General Discussion

And saying that does not "admit" to anti-semitism. That accusation was uncalled for and does not stand up to scrutiny.

It is up because:

1) even legitimate and well-earned criticism and outcry over Israel's inhumane actions are defined as "anti-semitic". Speaking up for Palestinian rights and equality is often considered anti-semitic. With the Gaza "war" there is plenty new to criticize, and plenty more injustices against Palestinians - so plenty more false accusations of "anti-semitism".

2) Real anti-semitism from the intolerant far-right has been given more fuel by Israel's actions. And this is possible because Jewish identity itself has been conflated with Israel. An inevitable outcome of the creation of an ethno-religious state. The Nick Fuentes of the world are having a field day. This is another unintended but dangerous consequence of such conflation.

The IHRA definition is both dangerous for Jews and unfair and harmful to Palestinian rights. It is being used as we speak to hunt down student leaders and protesters, crack down on freedom of speech (but only for Palestinians) and stifle academic and public discourse when that is urgently needed to arrive at some modicum of a fair outcome for Palestinians. If you care at all about their rights, that is. If someone does not, then they will buy into the IRHA definition for its use in suppressing political speech and silencing Palestinian voices and their points of view.