Imagine this: Outraged by the Chinese government’s persecution of the Uyghurs, a group of Philadelphians organizes a protest targeting Chinese-owned restaurants. They call for boycotts, gather outside businesses, and demand that establishments associated with China be driven from the city.
Or imagine that, in solidarity with the people of Ukraine, protesters take to the streets of Philadelphia, targeting Russian American businesses, demanding that their owners answer for Vladimir Putin’s invasion of a sovereign nation.
Absurd? Offensive? Xenophobic? Perhaps even racist?
Most of us would say yes. And rightly so.
We understand, almost instinctively, that the owner of a Chinese restaurant in Philadelphia bears no responsibility for the actions of the Chinese Communist Party. Nor should a Russian American shopkeeper be made to answer for the atrocities committed by Vladimir Putin.
We recognize the injustice of assigning collective guilt to individuals based on their ancestry, ethnicity, or national origin. We understand that protesting a government’s actions is fundamentally different from targeting people whose identities or heritage connect them, however remotely, to that government.
Or do we?
Because this week, in Philadelphia, that very distinction is being tested.
A group calling itself Philly Bike On Your Left has organized a “Boycott Ride,” proclaiming itself anti-Zionist and demanding that “Zionist establishments must go.” In the name of solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, protesters are turning their attention not simply to the sharing of their disdain for the policies of the Israeli government, but to businesses in our own community.
To be clear, this op-ed does not seek to draw a moral equivalence between the governments of China, Russia, and Israel. Far from it. China’s systematic persecution of the Uyghurs and Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine are fundamentally different from Israel’s military response to the atrocities of October 7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists invaded Israel, massacred civilians, and took hostages.
One can believe Israel had every right to defend its citizens and respond militarily to those attacks and still hold that not every decision made by its government is beyond scrutiny. Reasonable people can disagree about Israel’s policies and practices, as well as the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But there is no obligation to accept the protesters’ characterization of Israel’s actions, much less equate them with those of China or Russia, in order to defend the rights and dignity of our Jewish neighbors.
Indeed, that is precisely the point. Even if one accepts the protesters’ harshest condemnation of Israel, how does that justify targeting Jewish-owned businesses in Philadelphia? Since when does a person’s religious or ethnic identity make them accountable for the actions of a foreign government? And why should Jewish Americans be subjected to a standard we would reject if applied to virtually any other minority community?
Let’s be clear. The First Amendment protects our right to protest, to dissent, to boycott, and to express even deeply offensive political views. It is among the most cherished freedoms of our democracy.
But the Constitution’s protection of speech does not confer moral legitimacy on every exercise of that freedom.
The question isn’t simply whether protesters have the right to organize a boycott. In many circumstances, they do.
The more important question is whether we, as a community, are willing to condemn the targeting of our neighbors when their ethnicity, religion, heritage, or presumed political loyalties become grounds for public intimidation and economic exclusion.
If we would recoil at a campaign demanding that Chinese-owned restaurants “must go” because of Beijing’s persecution of the Uyghurs, why should we tolerate the same rhetoric directed at Jewish-owned businesses because of the legitimate, and even illegitimate, derision some hold for the actions of Israel?
We shouldn’t.
And we ought to be willing to say so, without hesitation, without qualification, and without regard to where we stand on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If it is true that “hate has no home here,” then the true test of our commitment to tolerance isn’t whether we condemn prejudice when it targets people we agree with. It’s whether we have the courage to condemn it when it comes from people whose cause we support.
Farah Jimenez is a nonprofit and civic leader in Philadelphia. She recently joined 450 leaders from across the country, in Denver, at Together at the Crossroads, a Conference on Allyship and Unity in combatting antisemitism, hosted by the Merage Foundation.
VOICES OF PHILADELPHIA CITIZENS
