Uncategorized
The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society
(JTA) — A historian leafing through files in an archive discovered how a Jewish organization helped bring down an influential far-right extremist movement in the United States in the 1960s and ’70s by going undercover and acting as self-appointed spies.
The discovery of the Anti-Defamation League’s covert operation targeting the John Birch Society is the basis of a chapter in a new book by political historian Matthew Dallek of George Washington University. Published in March, “Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right” is Dallek’s fourth book. It examines the roots of today’s emboldened conservative movement in the United States.
“Birchers” is a history of a group that at its height numbered as many as 100,000 members and “mobilized a loyal army of activists” in a campaign against what it saw as a vast communist conspiracy. He also examines how the Birchers’ mission to defend Christianity and capitalism morphed into a radical anti-civil rights agenda that groups like the ADL saw as an existential threat.
Dallek, who grew up in a Reform Jewish household in Los Angeles, recently sat with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency to discuss the rise of the Birchers, how the ADL infiltrated their ranks and whether such tactics are justified in the name of fighting extremism.
The conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity.
JTA: Before we get into the Jewish aspect of the book, meaning the chapter on the Anti-Defamation League’s relationship with the John Birch Society, let’s take a step back. Who are so-called Birchers? Why do they matter?
Mathew Dallek: The John Birch Society was a household name in the 1960s, becoming the emblem of far-right extremism. It didn’t have huge numbers, but it did penetrate the culture and the national consciousness. Its leader, Robert Welch, had argued at one point that President Dwight Eisenhower was a dedicated agent of a communist conspiracy taking over the United States. Welch formed the John Birch Society to educate the American people about the nature of the communist threat.
In its heyday, the group had about 60,000 to 100,000 members, organized into small chapters. They sent out literature trying to give members roadmaps or ideas for what they could do. They believed a mass education of the public was needed because traditional two-party politics was not going to be very effective at exposing the communist threat. They would form front groups such as Impeach Earl Warren [the Supreme Court’s chief justice] or Support Your Local Police. They tried to ban certain books that they viewed as socialistic from being used in schools. Some Birchers ran for school board seats and protested at libraries.
Critics feared that the Birchers were a growing fascist or authoritarian group and that if they were not sidelined politically and culturally then the country could be overrun. The Nation magazine wrote that Birchers essentially had given their followers an invitation to engage in civil war, guerrilla-style. Those fears sparked a big debate about democracy. How does one sustain democracy and, at the height of the Cold War and in the shadow of World War II, Nazi fascist Germany, and the Holocaust?
As you were researching, you came across a trove of historical internal documents from the ADL in the archives of the American Jewish Historical Society in New York. Why did you devote a chapter to what you found in those documents? What did those files reveal to you about the John Birch Society?
These papers are a goldmine. They’re this incredible and often detailed window into the far-right and, in particular, the John Birch Society. They show the ADL had an extensive, multi-dimensional counterintelligence operation that they were running against the Birch Society.
People knew at the time that the ADL was attending events where Birchers were speaking. But the ADL also had undercover agents with code names, who were able to infiltrate the society’s headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts, and various chapter officers. They dug up financial and employment information about individual Birchers. And they not only used the material for their own newsletters and press releases, but they also fed information to the media.
Another layer is about a debate that’s been going on: Were the Birchers racist and antisemitic? The Birch Society always insisted that they did not tolerate white supremacy and didn’t want any KKK members. They said they accepted people of all faiths and races. And it’s true that they did have a handful of Jewish and Black members.
But what the ADL found was that a lot of hate was bubbling up from the grassroots and also leaking out from the top. The ADL was able to document this in a systematic way.
Some critics of the ADL today say the organization has strayed from its mission by focusing not just on antisemitism but on a wider array of causes. But from reading your work, it sounds like the ADL even then took an expansive view of its role, examining not just direct attacks on Jews but also how the political environment can jeopardize Jews. Am I getting that right, and why did the ADL devote so many resources to a group like the John Birch Society?
So, a few things: It’s the late ’50s and ’60s, and a civil rights coalition is emerging. Benjamin Epstein, the national director of the ADL, was friendly with Thurgood Marshall, the Supreme Court justice, and Martin Luther King. John F. Kennedy went to an ADL event and praised the ADL for speaking out very strongly in defense of democracy and pushing for the equal treatment of all Americans.
Isadore Zack, who helped lead the spy operation, at one point wrote to his colleagues that it was only in a democracy that the Jewish community has been allowed to flourish and so, if you want to defend Jewish Americans, you also have to defend democracy.
There certainly were other threats at the time, but the Birch Society was seen by liberal critics, including the ADL, as a very secretive group that promoted conspiracy theories about communists who often became conflated with Jews.
Would you consider the ADL successful in its campaign against the Birchers?
They were successful. They used surreptitious and in some cases underhanded means to expose the antisemitism and the racism and also interest in violence or the violent rhetoric of the Birch Society in the 1960s.
The ADL was at the tip of the spear of a liberal coalition that included the White House, sometimes the Department of Justice, depending on the issue, the NAACP, Americans for Democratic Action, labor unions, the union-backed Group Research Inc., which was tracking the far-right as well. The ADL was one of the most, if not the most effective at constraining and discrediting the society.
Clearly, however, the Birchers’ ideas never died. They lived on and made a comeback.
It’s somewhat ironic that you reveal the existence of this spying apparatus devoted to targeting an extremist and antisemitic group in the 1960s given the infamy the ADL would earn in a later era, the 1990s, for allegations that they colluded with police agencies in San Francisco to spy on and harass political activists. They eventually settled with the Arab American, Black and American Indian groups that brought a federal civil suit. I know you didn’t study these revelations, which are outside the scope of your book, but could you perhaps reflect on why undercover tactics were seen as necessary or justified?
It’s important to remember that in the mid-20th century, law enforcement in the United States was often led by antisemites or people who were much more concerned with alleged internal communist threats — the threat from the left.
From the ADL’s vantage point, one could not rely on the government entities that were by law and by design supposed to protect Jewish Americans. There was a sense that this work had to be done, at least in part, outside of the parameters of the government.
When I first discovered the ADL’s spying, I didn’t quite know what to make of it. But I realized they weren’t just spying to spy, they exposed a lot of scary things, with echoes in our own times — like easy access to firearms, a hatred of the government, a denigration and defamation of minority groups. And this was all happening in the shadow of the Holocaust and World War II. I became much more sympathetic; they were very effective, and they had a vision of equality of treatment for all Americans.
It’s obviously controversial. I try not to shy away from it. But they had a lot of good reasons to fight back right and to fight back in this nonviolent way.
That last thought brings to mind another, right-wing Jewish group that existed in this era of taking things into our own hands, that did use violence, explosives even.
You mean the Jewish Defense League, led by Meir Kahane.
Yes, exactly.
He was a Bircher. Toward the end of my book, I mention that he was a member for a while, under his alias Michael King.
Antisemitism is on the rise, and lots of initiatives are being organized to address it, both by existing groups like the ADL and new ones. The ADL’s budget has almost doubled over the past seven years. I am seeing Jews talk of fighting back and taking things into their own hands. And we are in this politically precarious movement in American history, all of which suggests parallels to the era you examined. What kind of wisdom can we glean from examining the ADL’s secret and public fight against the John Birch Society as people who care about the issues affecting Jews today?
A lot of liberals in the 1960s and a lot of the leadership at the ADL grasped the axiom that things can always get worse.
In 2015-2016, you’ll recall, there was Trump’s demonization of Mexican immigrants, and the so-called “alt-right” around him and his campaign and expressions of vitriol by people like Steve Bannon.
There was an assumption among a lot of Americans and among a lot of Jewish Americans that the fringe right — the antisemites, the explicit racists, the white supremacists — that there’s not a majority for them and they can never achieve power.
If you go back and you look at Trump’s closing 2016 campaign ad, it’s textbook antisemitism. He flashes on screen these wealthy Jewish international bankers, and he argues that basically, there’s a conspiracy of these global elites who are stealing the wealth of honest Americans. There’s also 2017, the white supremacists in Charlottesville, who said “Jews will not replace us” and Trump saying there are fine people on both sides.
The sense that democracy is incredibly fragile is not just a theory or a concept: It’s an actuality, the sense as well, that the United States has only been a multiracial democracy for not very long and a haven for Jews for not that long either.
The work that the ADL and the NAACP and other groups did to try to constrain and discredit as fringe and extremist still goes on today. It’s harder to do for all sorts of reasons today including social media and the loss of faith in institutions. But it still goes on. You see the importance of institutional guardrails including the Department of Justice that is prosecuting 1,000 Jan. 6 insurrectionists.
The last thing I’ll say is that one of the admirable things in the 1960s about the ADL and the liberal coalition it belonged to is that it built support for landmark legislation like the Immigration Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of ’65. And a coalition eventually fell apart, but it was powerful, reminding us why Jewish American groups should care about or focus on issues that don’t directly affect Jewish people.
—
The post The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Mourning the victims of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire
דעם 25סטן מערץ וועט ווערן 105 יאָר זינט דער שרעקלעכער טראַגעדיע — די שׂריפֿה אינעם טרײַענגל־שוירטווייסט־פֿאַבריק, אין 1911. 146 יונגע אַרבעטאָרינס, ס׳רובֿ ייִדישע און איטאַליענישע, זענען אומגעקומען, ווען די טיר, וואָס האָט באַדאַרפֿט בלײַבן אָפֿן זיך צו ראַטעווען אין אַזאַ פֿאַל, האָבן די סוועטשאַפּ־באַלעבאַטים געהאַלטן פֿאַרשלאָסן.
צו יענער צײַט, האָט דער פּאָעט מאָריס ראָזענפֿעלד געאַרבעט אין „פֿאָרווערטס“ סײַ ווי אַ זשורנאַליסט, סײַ ווי אַ פּאָעט. ער איז אָנגעקומען צו דער שׂרפֿה, בעת די טראַגעדיע איז פֿאָרגעקומען און האָט במשך פֿון עטלעכע וואָכן געשריבן עטלעכע אַרטיקלען און לידער וועגן דער טראַגעדיע. מיר דרוקן דאָ אַן אויסצוג פֿון זײַן אַרטיקל, וואָס איז געווען געדרוקט אויף דער ערשטער זײַט פֿונעם „פֿאָרווערטס“, אַ וואָך נאָך דער טראַגעדיע, און אַן אויסצוג פֿון אַ פּאָעמע וואָס ער האָט געשריבן אין אָנדענק פֿון די אומגעקומענע מיידלעך.
זינט עס זײַנען אין ניו־יאָרק איבער הונדערט לעבנס פֿאַרברענט געוואָרן צוליב דער צוגעשלאָסענער טיר, וואָס האָט לויט דעם געזעץ געזאָלט זײַן אָפֿן, קוק איך מיט פֿאַרדאַכט אויף אַ טיר, אויפֿן געזעץ און אויף פֿײַער.
איך באַטראַכט זיי אַלע פֿאַר איבעריקע זאַכן.
וואָס טויג מיר אַ טיר, אַז זי איז פֿאַרשפּאַרט? וואָס טויג דאָס געזעץ ווען מען פֿירט אים נישט דורך? און פֿײַער… יאָ, מיר דאַכט, אַז מענטשן ווייסן נישט וואָס צו טאָן מיט זייער פֿײַער…
איך האָב פֿון אייביק אָן געוווּסט, אַז מיט פֿײַער שפּילט מען זיך נישט. איצט אָבער ציטער איך פֿאַר דעם וואָרט פֿײַער. איך קען קיין נאַכט נישט שלאָפֿן. פֿײַערדיקע חלומות שרעקן מיך, זיי פֿאַרברענען מײַן מנוחה און איך ליג און שוידער.
מיר דאַכט, אַז הימל און ערד האַלטן אין אײַן ברענען, אַז עס פֿלאַקערן די זון, די לבֿנה און די שטערן, אַז די מלאכים שפּרינגען ברענענדיק פֿון די הימלשע פֿענצטער אויף דער ערד און פֿאַלן אַרונטער טויטע… און די אַמבולאַנסן פֿירן זיי אַוועק אין מאָרג (מתים־שטיבל).
מיר דאַכט, אַז גאָט אַליין איז אײַנגעהילט אין אַ פֿײַערדיקן טלית און ברענט. ברענט און גיסט מיט פֿײַערדיקע טרערן, וואָס פֿאַלן אַרײַן און פֿאַרלירן זיך אין זײַן וועלטן־גרויסער, פֿלאַקערדיקער באָרד, און פֿון זײַנע נאָזלעכער זעצט אַ רויך ווי פֿון אַ צוויי וווּלקאַנען.
איך זע ווי די גאַנצע פּמליא־של־מעלה קרימט זיך, דרייט זיך מיט גסיסה־שמערצן אין אַ ים פֿלאַמען, ווי די כּרובֿים און שׂרפֿים און חיות־הקודש צאַפּלען מיט די פֿלאַמענדיקע פֿעדערן, רײַסן זיך די אָנגעצונדענע האָר פֿון די ברענענדיקע קעפּ און קלאַפּן פֿאַרצווייפֿלט מיט די רויטע, פֿײַערדיקע פֿליגל אין אַ שווערער, גרויסער, אײַזערנער טיר און די טיר איז פֿאַרשלאָסן… דער שׂטן האָט איר פֿאַרשלאָסן און באַהאַלטן דעם שליסל…
איך זע ווי די „אופֿנים“ און „גלגלים“, די „הימלשע רעדער“ דרייען זיך און פֿלאַקערן, און מיר דאַכט, אַז דאָס זײַנען שנײַדער־מאַשינען, און אין די ברענענדיקע, צום טויט־שפּרינגנדיקע מלאכים דערקען איך די פּנימער פֿון די פֿאַרשׂרפֿעטע אַרבעטער־מיידלעך, די טעכטער פֿון דער ייִדישער גאַס אין דער בלוטיקער פֿון פֿרויען־יאַקעס פֿון וואַשינגטאָן פּלייס.
איך שרײַ, איך ליאַרעם, איך וויין, איך פֿלוך, איך לאַך און כאַפּ זיך אויף אין היסטעריע.
פֿײַער… פֿײַער…
וואָס איז אייגנטלעך פֿײַער? איז דאָס אַ ברכה? איז דאָס אַ קללה?
די תּורה איז געגעבן געוואָרן אין פֿײַער, די אינקוויזיציע האָט געהערשט אין פֿײַער.
פֿײַער איז די נשמה פֿון דער וועלט. אין פֿײַער גייט אויף דער טאָג און מיט אַ פֿײַער פֿאַרגייט ער.
דאָס לעבן פֿון יעדן באַשעפֿעניש איז פֿײַער.
דער מענטש, אין וועמען זײַן פֿײַער האָט אויסגעברענט, דער האָט אויפֿגעהערט צו „זײַן“.
אַפֿילו די מילב האָט אין זיך אַ קליינעם לאָקאָמאָטיוועלע מיט פֿײַער, וואָס טרײַבט איר דורכן לעבן.
ליבע איז פֿײַער, דענקען — פֿײַער, אַרבעט — פֿײַער, האַס — פֿײַער, ראַכע (נקמה) — פֿײַער. אַלץ איז פֿײַער, אַפֿילו דאָס וואַסער: מיר גיסן אין זיך וואַסער צו פֿאַרלענגערן אונדזער פֿײַער. די דורשטיקע ערד טרינקט וואַסער, כּדי צו האָבן גענוג פֿײַער אַרויסצוגעבן אירע געוויקסן.
איך קען דאָס קלענסטע ליד נישט זינגען, ווען איך זאָל נישט דערפֿילן אין דער נשמה אַ ברען, אַ פֿײַער, דעם הייליקן פֿײַער פֿון שאַפֿן.
איך פֿאַרגעטער דעם פֿײַער, ער איז דער סימבאָל פֿון טעטיקייט, פֿון שטרעבן, פֿון שטײַגן, פֿון גיין אַרויף, הויך, הויך הימלווערטס…
אָבער איך פֿאַרער נאָר אין פֿײַער דאָס שאַפֿערישע און נישט דאָס צעשטערנדיקע. איך בענטש אים ווען ער גיט, אָבער נישט ווען ער נעמט. איך בענטש אים אויפֿן סיני און פֿלוך אים (שעלט אים) אויפֿן שײַטער־הויפֿן.
איצט פֿאַרדאַם איך אים. ער האָט פֿאַרצערט אַ פֿאַבריק מיט אַרבעטער־מיידלעך. ער האָט פֿאַרוואַנדלט ניו־יאָרק אין אַ לוויה־שטאָט און איז געוואָרן די קללה פֿון דער מענטשהייט.
ברעכט אויף די טיר און באַפֿרײַט זיך!
און אָט איז דאָס ליד וואָס משה ראָזענפֿעלד האָט דעמאָלט אָנגעשריבן:
די פֿאַרשלאָסענע טיר (פֿײַער־געדאַנקען איבער פֿאַרברענטע אַרבעטער)
דער פֿײַער בושעוועט אָן שיעור
עס זעצט דער רויך, די העל דערוואַכט.
מען שפּאַרט זיך צו דער רעטונגס־טיר,
אומזיסט! אָ, וויי, זי איז פֿאַרמאַכט!
מען שרײַט, מען ראַנגלט זיך, מען פֿאַלט,
אין טײַוולס בלוטיקן געצעלט.
מען בלײַבט אין זײַן פֿאַרפֿלוכטן גוואַלט,
אַיעדער אויסגאַנג איז פֿאַרשטעלט.
מען לויפֿט, מען ווייס אַליין ניט וווּ,
און יעדע האָפֿענונג איז גענאַרט.
די שווערע גיהנום־טיר איז צו,
דער אַשמדאַי האָט איר פֿאַרשפּאַרט.
ניט רופֿט דעם שוואַרצן שד צום דין!
אַ שאָד די מי, ער איז גערעכט…
צו דער פֿאַרמאַכטער טיר אַהין!..
און אַלע, פּונקט ווי איינער, ברעכט!
מען בלײַבט אין דעם גיהנום־בראַנד
כּל־זמן דער שלאָס איז אים געטרײַ…
קומט אַלע גלײַך, לייגט צו אַ האַנט!
ברעכט אויף די טיר און איר זײַט פֿרײַ…
די העל איז נאָר אַ העל ווי לאַנג
דער שלאָס פֿון טײַוול הענגט אויף איר.
געפֿערלעך איז איר פֿלאַם, איר צוואַנג
נאָר בײַ אַ צוגעמאַכטער טיר…
אַ צווייט ליד וואָס מאָריס ראָזענפֿעלד האָט אָנגעשריבן וועגן דער שׂריפֿה האָט די פֿאָרשערין און זאַמלערין פֿון ייִדישע לידער, חנה מלאָטעק, אָפּגעדרוקט אינעם פֿאָרווערטס אין 2011 — פּונקט הונדערט יאָר נאָך דעם אומגליק, אינעם אַרטיקל, קינות וועגן דעם טרײַענגל־פֿײַער. דאָס ליד געפֿינט זיך אויף דער פּלאַטע „דאָס גאָלדענע לאַנד“ פֿון יאָסל מלאָטעק:
די רויטע בהלה (אויף פֿאַרברענטע פֿאַבריק־מיידלעך אין ניו־יאָרק)
ניט קיין שלאַכט, ניט קיין פֿאַרטײַוולטער פּאָגראָם
האָט אָנגעפֿילט די גרעסטע שטאָט מיט קלאָגן,
די ערד האָט ניט געציטערט אין איר תּהום,
עס האָט קיין בליץ, קיין דונער ניט געשלאָגן;
סע האָבן קיין שוואַרצע וועטער־וואָלקנס ניט געקראַכט,
און קיין קאַנאָנען ניט די לופֿט צעאַקערט —
אָ, ניין! דאָס האָט אַ מוראדיקע העל דערוואַכט,
אַ שקלאַפֿן־נעסט מיט שקלאַפֿן ווילד געפֿלאַקערט,
דאָס האָט דער גאָלד־גאָט מיט אַ בראַנד־געלעכטער
געפֿרעסן אונדזערע זין און טעכטער,
געלעקט די לעבנס מיט זײַנע רויטע צונגען —
זיי זײַנען אין דעם טויט געשפּרונגען,
אין זײַן שויס געדרונגען,
ער האָט זיי געכאַפּט, געלאַכט, געזונגען…
ער האָט זיי פֿאַרשלונגען.
* * *
זיי זײַנען געזעסן אין זייער יאָך פֿאַרטיפֿט,
זייער שווייס האָט געטריפֿט —
אין דעם פֿאַרטויבנדן געזשום
פֿון מאַשינען אַרום, —
ווען צען שטאָק אין דער הויך,
האָט זיי פֿאַרוויקלט דער רויך,
פֿאַרשפּונען דער פֿלאַם,
און אַ גלוטיקער ים
געפֿרעסן, גענאַשט,
פֿאַרקוילט, פֿאַראַשט!
* * *
שוועסטער מײַנע! יונגע שוועסטער!
מײַנע יונגע ברידער!…
טרויערט מײַנע לידער!
יאָמערט און טרויערט!…
זעט ווי עס לויערט
פֿון טונקעלע נעסטער
דעם אַרבעטערס טויט;
ווי ער האַלט זײַן ברויט…
ווי ער גלאָצט בײַ זײַן טיר,
בײַ זײַן אָרעם געצעלט —
וויי, וויי איז מיר!
וויי, וויי דיר, וועלט!
אַ שבת איז דאָס געווען,
אַן אַרבעטערס אַ שבת,
זײַן „קידוש!“… זײַן „הבֿדלה!“…
די רויטע בהלה
איז פּלוצלינג געשען,
געשיקט פֿון דעם רײַכן,
דעם פּרינץ פֿון געלט.
אָ, אָ, וויי אָן אַ גלײַכן!
פֿליסט טרערנטײַכן,
אַ פֿלוך דער אָרדענונג!
אַ פֿלוך דער אומאָרדענונג!
אַ פֿלוך דער וועלט!
* * *
אויף וועמען זאָל מען פֿריִער קלאָגן?
אויף די פֿאַרברענטע?
אויף די ניט־דערקענטע?
אויף די, וואָס קדיש זאָגן?
אויף די פֿאַרקריפּלטע,
פֿון „זײַן“ געטראָגן?
מײַן טרערנטײַך
אויף אײַך אַלעמען גלײַך!
* * *
פֿאַרהיל זיך אין שוואַרצן, דו גאָלדן לאַנד!
צו טיף דײַן פֿאַרברעכן, צו שרעקלעך דײַן שאַנד,
צו טויב דײַן געוויסן, צו בלינד דײַן געזעץ,
צו טײַוולש דײַן „האַווען“, צו בלוטיק דײַן נעץ,
דײַן נעץ, וועלכע פֿאַנגט דײַנע אָרעמע־לייט —
ס׳וועט קומען די צײַט!… ס׳וועט קומען דײַן צײַט!…
* * *
צינדט יאָרצײַט־ליכט אָן אין די ייִדישע גאַסן!
דער בראָך איז דער בראָך פֿון די ייִדישע מאַסן,
פֿון אונדזערע מאַסן פֿאַרחושכט און אָרעם.
ס׳איז אונדזער לוויה, יאָ, — אונדזערע קבֿרים,
ס׳האָט אונדזערע קינדער, וויי, אונדזערע בלומען,
דער פֿײַער פֿון אונדזערע אָרעמס גענומען.
וויי! אונדזערע ליבע פֿאַרשׂרפֿעטע קוילן,
וויי! אונדזערע פֿריידן אַ העלע מיט גרוילן,
וויי! אונדזערע גליקן אַ באַרג מיט אַרונות,
וויי! אונדזערע זיסע — גיהנום זכרונות!…
אַ צווייט ליד וואָס חנה מלאָטעק האָט דעמאָלט געדרוקט הייסט „מאַמעניו, אָדער עלעגיע פֿאַר די טרײַענגל־פֿײַער־קרבנות“, ווערטער פֿון אַנשל שאָר, מוזיק פֿון יוסל רומשינסקי:
עס רײַסט דאָס האַרץ פֿון דער שרעקלעכער פּלאָג,
ס׳ייִדישע פֿאָלק קלאָגט און וויינט, און ברעכט די הענט.
עס ברעכט אויס אַ פֿײַער, אין העלן טאָג
און הונדערטער אַרבעטער, זיי ווערן פֿאַרברענט.
די וואָס זײַנען פֿון פֿײַער אַנטרינען
האָבן שפּרינגענדיק זייער טויט געפֿינען.
די „מאָרג“ איז פֿול,
מען ווערט שיעור דיל,
ווי אַ מאַמע קלאָגט דאָרט אין דער שטיל:
— אוי־וויי, קינדעניו!
רײַסט זיך בײַ די האָר די מאַמעניו,
— צוליב דעם שטיקל ברויט
האָט אַ שרעקלעכער טויט
גערויבט מיר מײַן איינציק קינד;
טויט ליגט מײַן מיידעלע,
תּכריכים ׳שטאָט אַ חופּה־קליידעלע,
וויי איז מײַנע יאָר,
אַ קינד פֿון זעכצן יאָר,
אוי, מאַמע, מאַמע, וויי איז מיר!
חנה מלאָטעק האָט אויך אַרײַנגענומען טייל פֿון אַ ליד וואָס זי האָט באַקומען פֿון איוו סיקולאַר. די ווערטער זײַנען פֿון לויִס גילראָד און די מוזיק — פֿון ד. מייעראָוויץ. דער אָנהייב לייענט זיך אַזוי:
די שטונדע האָט געקלאַפּט,
דער שאַפּ האָט געסטאַפּט
אין דער גרויסער ווייסט־פֿעקטאָרי.
די אַרבעטער, זיי
האָבן געקראָגן די פּיי
און געאײַלט זיך אַהיימגיין פֿאַר פֿרי.
נאָר פּלוצים, אוי־וויי,
אַ שרעק, אַ געשריי,
אַ העלישער פֿײַער ברעכט אויס.
פֿון איבעראַל קומען
פֿאַרצווייפֿלטע שטימען
אַיעדער וויל פֿריִער אַרויס.
פֿײַערלײַט קלינגען,
פֿון צענטן פֿלאָר שפּרינגען
מיידלעך פֿאַר אַנגסט און פֿון נויט.
עס קראַכט אומגעהײַער
דאָס שרעקלעכע פֿײַער
און פֿאַרברענט יונגע לײַבן צום טויט.
The post Mourning the victims of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
I had a shot and rock ‘n’ roll fame — I chose a lifetime of Shabbat instead
In 1986, saying no was not part of the plan. I was 26, newly signed to Island Records, and for the first time in my life, the machinery of the music business had begun to move in my favor. My songs “Waning Moon,” “I Feel Young Today,” and “1000 Years,” from my second album Gematria, were on the radio and MTV. There was talk of tours, of opening slots with artists like Sting, Joe Cocker and Greg Allman. My job, as everyone understood it, was simple: Say yes. Yes to every opportunity, yes to every kind of exposure, yes to everything that could possibly give my career momentum.
Lou Maglia, the president of Island Records, was an old-school Italian record guy — street-smart, direct and deeply invested in the artists he believed in. I was among his first signings. He had taken me on largely because of an independent record I had made called This Father’s Day, written and recorded as tribute to my dad, who died at 54, just a day after I’d turned 24. He was my mentor and my hero. Those who say his death had much to do with my sudden turn toward observant Judaism are partly right.
The other part is that in seeking a record deal since I was 13, and then finally getting one, I discovered it wasn’t the answer to what I’d actually been searching for, which was a loving family, a clearer understanding of what my life’s purpose might be, and a deeper sense of belonging in my tribe — the Jewish people.
That’s why, one afternoon, when I walked into Lou’s office and closed the door behind me, what I said to him must have sounded incomprehensible.
“Lou, I’m starting to keep this Jewish thing called Shabbos, and I won’t be available to perform on Friday nights anymore.”
He stared at me for a moment, then burst out laughing.
“Ha! Fucking Shabbos. Ok, that’s a good one, I get it. But can we talk about these opening slots?”
It wasn’t a cruel laugh. It was the laugh of a man encountering something he had no category for. In Lou’s world, artists did all kinds of self-destructive things and made radically poor decisions. But remove themselves from the single most important performance night of the week? Never. Ever.
I was, in effect, telling him I had decided to become unavailable for my own ascent.
At the time, I couldn’t have explained my decision in any coherent way. I didn’t have the vocabulary or even the conceptual framework. All I knew was that after my dad’s death something had begun to feel hollow. Not the music. The music was real. It was everything around it. The sense that if I just kept moving forward fast enough, saying yes often enough, I’d arrive at some point where things would finally make sense. They didn’t. (I can state for the record, 40 years later, they still don’t.)
But around that same time, through a chain of introductions, I met the record producer and singer Kenny Vance, of Jay and the Americans fame. Kenny, now my dear friend, had worked with everyone, and he wasn’t shy about mentioning it.
“I used to date Diane Keaton,” he told me. “I know Woody Allen. I was the music director for Saturday Night Live. But tonight, I’m gonna take you to my main connection, a religious Jew in Brooklyn.”
I suspect he thought I’d roll my eyes at the prospect. I did nothing of the sort. I was excited.
Before long, we were crossing the Brooklyn Bridge, the lights of lower Manhattan burning behind us. We arrived at an apartment in Crown Heights where Rabbi Simon Jacobson greeted us. I connected with Simon right off the bat. His eyes reflected a paradox, an awareness that being alive was both a source of great humor and great sadness. Simon told me about his work reconstructing the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s talks from memory, highly complex talks that lasted for hours and drew on thousands of Jewish sources. The scale of it was incomprehensible to me. It belonged to a world governed by entirely different assumptions than my own.
Later that night, after Kenny, who seemed very old — I think he was 40 — got tired and left for his home in Far Rockaway, I asked Simon about the paintings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe hanging on the wall.
“What’s the deal with those pictures?” I said. “They seem sort of cultish to me.”
Simon wasn’t offended. “I enjoy them,” he said. “To me, the Rebbe is like a very inspiring grandfather.”
Makes sense, I thought.
He grew quiet, then continued. “There are people called tzadikim,” he said. “They have no sense of self. They live only to serve others. And they can do anything they wish.”
I knew enough to know he wasn’t using the colloquial tzadik, as in “What a tzadik, that Herb Shapiro. Got me such a deal on my new Firestones.”
“Really?” I asked. “Can they fly?”
Simon looked at me. He became serious.
“I’ve never seen anyone fly. But for a tzadik, flying is no greater miracle than walking.”
The remark just about toppled me. Not because it sounded weird and mystical, but because it cohered with something I had always felt, but had never heard expressed so simply: that walking itself was a miracle. That breathing, eating pancakes, taking a piss, that just being alive, was a miracle.
One could accurately say that I was the fastest person ever to join the “cult.” I went out and bought tzitzit the next day. I began keeping kosher. “One less shrimp,” was how I thought of it. Then came Shabbat observance in my dumpy railroad apartment on 47th and Eighth Avenue in Hell’s Kitchen.
Shabbat, like music, was the space between notes. A kind of purposeful interruption. For one day each week, I stopped. I stopped producing. I stopped striving. Most importantly, I stopped trying to turn success into proof of my worth. It wasn’t only about stopping work. That’s too simple. It was about remembering that I was more than my work. It felt like an authentic subversion of shallow cultural norms, something that instinctively appealed to me. It was the more truthful version of the so-called subversion that rock and roll had always only imitated.
This is why I told Lou Maglia no.
Not because I was certain, but because I had begun to understand that if I lost this, I might lose something far more essential than a career.
My friend, the late Lou Maglia, lapsed Catholic, soulful man that he was, stopped laughing. He saw that I was serious. He didn’t drop me. Far from it. He became my biggest champion. When it would have been only logical for us to play cities like Cleveland and Chicago in support of one of my recordings, Lou even helped finance my tour of the Caucasus in what was then the USSR. (Another story for another time.) He knew that my music wasn’t a posture, but a reflection of my deeply held values.
Hey Lou, if you’re up there listening, thank you. You were a beautiful man with a beautiful spirit.
People sometimes ask me if the cost to my career was worth it. There are two issues I have with the question. First, it assumes the career was the central measure of my life. Second, few ask what I received in return. I have, thank God, been blessed with a beautiful marriage, a tight-knit, loving family, grandchildren, a body of work that I could never have imagined at age 26, and time. I have been able to see the value of time and secure it as my own.
As for music, Shabbat didn’t take any of it away from me. It taught me to hear it better, write it better, and perform it better.
I have never struck a better bargain.
The post I had a shot and rock ‘n’ roll fame — I chose a lifetime of Shabbat instead appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Spain withdraws ambassador to Israel, widening diplomatic rift as Trump threatens to sever trade
(JTA) — MADRID — Spain has permanently withdrawn its ambassador to Israel in a symbolic rebuke of the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has emerged as an unequivocal and lonely voice in Europe against the Iran war, widening Spain’s rift with Israel and making an enemy of President Donald Trump.
Ambassador Ana María Salomón Pérez was removed from her post on Tuesday, according to an announcement issued Wednesday by the Spanish government. Israel recalled its ambassador to Spain, Rodica Radian-Gordon, shortly after Spain said it would recognize a Palestinian state in May 2024.
Spain’s move marks an escalation in the countries’ strained relations, which have severely deteriorated since the start of the war in Gaza in 2023.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez became one of Europe’s most vocal critics of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s prosecution of that war. Over the last three years, he rallied support for Palestinian statehood, accused Israel of genocide in Gaza and imposed a total arms embargo on Israel.
Pérez was summoned to Madrid in September, following a diplomatic row over Spain’s ban on aircrafts and ships carrying weapons to Israel. Israel’s foreign minister Gideon Saar called the measure antisemitic and barred two members of Sánchez’s Cabinet from entering Israel, saying they supported “terrorism and violence against Israelis.”
Spain and Israel are now both represented in each other’s embassies by their respective chargés d’affaires, lower-ranking officials who reflect their downgraded relations. It is the same status that Israel maintained with South Africa before the two countries ejected even the lower-level envoys earlier this year.
Sánchez has been one of few major European leaders to emphatically reject the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran, calling them “an unjustified and dangerous military intervention” that he says violates international law.
As the leaders of Germany, France and Italy have taken more conciliatory tones, Trump has lashed back at Sánchez. After Spain refused to allow the United States permission to use two jointly operated bases in its territory for strikes on Iran, Trump threatened to sever trade.
“Spain has been terrible,” Trump said during a press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on March 3. He added, “We’re going to cut off all trade with Spain. We don’t want anything to do with Spain.”
Sánchez, in response, has revived the “No to war” slogan that galvanized Spaniards in 2003. At the time, millions took to the streets to reject then-Prime Minister José María Aznar’s support for the Iraq war, contributing to his center-right party’s collapse in 2004. The war was also seen as a driver behind a deadly terrorist attack in Madrid whose 22nd anniversary Spain marked on Wednesday.
Sánchez said the slogan summed up the Spanish government’s position in a televised address on March 4. In a pointed line, he said leaders who have not improved their people’s lives “make use of war to hide their failure whilst filling the pockets of a few — the usual ones, the only ones who win when the world stops building hospitals in order to build missiles.”
Even more pointedly, without naming Trump, he said, “We are not going to be complicit in something that is bad for the world and contrary to our values and interests, simply out of fear of reprisals from anyone.”
The post Spain withdraws ambassador to Israel, widening diplomatic rift as Trump threatens to sever trade appeared first on The Forward.