Olivia Fendrich / The Mossy Log
On Oct. 7, 2024, LC Hillel sponsored a display to bring attention to the then 95, mostly Jewish hostages who were kidnapped from Israel a year prior by Hamas. An unknown person vandalized this memorial by placing flyers that read “Zionists fuck off,” “This institution protects Zionists” and “October 7th was natives breaking free” with depictions of Hamas paragliding into Israel representing “Palestinian resistance.”
Slogans and soundbites like these have become a succinct method of expressing political ideologies, especially when addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Whether labeling Hamas as a resistance movement or voicing anti-Zionist sentiments, soundbites serve as quick ways to sum up beliefs. On the other hand, these soundbites and slogans are intertwined with a deep history of antisemitism, a pseudo-scientific word originating in Germany disguising the more accurate term of “Jew-hatred.”
Real criticism of the Israeli government is not inherently antisemitic and is even necessary to facilitate growth and hold those in power accountable. However, effective discourse requires clear language and knowledge. Neither slogans nor symbols easily deliver this. They are often too open to interpretation, hindering effective communication. Reductive slogans and soundbites remove nuance from discussions of the conflict and create narratives that perpetuate violence against Jews.
Various slogans refer to Hamas as a resistance group, so what is the resistance they reference? On Oct. 7, 2023, during the Jewish holiday of Simchat Torah, the Palestinian militant and terrorist group Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, invaded Israel by land and air. Hamas, alongside other Palestinian militant groups, murdered 1,195 people. Hamas tortured, raped, burned alive, mutilated and executed entire families, whom they looted after murdering them. They kidnapped 251 people as well, including the elderly, young children and women.
The hostages were sexually abused, starved, beaten and deprived of medical attention in Hamas’s underground tunnel system. Israeli forces have also committed acts of violence against detained Palestinians — a common retort when the Israeli hostages are mentioned. This “tit-for-tat” framing makes violence acceptable against Israelis and Jews as a form of revenge. It is more productive to firmly acknowledge that both actions are unacceptable.
To determine why Hamas would commit such horrific atrocities, we must examine their founding charter from 1988. Article 7 bluntly states that “The Day of Judgement” will not come until Muslims kill the Jews. Article 13 emphasizes that peaceful solutions are “all a waste of time” in comparison to armed conflict. Lastly, Article 22 in Hamas’ charter states that the Jewish people were behind the French and Communist revolutions and “most of the revolutions we heard and hear about.” It also claims that Jews have created various secret societies and orchestrated World War I and II.
Hamas’ core tenets include: advocating for the genocide of the Jewish people, endorsing antisemitic conspiracy theories and refusing and disrupting any peaceful solutions in favor of armed conflict. Hamas’ violent ideology has a history of negatively impacting both Palestinian and Israeli people.
During the Oslo Accords peace agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) that started in 1993, Hamas aimed to stop the diplomatic process by committing terrorist attacks. According to Middle Eastern geopolitician Avi Melamed, from 1989 to 2007, there were over 150 suicide bombings, a majority of which targeted Israeli civilians. Their plan succeeded as these attacks contributed greatly to the failure and stagnation of the Oslo Accords. Hamas sacrificed potential Palestinian statehood in favor of killing Jews, as per Article 7 of their founding charter. This is not resistance.
In 2017, Hamas released a more “moderate” charter in order to appear less dogmatic. While Hamas removed all explicit references to killing Jews, they continued to reject peaceful solutions. In Article 16, they are careful to say that they have no issues with Jews at all, just Zionists, a far cry from advocating for the murder of Jews as they did in the 1988 charter. Oct. 7 confirms that the 2017 charter was just to save face — it was not an actual ideological shift away from Hamas’ previous agenda. In January 2025, Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya hailed the slaughter on Oct. 7 as “a source of pride for (the Palestinian) people … to be passed down from generation to generation.” These violent actions are what organizations like JVP, SJP, BDS, etc, refer to as “breaking free” and “resistance,” glamorizing Hamas on college campuses and social media.
Remember, the flyers placed on the hostage display made similar distinctions, insulting Zionists rather than Jews. This comes across as attacking Jews because there is no way to fully disconnect Zionism and Judaism.
There are two types of Zionism: religious Zionism and political Zionism. Religious Zionism is the yearning for a return to Zion (the land of Eretz Israel). Religious Zionism originated after the forced displacement of the Jewish people from Eretz Israel during the Babylonian Exile (598-538 BCE). Jewish holidays, prayer and language are directly connected to the 3,000-year presence of the Jewish people in the land of Israel. Simply put, Judaism is intrinsically connected to religious Zionism.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) defines political Zionism as “the movement for the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland.” In this regard, political Zionism is a national realization of religious Zionism.
Anti-Zionism does not differentiate between religious Zionism, political Zionism and Judaism. Anti-Zionism quickly becomes a direct attack on Jews, as shown historically by the USSR.
Under Soviet control, Russian Jews were prohibited from leaving the country, speaking Hebrew or Yiddish, celebrating Jewish holidays and observing religious practices. Stalin tokenized certain Jews like the actor Benjamin Zuskin as anti-Zionist “mascots,” trying to convince the Jewish population to abandon religious Zionism. Nonetheless, Zuskin’s anti-Zionist identity did not save him — as he was executed in 1952 for being ethnically Jewish. These laws culminated in the Doctors’ Plot, a 1953 incident where Stalin accused several Jewish doctors of preparing to poison top Soviet officials and fabricated an anti-Zionist campaign to remove Jews from society. Stalin hoped to send all Russian Jews to the gulag after revealing this plot, but he died before this could be realized. This illustrates the tight connection between religious Zionism and Judaism. Attacking religious Zionism is just one method of attacking Jews.
Ultimately, it is difficult to find an example of anti-Zionism that does not involve antisemitism by targeting Jews through religious Zionism for their ethnic background, cultural or religious beliefs. In 2023, the ADL documented 8,873 antisemitic incidents in the US, a 140% increase from 2022. Between Oct. 7 and the end of 2023 alone, there were 5,204 incidents, 52% of which referenced Israel, Palestine or Zionism.
The “Hamas as resistance” narrative and anti-Zionist rhetoric intersect with antisemitism. So, what constitutes valid criticism of Israel? A simple way to determine valid criticism is by using Soviet dissident, Israeli politician and human rights advocate Natan Sharansky’s three D’s test: Demonization, Double Standards and Delegitimization.
Demonization: Comparing Israel to Nazi Germany or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the Holocaust is unjust. The death and destruction in the current conflict is horrific but it is not comparable to the scale of the Holocaust.
Valid Criticism: The Israeli government should have conceded some of their demands for a hostage deal. A military campaign will not save the hostages or pressure Hamas into surrendering them.
Double Standards: The UN singles out Israel for human rights abuses while staying silent on abuses committed in other countries such as Iran, Sudan, China, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.
Valid Criticism: The Israeli government must properly reprimand and put a stop to extremist Israeli violence against Palestinians in the West Bank rather than turning a blind eye to it.
Delegitimization: Referring to Israel as “Isnotreal,” “Israhell,” or saying that Israel has no right to exist, even though the Jewish people have inhabited Israel for over 3,000 years.
Valid Criticism: The Israeli government must stop the extremist movement that seeks to annex the West Bank. It is not conducive to peace and ignores the fact that Palestinians also have a history attached to the land.
Escaping the usage of antisemitic slogans and soundbites requires knowledge of Judaism, antisemitism and Middle Eastern affairs. A good starting point is through humanization and an education on what modern-day antisemitism looks like.
To develop this knowledge and break barriers of hate, attend Jewish events on campus; you do not need to be Jewish to participate. Allies are deeply appreciated as many in the Jewish community, including myself, have not felt heard, respected or understood since Oct. 7, 2023.
The Jewish people remember those who have stayed silent during intense times of antisemitic persecution and just as equally, we remember fondly those who have stood by and helped us. Be a part of the positive change that Lewis & Clark needs to keep its Jewish students safe and create more nuanced conversation.
About the Author
Wow this article is full of accusations presented as fact. Let me address one: In December 2023, the New York Times published an explosive article that detailed Hamas’s agenda to weaponise r*pe and s*xual violence on October 7, which was picked up by all Western Media outlets. However, this story has been discredited and deemed highly unlikely. This has been researched pretty well by Al Jazeera amongst others. You quoting articles from Israeli and US media is reflecting a biased narrative.
Would you consider Nat Turner not to be genuinely resisting slavery and just hating white people? Even if he took things to conclusions that were wrong you can’t take that away from the context of the brutality he was born into. Anyone who really cared about the violence done by Nat Turner would call for the unconditional abolishing of slavery rather than stoking concerns over white safety.