June 18, 2009

The tragic shooting of a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum by an elderly anti-Semitic polemicist sent shudders through the Jewish body politic. Coming on the heels of at least two other widely publicized anti-Semitic incidents — the foiled plot targeting synagogues in Riverdale, NY, and the murder of a Jewish Wesleyan student by a killer who spoke of a “Jewish Columbine” — the killing of guard Stephen Tyrone Johns led some to suggest that it is “open season on Jews.”

Brandeis University historian Jonathan Sarna recently wrote that he was prepared to dismiss such talk as “typical Jewish paranoia.” But as the “isolated incidents” piled up, Sarna wrote that it is “surely long past the season when concern over anti-Semitism can be dismissed as typical Jewish paranoia.”

As much as these recent incidents are linked in their anti-Semitism, they are almost completely dissimilar in their motives and plans of attack. That being the case, what do we do with our “paranoia”? Fear without some sort of strategy is a Jewish telegram: “Start worrying — details to follow.”

Jewish leaders are rightly reluctant to call for a communal lockdown. And the daily experience of America’s five million Jews does not seem to justify draconian measures.

Still, it is vital that every Jewish institution review its security plans and consult with experts in the field, like the Secure Community Network, a Jewish consortium. And we urge Jewish defense groups like the Anti-Defamation League not just to issue strong news releases but to remind us of the ways they are working with law enforcement to determine where current measures to monitor hate, prevent attacks, and punish perpetrators are lacking.

Sarna’s glum assessment raises a challenge: not whether Jews should be concerned over anti-Semitism, but how we should address and express that concern.

Comment: comments@njjewishnews.com

--TOP--