NJCRAC Criteria for Assessing Anti-Semitism

The NJCRAC Executive Committee adopted in June 1985, and updated in June 1986 the following criteria, which are intended to provide guidelines to the NJCRAC and its member agencies in monitoring and assessing annually anti-Semitism in the United States.

---

 

There are many ways in which the state of anti-Semitism, and/or the potential for anti-Semitism can be assessed. No single factor, unrelated to other factors, can provide a definitive assessment of the state of anti-Semitism at any time. All factors should be seen as interrelated. An overriding consideration in prognosticating the potential for anti-Semitism is an assessment of those objective conditions in society that traditionally have created a risk for the growth of anti-Semitism, notably: economic breakdown; intergroup or interclass conflict; the propensity to violence, and general breakdown in the democratic process. Indeed, any issue that polarizes American society, regardless of the specific issue at hand, should be regarded as a "risk factor." Within this context, the following considerations should be taken into account in assessing anti-Semitism:

1.

Prevailing Attitudes Towards Jews

These measurements of American public opinion have been made regularly for about a half century by a number of different agencies, often repeating exactly the same questions. The questions tend to concentrate on negative stereotypes (e.g., "Are Jewish businessmen more dishonest than others?"), on predispositions to action (e.g., "Would you object to a Jewish neighbor?"), and on general feelings (e.g., "Which of the following groups do you dislike?"). Comparing the answers to the same questions from year to year provides some trends for analysis.

2.

Acts of Aggression, Overt or Covert, Against Jews

These include anti-Semitic graffiti, vandalism to Jewish buildings, mailed threats, and the like. For the most part they are anonymous, but they may be indications of underlying attitudes.

Comprehensive measurements of these phenomena require a highly systematic and universal system of reporting these acts. A uniform information-gathering could provide for significant trends for analysis.

3.

Discrimination Against Jews

These are more institutionalized forms of behavioral rejection: discrimination in employment, in housing, in places of public accommodation, and any disability for Jews in being appointed or elected to public office. There are some discreet systematic measurements of these phenomena; e.g., trend measurements of Jewish employment in executive positions; numbers of Jewish public officials appointed or elected; and the number of cases brought before statutory human rights bodies.

4.

Expressions of Anti-Semitism by Public Figures

Anti-Semitic expressions by public personalities-whether in politics, journalism, or other realms of public life-are usually given currency in the media. Although a systematic monitoring of media could provide some trend measurement, the evidence of this phenomenon is largely impressionistic.

5.

Expressions of Anti-Semitism by Religious Figures

In light of the long history of anti-Semitism rooted in some aspects of Christian theology and teaching, special attention should be given to anti-Semitic statements and materials propagated in sermons, public comments, passion plays and religious textbooks.

6.

Responses to Conflict Situations

Prevailing attitudes toward Jews can be revealed by situations of severe conflict or pressure. For example: the oil embargo of 1973-74 and the gasoline lines of 1979 might have triggered sharp anti-Israel attitudes; that they did not was significant.

Official Reactions to Anti-Semitism

Presumably, one index to a society's readiness for anti-Semitism is the extent to and the alacrity with which public officials and official bodies publicly reject any expression or manifestation of anti-Semitism. Although a systematic monitoring of media could capture this phenomenon, it has so far largely been an impressionistic measurement.

8.

Anti-Semitic "Mass" Movements

One critical measure of anti-Semitism would be the relative growth of any movement for "organized anti-Semitism," such as neo-Nazi groups or the Ku Klux Man. This growth has been subject to some measurement by law enforcement agencies and others. The nature of the activities of these groups, particularly their propensity toward violence, should be monitored and assessed on an on-going basis.

9.

Personal Experience with Anti-Semitism

This would entail the survey measurement of how many experiences Jews have had personally in a given period with anti-Semitic remarks or actions. There may be some overlap with other measurements. There has been some corroborative survey measurement of these trends, but the evidence is mainly impressionistic.

10.

Anti-Zionist and/or Anti-Israel Manifestations

Since the creation of the State of Israel, and especially since the passage of the infamous "Zionism Equals Racism" resolution by the General Assembly of the United Nations, attacks on Zionism and on the legitimacy of the State of Israel have often masked attacks on the Jewish community as such. Such attacks are anti-Semitic; they go beyond legitimate differences that could exist with regard to the policies and actions of the government of Israel and the policies and conceptions of Zionism. What should be evaluated is the nature and extent of such attacks, and, when they occur outside the United States, their impact in the U.S. It should not be assumed that criticism of aspects of Zionism and Israel is necessarily anti-Semitic.