‘Wake up, stand up, and speak out before it’s too late’: Why non-Jews should care about antisemitism too

David Harris, executive vice chair of the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, discusses his must-read book, Antisemitism: What Everyone Needs to Know. He brings light to the alarming rise of antisemitism across the Western world, how antisemitism is fundamentally a non-Jewish problem, and how it serves as an early warning system for broader threats to liberal democracy. He also emphasizes that combating antisemitism requires clear political leadership, a comprehensive approach addressing all sources of hatred, and a renewed commitment to the fundamental principle that all people are created equal. Program Transcript This is an automated transcript. Please check against delivery. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Rudyard Griffiths here, the publisher, the Hub. Welcome to Hub Dialogues. I’m sitting in for Sean Speer and Harrison Lowman today to have a special conversation on a topic that personally important to me and one that I think we need to spend more time focusing on, that is antisemitism and its rapid rise in the West. Why is this happening? What’s driving this surge in antisemitism? I couldn’t think of anyone better to talk to than the author of a big new book called what Everyone Needs to Know. A great title. His name is David Harris. He is the Executive chair for the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, isgap. He’s also been a junior associate and later a senior associate at St Anthony’s College, Oxford University, who is publishing the book and a visiting scholar at John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. He’s had a storied multi decade career in a variety of different Jewish groups focused on this issue and engaging it in the public square. David, great to be in conversation with you. DAVID HARRIS: It’s a pleasure and an honor. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Let’s start with definitions. They matter. How we frame things provides the kind of context, hopefully for greater understanding. If someone asked you for a concise definition of antisemitism, what would it be? DAVID HARRIS: Hatred of Jews as Jews. In other words, a collective hatred of a people simply for who they are. That’s the easy part in the way Rudyard. The harder part these days is how to deal with the Israel issue and perhaps in the conversation we’ll get into it. That’s where the controversies erupt and the arguments begin. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Yeah, let’s talk about the rise of antisemitism as no doubt was a big reason for you to write this book. You’ve been at this book for the last two years. We’ve seen during this period a surge of hate crimes against Jews and the Jewish community across much of the Western world, including here in Canada. Why is this both new but also very, very old in terms of the surfacing of these hatreds and how they echo back through the past? DAVID HARRIS: Well, I hope listeners will read the book because it goes into that question in great depth, both historically and also today. I also should add, Roger, that the book was not my idea. I have to give all credit to Oxford University Press. Two years ago, October of 2023, I got a call out of the blue from the executive editor of the publishing house who said, we need a book. The Times demand that we need a book. And we need a book that’s written not for scholars who are going to debate the semicolon or what happened in 1264 versus 1263. We need a book to use their language that the average New York Times reader can readily understand. We need it in high schools, we need in universities, we need it in book clubs, we need it in church groups. We have to grapple with these issues. Why now? I think the fundamental question here, Rudyard, is were we living with an illusion that liberal democracy in the post war era was the great Pfizer vaccine, that finally, after literally thousands of years of anti Semitism, we had found the cure and the cure was in the Canadian, American, Australian, if you will, Western model of liberal democracy, which made room for minorities, which made minorities feel like equal stakeholders and shareholders. So was that an illusion and we simply were on a brief sabbatical from history in the post war period, or have things fundamentally changed in a way that we just couldn’t see? I have my thoughts, but it’s a big question. Is there something fundamentally new here or is it the same old but rehashed in new packaging? RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Yeah, so let’s go into that. Because there has been a war in Gaza, it has elicited a great deal of international attention. Some of that, as we know, through the work of isgap, has been, you studiously manufactured, but nonetheless it has been a lightning rod, a catalyst, at least in our streets and a lot of our public conversations around the rise of antisemitism. But also I sense, David, that maybe to have you expand on this, that it in itself is not a complete or adequate explanation for the rise of antisemitism that we are seeing, for instance, the rise of antisemitism on the right for people who traditionally, ideologically, and maybe even some who are avowed anti Semites now, are also supporters of a stern line against Hamas as an international terrorist group. So am I right, David, to feel that it’s too easy, it may be a little too pat just to attribute the rise of antisemitism to the war in Gaza? DAVID HARRIS: Absolutely, Rudyard, I couldn’t agree with you more. I mean, my concern professionally, but also personally, as a father and a grandfather, of Jewish children and Jewish grandchildren. My concern did not begin the day that Hamas invaded Israel. I’ve been writing about speaking about these issues for many years, if not decades. The problems began well before October 7th. However, in the last two years, since October 7th, I mean, we’ve really seen the anti Semitic genie come out of the bottle. We’ve seen in a way that I think has shocked many. And I’ll include myself even as a lifelong student of the subject and even having come from a family which experienced anti Semitism, life threatening anti Semitism, very personally. I’m speaking about my mother, my father and my wife, all three each with their own stories reflecting the three main sources of antisemitism before October 7th and since. And that is left wing anti Semitism. My mother was born in the Soviet Union under the Bolsheviks. Fascist Nazi anti Semitism. Both my mother and father were targeted. Miraculously, they survived, and it must be said, jihadist antisemitism, the third rail of the discussions, because it immediately triggers the response of racism and Islamophobia. But my wife was 16 and a half years old when the mob came for her and her seven siblings in Tripoli, Libya, because they were Jews. Only because they were Jews. Again, miraculously, they survived, they hid, and eventually they were. They were led to safety, never to return to Libya like 850,000 other Jews. So the same three sources existed well before October 7th. And if we look at the last two years, lo and behold, the same three sources all need to be examined. The left wing, because its obsession with denying Israel and the Jewish people the fundamental right to exist. The right of self determination they affirm for everyone else, including the Palestinians, they deny to the Jewish people. The right wing, because there are neo Nazi elements in the right wing. As we’re recording this program, there are reports here in the United States about messages among young Republicans that praise Hitler, that make fun of the gas chambers and the crematoria. So we would be, we would be utterly foolish to pretend that the right wing has not reemerged in a classic way. And of course, jihadism. And the challenge of jihadism in 1967 when my wife’s family was threatened with death, has now spread globally with immigration trends, demographic changes, including in countries like Canada and the United States. And the last thing I’d say is one of the things I really came to understand writing this book was that the old anti Semitic tropes, the Christian tropes, the Muslim tropes that go back centuries and centuries, the racist tropes, the accusations of Blood libel, of scheming, of malevolence are all now being applied to the State of Israel. It’s quite fascinating that the tropes that were directed at Jews, Jews as minorities, Jews and communities, whether in present day Iraq or present day Poland, are now being projected on Israel. So Jews as the child killers on the eve of Easter, allegedly desperate for Christian blood to bake matzah for Passover, have now been transposed onto the state of Israel that Israel allegedly seeks out and joyfully, ecstatically kills Muslim children. It’s fascinating to see how enduring and flexible and creative anti Semitism and its tropes are. And we’re seeing them today now projected principally on the State of Israel, as, if you will, the collective Jew. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: You know, David, I have a confession to make. As a non Jew, you know, prior to October 7th, you know, I assume that anti Semitism was a problem. I knew it existed, but I want to be honest with you and myself, I discounted it. I discounted it as something that was specific to, to the Jewish community that didn’t really involve me, that didn’t involve values or things that I cared about. I cared about the Jewish community. I wanted to see less antisemitism in our society. But I was completely disconnected to the extent to which the sources of antisemitism and the arguments, the lines of argument that it has prosecuted over the last couple years are actually bound up in, David, in things that all of us care deeply about. Pluralism, civility, a Western series of beliefs in things like democracy, the sanctity of the individual, human rights. Talk to us a little bit about that, about why in this book, as you argue that antisemitism is not a Jewish issue, it is not a Jewish phenomenon. It is something that has a universality that all of us need to wake up to and take some responsibility for. DAVID HARRIS: I’m so glad you made the point, Rudyard, because this is my essential point. Antisemitism does not begin with Jews. Antisemitism is a non Jewish problem that targets Jews. But the solution to antisemitism is not in the Jewish community, it is in the larger community. Jews have tried every strategy under the sun, Rudyard, over centuries in terms of trying to integrate, ingratiate themselves, demonstrate that they’re very much a part of society. Including, by the way, the countless German Jews who fought in the First World War, received the Iron Cross for bravery and then were certain it would protect them. When the Nazis surfaced, all they had to do was brandish their Iron Cross and say, but I’m as German as you. And by the way, I also love the music of Beethoven and I read the books of Schiller and Goethe and Heine. And, you know, yes, I’m Jewish, but, you know, I’m not that Jewish. And we’re even trying to build our synagogues in a way that look more like churches. And, and we’ve introduced the organ. I mean, we really are like you. We’re just Saturday people, not Sunday people. So the issue really is non Jewish behavior. And I think to your, to your point about you really weren’t attuned to the problem as you might have been, I think that’s understandable because at the same time, Jews don’t wallow in self pity and victimization. I mean, this is quite a contrast, for example, to the Palestinian story. My wife fled Libya with her family and they arrived in Rome, Italy, within two days. They were working, they integrated into Italian culture, they became Italian citizens. They moved on with all their scars, their hurt, their loss, but they moved on. So when people in Canada, for example, look out, they see Jews who are successful, Jews who are active and productive in all spheres of life, in all aspects of Canadian society. And so when, when Jews might also come along and say, there’s a problem of anti Semitism, it can be jarring to other Canadians who don’t really see it because they see Jewish success. They see a Jewish doctor, they see a Jewish CEO, they see, you know, a Jewish cultural figure, and they say, I, you want me to believe that this is a targeted community, look at how integrated and successful they are. So I can understand your reaction, but the larger point you made, I think, is one of the takeaways for your listening audience from this podcast. Anti Semitism is a sign of something bigger and deeper. And those who simply think that they can compartmentalize it, you know, they can say, well, yeah, what a shame, but, you know, it’s the Jews and they’re what, 400,000 or 450,000 in Canada, but the rest of us are fine. Or in the States, there may be 7 million, but the other 325 million, we’re fine. No, it takes a simple reading of history to understand that we’re the beginning of a much deeper problem. When antisemitism grows, be assured that liberal democracy and all the core values that you enumerated, human dignity, human freedom, human rights, pluralism, separation of church and state, all of those things that we’re attached to, even though sometimes we underappreciate them, all of those things are at risk The Nazis began with the Jews. By the end of the Second World War, between 60 and 70 million people were killed, of whom some 6 million were Jews. The other 60 to 65 million were Rudyard were not Jews. They were soulful democrats. They were trade unionists. They were the handicapped. They were Allied soldiers, including Canadian and American soldiers. There were civilians in Britain. There were all kinds of casualties. Civilization itself came close to the edge. So Jews need to be an early warning signal Antisemitism is going up. You may or may not know Jews particularly care about Jews, but if you cherish liberal democracy, core values, wake up, stand up and speak out before it’s too late. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: David. I’m glad. I just want to have one more pass at this because I think I want to try to connect with people out there like myself before October 7th, who are thinking, people who care about issues and ideas, but maybe didn’t care about this issue and idea in the same way that I care about it now. And it’s this idea of the canary in the coal mine, David, that antisemitism is presaging. It’s a sign of a broader dysfunctionality and breakdown in a social, political and cultural order that if it isn’t addressed and if we don’t find ways to head it off again, as you say, history would predict that antisemitism and the forces that it unleashes doesn’t stop with the Jewish community. And I would say a proof point of this, David, is how we’re seeing now antisemitic tropes expand across society to different groups. There’s obviously been a lot of attention and focus on universities, as there should be. But now we’re seeing it in parts of the media. We’re seeing it as we’ve discussed earlier in parts of right wing media, not just left wing media. Talk to us a little bit more about this, David, about in a more dystopian future what we might see, what you might see as the steps now that could happen over the next period of time as the forces and toxicity that’s inherent to antisemitism breaks out of that vessel and starts to spread through the rest of society. DAVID HARRIS: So I need to begin, Rudyard, by, if you will, rejecting the canary in the coal mine reference. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Got it. DAVID HARRIS: And not because it’s not accurate in its own way. It is, however, as we both know, in order for the miner to survive, if the methane gas comes, the canary has to die. And as a Jew, I refuse to die in order that others may live simply because they’ve been blind up until that point. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Hear, hear. DAVID HARRIS: We played that role. We played that role for too long in history. So I prefer to call this, if you will, the early warning system, the wake up call, whatever you will. Though of course, technically you’re right. But look again, I know you know, any mention of the word history triggers a roll of the eyes these days. We live in an ahistorical world. History becomes what we had for breakfast this morning or what film we saw last night. People don’t want to be bothered with the details of history, but look at the connection between antisemitism at any point in time and governance. As I mentioned earlier, for me, this is not abstract and this is not a matter of sitting in libraries for hours. The Soviet Union launched its Bolshevik revolution and all of the promises of the workers paradise and the brotherhood of nationalities replacing the tsarist regime. And even some Jews who were desperate after the tsarist period bought into it. How long did it take before the Bolshevik regime began its totalitarian march through history, its murder and destruction not just of Jews, but of any free thinking person? I landed in the Soviet Union in 1974 on a government exchange program to teach in the Soviet Union. I saw it with my own eyes. I was detained by Soviet authorities. I was held for several days and kicked out, for heaven’s sake. That system which used antisemitism as a tool of control, it went down the tubes as it had to. Right wing. How much does one have to talk about where the Nazis led what was considered the most educated, cultured, civilized nation on earth, Germany at the time, and where fascism, whether in Italy or Spain or Chile, where it led those countries and jihadism? Where has Libya been since all the Jews were expelled in 1967? What’s happened to Syria and Iraq and Algeria and Sudan and all the countries that once had Jews? And these orgies of anti Semitism and murder and expulsion, have these countries emerged as Jeffersonian democracies? So we have to understand, look at the agenda of any of the prominent anti Semites in the world today. Richard and just go a step beyond their antisemitism, what else do they think? What do they think about the American flag or the Canadian flag? What do they think about equality between the sexes? What do they think about separation of church and state? What do they think not just about freedom of religion, but freedom from religion. What do they think about, about a woman’s right to have an education and a career and full equality? Antisemitism is not decoupled from any of these things. And those who simply robotically march because they get a, a kind of psychic thrill from wearing the keffiyeh and think they’re part of some, some movement that, that gives them a sense of purpose and connection, especially after the COVID isolation, they’re the useful idiots. I mean, when I see left wingers marching in Toronto or New York together with jihadists, a part of me has to last only because the moment the jihadists would come to power, their first target would not be the right wing, it would be the left wing enablers. Again, a lesson of history. The Bolshevik Revolution. It turned immediately on the Mensheviks and the Social democrats once they achieved power. So yes, we need to return to history, but we need to, to teach ourselves and our young people that history is not meant to roll the eyes or to generate the yawn. It’s the only guide we have not to become prisoners of history, but students of history, lest we lose this gift we’ve been given. Rudyard the gift of liberal democracy is a blip on the historical screen. In thousands and thousands of years of recorded history, we’ve had a few centuries of liberal democracy. We’re in danger of seeing it vanish. And antisemitism is the first warning sign that something is wrong. Fix it. Fix it before it’s too late. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Well said, David. It’s again just critical point for everyone to understand that antisemitism is kind of a delivery device for a lot of other things. Primarily it is the hatred of Jews. But it is also these other vectors, these other pathogens that have this trajectory, which, as David rightly points out at these turning points in history, often leads to horrible consequences for society writ large. David in our remaining moments, let’s turn to solutions because this discussion understandably can become quite pessimistic because of the surge in violence that we’re seeing. Because as we’ve just discussed that this is, there are higher stakes at play here than just violence against Jews in the Jewish community in the western world. How do we begin to kind of address this? How do we begin to push back? What are the top two or three things that you can see in history in your reading and writing and your engagement with these issues over decades that you think can kind of begin to, as you say, assert the Pfizer vaccine over the kind of viral spread of this hatred? DAVID HARRIS: So in the book that I wrote, Rudyard, I wanted to make sure that it was not just description but also prescription. And the last part of the book is solely devoted to at least my prescriptions, plural. But to summarize, I think, number one, I’m absolutely convinced that we need political leadership. Not political followership, not political ambivalence, not political ambiguity. We need political leadership. And I offer examples in the book because I divide political leadership into three categories. One, which is clear, unambiguous and forthright. Bravo. The second, which is quite the opposite. And we’ve had leaders from the Prime Minister of Malaysia to the current President of Venezuela, not to mention the leadership in Iran and elsewhere, who are openly, blatantly anti Semitic. And then I describe a third category of people who themselves are not anti Semitic, but in their behavior at critical moments, spoke out of both sides of their mouth and tried to play, on the one hand, the principled leader and on the other hand the ambitious politician. And I offered some examples as well. So clear, unambiguous political leadership, number one. Number two, antisemitism needs to be approached in a swivel headed fashion. It cannot be weaponized or instrumentalized. People on the left cannot talk about antisemitism only from the right and those on the right only about antisemitism from the left. And everyone tiptoes when it comes to jihadist antisemitism because at the same time they’re looking for votes domestically or internationally, they’re trying to tap into Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund. You want to be serious in fighting antisemitism, you need to be swivel headed. 360 degrees. Number three, we cannot ignore the impact of social media in any of these conversations. Imagine for a moment, Rudyard, that Goebbels, Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda chief of the Nazis, had the tools today of TikTok and Instagram and YouTube go down the list. So how do we balance the obvious need for freedom of speech and protection of that cherished value on the one hand, while on the other hand, recognizing our responsibility not to incite, not to recruit. And this is not just a matter of legislation, this is also a matter of corporate responsibility. And number four, and my list is much longer. But whether in schools or religious communities or elsewhere, we have to affirm the central value that we are all created in God’s image. And I’m not now sort of trying to offer a weekend sermon, but what I am saying is every religion has some variation of the Golden Rule. The problem is not the formulation, the problem is the practice. It’s still, after thousands of years, elusive for too many. I’ve tried to understand the righteous Gentiles in the Second World War. They were not many in number, but each one to me was a universe unto themselves, at risk to their lives. They sought to save, in this case, Jews, in many cases not knowing those Jews personally, but simply because they were fellow human beings. When we create an educational system, a value system, a spiritual system that says we’re different in many ways, we’re different in our house of worship, we’re different in our skin color, we’re different in the language we speak at home. But all of those are minor. What matters is we are all created in God’s image and we’re all dependent on one another for this journey we call life and liberal democracy. When we reach that point, then I think we’ve got a chance. Because in the Second World War, Rudyard, we saw not just individuals, we saw a nation, Denmark. Denmark, which with some exceptions, there were some Nazi collaborators. But the country of Denmark, by and large rose to save 90% of its Jews and ferry them to Sweden in order to keep them out of the Nazi concentration camps. Meanwhile, as you may remember, Canadian immigration policy was summed up in the title of that legendary book, None Is Too Many. American immigration policy towards Jews was very similar. So how do we become a bit more like Denmark during the Second World War or those other examples, people and nations that rose up and said, these are people, these are human beings, these are created in God’s image. We cannot sit idly by while they’re targeted, persecuted, arrested, gassed, annihilated. It’s as simple and as difficult as that. Rudyard. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Yeah, well said, David. Final question on this theme of recommendations. The Hub’s audience has a lot of probably people who would describe themselves as small C conservatives, not necessarily big C conservatives active in politics, but people who are kind of attracted and animated by, you know, a conservative set of values and assumptions. What is your recommendation to conservatives who are worried about what they’re seeing in their own intellectual ideological movement? The rise of the Tucker Carlson’s, the Candace Owens. Yes, these are Americans, but they’re in Our podcast feeds here in Canada. They are influential and maybe especially younger conservatives, younger conservative men who seem especially susceptible to these types of anti Semitic messages. What could conservatives, or how should conservatives think about this challenge? And to what extent should we be dedicating ourselves to standing up, speaking out and naming and shaming people who are purveyors of anti Semitic hate? DAVID HARRIS: So I think my message would be the same, whether to conservatives with a small C or liberals with a small L. We have to recognize, and I’ll speak for a moment about the states we have within the Democratic Party, most certainly today, but in the Republican Party as well, and you mentioned some names. We have ongoing culture wars within the party to claim ownership of the party and the ability to establish the platform of the party. So I would say in this case to your conservative with a lowercase C audience, there’s no room for complacency. I’ll even give complacency an uppercase c to emphasize it. There’s no room for complacency because we may think at times that it’s really about, in this case, conservatives versus the Liberal Party in Canada or the Republican Party versus the Democratic Party. And obviously on election day it is, and often in the halls of Parliament it is. But at any given moment, and that includes right now, there are battles royale going on within the parties. In the Democratic Party in the United States, I can no longer tell you what the platform is because the party itself has profound disagreements, including, by the way, on Israel, including on how to define antisemitism, including on the place of Jews. We’re about to see in New York City an election for mayor that is unprecedented in the history of the city. Jews first arrived here in 1654. He’s running as a Democrat while supporting the Intifada while refusing to recognize Israel’s nature as a Jewish majority state, while threatening to arrest the prime minister of Israel. For many Democrats, those are abhorrent positions, not to mention some of his neo Marxist policies. So the battle is constant with within the party, and not just the Democratic Party in the United States, but the Republican Party. Is this going to be the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan in the future or the Republican Party of Tucker Carlson? They’re not the same. They’re not even close. So with one eye, conservatives with a small C need to be focused on the next general election, I guess, and how to win, especially after the thrashing they took in the last election. But with the other eye, don’t assume that everyone who defines themselves as a conservative thinks like you do on. I’m not talking about peripheral issues, I’m talking about core issues. And in a country like Canada, where as I recall, a number of universities made it almost impossible for Jewish students to, to study and to live normally, and where I recall Jewish parents having to accompany their children to Jewish day school surrounded by other parents to protect the children, I’m sorry, not from Jewish day school, but from private or public schools because those children were being taunted as Jews. That may sound like a threat to the Jewish community in Canada. The Canada that I’ve known for decades, that I visited a gazillion times. The Canada where my daughter in law and her family come from Ottawa, where my first cousins live in Halifax, that’s not the Canada that I know. And I don’t believe that’s the Canada that either liberals or conservatives should ever want to see, where a Jewish child has to be surrounded by a group of adults simply to take that child to school lest he be bullied, attacked on the way. That’s not a conservative issue, that’s not a liberal issue. That should be a Canadian issue. And we need politicians on all sides of the spectrum who say it that plainly, Roger. And if they start equivocating and they can’t speak about it without adding racism, Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia, then the problem goes way beyond the Jews, which has been the theme of this conversation. At the end of the day, I hope your listeners will take a look at the book. It’s available on Amazon right now. I can actually say proudly it’s number two on their political history list, just from pre orders. But again, the book is called what Everyone Needs to Know and it offers both description and yes, necessarily, prescription. Hear, hear. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Yeah, I just want to urge our listeners to get out, grab a copy of the book pre order. You can do that here at Indigo in Canada or Amazon ca. Antisemitism. What Everyone Needs to Know. As David said, number two on the web giant’s political history list. So congratulations David. This book is so timely and it’s been just such a pleasure talking with you here on Hub Dialogues and I really hope we can do this again. DAVID HARRIS: I would love to and I thank you for the opportunity. Bye bye to everyone listening. RUDYARD GRIFFITHS: Bye bye everyone. Thank you for tuning into this episode of Hub Dialogues. Check out all of our other great interviews on our podcast feed. Leave a review and a comment. We always appreciate your thoughts on what you’re hearing on the Hubs podcast.