The Big Dilemma in Combating Antisemitism: Reframing or Reclaiming American Values?

The current wave of antisemitism grows out of a larger assault on Western, American and democratic values and can only be countered by strengthening bipartisan public support for these basic values. The most effective way to counter this challenge is to build broad coalitions with diverse ethnic and civic groups who support American values as a bulwark against extremism of all kinds, including antisemitism.

These potential allies largely share our concern about the extremist elements within the anti-Israel movement that propagate antisemitism but likely have other concerns that grow out of the same extremist ideological framework that has become dominant in many institutions. Their motivation stems from a shared perception that such ideologies undermine the very fabric of American society as well as their community’s well-being.

We liken the radical ideology to the head of an octopus with multiple tentacles, antisemitism being just one such tentacle, along with an attack on open discourse in universities, the concept of merit in schools and the workplace, and the foundations of scientific inquiry, etc. Each tentacle also produces constituencies willing and able to fight for the fundamental values that protect them and their fields of interest.

However, implementing such a strategy presents a significant challenge for the Jewish community, one that cuts to the heart of America’s current political polarization.

The elephant in the room is the partisan divide over American values. In our conversations with Jewish professionals and lay leaders, many expressed concern that in the current political climate, even a non-partisan campaign for American values risks being politically stigmatized as “rightwing.” Moderate Democrats who may agree with us at a theoretical level may hesitate to align with an effort that could be perceived as politically slanted.

This perception creates a dilemma for Jewish organizations seeking to build broad coalitions for American values. Two potential approaches emerge from this quandary. The first is a grand reclamation project, aiming to redefine American values across the political spectrum. This would involve actively working to disentangle these principles from any single party association. In other words, it would require us to articulate a “liberal patriotism” that upholds America’s highest ideals of democracy, pluralism, and freedom.

The second approach would seek alternative framing, such as “core democratic values” to avoid triggering partisan reactions, but the downside is that this framing may be so general that it fails to convey a full commitment to the American idea. Even ideologues on the far left and right claim to embrace democratic values, albeit with very different ideas in mind.

There are parallels between this dilemma and the challenges Jewish organizations have faced over the past 15 years in using the term “Zionism” on college campuses. As criticism of Israeli policies intensified and delegitimization campaigns gained traction, the term “Zionism” became increasingly contentious. Public opinion researchers warned the Jewish community that the term consistently polls badly, yet many Jews felt that Zionism is so central to our collective identity that we had no choice but to proudly reclaim it.

The debate over these strategies—whether to reclaim contested terminology or seek alternative framing—reflects a broader question in advocacy: Is it more effective to fight for the original meaning of a term, or to shift to less controversial language that might be more readily accepted?

The authors of this op-ed strongly believe in the reclamation strategy in this instance because the concept of American values is so central to our ability to sustain a democratic society based on the highest ideals and aspirations. If we cannot say “American values”—or some version of the phras—we cannot advocate for and protect those values. The very fact that the concept of American values has been so demonized is evidence of the root problem itself. If we fail to change this reality then we will be unable to generate the very conditions in which Jews and others can survive and thrive.

The specific terminology we use, however, may be less critical than achieving a shared understanding of how the diminution of American values fuels social ills, including antisemitism. If we can align diverse groups around the goal of resurrecting a common values framework, we can create the broad, systemic effect needed to combat extremism and hate effectively.

If we can align diverse groups around the goal of resurrecting a common values framework, we can create the broad, systemic effect needed to combat extremism and hate effectively.

The historical example of the 1951 MacIver report offers an intriguing parallel. This report, commissioned by the umbrella organization of the Jewish community  relations organizations and of several national agencies, the National Community Relations Advisory Council (NCRAC), called for Jewish organizations to prioritize their common cause and unify their efforts over individual organizational interests. While initially rejected due to concerns about centralization and loss of autonomy, the resulting decentralized and “chaotic” structure paradoxically contributed to the rise of U.S. Jewry to unprecedented influence and prosperity during the Civil Rights movement and soon later during the Soviet Jewry movement in the ’60s and ’70s. It showed that where there is a shared understanding of the essence of a challenge, even when different tactics are deployed by politically diverse groups, an effective advocacy ecosystem can be generated.

Our current challenge may benefit from a decentralized approach that allows for diverse strategies united by a common understanding of the threat. To further this crucial conversation and encourage more effective responses, every community and Jewish organization should conduct its own strategic deliberation and develop tailored strategies that align with the shared goal of combating antisemitism. As long as there is a shared understanding of how contemporary antisemitism undermines American and Western values, even substantially diverse strategies will serve the purpose of mitigating the current rise in antisemitism.

Eran Shayshon is Founder of Atchalta. David Bernstein is Founder of the Jewish Institute for Liberal Values.