Trump’s Dubious Defense: Examining Contradictions in His Fight Against Antisemitism
Donald Trump has consistently positioned himself as a staunch defender of Jewish Americans, promising to aggressively combat antisemitism. His administration has issued executive orders aimed at curbing antisemitism on college campuses and in public spaces, particularly in the wake of the October 7th attacks. Trump has personally vowed to be the "best friend Jewish Americans have ever had" in the White House.
However, a closer examination reveals significant contradictions that cast doubt on the sincerity and effectiveness of Trump’s efforts. These contradictions stem from his associations, his language, and the selective nature of his actions, raising questions about whether his anti-antisemitism stance is genuine or merely a political tool.
One of the most glaring inconsistencies lies in Trump’s close relationship with Elon Musk, a billionaire entrepreneur who has repeatedly courted controversy with statements and actions perceived as antisemitic. Musk has been criticized for performing what appeared to be a Nazi-esque salute, making jokes about prominent Nazis, and sharing a social media post that downplayed Hitler’s culpability in the Holocaust. This particular post, which stated that "Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn’t murder millions of people. Their public sector employees did," is widely considered antisemitic for its attempt to absolve Hitler of personal responsibility for genocide.
Despite Trump’s claims of unwavering support for Jewish Americans, he has remained conspicuously silent about Musk’s actions. This silence suggests a willingness to overlook antisemitism when it comes from allies, undermining the credibility of his broader anti-antisemitism agenda.
Furthermore, Trump’s administration has faced criticism for its handling of the term "antisemitism" itself. The administration’s use of the hyphenated form, "anti-Semitism," contradicts the preferred usage of leading Jewish organizations and scholars. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), for instance, advocates for the unhyphenated form "antisemitism" to emphasize that the term specifically refers to hatred and opposition towards Jews.
The historical context of the term "antisemitism" is also relevant. The term was coined in 1879 by Wilhelm Marr, a German bigot who sought to replace the more overt "Judenhass" (Jew-hatred) with a seemingly more sophisticated euphemism. Marr’s intention was to legitimize his campaign against Jews by framing it as a reasoned opposition rather than a crude expression of hate.
Trump’s embrace of the hyphenated form, despite objections from Jewish groups, may seem like a minor detail. However, it reflects a lack of attention to the nuances of antisemitism and a disregard for the concerns of those most affected by it. It also can be seen as a form of denial of the seriousness of antisemitism as hatred against Jews.
Beyond his association with Musk and his handling of the term "antisemitism," Trump has also been criticized for using language that can be interpreted as antisemitic. His frequent use of the term "globalist," for example, has raised concerns. The American Jewish Committee notes that "globalist" has become a coded term for Jews who are perceived as international elites conspiring to undermine Western society. This trope echoes historical antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish control and manipulation.
While Trump may not explicitly intend to promote antisemitism through his use of the term "globalist," the fact that it resonates with antisemitic tropes is troubling. As president it is crucial for leaders to be mindful of the potential impact of their words, especially when those words can be easily weaponized by antisemites.
The selective nature of Trump’s actions against antisemitism is another cause for concern. While he has focused heavily on alleged antisemitism on college campuses, particularly among pro-Palestinian activists, he has been less vocal about other forms of antisemitism, such as white supremacist antisemitism. This selective focus suggests that his anti-antisemitism efforts may be driven more by political considerations than by a genuine commitment to combating all forms of anti-Jewish hatred.
For example, Trump’s administration has taken extreme steps against individuals like Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student and Palestinian activist, who was arrested and threatened with deportation for his pro-Palestinian activism. While it is important to address antisemitism on college campuses, the disproportionate focus on pro-Palestinian activists raises concerns about whether these actions are motivated by a desire to silence dissent or to punish those who criticize Israeli policies.
Moreover, Trump’s ties to right-wing European political parties with antisemitic elements raise further questions about his commitment to fighting antisemitism. He has expressed support for Germany’s AfD, a party whose leaders have echoed Nazi slogans and minimized the Holocaust. Musk, who Trump appointed to a position related to government efficiency, spoke at an AfD rally and argued that Germany should move past its "past guilt."
Trump’s actions and associations suggest a complex and potentially contradictory approach to combating antisemitism. While he has taken some steps to address antisemitism, his ties to individuals like Musk, his use of potentially antisemitic language, and the selective nature of his actions raise serious questions about the sincerity and effectiveness of his efforts. It remains to be seen whether Trump’s anti-antisemitism stance is truly a genuine commitment or merely a political tool used to appeal to certain constituencies. It is up to voters and the public to make their own judgements and hold Trump accountable for his actions and words.
