Why, as a Hoosier, I support Indiana’s bill defining antisemitism

By Greg Maurer

 

You don’t need to be a Jew or a Muslim to mourn every innocent life lost in the recent and continuing Middle East violence. Any human with a heart would feel sorrow and grief. You do need to have both critical thinking skills and an understanding that not everyone sees the world through our lens to determine who broke the last ceasefire and who holds the reins to peace (a cursory knowledge of history is a plus).

Antisemitism is a scourge worth combating. It is an insidious, polymorphous disease that has existed for thousands of years. It has shifted to appeal to the hatred of the day, using every arrow in the quiver. Claims of deicide, racial inferiority, dual loyalty, and blood libels led to pogrom after pogrom in Europe and the Middle East. Today, the fulfilled right of the Jewish people to a nation-state in its ancestral homeland is often the cudgel used by civilization’s enemies. Since Hamas’s attempted genocide of Israelis on October 7^th, antisemitic incidents in the U.S. are up 360% across the United States and 700% on college campuses. Hatred of Jews has cut my family: my children have been targets of Jew hatred, my youngest son’s Jewish school has had to fortify its facility and hire additional security personnel, my daughter was visiting friends and nearly stayed the night on October 6^th at one of the villages near Gaza that you have read about in the news, and I have personally lost a loved one to Hamas terror. But this is not about me, it is about the values that we all hold dear in our free society.

Antisemitism is not just the Jewish community’s problem. This fight is the responsibility of every patriotic American who cares about our values and ideals. Hoosiers know right from wrong and are true to our values, which is why Hoosiers want to fight antisemitism. Only a small dose of pragmatism tells us that to fight this unique form of hate in this unique time, we must define it (you cannot fight what you have not defined).  HB 1002, a bill that unanimously passed the Indiana House and is awaiting a hearing in the Indiana Senate, adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.

So, why do some people see the IHRA definition, adopted by more than 1200 entities, dozens of countries, the European Parliament, the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, the United Nations Secretary General, and 34 U.S. States, as controversial?

The most common assault on this definition is that it serves to curtail criticism of Israeli actions and policies. In fact, this definition, which HB 1002 proposes to put in the Educational and not the Criminal Code, specifically allows for such language so long as there is no double standard. Clearly this definition allows for criticism of Israel – just look at the criticism coming from other countries who have adopted IHRA. Do you want to condemn Israel for its policies, whether that be in the West Bank or Gaza? Go for it – criticism is an essential component of a healthy democracy. If that leads you to call for the erasure of the Jewish state without applying that same standard to any other country (and there are some pretty bad actors in the world), then you have crossed a line.

Antisemitism is a form of hatred targeted at Jews, but its corrosive nature leaves its ugly mark on all of society. Fighting antisemitism, especially today with its exponential rise, requires a definition. We have one that is widely accepted, avoids free speech concerns, is not in the criminal code, and is designed to protect Jewish children from chilling hatred and violence.

Given the facts stated above, one must wonder about the motivations of those standing against defining antisemitism and the empowerment of educators to protect Jewish children.