"Antisemitism" defined as including
"the definition of antisemitism"
I am looking at the Senate
version of the Act that was passed on Dec01. It’s bill S.10 as
shown by its style, above.
Section 4 – the directive of the bill, requires that when
investigating a Title VI violation, the Department of Education ". .
. shall take into consideration the definition of anti-Semitism."
Hold on . . . what definition???
Well, Section 3, titled "DEFINITIONS," seems like a
good place to look. It says:
"For the purposes of this Act, the term ‘definition of
and then it doesn’t give a definition at all, but, rather, provides
two paragraphs that say what the definition of anti-Semitism
"includes." You don't have to be the brightest bird on the
branch to see that defining a word is a different process from articulating a
couple of concepts that a definition includes. And, as a result, there is no
actual definition in this law for "antisemitism," only an opinion of
what the definition of "antisemitism" includes.
As an analogy, if you asked me for a definition of "baseball"
and all I gave you in response was "Baseball includes three
strikes," you would not be that much closer to the definition than
before you asked. You would, in fact, have been jerked around. It seems to
me to be axiomatic that Congress has an ethical and moral obligation not
to jerk Americans around like this. Tim Scott (R-SC) and Bob
Casey (D-PA), who introduced this feculent bill, I'm looking at you.
Be that as it may, let's look at what the Act says the definition of
"antisemitism" includes to see where Scott and Casey are going
Paragraph (1) of Section 3 says the " . . . definition of
antisemitism. . . (1) includes the definition of anti-Semitism set forth
by the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism of the Department
of State in the Fact Sheet issued on June 8, 2010, . . ."
OK, so . . . the definition of "antisemitism" includes the
definition of "antisemitism." IOW, the word as used in
this Act "includes" the definition of same word as set forth in
a Fact Sheet. The Act provides no link to this "Fact
Sheet" but you can find the thing on the Department of State website,
Here comes the mind-control part
Here is that Fact Sheet's definition of "antisemitism"
"Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which
be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical
manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish
individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions
and religious facilities." --Working Definition of Anti-Semitism by
the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia
(In addition, Paragraph (2) of Section 3 says the definition of
antisemitism also "includes" the rest of the content of the Fact
Sheet, which includes "Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism"
and additional material that is relevant to comments and criticisms
directed at Israel.)
The legal/constitutional problem is that by this sleight of hand the
Act defines antisemitism to include "a certain perception of Jews." And
so what is being made illegal is a mental process or thought process. (Experts may disagree on the
semantics of whether perception itself is a "thought process,"
but not on whether it is a "mental process." In my view it is
safest to consider perception to be a mental process that includes
thought. Not all thought includes perception, but all perception includes
some degree of thought.)
And note that the prohibited mental process is described not by any
harm it does and not by the way the mental process is expressed, but by
the way in which the mental process MAY BE EXPRESSED. In other words,
according to this Act, merely having a certain perception about Jews is
prohibited or punished so long as it is possible to express that
perception as hatred toward the Jews -- and, "Jews" includes
Israel, pursuant to Paragraph (2).
More specifically, according to this Act, if one engages in the mental
activity of perceiving Jews and/or Israel in any way that could be
expressed as hatred, then that mere perception, regardless of whether or
not it is actually expressed as hatred, gives rise to a complaint under
The Act, in other words, is an example of the government making a
certain class or category of purely mental activity illegal and punishable
under (here comes the irony) the Civil Rights Act. This is an attempt
at governmental thought-control, or, more precisely, perception-control
under the rubric of "civil rights." But then a lot of
political correctness is really a warped manifestation of "civil
I admit that I don't know the 52 titles of the U.S. Code word for word; after all
there are nearly 5,000 criminal statutes alone. Nevertheless, I am not
aware of any other federal statute, or act, or bill, or regulation in
which Congress or an agency assumes to itself the authority and power to
punish, control, or in any way sanction a mental process. We're breaking
new ground here, with the assistance and for the benefit of our Jewish
friends at AIPAC and ADL.
You have, no doubt noticed by now an edge in this post. It's there because as
a neuroscientist and lawyer, when the government begins passing
legislation that controls or in any way attempts to affect individuals'
mental processes, it frightens me. And as an ex-Marine with a Purple Heart
it pisses me off.
As a society we need to think and talk about the way
politically-privileged Jews in America
and Israel are given special consideration by, and access to, Congress. More
importantly, we need to think and talk about the way
politically-privileged Jews are using their
special access to Congress to turn the country into a mind-control police
state, as is clearly indicated by the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act.
Anthony L. Fisher, Reason,
Proposed 'Anti-Semitism Awareness Act' is an Unconstitutional Mess
Alex Emmons, The
Intercept , Sentate Response to Trump-Inspired Anti-Semitism By
Targeting Students Who Criticize Israel
Stephen Lendman, SteveLendmanBlog,
Disgraceful US Anti-Semitism Awareness Act