Fr. Fahey is correct in noting that anti-semitism is too loose, and I would say that your definition(anti Jєωism) is also too loose(imperfect compared to a more perfect - rabbis are their leaders = strike shepherd and sheep are scattered). Attack the rabbis, by being anti-rabbi.
I'm pretty sure we can all agree that "αnтι-ѕємιтє" is meaningless in and of itself (as per Fr Fahey's observation that it is never applied to most of the world's Semites) and it has no practical application except as a cudgel used by Jєωs to silence their opponents (the old truism "an αnтι-ѕємιтє is someone a Jєω hates" comes to mind).
However your proposed "anti Rabbinic" term is too narrow. Religious Jєωs make up a tiny minority of the world population of Jєωry. Most of the wickedest Jєωs in the world today haven't been anywhere near a Rabbi since their Bar Mitzvahs, yet they are still perverse, power hungry, Christ hating sons of Satan in a uniquely Jєωιѕн way. That is because there really is a supernatural character to the race itself... They called down the Blood of Our Lord as a curse upon their entire race... The founding of "Judaism" as a religion expressly designed to oppose God the Son made them a people uniquely consecrated to the Devil ("you are of your father the Devil," "the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan," etc.). And we can see the effects of this curse - spiritual blindness, carnality, diabolic scandals - as well as the rewards reaped by the Jєωs for their service to the Prince of This World (anyone here can admit that the amount of power they wield for so small a group of people is truly inexplicable apart from supernatural influence).
So we can see that what we must oppose is the Jєωs themselves, inasmuch as they are Jєωs, irrespective of how much direct control the Rabbis have over them. Insofar as they behave as Jєωs, support and work toward Jєωιѕн interests (religious or secular), Jєωs are enemies of the Church... An individual Jєω may not be. An individual Jєω might see the evils of Jєωry for what they are, and such an individual Jєω might be given the Grace to convert to the Catholic Faith. But the Jєωs as a people, as a collective, as a race, must necessarily be seen and treated as enemies of the Church.
Thus, I agree with J. Paul that "anti-Judaism" is the best term to describe the proper Catholic attitude toward the Jєωs.
There have been converts from judaism to catholicism that became great evangelists and great saints. If we go around saying that we were anti all Jєω without determination(equally), we run a risk of uprooting wheat with cockle(and our Lord also said I come not to bring peace, but the sword), and that would be a tragedy. We do have to preach conversion to the Jєωs as well(our lord healed all the ten lepers, nine of which were proud Jєωs).
I agree there have been individual Jєωs who have converted and have become great Catholics and holy saints (see above). But there is no question of the Jєωs converting en masse any time before the End of the Earth. So quibbles about terminology that might offend them and thus impede that mass conversion are quite moot. If a Jєω is given the grace to convert, he will convert, irrespective of whether we Catholics call ourselves "anti Jєωιѕн" or "anti Rabbinc" (and I honestly can see the Jєωs cottoning to the latter any more than to the former).
And as for the lepers healed by Our Lord - be careful that you do not neglect to make all proper and necessary distinctions. Jєωs who lived in the time of Our Lord (prior to His founding of the Church) still belonged to the One True Religion, not to the false diabolical sect of modern "Judaism." The two must never be confused or equated - it is on that error that Jєωs have made so much headway against us, having fooled so many foolish goyim (lay and clerical) into believing that they are our "elder brothers."