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: Tarkastelemme kahden eri etnografisen aineiston pohjalta suomenjuutalaisten naisten kokemuksia antisemitismistä nyky-Suomessa. Aineistomme koostuu Ruth Illmanin Minhag Finland -hankkeessa tehdyistä suomenjuutalaisten haastatteluista (2019–2020) ja Elina Vuolan Ruumiillinen uskonto -hankkeessa tehdyistä haastatteluista (2015–2016). Vuola haastatteli vain naisia, Illmanin aineistossa on sekä naisia että miehiä. Keskitymme artikkelissamme naisiin. Myös antisemitismin kokemukset ovat joiltakin osin sukupuolittuneita. Pääasiallisena teoreettisena tulokulmana käytämme Helen Feinin (1987) kulttuurihistoriallista määrittelyä, jonka mukaan antisemitismillä on rakenteellinen, diskursiivinen ja yksilöllinen ulottuvuus. Fein kuvailee antisemitismiä kolmiona, jonka pohja on yhteiskunnan rakenteisiin upotettu juutalaisvastaisuus, joka ilmenee tietämättömyytenä, ymmärtämättömyytenä tai suorana syrjintänä. Tämän päälle rakentuu diskursiivinen ulottuvuus, joka tuo esille kulttuurisidonnaiset tavat puhua juutalaisuudesta, ja näyttäytyy stereotypioina ja ennakkoluuloina yleisessä keskustelussa. Kolmion huipulla ovat yksilön kokemukset suorasta tai välillisestä antisemitismistä omassa arjessaan. Tarkastelemme, miten Feinin malli näkyy (tai ei näy) aineistoissamme ja sitä, miten sen avulla voidaan jäsentää haastateltavien kokemuskertomuksia. Sukupuoliteoreettinen lähestymistapa puolestaan auttaa ymmärtämään koetun antisemitismin sukupuolittuneisuutta. Feinin malli osoittautui käyttökelpoiseksi, mutta jäykäksi tavaksi jäsentää arkisiin kokemuksiin keskittyvää etnografista aineistoa. Lisäksi havaitsimme, että paikkasidonnainen ja kokemuksiin keskittyvä analyysimme tuo uutta tietoa antisemitismin ilmenemismuodoista ja siinä tapahtuneissa muutoksissa Suomessa. Suomenjuutalaisten naisten kokemuksissa antisemitismi sekä uhan ja pelon tunne ovat lisääntyneet.
Abstract: For a well-functioning and inclusive democracy, it is crucial that minority voices can participate in public debate and express their opinions through the news media. However, media participation can be demanding, especially considering the proliferation of online hate. Based on in-depth interviews with 15 self-identified Jews who have participated in Norwegian media as Jews, this article explores the strategies Jewish minority voices employ when participating in the news media, both to position themselves and achieve their aims as representatives of a small-sized and vulnerable minority, and to deal with the risk of and experiences with antisemitism. The findings show that it can be demanding and distressing, but also rewarding to participate in the media as a minority voice, and most often the motivations and gains outweigh the risks. Although it is common to experience antisemitic hate speech in the wake of media participation, this has not led the participants to withdraw from public engagement. Consequently, this article argues that hate speech does not necessarily represent a boundary for public participation. However, participating as a minority voice requires strong motivation, emotional resilience, and the ability to focus on the positive outcomes of media participation, including the possibility of social change.
Abstract: From Foreword:
The events of 2021 have left their mark on Britain’s Jews.
For several weeks in May and June, during the conflict between Hamas and Israel thousands of miles away, antisemitism surged on British streets and campuses, online, in workplaces, schools and hospitals and in other institutions. Reported incidents broke records, with some making national headlines and prompting intervention by the Prime Minister.
Among the incidents were demonstrations that featured antisemitic speakers, chants and banners — some of which were endorsed, promoted and addressed by politicians, trade unionists and other luminaires — and convoys that saw allegations of the most despicable antisemitic incitement and violence in Jewish neighbourhoods.
These events weighed on British Jews, with almost eight in ten disclosing in our research that the various demonstrations, processions and convoys during the conflict caused them to feel intimidated as a Jew.
Consequently, there is a noticeable reversal this year in the optimism reflected in polling a year ago. Fewer British Jews believe that their community has a long-term future in the UK, and a record number — nearing half — have disclosed that they avoid displaying outward signs of their Judaism in public due to antisemitism.
Not only do perpetrators of antisemitism give the Jewish community reason for concern, but so does the criminal justice system. The Crown Prosecution Service has always performed poorly in our polling, but for the first time ever, a majority of British Jews do not believe that the police or the courts do enough to protect them either.
Antisemitism this year has also affected how British Jews view wider society. For the first time ever, a majority do not believe that their non-Jewish neighbours do enough to protect them, with many respondents deeply concerned about apathy towards Jews amongst the British public.
As our polling of the British public shows, there is reason for discomfort: almost one quarter of British adults believe that “Israel treats the Palestinians like the Nazis treated the Jews,” which is antisemitic under the International Definition of Antisemitism, and more than one in ten Britons have entrenched antisemitic views.
There are more specific incubators of antisemitism as well. Over eight in ten British Jews still feel that Labour is too tolerant of racism against Jews, belying Sir Keir Starmer’s claim to have “shut the door” on antisemitism in his Party. Almost all British Jews also believe that antisemitism in British universities and on social media is a problem — the first time these issues have been polled — underlining the need for action.
Britain cannot be content when almost half of a long-established minority community avoids disclosing identifying signs in public, or when a broad majority considers one of the two major political parties to be too tolerant of racism. It is not too late to make the right changes in politics, at universities, online and to criminal justice, but the time for action is now.
Abstract: Research about the relation between migration and mental health as well as factors influencing the mental health of migrants has been growing because challenges of migration can constitute a significant mental health burden. However, its divergent findings seem to reflect group-specific differences, e.g., regarding country of origin and receiving country. Almost no empirical studies about individual migrant groups in different receiving countries have been undertaken so far. The present population-based study explores symptoms of depression, anxiety, and somatization as well as quality of life in an Austrian and a German sample of ex-Soviet Jewish migrants. We mainly investigate the relationship of religiosity and perceived xenophobic and anti-Semitic discrimination to the psychological condition of the migrants. Standardized self-report scales, specifically the Beck-Depression-Inventory-II (BDI), State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI), Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), and WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF), were used to measure mental health. Ex-Soviet Jewish migrants in Austria showed significantly more depression, anxiety, and somatic symptoms than those in Germany. Regression analyses support a protective effect of religiosity on mental health in the sample in Germany and an adverse effect of perceived discrimination in the sample in Austria. The present study reveals a less favorable situation for ex-Soviet Jewish migrants in Austria, in terms of income, residence status, and xenophobic attitudes in the local population, compared to the group in Germany. Furthermore, our data suggest that the receiving country matters for the mental health of this migrant group. However, further research is needed to support these conclusions.
Abstract: Migration, displacement, and flight are major worldwide phenomena and typically pose challenges to mental health. Therefore, migrants’ mental health, and the factors which may predict it, have become an important research subject. The present population-based cross-national comparison study explores symptoms of depression, anxiety, and somatization, as well as quality-of-life in samples of ex-Soviet Jewish migrants settling in three new countries: Germany, Austria and Israel, as well as in a sample of non-migrant ex-Soviet Jews in their country of origin, Russia. In the current study, we investigate the relationship of perceived xenophobiа and antisemitism, acculturation attitudes, ethnic and national identity, as well as affiliation with Jewish religion and culture to the psychological well-being of these migrants. Furthermore, we consider xenophobic and antisemitic attitudes as well as the acculturation orientation of the new countries’ societies, assessed in the native control samples. Our data suggest that attitudes of the new country’s society matter for the mental health of this migrant group. We conclude that the level of distress among ex-Soviet Jewish migrants seems to depend, among other factors, on the characteristics of the new country and/or specific interactions of the migrant population with the society they are settling in.
Topics: Antisemitism, Israel Criticism, Jewish Identity, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Anthropology, Employment, Ethnography, Work, Main Topic: Other, Religious Observance and Practice, Jewish Women
Abstract: This research introduces an anthropological perspective in the debate on religious identity and the workplace. In particular, it examines the relationship between Jewish identity and practices and the workplace in Belgium, with a focus on gender issues. Thanks to in-depth interviews with a number of Jewish women in Brussels about their daily experiences in the workplace and extensive field work in this community, valuable and generally difficult to access data regarding Jewish women’s workplace participation, perceptions, and experiences has been collected and analyzed. There is a complex relationship between Jewish identity, practices and the perception of the respondents as it relates to the workplace and their own position. Perceived hostility towards Israel and the Jewry is a recurrent issue amongst the respondents. As Judaism is often connected to the State of Israel and the current political climate, individual Jewish women are sometimes confronted with unpleasant or negative comments or experiences in the workplace. Besides forming a strong deterrent for many of the respondents to participate in the mainstream workforce, this puts a lot of pressure on those women working for non-Jewish organizations. To a certain extent, Jewish practices are adapted, modified and negotiated by the working Jewish women to meet the demands of dominant norms in the modern Belgian workplace. In addition, the ‘coping mechanisms’ that are applied by the respondents are frequently gender-specific and family-motivated.
Abstract: Thema dieser Dissertation sind die Strukturverwandtschaften und gesellschaftlichen Funktionsähnlichkeiten von Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus. Der Schwerpunkt der Analyse liegt auf der gesamtgesellschaftlichen Makroebene, wo die Intersektionen sich sowohl über die Korrespondenzen als auch über die Eigenheiten und Differenzen beider Kategorien manifestieren. Aus der Perspektive soziologischer, politischer, ökonomischer und geistesgeschichtlicher Erklärungsansätze wird der Frage nachgegangen, wogegen sich Feindschaft und Abwehr im Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus richten und was der jeweilige Gehalt von Konstrukten des Jüdischen und des Weiblichen ist, die beide im Bereich des Phantasmagorischen und Ideologischen anzusiedeln sind. In sie geht die gesellschaftliche Vorstellung von Natur ebenso ein wie die Überhöhung von Stärke bei gleichzeitiger Abwertung von Schwäche.
Geschlechterbilder und -normen spielen dabei eine bedeutsame Rolle. Nach einer analytischen Auseinandersetzung mit den gesellschaftlichen, historischen, ökonomischen und politischen Fundierungsverhältnissen von Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus werden anhand des antisemitischen und frauenfeindlichen Bildarchivs der Moderne, zumal jenes des Fin de Siècle, die Intersektionen von Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus einer genaueren Betrachtung zugeführt. Auffallend sind vor allem die deutlich gegenderten und rassisierten Imagines des Juden und der Frau, denen gleichermaßen eine Transgression der Geschlechtergrenzen immanent ist.
Sie alle gruppieren sich um einen antiemanzipatorischen Gestus. Diese Imagines sind als performative Akte des Antisemitismus und des Antifeminismus zu fassen, und werden somit nicht bloß als Ausdruck diskriminierender und unterdrückender Diskurse und Strukturen der Gesellschaft analysiert,
sondern als diese Strukturen selbst beständig (re)produzierend. Sie tragen damit zu einer kaum mehr durchdringbaren weil verselbständigten Institutionalisierung von Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus bei. Dieser Institutionalisierung wird in einem Abschnitt über den Umgang mit dem Nationalsozialismus gesondert nachgegangen. Ein weiterer Abschnitt ist der Durchsetzung von Antisemitismus und Antifeminismus auf der Mikroebene des doing difference gewidmet, wo der erlebnisanalytische Aspekt von Juden- und Frauenfeindlichkeit anhand einer Auswertung qualitativer Interviews im Zentrum steht.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Christian, Antisemitism: Far right, Cemeteries, Jewish - Christian Relations, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Nationalism, Main Topic: Holocaust and Memorial, Holocaust, Holocaust Commemoration, Holocaust Memorials, Memory
Abstract: Depuis les étoiles jaunes portées par des manifestants opposés au passe sanitaire jusqu’à l’usage par
certains du pronom « qui » utilisé pour dénoncer la supposée mainmise des Juifs sur les principaux médias,
sans oublier la notion de complot juif remis au goût du jour pour expliquer la pandémie du coronavirus,
l’année 2021 a été marquée par la multiplication d’incidents antisémites. Si de tels faits sont venus
rappeler la persistance des préjugés sur les Juifs au sein de la société française, l’histoire enseigne
que l’antisémitisme prospère dans les périodes de crise. Ainsi, près de deux ans après le début de la
crise sanitaire, il nous a semblé essentiel de réaliser une vaste étude pour dresser un diagnostic fin et
dépassionné de ce phénomène.
Quel est le poids des préjugés à l’égard des Juifs dans la société française en 2021 ? La crise sanitaire
s’accompagne-t-elle d’une poussée de l’antisémitisme dans l’opinion publique? Quel regard portent les
Français sur ce phénomène? Dans quelle mesure les Français juifs s’inquiètent-ils des violences les visant ?
Comment ces violences se déroulent-elles ? Pour tenter de répondre à ces interrogations, nous avons
construit un dispositif d’enquête exceptionnel. Exceptionnel par sa taille : nous avons conduit l’enquête
parallèlement auprès de deux échantillons spécifiques – personnes de confession juive, personnes de
confession musulmane – et auprès d’un échantillon global, représentatif de la population française
dans son ensemble, ce dernier permettant de se pencher également sur d’autres sous-catégories de
la population : les Français catholiques, les jeunes, des groupes de Français classés en fonction de leur
zone géographique, de critères socio-économiques, d’affinités politiques ou encore en fonction de leurs
sources privilégiées d’information. Exceptionnel également par la diversité des thématiques abordées :
exposition et observations d’actes violents, opinions à l’égard d’Israël, de la Shoah, préjugés à l’égard des
Juifs… autant de sujets clés à examiner pour tenter d’apporter de nouveaux éclairages sur l’antisémitisme1
.
Abstract: Threats and violence from radicalized Islamists have led to heightened security measures for Jewish organizations in France. French soldiers are protecting Jewish schools, kindergartens, community centers, and other Jewish institutions. In addition to terrorism, there are a number of other factors that have led to increased antisemitism in France. This article discusses data on antisemitic incidents and surveys on antisemitic attitudes in France. While there is a clear rise in antisemitic incidents, the trend in antisemitic attitudes is less clear. Levels of antisemitic attitudes are particularly high among Muslims, the far-right, and also the far-left, but not necessarily among the general French population. However, the rise of antisemitism has hit observant Jews more than non-observant Jews and it has led to changes in behavior, including in the display of religious signs and avoidance of places of worship. Many French Jews today question their future in France.
Abstract: As pandemic restrictions intensified in Western Europe, so too did a wave of COVID-related
antisemitism and Islamophobia, proliferating on social media. Considering antisemitism and
Islamophobia as joint and intersecting phenomena, this report investigates the ways in which,
eighteen months after the start of the pandemic, anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim narratives continue to be created, spread and accessed on social media. Through interviews with thirteen Jewish
and Muslim community leaders, subject-area experts and representatives of inter-governmental
organisations, this report presents not only the key trends both on and offline, but they ways in
which they have impacted the targeted communities, and the ability of Jews and Muslims in
Western Europe to live and practice their religion threat-free. This research makes ten key recommendations for social media companies, governments and civil societies, in order to urgently
address the spiralling radicalisation which is evidenced throughout this report.
Abstract: Rund 75 Jahre nach dem Holocaust verzeichnet die Polizei einen An-stieg antisemitischer Straftaten in Deutschland; als bedrohte Minderheit sorgen sich jüdi-sche Menschen um das gesellschaftliche Meinungsklima, das auch die etablierten Massen-medien prägen. Vor diesem Hintergrund untersucht der vorliegende Beitrag mit Hilfe des normativen Konzepts der „interkulturellen medialen Integration“ die medienjournalisti-sche Berichterstattung der Wochenzeitung Jüdische Allgemeine. Die Befunde der qualitati-ven Inhaltsanalyse von 168 Beiträgen zeigen, dass die vom Zentralrat der Juden in Deutschland herausgegebene Publikation in verschiedener Hinsicht heftige Kritik an etab-lierten Medien übt. So hätten einzelne Medien antisemitische Stereotype verbreitet, Perso-nen, die sich antisemitisch äußern, eine Plattform geboten und Antisemitismus als solchen nicht erkannt, relativiert oder negiert. Im Sinne einer differenzierten Medienkritik macht die Jüdische Allgemeine aber auch deutlich, welche Merkmale von Medieninhalten sie für wünschenswert hält, darunter Berichte über alltägliches jüdisches Leben in Deutschland, aber auch authentische Beiträge über Antisemitismus, in denen Betroffene zu Wort kom-men. Die Befunde können zum einen verstehen helfen, warum viele Jüd*innen in Europa Antisemitismus in den Medien als Problem sehen. Zum anderen liefern sie Produzierenden von Medienangeboten Hinweise darauf, welche Resonanz ihre Inhalte innerhalb der jüdi-schen Gemeinschaft finden.
Topics: Antisemitism, Antisemitism: Education against, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Schools: Non-Jewish, Schools: Primary / Elementary, Schools: Seconday / High Schools, Jewish Pupils, Jewish Children In Mainstream Schools, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Teaching and Pedagogy, Universities / Higher Education
Abstract: Malmö stad har under hösten 2020 undersökt förekomsten av antisemitism och förutsättningarna för judiskt liv i Malmös förskolor, skolor, gymnasier och vuxenutbildning. Resultatet presenteras nu i en rapport tillsammans med en forskningsöversikt och förslag på åtgärder framåt. Undersökningen och rapporten är en del av Malmö stad och Judiska Församlingen Malmös samverkansöverenskommelse.
Rapporten handlar om att motarbeta antisemitism och stärka förutsättningarna för judiskt liv i Malmös förskolor, skolor, gymnasier och vuxenutbildning. Studien består av intervjuer med skolpersonal och judiska barn och unga i Malmö, vilket kompletteras med en skolpersonalenkät utförd i några av Malmös grundskolor och gymnasier, samt en forskningsöversikt.
- Antisemitismen i Malmö är ett verkligt problem med tydliga offer, men frågan är mer mångbottnad än vad den ibland beskrivs som. Målsättningen med det här arbetet är att, utifrån kunskap och forskning, identifiera problem och behov i Malmös skolor för att skapa förutsättningar för att arbeta systematiskt med dessa frågor i utbildningen, säger Mirjam Katzin, samordnare för arbetet mot antisemitism och författare till rapporten.
Resultatet visar att det ofta saknas tillräckliga förutsättningar och förkunskaper hos skolpersonal för att arbeta mot antisemitism. För att förebygga rasism och antisemitism är en ökad kunskapsnivå central. Detta gäller i första hand lärare och annan skolpersonal och i andra hand eleverna. Slutsatsen är att det behövs kunskap och utbildning i demokrati, rättigheter, antirasism och specifikt frågor om antisemitism, konspirationsteorier, Israel/Palestina och de nationella minoriteterna.
Topics: Antisemitism, Hate crime, Focus Groups, Interviews, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Jewish Identity, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Orthodox Judaism, Mental Health, Religious Belief, Trauma
Abstract: Records of antisemitic incidents in the UK have reached an all-time high in the last 3-5 years. I have used antisemitism to mean in this study: any form of hostility or prejudice towards Jews based on their identity. The main objective of this study is to explore a section of the Jewish community, which has been marginalised in research on antisemitism: The Orthodox Jewish community. Being most visible, as identifiable Jews, within the Jewish community, they are also the ones most frequently targeted. Drawing on qualitative data resulting from 28 interviews with Orthodox Jewish individuals as well as five focus groups with key stakeholder, this thesis explored the lived experienced of antisemitism within the Orthodox Jewish community. It investigated the types of antisemitic incidents, the impacts and meaning which participants attached to these incidents, the perceptions of antisemitism, the coping mechanisms which were adopted in order to respond to the climate of antisemitism and the perceptions of agencies which respond to antisemitism. The thesis generated four main findings. First, the pervasive nature of antisemitism and its prevalence within the lives of Orthodox Jews. Second, the awareness that there is a resurgence of antisemitism and that there has been a shift in its manifestation, making it more institutionalised and therefore powerful. Third, that despite the high prevalence rate of incidents among the community, most respondents chose to normalise and accept the victimisation. My thesis proposes that the reasons respondents were able to show agency and to accept the incidents is due to their strong religious identity and their close 3 community ties. Finally, this study offers recommendations to support the Orthodox Jewish community; to address in a practical way some remediable issues uncovered by this study.
Topics: Antisemitism, Jewish Perceptions of Antisemitism, Hate crime, Jewish Identity, Interviews, Focus Groups, Main Topic: Antisemitism, Mental Health, Religious Belief, Trauma, Orthodox Judaism
Abstract: This paper aims at providing a new systemic contribution to research about perceptions of antisemitism/Judeophobia by contemporary Jews in 12 European Union countries. The perspective – the viewpoint of the offended side – has been less prominent relatively in research literature on antisemitism. The data analysis demonstrates the potential power of Similarity Structure Analysis (SSA) as a better theoretical and empirical tool to describe and conceptualize the contents of chosen research issues. After a brief review of some methodological problems in the study of antisemitism, this paper will re-elaborate data first published in the report of the 2018 FRA study Experiences and Perceptions of Antisemitism – Second survey on Discrimination and Hate Crimes against Jews in the EU (FRA 2018a). Topics include the perceived importance of antisemitism as a societal issue, the contents of anti-Jewish prejudice and discrimination, channels of transmission, perpetrators of offenses, regional differences within Europe, and the role of antisemitism perceptions as a component of Jewish identification. Special attention is paid to the distinction between cognitive and experiential perceptions of antisemitism, and to the typology of practical, populist, political, and narrative antisemitism.
Abstract: [Edited from press release]
Le bureau français de l’American Jewish Committee (AJC) a publié aujourd’hui sa première « radiographie » de l’antisémitisme en France ; une enquête sur les perceptions des Français et des Français de confession ou de culture juive sur la question de l’antisémitisme.
L’étude a été réalisée par l’institut de sondage IFOP, en partenariat avec la Fondation pour l’innovation politique (Fondapol). Un échantillon de 505 Français juifs et de 1027 Français a été interrogé selon un questionnaire commun.
« Les statistiques publiées chaque année par le ministère de l’Intérieur, bien qu’essentielles, ne reflètent pas les différentes facettes du problème que représente l’antisémitisme dans notre pays. Les données existantes s’appuient principalement sur les plaintes déposées, mais elles ne tiennent pas compte de la perception du problème et de son impact sur la vie des citoyens français » explique Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache, directrice de l’AJC Paris.
Selon l’enquête, la majorité des Français comme des Français d’origine juive considère qu’il y a beaucoup d’antisémitisme en France et que le phénomène est en augmentation.
70% des Juifs français déclarent avoir été victimes d’au moins un incident antisémite au cours de leur vie (84% pour les Français juifs de moins de 25 ans). Un tiers des Français juifs se sentent menacés en raison de leur appartenance religieuse ; le sentiment de menace est beaucoup plus fort chez les Juifs pratiquants et les jeunes Juifs (moins de 35 ans). Les deux principaux lieux où des incidents antisémites se produisent sont la rue (54%) et l’école (55%). Pour 26 % des Français ayant subi une agression physique, cela s’est produit à l’école ou dans un contexte scolaire. Pour échapper à l’antisémitisme, les Français juifs évitent certains territoires (44%) et s’abstiennent d’afficher des symboles exprimant leur judaïsme (37%). Un quart des Français juifs ont déclaré avoir déjà évité de révéler leur appartenance à la communauté juive sur leur lieu de travail.
« Il est très inquiétant de constater que l’antisémitisme a un impact sur la vie et le mode de vie de la majorité des Français juifs. Nous remarquons amèrement que ces derniers n’ont pas de répit face à l’antisémitisme. Cela doit cesser » a déclaré Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache.
Un Français sur cinq déclare avoir déjà entendu une personne de son entourage dire du mal des Juifs. 16% des Français disent avoir déjà assisté à une agression verbale antisémite. La grande majorité des Français (73%) et des Français juifs (72%) considèrent que l’antisémitisme concerne la société française toute entière.
« L’antisémitisme fait partie de la vie quotidienne des Français dans leur ensemble. C’est un phénomène qu’ils perçoivent et qui les touche. C’est désormais une préoccupation pour toute la société française, et non plus seulement pour les Français d’origine juive. C’est donc la note finale encourageante et positive de cette enquête : nous ne sommes plus aussi seuls, pour combattre ce fléau, que nous avons pu l’être – ou avons eu le sentiment de l’être – par le passé. Cela doit se refléter dans les actions politiques ; la lutte contre l’antisémitisme doit être une priorité nationale disposant de moyens adéquats pour couvrir l’ensemble du territoire français. » conclut Anne-Sophie Sebban-Bécache.
Abstract: [Edited from press release]
The AJC Paris study was conducted by IFOP, a leading polling firm, in partnership with Fondapol, a major French think tank. They polled 505 French Jews and 1027 French people between October 14 and November 19, 2019.
As antisemitism in France continues to spiral, Jews and the general population in France agree on the magnitude of the problem, according to the American Jewish Committee (AJC) Paris survey of perceptions of and experiences with antisemitism in France.
But alignment on the antisemitism threat to French society, and the government’s weak responsiveness, does not mitigate the fears of Jews about their safety and future in France.
Nearly three-quarters, 73%, of the French public, and 72% of Jews, consider antisemitism a problem that affects all of French society. 47% of the general public and 67% of the Jewish respondents say the level of antisemitism in France is high, while 27% and 22%, respectively, say it is low.
While 53% of the general public say antisemitism has been increasing, and 18% decreasing, in recent years, 77% of Jews say it has increased and 12% decreased.
The AJC Paris survey found that 70 percent of French Jews say they have been victims of at least one antisemitic incident in their lifetime, 64% have suffered anti-Semitic verbal abuse at least once, and 23% have been targets of physical violence on at least one occasion, with 10 percent saying they were attacked several times.
The continued spiraling of antisemitism in France has led significant percentages of the Jewish population to take protective actions. More than one-third, 37%, refrain from using visible Jewish symbols, 25% avoid revealing their Jewish identity in the workplace, and 52% have considered leaving France.
Overall, 44% of the Jewish sample say the situation for French Jews is worse than a year ago, only 11% say it is better and 42% no better or worse.
The youngest Jews, ages 18-24, are on the “front line” more than older cohorts in confronting antisemitism. 84% of them have suffered at last one antisemitic act, compared with 70% of all respondents; 79 percent had suffered verbal abuse, compared with 64% of all respondents, and 39% faced an act of physical aggression, compared with 23% of the full Jewish sample.
Visibly religious French Jews feel the most vulnerable, with 74% of them saying they had been a victim of at least one act of verbal abuse, compared with 64% of the full Jewish sample.
The main locations where antisemitic incidents occur the most are in the street and school. 55% said they had been insulted or threatened on the street, and 59% said they had suffered physical abuse in the school.
54% were victims of verbal abuse, and 26% had been victims of antisemitic violence in schools.
But equally disturbing is the finding that 46% said they had suffered anti-Semitic verbal abuse in the workplace.
Regarding the responsiveness of elected officials, Jews and the general public agree. Only 47% of Jews and 48% of the general public have confidence in the President of France tackling antisemitism, 46% of Jews and 41% of the public in the French government, and 58% of Jews and 56% of the public in local elected officials
Abstract: В настоящем исследовании была использована значительная часть вопросов общеевропейского
опроса, проводившимся Агентством Европейского Союза по основным правам (АОП) в восьми
странах Европейского Союза в 2012 году1
, направленного на мониторинг антисемитизма, личного
опыта опрошенных с подобными проявлениями, среди еврейского населения 8 европейских
стран.2
Использование одних и тех же вопросов дает возможность сравнить мнения и оценки
российских евреев с такими же оценками среди евреев из других стран, то есть оценивать современный масштаб антисемитизма в России в общеевропейском контексте. Отметим, что методика
европейского опроса иная, в отличие от российского опроса, проводившегося методом интервью face-to-face, европейское исследование – опрос онлайн. Это означает, что респонденты самостоятельно принимали решение отвечать на анкету. Несмотря на эти методические расхождения, мы считаем возможным сравнение полученных нами данных с европейскими, поскольку
они указывают на общие тенденции.
Все приводимые в настоящем отчете данные представляют собой распределение ответов (процент ответов к числу всех опрошенных, равное 517 человек, старше 16 лет, если не указано иное).
Отправной точкой для проведения настоящего исследование служит представление, что в последние многие годы мы не наблюдаем явного роста антисемитизма, основанное на результатах предыдущих массовых общероссийских исследований, проведенных по заказу РЕК. На фоне
весьма высокого уровня ксенофобии, нараставшего с середины 1990-х гг. по отношению к представителям различных этнонациональных общностей, прежде всего – к приезжим из кавказских
и среднеазиатских республик бывшего СССР, массовый негативизм по отношению к евреям выражен достаточно слабо. Но таковы были зафиксированные в социологических опросах массовые
установки всего населения России. Общенациональная репрезентативная выборка не позволяла
при этом сколько-нибудь определенно судить о том, а как смотрят на те же самые проблемы сами
российские евреи, насколько они обеспокоены угрозой агрессивного национализма, расизма и
антисемитизма в России. Потребность ответить на эти вопросы обусловила проведение настоящего социологического исследования.
Abstract: Настоящий отчет в основном описывает результаты качественных исследований 2018 г . Это была вторая волна фокус-групп и интервью, во многом продолжавшая и развивавшая исследование, первая волна которого прошла в 2015 г . и которая описана в соответствующем Отчете . Сведения об объеме и географии проведенных фокус-групп представлены в Приложении №1
Наряду с этим настоящее качественное исследование имеет целью дополнить и поддержать значительное по масштабам количественное исследование, проводимое одновременно Левада-центром в тех же городах (и ряде других) . Описываемые фокус-группы и интервью проводили модераторы Левада-центра А .Левинсон и С .Королева .
Приглашение респондентов из числа евреев осуществлялось через еврейские организации на местах . Контакты с этими организациями были установлены с помощью сотрудников Российского Еврейского Конгресса, за что мы им приносим свою благодарность . Приглашение других респондентов происходило силами местных маркетинговых и социологических агентств, сотрудничающих с Левада-центром .
Выборка для качественного исследования 2018 г . была построена так, чтобы в каждом из четырех городов провести встречи с местным еврейством и с представителями тех групп, которые образуют контекст или часть контекста для существования евреев . Поэтому в городах Дербент и Казань проводились фокус-группы с представителями мусульманского большинства, в городах Томск и Калининград – с представителями русского населения городов .
Исследователи полагали необходимым проверить гипотезу о том, что религиозность, т .е . включенность в жизнь религиозной общины и в соответствующее вероучение, влияет на восприятие проблемы антисемитизма . Поэтому были запланированы фокус-группы с евреями религиозными и с теми, кто себя к религиозным не относит . Такие же различия должны были быть в группах русских (относящие и не относящие себя к православным) и в группах мусульман, которые были разделены на «практикующих» (в Дербенте) и «этнических» (в Казани) . Мы не имели в виду обращаться к «истово-верующим» этих трех конфессий, поскольку это относительно узкие группы среди вообще «верующих»/ «практикующих»/ «религиозных» . Гипотеза нашла лишь частичное подтверждение . Среди евреев этот статус не влиял на их представление о наличии/отсутствии антисемитизма . Среди «практикующих» мусульман и православных было отмечен особый тип претензий к евреям и/или иудеям, не встречавшийся у тех, кто не причисляет себя к верующим . Претензии состояли в том, что иудеи считают себя выше нас – мусульман или православных . В остальном позиции людей более и менее вовлеченных в религию – в отношении обсуждаемых вопросов – не различались .
Abstract: Is criticism of Israel antisemitic? Do anti-Israel views and attitudes constitute a “new antisemitism”? These questions have occupied the minds of many academics and pubic intellectuals – both Jewish and non-Jewish – since the beginning of the twenty-first century. So far, no consensus has emerged. The definitions of antisemitism are many but all have been contested to varying degrees. This paper offers a brief survey of the definitions of antisemitism and the way in which these definitions accommodate anti-Israel and/or anti-Zionist views and attitudes. This is done, however, by way of introduction and without any assessment of the quality of the definitions in scientific terms, or their acceptability in political terms. The overview simply provides the background and the motivation for the main subject of the paper. The Jewish public’s perception of the link between antisemitism and anti-Israel/anti-Zionist attitudes forms the main focus of this paper. This is, to my knowledge, the first time that this subject has been treated in a strictly empirical, quantitative manner using large datasets.
What does the Jewish public, as opposed to the intellectual elite, think about the link between antisemitism and anti-Zionism? This question has so far remained unexplored, and in this paper I attempt to answer it utilising a newly created dataset. In summer 2012, a survey of experiences and perceptions of antisemitism among Jews took place in selected European countries.
Using advanced statistical techniques, it is possible to explore the extent to which the Jewish public makes a distinction between classic antisemitic and anti-Israel/anti-Zionist statements. Are anti-Israel/anti-Zionist statements perceived as antisemitic by Jews? Are they perceived to be antisemitic to the same extent as other, more classic, antisemitic statements? The paper addresses these questions focusing on the British and French samples of Jews, and comparing and contrasting insights produced by these two contexts.
Abstract: This article analyses the results of a study conducted for the Russian Jewish Congress in 2018. 517 people over the age of 16, living in 21 towns in the Russian Federation and identifying as Jews were interviewed. The goal of the study was to establish the scale of modern day anti-Semitism in Russia and to put it into all-European context. With this goal in mind the scientists used a considerable part of the questions from the all-European survey conducted
by the European Union agency for Fundamental Rights in 8 EU countries in 2012. The use of the same questions allowed to compare the views and evaluations of Russian Jews with those of Jews from other countries, that is to evaluate the modern scale of anti-Semitism in Russia in a European context. Anti-Semitism in Europe and in Russia is similar in several ways. It’s most often demonstrated in the form of offences, threats and publishing
of anti-Semite materials in the media. The main platform for expression of anti-Semite views today
is the Internet. Nevertheless, Russia differs from European countries in several important aspects.
Firstly, the origins and nature of anti-Semitism are different. In Russia anti-Semitism is built into xenophobia and is most often expressed on a mundane level. Its carriers are average citizens and not members of certain (neo-nazi) organizations. Xenophobia in Russia is, in turn, oriented against the “ethnically different” and not Jews who are
after all considered ‘insiders”. Secondly, there’s no anti-Zionist component in Russian anti-Semitism,
unlike European countries, where waves of antiSemitism are closely tied with Israel’s policies in the
Middle East.
Abstract: [From the introduction to the article]
Between March and November 1999, under the auspices of the Minority Research Institute of the Department of Sociology, Eötvös Loránd University, I conducted a sociological survey of the current situation of the Jewish community in Hungary. In the course of the survey, 2015 respondents were interviewed. The most important demographic and social data were collected for four generations – from respondents’ grandparents to their children. Participants in the survey were asked to respond to questions concerning their relationship towards Jewish traditions and their acceptance or rejection of various forms of Jewish identity. They were also asked for their opinions on assimilation, integration and dissimilation, on Israel, and on the current significance of the Holocaust. Finally, an attempt was made to gauge the opinions of Hungarian Jews on the state of their own community, on their relationships with non-Jews, and on antisemitism in postcommunist Hungary.
My purpose in this article shall be to analyse the data that we collected in this latter area. Firstly, I shall reveal how Jews living in Hungary define antisemitism, and whether – when it comes to classifying particular statements as antisemitic – there are any significant differences between younger and older groups of Jews, between those who are better educated and those with less education, and between those with a stronger and those with a weaker sense of Jewish identity. I shall then explore how the various respondent groups judge the extent, intensity and gravity of anti-Jewish sentiment in the country, examining in particular whether respondents themselves have experienced such sentiment or have been subjected to discrimination. I shall reveal whether respondents think that antisemitism will increase or decrease in the coming years. Finally, I shall touch upon the policies that respondents consider desirable when it comes to tackling antisemitic phenomena. Evidently, the images formed by Jews and non-Jews shall determine in large part the relations between the two groups of one other.
Abstract: JPR’s report, European Jewish identity: Mosaic or monolith? An empirical assessment of eight European countries, authored by Senior Research Fellow Dr David Graham, asks whether there is such a thing as a European Jewish identity, and, if so, what it looks like.
The question of whether there is a Jewish identity that is at once common to all European Jews but also peculiar to them, has intrigued scholars of contemporary Jewry since the fall of the Berlin Wall. This study contrasts the European picture with the two major centres of world Jewry, the United States and Israel, and examines the nature and content of Jewish identity across Europe, exploring the three core pillars of belief, belonging and behaviour around which Jewish identity is built.
This research was made possible by the advent of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) survey in 2012 examining Jewish people’s experiences and perceptions of antisemitism across nine EU Member States: Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Romania, Sweden and the UK. As well as gathering data about antisemitism, the study investigated various aspects of the Jewishness of respondents, in order to ascertain whether different types of Jews perceive and experience antisemitism differently. This study focuses on the data gathered about Jewishness, thereby enabling direct comparisons to be made for the first time across multiple European Jewish communities in a robust and comprehensive way.
The report concludes that there is no monolithic European identity, but it explores in detail the mosaic of Jewish identity in Europe, highlighting some key differences:
• In Belgium, where Jewish parents are most likely to send their children to Jewish schools, there is a unique polarisation between the observant and non-observant;
• In France, Jews exhibit the strongest feelings of being part of the Jewish People, and also have the strongest level of emotional attachment to Israel;
• Germany’s Jewish community has the largest proportion of foreign-born Jews, and, along with Hungary, is the youngest Jewish population;
• In Hungary the greatest relative weight in Jewish identity priorities is placed on 'Combating antisemitism,' and the weakest level of support for Israel is exhibited;
• In Italy, respondents are least likely to report being Jewish by birth or to have two Jewish parents;
• The Jews of Latvia are the oldest population and the most likely to be intermarried;
• The Jews of Sweden attach a very high level of importance to 'Combating antisemitism' despite being relatively unlikely to experience it, and they observe few Jewish practices;
• In the United Kingdom, Jews observe the most religious practices and appear to feel the least threatened by antisemitism. They are the most likely to be Jewish by birth and least likely to be intermarried.
According to report author, Dr David Graham: “This report represents far more than the culmination of an empirical assessment of Jewish identity. Never before has it been possible to examine Jewish identity across Europe in anything approaching a coherent and systematic way. Prior to the FRA’s survey, it was almost inconceivable that an analysis of this kind could be carried out at all. The formidable obstacles of cost, language, political and logistical complexity seemed to present impenetrable barriers to the realisation of any such dream. Yet this is exactly what has been achieved, a report made possible through an FRA initiative into furthering understanding of Jewish peoples' experience of antisemitism. It reveals a European Jewry that is more mosaic than monolith, an array of Jewish communities, each exhibiting unique Jewish personas, yet united by geography and a common cultural heritage."
