This article looks at several posts on X (Twitter) by academic staff at the University of Auckland in New Zealand. While academic freedom is an important principle in a university, so is non-discrimination. When academics use language that draws on antisemitic tropes, promote antisemitic narratives, or otherwise show hostility to Jewish people, this negatively impacts the university environment. Boycotts or black listings of academics or students based on their nationality are by definition racial discrimination.
In 2008 a leading antisemitism scholar in the UK, Dr David Hirsh, was commissioned to write an article explaining the problems with a nationality-based boycott of Israeli academics. He opened the article by stating, “I am reluctant to write this article because it should not be necessary. No antiracist and no scholar should need the case to be explicitly set out against a campaign to exclude Israelis from the cultural and economic life of humanity; especially from the global academic community. There is no campaign to exclude anybody else; only Israelis. That a reputable scholarly journal feels it has to commission an article giving reasons why such an exclusion is a bad idea should tell us something worrying about the depth and scope of contemporary anti-Semitism.”
In 2013 one of the world’s leading scholarly bodies, the American Psychological Association (APA) adopted a policy, that remains current, and highlights that in addition to its other problems, nationality-based boycotts act in opposition to academic freedom. In the policy statement the APA “condemns academic boycotts as a violation of academic freedom and a disruption of the exchange of scientific and scholarly ideas. Scholarship is intended to be based on the search for truth, and to discriminate between academics or academic institutions based on the grounds of nationality, ethnicity, race, sex or religion is antithetical to that search.”
This year Luciana Vaccaro, the President of Swissuniversities, the group representing all the universities of Switzerland, stated, “You can’t exclude a university because you don’t agree with the actions of a government”. She described “hate speech, violence and antisemitism” and “any racist discourse that could exclude one party” as redlines.
This article looks at a number of posts made on X (Twitter) by academics from the University of Auckland. These posts misrepresent Zionism to demonise Zionists, engage in Holocaust inversion through inappropriate comparisons of the Israel-Gaza war and the Holocaust, and seek to justify the October 7th terrorist attack that massacred 1,139 people. Some of this content, and the actions discussed in the comments, may well be regarded not as legitimate criticism under the principle of academic freedom, but simply as antisemitism. The comments come from lectures, senior lecturers, and in one case an associate professor.
The weaponisation of Zionism
Since October 7th, anti-Israel individuals have been using Zionism as a slur, often equating it to fascism or Nazism. We have discussed this new Racist Anti-Zionism in our report on Antisemitism after October 7. Sometimes this is an attempt to get away with blatant antisemitism, using Zionist or Zionism as a code word for Jews. Other times it seeks to declare Zionism as illegitimate, that is to deny Israel’s very right to exist, which is to deny the Jewish people the right to self-determination. Self-determination is a right afforded to all people under the United Nations Charter. This too is antisemitic.
Today, around 90% of Jews self-identify as Zionists, as they support the protection of Israel as a homeland for the Jews. Though there are several streams of Zionism, ranging from secular to religious, left-wing to right-wing, that is the common desire. Zionism and the establishment of a Palestinian state are not mutually exclusive and the official position of Israel itself has long been that of a two-state solution negotiated between the parties involved.
Some of the academics at the University of Auckland misuse the term Zionism, giving it their own meaning and seeking to label all those who support Israel’s existence (that is Zionists) as ‘genocide apologists/deniers’ and fascists. These same individuals seek to present Israel itself as a terrorist, apartheid, settler-colonial state. By demonising Israel, they create a parallel universe where they can frame their own actions as heroic and beyond reproach, at least within their own echo chamber.
Boycotting Zionists
Many anti-Zionist and anti-Israel activists are keen on the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) movement. Part of this movement has resulted in ‘cancelling’ Jews and Israelis on the grounds that they are Zionists. Their loose definition of a Zionist, from what I can tell, is anyone who:
- Served in the IDF (given conscription is mandatory in Israel this is effectively discrimination against all Israelis regardless of their religious beliefs)
- Has visited Israel
- Advocates for the return of the October 7 hostages
- Supports the right for Israel to exist (whether they support a two-state solution seems to be irrelevant)
- Believes that Jews are indigenous to the land of Israel (that is anyone familiar with the historic evidence)
- Condemns Hamas in any way (despite it being a proscribed terrorist organisation in many countries, including New Zealand)
- Any other proxy they feel they can get away with
In this first example, the academic shared on social media that they recently “had” to write an email to conference organisers about an Israeli speaker scheduled to give a talk. This international meeting most likely refers to the Frontline Mental Health Conference held from March 4th to 5th earlier this year, where world-renowned Dr. Moshe Farchi was uninvited by the organising committee. Dr. Farchi is an expert in trauma who aided the development of Israel’s national model of addressing mental health emergencies. The academic boycotting this speaker for being a Zionist is just targeting a Jew.
The conference was run by the Australian and New Zealand Mental Health Association (ANZMHA) and the Australian Jewish News reports how their Executive Director, Professor Philip Morris, later appeared with Dr. Moshe Farchi on a Zoom call. Prof. Morris apologised saying, “This was wrong. We made a big mistake. And it was not done for any malice, [it] was not done to disrespect him or the Jewish community”.
Prof Morris explained how the organisers have cancelled the invitation after receiving a lot of “attacking” material from pro-Palestinian activists, no doubt including the letter referred to in the post above. While we don’t know what this particular academic’s letter said, it was part of a campaign of intimidation. Along with his apology, Prof. Morris said that people should nto be removed from any conference based on groups seeking to enforce their opinions on the organisers.
The Zionist Empire
Since October 7th there has been a rise in traditional antisemitic tropes regarding conspiracies about Jews taking over the world, owning the economy, and controlling the media, governments, and other societal institutions. Some have tried to get away with this blatant antisemitism by masking it under the concept of discussion of the ‘Zionist empire’.
This antisemitism, masquerading as “only anti-Zionist”, often discusses the ‘Zionist Empire’, the Zionist Entity’, the ‘Zionist Project’, etc. in contexts that insinuate that a “Zionist agenda” has infiltrated the bureaucracies of the world. This is a form of power conspiracy theory, like that found in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The terminology of “Zionist Entity” started with Arab states that refused to acknowledge Israel’s existence, and therefore refused to use its name. It is itself recognised as antisemitic.
The term “Zionist entity” is used in the following two posts by an Auckland University academic.
The academic also refers to the “zionist project” in the post below where they are responding to a tweet about terrorist attacks that have targeted universities in Israel. They dismiss any concern for Israeli academics and students, instead promoting a boycott of the “Zionist Project” and suggesting Israel’s existence is a fantasy. This view seems to completely reject Israel’s right to exist, as well as the thousands of years of Jewish history which show the Jewish people are an Indigenous People from the land of Israel. It reframes Zionism not as a liberation movement of these people but as a fantasy with no connection to reality. It’s also unclear if the statement only refers to Israel, or is extended to Jews in general, the vast majority of which support Israel’s right to exist, making them Zionists. That would include Jewish students on the campus, and potentially in this academic’s classes.
In this example, a different academic reposted content that denies the sexual violence atrocities of the October 7th terrorist attack referring to it as a “debunked mass rape lie”. While not written by the academic, their amplification of it will have caused extreme distress to students who may know the victims, those following the investigations into this violence, and to victims of sexual violence in general which may include other students of the university.
In contrast to this claim, here is how Associated Press summarised a UN report into this matter that was released a few months before this post was made:
The U.N. envoy focusing on sexual violence in conflict said in a new report Monday that there are “reasonable grounds” to believe Hamas committed rape, “sexualized torture,” and other cruel and inhumane treatment of women during its surprise attack in southern Israel on Oct. 7.
The report itself says the following:
Based on the information gathered by the mission team from multiple and independent sources, there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations… At the Nova music festival and its surroundings, there are reasonable grounds to believe that multiple incidents of sexual violence took place with victims being subjected to rape and/or gang rape and then killed or killed while being raped… With respect to hostages, the mission team found clear and convincing information that some have been subjected to various forms of conflict-related sexual violence including rape and sexualized torture and sexualized cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and it also has reasonable grounds to believe that such violence may be ongoing.
The language in the post not only denies the claims of sexual violence, but uses them in an antisemitic manner claiming. They don’t only claim they are false (denying the sexual violence) but that they are part of a “zionist playbook [that is] is laughably predictable” and that they are “racist” and “genocidal” lies. This is a form of victim blaming with added antisemitism.
This academic also made a post referring to “rampant Zionism in our governments and communities”. This draws parallels to world Jewish conspiracy and other traditional antisemitic tropes about Jews influencing the government. It may also be seen as a comment attacking the presence of Jewish individuals in political, academic, and business.
When anti-Zionism becomes anti-Jewish
Another academic reposted a reply to an organisation that shared their experience meeting with members of the New Zealand Jewish community to speak about rising levels of antisemitism. The replier began with a slur in Te Reo Māori, the native language of New Zealand’s indigenous people, and went on to call the organisation “genocidal dog supporters”. The original post has no mention of Zionism or the Israel-Gaza war, so it can be concluded that the replier only has an issue with Jews and Israelis, neither of whom are responsible for Israel’s actions. The replier calls Jews and Israelis “dogs”, which is a form of traditional antisemitism used to dehumanise Jews to separate them from the rest of society and justify hatred towards them. The reposting of this antisemitic content by the academic is a promotion of racism.
Establishment of Israel
The academic above also reposted disinformation, an outright fabricated quote (according to AAP Fact Check) attributed to David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister. Using this disinformation as a basis, the academic comments that “‘Israel’ was established by terrorists”. This comment is made to suggest Israel is illegitimate and should not exist. They emphasise this by putting the word ‘Israel’ in quotation marks.
Holocaust Inversion: Comparisons to Nazi Germany
Anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and antisemitic individuals often use WWII and the Holocaust to justify the demonisation of Israel, in an effort to make it seem like Israel’s actions are equivalent to, or worse than, Nazi policy during the Second World War. This distorts understanding of the Holocaust itself. It can also help to rehabilitate Nazi ideology and other violent antisemitism. This sort of content is known by scholars as Holocaust inversion. Presented at a high volume to the right audience, those without a solid knowledge of the Holocaust itself, they go viral and are taken as fact.
An example of this is the comparison between Gaza and Nazi concentration camps. Before October 7th, these claims were made in an effort to depict the living conditions in Gaza. After October 7th, this comparison became more abundant, and just recently has extended to the detainment facility in Israel for Palestinian prisoners. Here is an example from one of the academics:
In the post below, this academic goes a step further using the Holocaust remembrance slogan “Never Again” and these false comparisons to concentration camps in a direct and overt inversion. In Nazi Germany the concentration camps were used both as a means to kill Jews, and to hold them prior to taking them to death camps. There are many other examples of people being interned at times of conflict. There are even more examples of refugee camps. This direct Holocaust language is a deliberate effort at inversion.
Support and Justification of October 7th
Throughout Israel’s history, the country has defended itself against terrorist organisations like Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Hamas’s 1988 charter clearly states that they wish for the abolishment of the Jewish state and the death of all Jews, and rather than moderating once they won elections in Gaza in 2007, they doubled down on violence first against Palestinian rivals then against Israel and Jews (see a detailed analysis). They have placed munitions in highly populated areas and in what should be civilian infrastructure like apartment blocks, schools, and hospitals in order to increase civilian casualties and demonise Israel when civilians die.
Since October 7th, some people refuse to see Hamas for what it is, and maintain the stance that Hamas was just retaliating against Israel for ‘70 years of occupation’. They believe that October 7th was “inevitable”. The issue here is that anti-Israel activists are trying to justify the mass violence perpetrated by Hamas on citizens of Israel, guising systematic rape, torture, and cold-blooded murder as Palestine’s ‘army’ defending itself.
Justifying the deaths of 1200 Israelis (Jews, but also Christians, Muslims, and Druze.) in the most inhumane ways is cruel and incites further violence and hatred. It dehumanises Israelis and suggests that it would be okay for it to happen again.
The post below by one of the academics begins by claiming that Israel is “beheading children and burning displaced Palestinians alive”, which makes it sound like Israel is deliberately targeting children with violence and death. Using this claim, they then justify violence against Jews and Israelis by supporting the “Palestinian resistance”, a term used by those seeking to legitimise terrorist attacks that deliberately target Israeli civilians. Calling Hamas a resistance army justifies their terrorism and killing of Jews in the name of their radical ideology.
An earlier example from this academic justifying the violence perpetrated by Hamas by calling the terrorist organisation the “armed resistance” of Palestine. Equivocating Hamas with a legitimate army is a tactic used to minimise the terror acts like systematic rape and torture, as well as to set up a fallacy to make Israel’s response seem disproportionate. This academic claims that anyone who condemns Hamas as a terrorist organisation for their deliberate attacks on civilians, including October 7, sees Palestinians as lesser human beings. This is an abuse of the language of human rights to seek to protect violent antisemitism and serious violations of the Geneva Conventions.
Another academic reposted something that ends with “Oct 7 was inevitable and justified”. By making the false claim that “Israel sees Palestinians as human animals” (a notion that has gained popularity during the war), the poster can freely justify any ‘retaliatory’ attack on Israelis. However, the false claim is used as a way to demonise Israelis before dropping this justification. It is antisemitic to demonise Israelis and Jews by way of spreading misinformation. Of course, there are extremists and ‘bad people’ from every country and ethnicity, but in other cases, these individuals are not used tokenistically to justify violence against a whole people (as they shouldn’t). This double standard that is applied to Israel must be challenged if we are to combat antisemitism.
Finally, another of the academics reposted a call to arms which claims that “there is only one thing that can stop Israel”. The post rejects the idea of a peaceful solution, promoting only total war. While this might be regarded as simply an opinion, consider the impact it will have on Israeli students who might be in this academic’s class.
