Abstract: Durant quarante ans, l’extrême droite a été l’ennemie officielle des Juifs de France. Or, certains leaders extrémistes ont pu voir dans l’irruption de l’islamisme radical l’opportunité de séduire un électorat jusque-là hostile: l’islamisme n’était-il pas un ennemi commun?
Marine Le Pen a ainsi voulu surfer sur l'inquiétude des Juifs de France face à la montée d’un antisémitisme dont elle prétendait, de surcroît, pouvoir les protéger. D’où ses tentatives, nombreuses et variées, pour les rallier à sa cause.
Le FN, devenu Rassemblement National, serait-il devenu un partenaire respectable? Ou, tout au moins un opposant fréquentable ?
Les auteurs de cette enquête ont sillonné la France à l’écoute des communautés juives présentes dans les villes d'extrême droite, de Fréjus à Hayange, de Béziers aux quartiers-nord de Marseille. Ils ont remonté le fil de l’histoire du Front National et de ses tentatives de séduction, ainsi que celle des réactions des juifs face à cette main tendue. Pour mieux comprendre, ils ont recueilli des confidences d’élus frontistes, de témoins et d'intellectuels.
Et ils racontent les coulisses de cette tentative de hold-up idéologique.
Abstract: Projekt Overview
This study explores the experiences, perceptions, and coping strategies of Jewish individuals in Germany in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. Our research aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of how Jews in Germany, with or without Israeli migration background, navigated the complex emotional landscape of collective trauma and rising antisemitism.
Key Objectives
Examine the immediate and ongoing impacts of the October 7 events on Jewish individuals in Germany
Investigate changes in experiences of antisemitism and perceptions of societal responses
Identify coping strategies and resilience mechanisms employed by Jewish individuals
Explore the influence of these events on Jewish identity and community engagement
Assess concerns and hopes for the future of Jewish life in Germany
Methodology
We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 18 Jewish individuals living in Germany, including both Israeli and non-Israeli backgrounds. Participants ranged in age from 23 to 68 years old and represented diverse socioeconomic backgrounds and levels of religious observance.
Key Findings
Profound emotional disruption and trauma following the October 7 attacks
Significant changes in social relationships, often leading to social withdrawal
Increased community engagement and activism among Jewish individuals
Heightened sense of insecurity and vigilance in expressing Jewish identity
Complex coping strategies, including humor, community involvement, and selective avoidance
Abstract: Auch 70 Jahre nach dem Holocaust hat sich in Deutschland noch immer kein flächendeckender Konsens über die Unteilbarkeit der Menschenrechte durchgesetzt. Antisemitismus, Islamophobie und Fremdenfeindlichkeit sind besorgniserregend weit verbreitet. Ein Viertel der Deutschen sind antisemitische Israelkritiker, bei denen juden- und islamfeindliche Einstellungen miteinander Hand in Hand gehen, und deren (scheinbare) Parteinahme für die Palästinenser ihnen letztlich nur als Mittel dient, „das wahre Gesicht der Juden“ zu entlarven. Gut ein Zehntel vermeidet es, Kritik an der israelischen Politik zu üben, „weil man ja nicht sagen darf, was man über die Juden wirklich denkt“, und selbst jenes Viertel der Deutschen, das der Politik Israels wohlwollend gegenübersteht, tut dies oft nur, um selbst vor der Welt gut dazustehen.
Jedoch kritisieren immerhin vier von zehn Deutschen die israelische Politik deshalb, weil sie für die Menschenrechte eintreten, Antisemitismus und Islamophobie gleichermaßen ablehnen und eine Politik verurteilen, die nicht nur den Palästinensern Unrecht antut, sondern auch Israel von innen heraus zu zerstören droht. Auch sie des Antisemitismus zu bezichtigen, kann weder im Interesse Israels noch im Interesse der in Deutschland lebenden Juden sein.
Abstract: Die Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Israel sind einzigartig. Geprägt von der Erinnerung an die Shoah und getragen von dem Anspruch, daraus praktische Konsequenzen für heute zu ziehen, gelten sie als „besonders“. Doch was bedeutet diese Besonderheit im Jahr 2025? Haben der Terrorangriff der Hamas auf Israel am 7. Oktober 2023 und der nachfolgende Krieg Israels gegen die Hamas im Gazastreifen Spuren im bilateralen Verhältnis hinterlassen? Wie blicken Deutsche und Israelis heute aufeinander, welche Erwartungen und Bilder prägen das gegenseitige Verhältnis, und welche Verantwortung resultiert daraus in einer Zeit wachsender geopolitischer Spannungen und gesellschaftlicher Polarisierung? Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Fragen gibt die vorliegende Kompaktauswertung einen ersten Einblick in die Ergebnisse unserer aktuellen Studie zur gegenseitigen Wahrnehmung von Israelis und Deutschen. Auf Basis einer repräsentativen Doppelbefragung in beiden Ländern gibt sie Aufschluss über das politische Selbstverständnis in beiden Gesellschaften, die Rolle der Geschichte für die Gegenwart, die Erwartungen an die deutsche Nahostpolitik sowie die Wahrnehmung von Antisemitismus und internationaler Verantwortung. Die Ergebnisse zeichnen ein ambivalentes Bild, geprägt von Nähe und Distanz, Zustimmung und Kritik, Hoffnung und Skepsis. In dieser Auswertung legen wir einen besonderen Fokus auf die Erhebung in Deutschland und ziehen die israelischen Befunde vergleichend heran. Eine umfangreiche Darstellung aller Ergebnisse ist in Vorbereitung. Mit dieser Studie setzt die Bertelsmann Stiftung ihre langjährige Reihe empirischer Analysen zur Entwicklung der deutsch-israelischen Beziehungen fort. Die Studie erscheint in einem Jahr, in dem sich die Aufnahme diplomatischer Beziehungen zwischen beiden Staaten zum sechzigsten Mal jährt. Ein Anlass, nicht nur auf das Erreichte zurückzublicken, sondern auch für eine kritische Selbstbefragung: Wie können wir, Deutsche und Israelis, unsere Beziehung in Zukunft verantwortungsvoll gestalten?
Abstract: In the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 attacks, reports of anti-Israel expressions at German universities have raised questions about the prevalence and nature of such sentiments in academic environments. Traditional survey-based research on antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment is often limited by response biases and social desirability bias. This study introduces a novel field-experimental approach to measuring anti-Israel sentiment in a real-world university setting. Using event history analysis, it examines the removal probability of stickers of the Israeli flag compared to German, US, Palestinian, and rainbow flags at a German university. Over a 24-week period, 600 stickers were placed on 50 public notice boards and were monitored for 14-day cycles. The results provide strong evidence of anti-Israel sentiment. The Israeli flag had the highest removal rate, with only 47.5% of the flags remaining at the end of the observation period—significantly lower than the survival rates of the other flags (which range from 68% to 80%). Cox regression analysis confirms that Israeli flags faced the highest removal hazard, being 3.3 to 3.7-times more likely to be removed than the rainbow flag and nearly twice as likely as the German flag. Politically motivated removals, though less frequent, disproportionately targeted Israeli flags as well. Removal rates were highest in hallways of the humanities, shared humanities/social sciences as well as in central facilities hallways. Hallways in the natural sciences, the human- and social sciences and economics had lower removal rates. Areas with higher student traffic exhibited fewer removals. Overall, the findings indicate a pronounced anti-Israel bias on campus, distinct from attitudes toward other nationalities or symbols.
Abstract: Reports have indicated an increase in anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitic incidents following the Hamas terrorist attack in Israel on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza. In two studies (NStudy1 = 354 and NStudy2 = 490), we experimentally investigated the impact of priming with material referring to the war in Gaza on hostility toward Jews, and on antisemitism as well as other various ethnic groups (to determine whether this exposure specifically affected attitudes toward Jews or had a broader impact on ethnic attitudes in general). We also examined the indirect relationship between political orientation and anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitism, through sociopolitical factors such as global identification, out-group identity fusion, social dominance orientation, and misanthropy. Our results showed an experimental effect of increased negative attitudes toward Jews, as well as toward Britons and Scandinavians, but did not reveal an increase in antisemitism. This effect was not replicated in Study 2, possibly due to reduced media attention. The indirect effects suggested that political orientation (left vs. right-wing) was positively associated with anti-Jewish hostility and antisemitism through social dominance orientation. In contrast, conservative political orientation was negatively associated with antisemitism through out-group identity fusion with the Palestinian people. Our findings imply two distinct political pathways to antisemitism: one linked with classical political right-wing orientation and the other to a complex identity-based conflation of attitudes toward Israel with prejudice toward the Jewish ethnic group.
Abstract: Teaching and education mirror what societies want to preserve, initiate, and pass along. Thus, the impact of teachers and school textbooks cannot be overestimated. It is absolutely necessary, therefore, to ensure high-quality textbooks, which convey balanced views as well as intellectual and unbiased approaches to the topics. The present study by historian and Holocaust education expert Dr. Melanie Carina Schmoll, PhD, offers a fresh approach to analyzing the subjects of Jews, Judaism, current Israel and the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts in curricula and relevant textbooks. The study indicates the status of information, problematic content, or words in curricula and history textbooks used in the German province of North Rhine-Westphalia. Besides analyzing and just denouncing mistakes, the study also provides options for an exchange of difficult and/ or incorrect content in the textbooks. The study assists authors and editors to write and develop unbiased textbooks in the future.
Topics: Attitudes to Israel, Attitudes to Jews, Holocaust, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Israeli-Arab Conflict, Israel Criticism, Main Topic: Culture and Heritage, Memory, Literature, Film, Television
Abstract: Examines an important relational shift in British and German cultural depictions of Palestine and Israel since 1987
Develops relationality as a critical tool to challenge mainstream ideas about Israeli and Palestinian narratives as separate and not connected to European histories of the Holocaust and colonialism
Argues that Israel and Palestine are used as geopolitical and imaginary spaces to discuss social and political concerns in the United Kingdom and in Germany
Examines works by authors and directors from outside of Israel and Palestine, including those with no direct link to the conflict, thus extending our understanding of Palestine and Israel as signifiers in the contemporary period
Offers a comparative analysis of British and German literature, TV drama, and film which focuses on country-specific case studies to identify common trends in imagining and reimaging Israel and Palestine since the first Palestinian Intifada
Discusses works published since 1987 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians since 1947 which depict encounters between (Israeli) Jews and Palestinians and their narratives since 1947
Isabelle Hesse identifies an important relational turn in British and German literature, TV drama, and film published and produced since the First Palestinian Intifada (1987-1993). This turn manifests itself on two levels: one, in representing Israeli and Palestinian histories and narratives as connected rather than separate, and two, by emphasising the links between the current situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the roles that the United Kingdom and Germany have played historically, and continue to play, in the region. This relational turn constitutes a significant shift in representations of Israel and Palestine in British and German culture as these depictions move beyond an engagement with the Holocaust and Jewish suffering at the expense of Palestinian suffering and indicate a willingness to represent and acknowledge British and German involvement in Israeli and Palestinian politics.
Abstract: Syrian refugees have become a significant minority in Germany over the past decade, with approximately one million now residing in the country. Most of them plan to stay and are eager to integrate into German society. Alongside practical challenges such as uncertain legal status, securing housing, finding employment, facing racism, and learning the German language, they must also navigate an ideological environment where common views on the Middle East, Islam, Israel, Jews, and the Holocaust differ significantly from those in their home country. This necessitates a certain degree of adaptation. Based on qualitative interviews with more than 200 Arab and Kurdish Syrian refugees, we examine self-perceptions, views on developments in the Middle East, and attitudes toward Jews. Significant differences emerged between Arab and Kurdish respondents. Especially among Syrian Kurds, there’s a noticeable openness to challenge antisemitic attitudes, often motivated by a rejection of Arab nationalist ideology and anti-Zionist propaganda. Syrian Kurds often perceive Jews and Israel more favorably than Arab Syrians. Their history of discrimination and oppression in Syria contributes to their rejection of hatred of Jews and Israel.
Abstract: The report looks into what Jews in the UK think of key Israeli political leaders and the country’s future, drawing on data from the responses of over 4,500 adult British Jews, members of the JPR Research Panel, to the JPR Jewish Current Affairs Survey, held in June-July 2024. The report reveals that levels of pessimism about Israel’s current situation have increased significantly among British Jews when compared to data gathered before the October 7 attacks on Israel and the war in Gaza.
Some of the main findings in this report:
Three-quarters (74%) of Jews in the UK describe Israel’s situation as “bad” (37%) or “very bad” (37%), increasing from 57% measured in Apr/May 2023. Overall, Jews in the UK characterise Israel’s current state more negatively than Israelis.
95% of adult British Jews have an opinion on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the most widely known leader among those examined. Four in five Jews hold an unfavourable opinion of him, with 65% saying they “strongly disapprove” and 15% saying they “somewhat” disapprove of him.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich (-78%), Minister of Security Itamar Ben-Gvir (-77%) and Netanyahu (-68%) are the Israeli leaders British Jews least approve of when looking at their net approval ratings. Former Prime Minister Yair Lapid (+12%) and former Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister Benny Gantz (+10%) are the only two leaders showing positive net ratings among those examined.
Lapid is the only leader examined showing an increase in net approval rate compared to data from before October 7.
Politically ‘right-leaning’ Jews were much more likely to approve of Netanyahu than those who are ‘left-leaning’.
Abstract: As a consequence of the Holocaust, Israel’s security is officially regarded as part of Germany’s
“reason of state”. Yet the criteria for a responsible relationship between Germany and Israel are by
no means self-evident or without logical or practical contradictions. One of the complications is
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In order to better understand this complication, I examine two
familiar national narratives, one from each side, about possible connections between the Nazi era,
the Holocaust, and this conflict. I also put the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a broader historical
context. It turns out that the examined relationships are not as obvious as the familiar narratives
describe them. The origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are older than the Nazi era and the
Holocaust, and they also point to broader European responsibilities more generally, to Europe’s
nationalism, anti-Semitism, colonialism and imperialism – with irresponsibilities towards both
Jews and Arabs. In no way does such a comprehensive perspective affect Germany’s special historical responsibilities resulting from the Holocaust. But it puts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a
more complete and also more honest framework, with consequences for Germany’s moral and
political position
Abstract: The Gaza War is a watershed moment not only in the Middle East. It has also increased political divisions in Germany, where Israel’s security and the fight against anti-Semitism are part of its historical legacy and political and moral identity. Incidents of anti-Semitism have increased dramatically, as have overdrawn accusations of it. An analysis of controversies about the definition of anti-Semitism, about the use of the term apartheid for the situation in the West Bank, of the BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), and particularly the characterization
of Israel as a settler-colonial state shows how difficult it has become to maintain a fair, honest, and frank discussion considering different points of view. The current crisis should be used as an opportunity for Germany to, on the one hand, face the unavoidable contradictions in its responsibilities stemming from the crimes of its Nazi past and, on the other hand, come to grips not only with Arab and Iranian terrorism and eliminationist rhetoric but also with the deficiencies in Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians. Germany’s new leitmotiv ought to be: ‘Between the River
and the Sea, Jews and Arabs should be free.’
Abstract: Les différentes réalités de l’antisémitisme sont enfin objectivées.
L’Institut Jonathas présente les résultats du premier sondage réalisé en Belgique sur la perception des Juifs, de l’antisémitisme, des autres minorités et de la guerre en cours à Gaza et en Israël.
Créé en mars 2024, l’Institut Jonathas est un centre d’études et d’action contre l’antisémitisme et contre tout ce qui le favorise en Belgique. Il a demandé à IPSOS d’objectiver et de mesurer, à la veille des élections du 9 juin, les opinions des Belges sur des sujets qui sont au cœur de sa raison d’être.
IPSOS a interrogé, du 8 au 12 mai, un échantillon de 1.000 personnes, représentatif de la population belge de 18 ans et plus, avec le même panel et la même méthodologie que pour les sondages politiques.
En l’absence de sondages pouvant tenir lieu de points de comparaison en Belgique, plusieurs questions ont été reprises de sondages récents menés en France par IPSOS ou par IFOP. Les résultats français sont indiqués ci-après, lorsque la comparaison avec les résultats belges est pertinente.
Le sondage réalisé par IPSOS pour l’Institut Jonathas met en lumière et objective les différentes facettes de l’image des Juifs et de l’antisémitisme dans la société belge :
Une image très moyenne des Juifs, 80 ans après la Shoah.
Des marqueurs d’antisémitisme primaire prégnants dans toutes les composantes de la société belge et sur-représentés à l’extrême-gauche, à l’extrême-droite et chez les musulmans
En plus de ces préjugés « traditionnels » (argent, pouvoir, religion…), des marqueurs d’antisémitisme dit « secondaire », aboutissant à banaliser la Shoah et à nazifier Israël
Une méconnaissance générale des Juifs, du judaïsme et de la réalité de l’antisémitisme en Belgique
Trois premières sources d’antisémitisme en Belgique, selon les Belges : l’hostilité à Israël, l’islamisme radical et les préjugés sur les Juifs
Un écho limité chez les Belges des sujets relatifs à Israël, à la Palestine et à la guerre, à l’exception d’une minorité dont certains éléments souhaitent la destruction de l’Etat d’Israël
Distance ou indifférence d’environ 50% des Belges vis-à-vis de la guerre entre Israël et le Hamas, mais aussi polarisation sur ce conflit de segments précis de la population belge.
La guerre, source d’inquiétude pour les Juifs en Belgique selon la majorité des Belges, mais aussi matière à hostilité contre les Juifs en Belgique pour une minorité de Belges
Un antisémitisme s’inscrivant dans une société belge plutôt tendue et inquiète concernant ses relations avec les différents groupes minoritaires et, en particulier, les musulmans et les Maghrébins.
Abstract: This study considers the flying of Palestinian flags by Celtic Football Club supporters in Scotland as an illustration of political activism in sport. Despite being over 4000 kilometres away and holding no ethnic, national or religious connections with any community involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle-East, fans wave these flags to demonstrate backing for Palestinian people. With reference to an historical context of the ethno-religious origins of Celtic FC and its supporting fanbase being significantly composed of members of a multi-generational Irish-Catholic diasporic minority community in Scotland, through utilizing fan writings, self-representations, and the results of a small survey of supporters, this research provides for deeper understanding of the intermittent use of sport as a space for ‘taking sides’ in conflicts that have ethnic, national, religious, and political resonances. Critically, this insight also offers important reflections regarding narratives of antisemitism in football and beyond.
Abstract: Quelques jours après l’attaque du Hamas en Israël, l’IFOP a réalisé pour le Journal du Dimanche, un sondage destiné à comprendre quelles étaient les représentations des Français à l’égard du conflit et de son impact sur une éventuelle importation de violences antisémites en France.
Premier enseignement de cette étude, le conflit au Proche-Orient apparaît comme particulièrement anxiogène. 86% des Français indiquent être inquiets (36% « tout à fait inquiets »), soit un niveau d’inquiétude proche de celui mesuré au début du conflit russo-ukrainien. Le sentiment d’inquiétude atteint son acmé dans certains segments de la population traditionnellement plus favorables à l’Etat Hébreu : les plus de 65 ans (44% de tout à fait inquiets parmi les plus de 65 ans contre 25% parmi les 18-24 ans) ou encore les électeurs de Valérie Pécresse (50% de « tout à fait inquiets »).
Deuxième enseignement de cette étude : les Français établissent clairement un lien entre les évènements au Proche-Orient et l’importation de violences antisémites en France. 48% des sondés estiment ainsi que les Français de confession juive sont plus en danger et 79% se déclarent inquiets que le conflit se traduise par une augmentation des actes antisémites.
Plus globalement, les Français identifient bien les « nouvelles formes d’antisémitisme » comme étant des causes à ce phénomène : 77% citent le rejet et la haine d’Israël, 76% les idées islamistes, soit des niveaux supérieurs à ceux mesurés pour les idées d’extrême droite (66%).
Dernier point, les pouvoirs publics bénéficient d’une certaine mansuétude dans l’opinion : 60% des Français estiment leur faire confiance pour assurer la sécurité des Français de confession juive. Jean-Luc Mélenchon suscite en revanche la défiance sur ce sujet : il apparait comme la personnalité politique qui suscite le moins de confiance pour lutter contre l’antisémitisme (17%), loin derrière Edouard Philippe (46%), Gerald Darmanin (42%), Marine Le Pen (42%) ou encore Emmanuel Macron (41%).
Abstract: This chapter introduces the notion of ‘enabling concepts’: concepts which may or may not themselves constitute a mode of hate speech, but which through their broad social acceptability facilitate or legitimate the articulation of concepts which can be more directly classed as hate speech. We argue that each distinct hate ideology will contain its own, partly overlapping set of ‘enabling concepts.’ In this chapter, we will focus on the enabling role of references to apartheid for the constitution of antisemitism in British online discourse around Israel. This argument does not rest on agreement as to whether the ‘apartheid analogy’—comparisons between contemporary Israel and the former Apartheid regime in South Africa—itself constitutes a form of antisemitism. The chapter draws on qualitative analysis of more than 10,000 user comments posted on social media profiles of mainstream media in the UK, undertaken by the Decoding Antisemitism project in the wake of the May 2021 escalation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict. We will show how web commenters frequently use the apartheid analogy to trigger more extreme antisemitic stereotypes, including age-old tropes, intensifying and distorting analogies (such as Nazi comparisons) or calls for Israel’s elimination. The results will be presented in detail based on a pragmalinguistic approach taking into account the immediate context of the comment thread and broader world knowledge. Both of these aspects are relevant preconditions for examining all forms of antisemitic hate speech that can remain undetected when conducting solely statistical analysis. Based on this large dataset, we suggest that—under the cover of its widespread social acceptability—the apartheid analogy thus facilitates the articulation and legitimation of extreme antisemitic concepts that would, without this prior legitimation, be more likely to be rejected or countered.
Abstract: Over the past 3.5 years, the Decoding Antisemitism research project has been analysing antisemitism on the internet in terms of content, structure, and frequency. Over this time, there has been no shortage of flashpoints which have generated antisemitic responses. Yet the online response to the Hamas attacks of 7 October and the subsequent Israeli operations in Gaza has surpassed anything the project has witnessed before. In no preceding escalation phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict has the predominant antisemitic reaction been one of open jubilation and joy over the deaths of Israeli Jews. As demonstrated in the sixth and final Discourse Report, this explicit approval of the Hamas attacks was the primary response from web users. The response to 7 October therefore represents a turning point in antisemitic online discourse, and its repercussions will be felt long into the future.
The report contains analysis of the various stages of online reactions to events in the Middle East, from the immediate aftermath to the Israeli retaliations and subsequent accusations of genocide against Israel. As well as examining online reactions in the project’s core focus—the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—this report also, for the first time, extends its view to analyse Israel-related web discourses in six further countries, including those in Southern and Eastern Europe as well as in North Africa. Alongside reactions to the escalation phase, the report also examines online responses to billionaire Elon Musk’s explosive comments about Jewish individuals and institutions.
Additionally, the report provides a retrospective overview of the project’s development over the past 3.5 years, tracking its successes and challenges, particularly regarding the conditions for successful interdisciplinary work and the ability of machine learning to capture the versatility and complexity of authentic web communication.
To mark the publication of the report, we are also sharing our new, interactive data visualisations tool, which lets you examine any two discourse events analysed by our research team between 2021 and 2023. You can compare the frequencies and co-occurrences of antisemitic concepts and speech acts by type and by country, look at frequencies of keywords in antisemitic comments, and plot keyword networks.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Discourse, Antisemitism: Monitoring, Internet, Social Media, Main Topic: Antisemitism, War, Terrorism, Attitudes to Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)
Abstract: This article follows up on assumptions of Rogers Brubaker and Benjamin Moffitt, according to whom, some Western and Northern European right-wing populist parties use ‘civilisationist’ and liberal-illiberal narratives that are, for instance, characterised by a ‘philo-Semitic stance’. The paper analyses to what extent the German right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany (AfD) fits into this concept, considering the party’s ambivalent attitude towards Judaism, Jews, and Israel. Using qualitative content analysis, the study is based on an examination of AfD electoral manifestos and parliamentary documents from the federal level as well as from states such as Berlin, Baden-Württemberg, and Thuringia between 2014 and 2019. Our results reveal differences that range from open anti-Semitic statements to self-definitions as a ‘pro-Jewish’ party. We argue that different positions can be explained by regionally divergent discursive opportunity structures as well as personnel heterogeneity across the party sections under study. Furthermore, we reason that a combination of anti-Semitic and pro-Jewish/Israeli statements fits into the AfD’s strategy of addressing both voters from the radical right with anti-Semitic prejudices and more moderate, conservative voters that reject open hostility towards Jews and Israel. We conclude that the AfD fulfils Brubaker’s and Moffitt’s concepts only to a rather limited extent.
Abstract: In this report:
Five weeks after the barbaric attack on innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas, this factsheet uses data from recent polling by two major polling agencies, Ipsos and YouGov, alongside historical data on these issues, to shed light on what people in the UK think about the conflict, where their sympathies lie, and what they believe the British government should do in response to the latest events in Israel and Gaza.
Some of the key findings in this report:
Since the 7 October attack, the proportion of British adults sympathising with the Israeli side has doubled from a pre-war level of about 10% to about 20%, whereas sympathy for the Palestinian side has fallen by a few percentage points from 24% to around 15%-21%;
Nevertheless, levels of sympathy for the Palestinian side have been gradually climbing since October 7, and are now approaching their pre-war levels;
Young adults are much more likely to sympathise with the Palestinians than the Israelis; older people hold the opposite view;
British adults are over twice as likely to think that Israel does not try to minimise harm to civilians than it does make such efforts;
British adults are more likely to think the UK should be more critical toward Israel than it has been, as opposed to more supportive. The younger respondents are, the more likely they are to believe the UK should be more critical;
British adults are twice as likely to think the police should be making more arrests at pro-Palestinian demonstrations than less, though there is are clear generational differences of opinion on this issue;
Almost all subgroups think the police should arrest people who openly support Hamas at demonstrations in the UK.
Abstract: Antisemitische Feindbilder sind bei arabischen Flüchtlingen weit verbreitet. Dies belegt eine Studie, welche vom American Jewish Committee (AJC) in Auftrag gegeben wurde.
„Bisher beruhte diese wichtige Diskussion, etwa zum Thema Antisemitismus, lediglich auf der Ebene von Vermutungen. Nun haben wir ein wissenschaftlich-fundiertes Bild: Judenfeindliche Ressentiments, antisemitische Verschwörungstheorien und eine kategorische Ablehnung Israels sind bei vielen Flüchtlingen aus dem arabischen Raum weit verbreitet. Dies ist angesichts der tiefen Verwurzelung des Judenhasses in arabischen Ländern zwar nicht verwunderlich, dennoch hat uns die Klarheit einiger Aussagen überrascht. Das Problem ist komplexer als von manch einem angenommen“, sagte Deidre Berger, Direktorin des AJC Berlin Ramer Institute.
Die Studie wurde von dem Historiker und Antisemitismusforscher Dr. Günther Jikeli (Indiana University/Universität Potsdam) in Berlin durchgeführt. Hierfür wurden 68 Geflüchtete (18-52 Jahre) aus Syrien und dem Irak in Gruppeninterviews befragt. Eine aktuell laufende Folgestudie vom Forscher mit 85 Befragten bestätigt die Ergebnisse.
„Wir haben die Studie in Auftrag gegeben, um Antworten über Einstellungen zu Juden, Israel und demokratischen Werten unter Flüchtlingen aus dem arabischen Raum zu bekommen. Die Erkenntnisse sind von großer Bedeutung für die Frage, wie die Integration von Geflüchteten gelingen kann“, so Berger weiter. „Die Ergebnisse der Studie sind erschütternd, aber nicht alle Flüchtlinge sind gleich und unser Verständnis muss viel differenzierter werden. Gerade diejenigen, die in Syrien oder dem Irak als religiöse oder ethnische Minderheiten verfolgt wurden, positionieren sich häufiger gegen Antisemitismus und für Israel."
Abstract: First International Resources was commissioned by the AntiDefamation League to research attitudes and opinions toward Jews, the Middle East and the global financial crisis in sevenEuropean countries.
¾ Our research focused on the attitudes of the general public in
Austria, France, Hungary, Poland, Germany, Spain and the
United Kingdom.
¾ Data results for each individual country were weighted based
on age and gender. The completed interview data underwent
minor weighting to national population data using official
government information on age and gender.
¾ In addition to the individual country results, we have compiled
overall statistics which take into account the findings from the
seven countries surveyed as a whole. These figures are
combined results from our surveys, with each country’s
findings being weighted equally as one-seventh of the whole.
¾ Fieldwork was done by Taylor Nelson Sofres (TNS), which
conducted a total of 3,500 telephone interviews -- 500 in each of
the seven countries -- among the general public between
December 1, 2008 – January 13, 2009.
¾ Interviews were conducted in the native language of each of the
countries and were completed by TNS.
¾ The margin of error for each country is +/- 4 at 95% level of
confidence.
Abstract: First International Resources was commissioned by the AntiDefamation League to research attitudes and opinions toward Jews in twelve European countries.
• Our research focused on the prevalent attitudes of the general public
in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Austria, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and for the first time,
Poland and Hungary.
• Data results for each individual country were weighted based on age
and gender. The completed interview data underwent minor weighting
to national population data using official government information on
age and gender.
• In addition to the individual country results, we have compiled overall
“European” statistics which take into account the findings from the
twelve countries surveyed as a whole. These “European” figures are
combined results from our surveys, with each country’s findings being
weighted equally as one-twelfth of the whole.
• Fieldwork was done by Taylor Nelson Sofres, which conducted a total
of 6,000 telephone interviews -- 500 in each of the twelve countries --
among the general public between April 11 -- May 6, 2005.
• Interviews were conducted in the native language of each of the
countries and were completed by TNS.
• The margin of error for each country is +/- 4.5 at 95% level of
confidence.
Abstract: First International Resources was commissioned by the AntiDefamation League to research attitudes and opinions in ten European countries toward Jews, Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
• Our research focused on the prevalent attitudes of the general public
in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland.
• Data results for each individual country were weighted based on age
and gender. The completed interview data underwent minor weighting
to national population data using official government information on
age and gender.
• Fieldwork was done by Taylor Nelson Sofres, which conducted a total
of 5,000 telephone interviews -- 500 in each of the ten countries --
among the general public between March 16-April 8, 2004.
• Interviews were conducted in the native language of each of the
countries and were completed by TNS.
• The margin of error for each country is +/- 4.4 at 95% level of
confidence.
Abstract: Many in Europe today are concerned about the rise in violence against Jews, which clearly raises fears in Jewish communities on the Continent. Neither Jewish communities nor individual Jews can be protected unless there is data on antisemitic incidents and scientifically thorough situation analysis. We need to know and analyze the current social attitudes related to antisemitism, to the coexistence with Jews, mutually held prejudices, related taboos in a representative sample of the European countries’ population.
This is the reason why we have launched the largest European antisemitism survey. The research, initiated by the Action and Protection League and carried out by the polling companies Ipsos and Inspira, aims to provide a comprehensive picture of antisemitic prejudice in 16 countries in the European Union.
Data were collected between December 2019 and January 2020 in 16 European countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom. 1000 people were surveyed in each country.
We used a total of 24 questions to measure antisemitism. We measured the cognitive and conative dimensions of prejudice with 10 questions, and three additional questions for the affective dimension of antisemitism, that is, to measure the emotional charge of antisemitic prejudice. We mapped secondary antisemitism relativizing the Holocaust with seven questions and antisemitic hostility against Israel with four questions. We used two and three questions, respectively, to measure sympathy for Jews and for Israel.
With the exception of questions about affective antisemitism, all questions were asked in the same form: Respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point scale how much they agreed with the statements in the question (strongly agree; tend to agree; neither agree nor disagree; tend to disagree; strongly disagree).
Abstract: Many in Europe today are concerned about the rise in violence against Jews, which clearly raises fears in Jewish communities on the Continent. Neither Jewish communities nor individual Jews can be protected unless there is data on antisemitic incidents and scientifically thorough situation analysis. We need to know and analyze the current social attitudes related to antisemitism, to the coexistence with Jews, mutually held prejudices, related taboos in a representative sample of the European countries’ population.
This is the reason why we have launched the largest European antisemitism survey. The research, initiated by the Action and Protection League and carried out by the polling companies Ipsos and Inspira, aims to provide a comprehensive picture of antisemitic prejudice in 16 countries in the European Union.
Data were collected between December 2019 and January 2020 in 16 European countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom. 1000 people were surveyed in each country.
We used a total of 24 questions to measure antisemitism. We measured the cognitive and conative dimensions of prejudice with 10 questions, and three additional questions for the affective dimension of antisemitism, that is, to measure the emotional charge of antisemitic prejudice. We mapped secondary antisemitism relativizing the Holocaust with seven questions and antisemitic hostility against Israel with four questions. We used two and three questions, respectively, to measure sympathy for Jews and for Israel.
With the exception of questions about affective antisemitism, all questions were asked in the same form: Respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point scale how much they agreed with the statements in the question (strongly agree; tend to agree; neither agree nor disagree; tend to disagree; strongly disagree).
Abstract: This article analyzes the attitudes of 25 refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq, now living in Germany, toward Jews, the Holocaust, Israel, and the Middle East conflict. It reveals both anti-Jewish and anti-Israel sentiments among many of the respondents, as well as a lack of knowledge about the Holocaust, and a wide range of attitudes between individual participants. Some of the factors influencing attitudes include everyday knowledge in the countries of origin, Arab nationalism, as well as specific religious and ethnic identities. The findings are discussed in relation to other recent studies, and against the backdrop of German media discourse, current debates about an “imported” antisemitism among refugees and migrants, and the relationship between experiences of racial discrimination and anti-Jewish attitudes.
