My experience with campus antisemitism: the good and the bad

Over the last two years, one question has followed me everywhere: “How is the antisemitism at Cambridge?”. My answer to this question indicates that we should be hopeful about the future of Jewish life on campus despite very real fears.

Antisemitism on campus is not widespread or constant, but when it does occur, it tends to be serious and highly visible. To illustrate this distinction, a Jewish student might attend lectures, participate in a range of societies, and engage in all campus life has to offer for months without experiencing any discrimination. Yet, they remain aware that serious instances of antisemitism do still happen on campus.

Cambridge has achieved something commendable in its day-to-day culture. Antisemitism is not a daily occurrence on and around campus. Traditional antisemitic stereotyping, despite some appearances in the wake of October 7th, has largely disappeared from both academic and social environments. Harmful rhetoric remains surprisingly minimal in lectures.

This represents genuine progress that deserves recognition. The university’s institutional commitment to combatting antisemitism has been resolute, creating an environment where antisemitism is neither tolerated nor normalised. The administration has repeatedly denounced any forms of antisemitism, maintained a steadfast commitment to the IHRA definition of antisemitism, and has an excellent track record of investigating every single worrying incident.

However, this positive daily reality coexists with a troubling pattern of extreme incidents that, whilst infrequent, cast a shadow over Jewish campus life. These events reveal the paradox of modern university antisemitism: it manifests not as constant low-level harassment, but as periodic eruptions of serious concerns.

Since October 7th, the Jewish Society building has received three bomb threats, though all proved to be hoaxes. Rare instances of physical threats and altercations have occurred. Faculty members have posted disturbing content on social media, including imagery merging the Star of David with Nazi symbols. Additionally, controversial speakers with histories of antisemitic rhetoric have been invited to campus despite their records.

The digital dimension of antisemitism deserves particular attention. Online platforms have fundamentally altered how antisemitism manifests on campus, creating spaces where extreme rhetoric can flourish while remaining technically separate from the physical university environment. Social media posts advertising protests often conclude with calls for a “student intifada.” Anonymous submission pages for Cambridge students, notably “Camfess”, have also provided platforms for worrying rhetoric, downplaying antisemitism and promoting events like a ‘Kneecap club night’. These digital spaces create an atmosphere of unease that extends far beyond their actual reach yet profoundly shapes the campus experience for Jewish students.

This pattern of extreme but infrequent incidents has created a climate where many Jewish students feel unsafe expressing their identities fully, regardless of their personal beliefs about Middle Eastern politics. The fear is not of daily harassment, but of being the target of the next extreme incident.

Four different protest encampments have appeared on campus this year, yet these generally lacked the intimidating atmosphere those not on campus might have expected. Rather than the aggressive confrontations elsewhere that we have seen go viral online, these encampments were not directly threatening to Jewish students walking past them. The concerning elements emerged primarily from online discourse on “Camfess” surrounding the encampments rather than from the encampments themselves. The real impact comes from the margins: extreme online comments, isolated incidents, and the debates they provoke. These events, though statistically rare, shape the psychological landscape of Jewish university life.

This disconnect between daily safety and periodic fear reflects broader challenges in how we discuss campus antisemitism. Media coverage often focuses on the most dramatic incidents, creating an impression that universities are hotbeds of antisemitism. While these incidents deserve serious attention, they can overshadow the more encouraging reality of routine campus life.

The result is a community consciousness that emphasises threat over progress. Jewish students and their families develop heightened anxiety about university environments that are, in most respects, more welcoming than ever before. This psychological burden affects educational choices, campus engagement, and community confidence. Worryingly, this might prevent Jewish students, both present and future, from going to universities that are right for them. In the worst case, they might stop going to universities full stop. The spectre of antisemitism should not discourage students from attending universities as is their right, nor prevent them from fulfilling their potential.

Addressing this challenge necessitates targeted interventions that recognise the specific nature of contemporary campus antisemitism. Universities need clearer social media policies for students and staff, better reporting mechanisms for digital abuse, and partnerships with platforms to address anonymous harassment. For dealing with extreme incidents, there must be clearer consequences and more effective welfare support systems on campus for students affected. Other than the 24/7 UJS helpline, the only support Cambridge JSOC can offer is a nominated, un-trained student on committee. Lastly, and most importantly, universities must develop rapid response protocols that can address serious incidents of antisemitism while maintaining the broader climate of tolerance that has been achieved.

The encouraging truth buried within these challenges is that antisemitism at universities increasingly operates from the margins rather than the mainstream. The current generation of university students has grown up in an era where diversity, inclusion, and respect for different communities are foundational values. While this does not eliminate prejudice entirely, it creates a cultural foundation that makes widespread antisemitism increasingly difficult to sustain.

Understanding this is crucial for developing effective responses. Rather than treating campus antisemitism as a plague infecting every institution, we should recognise it as a problem of extremist minorities operating within otherwise very inclusive environments. This doesn’t minimise the seriousness of the incidents, but it does suggest different solutions.

The challenge lies in addressing the extreme incidents that continue to occur while building on the positive foundation that already exists. This requires sustained commitment from university leadership, continued vigilance from the broader community, and recognition that progress, while incomplete, is both real and encouraging.

Jewish students deserve to feel safe expressing their identities fully within university communities. The encouraging news is that the infrastructure for such safety, such as widespread adoption of IHRA, already exists in most campus environments. The task now is to strengthen these foundations while addressing the remaining challenges with the seriousness they deserve.

The question “How is the antisemitism at Cambridge?” ultimately reveals a story of imperfect but genuine progress. While vigilance remains necessary, the trajectory points toward university environments where antisemitism becomes increasingly marginalised and ultimately eliminated. This is not wishful thinking. All evidence indicates that as university administrations continue to crack down on antisemitism, and discourse around Israel uses less problematic rhetoric, antisemitism will become a marginal worry for Jewish students.