Topics: Memory, Jewish Neighbourhoods, Jewish Space, Jewish Heritage, Oral History and Biography, Holocaust, Holocaust Commemoration, Holocaust Memorials, Holocaust Survivors, Holocaust Survivors: Children of, Main Topic: Holocaust and Memorial
Abstract: The Sixth Survey of European Jewish Community Leaders and Professionals, 2024, presents the results of an online survey offered in 10 languages and administered to 879 respondents in 31 countries. Conducted every three years using the same format, the survey seeks to identify trends and their evolution over time.
The 2024 survey came during a historically fraught moment for the Jewish people globally. The impact of the horrific October 7th attacks and the subsequent war in Israel cannot be understated. How is this affecting Jewish leadership and Jewish communal life? Therefore, in addition to the regular topics covered by the survey (community priorities, threats, security concerns, attitudes towards Europe and Israel), this edition included a special section designed to understand the impact of October 7th on Jewish life in Europe.
That October 7th has profoundly affected Jewish Europe is evident across multiple sections throughout the survey. Concern about antisemitism and the threat of physical attack has intensified. A large majority of 78% feel less safe living as Jews in their cities than they did before the Hamas attack, and respondents are more cautious about how they identify themselves as Jews. They are also more distant from their wider environments, with 38% reporting they have become more distant from non-Jewish friends.
The respondents were comprised of presidents and chairpersons of nationwide “umbrella organizations” or Federations; presidents and executive directors of private Jewish foundations, charities, and other privately funded initiatives; presidents and main representatives of Jewish communities that are organized at a city level; executive directors and programme coordinators, as well as current and former board members of Jewish organizations; among others
Abstract: FRA’s third survey on discrimination and hate crime against Jews in the EU reveals their experiences and perceptions of antisemitism, and shows the obstacles they face in living an openly Jewish life.
The survey pre-dates the Hamas attacks on 7 October 2023 and Israel’s military response in Gaza. But the report includes information about antisemitism collected from 12 Jewish community organisations more recently. Jewish people have experienced more antisemitic incidents since October 2023, with some organisations reporting an increase of more than 400%.
The survey results point to:
Rising antisemitism: 80% of respondents feel that antisemitism has grown in their country in the five years before the survey.
High levels of antisemitism online: 90% of respondents encountered antisemitism online in the year before the survey.
Antisemitism in the public sphere: in the year before the survey, 56% of respondents encountered offline antisemitism from people they know and 51% in the media.
Harassment: 37% say they were harassed because they are Jewish in the year before the survey. Most of them experienced harassment multiple times. Antisemitic harassment and violence mostly take place in streets, parks, or shops.
Safety and security concerns: Most respondents continue to worry for their own (53%) and their family’s (60%) safety and security. Over the years, FRA research has shown that antisemitism tends to increase in times of tension in the Middle East. In this survey, 75% feel that people hold them responsible for the Israeli government’s actions because they are Jewish.
Hidden lives: 76% hide their Jewish identity at least occasionally and 34% avoid Jewish events or sites because they do not feel safe. As a reaction to online antisemitism, 24% avoid posting content that would identify them as Jewish, 23% say that they limited their participation in online discussions, and 16% reduced their use of certain platforms, websites or services.
The EU and its Member States have put in place measures against antisemitism, which have led to some progress. These include the EU’s first ever strategy on combating antisemitism and action plans in some EU countries. The report suggests concrete ways for building on that progress:
Monitoring and adequately funding antisemitism strategies and action plans: This includes adopting plans in those EU countries which do not have them and developing indicators to monitor progress.
Securing the safety and security of Jewish communities: Countries need to invest more in protecting Jewish people, working closely with the affected communities.
Tackling antisemitism online: Online platforms need to address and remove antisemitic content online, to adhere tothe EU’s Digital Services Act. They also need to better investigate and prosecute illegal antisemitic content online.
Encouraging reporting and improving recording of antisemitism: National authorities should step up efforts to raise rights awareness among Jews, encourage them to report antisemitic incidents and improve the recording of such incidents. Greater use of third-party and anonymous reporting could help.
The survey covers Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain and Sweden where around 96% of the EU’s estimated Jewish population live. Almost 8,000 Jews aged 16 or over took part in the online survey from January to June 2023. This is the third survey of its kind, following those of 2013 and 2018.
Abstract: Rising antisemitism in the twenty-first century has alarmed Jewish communities and the general public, but antisemitic hate crime victimization remains understudied outside the US context. This study primarily relies on a comprehensive survey of 16,400 Jews across twelve European countries, supplemented with data from additional sources, to assess individual and country-level predictors of Jews’ experiences and fears of antisemitic harassment and violence. Multilevel models indicate that young age, perceived discrimination, identity visibility, and identification with Israel are pronounced individual risk factors for victimization. On the country level, negative opinion of Israel and Muslim population share predict victimization, highlighting the role of a “new” or Israel-derived antisemitism in the twenty-first century. The factors most strongly associated with fear are young age, previous victimization, perceptions of an ambient antisemitic threat, and recent occurrence of fatal antisemitic violence. Overall, the findings underscore the importance of integrating general theory on hate crime and victimization with context-specific factors when seeking to understand the experiences of targeted groups.
Abstract: Les manifestations de nationalisme et d’antisémitisme qui accompagnèrent la transition furent souvent interprétées en termes de retour du même. En témoignent des expressions chargées en connotations primordialistes telles que « retour des nations et du nationalisme », « réveil des nationalismes », « retour des vieux démons ». Effet « réfrigérant » de la domination du Parti-État, « vide idéologique » postcommuniste, telles furent, dans un premier temps, les explications communément invoquées pour en expliquer la réactivation.
C’est oublier que l’effondrement idéologique du communisme en Europe du Centre-Est a largement précédé celui du Mur de Berlin, et que les passions nationalistes n’avaient jamais été mises au frigidaire sous le régime communiste. Instrumentalisées par certaines élites du Parti comme par des fractions de l’opposition, elles n’ont pas attendu l’effondrement du Mur de Berlin pour se déployer. Reste que leurs manifestations récentes sont d’autant plus difficiles à interpréter en bloc que l’hétérogénéité sociologique de l’Europe du Centre-Est s’approfondit depuis la désintégration de l’Empire soviétique et que le concept même de nationalisme désigne parfois des réalités sociales et politiques diamétralement opposées.
En partant de l’idée que « le renouveau du nationalisme en Europe de l’Est est moins la cause de la situation actuelle que sa conséquence », nous montrerons à partir de l’exemple polonais, que celui-ci participe en réalité d’un phénomène classique de réinvention d’une tradition…
Abstract: In August 1942, a majority of Bochnia’s Jewish residents were deported to the Bełżec death camp by the German occupying forces – this was the beginning of the direct extermination of Bochnian Jews which lasted for over a year. To commemorate them, as well as all other Jews murdered during the German occupation of Bochnia, the Stanisław Fischer Museum in Bochnia organised an exhibition, inaugurated on the 80th anniversary of this tragic event. The exhibition showed the presence of Jews in the town, remembered important figures whose roots came from Bochnia, and presented the activity of some contemporary descendants of former Jewish inhabitants of the town. The items on display were, in part, property of the museum, Judaica on loan from other museums, scanned documents from the National Archive in Kraków, and also materials submitted by families, descended from Bochnia residents, who live abroad.
Abstract: The Holocaust monuments in Poland commemorate this historical event in the place of its occurrence. This empowers the commemoration, its meanings, and messages. However, the monuments also reflect the way the Polish state’s collective memory consolidates over the years. The memory of the glorious and significant Jewish past in Poland is in the form of ruined synagogues, displaced or neglected gravestones in cemeteries, warehouses full of relics, and ruins of concentration and extermination camps. The memory of this Jewish past remained in the hands of the Poles and became part of the Polish national landscape. One of the ways to commemorate the magnificent and rich Jewish past, the way the Jewish communities were destroyed, and the community members were murdered, is through monuments. Holocaust monuments in Poland were erected right after War World II and continue to be constructed until the present. What is the character of the commemoration presented in the monuments, Polish, Jewish, or universal? Which themes are commemorated, and which artistic expressions were chosen for this purpose? In this chapter, I will discuss Holocaust monuments erected in Poland through the years with tombstones, at the event sites, and former concentration camp sites, addressing their historiographical context, and the variety of visual expressions.
Topics: Holocaust, Holocaust Commemoration, Holocaust Education, Holocaust Memorials, Holocaust Survivors, Holocaust Survivors: Children of, Holocaust Survivors: Grandchildren of, Memory, Main Topic: Holocaust and Memorial, Jewish Museums, Jewish Heritage, Museums
Abstract: The racial formation of nationalism from the perspective of migration produces multiple forms of “whiteness”. “Not quite/not white” (Bhabha) translated racial difference into a culturally-hybrid formulation of the postcolonial subject in postcolonial theory. The consequence of translating racial difference into culturally hybridity also diluted a focus on the nation by focusing on the diasporic subject. In Eastern Europe however, “whiteness” is firstly marked by the ambiguous history of the racial other within the nation rather than the historical colonization of racial others beyond. Further, the often traumatic displacement of racial others in/from Eastern Europe has more to do with forms of nationalism than colonialism. Thus, the displacement of racial others in relation to Eastern European nationalism take on an importance largely missing in deracinated postcolonial condemnations of the nation. Europe-based Israeli artist Yael Bartana’s And Europe will be stunned: the Polish trilogy, provides a provocative invitation to think the disturbing place of race in the formation of nationalism in Eastern Europe precisely from these two dimensions: the history of racial difference (Jews) within the nation (Poland), and the centering of racial “returns” for the past and future of nations both in Eastern Europe and beyond it. Through film, public performance and spoken/written word, And Europe… firstly stages the nation from the historical perspective of displaced/exterminated racial others. Through a provocative call to return of the Jews into the Polish nation from which they fled or were exterminated, Bartana proposes a ghostly and literal racially hybridity within the nation to counter the ongoing construction of “whiteness” in Eastern Europe. Secondly, And Europe.. also performs a powerful critique of the problematic politics of return in Israel which deploys Europe’s treatment of its Jewish others to now consecrate the Israeli nation as an exclusively Jewish state. The currency of “whiteness” from the doubled perspective of a future Poland and the present in Israel delivers contradictory returns for the nation by producing hybridity here in Europe and homogeneity there outside it.
By thinking “whiteness” for/against the nation, the essay shows how the returns of race and of racial others can help think a hybrid nation both within Eastern Europe and outside it. Seen from a global perspective, “Whiteness” in Eastern Europe thus offers the racially hybrid nation rather than the culturally hybrid postcolonial subject as a counter to the racism of contemporary nationalisms.
Abstract: This article examines an under-researched artistic practice of Holocaust memorialization, which, emerging in Poland in the early 1990s, combines elements of theater, performance art, and religious ritual and invites a high degree of civic participation. I argue that these artistic practices are similar to traditional practices of lived and embodied transmissions of memory referred to by French historian Pierre Nora as milieux de mémoire. This article will challenge Nora's view that milieux de mémoire have been permanently replaced with lieux de mémoire (sites of memory). To counter this claim, I invoke the memorialization activities of the grassroots and Lublin-based cultural institution the Grodzka Gate – NN Theater Center. Through the series of artistic actions called Mystery of Memory (2000–2011) and Letters to (2005–present), this institution is actively involved in creating and sustaining Polish milieux de mémoire dedicated to the memory of the Holocaust. The ensuing milieux de mémoire have a practical, civic and social function to establish a sense of shared community among younger generations of Poles. Therefore, these actions look toward the future, rather than solely remembering the difficult past, and encourage participants to acknowledge and celebrate difference and multiculturalism, rather than singly confronting unsavory moments of Polish–Jewish relations.
Abstract: As the ethical barriers surrounding ‘digital Holocaust etiquette remain contested, scholars like Daniel Magilow and Lisa Silverman question whether there can be unwritten rules of behavior at sites of historical trauma. Because of
significant shifts in the digital arena, too, legacy types of memory formation, such as collective memories associated with physical spaces, are being challenged by a new type of digital archive that is both active and passive. This article seeks to interrogate the socio-psychological aspects of selfies taken at Holocaust memorial sites and of their subsequent shaming. We wish to juxtapose current research findings with the public audience’s reaction to these photos after they have been posted on social media. In many respects, commenters may offer insight into a larger phenomenon outside of what is deemed appropriate in terms of Holocaust memory. Our article may not provide solutions or easy answers, but this is not our goal. Rather, our research aims to point to the complex, often
uncomfortable, nature of this topic due to the fact that selfies encapsulate both micro and macro histories, reality and virtual reality, and a shift in traditional types of memory formation.
Topics: Jewish Identity, Jewish Renewal, Jewish Revival, Main Topic: Identity and Community, Jewish Continuity, Post-1989, Educational Tours, Birthright (Taglit), Interviews, Jewish Leadership, Young Adults / Emerging Adulthood
Abstract: Seventy years have passed since the Holocaust, but this cataclysmic event continues to reverberate in the present. In this research, we examine attributions about the causes of the Holocaust and the influence of such attributions on intergroup relations. Three representative surveys were conducted among Germans, Poles, and Israeli Jews to examine inter- and intragroup variations in attributions for the Holocaust and how these attributions influence intergroup attitudes. Results indicated that Germans made more external than internal attributions and were especially low in attributing an evil essence to their ancestors. Israelis and Poles mainly endorsed the obedient essence attribution and were lowest on attribution to coercion. These attributions, however, were related to attitudes towards contemporary Germany primarily among Israeli Jews. The more they endorsed situationist explanations, and the less they endorsed the evil essence explanation, the more positive their attitude to Germany. Among Germans, attributions were related to a higher motivation for historical closure, except for the obedience attribution that was related to low desire for closure. Israelis exhibited a low desire for historical closure especially when attribution for evil essence was high. These findings suggest that lay perceptions of history are essential to understanding contemporary intergroup processes.
Abstract: W polityce historycznej propagowanej przez Obóz Zjednoczonej Prawicy ważne miejsce zajmuje martyrologia narodu, m.in. zbrodnie popełniane na ludności polskiej przez Niemców, Sowietów czy Ukraińców. Działania władz sprawiają wrażenie, że te próbują zrównać los Żydów i Polaków w czasie wojny, a nawet wymazać z kolektywnej pamięci zbrodnie popełniane w czasie wojny na Żydach przez ich polskich sąsiadów. Nie jest to zabieg nowy, ponieważ również w czasach PRL starano się ukrywać wstydliwe karty dziejów Polski. Jednak po 2015 r. narracja promowana przez Zjednoczoną Prawicę na temat postaw Polaków wobec Zagłady idzie dalej: nie tylko przemilcza się sprawy trudne, ale na wszelkie sposoby promuje postawy świadczące o bohaterstwie i ofiarności Polaków w ratowaniu Żydów, usiłując tym samym przekonać opinię publiczną w kraju i zagranicą, że były to postawy powszechne. Parafrazując znany wiersz Czesława Miłosza i esej Jana Błońskiego, powinniśmy powiedzieć, że nie „Biedni Polacy patrzą na getto”, lecz „Dzielni Polacy ratują getto”. Artykuł jest próbą komentarza na temat polityki historycznej po 2015 r. w kontekście stosunków polsko-żydowskich w czasie okupacji niemieckiej na podstawie literatury przedmiotu oraz wypowiedzi i doniesień medialnych.
Abstract: W polskim dyskursie publicznym zauważalna jest ciągłość form antysemickich. Według najnowszych badań, z postaw antysemickich się nie wyrasta, a co gorsza, doszło do rewitalizacji mitu o współodpowiedzialności Żydów za śmierć Jezusa Chrystusa. My, jako członkowie i członkinie Żydowskiego Stowarzyszenia Czulent, zaniepokojeni tym faktem, podjęliśmy się zadania zweryfikowania, dlaczego antysemityzmem zainfekowane są coraz młodsze osoby.
W tym celu postanowiliśmy przeanalizować podręczniki edukacji nieformalnej i podręczniki szkolne, dopuszczone do użytku szkolnego przez Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej i sprawdzić, czy i jak w podręcznikach przedstawiane są informacje o szeroko rozumianej kulturze, tradycji i historii Żydów w Polsce. Interesowała nas jakość i rzetelność tych informacji.
Dzięki pomocy m.in. Centrum Badań Holokaustu Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, zrekrutowaliśmy/zrekrutowałyśmy studentki ostatniego roku judaistyki oraz doktorantki Centrum Badań Holocaustu, które przeanalizowały podręczniki.
Na podstawie zebranych materiałów, Alina Cała, Bożena Keff i Anna Lipowska-Teutsch przygotowały artykuły analizujące zastane treści. Interesowało nas to, jaki wpływ treść zawarta w podręczniku ma na młodego odbiorcę i młodą odbiorczynię, uwzględniając tutaj aspekt kulturowy, socjologiczny, historyczny
i psychologiczny. Każdy artykuł wykorzystuje zebrane cytaty z podręczników do języka polskiego, historii, historii i społeczeństwa, wychowania do życia w rodzinie i wiedzy o społeczeństwie. Chcąc ułatwić czytelnikowi/czytelniczce weryfikację cytatów, za każdym razem podawaliśmy w przypisach pełny adres bibliograficzny podręcznika.
Naszym celem było również stworzenie publikacji edukacyjnej, która ma służyć jako narzędzie dla osób zajmujących się edukacją formalną i nieformalną oraz przeciwdziałaniem antysemityzmowi. Dlatego też zostały opracowane artykuły poruszające kwestię antysemityzmu w przestrzeni publicznej (Anna Zawadzka), zjawiska antysemityzmu w Polsce (Anna Makówka-Kwapisiewicz) oraz aspekty psychologiczne i prawne mowy nienawiści (Beata Zadumińska i Szymon Filek).
Spis treści:
Wstęp
Zjawisko antysemityzmu w Polsce na podstawie badań
Analiza podręczników szkolnych i scenariuszy zajęć
Kultura i społeczeństwo w podręcznikach szkolnych z przedmiotów humanistycznych
Kulturoznawcza analiza zawartości podręczników szkolnych związanych z treściami dotyczącymi Żydów (i pokrewnymi)
Pochwała myślenia krytycznego
„Kultywujemy polskość”. Antysemityzm w przestrzeni publicznej
Mowa nienawiści. Sprawcy. Ofiary. Świadkowie
Mowa nienawiści. Aspekty prawne
Biogramy autorów i autorek
. Informacja o projekcie
Informacja o Żydowskim Stowarzyszeniu Czulent
Publikacja powstała w ramach projektu „Antysemityzm nie jest poglądem” zrealizowanego w ramach programu Obywatele dla Demokracji, finansowanego z Funduszy EOG, a także ze środków The Kronhill Pletka Foundation, International Council of Jewish Women, Network of East-West Women oraz dzięki dotacji Kennetha Slatera, Allena Haberberga, Shaloma Levy i Michaela Traisona.
Abstract: Przez ostatnie dwa lata eksperci i ekspertki współpracujący z Żydowskim Stowarzyszeniem Czulent przy realizacji projektu „Zintegrowany system monitorowania antysemickich przestępstw i mowy nienawiści oraz pomocy i wsparcia dla członków społeczności żydowskiej” katalogowali i analizowali nienawistne wpisy, symbole i znaki znalezione w przestrzeni publicznej oraz na platformach mediów społecznościowych. Celem tychże działań, była analiza nienawistych treści wymierzonych w społeczność żydowską. Badając sposoby wykorzystania mediów społecznościowych, symboli i memów w próbach indoktrynacji i ataków na grupy mniejszościowe oraz reakcje organów ścigania czy wymiaru sprawiedliwości, doszliśmy do wniosku, iż nadal dominuje niska świadomość społeczna na temat praktyk i obrazów współcześnie promujących nienawiść.
Wychodząc naprzeciw potrzebom osób działających na rzecz praw człowieka, stworzyliśmy niniejsze opracowanie w którym zebrano przykłady symboli, pojawiających się w przestrzeni publicznej, aby zilustrować ich dwuznaczność, ironię i wiarygodne zaprzeczenia, dając możliwość osobom aktywistycznym narzędzia w rozszyfrowaniu i zmierzeniu się z symboliką nienawiści.
Wychodząc z założenia, iż nienawiść nie ogranicza się do żadnego spektrum ideologicznego, zebraliśmy i opracowaliśmy materiały, które wykorzystywane są do ataków na grupy mniejszościowe i nie tylko. Publikacja została ponadto poszerzona o perspektywę socjologiczną, uwzględniającą nienawistne znaki w domenie symbolicznej autorstwa Lecha M. Nijakowskiego. Psychologiczne aspekty mowy nienawiści opracowane przez Mikołaja Winiewskiego oraz praktyczne rozwiązania prawne opracowane przez Joanna Grabarczyk-Anders, Jacka Mazurczaka oraz Tomasza Plaszczyka.
Publikacja ta, zawiera nie tylko symbole związane z ruchami skrajnymi, które są dostrzegane przez społeczeństwo i jednoznacznie odbierane jako przejaw nienawiści, ale również takie, które nie wzbudzają zainteresowania czy niepokoju ponieważ eksponują niejasne i kontekstowe symbole nienawiści wykorzystywane bez większych konsekwencji, jeśli w ogóle. Są to symbole i znaki, które wykorzystują ironie, humor, przekierowanie na inny temat, błędną charakterystykę i estetykę, aby zawoalować swoje przekonania i zatrzymać „normies” w nienawiści.
Strategia ta polega na przywłaszczaniu symboli i przypisywaniu im nienawistnego znaczenia. W tym kontekście, na przykład gest „okay” czy żaba Pepe, mogłoby się wydawać dają możliwość wiarygodnego odpierania zarzutu o szerzenie nienawiści i ośmieszają oskarżyciela. Co w konsekwencji przyczynia się do zakodowanego funkcjonowania nienawiść w głównym nurcie. Mając ponadto na uwadze przyswajalność nowych technologii i platform komunika-
cyjnych, wiele ruchów nienawiści dostosowało się do młodzieżowych platform, takich jak TikTok, Instagram, Twitch czy Discord. Równie sprawnie wykorzystują serwery gier wideo, by radykalizować, propagując nienawiść i nienawistne zachowanie. Budują w ten sposób sieć kontaktów, mobilizują nowe grupy dla poparcia skrajnych grup czy partii politycznych, burząc podział pomiędzy światem online i światem offline. W ten sposób nienawiść ograniczona do ekstremalnych przestrzeni online, jest normalizowana i coraz częściej pojawia się w „prawdziwym życiu”, gdzie często jest powiązana z przypadkami terroryzmu
na całym świecie.
Dlatego tak ważne są rozwiązania systemowe, bazujące na wsparciu infrastruktury badawczej i edukacyjnej, zaangażowania organizacji non-profit oraz grup społecznych w przeciwdziałanie nienawiści. Niewystarczające jest
ustanowienie prawa przeciwko stale ewoluującym praktykom nienawistnym
grup skrajnych, bez rozwiązań edukacyjnych w tym zakresie, prewencyjnych i informacyjnych. Bez podejścia międzysektorowego tworzy się przestrzeń dla grup i ruchów nienawiści, które w pełni mogą działać na wolności i szerzyć nienawiść.
Mamy nadzieje, że nasze opracowanie przyczyni się do zmiany i będzie
zaczątkiem takiej współpracy.
Spis treści:
Domeny symboliczne i nienawistne znaki. Perspektywa socjologiczna. Lech M. Nijakowski
Psychologiczne aspekty mowy nienawiści. Mikołaj Winiewski
Znaki nienawiści – katalog. Anna Makówka-Kwapisiewicz
Zawiadomienie o przestępstwie i co dalej? – uwagi praktyczne. Tomasz Plaszczyk
Postępowania dotyczące mowy nienawiści w Internecie. Joanna Grabarczyk-Anders, Tomasz Plaszczyk, Jacek Mazurczak
Słowniczek podstawowych pojęć. Tomasz Plaszczyk
Kazusy – przykłady zawiadomień o przestępstwach z nienawiści
Publikacja powstała w ramach projektu „Zintegrowany system monitorowania antysemickich przestępstw i mowy nienawiści oraz pomocy i wsparcia dla członków społeczności żydowskiej”, realizowanego przez Żydowskie Stowarzyszenie Czulent oraz Gminę Wyznaniową Żydowską w Warszawie. Projekt finansowany ze środków Unii Europejskiej w ramach programu Prawa, Równość i Obywatelstwo na lata 2014-2020 oraz Fundacji Pamięć, Odpowiedzialność i Przyszłość (EVZ).
Abstract: Jewish Association Czulent as an advocacy organization working to spread tolerance and shape attitudes of openness towards national, ethnic and religious minorities, with particular emphasis on counteracting anti-Semitism and discrimination, taking into account cross-discrimination.
Observing the public debate on hate speech and hate crimes, which increasingly appears in the mainstream, we have noticed a high level of its politicization. This is particularly visible in the topic of anti-Semitism, which is even instrumentalized and used as a political tool.
The politicization and exploitation of hate thus influences discussions about hate crimes. In this way, we do not focus on the solutions and functioning of investigative bodies or courts, but on political "colors". As a result, injured people lose their human dimension and become only the subject of statistics.
Instead of focusing on eliminating the phenomenon or analyzing the increase in hate speech and hate crimes. We focus on the discourse regarding the uniqueness and tolerance of the "Polish nation". This contributes to the phenomenon of underreporting, and people and groups that require support and are particularly vulnerable to hateful attacks are afraid to report such attacks and seek support.
Therefore, we decided to focus on the injured people in our actions. We analyzed the individual stages, from the decision to report a crime to the final court judgment. The respondents represented various social groups, which allowed us to learn from different perspectives about the experiences and emotions that accompanied them at particular stages. In the interviews we conducted, we paid attention to the actors who appeared at various stages, which is why our study includes, in addition to the police, prosecutor's office, and courts, non-governmental organizations and the media.
We hope that our activities and research will contribute to supporting people exposed to such attacks and a comprehensive understanding of the challenges faced not only by people injured in hate crimes, but also by their representatives, investigators, prosecutors and judges. We encourage you to use the research cited, but also to develop and expand it.
Contents:
Information on the survey and methodology
Hate crimes – experiences
Human rights defenders
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council
Gender aspects
Hate crimes – enhancements are needed
Summary and final conclusions
The publication was created thanks to funding from the Foundation Remembrance, Responsibility and Future (EVZ Foundation), as part of the project "Pre-project for the Project: Strategic Litigation as one of the Tools to Counteract Antisemitism on the Internet".
Abstract: Niniejszy raport, powstały z inicjatywy Żydowskiego Stowarzyszenia Czulent, i Gminy Wyznaniowej Żydowskiej w Warszawie, zawiera dane o przestępstwach z nienawiści, incydentach na tle antysemickim i mowie nienawiści motywowanej antysemityzmem, zgłoszene przez członków i członkinie społeczności żydowskiej, za pośrednictwem platformy zglosantysemityzm.pl. Raport poszerzony został o opisane trendy, które zaobserwowano dzięki zebranym danym w 2023 roku oraz metodologię badawczą, którą zastosowano podczas naszych działań.
Spis treści:
Wstęp
Metodologia
Zestawienie: incydenty antysemickie zgłoszone na platformę w roku 2023
Graficzne zestawienie wyników
Typy incydentów
Formy antysemityzmu
Lokalizacja incydentów o podłożu antysemickim
Przejawy antysemityzmu po 7 października 2023
Konta hurtownicz
Podejmowane działania Żydowskiego Stowarzyszenia Czulent
Publikacja powstała w ramach projektu„Online antisemitism in Poland:
establishment of a legal aid helpdesk, reporting and advocacy activities”, finansowanego z Fundacji „Pamięć, Odpowiedzialność i Przyszłość” (EVZ), realizowanego przez Żydowskie Stowarzyszenie Czulent.
Abstract: While Holocaust memory underscores the significance of freedom, the actual enactment of freedom varies across different countries, posing a vital question for educating about the Holocaust. How do educators navigate this dissonance? Do they serve as conduits for government perspectives, or do they exercise their teacher autonomy? As part of a comparative study examining shifts in Holocaust memory in Europe from 2020 to 2022, my colleagues and I conducted in-depth interviews with 75 Holocaust educators from Poland, Hungary, Germany, and England, inviting them to share their life stories and professional experiences. This article delves into a recurring theme found within these educators’ narratives: the appreciation of freedom and choice.
To interpret the significance of this theme, I integrate educational theories on ‘difficult history’ and teacher autonomy with theories of psychological reactance and the freedom quotient (FQ). I draw on Isaiah Berlin's concepts of negative and positive liberty to bridge the personal and societal dimensions. The resulting model provides a framework for the study's findings. As expected, teachers from Poland and Hungary felt their negative liberty was constrained, while those from Germany and England reported a greater degree of autonomy. More surprisingly, limited negative liberty led many interviewees from Poland and Hungary to find powerful ways to express their inner freedom. These included resistance to authority, activism within and beyond the classroom, and the application of diverse and creative pedagogical approaches in EaH. The interviews also pointed to a connection between higher levels of negative liberty in Germany and England, and a plurality of content and goals in EaH within these countries. In light of these findings, I offer policy and educational recommendations.
Abstract: EUJS has published a report on the Rise of Antisemitism at European Universities as a result of the October 7 Massacre. For the compilation of this report, we received more than one hundred and ten (110) reports of antisemitic incidents across Europe. However, this in no way reflects the true magnitude of incidents that have taken place, as many have gone unreported.
This report has been sent out to the European Commission, Members of the European Parliament, major Jewish organisations, Heads of Jewish communities, our Partners, Universities, and the press.
The message we want to spread with the report is: Jewish students do not feel safe on their campuses. Jewish students have even stopped attending classes out of fear due to the extremely hostile campus atmosphere. In 2024, this is unacceptable.
The European Union of Jewish Students will continue to gather information and data on antisemitism from University campuses across Europe. We will continue to fight against all forms of antisemitism, be it on campus or online, and to protect our Jewish students. We will continue, throughout, to advocate for a world that will allow for Jews to showcase and celebrate their Judaism in a positive way. But for this, collaboration on a university, institutional, governmental, and societal level is needed
Abstract: The present report provides an overview of data on antisemitism as recorded by international organisations and by official and unofficial sources in the European Union (EU) Member States. Furthermore, the report includes data concerning the United Kingdom, which in 2019 was still a Member State of the EU. For the first time, the report also presents available statistics and other information with respect to North Macedonia and Serbia, as countries with an observer status to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). All data presented in the report are based on the respective countries’ own definitions and categorisations of antisemitic behaviour. At the same time, an increasing number of countries are using the working definition of antisemitism developed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), and there are efforts to further improve hate crime data collection in the EU, including through the work of the Working Group on hate crime recording, data collection and encouraging reporting (2019–2021), which FRA facilitates. ‘Official data’ are understood in the context of this report as those collected by law enforcement agencies, other authorities that are part of criminal justice systems and relevant state ministries at national level. ‘Unofficial data’ refers to data collected by civil society organisations.
This annual overview provides an update on the most recent figures on antisemitic incidents, covering the period 1 January 2009 – 31 December 2019, across the EU Member States, where data are available. It includes a section that presents the legal framework and evidence from international organisations. The report also provides an overview of national action plans and other measures to prevent and combat antisemitism, as well as information on how countries have adopted or endorsed the non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) (2016) as well as how they use or intend to use it.
This is the 16th edition of FRA’s report on the situation of data collection on antisemitism in the EU (including reports published by FRA’s predecessor, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia).
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.
Abstract: After the 1968 emigration, very few Jews remained in Poland, and even more miniscule was the number of “Jewish Jews.” Since then the number has grown somewhat, and much of it is due to the process of de-assimilation; i.e., some people with Jewish ancestors raised in completely Polonized families began to recover, reclaim, and readapt their Jewish background. An analysis of this phenomenon is offered with a series of putative reasons for its occurrence. The individuals constituting the “products” of de-assimilation are the majority of Polish Jews today and form much of the current leadership. While individuals everywhere can strengthen their ties to the Jewish people and can experience teshuvah or another kind of “Judaization,” the process of de-assimilation does not seem to be reducible to those moves. It begins with no Jewish identity, and is highly dependent on the attitudes and cultural trends in the majority society. It does not remove the de-assimilationists from the majority culture. The phenomenon is general and deserves to be studied as a sociological mechanism working in other cases of assimilation to a majority culture. In the Jewish case, it is especially dramatic. Probably the first example can be found in the evolution of the Marrano communities settled in Holland. The presence of de-assimilation seems to differentiate some European, first of all East European, communities from the globally dominant American and Israeli ones. Probably this rather new concept is needed to describe a significant part of the world of the Jews of twenty-first century Europe.
Abstract: W niniejszym artykule prezentujemy macierzyńskie doświadczenia trzech kobiet żydowskiego pochodzenia. Dane zebrane zostały za po-mocą wywiadu swobodnego z elementami narracji, a analizowane za pomocą językowo-narracyjnej metody analizy tekstu. Głównym pyta-niem, na które staramy się znaleźć odpowiedź, jest: Jakie typy macie-rzyństwa prezentują matki Żydówki? I czym charakteryzuje się każdy z nich? Cele artykułu to: (1) Zestawienie trzech stylów macierzyństwa i charakterystyka każdego z nich, (2) Ukazanie znaczenia transfe-ru kultury pochodzenia i wychowania dla pełnienia roli rodzicielskiej przez kobiety pochodzenia żydowskiego. W artykule przedstawiamy kulturowy wzór macierzyństwa, zestawiamy figurę matki-Polki z Jidy-sze Mame. Następnie prezentujemy szczegółowe założenia metodolo-giczne. W kolejnej części charakteryzujemy trzy typy macierzyństwa: jednokulturowe, dwukulturowe i wielokulturowe. Nasze analizy prowa-dzą do wniosków końcowych, wskazujących na to, że pomimo współ-czesnych przemian społecznych nadal za religijne wychowanie dzieci odpowiadają matki. Jednocześnie wskazujemy na podobieństwa po-między matką-Polką a Jidysze Mame.WprowadzenieMacierzyństwo to z jednej strony bardzo zindywidualizowane doświadczenie wielu kobiet, z drugiej – zjawisko niezwykle złożone, wieloaspektowe, dające asumpt do naukowych dociekań w obrębie wielu dyscyplin naukowych, w tym także pedagogiki. W literaturze znaleźć można rozważania na temat biologicznych aspektów stawa-nia się matką (np. Lichtenberg-Kokoszka 2008; Nowakowska 2014), analizy dotyczące społeczno-kulturowych uwarunkowań macierzyń-stwa (np. Budrowska 2000; Grzelińska 2012; Maciarz 2004; Sikor-ska 2012) czy też zmagania z rolą matki w kontekście innych ról życiowych (np. Pryszmont-Ciesielska 2011; Sokołowska 2013). Co ważne, wiele badań z tego obszaru prowadzonych jest w oparciu o narracje samych matek, zapisy doświadczeń konkretnych kobiet, funkcjonujących w różnych warunkach społecznych, ekonomicznych
