I appreciate the efforts of Rachel Gildiner and Rabbi Isaiah Rothstein to remind us that fighting antisemitism should not come at the expense of fostering inclusion within the Jewish community (“Belonging cannot wait,” eJewishPhilanthropy, May 13). They rightly caution against a false binary — the idea that we must choose between opposing antisemitism and promoting inclusion. In their view, these goals should complement each other.

In warning against one false binary, however, the authors risk falling into another. They suggest that we must embrace current diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts to promote belonging and not alienate marginalized Jews. But what if some of these efforts — particularly certain programs in educational and institutional settings — are part of the problem? What if many DEI practices, rather than fostering genuine inclusion, promote divisive ideologies that categorize people as either oppressed or oppressors, sometimes fueling the very antisemitism we are trying to combat?

We cannot allow inclusion efforts to suppress the necessary critique of radical DEI practices that are contributing to the rise in antisemitism.

In a recent strategy session on the growing issue of antisemitism in K-12 schools, several participants expressed concern about the way DEI frameworks are being implemented. One prominent attorney, whose firm runs a DEI mentorship program for young minority associates, asked, “What’s wrong with DEI?” His question was sincere — and crucial. In some professional contexts, DEI means mentorship, equal opportunity and thoughtful inclusion.

But the DEI frameworks encountered in many K-12 schools and universities are often very different. These practices include:

• Racial affinity groups, where students are grouped by race for discussions or activities. While intended to create safe spaces, these practices reinforce racial essentialism, fostering division rather than solidarity.
• The “white supremacy culture” framework, which labels traits like objectivity, individualism, or punctuality as expressions of white dominance. Increasingly used in teacher training and school programming, this framework casts suspicion on normative behaviors and implies that certain cultural values are inherently oppressive.
• The oppressor–oppressed binary, which teaches young people to categorize others solely based on identity. This lens flattens complex histories, encourages resentment and can marginalize Jews — who don’t fit neatly into this binary — especially when linked to whiteness or Israel.

Moreover, DEI frameworks have become deeply institutionalized, embedded in bureaucracies from school systems to universities to nonprofits. Once these ideologies take root, challenging them becomes difficult without being branded as reactionary or exclusionary. The result is a chilling effect: legitimate concerns about antisemitism go unvoiced for fear of offending others or appearing insufficiently progressive.

The danger in uncritically lauding inclusion and belonging is that we risk overlooking how these ideals can be weaponized — to shut down dialogue, silence dissenting voices and even perpetuate new forms of bigotry. In their call for urgency around inclusion, the authors ought to draw a critical distinction between sincere, pluralistic inclusion and radical ideological conformity disguised as equity. If we do not make this distinction, we risk undermining both Jewish safety and the broader project of democratic coexistence.

We paid a heavy price for suppressing criticism in the name of not alienating allies. As antisemitism surged in environments shaped by illiberal DEI ideologies, we were caught flat-footed. We cannot afford that mistake again.

We should absolutely strive to make Jewish spaces more inclusive — particularly for Jews from historically marginalized communities. But this effort must not come at the cost of intellectual honesty or moral clarity. True inclusion cannot be built on ideological conformity or silence in the face of bigotry, no matter how well-intentioned the framing.

David Bernstein is the founder and CEO of the North American Values Institute (NAVI).