Connect with us

RSS

Glazed over: 2010s vibes abound in Ilana Glazer’s made-in-Toronto comedy special ‘Human Magic’

In 2016, the American comedian Ali Wong put out a comedy special. As reviewer Michelle Ruiz put it at the time for Vogue, “Until her, I’d never seen a pregnant stand-up. I’d never seen a pregnant stand-up pretending to trap a man’s head between her legs in simulated cunnilingus either, but this is the beauty of Baby Cobra.” Jason Zinoman of the New York Times meanwhile called Wong’s performance “something new, a pregnant woman in her third trimester delivering a deliriously filthy and funny hour of comedy woven into a sneakily feminist assault on the double standards of parenting.”

Going on a decade ago, it was refreshing, raw, what have you, to see a woman in this deeply domestic state, speaking about sex and bodies in a way more commonly associated with… well, with men. And a racialized woman, too—a further change of pace in the white, male world of stand-up.

During that era, American comics Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer had moved their web series Broad City onto cable television, showing that young women—not just young men—could be hijinks-having stoners. We were still in the era (Knocked Up, 2007) where men (perhaps played by Seth Rogen) could be slackers and some no-nonsense woman, perhaps played Katherine Heigl, would be the responsible one. We’re kind of back in that era now, but for five minutes there, it was allowed that women sometimes slacked.

Like seemingly all Jewish women at the time, I was a huge fan of this show. I particularly loved the 2015 episode, “Knockoffs,” that weaves together a plot with Abbi’s character trying out a certain new act with a male partner and Ilana’s discount handbag shopping with her mother. It was the second of the two that truly made the episode, showcasing a part of the New York mother-daughter experience never before seen, or at least not seen since The Nanny. But you need both threads to make sense of what follows: The bargains turn out to be found underground, as in literally beneath the road, yielding one of the best comedic lines of all time: “All the good shit is always down a manhole.”

Art about slackerdom, told from the slacker’s perspective, is always a challenge, but they nailed it. Broad City was objectively delightful, but also innovative in a way of specific interest to me: it presented unambiguously Jewish, Jewish-looking young women as protagonists, not sidekicks. They were the comic relief and the ones out having sexual adventures, and going on a satirical version of Birthright Israel. After growing up surrounded by a Gwyneth-led beauty standard, I got a kick out of knowing that I now lived in a world where women like these were considered desirable. What’s it to me if men think Scarlett Johansson’s hot? Abby and Ilana, this is another matter.

I’m a few months older than Jacobson and (this will be relevant) a few years older than Glazer, but close enough in age to both that it was a bit like watching my own early-20s Brooklyn-dwelling life, except hilarious. I remember it as a kind of counterpoint to Lena Dunham’s Girls, about a not-dissimilar milieu and life stage, but just so much sillier, and therefore more my speed. While I can’t say I’m committed to realism or representation in my television viewing generally (or else why so devoted to Midsomer Murders?) there was something special about how this show was covering familiar-to-me territory and getting it so right.

***

As I will be the first in human history to observe, time passes. For most of us, it’s a bit who cares. It’s unremarkable if the classmate who partied hard at 19 is more settled-down at 39. Not so if you made a name for yourself as your own free-spirited slacker-stoner alter ego, the picture of unfettered youth. If you’re Ilana Glazer, if you played the less responsible of the Broad City broads, and had the audacity to grow up, get married, and have a kid, your fans may demand an explanation.

Glazer’s comedy special, Human Magic, filmed at the Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre in Toronto last May and released for streaming in the final days of 2024 (on Hulu in the U.S. but via the adult side of Disney Plus in Canada) , brings the fans up to speed. It reconciles the filthy-mind-possessing Ilana Wexler alter ego from Broad City with the grown-up, responsible, professionally accomplished Ilana Glazer before us today. It is also an attempt at making a 2010s… vibe? ethos? relevant to the 2020s.

Human Magic is the 2020s’ answer to Baby Cobra, which may be where things go awry. It’s no longer groundbreaking to be a pregnant woman or new mom who (glances around anxiously) does sex stuff. It is maybe slightly edgy to admit to being a mom who consumeth the marijuana, as Glazer does, as is central to her personal brand, but stonerdom itself isn’t the rebellion it once was, not with legal dispensaries surrounding the theatre she’s performing at on Yonge Street—to say nothing of the rest of North America—not with all the much-publicized research about alcohol as a carcinogen, making Team Weed seem as if they had the right idea all along.

That’s not to say there isn’t a twist. The twist is that Glazer is not like those other women who love their husbands and have babies with them and enjoy cleaning the house and help their inept-shopper husbands buy T-shirts. And I don’t just mean because she’s a famous person.

Glazer now describes herself as a “queer Jewy woman,” but does not elaborate on what sort of queer she—a woman with a husband—identifies as. A non-practising bisexual, one might guess. (Human Magic includes what might be the lewdest-ever way of expressing the fact that the speaker is monogamous, and much of the special is about her sexual history with men, though she does mime a sex act involving another woman, but only—hard to explain—to make a feminist point about microphones being too phallic.) And perhaps that as well, I have no idea.

A glance at Instagram and recent media coverage attests that Glazer uses she/her as well as they/them pronouns, suggesting that this is core to what Glazer’s referring to when speaking of queerness. Per a recent profile in The Independent—which was picked up by other clickbait headline outlets like it was still 2014—having a baby paradoxically tapped her into her own gender multitude (as versus the boring thing where it reminds you just how female you are), and today, “she identifies as a non-binary woman.”

If this has you wondering who among us identifies as a binary woman, you are not alone. If you’re not wondering this, you are mad at me for having done so. Those are, you see, the only options.

But the interview got picked up, as they will, and held up as evidence that a beloved celebrity had Come Out As Queer. Fine, an assigned-female-at-birth, feminine-presenting, husband-having one, but why should any of that matter? It’s a big tent! Vogue publisher Condé Nast’s gender-celebrity website Them celebrated this revelation-of-sorts as follows: “We love a subtle nonbinary slay, especially when it comes from none other than Ilana Glazer.”

The subtlety is undeniable. Blink and you’d miss it.

***

You can never know, when talking about another person, what’s a tentative first step on a journey, and what’s a gesture taken on for symbolic reasons. It’s entirely possible that tomorrow, Glazer will announce exclusively they/them—or he/they, or he/him—pronouns, and whichever material transitioning in whichever direction, and I will feel like a terrible person for having even fleetingly interpreted this as a case of a functionally if not technically straight lady presenting herself as more interesting (or oppressed) than she is.

It is also possible that I will wake up tomorrow with the politics and inclinations of someone born a micro-era later than I was (Glazer was born in 1987, whereas I’m an ancient ’83er, and this seems a critical difference for this sort of thing) and be putting she/they into my bios and—despite nothing substantively changing about me or how I live my life—everyone will have to walk on eggshells when discussing me and my bog-standard hetero household.

Everyone apart from the right-wing rabble-rousers, who take a different tack. Well those, and people who from-the-left critique such things, often with the derisive term, spicy straights.

My commitment to the she/her (or, more precisely, to not stating my pronouns and letting others come to the likeliest conclusion) is more a matter of generation or sensibilities than place on any gender spectrum. I have no reason to believe I am more comfortable in my femininity, or however you want to phrase such things, than Glazer is in hers. My hunch here—and it can only be a hunch, I’m not in her brain—is that we have different frameworks for understanding the same kinds of experiences.

Why, then, am I walking on eggshells talking about this? Why am I questioning my choice to use she/her for Glazer, wondering at 9:15 p.m. whether the Wikipedia entry’s use of they/them (which it notes is for consistency, just to pick something) ought to have trumped the Independent profile’s she/her? If I had reason to believe Glazer consistently preferred they/them, I would use they/them, I have no whole thing about this, and believe in using the pronouns people request. Why do I feel like a bad guy here?

My jumpiness isn’t much of a mystery, though. It’s because I’m a repeat visitor to rodeos of this nature. There’s a subset of people who will be next-level furious at me for what they will call erasure, gatekeeping, transphobia. All this because of what is essentially a semantic difference of approach between two people whose lives are—apart from one of them being a famous person who helped create the brilliance that is Broad City—remarkably alike.

Who cares, and more to the point, what does any of this have to do with Human Magic?

The subtext of Human Magic is that Glazer is not just some straight-lady comic offering up relatable anecdotes. She’s someone you’d least expect to be leading such a conventional life. And she describes it all in this cool-kid tone that makes you almost forget that the things she’s talking about (loving your baby, enjoying sex with your husband) are, well, square.

***

I am not an Ilana Glazer-ologist, which is to say, my interest is the persona, not the person. And the persona she presents in Human Magic is no more or less conventionally feminine than the typical straight woman. It is not just the gushing about the husband (more on that in a moment), but visible to anyone with any familiarity with gendered self-presentation in our society. She’s dressed in a black, off-the-shoulder minidress or shirt-and-miniskirt (mini-skort?) combo, with black stockings, a chic necklace, and gorgeous shimmery eyeshadow.

Now someone could be as described and use any pronouns. But the overall effect—combined with Glazer’s own references to herself as a woman and “mom” throughout the special—suggests that one would not be misgendering Glazer to call her a woman. She calls herself a woman! (Why am I walking on eggshells?) And unlike her Broad City co-creator and co-star, who is married to another woman, Glazer is what one might call straight-passing. (A wife, if you’re a woman, is a dead giveaway about the not-straight thing.)

What I keep returning to is the T-shirt interlude. In this part of Human Magic, Glazer pokes gentle fun at her husband for his inability to buy his own clothes. She has to show him the websites and tell him what size he wears. Men!

This is standard stand-up fare. The bumbling husband, flummoxed by a domestic task, or maybe he deems it too trivial. There’s also something mildly absurd about how specifically I related to this (the scientist husband, those exact T-shirt websites). Queer Jewy women, straight Jewy women, not so different after all!. 

Glazer is nothing if not a member of her moment. She admits that she’s married, but encourages applause for the divorcees in the audience at the start of the show, calling herself a “divorce enthusiast.” She performs—literally, she is on a stage—the requisite feminist ambivalence of being in an opposite-sex relationship. “I feel so lucky to be married to my husband, but it’s hard at baseline to be a woman married to a man. Cause I see him sometimes as [here she gets dramatically angry] SOME MAN, instead of the person I chose to spend my life with.”

It’s performative misandry, but it’s also heteropessimism—or what would be called that if the person experiencing it identified as heterosexual. Glazer negotiates a squickiness surrounding her quasi-straight-womanhood (straight quasi-womanhood?) by describing herself as pro-guys, anti-men, with a whole routine about the difference between guys and men. Something about guys wearing sweatpants to buy groceries and men wearing jeans to work out in.

The guys-good, men-bad bit is a little funny, maybe? Not earth-shattering. It taps into something in the culture, though. Specifically, to the loophole according to which you’re permitted to be a ban-men feminist and have a male partner, so long as you tell anyone who’ll listen that you’ve found one of the good ones. Where this is meant to leave the women married to less-good ones (are they victims or just bad feminists?) I’m never clear.

***

Human Magic has its moments, in the Baby Cobra mould. Glazer describes a medical exam she had before giving birth as being “fingered” and in a positive sense—something I think I might find unnerving to hear if I were the doctor who’d performed the exam, but it’s a comedy special, maybe this never happened! She recalls the expletives she uttered when in awe of the miracle of having just had her baby. She confesses—in a scandalous tone—that she enjoys performing oral sex. Is the audience meant to be scandalized because sex, or because the sex-haver is a mom, or is it that third thing: that it’s yeah kinda shameful to be into sex with men, if you’re a queer feminist?

Loving your husband, enjoying sex with him, liking that he can carry heavy items (“I’ll tell you one thing daddies can do: carry shit”) not liking that he can’t be bothered to order his own T-shirts, loving your baby, worrying about your baby eating solids and how that’s going, enjoying cleaning your house (this is, Glazer explains, her Shabbat ritual), these are all things that put Glazer in community with the wide world of basic straight ladies. (I detest cleaning my house, which puts me where on the gender spectrum?) She presents her preferences for ordinary things as shocking revelations—the subtext being, can you believe someone like ME is into this stuff?

The more I think of it, the stranger it all seems. Annoying, but also kind of brilliant? There’s a part about how the first time she had fully unprotected intercourse was when trying for a baby. She describes this entirely banal fact of how one plans a pregnancy in extremely funny terms that sound both erotic and sordid.

What Glazer does—and what puts her in the spirit of Ali Wong—is remind that getting older, moving through the various life stages, does not magically remove women’s humanness. (Human Magic the title refers to reproduction, but could as easily refer to what’s imagined happens to women when no longer 22 and carefree.) Human Magic reminds that mothers are also women, that women are also people. Not just as in, people deserving of human rights, but people whose minds go to places that our culture ascribes to teenage boys.

The breakthrough of Broad City was showing that what’s thought of as teenage-boy-ness exists in young women as well. Human Magic extends the privilege to slightly older women. In a way.

***

Is the special not that funny because it’s too sanctimonious? After all, Glazer is an outspoken progressive, Broad City had a Hillary Clinton cameo in 2016 (whole lot of good that did, but I digress), and is a supporter of the Palestinian cause.  

But we are not in the realm of humourless scolding a la Hannah Gadsby’s 2018 anti-comedy comedy special, Nanette. Glazer’s comic timing is still there, her exaggerated expressions, and if some of her qualities that were charming on Broad City now inspire a bit of, you do realize you’re borderline middle-aged now yes?, like when she refers to her toddler as “dawg,” it is clear she does in fact realize this, and is in on the joke.

Glazer comes across as aware she’s known for having righteous left-wing politics, and uses this as a way of offering unexpected twists. She talks about how dreadful it was, developing breasts early—“shtetl titties,” she calls them—and being sexualized from a young age. She then pivots to how, in her 30s, she’s no longer gently patted in public spaces and how she misses this. That’s it, that’s the joke.

Then there’s the interlude where Glazer admonishes mainstream (non-feminist) pornography for its emphasis on incest. She digresses a bit and you think she’s about to condemn the 1995 movie Clueless for its step-sibling romance. Really, you think, she’s out here cancelling Clueless? Instead she mimes her then-pubescent self let us say really enjoying the film—and in doing so, going somewhere far franker than Clueless itself ever did.   

I suppose a part of me reacted to the knowledge that Glazer doesn’t fully identify as a woman the way I would have had I learned that she no longer considered herself Jewish. (Note: she absolutely does consider herself Jewish; it’s an analogy.) Broad City was such a triumph of Jewish female representation that maybe I am, on some level, unjustly attached to the idea of its creators as female and as Jews.

The CJN’s opinion editor Phoebe Maltz Bovy can be reached at pbovy@thecjn.ca, not to mention @phoebebovy on Bluesky, and @bovymaltz on X. She is also on The CJN’s weekly podcast Bonjour Chai. For more opinions about Jewish culture wars, subscribe to the free Bonjour Chai newsletter on Substack.

The post Glazed over: 2010s vibes abound in Ilana Glazer’s made-in-Toronto comedy special ‘Human Magic’ appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Post Views: 283
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Brooklyn Woman Denied Bail, Claims She Didn’t Kill Anyone in Car Crash That Killed Jewish Mother, Two Daughters

An overturned auto in a car crash flipped on its roof landing on a mother and her three children, killing two children on March 29, 2025, in Brooklyn, New York. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect

A Brooklyn woman denied killing anyone when she appeared in court on Thursday, less than a week after a Jewish woman and her two daughters died when she crashed her car into them at a crosswalk.

Miriam Yarimi, 32, appeared in Brooklyn Criminal Court via a video stream from her room in NYU Langone Hospital-Brooklyn, according to the New York Daily News. She is undergoing a psychological evaluation at the hospital following Saturday’s deadly car crash.

After the crash, Yarimi told first responders she was “possessed” and believed the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was following her. She has made similar claims about being pursued by the CIA on social media several times in the past, The Algemeiner previously reported.

Yamini, who is also Jewish, faces a slew of charges that include three counts of second-degree manslaughter, three counts of criminal negligent homicide, and four counts of second-degree assault.

“The devil is in my eyes. I am haunted inside. I didn’t kill anyone. I didn’t hurt anyone. Prove it. Show me the proof. You have no proof,” Yarimi said in a statement after Saturday’s crash, according to Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Nocella. “I need CT scans in my eyes. I need to get the scanning done now … Where’s my daughter? My daughter’s always in my heart.”

“People are out to get me,” added the single mother. “I need CT scans on my entire body. F— you. I need a whole work up to get whatever is in my body out of it. I did not hurt anyone. All the evidence is on my phone.”

Nocella called Yamini a flight risk and asked the judge that she be held without bail due to the “nature and severity” of the allegations, as reported by the Daily News. Judge Jevet Johnson agreed with Nocella and ordered Yamini to be held without bail. Nocella said prosecutors are prepared to present grand jury indictment on the manslaughter charges.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said his administration is “committed” to taking more action to prevent traffic violence and deaths following the fatal car crash that killed Natasha Saada, 35, along with her daughters Diana, 8, and Deborah, 5. Saada’s 4-year-old son Philip was injured in the crash and is still being hospitalized in critical condition.

Adams’ office announced on Wednesday that there were 41 traffic deaths during the first three months of 2025 — 24 fewer than last year and the second fewest since they started being recorded by the city. Despite the decline in traffic deaths, Adams admitted that more work needs to be done to keep New Yorkers safe on the streets, as evident by Saturday’s deadly car crash.

“In order to make New York City the best place to raise a family, we need to be safer at every level — including on our streets,” he said in a released statement on Wednesday. “Our administration’s investments in intersection safety improvements, treating traffic violence as the serious crime that it is, and our expanding automated camera enforcement are all helping ensure we’re leading the way toward a safer future for all New Yorkers — whether they are pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists.”

“We understand there is more work to do, as evidenced this past weekend’s tragic crash in Brooklyn because one lift [sic] lost to traffic violence is one life too many, but our administration remains committed to reducing traffic violence as much as any other form of violence,” Adams added.

On Saturday afternoon, Yarimi crashed her car into an Uber and then slammed into four members of the Saada family as they were trying to walk across the street at an intersection on Ocean Parkway in Midwood.

Yarimi was speeding at the time of the incident, “probably doing close to twice the speed limit,” and “ran a red light” just before the crash, Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez revealed on Wednesday while speaking to Eyewitness News. Yamini was also driving on a suspended license and has accumulated almost 100 parking and camera violations, including 21 speed camera tickets and five red light tickets.

“It actually exceeds just being reckless, it’s almost being wanton, we’re not going to tolerate that,” Gonzalez told Eyewitness News. “Her vehicle had been ticketed many times by red light cameras and speed cameras, that car was a frequent violator of both speed laws and red-light laws, and there is no excuse for running a red light.”

Saada and her daughters were buried in Israel this week. Four-year-old Philip remains at the hospital for his injuries and is facing “tough straights,” Gonzalez said. “We expect him to make some kind of recovery, but it’s going to be a long road for him.”

The boy lost one of his kidneys during treatment at Maimonides Medical Center, according to New York City Comptroller Brad Lander. “It’s heartbreaking,” Lander said after he visited the home of the Saada family, according to the New York Post. “He’s still in critical condition. He lost one kidney but they are hopeful about his prognosis.”

Five people in the Uber hit by Yarimi’s car suffered minor injuries.

Supporters of a proposed state law that would stop repeat super speeders in New York have rallied together since the car accident on Saturday, calling for the passage of the bill that they said could have prevented the crash. The legislation would require speed limiters to be installed on vehicles owned by repeat reckless drivers, like Yarimi. The device automatically limits the vehicles to within 5 mph of the legal speed of the road. The “Stop Super Speeders” bill was sponsored by New York State Assembly Member Emily Gallagher and Senator Andrew Gounardes.

The New York City Comptroller, Brad Lander, supports the bill and criticized Adams for not already implementing such measures.

The post Brooklyn Woman Denied Bail, Claims She Didn’t Kill Anyone in Car Crash That Killed Jewish Mother, Two Daughters first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 30
Continue Reading

RSS

Hungary Announces Withdrawal From ‘Political’ ICC as Netanyahu Visits Country, Defying Arrest Warrant

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban speaks to the media next to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in Budapest, Hungary, April 3, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Bernadett Szabo

Hungary on Thursday announced that it will withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) as the country welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the capital city of Budapest, defying an ICC arrest warrant against him over allegations of war crimes in Gaza.

Despite Hungary’s status as a signatory of the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, Netanyahu was not taken into custody upon his arrival in Budapest. Instead, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban welcomed his Israeli counterpart with full military honors.

Netanyahu’s visit to Hungary, which is scheduled to last until Sunday, is his first trip to Europe since the ICC issued an arrest warrant against him last year. In February, he made his first foreign trip altogether since the ICC’s decision to the United States, where he met with US President Donald Trump.

As Orban and Netanyahu met to discuss regional developments and bilateral cooperation, Hungarian Minister Gergely Gulyas released a statement announcing that “the government will initiate the withdrawal procedure” from the ICC, which could take a year or more to complete.

After their meeting, Orban said he believes the ICC is “no longer an impartial court, not a court of law, but a political court.”

“I am convinced that this otherwise important international judicial forum has been degraded into a political tool, with which we cannot and do not want to engage,” Orban said during a press conference.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar praised Budapest’s decision to withdraw from the international court, highlighting the country’s “strong moral stance alongside Israel and the principles of justice and sovereignty.”

“I commend Hungary’s important decision to withdraw from the ICC,” Saar wrote in a post on X. “The so-called ‘International Criminal Court’ lost its moral authority after trampling the fundamental principles of international law in its zest for harming Israel’s right to self-defense.”

In November, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu, his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and now-deceased Hamas terror leader Ibrahim al-Masri (better known as Mohammed Deif) for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza conflict. The ICC said there were reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Gallant were criminally responsible for starvation in Gaza and the persecution of Palestinians — charges vehemently denied by Israel, which until a recently imposed blockade had provided significant humanitarian aid into the enclave throughout the war. Israel also says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, despite Hamas’s widely acknowledged military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.

After the court issued the warrant against Netanyahu, Orban rejected the decision by inviting the Israeli leader to Budapest and accusing the court of “interfering in an ongoing conflict for political purposes.”

During Thursday’s news conference, Netanyahu commended Hungary’s withdrawal from the ICC, calling it a “bold and principled action” as “the first state that walks out of this corruption and this rottenness.”

“The ICC directs its actions against us fighting a just war with just means,” Netanyahu said. “I think [this decision will] be deeply appreciated, not only in Israel but in many, many countries around the world.”

After the Israeli leader was welcomed in Budapest, Hamas issued a statement calling on the Hungarian government to reverse its decision and extradite Netanyahu to the ICC to stand trial, calling the decision an “immoral stance that shows collusion with a war criminal who is running away from justice.”

In a post on X, Israel’s top diplomat reiterated his support for Hungary’s decision, arguing that Hamas’s statement only proves the country is taking the correct stance in this matter.

“Whoever needed further proof as to how justified, moral and necessary Hungary’s decision to withdraw from the ICC is: Hamas just condemned it,” Saar wrote.

“Hamas is defending the politicized and twisted so-called ‘International Criminal Court.’ And that’s the whole story.”

After the ICC’s decision to issue the warrants, several countries, including Hungary, Argentina, the Czech Republic, Romania, Poland, France, and Italy, have said they would not arrest Netanyahu if he visited.

US and Israeli officials issued blistering condemnations of the ICC move, decrying the court for drawing a moral equivalence between Israel’s democratically elected leaders and the heads of Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group that launched the ongoing war in Gaza with its massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2o23.

The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel as it is not a signatory to the Rome Statute. Other countries including the US have similarly not signed the ICC charter. However, the ICC has asserted jurisdiction by accepting “Palestine” as a signatory in 2015, despite no such state being recognized under international law.

The post Hungary Announces Withdrawal From ‘Political’ ICC as Netanyahu Visits Country, Defying Arrest Warrant first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 39
Continue Reading

RSS

Jewish Individualism Will Not Work, But Solidarity Must

The Western Wall and Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

During the events of Purim, Haman approached King Xerxes I and said, “There is a certain race of people scattered through all the provinces of your empire who keep themselves separate from everyone else. Their laws are different from those of any other people, and they refuse to obey the laws of the king. So, it is not in the king’s interest to let them live.”

Queen Esther’s solidarity with her dispersed people in Persia, and her profound loyalty to her Jewish identity, saved them from Haman’s genocide and secured their self-defense when she courageously revealed her heritage to Xerxes I.

Today, Israeli Jews are once again fighting for their Jewish and Zionist survival. Since Oct. 7, 2023, this Jewish Armageddon has extended anew to Diaspora Jews, who have felt the past’s chilling draft. Antisemitism has reawakened, infecting non-Jews and Jews alike. Few people contribute to antisemitic attitudes more than “self-loathing” Jews. These “self-loathing” Jews, who cynically reveal only the negative aspects of their Jewishness, believe they can avoid antisemitic attacks if they condemn Israel. But they achieve only self-betrayal, gaining neither acceptance nor respect from those who hate all Jews. Jews are a nation of people who question, not people who answer.

Questions pervade the Jewish mind to such a degree that the adage, “two Jews, three opinions,” has become a common characteristic of Jewish identity. Moreover, the pursuit of an answer often serves as a springboard for further inquiry. For us, as Jews, the ultimate answer, akin to the messianic ideal, remains a distant, undefined future. This traditional perspective has granted Jews a sort of perpetual license to disagree. Jews enjoy engaging in debate with others, but they sometimes find particular delight in debating amongst themselves, which allows their intellects to roam and their sardonic wit to playfully engage with each other’s vulnerabilities, finding humor without causing offense.

This love for discourse, for questioning everything in sight, including Hashem himself, is by no means the only puzzle that makes up our Jewish identity. Another crucial element of our makeup is solidarity. In times of major upheavals, we have always stood together against the masses who rose against us. To our enemies, we Jews — atheists, nihilists, Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Haredi, religious Zionists, non-religious Zionists, or undecided — look, taste, and feel the same. They care nothing for our ingrained liberalism. Our enemies seek cracks within our communities in order to break us apart and cause irreparable damage.

Years of relative peace and prosperity since the Holocaust have allowed us to gather again and engage in countless polemics over the fate of Israel, Jews, Judaism, and Zionism. However, we have failed to notice that we are at war again, and that our enemies eagerly exploit the divisions within a nation that comprises only 0.2% of the world’s population. These enemies — radical Islamists and progressive Western leftists who view Jews and Israel as white oppressors and colonizers — avidly listen to Jewish internal squabbles and criticisms of the Israeli government.

Despite the significant progress the Shin Bet and IDF have made in dismantling much of Hamas’s leadership and terrorist infrastructure, destroying its complex network of tunnels and command centers, and weakening Hezbollah, in addition to eliminating tens of thousands of Hamas terrorists, many Jews remain critical of, and disagree with, what Israel represents today. Aware of government problems, Israelis desire improvement. However, their rage and almost addictive pattern of anti-government protests have provided their adversaries with more opportunities to exploit perceived weaknesses.

This has resonated with some Jews worldwide. In New York, some Jewish intellectuals have defended “free-Palestine” and pro-Hamas protesters harassing Jewish students, invoking freedom of speech. They appear to have fallen prey to what they perceive as the lies of progressive anti-Zionist media, which systemically omits crucial facts about Israel. This includes the IDF’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties, and its role in eliminating thousands of Hamas terrorists and dismantling their terror network, which posed a significant threat to Israel (and innocent Palestinians themselves).

These “romantic” progressive Jews also forget that no matter how critical they are of that “brutal” IDF, it is still fighting on their behalf, because it is fighting on behalf of every Jew. Civilian deaths do occur, but they are either unfortunate incidents of war or, more often, a direct result of Hamas’s cruelty, as Hamas terrorists purposefully embed themselves within the civilian population. I once sat at dinner in Israel with a wealthy American Jewish couple who came on a sympathy tour a few months after Oct. 7. Nevertheless, the husband was convinced that the IDF was deliberately killing Palestinian children.

Those were wealthy, educated American Jews who thought they were charitable because they donated to Jewish causes, and therefore, believed they had the right to express their views on everything. This is where I, a Soviet Jew who grew up deprived of Judaism yet targeted by antisemitism, felt differently. To begin with, the husband was completely wrong. Second, in times of existential crisis, we, as Jewish people, must set aside our irresistible urge to disagree and criticize Israel on basic premises such as Israel’s fight to ensure Jews don’t live through a second genocide. The freedom to speak our minds has been ours for thousands of years. We conversed with Hashem, we obeyed Him, we sacrificed for Him, and then we quickly learned to disobey and question Him, even before we began arguing amongst ourselves.

Still, throughout our dotted and punctured history, it wasn’t our tongues or our disagreeable minds that kept our small nation together; it was our solidarity. In solidarity, we walked out of Egypt. In solidarity, tens of thousands of Eastern European Jews came to their promised land as early as the 1920s and began to build from nothing. In solidarity with his orphans, Dr. Janusz Korczak, despite being given the chance to save himself, chose to march with them, hand in hand, through the ghetto to the deportation point, on their way to Treblinka, where they met their final hour. In solidarity with other Jews across the Soviet Empire, Soviet Jews secretly tried to remember who they were, despite years of persecutions and purges.

In solidarity with their Soviet brethren, powerful American Jewry fought for Russian Jews to be able to emigrate to Israel and the United States. One of the main reasons our small nation has not disappeared into the abyss is because, in Diaspora, across oceans, and through impenetrable iron curtains, we never ceased to support one another. We knew we could not afford the luxury of neglecting our faith, traditions, and, most importantly, we could never abandon defending ourselves against our enemies.

Caesar’s “Divide et impera” (“Divide and Conquer”), though a cliché, is particularly relevant here. Seeing fractures within our communities, our enemies have intensified these divisions through incessant anti-Zionist and antisemitic propaganda and violence. Therefore, only as an undivided people, united by a single purpose — eradicating our enemies and protecting our promised land — do we stand a chance of survival. Perhaps only then will the day come when Jewish people gather on virtual street corners to argue and ask questions to which they seek no answers.

Anya Gillinson is an immigration lawyer and author of the new memoir Dreaming in Russian. She lives in New York City. More at www.anyagillinson.com.

The post Jewish Individualism Will Not Work, But Solidarity Must first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 39
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News