Walking and Chewing Gum: Why the Jewish Community Should Continue to Speak Out About Islamophobia

In light of the heinous murder of a Palestinian boy in Chicago and the significant injuries suffered by his mother, evidence of marked increases in hate crimes against both Jews and Muslims, and most recently the shooting of three Palestinian students in Vermont in what at least appears likely to be a hate crime,[1] I think it important to revisit the discussion of a statement by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) in the wake of the murder of Wadea Al Fayoume.

My colleague and mentor Rabbi Bruce Ginsburg writes in “The American Jewish Preoccupation with Islamophobia” and “The American Jewish establishment’s Islamophobia blunder that he believes a statement by the JCPA was misguided.  I disagree with Rabbi Ginsburg’s understanding of the meaning and message sent by the JCPA statement, but I am more troubled by some of the broader analysis that contributes to his conclusion, much of which I believe paints an incomplete picture and other parts of which raise issues that, while broadly accurate, I believe have no place in the discussion.

Let me begin where we agree, as I believe it is the most important point.  Violent acts based on a person’s ethnic or religious background are deplorable and unacceptable (full stop) and the Jewish community is responsible to do its “fair share,” so to speak, of the work of denouncing such acts and expressing solidarity with the victims of such acts.  Although to my mind it didn’t come through clearly in Rabbi Ginsburg’s articles, he wrote to me (and I now share with his permission), that:

You mistakenly suggest that we have counseled silence in the shadow of a Palestinian boys’ murder.  Not true.  Prior to my [first] essay, four Chicago rabbis  — three of them Orthodox — had already attended his funeral in a demonstration of emotional support.  I probably would have been among them had I lived there.  … Moreover, in my essay, I indicated that the American Jewish leadership could have gone beyond Chicago’s local expression of Jewish sympathy and support by turning to one of the national organizational leaders (e.g. Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL) to issue a statement.  The question I raise in the essay is why, under the circumstances, 155 American Jewish organizations saw fit to feed the myths of moral equivalence, etc. rather than investing their energy in issuing a statement condemning Hamas, calling for its eradication, upbraiding the American Muslim community for its unconscionable silence, criticizing the cowardly response of American university presidents to rampant anti-Semitism on their campuses, etc.

Rabbi Ginsburg is also wise to call attention to the important questions of how the Jewish community should allocate its resources, including the voice of its many organizations in a time of existential crisis for Jews in Israel and throughout the world, while also acknowledging the responsibility of the Jewish community to maintain its concern for others who are in distress. While narrow self-interest may be our utmost concern at the moment – If Jews do not defend ourselves today, who will do so? (c.f. Ethics of the Fathers 11:14) – singular focus on this concern would sacrifice our identity as a people who are concerned with the wellbeing of all of God’s creatures (c.f. id., “if I am only for myself, what am I?”).  Relatedly, it is notable that Jewish law requires the pauper to give charity. (BT Gittin 7b, Maimonides gifts for the poor 7:5, Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 248:1).  Though we are in distress, and greatly need others to demonstrate their concern for our wellbeing and their opprobrium for those who demonstrate baseless hatred of Jews and the Jewish state, this does not exempt us from the obligation to reach out a caring hand to others who are victims of hate.  While others I have spoken with have argued that the Jewish community ought not expend even an ounce of energy worrying about the death of Wadea Al Fayoume given the grave circumstances faced by the Jewish community today, I fear that with such narrow self-interest the cause of Judaism will be defeated even as our people survive.  As my colleague Rabbi Seth Gordon wrote regarding this discussion, “I prefer that we not be silent and instead affirm both the evil that has been inflicted upon us, as it has singularly as Jews, as well as our concern for all innocent life, especially when emotions are raw.  That to me is the moral integrity of Torah’s בצלם א-לקים (image of God).”  So, ultimately, at least as between myself and Rabbi Ginsburg, the disagreements I raise here are not a matter of whether the Jewish community should participate in a response to acts of anti-Muslim hatred, but the nature and degree of that response.

With these important points of agreement in mind, I disagree with Rabbi Ginsburg’s conclusion that a “rare, if not unprecedented” proclamation co-signed by scores of Jewish entities was disproportionate to this situation.  Rather, given the limited bandwidth the Jewish community had at the moment, and as many Jewish organizations devoted their time and effort responding to Israel’s plight (including by issuing myriad nuanced statements tailored to each organization’s beliefs and purpose), it seems to me that releasing a basic statement related to Wadea Al Fayoume’s murder for other Jewish groups to sign on to may have been a wise and efficient implementation of our community’s obligation rather than an unprecedented and disproportionate response.  I would also add that at this moment, where we clearly are sitting on a powder keg of animosities in the United States, one could do worse than to err on the side of a strong responses to clearly wanton acts of identity-based violence.  Nor do I agree with Rabbi Ginsburg’s suggestion that the JCPA statement represented a pivot away from Hamas’s atrocities (the JCPA is not responsible for the White House Press Secretary’s talking points).  Rather, it represents the Jewish community’s ability to walk and chew gum and the same time, and woe to us if we are unable to do so when it comes to issues of morality and the fabric of the, thank God, mostly tolerant American society.

Similarly, I disagree with Rabbi Ginsburg that the JCPA statement creates false equivalents – false moral equivalence between Hamas’s heinous attacks and a single landlord’s murder of his tenant and false equivalence between the threats of antisemitism and Islamophobia.  I generally find “false equivalence” arguments to be entirely read in.  Nowhere in the JCPA statement does it suggest that any of the acts or phenomena it mentions are equivalent in any way, and any attempt to dispel such equivalences in the statement would likely have been counterproductive.

Moving on to Rabbi Ginsburg’s broader analysis, I believe his analysis of the relative impact of antisemitism and Islamophobia in America is too narrow.  To be certain, by one of the most important measures, FBI data on hate crimes, antisemitism in America dwarfs all other forms of religion-based hate,[2] a fact that ought to be repeated often, especially as many seem entirely unaware of this fact.[3]  And as my colleague Rabbi Hayyim Solomon put it, I think accurately, “Islamophobia is real, but is a new (post-9/11) phenomena – in our faces, yes, but not yet in our DNA.”  On the other hand, Islamophobia might have a greater effect than antisemitism on some other aspects of life.  For instance, it is hard to doubt that more Muslim Americans than Jews are subjected to enhanced security screening without any basis for suspicion other than religion, and there are infinitely more former United States presidents/candidates for the presidency advocating to ban Muslims from immigrating to the United States of America than threatening to ban Jews from immigrating.  Notably, the story was different prior to World War II when there were active efforts to keep Jews from immigrating to America (see e.g. here and here).  Broadening the lens slightly, there is evidence that Muslims are discriminated against in the workplace as much and probably more than Jews are.[4]  In any event, seeking to minimize the extent of Islamophobia in America, at least relative to antisemitism, seems to me both parochial and counterproductive, as we should be primarily focused on recognizing all forms of hate and decrying them.  As Jews, we know that many people spend time minimizing the extent of antisemitism.  To the extent Islamophobia isn’t “as bad” in America, may our voices be some of the voices that keep it so rather than the voices minimizing Islamophobia’s real effects until it is too late to respond to Islamophobia most effectively.

Rabbi Ginsburg devotes a great deal of both his essays to the shocking silence of Muslim leaders regarding Hamas atrocities[5] and also notes that while “a sizeable proportion of the most heinous anti-Jewish crimes are committed by Muslims,” at least in the decades he surveys, “you won’t find a single analogous act of terror against Muslims committed by Jews anywhere in Europe, Asia, or America.”  While these points are true, it seems to me that these points are profoundly irrelevant to the discussion of how and to what extent we should respond to acts of ant-Muslim hatred.  In fact, considering such points in this context appears to me to be a form of anti-Muslim bias.

Our horror at that silence of the Muslim community should, if anything, counsel us to more action. Our great Sage Hillel taught that the entire Torah boils down to “don’t do to others that which you consider abhorrent.”  (BT Shabbat 31a)  Notably absent from Hillel’s statement is a qualifier “unless they do it to you first.”  In fact, the Torah teaches us not to take vengeance (Leviticus 19:18), which our sages teach means not to repeat the same wrong toward one who has wronged us in the past (Sifra Kedoshim 4:10, quoted by Rashi on Lev. 19:18).  And, of course, course Wadea Al Fayoume (or the three Palestinian students if, indeed, they were targeted based on their identity) did not wrong us in any way.  Nor have we been wronged by any other innocent Muslims who might become victims in the future should we fail to play a fitting part in fighting this form of hatred, even if we do so because other Muslims may have attacked us or stood silent when atrocities were perpetrated against us.  In fact, failing to speak out on behalf of this Muslim child and future potential victims seems to violate the ubiquitous biblical concept that children ought not to be punished for the misdeeds of their parents (see e.g. Deut. 24:16, Ezekiel 18).  To quote the ethics of mothers, including my own, two wrongs don’t make a right.  This is true regardless of whether one wrong is morally equivalent to the other.  They are still both wrong.

I agree with Rabbi Ginsburg that we would be deceiving ourselves to believe “that a Jewish statement against Islamophobia will elicit a broad-based, heartfelt, and meaningful response from the Arab/Muslim community.”  However, we would be betraying our own values were we to allow this to influence our response.  We serve our Divine Master and implement God’s values not in the expectation that we receive direct benefit (see e.g. Avot 1:3).  In addition, without fooling ourselves into believing this particular statement will be a watershed moment, to the extent it sparks even an iota of realization in some that the battle against antisemitism is part of a broader war against the forces of intolerance, that possibility ought to be appreciated.

 

In conclusion, I fear that in our time of anguish it is easy for our emotional response to cause us to discount the concerns of those whom we consciously or unconsciously, rightly or wrongly, perceive as our enemy or associated with our enemy, and for that emotional response to lead us to do less than our fair share in responding to the suffering of others.  Rabbi Yohanan teaches that upon the parting of the Red Sea, when the angels wanted to sing, God responded “My creations are drowning in the sea, and you want to sing?”  (BT Megillah 10b)  Further, we are taught that one application of the Torah’s injunction not to take vengeance and to love one’s fellow as oneself (Leviticus 19:18)[6] is to exercise compassion when determining the method of executing a person guilty of a capital crime. (BT Sanhedrin 45a, 52a, Pesahim 75a, Ketubot 37a)  Taken together, these two teachings demonstrate that we are at our most sanctified when we are concerned with the suffering of others, even assuming that that suffering is justified, and even assuming that suffering is a necessary component of Israel’s salvation, neither of which are the case in this particular discussion.   In these most troubling times, may the light of Torah keep our moral compasses pointing true north, advocating always for the safety and wellbeing of Jews throughout the world but also working to expressing anguish at all forms of hatred and working to alleviate all forms of human suffering.

[1] Admittedly most of my thoughts were formulated prior to the recent Vermont incident, though I was unable to complete an article on this subject until now.

[2] For instance, per the FBI statistics, in 2022 there were reports of 1,124 anti-Jewish hate crimes and a total of 920 hate crimes against all other religious identities (Anti-Sikh 181, Anti-Islamic 158 Ant-Catholic 107, Anti-Other Christian 97, Anti-Other Religion 91, Anti-Eastern Orthodox 78, Anti-Protestant 63, Anti-Multiple Religions 42, Anti-Mormon 30, Anti-Hindu 25, Anti-Buddhist 20 Ant-Atheism/Agnosticism 14 Ant-J-hova’s Witness 14.  There were also 92 anti-Arab incidents which I would think might relate to religion).

[3] Witness, for example, Susan Sarandon’s suggestion that Jews in fear of violent attacks in America were somehow getting “a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country.”

[4] According to a 2022 study, 63 percent of Muslim respondents reported religious discrimination in the workplace compared to 52% of Jewish respondents.  The study notes that “Muslims report higher levels of religious discrimination than other religious groups. …. Muslims represented 23.3 percent of all complaints of religion-related discrimination to the EEOC in 2017, the last year for which these data are publicly available (EEOC 2018)”.  According to a 2013 study of responses by New England employers to otherwise similar resumes which were adjusted to indicate an applicant’s religion, “Muslims received the most job discrimination” while Jews “showed little-to-no evidence of receiving discrimination in the job application process.”  A similar 2014 study in the American South found the same results.

[5] Perhaps notably, many of those who justify their silence on Hamas atrocities say that are trying to avoid any sense of moral equivalence, quite similarly to an argument I discussed above.

[6] To investigate whether the “fellow” in this verse includes non-Israelites, see Hakham Isaac Sassoon’s An Adventure in Torah – A Fresh Look Through a Traditional Lens on Ex. 20:13 and Num. 35:15.