strobe lights directly into his eyes. They proceeded to threaten him, saying, ‘If you know what’s good for you, you’ll get out of here. Hope you have a good doctor, and how’s your dental plan?’”
— Eyal Jacoby, University of Pennsylvania senior
Desecration of Symbols and Open Threats
“The encampment at Penn waved the flag of the PFLP while chanting ‘Al Qassam, make us proud.’ … They vandalized the Benjamin Franklin statue with Nazi and Hamas logos, as well as graffiti reading ‘Zios get f**ed.’* … Within 24 hours of installing two American flags at Harvard Divinity School, they were vandalized three separate times. The flagpole was ripped in half. The flags were tossed across the ground.”
— Eyal Jacoby (UPenn) and Shabbos Kestenbaum (Harvard)
intimidation and anti-jewish policing at harvard
“The protesters established their own rule of law on campus, creating self-appointed ‘safety marshals’ to patrol the campus. These safety marshals followed Jews like me on our way to class, monitoring our every move. They often recorded us and demanded that we leave their encampment, as if we did not have a right to exist at Harvard…a staff at Harvard threatened me with a machete… To this day, Harvard has yet… to discipline this staff member.”
— Shabbos Kestenbaum, Harvard University graduate student
Faculty Endorsement of anti-jewish Violence
“Some professors at Penn are also abetting hateful speech and conduct. One professor posted a cartoon mocking 9/11; another posted on October 7 ‘beautiful and timely’—while in class, a different professor remarked that not all Jews should be thrown into the sea, but only because, in his own words, ‘it was not practical.’”
— Eyal Jacoby, University of Pennsylvania
Emotional Toll and Institutional Silence
“We invited two months ago a popular Israeli musician to sing songs to Jewish students who’ve been experiencing anti-Semitism. There was such a vicious boycott and protest … that we had to hire outside security. When I asked Harvard DEI to condemn the fact that Jewish students needed security to sing songs, they said, ‘This does not fall under our purview.’”
— Shabbos Kestenbaum, Harvard University
Columbia Campus Declared Unsafe for Jews
“An Orthodox rabbi employed by Columbia University urged Jewish students to avoid campus, warning it was no longer safe to remain on university grounds amid ongoing protests.”
— Opening Statement, House Hearing on Antisemitism in Higher Education, 2025
UCLA: Punished for Identifying as a Zionist
“A UCLA student was asked if he was a ‘Zionist’ and, after answering yes, was prohibited from moving to another part of the campus building—simply for expressing his view. Unconscionable.”
— Opening Statement, House Hearing on Antisemitism in Higher Education, 2025
UNC & Yale: Defaced Graduation and Assault with a Flagpole
“At the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, protesters defaced a campus building hours before graduation, coating its steps in red paint. At Yale University, a Jewish student was surrounded by a mob and assaulted by a demonstrator who jabbed her in the eye with a Palestinian flag.”
— Opening Statement, House Hearing on Antisemitism in Higher Education, 2025
Antizionist Bullying and Harassment
The report documents that “Jewish and Israeli students reported being verbally harassed, shouted down, or targeted online for expressing pro-Israel views.” It cites examples of “flyers and social media posts naming Jewish students as supporters of genocide or Zionist violence,” and notes that “some faculty reportedly mocked or dismissed students who challenged anti-Israel narratives in class.” Jewish organizations also experienced vandalism and intimidation.
“Some students described hearing chants such as ‘From the river to the sea’ shouted at them on campus pathways.” (Stanford Task Force Report, 2024)
Institutional Exclusion
According to the task force, “Certain DEI frameworks at Stanford excluded Jewish and Israeli experiences by categorizing Jews as white and privileged.” The report highlights cases where “Jewish or Israeli speakers were removed from events for being perceived as Zionists,” and that “students were pressured to denounce Israel or sign anti-Zionist statements to be accepted in activist groups.”
“Several Jewish students told the task force they felt they had to conceal or renounce their connection to Israel in order to belong in progressive spaces.” (Stanford Task Force Report, 2024)
Social Ostracism and Fear of Speaking
The report finds that “many Jewish and Israeli students described a climate of fear and self-censorship.” Students said they “avoided wearing Jewish symbols, discussing family history, or expressing opinions about Israel” for fear of social or academic retaliation. Others reported “being told directly that Zionists are not welcome in student groups or dorm communities.”
“Jewish students described the need to self-censor in nearly every social and academic setting, fearing that their words could be used against them.” (Stanford Task Force Report, 2024)
Harvard Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, April 2024
Social Ostracism
The report found that Jewish and Israeli students experienced social exclusion so pervasive that “many described feeling isolated, unwelcome, and even unsafe in academic and social settings.” Several reported being shunned by peers, told to avoid collaboration with Israelis, or pressured to hide their background. One example cited an Israeli student who was “bullied by pro-Palestinian activists and told by classmates that speaking to them was not acceptable.”
“Jewish and Israeli students reported being ostracized by classmates and student organizations, sometimes to the point of social isolation.” (Harvard Task Force Report, 2025)
silencing and self-censorship
The task force documented that “many Jewish students reported self-censoring to avoid being labeled or attacked.” One student said they were discouraged from telling a story about their grandfather’s Holocaust-era rescue work in Palestine because it “might offend Palestinians.” Others “removed Stars of David from their profiles or avoided discussing family history related to Israel.”
“Students described self-silencing on campus, particularly around anything that might be perceived as supportive of Israel.” (Harvard Task Force Report, 2025)
Faculty Bias and Institutional Fear
The report noted a chilling effect among faculty, with “some professors stating that they would not hire or collaborate with Israeli or Zionist scholars.” It also documented classrooms where “anti-Israel rhetoric was introduced in unrelated courses,” creating an atmosphere where disagreement was unwelcome.
“Several faculty members reported fear of being labeled for expressing views sympathetic to Israel or for working with Israeli colleagues.” (Harvard Task Force Report, 2025)
Columbia University Student Experiences of Antisemitism, August 2024
Hostility and Harassment
The report documents widespread incidents of hostility toward Jewish and Israeli students, including harassment, intimidation, and classroom bias. Students described being shouted at, called “genociders,” and excluded from discussions for expressing even mild support for Israel. The task force noted that some students “experienced antisemitic slurs and hate speech” and that “the emotional toll of this hostility was profound.”
“Many Jewish and Israeli students reported feeling unsafe, unwelcome, and afraid to express their views on campus.” (Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism, 2024)
forced exile
The report found that DEI and social justice initiatives on campus “frequently failed to include Jewish or Israeli identities” and, in some cases, “recast them as privileged oppressors.” Jewish student organizations were sometimes denied recognition or funding, while antizionist speech was tolerated under the guise of political expression.
“Jewish and Israeli students reported that DEI spaces often excluded them, perceiving their identities as inconsistent with the framework of marginalization.” (Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism, 2024)
Faculty Bias and Institutional Fear
The task force reported a pervasive climate of fear. Students avoided displaying Jewish symbols or speaking openly about Israel to protect themselves socially and academically. Many described “walking on eggshells” and feeling that revealing their identity could result in ostracism or academic retaliation.
“Students said they routinely self-censored, refrained from wearing Jewish symbols, and avoided conversations about Israel for fear of backlash.” (Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism, 2024)
Antisemitism and Anti‑Israeli Bias at UCLA, October 2024
Hostility and Harassment
The UCLA report documents pervasive harassment and intimidation of Jewish and Israeli students, including verbal attacks, exclusion, and physical threats. Over one-third of respondents reported discriminatory treatment, and nearly half said their peers engaged in antisemitic behavior. The task force noted that “many Jewish and Israeli students reported being shouted at, called ‘genociders,’ or excluded from class discussions” following October 7. These experiences produced “a negative impact on mental health and overall well-being,” with over 40 percent of respondents considering leaving UCLA because of antisemitism or anti-Israeli bias.
“Faculty, staff, and students report avoiding campus due to fears of harassment… Respondents describe hiding their Jewish identity, when possible, to avoid harassment and discrimination.” (UCLA Task Force on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, 2024)
encampment and institutional failure
According to the report, the 2024 encampment “was largely viewed as a source of antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias,” with roughly 70 percent of respondents identifying it as such. Witnesses described antisemitic graffiti, swastikas, and verbal assaults such as “Die you f***ing Jew” and “Israel = Nazis.” The task force concluded that university leadership “repeatedly decided not to enforce federal law, state law, and University rules,” allowing antisemitic behavior to escalate unchecked.
“Was denied entry through [the encampment] because I’m a Jew… Walking by campus and seeing signs emblazoned with ‘Israelis are native to hell’ and swastikas was a sight I will never forget.” (UCLA Task Force on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, 2024)
Fear, Isolation, and Administrative Distrust
The survey found widespread fear and alienation among Jewish and Israeli affiliates. Three-quarters of respondents said anti-Jewish bigotry was treated “less seriously than other forms of hate,” and one-third had filed complaints they believed would lead to no action. Many concealed Jewish symbols or refrained from expressing their identity altogether. The report concludes that discrimination has “eroded trust in the institution and compromised the ability of Jewish and Israeli students, faculty, and staff to learn and work.”
“Jewish and Israeli survey respondents lack confidence in UCLA’s ability to effectively address reports of antisemitism… The environment on campus has led a significant portion of respondents to consider leaving UCLA.” (UCLA Task Force on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, 2024)
Commission on Antisemitism Report, Board of Deputies of British Jews, July 2025
Hostility in everyday life
The report documents that antizionism in Britain “rose within hours” of the October 7 Hamas massacre, reaching record levels and spreading across “education, workplaces, the arts, and healthcare.” Jewish citizens described feeling that “there is almost nowhere they can turn outside the community where antisemitism does not seem present in some form.” Ordinary interactions—on the street, at work, or online—became fraught with hostility, leaving many feeling “unable to fully participate in society.”
“The community feels unable to fully participate in society as it has been facing increased antisemitism online, increased community tensions and a failure to effectively respond by institutions across the United Kingdom.” (Board of Deputies Commission on Antisemitism, 2024)
Discrimination in the Workplace and Public Institutions
The Commission received extensive testimony from Jewish professionals who reported being sidelined, silenced, or forced to hide their identity. NHS staff described antizionism being “swept under the carpet,” with some Jewish patients uneasy seeking care. Others spoke of being pressured in professional associations that “do not feel representative or respectful,” but which they cannot leave without losing employment or credentials. The report concluded that anti-Jewish prejudice in professional life “has not been given sufficient attention,” often because Jewish identity is not recognized as both ethnic and religious.
“Many Jewish employees within NHS organisations feel that antisemitism in their workplace is not being addressed; for example, that the issue has ‘simply been swept under the carpet.’”
— Board of Deputies Commission on Antisemitism, 2024, p.19
cultural and academic exclusion
Evidence from artists, educators, and students revealed how cultural spaces and universities became zones of exclusion for Jews after October 7. Jewish performers and academics reported cancelled events, blacklisting, and boycotts. “Artists who previously worked in the industry with ease found the door closed after October 7th,” the report states, adding that public institutions sometimes “opted out of hosting Jewish voices to avoid conflict.” The result was not just professional harm but the silencing of Jewish creativity and scholarship in public life.
“It is unacceptable that Jewish artists are being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity.” (Board of Deputies Commission on Antisemitism, 2024)
Antisemitism in Higher Education, July 2025
harassment and fear on campus
Nosanchuk’s testimony recounts that Jewish students “face discrimination ranging from social ostracism, verbal harassment and, more rarely, physical violence.” He described students being taunted or blocked from entering buildings while displaying Jewish symbols; mezuzot were torn from doorframes and swastikas scrawled on dorm doors. Many Jewish students “conceal their Jewish identity or have retreated from parts of campus life to avoid being targeted.”
“Too many students report that they conceal their Jewish identity or have retreated from parts of campus life to avoid being targeted for being Jewish.” (Testimony of Mathew S. Nosanchuk, Hearing on Antisemitism in Higher Education, 2025)
faculty misconduct and institutional failure
The report details multiple faculty incidents that “crossed the line from uncomfortable ideas into identity-based targeting.” At Stanford, a lecturer ordered Jewish students to stand in a corner, saying, “This is what Israel does to the Palestinians.” At the University of Vermont, a teaching assistant boasted online about deducting points from “Zionist” students and celebrated antisemitic vandalism. At the University of Florida, a law professor awarded first prize to a student paper promoting white-nationalist ideology, later defended by administrators.
“Professors have used instructional time to inappropriately promote advocacy or boycotts while others have created or permitted explicitly hostile environments for Jewish students.” (Testimony of Mathew S. Nosanchuk, 2025)
exclusion from student life
Beyond classrooms, Nosanchuk emphasized that “Jewish students at several universities report that an antisemitic hostile environment forced them to distance themselves from their Jewish identity or relationship with Israel in order to maintain friendships or participate in organizations.” This pattern, he warned, effectively “forces students to choose between their identity and their social acceptance.”
“No students, including Jewish students, should be forced to choose between their identity and their social acceptance.” (Testimony of Mathew S. Nosanchuk, 2025)
Antisemitism on College Campuses Exposed —October 2024
hostile learning environment
Epstein described how antisemitic incidents “became normalized” across campuses after October 7, with Jewish students “taunted, shouted down, and made to feel that their presence was a provocation.” She cited one case where a Jewish student wearing a Star of David was told, “Take that off—it’s a hate symbol.” Others reported graffiti equating Judaism with “white supremacy” or “colonialism.”
“Students told me they began avoiding class altogether because they did not feel safe walking through the quad when protests were happening. They did not feel that university leadership would protect them.” (Testimony of Shira Epstein, 2025)
silencing and administrative evasion
According to the testimony, university administrators often refused to intervene when antisemitic speech was framed as “political.” Epstein stated that Jewish students who reported harassment were “told to consider dialogue” or “avoid bringing up Israel in conversation.” This institutional reluctance, she argued, “turned prejudice into policy.”
“When Jewish students report harassment, they are told to ‘seek mediation’ with the very people targeting them. That is not inclusion; it is institutional abandonment.” (Testimony of Shira Epstein, 2025)
social and psychological impact
Epstein emphasized the deep emotional toll of sustained antizionist hostility. Students she interviewed described “losing lifelong friends overnight” and “hiding Jewish identity markers out of fear.” Many said the hostility was not episodic but “a background hum of exclusion that never stops.”
“One student told me, ‘I’ve stopped wearing my Star of David. I don’t post about my family anymore. I just try not to be noticed.’ That is not what belonging looks like on an American campus.” (Testimony of Shira Epstein, 2025)