Addy Pittenger and Mia Fischel, Arts & Life Editor Emeritus & Features Editor–

In January 2022, DCGA passed “Resolution to Address and Combat Antisemitism At Denison University,” shortened to DCGA-RACA. This resolution “[incorporates] the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Working Definition (IHRA-WDA) of ‘antisemitism’ into the university’s discrimination and harassment policies,” as stated in section 2 of the Implementation section in the 2022 resolution.

 However, in a letter to DCGA to repeal the resolution, it was stated that the IHRA-WDA “was never intended for policy or legislative purposes and has been widely critiqued as deeply problematic and ineffective,” and how “the DCGA-RACA conflates being Jewish with the State of Israel… [and is] extremely problematic, as Judaism is an ancient and contemporary religious tradition and Jewish identity is not singular but complex and historical.”

At DCGA’s meeting on Feb. 20, an open debate including DCGA senators and individual students was held to discuss the amended resolution which was proposed the previous week. The “Resolution to Address Antisemitism and Repeal the DCGA-RACA/IHRA Resolution,” sponsored by Norah Carter ‘26, aimed to tackle the problem of antisemitism whilst acknowledging the difference between anti-zionism and antisemitism. 

“SJP (Students for Justice in Palestine) reached out to me over the winter break to ask to help work on [the amended resolution]… and I had conversations with professors and peers about [the old resolution’s] issues… so I reached the conclusion that DCGA does not have a place to define “antisemitism” for Jewish students,” Carter said. 

The debate primarily focused on the question of defining “antisemitism.” Carter circled back to the adoption of the problematic IHRA-WDA which, implemented on Denison’s campus, would restrict criticism of the actions of the state of Israel, and therefore threaten free speech.

Senator Matthew Roth ‘26 raised concerns about responses from Jewish students on campus.

“A lot of Jewish students on this campus have faced antisemitism from all different sides and types of groups whether it be white supremacy or otherwise,” Roth said.

Greta Schreiber ‘24 discussed this concern in relation to the ability to advocate for Palestinian human rights on campus. As an anti-zionist Jewish student and member of SJP, Schreiber says that the old resolution considers her and the organizations she’s involved in as antisemitic.

“It conflates my Jewishness with Israel, a country I’ve never been to, and am extremely critical of,” Schreiber said. “The old resolution does nothing to help Jewish students. It just obfuscates the very real threat of antisemitism and seeks to silence speech critical of Israel, and this new resolution rectifies that.”

Janine Quigley ‘24 shared her opinion on student’s free speech at Denison stating, “I don’t believe that criticizing Israel is antisemitic and I don’t think that those two things should be conflated. The old resolution is definitely a threat to all student’s freedom of speech, and I think that protecting free speech is important especially when it’s potentially controversial.”

The previous resolution also cited a survey by the Brandeis Center, which the new resolution settled to define as a “right-wing, conservative group.” With this, the debate further discussed terminology used in the new resolution, particularly about what classifies as a “right-wing hate group” and how to address white supremacy. 

The debate continued on with BSU Community Senator, Taylor Thomas ‘26, sharing how “white supremacy” takes multiple forms of discrimination, and how it is more of an umbrella term.

“Most people would understand that there are differences among the forms of white supremacy. Nobody is denying that, but they’re all under the same umbrella… I feel like we shouldn’t be listing out each and every one because listing them out one-by-one, you forget about others… I don’t know if white supremacy necessarily needs a definition… like it is what it is,” Thomas said.

Monica Bradford ‘24 added, “I am obviously black, but I am also Jewish. I think that to say that antisemitism is separate from all other forms of white supremacy completely disregards the aspect of my identity… To separate antisemitism from all other forms of white supremacy, completely disregards the concept of intersectionality, the concept that white supremacy and hate does not only apply to one type of person.” 

Ali Imran ‘24 circled the debate back to the topic regarding the previous resolution and its issues conflating anti-zionism with antisemitism.

“I completely agree that we can’t possibly list out every single form that white supremacy takes in this world, because there are just so many. However, the problem with the previous bill was that it conflated anti-zionism with antisemitism, and that particularly harms Muslim, Palestinian and Arab communities because a lot of crackdown and backlash that’s happened over the last few decades has specifically targeted Arab and Palestinian students,” Imran said.

After minor edits regarding definitions of white supremacy and opening further meetings to discuss defining terms such as “antisemitism,” the amended resolution passed 16-2 with two senators abstaining from voting.

With the passage of this resolution, DCGA declared its commitment to tackling both “the serious problem of antisemitism,” and “all forms of white supremacy.” 

They also resolved to further deliberate over how to define, or not define, antisemitism in a way that does not exclude certain groups but also does not bar and prosecute political criticism.

If you are interested in any of the documents mentioned above, please reach out to Noah Chartier at [email protected]