Skip to content
  • Home
  • Subscribe / donate
  • Events calendar
  • News
    • Local
    • National
    • Israel
    • World
    • עניין בחדשות
      A roundup of news in Canada and further afield, in Hebrew.
  • Opinion
    • From the JI
    • Op-Ed
  • Arts & Culture
    • Performing Arts
    • Music
    • Books
    • Visual Arts
    • TV & Film
  • Life
    • Celebrating the Holidays
    • Travel
    • The Daily Snooze
      Cartoons by Jacob Samuel
    • Mystery Photo
      Help the JI and JMABC fill in the gaps in our archives.
  • Community Links
    • Organizations, Etc.
    • Other News Sources & Blogs
    • Business Directory
  • FAQ
  • JI Chai Celebration
  • JI@88! video

Recent Posts

  • Zionism wins big in Vegas
  • Different but connected
  • Survival not passive
  • Musical celebration of Israel
  • Shoppe celebrates 25 years
  • Human “book” event
  • Reclaiming Jewish stories
  • Bema presents Perseverance
  • CSS honours Bellas z”l
  • Sheba Promise here May 7
  • Reflections from Be’eri
  • New law a desecration
  • Resilient joy in tough times
  • Rescue dog brings joy
  • Art chosen for new museum
  • Reminder of hope, resilience
  • The national food of Israel?
  • Story of Israel’s north
  • Sheltering in train stations
  • Teach critical thinking
  • Learning to bridge divides
  • Supporting Iranian community
  • Art dismantles systems
  • Beth Tikvah celebrates 50th
  • What is Jewish music?
  • Celebrate joy of music
  • Women share experiences 
  • Raising funds for Survivors
  • Call for digital literacy
  • The hidden hand of hate
  • Tarot as spiritual ritual
  • Students create fancy meal
  • Encouraging young voices
  • Rose’s Angels delivers
  • Living life to its fullest
  • Drawing on his roots

Archives

Follow @JewishIndie
image - The CJN - Visit Us Banner - 300x600 - 101625

Tag: academia

Tackling antizionism head on

Adam Louis-Klein was deep in the Amazon on Oct. 7, 2023 – three months into fieldwork with an Indigenous community, living without any internet or phone contact. Two days later, in a local town, he reconnected with the outside world and saw the news. Then he saw something else: how people in his professional orbit were responding to the atrocities perpetrated against Israelis.

“I spoke up and said I stood in solidarity with Israelis, and spoke up against the bigotry I was already seeing, and I was quickly, basically purged,” he told the Independent.

photo - Adam Louis-Klein
Adam Louis-Klein (photo by Adam Louis-Klein)

Louis-Klein, a McGill University PhD candidate who now lives in New York state, describes a swift loss of “all my social and professional contacts.” But that didn’t stop him from expressing his views. He felt an obligation, he said, to offer a Jewish voice that speaks the same language as the academy and the left, especially in response to antizionism.

“As I wrote more about it, I think my understanding of antizionism got sharper and sharper,” he said. “I got more focused on antizionism itself as an ideology, not just antisemitism.”

That shift – treating antizionism as something that should be named and confronted directly, rather than in the context of its relationship with antisemitism – has become central to his work. In his view, focusing on antisemitism as the lens can become a rhetorical trap, positioning antizionism as a respectable political position.

His ideas went viral. 

“I was posting on Facebook and people kind of liked the little mini-essays I wrote,” he said. He launched a blog at the Times of Israel, then began writing for other outlets. “One thing led to another.”

The visibility has accelerated in recent months, he said. Movement Against Antizionism (MAAZ), the organization he founded and leads, has also caught on rapidly. 

People found his Times of Israel blog and were on the lookout for voices explicitly naming and confronting antizionism, he said. The people he works with have helped refine his language. Looking back at his writing over a short span, he said, “I already see a kind of progression whereby I get sharper at naming antizionism and making that the focus.”

The backlash was instantaneous.

“People tried to shut me down,” he said. “There were fake complaints against me … they would call my advisor, they would call the anthropology department to try and get me expelled.” He said he was removed from WhatsApp groups, a book club he organized collapsed, a presentation he organized on the Soviet roots of antizionist rhetoric was canceled without explanation.

He described a hardened ideological environment.

“I was told that no one would discuss with me whether it’s a genocide,” he said. “The genocide libel was not something that could be discussed.”

While the university environment may be a hotbed of antizionism generally, anthropology is particularly hostile, he said.

Early anthropology was connected to colonial infrastructures and later efforts to reckon with that legacy have put “settler-colonialism” at the centre of the discipline, Louis-Klein said. In his telling, the field has “swallowed wholesale” a narrative in which “Israelis are these evil white settlers.” He no longer sees a future in the discipline. “It’s not a field that Jews who do not profess loyalty to the antizionist movement … can exist in at this point,” he said.

Louis-Klein, who grew up mostly in Seattle and who spent time in Whistler growing up, holds a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from Yale University, a master’s in philosophy from the New School, a master’s in anthropology from the University of Chicago, and is nearing completion of his PhD at McGill.

With academic doors closing in front of him, he sees a new possibility: the creation of a serious intellectual space for the study of antizionism itself. 

“There is now a movement to try and create an academic space for critical studies of antizionism,” he said, adding that he wants to “provide an intellectual framework for treating antizionism as an objective study, as something that we can critically understand, break down, trace its genealogy, understand how it functions in the present as its own phenomenon.”

In his view, the public conversation must change for practical reasons, not just academic ones.

“We cannot fight anti-Jewish violence today without naming and opposing antizionism,” he said. “The vast majority of anti-Jewish violence is directly motivated by antizionism.” 

Even attacks rooted in “more classical” right-wing antisemitism now unfold within “the overall hysteria that has been created by antizionism since Oct. 7 and the genocide libel,” he said. Besides, he argued, as a strategy, equating antizionism and antisemitism is failing.

“Calling antizionism antisemitism is also not working,” he said. “We’re assuming that if we just say it’s antisemitic, a number of institutional levers will set into place Holocaust memory, and it’ll shut it down.”

But that’s not happening, he said, “because antizionism doesn’t look like classical antisemitism.”

Instead, he thinks people need to be taught what antizionism is. 

“You can’t just say it’s antisemitic,” he said. “You have to explain to people what antizionism is as an ideology, and you have to stop treating it as political critique.”

He draws a distinction between debating Zionism and describing antizionism as a social phenomenon. 

“Talking about antizionism also doesn’t mean … explaining how Zionism is actually good. It goes far beyond that. It means explaining how antizionism is a hate movement,” he said.

“It’s a mob movement,” he added. “There are lynch mobs … people who hunt down Zionists and try and shame and humiliate them.… They vandalize buildings, they smash windows.”

MAAZ delivers training in different sectors, including education, business, arts and journalism, designed to help people understand antizionism and “to fight back and to give people a language.”

“We really think naming and labeling is the way to defeat it,” he said.

Louis-Klein described teaching people to “maintain boundaries,” and to label recurring accusations – “colonizer libel, apartheid libel, genocide libel” – as antizionist so that Jews and allies stop feeling obligated to defend their legitimacy and instead “hold antizionism to account.”

The organization also includes legal thinking, with scholar Rona Kaufman developing a legal concept of antizionist discrimination.

Beyond training, MAAZ emphasizes public education. Louis-Klein encourages people to explore the organization’s website (movementagainstantizionism.org), which he describes as “kind of like a museum … a curation where you enter inside of the whole history of antizionism and its different forms and the different libels.” 

He emphasized a point he sees as essential for long-term success: expanding beyond the Jewish community. 

“Having non-Jewish people who can get behind that … will just be the key,” he said. “That will be the thing that catapults it to the next stage.” 

Posted on February 27, 2026March 9, 2026Author Pat JohnsonCategories NationalTags academia, Adam Louis-Klein, antisemitism, antizionism, discrimination, education, MAAZ, Movement Against Antizionism

Community milestones … Gutman, Marks Pulver, Doduck & Simpson

Gloria Gutman, PhD, has been honoured with the King Charles III Coronation Medal, which recognizes individuals who have made a significant contribution to Canada, or an outstanding achievement abroad that brings credit to Canada. She will receive the medal in a ceremony March 21.

A research associate and professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University, Gutman founded the Gerontology Research Centre and the department of gerontology at SFU, serving as director of both units from 1982 to 2005. She is the author/editor of 23 books, the most recent (with Claire Robson and Jen Marchbank) titled Elder Abuse in the LGBTQ2SA+ Community (Springer, 2023).

photo - Dr. Gloria Gutman
Dr. Gloria Gutman (photo from SFU)

During her career, Gutman has held many prominent roles, including president of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, president of the International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics and president of the International Network for Prevention of Elder Abuse. Currently, she is president of the North American chapter of the International Society for Gerontechnology, vice-president of the International Longevity Centre-Canada and a member of the research management committee of the Canadian Frailty Network. Previously, she served on the World Economic Forum’s Council on the Ageing Society, World Health Organization’s expert advisory panel on aging and health, and the CIHR-Institute of Aging advisory board.

“I am grateful to SFU for having nominated me for this award. 

Developing the gerontology department and Gerontology Research Centre, serving on boards, organizing conferences, and advocating for seniors in other ways nationally and internationally, has been a privilege and a pleasure,” said Gutman. “It could not have taken place without the strong support of FASS [the faculty of arts and social sciences] and senior administration.”

In 2012, Gutman was awarded a Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal by the Government of Canada and, in 2016, she was appointed to the Order of Canada, the country’s highest civilian honour.

– Courtesy Simon Fraser University

* * *

photo - Lana Marks Pulver
Lana Marks Pulver (photo from Jewish Federation)

Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver is proud to congratulate its board chair, Lana Marks Pulver, who was honoured by Jewish Federations of North America with the Kipnis-Wilson/Friedland Award for exemplifying the highest standards of philanthropy and volunteerism. Marks Pulver’s selection for this award is a testament to her exceptional dedication and leadership.

– Courtesy Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver

* * *

The Louis Brier Jewish Aged Foundation is pleased to announce the appointment of long-time volunteer leaders Marie Doduck and Lee Simpson as co-chairs of the 2025/26 campaign. Please join board directors Harry Lipetz, Rick Cohen, Mel Moss, Bernard Pinsky, David Zacks, Michelle Karby and Abbe Chivers, and staff Ayelet Cohen Weil and Wendy Habif in congratulating and thanking them for their tireless commitment to our Jewish elderly.

– Courtesy Louis Brier Jewish Aged Foundation

Posted on February 28, 2025February 28, 2025Author Community members/organizationsCategories LocalTags academia, aging seniors, Gloria Gutman, Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver, Lana Marks Pulver, Lee Simpson, Louis Brier Jewish Aged Foundation, Marie Doduck, philanthropy, research, SFU, Simon Fraser University, volunteerism

A best home for Jews?

Despite its flaws, most Canadians are proud to call this country home. And most of us would leave it at that, and not delve too much into why we feel that way. But a recently published book asks 20 scholars to consider the question, “Has there ever been a better home for the Jews than Canada?” The result is a compelling read that raises many more questions than answers.

No Better Home? Jews, Canada and the Sense of Belonging, edited by David S. Koffman of York University, was published by University of Toronto Press last year. While many of us may not rush to pick up an academic publication, for fear of its denseness and potential incomprehensibility for laypeople, this one is surprisingly readable. Not every essay will be of as much interest, as the book is Eastern Canada-centric, but many of its ideas will help us in determining for ourselves what we mean when we say Canada is one of the best places in the world to live. And some of its discussion will prod humility – for example, the reality that many immigrants to Canada would rather have been able to stay where they were, but had to flee persecution, war or other circumstances, is a sobering reminder. As is the fact that the situation in Canada has not always been good for Jews or other minorities.

An exact measurement of “best” is elusive and subjective, of course. As editor Koffman notes in his introduction, “Canada may now very well be the safest, most socially welcoming, economically secure, and possibly most religiously tolerant home for the Jews than any other diaspora country, past or present. Jews in Canada today enjoy (1) high rates of voluntary religious participation at all denominational in-points; (2) relatively low rates of nonviolent forms of antisemitism; (3) high degrees of Jewish literacy; (4) the capacity to exercise political power unfettered by antisemitism; (5) institutional completeness for Jewish communal needs; (6) thoroughgoing social acceptance; (7) significant cultural production; (8) public recognition; (9) comparatively low intermarriage rates; and (10) economic opportunities unrestricted by their Jewishness.”

image - No Better Home? book coverThat said, the matter is not so easily determined, as the other contributors to the volume delve into Canada’s past, into other countries that offer good homes for Jews, into the accessibility and affordability of Jewish education, into Canada as a point of arrival for Holocaust survivors, into Yiddish not only as a language but as a link to family, heritage or tradition, and into many other topics.

The situation in Ukraine makes Jeffrey Veidlinger’s essay particularly interesting for anyone wanting to know more about that country and the influence of its history and its emigrants on Canada. For instance, Canada’s multiculturalism policy was a concept introduced in the 1960s by Ukrainian Canadians, “who, in turn, adapted it from the notion of ‘national autonomy’ that Jews had introduced to early 20th-century Ukraine, where Jews were conscious of securing rights as a minority group within a largely binational (Russian and Ukrainian) state,” writes Veidlinger, who is at the University of Michigan. “Ironically, when multiculturalism made it to Canada in its new form, it was met with skepticism and even outright rejection by the organized Canadian Jewish community.” Some of that rejection had to do with this vision of multiculturalism being “premised on a common Christianity,” he says. As well, the Jewish community had learned to navigate between the so-called “two founding races” (French and English powers) and there was concern that diffusion of power would make it harder to do so.

More than one writer touches on the French-English dichotomy, as well as where Indigenous peoples fit in those narratives. In his essay, Koffman considers the question, “What have Jewish-Indigenous peoples’ interactions looked like? How might we think about Jews’ home in Canada refracted through the prism of the interactions between the placed and the displaced?”

The only local contributor to No Better Home is Richard Menkis, a professor at the University of British Columbia. The way in which his essay on museums fits into the collection is encapsulated in the two questions he poses: “What kind of home would it be if the narrative of the Jewish community were not considered ‘Canadian’ and included in the national experiences depicted in state-sponsored exhibitions? And the corollary question is: How comfortable are Jews, in this home, telling their stories, including the stories of the marginalized (the poor) and the ostracized (the criminals)?”

Menkis looks at three exhibits on Canadian Jewry – Journey Into Our Heritage (1970s), A Coat of Many Colours (late 1980s) and narratives at the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 in Halifax since it opened in 1999. He concludes that, in the two exhibits, as groundbreaking as they were, Canadian Jews were comfortable only in sharing their achievements and contributions (ie. worth) to Canadian society at large. These exhibits omitted people and activities that could be more controversial, such as Jews involved in the union movement or in radical politics.

At the Canadian Museum of Immigration, the historical summations eventually became more nuanced about Canada’s immigrant communities, and recognized them as having “enriched the cultural mosaic.” This is a grand improvement from the attitude in 1945 of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada when it was asked to recognize the country’s first synagogue. Menkis begins his essay with this point, citing a member of the board, who said “he was not particularly interested in the commemoration of Jewish activities.” The board member had a similarly dismissive response to the suggestion “that there be a commemorative marker for 400 African Canadians who lived on Vancouver Island before 1858,” notes Menkis.

Every contributor to No Better Home? offers a different perspective. One that seems sadly true is that of Jack Kugelmass of the University of Florida. “My point,” he writes, “is that good places for Jews have a lot to do with robust economies, with stable governments and a consensus in which difference is at least tolerated and immigrants welcomed because they’re good for business.” He recommends: “Enjoy the good times while they last. Nothing is forever. Right now is certainly Canada’s time, as it is for Canada’s Jews.”

Posted on March 11, 2022March 10, 2022Author Cynthia RamsayCategories BooksTags academia, David S. Koffman, No Better Home?, Richard Menkis
A testament to free speech

A testament to free speech

A new book on an incendiary topic turns out to be not quite as expected. The Conflict over the Conflict: The Israel/Palestine Campus Debate, by Kenneth S. Stern, may be the most comprehensive assessment of the (at least) 20-year battle on North American campuses between pro-Israel and anti-Israel forces.

Jewish and pro-Israel readers picking up the work might anticipate a litany of horrors, anti-Zionist if not antisemitic incidents, brawls, screaming matches, vandalism, boycotts and the like. There is that. But Stern argues that the perception that campuses are aflame in anti-Zionist rage is simply not true. More, he offers proof that the pro-Israel side is far from innocent of engaging in disgraceful tactics, too. There is ill will and there are bad actors on both sides. Most unexpectedly, as much as the book is about the conflict, it is more than anything an exercise in applied ethics on the topic of free expression.

Stern is the director of the Bard Centre for the Study of Hate, an attorney and an author. For 25 years, he was the American Jewish Committee’s expert on antisemitism and he was a lead drafter of the Working Definition of Antisemitism. He is also, it appears, something close to a free speech purist. As such, he rails against efforts by Israel advocates who have organized campaigns to censure (and censor) anti-Israel voices. He doesn’t let the other side off easily, either, calling out acts of harassment like drowning out pro-Israel speakers with the “heckler’s veto.”

The book, from New Jewish Press, an imprint of University of Toronto Press, begins with an empirical assessment. In institutions of higher learning in the United States, Israel is an issue in very few, he writes.

When speaking with Jewish audiences, Stern asks for a show of hands to gauge perceptions on anti-Israel attitudes. He asks for guesses on how many American colleges have divested from Israel.

“Many seem surprised when I say ‘zero,’” he writes. “There are relatively few campuses where Israel is a burning issue, and every year the number of pro-Israel programs … is usually at least double the anti-Israel ones. There are over 4,000 campuses in the U.S. – in the 2017-18 academic year, 149 had anti-Israel activity.… So the campuses aren’t burning.”

He does not dismiss the extreme tensions on a few campuses, however.

“[O]n some campuses where anti-Israel activity is prominent, pro-Israel Jewish students may feel marginalized, dismissed or vilified, sometimes with antisemitic tropes.” Identity politics and the conflation of Jewish people with “whiteness” creates racial conflict. “[T]he labeling of Jews as white becomes a problem when shared victimhood becomes a sacred symbol, a badge of honour, a precondition to enter a club of the oppressed. Antisemitic discrimination is rendered invisible.”

Though bigotry may play a role in the discussion, Stern does not see constructive resolutions in neologisms like trigger warnings, safe spaces and microaggressions.

“Faculty should have the right to give trigger warnings if they want, but I never do, and I think the idea is a horrid one,” he writes. “I teach Mein Kampf. It’s disturbing – get over it. College should prepare one to be an adult, and there are no trigger warnings after graduation day. Why are we encouraging students to be ostriches? Shouldn’t they, rather, be learning how to navigate things that will likely unsettle them over the rest of their lives?”

He quotes CNN commentator Van Jones, a strong civil rights proponent, who opposes “safe spaces” on campus: “I don’t want you to be safe ideologically. I don’t want you to be safe emotionally. I want you to be strong. That’s different. I’m not going to pave the jungle for you. Put on some boots and learn how to deal with adversity. I’m not going to take the weights out of the gym. That’s the whole point of the gym.”

Stern contends a fundamental error has been made in defining terms.

“We want campuses that are open to expression – including, perhaps even especially, difficult and disturbing ideas – but which protect students from real harassment and intimidation. Hate speech codes were efforts to say that ideas themselves can harass and intimidate. Ideas can and should make one uncomfortable (a comfortable college education is a wasted college education). But harassment is something different.”

Strategically, he argues, trying to censor hateful ideas is self-defeating and advances hate agents by martyring them.

“By trying to censor, rather than expose and combat, speech the students perceived as hateful, they were actually helping the alt-right and white supremacists,” writes Stern. “It’s no coincidence that the white nationalists in recent years have wrapped their racist and antisemitic messages around the concept of free speech. Why would progressives allow these haters to steal the bedrock democratic principle of free speech, disingenuously saying that this is what their fight is about? By trying to deny alleged racists platforms, progressives are helping white supremacists recast their vile message as noble protection of a right.”

Another strategic failure, he argues, is buying into the Palestinian narrative’s good/evil dichotomy.

“Israel’s case is best understood as inherently complex and difficult; playing into the ‘all bad’ and ‘all good’ binary of the other side renders those complexities invisible,” he writes.

The conflict on campus spills over, of course. Israel has created a list of 20 organizations, those that urge boycotts of the country, for instance, and bars their members from entering the country. Stern sees this as counterproductive: “You don’t make the case that blacklists (especially of academics) are proper if your goal is to oppose blacklists. You are conceding the argument.”

He gives an example of an anti-Israel campus activist who defends his group’s refusal to meet with Zionists “over cookies and cake” because “you Jews, in all due respect, you wouldn’t sit down with Nazis for tea and cake.”

He also reflects on the “Standards of Partnership” adopted by Hillel International, the Jewish campus organization, which proscribe engaging with groups or individuals that deny Israel’s right to exist, or who delegitimize, demonize or apply a double standard Israel, who support BDS or who exhibit “a pattern of disruptive behaviour towards campus events or guest speakers or foster an atmosphere of incivility.”

Writes Stern: “For those who are not yet ideological soldiers, but want to learn more, and want to do it around their campus Hillel, what sense does it make that adults are telling them they can only bring in certain types of speakers? Yes, the adults defined BDS as hateful. But does it make sense to tell students they have to go elsewhere than the Jewish address on campus to hear about it firsthand from those who support it?”

The litany of bad behaviours on all sides of the ideological divide is likely to make readers of Stern’s book uneasy, whether the reader is Zionist or anti-Zionist. But it is a rare and uncompromising testament to free expression that should give genuine free speech advocates an uplift, particularly in an era when ideologically driven regulation of expression and ideas, especially on campuses, has left many advocates of core liberal, academic values feeling beleaguered.

Format ImagePosted on September 11, 2020September 10, 2020Author Pat JohnsonCategories BooksTags academia, anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, antisemitism, BDS, boycott, censorship, conflict, free speech, Hillel, Israel, Kenneth S. Stern, Palestine, university campuses, Zionist
Proudly powered by WordPress