Abstract:

This article investigates the global controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the state to impose definitions of antisemitism in higher education settings. It focuses in particular on the institutional uptake of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism (2016), which has been endorsed or adopted by numerous governments and universities in Europe and beyond. While acknowledging the urgent necessity of combating antisemitism in educational contexts, the study critically examines the conceptual scope and practical consequences of expansive or ambiguously applied definitions when embedded in academic governance and teacher education.

Methodologically, the article is grounded in a qualitative research design employing critical text analysis. The corpus comprises newspaper articles, public statements and policy papers issued by governmental bodies and civil society organizations, as well as institutional announcements and regulatory initiatives by universities. Through this approach, the study reconstructs the discursive framing of antisemitism definitions, tracing how specific interpretations are promoted, legitimized, and translated into administrative or pedagogical practice. Particular attention is paid to how governmental actors, often in cooperation with university administrations, encourage or require the adoption of specific definitions within academic settings.

The analysis highlights ongoing debates about the application of the IHRA definition, especially concerning its examples related to the concept of "new antisemitism" as opposed to primary and secondary antisemitism and the boundaries between antisemitism in all its versions and political criticism. It argues that when broadly formulated definitions are operationalized through compliance-oriented measures, reporting mechanisms, or institutional guidelines, they may generate normative uncertainty among students and trainee teachers. In the context of pre-service teacher training—where future educators are professionally authorized by the state to address antisemitism and related forms of discrimination in schools—such uncertainty may discourage open inquiry, critical discussion, and reflexive engagement with contested political and historical questions.

The article contends that imposing contested definitions through top-down governance mechanisms risks constraining academic freedom and narrowing the epistemic space essential for robust teacher education in terms of critical pedagogy and independence in social research. It concludes by reflecting on the tension between the legitimate fight against antisemitism and the preservation of democratic educational principles, arguing for conceptually precise, context-sensitive approaches that strengthen rather than undermine critical pedagogical practice.

Keywords:

Antisemitism, IHRA antisemitism definition, higher education, teacher training, critical pedagogy.