(RNS) — Few think-tank initiatives have garnered as much public attention as the Heritage Foundation’s set of policy proposals, called Project 2025, a conservative vision aimed at gutting funding for education, attacking LGBTQ+ rights, cutting overtime pay for workers and passing tax benefits for the rich. Trump has disavowed Project 2025 in his campaign, but now that he has won the presidency, most observers expect the plan will make up a large measure of his agenda.
But nearly a year after its release, the foundation has expanded to incorporate a new issue. On the anniversary of Oct. 7, Heritage released an initiative called Project Esther, purportedly to take on a real and undeniable problem: the rise of antisemitism.
Though a bit convoluted and repetitive, Project Esther argues that the movement for Palestinian liberation is part of a global Hamas support network — they dub it “the HSN”— that the authors say is working overtime to destroy American society. The report suggests that these supposed antisemitic forces support foreign adversaries while leveraging America’s open society to seize control of higher education, the media and the federal government.
Unlike what one might think of a report on antisemitism, Project Esther speaks dismissively of Jewish concerns, going so far as to attack “American Jewish complacency” for failing to address the problem. In fact, the Jewish Insider reported that only two organizations listed on their task force actually represent any Jews. James Carafano, the leader of the initiative, said, “We really understood the Jewish perspective, but it was important for me to have all these organizations represented, and quite honestly, if they were doing their job and they were being effective, we wouldn’t have the problem that we have.”
On closer inspection, it becomes clear that Project Esther isn’t about Jews or antisemitism; it’s about using justified concern over antisemitism to turn the power of the federal government to dismantling domestic civil society.
Project Esther does this first by equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism and attacking some of the leading pro-Palestinian organizing movements, including National Students for Justice in Palestine, American Muslims for Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. While we must remain vigilant to interrogate antisemitism wherever it appears, this report goes beyond pushing back against these groups’ public arguments. It advocates for dismantling their funding structures and applying this approach across the progressive left.
Hundreds of demonstrators protest against the military policies of Israel in the Cannon House Office Building at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, July 23, 2024. (RNS photo/Jack Jenkins)
The 30-page document urges the federal government to shutter a list of foundations that support pro-Palestinian organizations as part of their work on issues in the Middle East, including the Open Society Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Tides Foundation. But these groups do much more than support Palestinian causes; they support invaluable work for a host of issues, including climate justice, separation of church and state and immigration reform.
The report suggests attacking these organizations by taking advantage of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, normally reserved for going after foreign lobbying and organized crime. They also suggest using counter-terrorism, hate speech and immigration laws to press charges against pro-Palestinian voices. The whole operation, it says, could be achieved within 12 to 24 months given that a “willing Administration occupies the White House.”
By making it appear like they’re addressing antisemitism, they can create a smokescreen to attack the funding infrastructure for a variety of progressive causes. Project Esther isn’t really for Jews: In other words, it’s an attempt to cite antisemitism as an excuse to advance Heritage’s broader Christian nationalist agenda.
One giveaway is that Project Esther’s McCarthyist blueprint completely ignores the most violent manifestations of antisemitism, including white nationalism and the great replacement theory. This year, neo-Nazis have marched in the capitals of Tennessee and Pennsylvania, while three weeks ago, far-right Trump supporters flew swastika flags at a boat parade in Florida. Nor does the document give an account of the role hateful, anti-immigrant rhetoric played in inspiring the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue and the Unite the Right march in Charlottesville.
The Project Esther website. (Screen grab)
The bait-and-switch of ignoring far-right antisemitism in favor of demonizing pro-Palestinian activism has become common on the right. While crusading against antisemitism, Republican politicians traffic in antisemitic tropes. In April, New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik tweeted, “George Soros is trying to fund the downfall of America by buying elections for radical Far Left politicians and corrupting the next generation to support terror groups.” The Southern Poverty Law Center has long documented how attacks on Soros play off of traditionally antisemitic tropes and should be understood as thinly veiled attacks on Jews.
Naming the report after Esther (the Jewish heroine who saved the Jews from destruction in ancient Persia) continues her appropriation by far-right figures as a Christian nationalist paragon. At a rally in late October hosted by the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, a prominent Christian Zionist organization, speakers called on the women to act as “Esthers” by submitting to their husbands to save today’s youth.
Heritage is betting that many Americans who oppose Project 2025 itself won’t know what to make of a proposal to tackle antisemitism. As civil society begins to strategize on a response to the coming Trump administration, it’s important to see Project Esther for what it is: an extension of Project 2025 that would assault social justice and advance Christian supremacy.
(Zev Mishell is a writer currently studying at Harvard Divinity School. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)