Clubhouse of Antisemites
As a Jewish educator and rabbi who could speak authoritatively on the historical roots and applications of Jew-hatred, I began to get pinged or invited to join such rooms by other Jews who wanted a defense of our community.Arizona's Holocaust education does not protect Jews - opinion
One afternoon, I was called into a room discussing Israel and her struggles against Hamas and other terrorist organizations. One person in the discussion suggested that if Israel ever had the upper hand militarily, they would kill all Arabs in the region. I gently pointed out that since the late 1960s, Israel has had—as policymakers call it—a qualitative military edge, but despite that advantage, Israel instead pursued peace with its Arab neighbors in the region. A pointed exchange, but a purely political one.
Then a young man who was known for frequent antisemitic outbursts joined the virtual stage, and not only condemned my view, but equated my acknowledgement of Israel’s military might with a call for genocide. Despite everyone present pointing out that this was not what I said, the young man went on a tirade against Jews in general and their innate desire for blood and vengeance.
That night, a room began, hosted by several anti-Israel voices on Clubhouse including the fellow I met earlier that day. The room suggested that all Jews sought to murder Arabs living in Israel or the territories, and then the topic turned to me personally. I was quickly identified as a problem because “no one is able to counter his views.” Two solutions were proposed. The first was to use the reporting feature that Clubhouse includes to flag problematic content to mass report my account, with the hopes of having me removed from Clubhouse. The second was to “dox” me personally. My home address, where I live with my wife and five children, was publicly announced in the room. While as the Chabad rabbi of the University of Kentucky and the Lexington area, my address is fairly easy to find by design, to hear it announced in this fashion along with calls for “someone to do something about him” was certainly jarring.
The campaign to mass report me bore fruit and Clubhouse restricted my ability to begin conversations for 24 hours. My rights were thankfully restored after an appeal, but nothing was done to moderate the violent threats being made against me or other members of the Jewish community.
In the aforementioned Nation of Islam room led by LaKeith Stanfield, I was pinged in on a Saturday night following hours and hours of conversation on the app over Shabbat when many Jews were not there to defend themselves. After laying out academically how The Secret Relationship, the nation of Islam’s hateful pseudo-history book, has long been debunked, I was immediately inundated with vicious attacks, including references to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Holocaust denial, and death threats in my inbox.
Obviously, there is little value to Holocaust education if we don’t teach students to identify antisemitism when they see it today. As HB2241 proceeded through the Senate, a video of House Minority Whip Athena Salman using an antisemitic blood libel on the floor of the Arizona House surfaced. Suspiciously, Salman was also a co-sponsor of HB-2241, an oddity that hardly makes sense to those who understand the issue of contemporary antisemitism. The prime House sponsor of HB-2241, Rep. Alma Hernandez, was privately approached and surprisingly refused to engage in a discussion of the policy and practical concerns raised by her bill’s exclusion of the IHRA definition. This was unlike her, given her history of strong national leadership within the Jewish community and in supporting the IHRA definition.Failed Louisiana Holocaust education bill was used to pan critical race theory
SOON ENOUGH, another video emerged of Minority Whip Salman claiming credit for having stopped the IHRA Definition in 2020. This was an attack effort she pursued in partnership with the ACLU. Suddenly, the suspicion surrounding HB-2241 gave way to an understanding of what was taking place. The price paid to clear Holocaust education with Salman and other progressive House leaders was for moderate Democrats to detach and hand over control of the serious issue of antisemitism to the ACLU. What we see clearly reflected in this bill is the fact that many of Arizona’s fine Democratic legislators have politically been taken hostage by extremists, a trend taking place all around the country.
Antisemitism in America today has no greater asset than the sophisticated legislative and legal support it receives from the ACLU. One need look no further than their unabashed activities and affiliations in Arizona in recent years to gather this fact. Their aligning efforts with hate groups that persecute Jewish persons on the basis of national origin showcase a stunning lack of objectivity, an embrace of bigotry packaged in deceitful narratives of victimhood and anti-racism, and double standards applied to suit their extremist political agenda.
The ACLU and antisemites of all ideologies oppose the IHRA definition because it objectively exposes the true nature of stylized contemporary antisemitism. We all know that antisemites often use the pretense of referring to Israel or Zionists when the public perception they seek to cultivate speaks to the Jewish people as a collective. Contrary to the ACLU’s false claims, the IHRA definition doesn’t prevent antisemitic speech, it merely highlights its bigoted nature for those who lack a proper understanding of this unique form of racism.
To be clear, the overwhelming majority of Democrats oppose antisemitism and wish to combat it. However, if they are unable to stand up to the ACLU and antisemites in legislatures, they will certainly be unable to do so in classrooms. Arizona’s Democrats now face a heavy moral responsibility for the fate of a Holocaust education mandate that includes no safeguards from abuse at a time of crisis for Jewish students. HB2241 is therefore a cause for soul-searching rather than celebration.
He soon began telling fellow board members at Shir Chadash Conservative Congregation, in the New Orleans suburb of Metairie, that the bill was more complicated than it appeared.
The Shir Chadash board decided not to weigh in on the legislation. And it wasn’t alone: While the regional chapter of the Anti-Defamation League and the New Orleans Jewish Federation backed the bill, several of the state’s Jewish community leaders declined to endorse it.
Ultimately the bill died in the State Senate. Still, its short life was notable because of how it functioned as a front in the battle between right-wing white lawmakers and progressive Black lawmakers over critical race theory, an academic framework for teaching race and history that has become a target for conservatives at statehouses and school board meetings across the country.
The Holocaust education bill seemed potentially uncontroversial when Hodges introduced the measure in April. The original text simply called for “instruction regarding World War II and the Holocaust for middle and high school students and training for teachers relative to such instruction.”
Many Jewish groups have called for exactly that kind of requirement, arguing that education is the key to increasing tolerance and preventing genocides in the future. Currently, 17 states require some form of Holocaust education in schools. Louisiana, which one study pegged as having one of the lowest percentages of Holocaust-aware young people in the US, is seen as especially in need of similar mandates. The state also recently became the new home of the Museum of the Southern Jewish Experience, boosting the visibility of Jews in the region.
But as lawmakers held hearings on the bill, it became clear that many of its supporters had a different vision — starting with Hodges, an evangelical ex-missionary and prominent conservative who has served in the Louisiana State Legislature for a decade. Hodges initially accepted, then declined, an interview with JTA.
On her professional Facebook page during the bill’s debate period, Hodges shared an image of Hitler with a caption calling him “everything today’s liberal craves.” Another post compared Nazi Germany to critical race theory and the New York Times’ 1619 Project, writing, “World War II was about RACE, yet liberals objected to it being included in my bill … Hitler had been laying the groundwork for at least 15 years before the Holocaust. It began with the organization of college students who would be the ones to help him implement his reign of horror.”