Noem signs historic anti-semitism bill into law

In case the link stops working, here's the text of the article:

"As the fires of war sweep through the Gaza Strip, Governor Kristi Noem signed into law a historic bill requiring the consideration of the definition of antisemitism when investigating unfair or discriminatory practices.

This definition comes from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, adopted in 2016, and it includes language that “demonizes” Israel or holds it to an unfair double standard.

It comes as rising rhetoric condemning Israel for its reprisals against Palestine – at present, the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry reports over 30,000 dead, thousands more missing or unaccounted for, since military actions began in October of last year. Of those killed, the health ministry reports, the majority of them are women and children.

These are the only official numbers, reported by the Associated Press and other national outlets. On the Israeli side, the Jerusalem Post reported some 1,391 Israelis killed and many more taken hostage – as of a January report, there were still 136 hostages. Beyond deaths, reports of sexual assaults and barbaric treatment of children have been reported by Israeli sources. Israel has maintained the high death toll is the fault of Hamas using its own civilian population as human shields

“Ever since the horrific terrorist attacks on the State of Israel on October 7th, 2023, we have seen a shocking spike in antisemitic acts of hatred around the world, including some isolated incidents right here in South Dakota,” Governor Noem said. “I am very proud to sign this historic bill to keep our Jewish people secure. I hope more states will follow our leadership.”

The Capital Journal was given opportunity to speak to Elan Carr, CEO of the Israeli-American Council, who was present for the signing of the bill and who spoke thereafter. Carr explained in detail the purpose and implementation of this definition, which he says does not contradict the values of the First Amendment, but rather embraces them.

“(There’s) no contradiction whatsoever. And the reason why is because this law, on its face, but also … in the text, does not in any way contradict or limit freedom of expression. This does not outlaw expressions of anti-semitism, whether the anti-semitism touches on Israel, or whether the anti semitism touches on Jews – Jews are evil, Jews control the world, whatever it is,” Carr said. “What the definition does is simply define it as anti-semitism and now, what you do with that, well, maybe it’s nothing more than condemnation. And, incidentally, condemnation is exactly what the First Amendment contemplates. The entire basis of the First Amendment is that we meet bad speech not with censorship and punishment, but with good speech.”

The IHRA definition, Carr says, is a tool of education – not of censorship.

“Now let me figure it fairly … crimes are not protected speech. Discrimination (is) not protected speech. So what the IHRA definition allows us to do in that case is determine whether anti-Jewish hatred, anti-Jewish animus, underlies conduct that is already defined as illegal, like a crime, like discrimination. Then … it is relevant into an investigation. But that’s only when there’s conduct that’s prohibited. If all we’re talking about is expressions of speech, no limit whatsoever.”

Double Standards

Few foreign journalists have been allowed into Gaza – according to the AP, they are among a small group of international journalists in Gaza. Carr said that the AP’s coverage would not run the risk of our paper being branded anti-semitic. However, he did note one major media outlet that he says does hold a double standard in its coverage of Israel.

“Let’s take an organization that is widely deemed problematic, the New York Times,” Carr said. “Specifically with media, it’s about double standards – disparate coverage for Israel. And double standards are one of the examples (of anti-semitism.)”

These examples are not categorical, Carr said.

“Might it be productive to go to a paper and say ‘why are you treating Israel differently? Why are you covering Israel? You're here in this country, which around the world is defending itself against terrorism. And you're not taking issue with it, and here you're pummeling Israel with bad coverage … when it's defending itself against one of the most horrific examples of medieval monstrosity that we've seen in a long time in the world. So that's what happened on 10/7. Why is that? Is it productive to have a conversation like that with the New York Times, or with Al Jazeera, which has been widely criticized for how it treats Israel and how it gives comfort to terrorism? Of course. Censorship, no. But should we have those conversations? Of course – we should have those conversations … the Press is open to self-exploration, we all are. That’s one of the big reasons for the Freedom of the Press, if a society needs to criticize itself … so those are productive conversations to have.”

In fact, Carr says that the IHRA definition can help avoid papers from drawing the mark of anti-semitism simply for reporting on the conflict.

“Without the IHRA definition, people can … make wrong statements all the time. When you’ve got a definition that gives people a guideline, it helps minimize statements (that publications are antisemitic).”

The definition explicitly states that criticism of Israel, as might be leveled against any country, cannot be considered antisemitic. Carr also clarified that it is a misconception to see Israel as a nation given to a specific religion.

“The State of Israel doesn’t exist for religious reasons. There are religious underpinnings for why Israel exists, and there there's biblical reasons and so on. But the State of Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people as an ethno-national group,” Carr said. “Religions don't have self determination. People have self determination, nations have self determination. And that's why IHRA, one of the examples, is denying the Jewish people the right of self determination. The State of Israel is the nation-state of the Israelites, the people of Israel, the children of Israel in the Biblical sense … it’s very important to remember that this isn’t a state that was given to a religion or a state that is justified because of a religion … the Jewish people come from there. They come from that land and they were dispersed twice, by the Babylonians and the Romans. They’ve always aspired to return … and through a modern miracle, through the ashes of the Holocaust, the Jews returned to their ancient homeland … Why does Judaism get a country? Judaism doesn’t get a country. The Jewish people get a country, just like the Italians get a country and the Greeks get a country and the French get a country. That’s really the basis of Zionism.”

A Marxist Monster

On college campuses, anti-semitic rhetoric as defined by IHRA is on the rise, with many young, politically-charged students falling firmly on the pro-Palestinian side of the issue. Carr acknowledges that this is a growing reality, and sees it as a manifestation of Marxist worldview that seeks to divide the world between oppressors and oppressed.

“There has been an ideology with its origins in the Soviet Union that was propagated early on by the Soviet Union in a methodical and an intentional way,” Carr said. “And that ideology sees the world in terms of perpetual struggle … between socio-economic classes. But the new version sees it largely in terms of racial privilege, or privileged and marginalized peoples or whiteness deemed privileged, that people of color are marginalized and it's not simply about fighting racism, which we all should and must do, nor is it acknowledging that there are examples of oppression in society, which we all should and must do. This is a poisoned, dangerous anti-American ideology that categorically puts people in categories of moral blame and moral praise, based on identity. The name for something like that is racism. But that's what it does. And so if White Privilege is taught, as being objectionable, oppressive, Jewish white privilege is seen as even worse. And this is something by the way that literally Jews are being told on campuses. Jews are being told on campuses, you're white and you're Jewish, double bad because you are a racist oppressor.”

It’s not simply a game of blame, but also one where violence is justified in the name of battling oppression.

“(In this worldview) Israel is a colonialist oppressor and … can do no right. And if there’s a marginalized people, in this case the Palestinians are deemed marginalized and oppressed, then nothing they can do is wrong,” Carr said. “They are justified in doing anything to tear the system apart. We see this ideology in this country, which is why university campuses today are hostile places for Jews.”

The majority of Jewish kids in American universities feel a need to hide their identity, Carr said, and that was even before October 7.

“That’s also why the cause of Israel-hatred has been widely adopted by those who embrace this anti-American ideology and systemic oppression,” he said. “That’s why so many young people especially have been seduced into this worldview – that’s also why, what South Dakota has done today, is so important. That ideology isn’t just a threat to Jews … this ideology is unamerican at its core. It is deeply threatening to America’s best values, such as meritocracy … so in making this statement against antisemitism … South Dakota is saying ‘not only are we going to protect our Jewish population, small as it is, but we are going to lean on American values. We are going to say no to deeply dangerous … ideologies in the state.”

Carr sees signs of hope in Israel’s future, citing efforts achieved by the Trump Administration to establish peace between the Arab world and the Israeli.

“There are real forces of enlightenment in the world that are doing the right thing,” Carr said. “We just had the first peace treaties between Israel and Arab states in many years. I was at the White House for the signing of the Abraham accords. It was an amazing moment. You now have the UAE, where I’ve been, celebrating the connections … to Israel.”

These treaties linked Israel to the peoples of Morocco, of Bahrain.

“These are growing ties, people-to-people … there’s excitement about this,” Carr said. “Look, the Palestinians have chosen to adopt an ideology of despair, victimhood and ultimately of death. Not all Palestinians, but Palestinian leadership. I’m saying Palestinian leadership because it’s not only Hamas. I want to be clear – the Palestinian leadership has been supporting terrorism for years, financially. The Palestinian authority is paying all the butchers of October 7th.”

Carr believes that the Arab world is changing, looking forward to embracing Israeli cooperation.

“The Arab world is changing and it’s remarkable to see. I’ve been there as a U.S. diplomat and I was moved to tears by the genuine excitement from Arab leaders on the ground … for embracing the Israeli people … for the betterment of the world,” Carr said. “So while things look very dark and dismal with regard to the Palestinian leadership, it’s important to recognize that this isn’t the whole story in the Middle East.”

Carr sees the U.S. role in supporting Israel as taking a side in a battle between good and evil.

“Like with anything else, when it comes to evil, we have to defeat it … you have to defeat evil in the world and encourage goodness in the world. The U.S. has to do that too,” Carr said. “I’m hoping that the U.S. also gets tough on Iran, the chief source of violence and sickness and death in the Middle East … a deep threat to not only Israel but also the United States … it’s about fighting evil and encouraging good. If we do that, I think we will win this fight and I think the future is bright.”

In the interests of balanced reporting, we will note that the U.S.’ own global fight against terrorism, the War on Terror which emerged following 9/11, has amassed a death toll of over 900,000 people, according to the Watson Institute at Brown University. Of those deaths, over 400,000 are civilians – and the indirect death tolls come out to nearly four million. The Institute reports the cost of the War on Terror is estimated to be about $9 trillion".

Pursuit may be, it seems to me, perfect without possession.
Robert Kelley Weeks (1840-1876)