Last month I wrote to the Montgomery County MD Council urging delay in consideration of the proposed Resolution to define and address antisemitism (see here), as did many other residents of the County.
Wisely, the Council decided to put the Resolution on hold until its September session. Today I wrote again to the Council (see below). I urge those who agree with the warning of the Union for Reform Judaism regarding the codification of the "working definition" of antisemitism developed for non-legislative purposes by the IHRA to write or call members of the County Council. The contact information is pasted below, after the text of my letter.
August 18, 2022
Gabe Albornoz, President
Montgomery County Council
Councilmember.Albornoz@
RE: Resolution to define and address antisemitism: Please do not codify the IHRA “working definition” with its “contemporary examples.”
Dear President Albornoz:
On July 23, I wrote to you and your colleagues requesting that you delay the then-scheduled July 26 consideration of the Resolution “to define and address antisemitism” by codifying into County law the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s “non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism” (the IHRA’s words). I want to thank you all of you for stepping back so that the matter could be more deeply considered.
At the outset, it is essential to note that last year the Union for Reform Judaism – the umbrella organization of the largest segment of American Jewry -- warned that the IHRA “working definition,” while having positive uses, should never be codified into law (see here for the 2021 URJ Statement: https://urj.org/
Your decision to delay consideration of the Resolution was a wise course to take, and is vital to all of us who wish to resist antisemitism, to protect freedom of speech, and to block attempts in some quarters to suppress, chill, or censor certain views on how to protect those who live in Israel and Palestine from the unfairness and brutality which has made it so difficult to find a peaceful and just resolution in that troubled part of the world.
The Resolution as drafted, while well-intended, would be divisive within the Jewish Community, as well as among other groups who sincerely seek a just peace in the Middle East.
It is certainly useful to reaffirm of the County’s commitment to counter antisemitism, discrimination, and hate. But the proposed use of the definition set forth by reference in the proposed Resolution would create unanticipated consequences.
Here is why: The Resolution states that “Montgomery County adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, including the eleven contemporary examples, and endorses the use of the working definition as a framework to identify discrimination rooted in antisemitism and for discussions to address such discrimination.” The Resolution does not actually set forth those “eleven contemporary examples.” But those examples are specifically incorporated by reference. Some of the examples are subject to misuse, as the URJ warned in its 2021 statement on the IHRA formulation. The URJ explained that the IHRA “working definition,” while having positive uses, should never be codified into law:
Our commitment to principles of free speech and concerns about the potential abuse of the [IHRA] definition compel us to urge its use only as intended: as a guide and an awareness raising tool. The definition should not be codified into policy that would trigger potentially problematic punitive action to circumscribe speech [emphasis added], efforts which have been particularly aimed at college students and human rights activists. If the effect of application of the IHRA definition is to limit free speech, it threatens to divide the broad coalition needed to combat antisemitism.
IHRA’s opening words introducing the “working definition” clarify the intent that it serves as a “non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism” with examples as a “guide.”
While most of the “contemporary examples” in the IHRA “working definition” are uncontroversial, some can easily (and improperly) be used to label people of good faith – including Jews – as antisemites. That is why the IHRA calls its entire document a “non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism.” It is noteworthy that one of developers of the “working definition” has shown how the Trump Administration used it to seek to stamp out legitimate discussion of hard questions. See, I Drafted the Definition of Antisemitism. Rightwing Jews are Weaponizing It, by Kenneth Stern (2019), responding to former President Trump’s efforts to stamp out dissent through use of the IHRA definition examples.
For instance, the 8th example is “[a]pplying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” Many American Jews vigorously oppose actions of the Israeli Government regarding Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and East Jerusalem, and, according to a poll taken by the American Jewish Committee, an overwhelming majority want Israel to be willing to dismantle some or all of the settlements as part of a two-state solution. They expect Israel to act better because, to use the famous Hebrew National advertising phrase, “we answer to a higher authority.” They oppose certain Israeli government actions not in spite of being Jews, but because they are Jews. They expect more of their Israeli cousins. That, surely, does not make them antisemites. And it certainly should not be a basis to bring legal actions for discrimination.
The 7th example is “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a ‘racist endeavor.’” In our own country, we are now engaged in painful, but needed, discussions as to the degree to which the United States, through European Americans’ extermination of indigenous peoples and the building of an economy on the backs of enslaved Africans, was (and continues to be) a “racist endeavor.” Recognizing such embarrassing elements in our history and present-day circumstances does not make people anti-American. As the American statesman Carl Schurz proclaimed a century and a half ago, “My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” Those who point out a nation’s flaws – whether that nation is the United States, or Israel, or any other nation – in order to help it get on the right track are not enemies of that nation. And pointing out such problems certainly should not be a basis to bring legal actions for discrimination. Certainly no one on the Council would criminalize statements about observations concerning racism in America. The same should certainly apply with respect to Israel.
While the draft Resolution is well-intentioned, any adoption of the IHRA’s working definition, including its “eleven contemporary examples” (as the draft Resolution specifically does) should not be part of our County’s reassertion of its unalterable opposition to antisemitism. Codifying that definition into law would open the door to abuses for which it was never intended.
A Resolution to reaffirm the County’s opposition to antisemitism is very appropriate at this time. But no such Resolution should include the IHRA “working definition” examples, particularly Examples 7 and 8, as currently written. We can, and must, do better.
Sincerely,
David S. Fishback
Olney, MD
CC: County Councilmembers Friedson, Glass, Hucker, Jawando, Katz, Navarro, Rice, Riemer
County Executive Elrich (via County Executive portal)
**********************************************************************
Here is the contact information for members of the County Council and for the County Executive:
Councilmember Gabe Albernoz - Office: (240) 777-7959,
email: Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Andrew Friedson - Office: (240) 777-7828,
email Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Evan Glass - Office: (240) 777-7966,
email: Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Tom Hucker - Office: (240) 777-7960,
email: Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Will Jawando - Office: (240) 777-7811,
email: Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Sydney Katz - Office: (240) 777-7906,
email: Councilmember.Katz@Montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Nancy Navarro - Office: (240) 777-7968,
email: Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Craig Rice - Office: (240) 777-7955,
email: Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
Councilmember Hans Riemer - Office: (240) 777-7964,
email: Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
County Executive Marc Elrich - Office: (240) 777-0311
No comments:
Post a Comment