On a pailful conversation – Isaac Chotiner interviewing Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt in The New Yorker:

‘I recently spoke by phone with Lipstadt. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed whether the Trump Administration really cares about antisemitism, why she wanted to keep some of her comments off the record, and the problem with “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”’

(…)

‘ Are you pleased that the Trump Administration is talking so much about antisemitism? I’m pleased that they’re addressing it, because that’s what I did for the past three years, which was to really push the Biden Administration to seriously address it. So I am very, very pleased that it’s on their agenda.
And what do you see that agenda as being? Well, I guess I’ve gone through a transition. Let me step back for a minute and say that from my first day in office, one of the things that I called for was for institutions—such as governments, universities, and the media—to take antisemitism seriously. I talk about antisemitism as a multi-tiered threat. One is the threat to Jews and Jewish institutions. But it’s also a threat to democracy. And I know that’s a very easy thing to throw around. People will say food insecurity is a threat to democracy. Which is true. But there’s a very direct link in terms of antisemitism. And that direct link is the fact that antisemitism is a conspiracy theory, in contrast to any other form of discrimination. Its distinctive characteristic is as a conspiracy theory.
What do you think the Trump Administration is doing to fight antisemitism and, in that sense, uphold democracy? It’s calling universities to account. And, if you look at the first demands it made of Columbia, what’s striking about those things, like an end to encampments and masks—those were things that Columbia students have been asking for for a very long time. So I was pleased by that because they were asking the university to live up to its own standards. I’ve been told by people who are close to university presidents and administrators that many of them felt those were legitimate demands that should have been seen to earlier. So I didn’t have any gripe with those.
You are a smart person. Do you seriously believe that the Trump Administration cares about antisemitism? I’m a little confused here.
Yeah, I don’t . . . I don’t know. They haven’t spoken to me, they haven’t consulted with me. So all I can judge is by—’

(…)

‘There were some really terrible instances of antisemitism after the war in Gaza began, but now we are actually in a political environment where an American President is using antisemitism as an excuse to literally pick people up off the street for writing op-eds.
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. And I’m a stalwart supporter of freedom of speech. In other countries where they’ve outlawed Holocaust denial, I’ve spoken out against that. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. Incitement is something else. I’m not a lawyer, and I’m not going to get into what that is.’

(…)

‘Are we making a mistake in thinking that the Administration even cares about antisemitism at all? Is it simply using antisemitism as an excuse to crack down on educational institutions? Yeah, it’s a good question.
It is, I think.
I served in an Administration in which the people who worked for it did not march in lockstep. There were different views. I think there are people there who seriously care. I spoke with my successor, the person who’s been named as my successor. You know, he called, and we had a nice conversation. It wasn’t substantive, but he really cares.
Who has been named as your successor? What’s his name? Kaploun? Yehuda Kaploun, I think it is. And he seems to really care about this deeply and genuinely. I know other people in the Administration who care about this deeply and genuinely. I worked in an Administration with people who cared about this deeply and genuinely, and there were some who didn’t. You know, an administration is made up of thousands of people, so I can’t say that it speaks with one voice.’

(…)

‘Is there a reason you don’t want to say that on the record? Yeah, I don’t, because I’m still, you know . . . I don’t want to give people the chance. You know, there’s some people I know, including good friends of mine, who suffer from what the Republicans would call, what is it, “Trump Derangement Syndrome”? You know, anything he does is bad. Look, he moved the Embassy to Jerusalem. So I give him credit for that. I do give him credit for that. I’m not gonna say just because it’s the Trump Administration it’s bad.
I wasn’t asking you to say just because it was the Trump Administration that it was bad. I was just pointing out that they’re sending people without any sort of due process to a horrible prison in El Salvador.
You know, that is something that I find disturbing and I would hope that, you know, that they would, they would recognize that, because that’s not what this country is all about.’

(…)

‘If people are close to antisemites, or part of a party that’s awash in antisemitism, or working for a man who dines with white supremacists and says really gross things about Jews, it makes me think that if they’re pro-Israel you give them slack that you wouldn’t if people were doing the same thing but were not pro-Israel.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Look, the universities failed to address this seriously. And by failing to address this seriously, they failed the Jewish students on campus. They dismissed their grievances. They created an inhospitable atmosphere. We’re now seeing the fruits of that failure. What disturbs me so much is that the debate will now become over whether antisemitism is being used as a weapon to fight against people we don’t like. Antisemitism should not be a cudgel.
If you are worried about that, and you want to say very clearly that you think the Trump Administration is doing that, and you even want to put on the record the very brief comments you gave to me, you’re welcome to do that.
I think there are certainly trends right now. For instance, some of the latest demands made of Harvard have been disturbing in part because if you’re calling for an external audit of courses and things like that, then what happens when you get a progressive administration? Do they then turn around and audit? The fight should be against antisemitism and not against the institutions. The institutions opened the door. Most universities failed miserably to address this, and we’re seeing the consequences of that now.’

Read the complete interview here.

There is a slight difference between fear and diplomacy. I’m in favor of diplomacy, especially given the undiplomatic times we live in, but here fear appears to be the motor.

The question is: fear of what? The fight against antisemitism has been tarnished by looking for help in places where you would not want to look for help.

Deportations to El Salvador are disturbing, but let’s keep it off the record by all means.

The understatement will save us. At least a week or so.