by Priscilla Alderson.
1. Antisemitism is a very serious, tragic problem and it is good that Quakers address it in a new 24-page Guidelines. The Guide has many valuable ideas for avoiding discrimination and for fulfilling Advices & Queries 17. However, the Guide raises problems.
2. The Guidelines define Zionism in positive terms: ‘the national liberation movement of the Jewish people’, ‘a religious/spiritual concept about reviving a profound Biblical ideal of a homeland grounded in justice and peace’. The Guide agrees ‘violence in Israel and Palestine is a big driver of modern-day antisemitism’. Yet this sentence implies violence and suffering are equal on both sides.
The Guidelines ignore the peace-making views of thousands of Jews and their organisations such as Jewish Voice for Liberation, who ‘stand for rights and justice for Jewish people everywhere, and against wrongs and injustice to Palestinians and oppressed peoples anywhere.’ They campaign against antisemitism (hatred of Jews) but support anti-Zionism (when Zionism involves genocide in Gaza and occupation of the West Bank). Many Jews join the Palestine Support demonstrations, horrified about the genocide. Some Jews see Zionism as antisemitic, when it risks bringing all Jews in the world into disrepute however unfairly. Some object to Israel on theological grounds. Some are Zionist but don’t think the Jewish state should be in Palestine. The Guidelines add to this danger when they confuse instead of clarifying differences between anti-Zionism and antisemitism. The Guidelines imply that Friends side with political Zionism, and they ignore Quakers and Jews and all other people who oppose it.
3. ‘People with stronger connections to Israel (such as by living there, or in Israeli occupied Palestine, or having greater personal links with Israel) have greater leeway to speak about the country than those of us elsewhere in the world.’ Here, the Guide seems to ask us to respect the views of leaders of the war in Gaza and violent occupiers in the West Bank.
4. Why are the Guide’s authors and quoted reviewers anonymous? The authors will know of pro-Israel lobbying and donations that shape UK and US policy, and therefore the need for transparency in all related discussions. An anonymous version can imply this Guide is general Quaker policy, but it has not yet been approved by any committee. Israeli ‘lobbying’ keeps appearing in the Report in quotation marks as if it might not exist. The Jewish professor Ilan Pappé reports Israeli lobbying and pressures on the US and UK governments that have achieved unparalleled military aid, recognition of unlawfully occupied territories, erasure of Palestinian rights, and beliefs that Palestine supporters are ‘antisemitic’ and ‘Jew haters’. There are global effects. These false beliefs overturned the Labour shadow cabinet in 2019. Jewish members of the Labour Party were six times more likely to be accused of antisemitism than non-Jewish members, and 13 times more likely to be expelled for ‘being antisemitic’. The false beliefs are still repeated or implied in the Friend when Jeremy Corbyn is mentioned, although the beliefs differ from repeated views of Quakers in Britain.
5. The Guidelines mention ‘The ancestral home of the Jews’, but not the Palestinians’ historic right to the land, or that the UN has deemed the Zionist occupation of Palestine illegal, apartheid, and genocide. Although the Guide is ‘for Quakers based in Britain rather than people talking about Israel and Palestine’, ‘Israel’ is mentioned 58 times. Many readers’ attention to Palestine is inevitable, given the overwhelming complex entanglements between Israel and Palestine.
6. The references and the reading list are one-sided, with many Jewish sources but no Palestinian voice, and no critical sources, such as Jewish Voice for Liberation. Recently, 64% of adult British Jews surveyed identified themselves as ‘Zionist’. Yet among the 20-30 age group, only 47% did so; 20% of that age group described themselves as ‘non-Zionist’ and 24% as ‘anti-Zionist’. Their views are not heard.
7. One sentence states that ‘the Jerusalem Declaration is used mainly by politically left-wing groups and that many Jews will immediately suspect a document which promotes it.’ It is not clear why left-wing views are ‘suspect’. The Guide takes a right-wing approach when it emphasises behaviours but ignores powerful political contexts, which partly explain and motivate those behaviours. To understand causes is the crucial first step towards real change, peace and justice – just as doctors investigate causes and diagnoses of illness before they can prescribe treatment.
In 2012, 48% of British Jews said antisemitism in Britain was a problem, but now 82% of them report problems. The Guidelines link this increase to the attack by Hamas on 7 October 2023 and ‘the Israeli response attacking Gaza’. They do not mention the many decades of Zionist oppression and atrocities and Palestinian resistance that begin to explain the 7 October attack. Instead, they go straight on to challenge ‘myths about Jews’. Analysis that offers hope of peace, justice and ending the tragedy of antisemitism, through understanding crucial differences between antisemitism and anti-Zionism and unravelling complex Zionist denials of genocide, is missing.
8. The Guidelines state: ‘In the context of the current (2025) world situation, some reviewers of this paper queried why there have been many public demonstrations and statements about the mass killing of civilians in Gaza, but not about mass killings in e.g. Sudan or Myanmar.’ And ‘If people are repeatedly or prominently criticising Israel but not criticising the same actions by other countries, then it can feel like Israel is being singled out or held to a higher standard than other countries.’
If only we had time and resources to campaign about all atrocities. Yet Israel is a priority because: the intended total destruction of Gaza is exceptional; Britain led the creation of the state of Israel and continues to give political and military support to Israel’s wars in Gaza and nearby Arab countries; Britain’s aid and education work in Palestine involves many close interpersonal international ties; we hope to alter specific UK government policies, funding and activities; Israel claims to be part of Europe (Eurovision song contest, for example) so needs not a ‘higher standard’ but a basic democratic non-apartheid standard.
9. The Guidelines say they ‘do not endorse’ the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism, which regards any criticism of Israel as likely to be antisemitic. Yet the Guidelines seem to adopt that view. To veto all criticism of a government denies democracy. The Guidelines ignore Jewish people’s and others’ criticisms of the IHRA. The IHRA is creating great problems.
10. Conflicting meanings of peace are confusingly combined: personal peace – being polite to others; political peace – working for justice to ‘take away the occasion of all war’. Impartial balance can be mistaken for (superficial) peace but, in cases of extreme inequality and injustice, attempts at ‘neutral’ justice inevitably side with and are exploited by the powerful. Desmond Tutu said, ‘If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor’. Might Britain Yearly Meeting’s valuable work with ecumenical accompaniment, which depends on Israel’s permission, prevent or at least discourage open support for Palestine? The early Quakers supported peace and justice by speaking truth to power in ways that offended and enraged people. ‘Radical peace-making requires us to engage with and to acknowledge truth in all its discomfort, complexity and cruelty.’
11. The Guidelines say, ‘As in other “difficult conversations”, it is important to listen respectfully and look for “kinder ground” rather than demand an absolutist or (to you) internally logical position.’ This seems to allow illogical relativism, and even collude with denying truths that millions of Palestinians, both Arabs and Christians, have been murdered or exiled into refugee camps.
12. Repeated mention in the Report of ‘the unconscious influences on our thought’ only refer to thoughts that are antisemitic or critical of Israel, although the unconscious influences all positions.
13. Quakers are the only church, so far, to name ‘genocide’ formally. Yet what action has followed? ‘As long as Israel knows it is above the law, then nothing will change,’ said the Palestinian Christian pastor, Isaac Munther. The Guidelines name ‘genocide’ six times in relation to the Holocaust, but never to Gaza.
14. The long BYM Minute 30, named the war in Gaza as genocide. The Guidelines quote only one sentence, from Minute 30, a sentence that supports Jews. Like the Guidelines, Minute 30 (BYM, 2025) is confused. The Minute refers to ‘heinous, unjustified crimes of Hamas on 7 October 2023’, ignoring many decades of violent oppression of Palestinians. The Minute states: ‘And so, we cannot say clearly enough: it is this current Israeli government that we are led to say we believe is committing genocide. Jewish people are not committing genocide. The Israeli people are not committing genocide.’ However, ‘Genocide is never done by a small group of people. It is always done with the cooperation, and often the support, of an entire society.’ For example, Israel’s Fundamental Guiding Principles state: ‘The Jewish people have an exclusive and indisputable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The Government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel.’ In one survey, 70% of Israelis said that, if Gazans leave, Israel should not allow their return at all.
15. A big omission from the report is mention of far-right Christian Zionists that complicate antisemitism, the dangers they pose, and the Churches’ responsibility to address these dangers.
16. Islamophobia is more prevalent in Britain than antisemitism. The Guide mentions the recent ‘spike’ in Islamophobic incidents. When will that be addressed too, other than in short personal accounts?
17. How can Zionists claim a ‘homeland’ (in the Guide’s words) that they are destroying, and where they commit ecocide? Gaza has largely been reduced to rubble mixed with thousands of corpses. Occupiers in the West Bank burn and raze forests and farmland with British bulldozers. They attack and kill Palestinian farmers, prevent them from watering their crops and herds, and steal the herds. They poison and fill in wells. The army has destroyed nearly 1 million of Gaza’s 1.1 million olive trees.
18. Can we have a revised Guide, informed by a wider range of Jewish voices, and also by Palestinian Arabs and Christians, and enlightened by the concerns that Quakers have shared for decades with our allies, including Jewish allies, in Oxfam, CND, Liberty, Amnesty, UNHRA, WHO and many related NGOs?
Useful books include:
Lerman, A. 2022. Whatever Happened to Antisemitism? Redefinition and the Myth of the ‘Collective Jew’, Pluto Press.
Marfleet, P. 2025. Palestine, Imperialism and the Struggle for Freedom. Bookmarks.
Munther, I. 2024. Christ in the Rubble: Faith, the Bible, and the Genocide in Gaza.Eerdmans.
Oborne, P. 2022. The Fate of Abraham: Why the West is Wrong about Islam. Simon & Schuster.
Pappé, I. 2017. The Biggest Prison on Earth: The History of the Israeli Occupation. Oneworld.
Pappé, I. 2024. A Very Short History of the Israel–Palestine Conflict. Oneworld.
Pappé, I. 2024. Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic. Oneworld.
Shabi, R. 2025. Off White: The Truth about Antisemitism. Oneworld.
Shaw, M. 2025. The New Age of Genocide: Intellectual and Political Challenges after Gaza. Agenda.
Shehadeh, R. 2024. What Does Israel Fear from Palestine? Profile.
Shlaim, A. 2025. Genocide in Gaza: Israel, Hamas, and the Long War on Palestine. Irish Pages Press.
Priscilla Alderson 4/2/2026
Quaker Socialist Society 
my thoughts exactly. I was dismayed and angry when I read the report. I had hoped for a useful dissection of antisemitism and anti-zionism but found nothing of the sort. I don’t know why a bunch of anonymous Friends have taken it upon themselves to produce this seemingly on behalf of all Quakers
LikeLike
I was so disturbed by this post that I chose to resign from the QSS after reading it.
I don’t have the energy to respond in detail to all of the points. I will just say that while many of the facts you share are true, and worth knowing and sharing, they clearly have no place whatsoever in a pamphlet on countering antisemitism in a church, any more than true facts about, say, the Taliban or ISIS would have a place in a guide to countering Islamophobia. I was shocked in particular by this line:
They do not mention the many decades of Zionist oppression and atrocities and Palestinian resistance that begin to explain the 7 October attack. Instead, they go straight on to challenge ‘myths about Jews’.
I do not think most people will find it inappropriate for guidelines on countering antisemitism to focus more on challenging myths about Jews (i.e. on countering antisemitism) than on giving a history of the Israel-Palestine conflict or on potential justifications for violence against Jewish people. Likewise, I cannot think of any good reason for facts about the number of trees uprooted by settlers in the West Bank to be included in guidelines on antisemitism. The statistics about support for JVL are not relevant either – antisemitism would be wrong whether all Jews were antizionists or none were.
I heard from a member of the Palestine solidarity movement, verbatim, “if you’re not antisemitic by this point, you should be”. The prejudice is real, and the people who are hurt by it ought to be allowed to speak out against it without first having to prove to us that they have all the ‘correct’ opinions about the Israel-Palestine conflict. We don’t make this same demand (“agree with me about history and geopolitics, and help me promote my understanding of them, before I’ll care that you’re a victim of racism”) for any other form of racial prejudice. It’s usually fairly well understood that we oughtn’t to be racist to people even when they have opinions we find odious or they do terrible things that make us angry.
Elsewhere on this site I find claims that Israelis are ‘harvesting the seed of child life’, that Israelis do not have ‘that of God’ in them, that Quaker testimonies call us to support the SWP (who “rejoice[d] as Palestinian resistance humiliates racist Israel” on October 9th), that October 7th was “as justified as the attempt to break out of the Warsaw ghetto”, and so on.
Where in all this is the QSS that “supports nonviolent approaches to change” and “grounds socialist engagement in Quaker commitments to peace, integrity, and nonviolence”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Michael, it has been the case for some time that all articles on the QSS website are headed by the name of the author. Every single one. This is to show that the articles do not represent the views of QSS. Instead of resigning from QSS all you have to do is write an article elaborating on your heartfelt views and it will be posted. That would take the debate forward. As you know, antisemitism is one of the most difficult topics to handle in all of contemporary politics. The only practical way of dealing with it on a website is to let every Quaker and/or socialist have their say. Please, please, have your say. Your article could be posted tomorrow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Graham – an invitation from ‘the QSS committee’ to read and discuss this article was the only contact I have had about anything from anyone in QSS in the last 18 months. That is somewhat informative about where the QSS’s priorities lie. I have posted a short response above, but really I joined to get involved in quaker socialism, not to debate the relative merits of different definitions of antisemitism.
I have seen a lot of borderline-antisemitic rhetoric in both quaker and socialist circles. Occasionally I try to refute it. But often I feel that getting involved only serves to turn up the temperature and to reinforce the (erroneous, I think) idea that Christians and socialists ought to spend their time debating rival viewpoints about Israel.
There are some basic principles I had hoped all quakers would agree on:
It pains me to hear that my fellow quaker socialists believe that even a guide on countering antisemitism ought to contain an ‘explanation’ for October 7th and a long list of ‘Zionist’ crimes, to see quakers publishing a volume of poetry with lines about how Israelis harvest children’s body parts like crops, and to read jokes about gas chambers in The Friend. I know that when people are angry they tend to forget their prior commitments to peacemaking, because I do that too. But I don’t know how to ‘advance the debate’ beyond reasserting my belief in those basic principles. I have never been a convincing or effective rhetorician. Sometimes it is better to shake the dust off of one’s feet and move on to the next town.
LikeLike
I am not a Quaker and it may be felt that I should not be making a comment on this website. One thing that strikes me in debates about antisemitism is that much time and effort is devoted to attending to what people say and not reflecting upon what people do. Words can be hurtful, including being called an antisemite. But I decline to make some kind of moral equivalence between words that lead to hurt feelings and deeds which lead to hurt heads
LikeLike
I have only recently joined QSS in order to find fellowship with other socialists within the Society of Friends. This was an excellent article with a really good reading list. However, although I can see that Michael Bartletts views are very deeply held, after reading through his comments a couple of times I am having some difficulty in understanding were he is coming from. I am wondering if he is conflating the terms Zionism and Judaism without realising it? Unfortunately, in my opinion and that of others Zionism has become a racist settler colonial ideology. Also the criticism of the lauded IHMA definition of Antisemitism is that out of the eleven or so examples it gives seven relate to Israel. Accusations of Antisemitism are currently being levelled at almost everybody who criticises Israel and its actions therefore-unfortunately- making any statement on what is or is not Antisemitism very political. Additionally in writing this statement I am afraid that the Society of Friends were not being impartial and that I think was the whole point of the article. If they had written a similar statement on Islamaphobia I would feel differently but I am wondering if they had been ‘lobbied’ beforehand and that is why they wrote it now?
People are rightfully very angry when they see the daily images coming out of Gaza. I have not read some of the articles/letters which Michael refers to but nothing that I have read on this site or in ‘The Friend’ would I describe as Antisemitic. We also have to distinguish between genuine Antisemitism-hatred/oppression of Jewish people for being Jews and statements about the current situation (e.g. Anti-Zionist statements) that may make some Jews feel uncomfortable (although we must remember that an increasing number of Jews are now Anti-Zionists.
Thank you
Jeremy Lax-Attender, Friargate Meeting, York
LikeLike
Dear Michael,
As you are a Reader in Law at SOAS (after good work as the Quaker Parliamentary Officer) and I’m a Professor next door at UCL, I’m writing to you as a colleague about your comments on my Response to the Guidelines on Antisemitism.
* You seem to compare all the Palestinian people to the terrorist groups, the Taliban and ISIS. Israel uses a similar approach when saying they only aim to kill members of Hamas, although 70% of the deaths are of women and children.
* You do not want ‘a history of the Israel-Palestine conflict’.
My Response does not ask for a history, but it asks at least for inquiry into causes behind the 7th October 2023 attack as a necessary step towards informed peace-making.
* You say, ‘I cannot think of any good reason for facts about the number of trees uprooted by settlers in the West Bank to be included in guidelines on antisemitism’.
These are almost 1million of 1.1million olive trees. Again your comment avoids analysis of possible causes for the great increase in the evil of antisemitism.
* ‘I heard from a member of the Palestine solidarity movement, verbatim, “if you’re not antisemitic by this point, you should be”.’
As a long-term member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, I am very surprised and saddened by this example. Perhaps our local group is more enlightened because, like many local PSC groups, we have Jewish members, and our PSC group leader is a Jew. Quakers often make foolish remarks, but that would not be a reason to dismiss the whole Society of Friends. Antisemitism should never be excused, but as an academic and a legal scholar surely you agree that problems, including any kind of racism, can only begin to be resolved when causes and origins are analysed.
* ‘Elsewhere on this site I find claims that Israelis are ‘harvesting the seed of child life’, that Israelis do not have ‘that of God’ in them, that Quaker testimonies call us to support the SWP (who “rejoice[d] as Palestinian resistance humiliates racist Israel” on October 9th), that October 7th was “as justified as the attempt to break out of the Warsaw ghetto”, and so on.’
None of these examples is in my Response to the Guidelines. Mention of the ‘Warsaw ghetto’ and ‘The harvest in Gaza again – the seed crop of child-life – all is safely gathered in plastic bags in bloody bits of children’s bodies’ are both quotes from a book by a highly respected Friend in a book review that was also printed in The Friend. I cannot find mention on the QSS site of ‘Israelis’ who do not have that of God in them’ or of ‘racist Israel’.
* You say you had no contact ‘from anyone in QSS in the last 18 months’. Among the fairly recent emails to all members was an invitation to join a meeting on ‘What does Quaker Socialism mean to me?’ You would have been very welcome.
I agree very much with all your four bullet points though I wonder why you include lurid comments that never appear on the QSS site.
Best wishes,
Priscilla
LikeLike
Hi Priscilla
Michael Bartlet (one T at the end) is someone else! We have (slightly) different surnames but I can def see why that’s confusing.
Sorry that I have misrepresented your views a bit. You can see I bring some baggage from previous experience. It is actually the extremist Likud/allied groups I mean to compare to the Taliban by the way!
Kindest regards
Michael
LikeLike