At University of Wisconsin-Madison, an anti-Israel resolution muscled through the process is a sign of the times in divided America
Rep. Jianda Ni refused to support an anti-Israel resolution in University of Wisconsin-Madison student government, because he believes in focusing on having a safe campus and serving everyone, not divisive international politics.
After he spoke his mind on this, at a meeting, the resolution was quickly pushed through the legislative process, appearing to bypass pro-Israel students. It ultimately passed.
Next, one of Ni’s friends from the anti-Israel side stopped speaking to him, even though Ni did not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even though Ni says the conflict is nuanced and complicated. Even though Ni is not Jewish.
This is college in 2026. An alliance of left-leaning students appear to have muscled an anti-Israel resolution through the UW-Madison student government legislative process, despite objections from students that the resolution would resolve nothing overseas and contribute to fear and antisemitism on campus.
Antisemitism at a great Jewish campus
Student government at Madison is called “ASM” – Associated Students of Madison. The University reported in a March statement on the anti-Israel resolution that administrators were “reviewing reports alleging that an online chat, including possibly some ASM representatives, used an antisemitic term in reference to limiting potential speakers (at a meeting).”
Though the resolution named Israel, not Jews explicitly, it felt to some students like it was aimed at Jews. Consider it within the larger campus climate, at a campus that has been one of the great magnets for Jewish students from around the country, with multiple Jewish organizations active on campus. But it’s a campus in modern America.
Ian Braun attended two ASM meetings on the resolution, one that introduced it and one that passed it. “As someone who has family in Israel, I felt I was obligated to stand up to what I thought was antisemitic,” said Braun, a freshman who grew up in a small town with few Jews in New Jersey. The issue, he said, is that an anti-Israel resolution opens the door to antisemitism.
Long before the vote, Braun was outside at Library Mall, sitting at a public table with a rabbi for Jewish Experience of Madison. Braun said the table had JEM signage but little-to-nothing related to Israel. Someone still walked up, didn’t take the time to look at the table in detail, and said: “Free Palestine.”
“So to me, that experience really demonstrates the conflation of Jewish identity, and the assumption that people think you support Israel,” Braun said.
And yet Jewish students still say they love Madison. Asked about that, Braun quickly said: “Go Badgers!”
Sophie Genshaft, the student president of UW-Hillel added, “I also feel like a lot of people just pick a side, and usually it’s the pro-Palestine side, and they don’t actually know what they’re talking about.” Aaron Seligman, director of community relations for UW-Hillel, said people seem to think if you’re pro-Israel, you’re anti-Palestinian, and, of course, that does not follow.
Not hearing others
“I know some other representatives who actually either privately or subtly expressed their concerns over the resolution, but I knew they were going to be peer pressured into voting yes, or at least abstaining,” Ni said.
Students say there seemed like there was no desire on the other side to hear counter-arguments. But why? Why serve on student government if you don’t want to hear students?
The problem, said Ni, a third-year student at University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School, is the decades-long accumulation of social and economic problems in American culture.
“I think we are at a point where a lot of these problems can no longer be masked by economic growth,” he said. “I think we are really witnessing a disintegration of consensus that once held this society together.”
Based on his own reading and experience, he feels our culture is sliding into a kind of “friend” or “enemy” distinction.
“You’re from a different camp, and therefore, you know, there’s no need in engaging with them. There’s no value in what you have to say. There’s no point in hearing them or debating them.”
How it all unfolded
The resolution, with backing from Students for Justice in Palestine, was introduced March 18. It was then passed at a March 25 student government meeting. It did name other problems and countries in the world but was most focused on Israel. It passed 15-3, with 3 abstaining. The resolution calls for divestment, which the University quickly set aside in a statement issued the same day as the vote:
“UW–Madison is disappointed that the Associated Students of Madison (ASM) Student Council passed a resolution on Wednesday that issued a number of flawed, unrelated and illegal demands.”
“Wisconsin state law prohibits state and local government agencies from adopting their own rules or policies that would involve them in a boycott of Israel. Despite the fact that ASM leadership was counseled by university attorneys on the clear illegality of that specific part of the resolution, ASM Student Council nonetheless voted to pass it.”
Though most Jewish students at the meetings appeared to oppose the resolution, there were those who stood up to identify themselves as “anti-Zionist” Jews, Braun said.
Braun felt that these introductions were meant “to invalidate and discredit the experiences of the students on campus that do experience antisemitism.” Braun added that “their choice to say that kind of disgusted me, and I didn’t really appreciate it.”
The legislative jockeying
The resolution took two meetings to pass. At the first meeting, it seemed like there were more than 50 speakers, with three minutes each to speak, Braun said. Senior Yoni Greenspan alleged at the meeting that one student representative messaged that they didn’t want to “[extend] past the set 45 minutes” of speaker time because the “proportion of zios rises as the speakers list goes on,’ according to the Daily Cardinal.
The meeting lasted for hours, the building was closing at 10 p.m., and student senators decided to postpone the issue to a second meeting, Braun recalled.
Next, the second meeting was held on March 25. Dozens of students arrived to walk out in protest after one read a statement in opposition to the resolution. The idea was that they didn’t feel they were going to be heard anyway.
Seligman, from UW-Hillel, who assisted the students with their push-back initiatives, said he realized at the first meeting, when someone used the slur “zio,” that “this is a setup – they’ve literally stacked the deck here.”
Seligman added that after seeing how students were treated at the first meeting, he concluded that “this is not an honest debate where students are really interested in listening to the argument here or open to be persuaded.”
Ni voted to abstain and walked out with the group.
Before the walk out, one student, Ariav Hayempour, identified himself as a Jewish Iranian-American and read a statement that included:
- An allegation that student representatives were caught using the word “zios.” “This is a term popularized by David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. It is used to demonize Jews.”
- “Zionism isn’t what you might think. It isn’t racism and white supremacy. It is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to establish their own country in their ancestral homeland, Judea.”
- “The consequences of this moral blindness are not theoretical …. Synagogues, schools and community centers operate under heavy security, while Jews are forced to weigh the risks of gathering publicly simply as Jews.”
Later, Ni said he saw it this way: “This body is not interested in what we have to say. We are very disappointed. So, you know, we’re not going to entertain this, kangaroo parliament, and we walk out collectively. So, at that time I realized, indeed they are right, there’s no use in debating here, there’s no use in pushing back here.”
Ni wanted his fellow representatives to consider that Jewish students feared having more anger directed at them on campus, among other issues. “I didn’t think we should rush it through,” he said.
Ni recalled that some pro-resolution students told him privately that they knew the resolution would change nothing overseas. One student at the meeting acknowledged the risk of heightened antisemitism, but added that if this can free Palestine, it’s worth it, Ni said. Another suggested at a meeting, Ni said, that passing the resolution is the bare minimum, but at least it’s doing something.
“I was like, this is not doing something. This is pretending you’re doing something, but actually you’re doing nothing.”
Helena Birbrower contributed to this story.
Loading ...