Latest / Infidels / The Critical Study of Antizionism: A New Field | Andrew Pessin
Transcript
- Richard Landes: so We're here today with Andrew Pessin who has a long and distinguished career preceding his how should we put it, untimely introduction. to the problem of not just supremacism supremacist Islam, but the, shall we say, red-green alliance, which in a sense tore through academia in the twenty first century. And so Andrew, as a result, has gone from being a philosopher to a student I mean, he's still a philosopher, of course. Andrew Pessin: Still a philosopher. Richard Landes: Never never leaves once you started that. but in addition, he's taken on an analysis and a study of what presents itself as an academic field, but is in fact a form of hate speech that presents itself in academic form. Andrew, would you like to Elaborate on that or did I already give away all the Andrew Pessin: That one sentence pretty much covers it, but you know, there's a long history and tradition, and and I'll I'll going back at least to the Nazis, of taking something hateful and basically dressing it up in science. Hitler I don't think used those exact words, but it was something similar. He understood Hannah Arendt documents this. he understood that the the traditional coarse Jew hatred of the street, wouldn't fly for his purposes. For propaganda purposes, he needed something more scientific to advance his anti-Jewish program. And so he he launched a number of scholarly institutes which were to take on people, you know, the German Academy was traditionally enormously prestigious and enormously productive and successful. And his goal was to mobilize as many of those professors as possible to start churning out the science. Whose logical conclusion was we must annihilate the Jews, basically. So I like the phrase: you take this coarse hatred, it was it was eliminationist anti-Jewishness, but you dress it up in science and it suddenly becomes palatable, socially respectable, etc. So we got that in the Nazis. And the the the best source for that is, of course, Max Weinreich's book, Hitler's Professors, aptly named, right? These were professors who were. Weaponized and orchestrated by Hitler to advance the eliminationist anti-Jewishness. and I would argue that what we're seeing in the 20th and certainly in the 21st century is just the a century later an updated version of Hitler's professors. I prefer to call them Hamas' professors now, but the the analogy is nearly perfect. They're taking a hateful eliminationist Richard Landes: Right. I was Andrew Pessin: ideology and dressing it up in science. Richard Landes: Right. I was gonna say suggest jihad's professor. Andrew Pessin: okay, you know, we we could quibble over that. I I like Hamas as it's a little bit more gripping and it was more when I coined that phrase right around, you know, October seventh, Hamas is the the face of global jihad for many. They're the ones that were most prominent. So I think that that gets the idea. But if you want to go with it and call them jihad's professors. Richard Landes: Okay, but great, great, but but hold on one sec, because the fact is that there's a distinct tendency on the part of people who are in denial to insist that Hamas is a nationalist group working for Andrew Pessin: True. Richard Landes: Palestinian liberation. So they don't automatically associate Hamas with, for instance, the founder's statement. As far as they're concerned, the entire five hundred and ten million square kilometers of planet Earth should be under Islamic rule. Andrew Pessin: Right. No, fair enough. So if we were getting a little bit more precise, you know, the anonymous blogger Elder of Zion has a lot of excellent material on the subject, as you well know. and he has, you know, recently been isolating the distinct distinct Islamist jihadi streams, which differ amongst each other in all sorts of interesting ways. What they share is, of course, the desire ultimately to conquer the globe for their version of Islam, but there are internal differences. So they're not all Hamas. So I I grant to you Richard Landes: Right. Absolutely. Andrew Pessin: that Jihad's professors would sort of capture the super category. Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: and you know, but part of my goal and the work that I'm doing is to address the problem that you just mentioned. Too many people, and this is part of this the accomplishment of antizionism in the academy, have cast Hamas as merely a national liberation organization, obscuring their jihadic element. So by so you you could argue that by using the label Hamas as professors and then doing the work under that label. you are showing that they actually are jihadis, right? That this is their ultimate goal. So we Richard Landes: Right, right, right. Okay. Andrew Pessin: I could see in different circumstances using different phrases. Richard Landes: All right, all right. But but very powerful. The idea I mean this is really in some senses an astonishing phenomenon because as opposed to Hitler's professors who entirely agreed with Hitler's program and consciously participated, jihad's professors are doing the work of jihadis who are in fact enemies of everything that they benefit from, which is a free society, free speech, institutional, you know, encouragement of research and so on. Andrew Pessin: Yeah, that's a fantastic point, as always, for Professor Landis. let me just say one qualification with Hitler's professors. I'm not scholar enough to support the universal generalization that they all knew what they were doing, they were all on board. I'm sure there were some who were Richard Landes: I see. Right. Andrew Pessin: at least individually hesitant, but you know, but what the the analogy is when you are in a social environment where there are tremendous benefits from going along and tremendous co the costs from d being dissident. It's just very easy to go along and I'm sure that applies today as well, now that anti Zionism is the totalitarian ideology that's dominating our scene. But that's Richard Landes: You know what you you know what really illustrates the point you just made is that twenty five minute ovation for that film. Did you see Isabella Tabarati? Andrew Pessin: Did I see that? So, you know, like as you know, in terms of moments that ought to just undermine the entire anti scientist movement immediately, that's way up there. Of course it doesn't. I immediately commented, and in fact this was I think my most viral Richard Landes: First see what her see what her comment was and then tell your comment. Andrew Pessin: See what whose comment was? Richard Landes: Isabella's comment. Andrew Pessin: No, no, no. I was before her. I made the same comment, but before her. Yes, Richard Landes: really? Andrew Pessin: yes, yes. But but I'm sure she did it independently. But this turned out to be, I think, the most viral comment I've ever had on X at least. It got like 140,000 views, which is big for me. You know, and I basically said this immediately reminds me of the Stalin speeches where the first person to stop clapping gets shot, right? Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: The the the ludicrousness and the absurdity of it, not to mention that everything I'm reading about that film just, you know, it's not even a serious film, right? It's like it's so non-credible in every respect and twenty five minutes of applause. But okay. So apart from that little moment where I think I was just defending some Nazi professors for some reason. Richard Landes: No, I was thinking the same thing as I said it, I think. That's that's what you're saying the case. Good. Andrew Pessin: Yeah, I don't mean to defend them. I'm I'm just trying to be academically accurate. There might have been a few who were reluctant but went along anyway, so they're fully culpable. you're absolutely right that today's professors are ultimately advancing a program that is that they that on some level they should not and do not share, right? That's actually a really deep question there. They should not share it. The the dominant form of this movement in the academy is, of course, progressive left ideology. Progressive left ideology is about as opposite on the spectrum from Islamist jihadi ideology. They should Richard Landes: You can get Andrew Pessin: have nothing in common and indeed they should hate each other and oppose each other, right? And Richard Landes: Okay. Andrew Pessin: yet the red-green alliance, as you as you pointed out, right, is is animating them. So in in my mind, this is a little too simplistic, but it it still is what you get when you're not simplistic. The only plausible conclusion is they actually do share what they take to be the most important part of the agenda, the foundational central part of it, which is eliminate the Jews. Right. So if the progressive left idea ideology's core idea is eliminate the Jews, and the Islamist ideology, core idea, at least for Western purposes, is eliminate the Jews, then there's n nothing, you know, they're all in as much as most of the Hitler's professors were. Richard Landes: Alright, let's so so let me let me see if I could reformulate that slightly. I I don't think that a lot of people on the left think that they want to eliminate the Jews. And I think that they specifically ignore Hamas's genocidal sermons, because that's not something they could be in line with. Now, to eliminate Israel and create Dalla Peter Bainer you know the the the Andrew Pessin: Tumba. Richard Landes: ludicrous notion of a democratic state in the Middle East with a Muslim majority and a Jewish minority. So that's that's that's not part of the issue but it seems to me that so what what strikes me is that the thing that binds them is not the elimination of the Jews, it's the hatred of America and Israel. In other words, it's a hate movement. And there's we had we discussed the Red Green Alliance on September eighth of at when we discussed Durban, which concluded that day twenty five years ago. And there was a there's a quote from Eric Coffer where he says, A mass movement does not need a God, but it does need a devil. And they share the devil. So yeah. Andrew Pessin: God. It needs a right. Right. So I yeah, I don't think that's particularly inconsistent with anything I've said, without question. Richard Landes: No, it's just not focusing on the Jews. It's focusing on their hate. Andrew Pessin: Right. But here's, you know, here's the thing. And first of all, it's hard to generalize. There's so many of them and there are many differences amongst individuals and within different streams of the progressive left movement. Right. And so there there will be some hardcore people who openly hate the Jews and want to eliminate the Jews. And then there'll be some people, you know, more on the let's call them on the periphery. I don't know if that's the right metaphor, but that fit your description better, right? They they deny they hate the Jews, they're against antisemitism, so they say And yet they end up endorsing positions whose logical conclusion is eliminate the Jews, right? And it's true that for many of them, they will say what animates them. It will be anti-capitalism, you know, antizionism Richard Landes: So just Andrew Pessin: is the new socialism for idiots or for fools, whatever the expression is, right? I think, you know, originally it was antisemitism is a socialism of fools, but today Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: antizionism is a socialism of fools. And I think that that applies to some reasonable subset of these people. But what you find is maybe a couple of things. You know, you've heard the slogan, of course, characterizing the Islamists, first the Saturday, first the Fry Saturday people, then the Sunday people. and indeed the Islamists do spend a little time going after the Sunday people, but the overwhelming majority of the effort, intellectual and violent, is directed towards the Saturday people, towards the Jews. So too, you have a lot of these folks on the progressive left who are I'm anti-capitalism, anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism, and good. Well, at least the last two. I could be against those is imperialism colonialism with qualifications. but the reality is 90% of their psychic energy and of their activity is focused on the Jews. And so Richard Landes: Yeah. Yeah. Andrew Pessin: what allows them to, you know, what what w one imagines there should be some sort of cognitive dissonance there. With the Islamists, right? And I'm shocked by how little there is. But what Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: allows them to maybe dissipate that cognitive dissonance is precisely the label they give to it. I'm fighting capitalism, I'm fighting racism, I'm fighting injustice. And okay, I'm waving a Hamas flag while I do that. so you know, that labeling allows them to dress up in science, but Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: in the end is eliminationist Jew hatred that's really driving them psych psychically. That's my you know, that's the that's why I think the Jews in the end really are centered here, despite the the rhetoric which will decenter the Jews. Richard Landes: Right, right, right. Andrew Pessin: And, you know, as you look at their responses to the genocidal language, right? Like it i it runs the whole gamut, but it goes from everything everything from they don't say you you actually remember you sent me a cartoon years ago. it was I think there was like an is Islamist holding a sign, something like, you know, kill the gays, kill the Jews, kill you know, et cetera. And then there's Richard Landes: Mm-hmm. Andrew Pessin: a liberal next from saying he doesn't mean it. So we see that. We see that. Richard Landes: Right, right, right. Against an Oxford backdrop. Andrew Pessin: And Oxford, yeah. So without question we see that. They either deny they b say those things, or if they say those things, they deny they mean it. And then they try to find a few nasty remarks that an Israeli politician has said and somehow make a false equivalence between these things, etcetera. They they you know, so the hardcore embrace it. Let's eliminate the Jews. The less hardcore are uncomfortable with it, but they easily explain it away. And the Richard Landes: All right. Andrew Pessin: as you said, even just a few moments ago, right? Like They did they'll look at Hamas and and this is a a big theme in the the book I'm writing, a draft of which I hope to complete after this interview today. you know, the power of ideology to I'll put it neutrally, influence your perception of the world, corrupt your perception of the world, to put it a little bit more negatively. you Richard Landes: Why do you Andrew Pessin: know, we see this here in this progressive ideology, they can look at Hamas and see a national liberation movement. And all the counter evidence is either not seen, explained away, or you know, ig ignored. Richard Landes: were transmuted into resistance into into their language. Okay so Andrew Pessin: Transmuted into resistance. They s well, they turn, you know, they turn what is in fact aggressive genocidal annihilation agenda into an act of defense. Richard Landes: of the most of the most right wing, authoritarian, domineering, primitive style. And here are these postmodern progressives who are getting sucked in. Okay, so now this is a question I ask everybody, and you opened it up the passage to it, and that is, you know, on one level, they're doing exactly what Hamas wants. They're doing exactly what the jihadi wants. Literally, they're taking instruction. And this is true not just of the academics that you're working on, but also of the news media. So so essentially, once you understand what the three choices of an infidel are, they are behaving like Dimmy. They have already submitted Andrew Pessin: Yeah. Richard Landes: to Islam and they are taking direction from Islam. And the primary rule that they must observe is not to criticize Islam, which is why Hamas doesn't even appear in the news analysis that we see. It's, you know, poor Hamas. Whatever. So so here they are from the their point of view, they're revolutionaries, they're cutting edge, theoretical, pushing the limit, radical deep thinkers. But from the point of view of the supremacist Muslim, they're just obedient dhimis. Andrew Pessin: You want my comment? Is that is is there a question there or like Richard Landes: Yeah, yeah. So here's y I mean, your comments on, but here's the question. Andrew Pessin: Okay. Richard Landes: You raise the issue of cognitive dissonance. Where at what level of submersion is this denial of all of these terrifying indices that they are completely wrong? They've been duped. Andrew Pessin: Yeah, you know, so I I deliberately put my n a mar remark initially in a neutral way. Ideology can shape perception. That's that's like a banal no obvious, right? Nobody that's a platitude. and sometimes it can be positive. Ideology allows is is what's necessary, it what's it's what constitutes understanding something, right? If the world here's the philosopher, if the world is just this thing happens, that thing happens, another thing happens, that's how a dog experiences the world, doesn't understand it. To understand it is to make meaning out of it. To make meaning out of it is to tie it together into some form of narrative. and Richard Landes: Or or paradise. Andrew Pessin: or a par paradigm, narrative, right? Of ideological framework, whatever, analytical framework, a lot of different terms for it. so it's an act that is essential. Certainly to intellectual life, that is what it is to understand something. And then we have to distinguish between those ideologies that are valuable and productive and constructive and truly help us understand versus those ideologies that go the opposite direction. And obviously, your and my view is that the progressive left are gripped by an ideology that corrupts their perception and gives them an absolutely false understanding of the world. Presumably we ours is better. So what I wanna say, and this I compliment you because that that That one minute, ninety second summary you just gave was was sort of a ninety second summary of your masterpiece of a work and the whole world be wrong. So I I Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: do recommend if people have not yet bought or read that book that they must. It's a long, dense book. It's a little challenging, but it's brilliant. Richard Landes: I'm putting it up in I'm putting it up in pieces for the Andrew Pessin: I I saw it. Yeah, that wonderful. But people should get, you know, people should get the book. Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: because what what happens is if you're not aware of let's say, this Islamist ambition to establish a global caliphate and turn everybody either into dimmies or corpses, basically. thimmies or corps corpses, right? Then you're not gonna understand what's going on here. And but once you ha understand that, you can look at this Western progressive behavior. And again, I focus on the academy, but y you put a lot of focus on the media and rightly so. that behavior will look different to you once you understand this framework. The fact that you can see it as you like to call it preemptive vimitude, right? Like they they're not even waiting for the Islamists to come with the sword over their throat to capitulate. They're capitulating in advance preemptively themitude. That is Both the product of a you know applying an ideology to what's going on here, but also but then the question is, is that a good, true, valuable one? And it almost Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: certainly is, right? So when you're aware of the role that ideology plays in shaping perception, that allows you to start saying, well, let me evaluate my ideology. Because the danger of ideology is it will cause you to emphasize some things and ignore other things. Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: If you want to get at something resembling truth, right, you can't. Only emphasize some things and ignore other things without at least making an argument why it's correct to emphasize those Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: things and ignore the other things. That's precisely what the progressives do not do. They have bought into this ideology that allows them to see in Islamist groups like Hamas not just resistance movements, but really many of them, I think, see, you know, the Marxist proletarian revolution that never really happened. That's so central to their worldview. And here you see a violent group overthrowing an established power system. that must be the Marxist revolution, right? So there's all this psychic energy that's been longing for the proletarian revolution that never happened can now just get projected onto this other thing, which Richard Landes: Right. Yeah. Well. Andrew Pessin: is, of course, to totally not understand what that other thing is. It's to project your ideology. So, Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: but yeah, so the advantage of I'll call it ours. It's It's primarily yours, but I I adopt it, so I'll take it. of our ideology is we look at the Marxist ideology, but then we also look at the Islamist ideology and we make an argument that the Islamist framework is the more accurate, truer framework. Whereas the other side, as we were just saying earlier, largely just has to ignore it, pretend it doesn't happen, or reinterpret it. So that's my comment on on that. I don't know if I answered the question. Richard Landes: Right, right. And they're right, and they're driving and they're driving their truck off the cliff at top speed. so y there are two things you reminded me of. One is Judith Butler in two thousand and six, after Andrew Pessin: Famous right. Richard Landes: saying Hezbollah and Hamas are part of the global progressive left and later clarified it by saying that they're anti imperialist. So you you can't get it more wrong. They are the worst imperialists on the planet. Andrew Pessin: They're the worst imperialists and they're open about their imperialism. They don't hide it. Richard Landes: And it's because I think in the book I compare it to that scene in Independence Day, you know, at the beginning with that and and they're all Andrew Pessin: But the sh the machine. Richard Landes: out there singing welcome, welcome, and then the bottom opens up and just pulverizes them. And and you know, one of the things about that Andrew Pessin: Boiler alert. Richard Landes: right, one of the things about that scene is they couldn't know what was in those, what the ideology that but we can know what the ideology Andrew Pessin: We can know. No, and they don't hide it. That's the thing that Richard Landes: UFP supremacy. Right. Andrew Pessin: kills me. It's one thing if, you know what, there was a se it's secret, it's hidden, i it's reasonable to misinterpret, you know, i it's it's not. They're open and clear. It's it's actually quite stunning. Richard Landes: Yeah. Okay. So I'm gonna skip the second thing you reminded me of because I I I would like you to describe what the academic steps you're taking to confront this are. Andrew Pessin: okay, so that's a thank you for that question. So in particular, to answer it concretely, I have launched recently launched the Institute for the Critical Study of Anti Zionism. the Institute for the Critical Study of antizionism. here's the one thing we we haven't done in the last let's say twenty years. By we, I mean Jews in the academy, Zionists in the academy, I like to think all sane, decent, rational people in the academy, whichever however many of those are actually left. Richard Landes: True true liberals who believe in responsible freedom. Andrew Pessin: True liberal super yeah, thank you. That's puts it nicely. although I like saying decent rational people as well. here's what we haven't done. We've won we've watched this ideology take over. it began to take over, you know, earlier, depend let depending how far back you want to go, nineteen seventy eight Orientalism, Edward Said was certainly in a crucial moment. Probably the nineteen sixties, Herbert Marcusa, like It it began. They in fact they they openly launched the ambition for the long march through the institutions to Richard Landes: Yes. Andrew Pessin: get their people when they realized that the revolutions they were seeking in the 1960s, often by violent means, w were not happening. Right. They took this inspiration from Mao's long march, Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: which turned a moment of defeat into a moment of victory ultimately. So they undertook the the progressive left as it was forming, undertook this long march through the institutions. To get their people into positions of intellectual influence and lots of them became college professors and that's sort of how it began. What was that? That's right, tenured radicals. So Richard Landes: Tenured radical. Tenured tenured radical. By the way, well hold on. Keep that thought because I just want to mention I had a conversation with Benedict Bechelt. You know him? But his specialty, Andrew Pessin: I don't, but you've mentioned his name recently, so Richard Landes: his specialty is oikophobia, which is the loathing of your own culture, in this case Andrew Pessin: Wait. The West. Yes. Richard Landes: of the West. And he located the beginning of American oikophobia in the late sixties and seventies. Yeah. Andrew Pessin: That's where I would put it myself too, yeah. Richard Landes: So I said, look, you know, is it possible that what's happening is you had these people with apocalyptic messianic expectations in the late 60s, bitterly disappointed with you know, as never mind, bitterly disappointed, who then Andrew Pessin: Didn't happen. Richard Landes: right, who then go into academia and part of their attitude towards the very society they come from is shaped by the bitterness of their disappointment and they're blaming their own society for the failure of the messianic dream. Andrew Pessin: Yeah. I think that's fair. I think that's fair. There's another book also. Richard Landes: Okay, let's go back to Andrew Pessin: Yeah, another book. I think it's called Occidentalism. I read sometime Richard Landes: Yes. Andrew Pessin: in the past year. So I got that that same very interesting book. so all right, so we trace it back to the sixties, but certainly by the early two thousands, the the full fledged anti Zionist aspect of it was under underway. So we've been watching this for at least twenty years and Those of us who care about these issues have been a little concerned about you know, growing hostility to the Jewish state and therefore growing hostility to Jews, which follows almost immediately from hostility to the Jewish state on campuses, but partly because, you know, the growth was incremental. It was a little bit of the frog and boiling water effect. Like, you know, like at what point is it a crisis or an emergency? You could always just say, well, it's gotten bad, but it's not gonna go any further in the same way that Jews in 1930s, Germany, like you just can't believe it's gonna go to some horrible place. And so you find a way to live with whatever you're dealing with. So we've watched it develop for 20 years. we didn't merely watch it. In some ways, we openly contributed to it. And by that I mean the the progressive left ideology, which is sort of the umbrella. I call the whole package of ideologies antizionism, but progressive left is just, you know, separately identifiable. They very cleverly commandeered the label anti-racism for what they were doing, which meant that any mode of criticism of it, even otherwise friendly criticism from within the framework, right? Because that any movement is going to have people disagree about details or about strategies or tactics. But once you've commandeered the anti-racism label, then any form of criticism is instantly labeled racist. And of course, going along with campel cancel culture, that made it impossible for most people to say boo to say any anything critical whatsoever. and we collectively, the same people, Jews and even most Zionists, were pretty all in on supporting progressivism, I would like to argue, because collectively anyway, there's certainly exceptions, we are really we're good people. We we want to help the marginalized and the oppressed. And this was the the reigning method by which to help the marginalized and pressed. So lots of Jews went all in on the what became the DEI industry, progressive left. And for good reason. I mean, there it it offered some promise, I I I suppose, right? and we either ignored we you know, like we basically ignored the anti Jewish elements of it. We were willing to tolerate them because we are good people and wanted to help the marginalized and the press. So we contributed. I I cite, for example, you know, the ADL. had a long legacy of doing some good work, but it went all in on the progressive agenda to the point where it's, you know, allying with groups who openly hate Israel. Right. so Richard Landes: Right, and and in particular, I mean, I remember this specifically around two thousand, after the outbreak of the Antifada and then after nine eleven, there was just a a a wave of Muslim antisemitism that hit and they wouldn't touch it. same thing with facing same thing with facing Andrew Pessin: I don't remember that, but that right. So Richard Landes: history, which was there to prevent another Holocaust, and they would not touch the hate speech. Andrew Pessin: Right. Right. Well Richard Landes: Because it was viewed as Islamophobia and therefore leading to a holocaust against one point six Andrew Pessin: Right, or you know Richard Landes: billion Muslims. Andrew Pessin: or black hostility to Jews, you you start criticizing that and you're a racist, right? And so you you if your goal is to make alliances with these marginalized groups, then you're not allowed to call them out, right? That's and that's the dynamic that was enforced by the ideology itself. The ideology basically said, you know, what you and I might consider objective critique of some aspects of these movements is actually a form of you know, supremacy oppression, Islamophobia or or racism as the case may be. So we watched it, we contributed to it. We as as the problem got sort of noticeably worse with the beginnings of apartheid weeks on campuses and then the BDS movement taking off and then students for justice in Palestine, you know, having a few chapters, then dozens of chapters, then several hundred chapters, right? Like we're quantitatively we've watched it grow. We we started to do a number of things. So we l like put a lot of emphasis on Jewish studies. We put emphasis, we started some collectively, Israel studies programs. We went kind of all in on the IRA definition and trying to put anti-Zion Zionism into the antisemitism box to use and use the IRA definition. We a lot of programs supporting Zionism just in general, trying to support Israel and more. And I'll say of each of these things, all of them were well-intentioned. Had some value, were worth doing, and and probably should be continue to be done to some degree, but they all failed. They all failed to stem this growing tide of Jew hatred, which blossomed into full visibility on October 7th on campuses with the mass celebrations and endorsements of this slaughter of Jews. they all failed because they all failed to. look at the root source of the problem, the root source of the hatred. And that is this set of ideologies that turns people into Jew haters. and as long as that ideology is reigning and it is, you know, you can talk about Israel's many contributions to the world, the cherry tomato and the iPhone, but who cares if they're genocidal baby killing ethnic cleansers? Like Hitler made the trains run on time and that that's not a doesn't matter, right? Of given who he is. And even things like Jewish studies Precisely because they became part of the academic trend, became woke early on. And once they're woke early on, today they are probably majority. A study came out recently, I don't know how credible it is, but came out recently that something like 50 or 60% of people who teach in Jewish studies are openly anti-Zionist. So they get taken over by the ideology. And even this important question about antizionism and antisemitism, the effort to put antizionism into the antisemitism box. You and I all know, I wrote an 80-page philosophy paper basically arguing antizionism is antisemitism. It failed to persuade anybody except ourselves, except some small group of people. So just empirically it failed, even no matter how true or correct we know that it is. So th here's what we haven't done. We have allowed the other side, the anti-Zionist, as part of the larger progressive left movement on campuses. To endlessly sling accusations at Israel, which we have dutifully, because it was necessary, refuted. We've defended Israel from all of the allegations. They're all actually not just false, but ludicrous. But you know, we have we have to defend them, et cetera. every Richard Landes: Mass starvation when fat people Andrew Pessin: s every single one of them is ludicrous, not even close to true. Richard Landes: Not even close. Andrew Pessin: Not even close to true, right? But you They work like any good conspiracy theory works, is you can always find a handful of facts that you sort of peg your theory on, but they only work by omitting zillions of other relevant, more important facts, right? So they're all ludicrously true. But we've defended ourselves by pointing out the falsehoods, but we've spent 20 years essentially the Jews and certainly the Zionist Jews on campuses have been sitting in the dock on trial, constantly saying, We're not guilty, we're not guilty, we're not guilty, we're not guilty. And that means that almost everybody who walks by, and then probably the majority of campus people, both faculty and students and staff, are not particularly invested in these issues, mostly don't care, just want to have their college experience or whatever, right? But they walk by saying the Jews keep saying they're not guilty. So they must be guilty, right? Where Richard Landes: Smoke it where there's smoke there's fire. Andrew Pessin: there's smoke, there's mirrors, and r and by endlessly defending ourselves. We actually ended up feeding into this. Here's what we haven't done. I'm taking a long time to get there. Sorry. But what we haven't done is put the other side on trial, put the other side in the dock and aggressively gone after them, criticizing them. And we will not sling lies at them because that's not who we are. And we believe actually in academic norms and academic integrity, unlike the other side, which openly rejects standard academic norms. but we don't need to, because by basically simply arguing the truth. We can expose anti-Zionist ideology as being two things. Ultimately, it's hollow, corrupt bullshit. That emperor has no clothes. When you look at any of the major ideologies, you can see that they've been allowed to fester partly because standard academic norms have been relaxed. That should interest anyone who cares about the academy and actually Western civilization in general. And then second, Of course, antizionism is ultimately dressing up in silence this eliminationist hate move in silence, dressing up in science, this eliminationist hate movement against the Jews. So we need to expose both of those things. And that's what the Institute for the Critical Study of antizionism aims to do. We, you know, individuals along the way, you know, have written a paper criticizing antizionism, of course, but you know, an individual doing it, the paper comes out, people talk about it for five minutes, and then it just evaporates into the ether. What we need instead is per the tagline of ICSA, teams of scholars producing reams of scholarship about antizionism. Most people actually have no understanding of what antizionism is as an ideology, where it came from, what motivates it, what its alliances are. That's what we need to expose, and we need large numbers of scholars doing it in order to begin to change, to dismantle. What now is nearly a totalitarian ideological structure that dominates at least the most important campuses. So that's what that's what we're doing, the Institute for the Critical Study of Anti Zionism. Richard Landes: So now let me ask you, when you go to when you do the genealogy of this, what if I understand correctly, you're calling a a a hate ideology, an ideology of hatred. Where do you where do you start it? I mean yeah. Andrew Pessin: So let's see, when Avram was called to go to the land Richard Landes: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, we still haven't gotten to the question of what the bigger phenomenon is. You're saying 19th century, late 19th, early 20th century, antisemitism is the ideology the dominant ideology of Andrew Pessin: ideology of that day. Richard Landes: Jew hatred, whatever we call it. late 20th century, early early 21st century, hopefully only early 21st century, it's antizionism. Right. So Andrew Pessin: Correct. Okay. Richard Landes: Where do you find the r the origins of this anti Zionism? Andrew Pessin: So as as a modern ideology, 'cause you really can trace I would trace it back seriously to the origins of Christianity, for whom Jewish power, equality, and sovereignty would undermine the whole religion. And that goes back to like the first century. So Richard Landes: Right, right, right. Right. The super the super yes, the supersessionist argument that God destroyed the temple because they killed Jesus. Andrew Pessin: That's right. Which, by the way, although that's the historical origin, it still animates Christian anti-Zionists to this very day, right? So it's a live argument. but in terms of the modern movement, I I almost called it a political movement. I don't think it's the right adjective there. But for the modern movement, I trace it. I'm writing a book right now. we're Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: creating this new field of study, the critical study of antizionism. So I'm writing a book which will be the introduction to the critical study of antizionism, to sort Richard Landes: Right. No, no. Andrew Pessin: of lay out the foundations and the fundamentals and hopefully encourage others. Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: follow up because there's so many so much work that needs to be here. Richard Landes: All right, right. Andrew Pessin: so I start this book with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which everyone identifies as this classic anti-Semitic text, but it is actually also a classic foundational anti-Zionist text. Not for nothing. It's no accident that this book is typically understood to be set at the first Zionist Congress, right? In 1897. Richard Landes: Right, right, right, right, right. Andrew Pessin: and that is enormously important. Why? Because The anti-Semitic aspect of it, I'm assuming anyone watching this is familiar with the basic idea of the protocols, but you know, it's a let spelling out the alleged Jewish plot to basically conquer the world and subjugate or eliminate. Basically, it says the Jews are ready to perpetrate genocide in the protocols, right? Subjugate or eliminate non-Jews and ultimately make Judaism, just like the Islamists want to do today with Islam, Judaism should be the only religion on earth that says that in the protocols, right? That's one of that's part of the Jewish plot. So Richard Landes: And and the protocols are written in the voice of the rabbis. In other words, it claims Andrew Pessin: It's in the voice, it's a le you Richard Landes: to say and the rabbis a we are saying, yeah. Andrew Pessin: No, it's right. It's allegedly the secret minutes of the meetings that the Jew, the Jewish leaders, the elders of Zion had to discuss their plot to control the world. So classic conspiracy theory, antisemitism, sure. But the fact that it's located this is happening, this meeting that whose minutes these allegedly are, is happening at the first Zionist Congress tells you that Zionism, which had just, you know, launched the year before with H Herzl's book, Zionism is part of the Jewish plot to control the world. So you from the antisemitism instantly entails the antizionism. If you fear the Jewish plot to control the world, you will be an anti-Zionist because Zionism is simply part of that plot. So I and and I let me add one more point there. So Richard Landes: Okay. You guys. Andrew Pessin: not only does that book, and I assume your listeners know that it's a fraud, it's it didn't happen. There are no elders, there's no such plot. Like we don't have to say that. not only does that book Launch antizionism as an ideology in the modern period in the 20th century, but it also contains the at least the seeds of every single Libor allegation that is subsequently made against the Jews or the Jewish state in the 20th century, including racism, colonialism, settler colonialism, apartheid, and genocide, right? All of those allegations are made in the protocols, and literally the protocols is mined. by the Nazis, by the Soviets, and the Islamists to do their twentieth century campaign. Richard Landes: Right. Okay. So that's right. That's that's where I'm interested in how you handle this because after World War Two, the Protocols was widely dismissed as as fake. And in the public sphere in the West, you know, when I I remember when I read Norman Cohn's what does he call Warrant for Genocide? Andrew Pessin: Warren for genocide. Yeah. Richard Landes: When I read the warrant for genocide, I didn't even read the protocols because, you know, he described it as this ludicrous text, this you Andrew Pessin: Yes. Richard Landes: know, absolutely absurd piece of work. And so the dominant mode was not to accept this text. How did it re-enter? Andrew Pessin: So dominant mode. you know, i it my own impression from this period onward, the Nazis certainly gave antisemitism a bad name. Okay, we can we amongst Richard Landes: Yes, they did. Andrew Pessin: decent, rational, polite people in the West. Richard Landes: Western public sphere. Andrew Pessin: West and public public sphere, right? It became unacceptable to openly be anti Semitic. And I no doubt, you know, the the protocols, which by the way, were proven quite conclusively to be a forgery. Richard Landes: In court, in court. Andrew Pessin: Even before that, you know, in nineteen twenty-one, when they first were translated into English, an English journalist documented that there were fraud and that they were forgery. And then it was proven in court in 1930s and again some some later period, right? Richard Landes: Forgery and plagiarism. Andrew Pessin: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. No, there's there's nothing legitimate about it whatsoever. it's also horribly written and absurd on so many levels, but nevertheless, That was known by the Nazis, but ideology finds a way to get around that as well. Right. So you know, and the the standard line with the Nazis was ev you know, even Hitler at certain points acknowledged that it was probably Richard Landes: But it was Andrew Pessin: a forgery, but he said it actually didn't matter because it has an inner truth. And just Richard Landes: Yeah. Yes. Andrew Pessin: look at the world and you can see how what's going on in the world confirms what it says. So even if right, so it really barely the fact that it was proven. Barely slows it down amongst those who are already committed to hating the Jews. It won't affect them. It remained absolutely prevalent and widely believed outside the Western Instosphere. So it I don't think there was even a a pause there. but here's what I I would say happened. The protocols, yes, for some period, there was a couple of decades, especially amongst the Western left, where they were supportive of Zionism because they had a Richard Landes: Right. Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: A more accurate narrative of it as a decolonizing national liberation movement of an oppressed people, right? But I do believe this is a little speculative and you know psych psychological or something, right? Like, Jew hatred is this deep, deep thing. I'm not a psychologist, so I don't ask follow-up questions, but you know, it's so built into the cultural DNA after two millennia at least in the West of you know, dominant Jew hatred that it just gets buried a little deeper. And then I not to quote Freud, but you know, Freud's sublimation, it finds a way out, it finds a new expression, right? If the psychological Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: and we were talking about this a little earlier, but the psychological pressure is enormous. You're not allowed to say, I hate the Jews, but some other way comes up that allows Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: you to get that sentiment out, but doesn't sound like I hate the Jews, right? And so, you know, anti Richard Landes: Okay. Andrew Pessin: Zionism becomes that way quite clearly. From the forties onwards in Richard Landes: right. I I wanna Andrew Pessin: the West. Richard Landes: when does it return? When would you date the return of the protocols? And i y you agree to the to the progressive Andrew Pessin: so I would say the protocols never never left. Richard Landes: I understand, but you also describe progressive circles as being part of that post-war consensus that the protocols Andrew Pessin: Right, right. Richard Landes: were bad, anti the protocols were fake, antisemitism was bad. Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: At what point did the left re we're what point did Andrew Pessin: The left. Richard Landes: it re-emerge on the left? Andrew Pessin: certainly by the late 1960s, and here's why, because the Soviet Union, as it launched into its quite formal international anti-Zionist campaign, Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: many of the key texts that they were producing, and again, like Hitler's professors, I call these Brezhnev's professors, basically, right? Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: They literally created scholarly institutes to train and produce scholarship whose logical conclusion was we need to annihilate the Jews, right? It's exactly analogous to Hitler's professors, Brezhnev's professors. and many, many of those texts are literally the protocols either directly intentionally copied and transformed into new progressive language, or Richard Landes: More torture. Andrew Pessin: if it wasn't done that way, it was literally the ideas of the protocols were just simply reshaped and re-reformed. I'm I'm willing to grant, for example, Richard Landes: More more plagiarism, right. Andrew Pessin: yeah. Well, in some cases it was direct pleasure. Like there's a famous case in the 1970s in Paris. There was a a trial. The Soviet embassy in Paris had published this anti-Zionist screed. and it it happened to France had just passed some sort of anti-hate law. And so Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: so or some organized Jewish groups basically sued the embassy for for you know incentivizing hate through this thing. And in the course of the trial, it was revealed that this Soviet embassy document was literally. From a 1906 Black Hundreds document. The Black Hundreds were the guys doing the pogrums in Russia at this time, right? Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: Like viciously anti-Semitic. They're literally this was a pamphlet they had written saying Jews should not be emancipated, they should not have equal rights. We need to keep them subjugated. The Soviet Union took this and literally swapped in the word Zionist for Jew. And that's what's right. So Richard Landes: Yeah. All right. Andrew Pessin: that's a deliberate intentional case. But let me, I wanna add one more point, because you know, today's campus progressivists. As as good progressives, they'll say, We're against antisemitism, even though they support Hamas eliminating the Jews. We're against antisemitism. If they have even heard of the protocols, they won't have read it. And they'll certainly will say, Well, we're against that, because that's an anti-Semitic text. And yet they manage to reproduce protocols, tropes, and libels nearly perfectly, right? So Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: what happens is, you know, once ideas are in the infosphere, they carry on even once the book has been dismissed. Richard Landes: Yeah. I'm gonna push Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: I'm gonna push a little harder on this because I Andrew Pessin: Yeah, okay. Richard Landes: I see another factor that you haven't really mentioned, and that is the way in which the protocols re enter via the supremacist Muslim narrative, the jihadi narrative. And I would Andrew Pessin: so he okay. Well you had asked how does it enter the the West? and so the f the first entry point is through the Soviet antizionism campaign. But of course, what the Soviets did is what the Nazis had done earlier, the Soviets flooded the Arab world with translations of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion starting in the nineteen seventies at least. And so what my understanding of what happened there, and not exactly like a scholar of this stuff, but you know, Islam has its own long Eliminationist anti-Jewish tradition, going back to Muhammad, basically, right? 14 centuries of this eternal battle with the Jews. Added to that, if you want to call this adding fuel to the fire, right? Then the protocols, Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: this European version of this eliminationist anti-Judaism is now flooded into this world. And that fusion is apocalyptic. Richard Landes: Right, and into the and into this world which has g undergone two self described knockbas, the fall of the Calavate in nineteen twenty four and the creation of Israel in nineteen forty eight. So Andrew Pessin: That's right. Richard Landes: they are literally overwhelmed by how history has turned against them. And the protocols yeah. All right, but the but then what right. But Andrew Pessin: That's right. And the protocols explains it. You know, fake explains it. Not really explains it. Fake explains. Richard Landes: what I'm interested in is because the protocols you know certainly up until well no I I w up until two thousand I was actually I co edited a volume on the protocols in nineteen ninety right. Right. Andrew Pessin: Yes. brilliant. I have it right here. Paranoid Apocalypse. Richard Landes: And it was based on a conference we had in nineteen ninety five or nineteen ninety six. So you know I was worried about it. I'm not gonna go into my history with it, but But it seems to me that by and large, anything directly from the protocols wasn't going to make it. And Soviet worked with Trotsky's people who sort of came out of the woodwork after 2000 with, you know, international answer and so on. But it seems to me that that the way the protocols re-entered the progressive left was via the jihadis. That is that that Andrew Pessin: I don't think that's that's yeah, finished your thought yeah, sorry. Richard Landes: Yeah, that is that that this really apocalyptic hatred of Israel and the Jews, which David Cook chronicles in his book Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic, it that is what has re entered via the Palestinian cause into the Western public sphere. So th the the the supremacists, the Hamasniks, Who are producing these blood libels against Israel, genocide, mass starvation, and so on are actually their sort of medieval blood libel producers who are then getting postmodernized by a media that is transmitting their accusations to the West as news. Andrew Pessin: So I I I don't think these are mutually exclusive. So I I think without question, I think Isabella Tabarovsky has shown very conclusively the straight line from the Soviet antizionism campaign into the Western progressive left, which at the same time is beginning to ally itself with the Islamist causes who are now also on fire from the protocols. And as the decades go on, sure like the the you know, it goes both it's going both directions at this point. The progressive Richard Landes: Okay. Andrew Pessin: left isn't is fueling the Islamists. And the Islamists are fueling the progressive left. So you know, both are important sources as in the year, what year are we at? 2026 now, right? Without question, many progressives, and this is going in line with a lot of your stuff, right? Like, like the Palestinians can say who is the woman? I c I I can't always forget her name, but she's quoted in your book, who basically a UN official who says, it would be Richard Landes: All right. Andrew Pessin: cruel not to give them credence, the what the Palestinians say, right? meaning Palestinians can say anything and the Western progressives, for a whole bunch of reasons, have to accept as truth whatever the Palestinians or whatever the Muslim Arab narrative happens to be. So that's a point where absolutely it's coming from the Islamists into the Western progressives. But but the channels are absolutely both ways. And there really is an independent channel from the Soviet Union into the progressive left, as Taporovsky, I think, has documented. Richard Landes: All right. Well, I would be very interested in a panel in which you and me and Isabella discussed the the the moment at which a progressive left that was miles away from the jihadis somehow found through the protocols Andrew Pessin: Well, but here here's the thing. Here's where you're you're certainly right. The protocols once officially discounted, you can no longer like most of them will no longer cite it, right? You can't you can't cite it anymore. But what happens with the Soviet the Khamat Richard Landes: Right, right. And as it's but they will cite it. That you know, Hamas cites it in their charges. Andrew Pessin: cites it? No, exactly. Stunning, right? And for some reason that doesn't stop the progressives immediately and saying, you know what, we can't side with this movement. That's that's another fascinating moment. But what the Soviet antizionism campaign does so effectively is it It removes the libels from the protocol's context. And now, you know, imperialism, apartheid, racism and and genocide, they don't need the protocols anymore because, you know, they g they they come from the protocols. And Richard Landes: It's Andrew Pessin: I would argue that the protocol's ideology shapes the perception of the Soviets, let's say. So this is what they see. They don't even have to be lying. This is what they see because they're so shaped by this ideology. And then once they're they're severed from the protocols, now they have a life of their own. Richard Landes: you have found this this institute. You are coming out with a journal. Andrew Pessin: Yes. We are launching the journal for the critical study of antizionism. It will be a proper scholarly journal with the typical double-blind peer review processes, et cetera. we hope to get the first issue out in the next couple of months. we've already had loads of submissions. There's plenty of work ahead. We're creating this new field of study. So we need a book that I'm writing, introduction to this, to sort of lay out the basic ideas. We need this fundamental organ. if the goal is to produce, have teams of scholars producing reams of scholarship, they need venues in which to publish this material. So this journal will be the you know the centerpiece of this new field of study. And we're we're very excited. In my view, there is so much work ahead to dismantle this enormous edifice, which is the anti-Zionist complex. It's got so many players and so many streams and so many different ideologies. We need teams of scholars to begin going after each component of it from its foundations to its periphery. And w you know, the battle has been joined. We've begun. Richard Landes: Gotcha. Well more more power to you. let me ask you one final question. you're saying anti Zionism is sui generis. It's its own mutation of Jew hatred. Right. Andrew Pessin: That's a little too strong, but okay, I get it. Yeah. Richard Landes: But it it's a it's a new muta it's a new avatar, okay, of anti Semitism. But anti Semitism is also a new avatar of Christian, you know. Theocracy-based, theodicy-based antisemitism. The Jews kill Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: Jesus, then the Jews are scientifically inferior, then the Jews are genocidal imperialists. What do you call the big phenomenon that goes back to yeah, Abraham, we can take it back to Abraham. Andrew Pessin: that's a great question. in some respects, I think it's not so important a question only because a lot of people are getting distracted by long arguments over this that aren't, I think, what of central concern. but you know, the there's a popular idea right now. It's inspired partly by Rabbi Sachs's, you know, idea of opposition to this is what you're opposition to the Jews as a mutating virus taking different forms. And so on, you know, the the Currently popular idea is that there's three major phases or eras of this opposition to the Jews, who's a word for which we're going to look for in just a second. Anti-Judaism, which is opposition to Jews on the basis of religious concerns. Anti-Semitism, classical 19th, 20th century Nazi antisemitism, which is opposition to Jews as a race or as a people. And then antizionism is opposition to Jews with respect to their national project. Or their nation state or something along those lines. if these are three manifestations of some single thing, we need a w a word or conception of what that single thing is, of which these are three distinguishable manifestations. What makes them Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: distinguishable is each one has its own sort of primary libels or tropes and comes out of its own particular different. both historical era and political era. You know, the anti-Judaism has all sorts of Christian considerations that antisemitism doesn't. So there's ways of distinguishing these manifestations, but if they're all manifestations of one single thing, what is that thing? What confuses this question for many is that many people, ordinary use of the word antisemitism, antisemitism is the blanket term for opposition Richard Landes: Right, right. Andrew Pessin: to Jews, hatred of Jews, fear of Jews. I know that you're big on that one, etc. So if antisemitism is the blanket term, then we would see all three manifestations as manifestations of antisemitism. However, if we want to reserve the word antisemitism for this particular manifestation of it that's prominent in the 19th and 20th centuries, associated Richard Landes: Right. Absolutely. Andrew Pessin: with the right wing and with the Nazis, et cetera, then we we shouldn't say what you just said as you launched into this, which is that anti Zionism is the latest manifestation of anti Semitism. Don't worry. Richard Landes: You're right, and I I accept the conviction. Andrew Pessin: Most people use antisemitism, I do very broadly. So so the question is, what are the if if we're making that distinction of manifestations, what are they manifestations of? And it's a hard, hard question. I I I actually think Elder of Zion has a good answer to this, but without question, so what I've settled on as the most neutral term is simply anti-Jewishness, anti-Jewishness. And there's many different ways or reasons to be anti-Jewish. religious, racial, you know, nationalistic or whatever it is, international human rights, et cetera. Anti-Jewishness. But what is anti-Jewishness? Then we get into your question. Without question, anti-Jewishness manifests itself in at least two ways. One, and this is another word, Jew hate is the sort of simple course way for just describing they hate the Jews, right? Richard Landes: Right. Two hatred. Andrew Pessin: But you have pointed out, and this is very important, that anti-Jewishness is more than just hate. It's also fear. It's fear of the Jews. And maybe you hate the Jews because you fear the Jews ultimately. So it might be that Judaiophobia is really the best word for this underlying thing, fear of the Jews. so I'm I'm open to more discussion on that issue. I think it's an interesting analytical question. I I'd rather spend most of my time going after the anti-Zionists directly Richard Landes: I gotcha. Andrew Pessin: than figuring out what the right word is for what we're doing. But Richard Landes: We got we got your back on this. Andrew Pessin: All right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean Judaiophobia is great. It has the downside that most people don't it it's Richard Landes: associated with Islamophobia and homophobia. But the term was coined a long time ago and in fact there's a major academic scholarly volume on Judeophobia in the ancient world. So in any case in any Andrew Pessin: Yeah, it's there. Yeah, yeah. We Richard Landes: case we're gonna have a discussion of some of these issues tomorrow with David Deutsch, who is gonna Andrew Pessin: Fantastic. Richard Landes: appear in your journal. what he calls the pattern of this phenomenon which we're still looking for a a a permanent name for or at least a lasting name for. Andrew Pessin: That's right. Richard Landes: so listen, thank you very much. It's pleasure always Andrew Pessin: Thank you. Richard Landes: talking with you. Andrew Pessin: Always, always. And I just so, you know, I admire what you're doing, your current project is I think very, very important. We need to call awareness to things that most people are unaware of. Let them reach their Richard Landes: And to Andrew Pessin: own conclusions, but let them at least be aware of it. Richard Landes: Right, and don't want to be aware of Andrew Pessin: Yeah. Alrighty. Richard Landes: All right, good. Thank you very much. Andrew Pessin: Thank you, Professor Landis. Always a pleasure. Bye. Richard Landes: See you later.