Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zionism

A Four-Part Project Proposal, in search of collaborators and an institutional home

[I have an idea for a project. A BIG project. I would need a lot of help with it. In fact it probably needs to find some sort of institutional home that would help with lots of it, including funding. I sketch the project here. If it sounds intriguing to you and you’d like to be part of it, please let me know. And if you have any ideas of what sort of institutional home it might find and how to get it there, definitely please let me know.

Meanwhile, if you appreciate these substacks and felt like a buying me a coffee, you’d receive no objection from me: https://coff.ee/andrewpessin.

Here’s the proposal.]

Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion,

and the Institute for the Critical Study of Antizionism

a proposal by Andrew Pessin

I propose a four-part project: an essay, a conference, a book, and an entire “institute.” The four parts increase in order in terms of scope, required labor, and potential concrete significance or impact. The first part I have done on my own; for the remaining three parts I seek collaborators and support. I would love to find a suitable organizational home for the project, in part or in whole, that would support this project, in part or in whole.

Part I: Essay, “Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion”

The first part is more or less done, and foundational to the other parts.

I’ve drafted a 9000-word essay called the “Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion,” which I may well submit to an academic journal (I already published it on this substack). This essay, with its (I believe) catchy title, documents the irony of the fact that the extensive scholarly attention rightly paid to the infamous forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion—a conspiracy theory believed by tens of millions or perhaps billions, to this very day, to be factual—overlooks the fact that there actually does exist a real conspiracy, a global conspiracy, a literal conspiracy, albeit in precisely the opposite direction. Sometimes working together, sometimes in parallel, sometimes centrally directed, sometimes dispersed, sometimes secretly, sometimes overtly, collectively there is an enormous collection of individuals, organizations, and governments who have all been working toward the same inglorious end for well over a century now. It’s not, per the original Protocols, that the dastardly Jews are conspiring to subjugate or eliminate the peoples of the world. It’s that the peoples of the world (or at least enormously large constituents thereof) are actively conspiring to subjugate and (in all too many cases) to outright eliminate the Jews, in particular by means of eliminating their national project, the State of Israel.

As my essay puts it, it’s time to examine their protocols, these Elders of Anti-Zion.

The essay then documents this real century-plus-long conspiracy, taking a tour through the antisemitism and antizionism orchestrated first by the Protocols themselves, then by the Nazis, the Soviets, the Western Left, and others. The emphasis throughout is specifically on the antizionism (for reasons to be discussed below), and also specifically on the work of the thought leaders, the scholars, the professors, the “scientists,” the ideologues ultimately responsible for formulating and running the conspiracy. Although many of the individual actors are well known—that the Nazis, Soviets, Western Left etc. are profoundly committed to antisemitic antizionism is no surprise to scholars—there is particular value in bringing them together and conceiving of the entire scheme as a global conspiracy. When you show that literally the same positions, arguments, tactics, methods etc. are employed across all the different players you really bring out the ideological nature of the antizionism and, ultimately, its antisemitic foundation.

For just one concrete example of this: the Nazis established numerous “scientific institutes” to “study the Jewish Question,” i.e. produce the bogus “science” that justified and motivated the Final Solution. Every decent person today sees that endeavor for the blatantly antisemitic endeavor that it is, corrupting or weaponizing scholarship to nefarious political ends. Yet today, as we speak, something called the “Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism” (ICSZ) has been established in the United States, which, looked at in isolation, might appear to be a legitimate scholarly enterprise devoted to “science.” But when you put it in the context of the global conspiracy you immediately see that everything about it—from its name to its methods to its ideologies—is a direct echo of the Nazi (and Soviet) endeavors to do the same. Suddenly it becomes blatantly clear that the ICSZ is no ordinary scholarly enterprise, but, like their Nazi forebears, a blatantly antisemitic endeavor weaponizing scholarship to nefarious political ends.

It’s powerful stuff.

As I finished this essay I had three important insights:

(a) How incomplete it was. There remain numerous other very significant players in the conspiracy, including the Arab-Muslim world, the United Nations, the international NGO network work, and, coarsely speaking, the Western academy as a whole as it has become swallowed by antizionist ideology, with certain disciplines playing outsized roles. I realized that properly documenting and understanding this conspiracy requires adding quite a lot more material.

(b) I saw there was great value in focusing not only on antisemitism in general but specifically on antizionism, i.e. on opposition to the Jewish national endeavor as manifest in the State of Israel. Though that point needs further articulation—Shany Mor gave his own powerful articulation of it in a talk I heard exactly as I was finishing the essay, and Judea Pearl has long advocated for focusing on “Zionophobia” as its own specific bigotry—three quick observations of my own are these:

• (i) Antizionism really has its own history, internal logic, its own characteristics, its own tactics and methods, and has profound roots in and relationships to world-historical ideologies, all of which have been inadequately studied;

• (ii) Much effort has been expended to show that antizionism is a form or manifestation of antisemitism, but there is value in exposing it as problematic, objectionable, corrupt etc. in its own right—not least because many people deny that it is a form of antisemitism and so close their ears when you criticize it, believing you are merely “covering for Israel”; and

• (iii) Antizionism of course is the major form antisemitism has taken since Zionism launched as a modern political movement in 1896, as well as serving as the major method of masking the underlying antisemitism. Focusing directly on it is one way of exposing it for what it is.

(c) The essay reads almost like the précis of a book. And so it clearly should become a book.

Parts II and III: The Conference and the Book, Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion

That leads to the second and third parts of the project: the organization of a conference and the production of a book, both perhaps with the same (catchy?) title, Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion. Perhaps my essay above, appropriately revised and expanded, could serve as the basis of a “Call for Papers” for a conference and then as the introduction to such a book, by providing a general overview.

I propose to organize the conference first, where the papers presented would become the chapters of the book. There are many obvious advantages to proceeding this way, as conferences bring together scholars and produce indispensable conversations, collaborations, and new ideas, not to mention produce collaborative energy. (The conference will also be a useful step, perhaps the very first step, toward Part IV of the project below.) The book produced by the conference would be an edited volume, including contributions from the scholars who have the greatest expertise on the many individual components of the conspiracy. I already have in mind potential scholars for many of the chapters (and thus for the conference), and plan to begin reaching out shortly to people to explain the project and hopefully obtain commitments. Once I have an ample number of these I will simultaneously work on organizing the conference, drafting a formal book proposal, and looking for an appropriate publisher.

A very early, very rough sketch of possible topics for the conference and chapters for the book might include these, divided into three sections:

Section 1: The Elders of Anti-Zion (i.e. the major actors in the conspiracy)

• Russia/Protocols

• Nazi Germany (and its spheres of influence)

• Soviet “Zionology” (and its spheres of influence)

• Arab-Muslim world

• Islamism, then and now

• United Nations (talk about a global conspiracy!)

• International NGO network (ditto!)

• Lawfare (ICC, ICJ, etc.)

• Right-wing activism

• Western Leftist progressivism, ideology and methods

--sub-components here perhaps addressing specific aspects of progressivism such as concern with class, race, sex, sexual preference etc.

Other Groups: identify the main groups running organized antizionism (such as the BDS movement, PACBI, etc) and in particular their funding sources (Soros, WESPAC, etc.)

Wikipedia? AI? Social Media?

Section 2: The Academy (i.e. more detailed studies with narrower foci):

• Ideological corruption of the Western academy

• Studies of specific disciplines: Middle East Studies, Anthropology, Women-Gender, etc.

• Study especially of the issues as manifest within Jewish Studies, Jewish Antizionists

• Case Studies of specific universities: Columbia U. the clear favorite, but others possible

• Study of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and its affiliations

• Study of Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FJP)

• Study of The Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism (see Part IV below)

Section 3: Theory/Analysis

There should also be room for several more theoretical/analytical chapters. Here’s where someone might make the scholarly case for focusing on antizionism in its own right. Perhaps an essay explaining exactly why, despite the intimate relationship between the two, antizionism (or perhaps Judea Pearl’s preferred “Zionophobia”) is a distinct form of bigotry from antisemitism. I might include here an unpublished essay I’ve written explaining exactly what the relationship is between antizionism and antisemitism. Maybe an essay on the relationship between theory and praxis: given what we have learned about the origins, history, and logic of antizionism, what are appropriate methods for countering it? And I am excited to reach out to several other very talented scholars to get suggestions of how or what they might contribute to such a volume. Maybe find someone to read all the other components of the book and offer a concluding analytical overview.

The conference, and the book, then lead directly to the final part of the project.

Part IV: Institute for the Critical Study of Antizionism (ICSA)

What the book project suggests is that there is a real need for a formal structure to motivate and cultivate the study of antizionism. The immediate impetus and model, both for the name and the overall idea, is the establishment in 2023 by some serious Jew-hating scholars (IMHO) of the “Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism” (ICSZ), which held its first formal conference, coincidentally (or not?), just a week after the October 7 massacre. Bare minimum, we need to be studying those folks and what they are doing—which, to the surprise of no one familiar with the first three parts of the current project, is simply the 21^st-century manifestation of what the Protocols, the Nazis, and the Soviets did before them. Bare minimum, too, we need to expose to the world that the ICSZ is literally the continuation of the Nazi program, dressed up all nice and spiffy in contemporary language. (This point can (and should) be made quite viscerally: in 1944, for just one example of so many, the Nazis organized an international anti-Jewish congress whose aim was to reach “the intellectual stratum of the European peoples who up to now could not be won by simple anti-Jewish propaganda,”[1] and whose overall design, agenda, and methods sound like they could come right off the website of the ICSZ.)

Though the ICSZ is the immediate impetus, and would be an object of study of the ICSA, the ICSA would have a far broader scope. Though this too needs further articulation, I believe there are important merits to establishing a stand-alone institute studying antizionism in its own right. These include, again, that antizionism has its own history, internal logic, characteristics, tactics and methods, and ideological roots that distinguish it from other forms of antisemitism, and that, further, it’s imperative to expose it as a particularly pernicious form of antisemitism. Moreover there is an immediate need for practical action to counter the antizionism that has swept the academy, the Left, and much of the world, devising which requires a close understanding of the history, logic, tactics, ideological roots, etc., of the antizionist movement, now culminating in the ICSZ.

Those are all tasks that require the establishment of a counter organization such as the ICSA. The conference above would bring together the scholars most amenable to creating and participating in the ICSA; the book produced might well be its first publication.

To be honest, what the people of the ICSZ have done is impressive. Bringing scholars together to pursue investigations into and produce scholarly work on matters of shared interest can be enormously productive and impactful. The message gets magnified many times over when there is collaboration, which in turn furthers dissemination, which in turn fosters more cooperation and production. Their work is also deliberately designed to bring graduate students and undergraduates into the project, to foster them and support them, thus filling the academic pipeline for generations to come. It also trickles downward, as they prepare antizionist curricula for secondary and primary schools. The whole institute is designed to churn out “research” that will not only influence generations of students going through their classes but also flood the academy, serve as the citational basis for further “research,” then make its inevitable way into NGO reports, the UN, and international lawfare. The ICSZ has already had its first conference, has already produced a journal and podcasts, is already flooding social media with its wares. It really is impressive what they are doing. It’s a shame they are doing all this to advance the forces of darkness. That is why we need to do it too, to advance the forces of light. (Or at least of truth, academic integrity, etc.)

The ICSZ website is here: https://criticalzionismstudies.org/.

For a brief account of the organization, the ADL published a summary in April 2025, from which I quote some excerpts:

The institute is not formally affiliated with any particular university and has individual members associated with different activist organizations and universities. It is also a registered 501(c)3 organization that solicits donations via its website and receives funding from the Sparkplug Foundation, of which ICSZ Director Emmaia Gelman is a trustee. The ICSZ has collectively used its platforms, including its annual publication, the Journal for the Critical Study of Zionism (JCSZ), to legitimize false and even dangerously conspiratorial claims within the academic world about the nature of antisemitism and Zionism.

Since its inaugural conference in October 2023, the institute’s activities have expanded to include additional events, workgroups, research workshops, a digital library of resources for research, podcasts, the creation of shareable social media materials, fellowships and syllabi for academic courses in Critical Zionism Studies.

However, though it utilizes the veneer and language of an academic journal, it also seeks to provide activist materials and resources. For instance, one of the journal’s sections, Organizing Notes, is described as providing “tools and transcripts for anti-Zionist organizing” and contains an example letter for a local campaign against a county government adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Additionally, calls for papers emphasize special interest in decidedly non-academic submissions. A call for papers for the journal’s second issue in 2024 invites the submission of proposals and abstracts aimed at “challenging and resisting Zionism.”

Its first conference was co-sponsored by a number of academic programs and centers, notably the University of California, Santa Cruz’s Critical Race & Ethnic Studies Department and its Center for Racial Justice, the San Francisco State University (SFSU) Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diaspora Studies Program (AMED), and the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council.

However, the ICSZ intentionally disregards certain norms and conventions of scientific inquiry, such as disallowing or discounting the investigation of Zionist perspectives and narratives, on principle. “We reject the claim that those who critically study Zionism must debate its merits: our opposition to Zionism, colonialism, and white supremacy is a first principle,” says its FAQ page.

The ICSZ’s inaugural conference, held within days of the Hamas-led October 7 terrorist attacks on Israel, centered around combatting the IHRA definition and promoting a toolkit that advocates for its rejection. The conference, titled “Battling the ‘IHRA definition [of Antisemitism]’: Theory & Activism Conference,” took place on October 13-14, 2023, simultaneously at UC Santa Cruz's Center for Racial Justice and NYU.

Izabella Tabarovsky has also written a terrific initial study of the ICSZ here, exactly the kind of piece the ICSA might produce.

So the ICSA, in bringing scholars together, might also produce further conferences, journals, podcasts, resources, secondary school curricula, etc. Again, the conference and the book described above, Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zionism, could be the first event and publication of the Institute. There are many questions to answer. Should the ICSA establish itself as a non-profit? Should it be housed in a university or in a think tank, or somehow stand alone? Should it be affiliated with a Jewish organization, or non-Jewish? Should it have multiple affiliations? Should it be connected to, a subsidiary of, one of the already existing prestigious academic centers for studying antisemitism, located within universities or not: University of Haifa, Indiana University, Yale, the London Centre for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism, Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), etc.? What about at a more “neutral” sort of university, like the newly founded University of Austin? And where, or where, will any of the money come from necessary to establish and perpetuate such a center?

To be frank, I have no idea how to start an institute. So I figure the first step is to start talking to people who might agree that it’s a valuable idea and might be interested in being involved, and figure it out from there. And the first steps toward that would be producing an edited volume, which in turn would be facilitated by organizing a conference, itself called into being perhaps by some version of the essay in Part I ...

What do you think?

---

[1] Weinrich, Hitler’s Professors: The Part of Scholarship in Germany’s Crimes Against the Jewish People (1999/1946, Yivo Institute for Jewish Research), p. 221.)