top of page

The IHRA and the censorship of Jewish Voices


Kehillah was founded after October 7 to directly support JPS but also represent the voices of Jews who challenged the University’s status quo by refusing to align themselves with Zionism by rejecting its ideology. Administration and this university is directly complicit in the slander of Judaism, associating the murderous and genocidal beliefs of the “state of Israel” to the pre-supposed desire and will of all the Jewish people, not understanding that there is no religious reasons or justifications for the atrocities Israel is committing on Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria et al. Admin and uni are not the Jew’s allies, they and the state of Israel are our enemies.


Kehillah, Edinburgh University’s student society advocating for Judaism beyond Zionism, as well as the Justice for Palestine Society, have been advocating for the rescinding of the obsolete and erroneous definition of the IHRA for quite some time.


The primary author of the IHRA definition, Kenneth Stern (who is a self-avowed Zionist), has been very vocal that this working definition of antisemitism was never written with the intention of institutions formally adopting it, and objecting to the McCarthyist ways in which the definition has been utilized for strictly political purposes, having negative impacts on open dialogue around Israel-Palestine, rather than fighting antisemitism. There are many cases of leading universities having rejected the IHRA after careful reviews by antisemitism task forces, like the University of Toronto, or the University of British Columbia. 


The IHRA, namely “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel […] than to the interests of their own nations.” It is only by allowing for pluralist, varied Jewish voices to be platformed that the necessary education and awareness can be created which challenges this and other forms of antisemitic discrimination, such as “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.” How are Jewish students meant to feel safe on campus speaking out on these issues, bringing necessary nuances to conversations around Israel-Palestine, if the university’s definition of antisemitism itself threatens to censor those who criticize the Israeli state and the circumstances of its creation.


The fracturing of Jewish identity around the singular Israel-centric narrative of Judaism supplied by the IHRA has also entailed that some members of our community have been questioned on their Jewish identity and accused of antisemitism by other Jews for publicly criticizing the acts of Israel during the ICJ-ruled possible genocide in Gaza. This definition puts many Jewish people in a very unique position, open to discrimination, where their own, personal Jewish values are leading to them being called antisemites or ‘self-hating Jews’. which contributes to the harmful rhetoric already present in the Jewish community. They reduced Jewish voices to the monolith, weaponizing our voices and claiming “we feel unsafe” to censor activism and Palestinian voices on campus. Divided Jewish voices on campus and admin only listened to the Zionist minority, not considering the diversity of the Jewish student body and causing the amalgamation of Judaism and Zionism, a hurtful conflation. By upholding the IHRA, they actively continued to participate in said conflation, silencing our voices whilst still manipulating and weaponizing our religion.


They use our voices to justify their anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab racism. This definition is first and foremost dangerous for the Palestinian students on campus, perpetrating anti-Palestinian colonial rhetoric and racism. It labels our protests as “threatening”. 


The IHRA acts as a barrier to constructive discussions within and outside the Jewish community, at a time where it is crucial that these discussions do take place. It halts professors in their ability to correctly teach about Israel and Palestine, erroneously teaching young and impressionable students a false version of History, a tainted image of Judaism.


When conversations around the rescinding of IHRA started picking-up heat after the start of the genocide, we started voicing louder than ever our discontent with it and appealed for its replacement. In March, us anti-Zionist Jewish students wrote an open letter that picked up over 30 signatories in less than 48 hours, and staff also wrote on which got over 25 signatories. Immediately. But the University folded under the pressure of Zionists, once again truly showing us where they stand, as we understood that our Jewish voice is not enough but it challenges their comfortable Zionist status-quo. We feel cast aside and disregarded.


Ultimately, it censors our freedom of expression but also reflection, which are two core tenets of Judaism, which is a religion where the questioning of rules, the discussion of law and ethics, and the debate around fundamental ideals is not only valued but necessary. The IHRA is not only harmful to us on campus, it is also harmful to our Judaism. I wish the administration could understand that.


38 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page