The accusation is not even remotely true. The accusation misrepresents the festival’s Code of Conduct, which explicitly protects free speech - even the most extreme anti-Israel invective.
But it shows how "Gaza" is now used an an excuse to mainstream all antisemitism.
More than a third of the Festival's lineup has withdrawn or resigned in protest after participants were asked to sign a code of conduct that included reference to LaTrobe University's anti-racism plan. They claim that LaTrobe has adopted the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism which they claim declares that criticizing Israel is antisemitic.
IHRA does not say that - it says the opposite - but critics have pointed to a couple of examples listed in the definition such as calling Israel a racist endeavor or comparing Israel to Nazi Germany as examples of potential censorship.
However, LaTrobe University did not adopt IHRA definition to begin with. It, along with most universities in Australia, adopted a modified definition of antisemitism that avoided such "controversial" positions like comparing Israel to Nazis being antisemitic.
Here is the entire modified definition:
Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, harassment, exclusion, vilification, intimidation or violence that impedes Jews’ ability to participate as equals in educational, political, religious, cultural, economic or social life. . It can manifest in a range of ways including negative, dehumanising, or stereotypical narratives about Jews. Further, it includes hate speech, epithets, caricatures, stereotypes, tropes, Holocaust denial, and antisemitic symbols. Targeting Jews based on their Jewish identities alone is discriminatory and antisemitic.
Criticism of the policies and practices of the Israeli government or state is not in and of itself antisemitic. However, criticism of Israel can be antisemitic when it is grounded in harmful tropes, stereotypes or assumptions and when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel or all Jews or when it holds Jewish individuals or communities responsible for Israel’s actions. It can be antisemitic to make assumptions about what Jewish individuals think based only on the fact that they are Jewish.
All peoples, including Jews, have the right to self-determination. For most, but not all Jewish Australians, Zionism is a core part of their Jewish identity. Substituting the word “Zionist’’ for ‘’Jew’’ does not eliminate the possibility of speech being antisemitic.
All of the examples that critics of IHRA have pointed to for years have been excised. And even calling for the destruction of Israel, according to this definition, "can" be antisemitic but isn't automatically so. Even comparing Israel to Nazi Germany can be OK according to this definition.
But LaTrobe makes sure that even this definition cannot possibly be used to quash freedom of speech. It adds, in the antisemitism section,
Academic freedom is of paramount importance to La Trobe University. We adopted in full the French Model Code for Academic Freedom and Freedom of Speech. We support the right of members of our community to engage in free speech, however, have robust processes and procedures in place to deal with significant disruptions and/or contraventions of the limitations of free speech, including for speech that is racist, vilifying, or threatening.
This French Model Code further protects freedom of speech beyond this watered down definition, essentially saying that all speech is OK unless it is against the law or interferes with university principles to " foster the wellbeing of students and staff." In this case, that means it must protect Jewish students just as it protects all other students from harassment or verbal attack.
Most of the writers who are withdrawing from the conference no doubt did not read any of this. But the campaign itself is designed not to protect freedom of speech, but to destroy even the most minimal protections for Jewish students from antisemitic attack.
More than 200 Australian writers have now signed a letter that effectively calls to remove any protections of Jews. Article after article are misrepresenting the Bendigo policy as being against free speech. The idea of "free speech" is no longer a protection, but a weapon against Jews.
This incident shows that the "Gaza genocide" slander is not an end in itself. It is part of a campaign to protect and promote antisemitism itself.
And it is working.
(h/t Jill)
|
"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022) |
 |
Buy