respond
Antizionism is the primary driver of anti-Jewish hostility in the Western world today. Yet most institutions and colleagues still do not recognize it as such. While society widely condemns classical antisemitism, it often accepts antizionism as “legitimate political discourse.” This forces Jewish students, professionals, and community members into the exhausting position of having to educate and respond at the same time.
Note: because antizionism operates systemically and often invisibly, responding to individual antizionist incidents offers only mitigation. It is not a solution. Real progress demands that we move from defense to offense through proactive education and bold moral leadership in the public square.
Three Levels of Action
We can respond to antizionism on three distinct levels. These levels are presented in order from least effective (purely reactive) to most effective (proactive and preventive):
Level 1: Immediate Response
Reacting to specific antizionist incidents as they happen — such as a speaker spreading the genocide libel, antizionist harassment of Jewish students, or the brandishing of threatening antizionist symbols. This level is necessary for damage control, but it is inherently reactive and limited in its long-term impact.
Level 2: Institutional Reform
Challenging antizionism that has become embedded in policies, curricula, hiring practices, or organizational culture. This involves pushing for structural changes inside schools, workplaces, and institutions rather than simply responding to isolated events.
Level 3: Proactive Education
Actively getting ahead of the problem by educating the public before incidents occur. This includes organizing teach-ins, panels, essays, podcasts, art exhibits, storytelling, social media campaigns, public advocacy, and marches. Level 3 is where real cultural change begins and where we shift from merely surviving antizionism to prevailing over it.
the four-step response
The four-step response framework below is designed specifically for Level 1 (Immediate Response).
For Level 2 (Institutional Reform), sustained effort and partnership with leadership is usually required.
For Level 3 (Proactive Education), see our section on Proactive Education.
Step 1: Introduce antizionism
Briefly explain what antizionism is, its historical origins (Soviet propaganda → Middle Eastern state policy → Western ideological form), and its documented trail of harm. This sets the necessary context so people understand this is not a normal policy disagreement.
Step 2: Identify the specific libel, trope, or aggression
Clearly name what happened. Point out the particular antizionist claim, symbol, or act (e.g., equating Israel with apartheid or genocide, denying Jewish peoplehood, blood libels rebranded as “Zionist” crimes, etc.).
Step 3: Describe the harm and impact
Explain the real consequences — how this incident contributes to a climate of fear, exclusion, harassment, or violence against Jews. Connect it to the broader pattern rather than treating it as an isolated event.
Step 4: Make specific, time-bound demands
Be direct and concrete. Instead of vaguely asking someone to “look into it,” state exactly what you want them to do, by when, and why. Whenever possible, make the communication public or semi-public (cc relevant stakeholders, post on appropriate channels, or request a public response) to create accountability.
Sample letter
This letter is an open letter from the Network of Engaged Canadian Academics (NECA) to the President of Toronto Metropolitan University, expressing concern over a violent incident at a Students Supporting Israel event on November 5, 2025. The letter argues that the university has failed to adequately address antizionist harassment on campus, particularly by the student group SJP TMU. It calls on the university to publicly condemn antizionist rhetoric, hold those responsible for the violence accountable, revoke SJP TMU’s student group status, and provide administrators with training on addressing antizionism.