Uncategorized
NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther.
I first declared myself a Zionist when I was 10 years old in 1981, singing the song of Camp Young Judaea Sprout Lake, which went like this: “We are Young Judaeans, we have a story to tell. Too young for Tel Yehudah, but Zionists just as well.” Tel Yehudah was the high school age camp of Young Judaea, the year-round, non-denominational Zionist “movement” founded in 1909.
I was deeply involved in Young Judaea through my high school graduation in 1988. At the time, 40 years after the creation of the state of Israel, being a Zionist was not controversial. But Zionism as a “‘movement” felt fossilized. Its main goal had been achieved generations earlier, but we were still learning about the pre-state ‘Zionist thinkers.” The question of Jewish political autonomy in our ancient homeland had long since been settled. Some Israelis laughed at us. Israel was their country, not a movement.
Flash forward another 35 years and Zionism is very far from being a consensus ideology. We have seen anti-Zionism rise to prominence in New York City with the election of Zohran Mamdani. But it has arguably has reached its highest pitch here in my current city of Somerville, Massachusetts, where 55% of the electorate recently answered “yes” to the following non-binding ballot measure:
“Shall the Mayor of Somerville and all Somerville elected leaders be instructed to end all current city business and prohibit future city investments and contracts with companies as long as such companies engage in business that sustains Israel’s apartheid, genocide and illegal occupation of Palestine?”
This is possibly the most vociferously anti-Israel ballot measure that has been passed by any municipality in the country, making Somerville the unofficial capital of anti-Zionism. Many may criticize this as radically outside the mainstream, but the leaders of Somerville for Palestine, who spearheaded the measure, would take such criticism as a badge of honor. They call it leading on the issue.
Since my high school days, until Oct. 7, 2023, I hadn’t given much thought to Zionism. I never had a great urge to move to Israel. I lived there for a year before and after college. I turned my Jewish engagement into more of a religious enterprise than a political one. But, like many Jews, I have a wide group of friends and family there, and Oct. 7 and its aftershocks rekindled my convictions that Jews cannot rely on anyone else to secure our own safety. I am once again an active Zionist.
But, being a Zionist in Somerville is, frankly, exhausting. My post-Oct. 7 “Stand with Israel” sign was repeatedly stolen and vandalized just a few months into the war. This included a note from someone taped to the sign that ended in “Heil Hitler.”
In Somerville, there have been an ongoing parade of actions meant to isolate Israel and label it as the sole aggressor in the conflict. This included a hastily organized ceasefire resolution in January 2024 that originally did not condemn Hamas’ original attack. Following some last-minute scrambling that led to some improvements in the text, such as condemning Hamas, the measure passed 9-2.
Brian Sokol holds a sign opposing an Israel boycott ballot initiative in Somerville, Massachusetts, in 2025. (Courtesy Sokol)
In response, a group called “Shalom Somerville” was formed. This group counters the anti-Zionist narrative and actions and shares a more nuanced view of the conflict. It includes people from across the religious and political spectrum, all of whom agree on the basic idea that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. Within that framework, a large majority of the group does not support the current Israeli government or how Israel conducted the war.
Shalom Somerville has had its work cut out for it.
There has been a “standout” for Palestine outside the high school nearly every day. Throughout 2024 and 2025, many city community events have been disrupted by Palestinian activists. This includes Pride events, Disability events, film screenings, local markets, and festivals and an endless stream of graffiti. My own appointment to Somerville’s Human Rights Commission was also opposed by a letter-writing campaign on the basis of my professed Zionism. Protesters — Jewish and not — even showed up to the city’s Hanukkah celebration.
One additional key feature of local anti-Zionism is the extent to which it has divided the Jewish community itself. Somerville for Palestine has amplified the voices of Jews who agree with them. Several editorials signed by lists of self-identifying Jews have appeared in local newspapers. Local synagogues have had to struggle not to alienate either side in order to sustain their membership and some modicum of Jewish unity, with at least one issuing a formal non-statement that left frustrated people on both sides of the issue. Our sanctuaries are no longer sanctuaries.
But the biggest skirmish was the ballot measure. It was originally proposed in March 2025. The City Council meeting that voted whether the question could go directly to the ballot was attended by Somerville for Palestine activists, with their keffiyehs, signs, songs and chants. The City Council decided not to send the measure directly to ballot, but to require ballot supporters to gather the requisite number of signatures (approximately 5,800). As those opposing the ballot passed the chanting crowds while leaving the meeting, some were insulted and spat upon. The local head of the New England ADL, a Somerville resident who also spoke at the meeting, had to be escorted to her car by police officers. Thus began months of canvassing where the ballot measure was peddled in every major town square.
Meanwhile, Shalom Somerville focused on preparing for the November vote. We decided to highlight the impact of the measure on Somerville, while also noting that the measure would not have any real effect on Palestinians in Gaza. Despite our objections to the language of the measure, we did not want to be litigating the war. We wanted our local officials to “focus on Somerville,“ not Israel and Palestine. For example, we emphasized that boycotting the construction equipment giant Caterpillar would make it much harder to rebuild our schools and roads, and that boycotting HP, the supplier of laptops for our schools, would cost the schools more money and negatively affect local students and teachers.
We spent the summer organizing and raising funds. When we did start sending out mailers and creating social media ads and posts, we were called carpetbaggers. The campaign also raised several legal issues with the ballot approval process, including the lack of a 150-word pro and con discussion on the ballot itself. Lacking this, less engaged voters were more likely to see it as a simple vote for or against genocide, which the text proclaims as if this were a non-controversial, established fact. These court challenges were called anti-democratic. Both the outside influence and undemocratic charges also tapped into myths of hidden Jewish wealth and power.
The final election result should be understood as a split decision. The ballot passed, but not by a landslide. More importantly, Jake Wilson, the mayoral candidate who said he would not implement the measure, beat Willie Burnley, Jr., who pledged to enact it. This could be taken to mean that the majority of voters either were comfortable with the “statement of conscience” but not with the prospect of implementation. Or, more likely, voters simply had higher priorities in their choices for city government. Voters were focused on Somerville after all.
At left: Somerville for Palestine supporters celebrate a projected win for Question 3, a non-binding resolution imploring the Boston suburb to divest from companies that do business with Israel, Nov. 4, 2025; a still from an ad opposing the measure paid for by a local Jewish group. (Screenshot via Instagram; Screenshot via YouTube)
The ballot measure was just a beginning. The proponents will now push at every turn to implement it. And Shalom Somerville will push back. All of this, will happen regardless of events on the ground in the Middle East or issues we could be working on together in Somerville. The ceasefire currently in place made barely a ripple in the local political climate. Shalom Somerville is also exploring ways to not just react to anti-Israel efforts but to engage positively in creating spaces for dialogue and deeper understanding of Israel and Palestine.
As one of the leaders of Shalom Somerville said after the election, Jews know how to be in the minority and continue to fight for our own dignity. We have done that throughout history. We had grown unaccustomed to this need here in America, but we have tapped back into that deep, generational knowledge. As a first step, we have found each other, learned to support each other, disagreed civilly, relied on each other’s skills, built coalitions, and fought back. Like the first Young Judaeans way back in 1909, we have started a new movement.
—
The post NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
The Gospel of Grievance — From Father Coughlin to Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson speaks at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana, Oct. 21, 2025. Photo: Gage Skidmore/ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
There is a new digital gospel sweeping the American landscape. It preaches grievance, faith, and freedom in equal measures. Its apostles include the likes of Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Nick Fuentes, and a proliferating class of imitators.
Freed from the guardrails of editors and regulators, they feed off of mob fury and algorithmic applause. They use their pulpits to preach of national decay, all while wrapping themselves in the vestments of Christian renewal.
They all claim to be “just asking questions,” but by some perverse irony, the answer is always the same. Behind every corruption, every lost ideal, and every “establishment,” they inevitably will find the familiar silhouette of the Jew.
They have updated the tropes with terms like globalists, neo-cons, and Christian Zionists, but the pogrom-era rhetoric remains familiar. This is not theological antisemitism; this is a 21st-century cultural version, an aesthetic antisemitism of mood, meme, and insinuation. Utilizing borrowed piety, they baptize resentment and harvest rage and indignation.
This is their crusade, and they have corrupted a religious thematic to lend them divine coverage. “The truth shall set you free,” is their battle cry, and “Christ is King” has become their slogan of defiance, not devotion.
As my grandmother was fond of saying, “there is nothing new under the sun.” This is not a new gospel, only a recycled heresy. We have a recent and more successful American epoch to which we can look to for perspective. In fact, Tucker and his minions merely plagiarized the playbook of an American Catholic priest just over a century ago known as Father Coughlin.
Charles Coughlin began in Detroit as a preacher of hope — and ended up as one of the most prolific disseminators of antisemitism in American history. Armed with his frock and a national radio program, Coughlin delivered his own racist brand of Christian virtue that was populism with a halo.
He broadcast his divinely inspired grievances, to an audience estimated at its height of up to 40 million people, or roughly one-third of the American population. His diatribes were consistent in that they all revolved around a theme of Jewish conspiracy.
In his telling, Franklin Roosevelt, the New Deal, Wall Street, unions, the press, were all controlled and manipulated by the Jews.
When he launched his radio show, it was moralistic but not sanctimonious; he was charismatic, warm, and conversational.
Everything changed with the Great Depression — when he transitioned from theological to economic populism, less priest, and more crusader. As his popularity soared, his myopic focus on the Jewish population increased accordingly.
As a man who saw things in cosmic good and evil, God versus corruption, he became a demagogue railing against the banks and the “money changers.”
He was vocally defending Hitler, supporting fascism, and reprinting the “Elders of Zion” and other Nazi propaganda. This activity was accompanied by his incessant attacks on the ubiquitous Jew that he saw in every shadow of every corner.
Rabbi Jonathan Sachs once said, “More than hate destroys the hated, it destroys the hater.” In the case of Father Coughlin, his malady had taken him past the point of no return, and his passion had graduated from engaging to psychosis.
The Vatican decided Coughlin was a liability and pulled the plug by instructing him to cease broadcasting. Roosevelt’s government and the FCC decided that the good father had crossed the Rubicon and had no choice but to take him down. He was unceremoniously deprived of mail and radio privileges.
Father Coughlin went back to quiet pastoring for another few decades, and passed away in ignominy in 1979.
Today’s pretenders to Coughlin’s throne are less talented, but they are equally venomous and divisive. We can no longer rely on the church and government to stymie the efforts of those who wish to divide us.
Anyone with a Wi-Fi connection can mine the depths of human debasement and moral despair. Radio towers are no longer the barrier to entry, all that is required today is a grievance and a trending podcast.
In a way, this makes the likes of Carlson, Owens, and Fuentes more dangerous — because no one will be coming to stop them. It will be solely up to the American people to accept or reject what they are selling.
Coughlin’s America had the courage to silence him, but ours has provided a microphone and an audience. America today rightfully does not believe in guardrails and resists cancel culture, but at the same time it mistakes amplification for truth. Racism thrives when institutions abdicate, when grievances are monetized faster than they can be moderated, and when complexity is traded for conspiracy.
Philip Gross is a business executive and writer based in London. Born in New York, he writes on Jewish history, identity, and public affairs.
Uncategorized
What Would Happen if America Turned Against Israel — and US Jews?
An Israeli flag and an American flag fly at Abu Dhabi International Airport before the arrival of Israeli and US officials, in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, Aug. 31, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/Christoper Pike
The United States is arguably Israel’s greatest friend and ally. But what if it wasn’t anymore? What would American Jews and Israel have to do then?
With the recent election of Zohran Mamdani as the next mayor of New York City, which is home to more Jews than anywhere else in the US, the rise to power of anti-Israel politicians is now more apparent than ever. Indeed, as anti-Israel and antisemitic politics in both the Democratic and Republican parties becomes increasingly popular, it may only be a matter of time before enemies of the Jewish State dominate both houses of Congress, and even the US presidency. If that happens, Israel, its supporters, and all Jewish Americans need to be ready.
How would an anti-Israel US behave? Firstly, it would not support Israel in international forums, like the UN Security Council. As a result, Israel would face severe diplomatic isolation, unlike anything it has ever seen — even worse than the isolation Israel faces now. Indeed, Israel could end up becoming a pariah state like North Korea.
If the US ceases to be its ally, Israel would also likely face severe economic consequences. Currently, the US is Israel’s largest trading partner. Trade between the two countries is valued at $35 to $40 billion a year. Imagine if the US severely cut trade ties with Israel or even stopped trading with Israel entirely. The Israeli economy would be in danger.
Things wouldn’t be better for American Jews or other Americans who support Israel either. In fact, the kind of hostility Jews and supporters of Israel face in the US now might pale in comparison to the hostility they would face if the US was no longer a friend of the Jewish State. Eventually, even state-sponsored antisemitism could occur. In fact, many Jews around the world today will tell you they already feel as if it’s the 1930s all over again.
Both Israel and American Jews should immediately begin preparing for such a nightmarish scenario. There’s no time to waste.
For its part, Israel must be ready for a mass influx of immigration from the US. Absorbing immigrants, however, will probably be the least of Israel’s worries if the US is no longer its ally. The bigger problem will be reducing dependence on the US, especially in regards to military equipment and trade.
In Israel’s formative years, few countries were willing to sell arms to the Jewish State, so Israel had to be as self-sufficient as possible, and manufacture much of its own military equipment. Today, Israel has a thriving arms industry, one of the best in the world. Nevertheless, Israel is still too dependent on US military equipment. This has to change. Israel must undertake efforts to ensure that it can manufacture most if not all its own arms. Everything from ammunition to fighter aircraft. Because if the US ceases to be Israel’s ally, it will severely restrict its sale of arms to the Jewish State, if not stop altogether.
Furthermore, Israel must learn to survive without the US as a major trading partner. It must seek new trade partners and consolidate trade with current partners. Israel should do its utmost to ensure that it is as economically self-sufficient as possible in the event that the US decides to impose crippling sanctions or even a full-scale trade embargo.
Meanwhile, American Jews should prepare for the possibility that they might have to immigrate to Israel if being Jewish in the US becomes impossible and even threatens their lives. A good start would be learning Hebrew.
This is obviously a doomsday scenario, which will hopefully never come to pass. Nonetheless, we should all be prepared for the possibility that, in the future, the US may no longer be Israel’s ally — and might become hostile to all its Jewish citizens. Better to be safe than sorry.
Jason Shvili is a freelance writer and commentator on Jewish affairs, Israel, and the Middle East.
Uncategorized
Rabbi Moshe Hauer: In a World of Self-Promotion, He Chose Humility
Rabbi Moshe Hauer. Photo: Orthodox Union.
For four years, my boss and mentor, Rabbi Moshe Hauer, Executive Vice President of the Orthodox Union, and I, argued about how much self-promotion is needed for a leader to make a global impact.
As the leader of the Orthodox Union, representing the largest Jewish Orthodox organization in the world, I felt it was imperative that Rabbi Hauer spend more time talking publicly about the work of the organization.
I asked that he allow us to post more pictures of him in high-level meetings on social media, and that as a respected spiritual leader, he give people more access to his inner world in his writings. He fought me on each one.
And now, as we approach his shloshim on November 15, following his passing at age 60 on Shmini Atzeret, he has proven me wrong. Tributes streamed in from all over the world — from Presidents Trump and Biden to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, from faith leaders to communal leaders across all Jewish denominations.
I’ve been reminded that the Talmud teaches, “One who runs from honor, honor chases after him.”
Rabbi Hauer’s was not a natural shyness; it was a principled modesty. The book of Micah speaks of “walking modestly with your God.” It was a value that underscored all of Rabbi Hauer’s work.
There were initiatives that, for political reasons, he felt would be more impactful if they were not associated with the Orthodox Union. Without hesitation, he would greenlight the project and instruct those managing it to take no credit. Similarly, one colleague once quipped how a certain Jewish organization “beat the Orthodox Union to it,” by attaining a goal we were also working to achieve. Rabbi Hauer was incredulous: “Beat us?! We are all on the same team!”
Such levels of selflessness and integrity are rare in higher levels of leadership; corner offices are known for their outsized egos. This is perhaps why he made such an impact on the many political and faith leaders he met. Though he was soft-spoken, and though he never shied away from making it known when he disagreed with them, he was respected by all. In the words of Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, “Yes, we disagreed on so many issues but shared a profound respect and love for one another.”
Rabbi Hauer had a rich inner world. Watching him pray or study Torah, you could see the genuine emotions pouring forth. I begged him to write more often about his inner spiritual world, but he was allergic to charismatic faith leadership. As a rabbinic intern in the synagogue he led for 25 years, I saw how hard he worked to create leaders, not followers. Despite him rarely speaking about himself, thousands have described how much they grew from his spiritual teachings and model.
More recently, as his special assistant, I was witness to a unique dynamic between a boss and his employees. He was revered, and some may say feared, in the halls of the Orthodox Union, not because he reprimanded anyone, but because of his very high standards that motivated everyone around him to meet his expectations. Employees were often hesitant to argue with a decision made by Rabbi Hauer, their boss. They would ask me to be the go-between, and I would try to explain to them how wrong they were to avoid speaking with him directly.
Rabbi Hauer welcomed everyone into his office with a big smile. He took advice from anyone regardless of their title. If he was wrong, he would admit it — publicly and often. The Talmud states that God’s greatness is found in his humility. Rabbi Hauer was a Godly man.
I would assist him with his personal communications, which he was always catching up on. His inbox overflowed with messages; from wealthy donors, side by side with those from former congregants, from a world leader who wanted advice on a thorny topic and from a teenager who had a simple question about something he wrote. His schedule was grueling, and I begged him to ignore emails and just send a standard reply — a practice adopted by many people of his stature. He refused. He valued each and every person and wanted to make sure they knew it.
The most difficult part of my job was having to give him feedback. He was my teacher, and I had so much respect for him, making it hard to criticize him in any way. Whenever this happened, he would see me hesitating and begged me to speak my mind. Quite often he would ask me if he was missing something, if he was expecting too much from others or inserting himself too much into a situation. He was not asking from a place of low self-esteem, he was extremely confident. Rather, he recognized that in positions of power, one can too easily be blinded by that power, and so he worked tirelessly to maintain a healthy self-awareness.
Though some leadership books have recently started describing modesty and humility as valuable characteristics, it’s all too rare to see them put into practice.
In a world of social media influencers, and even faith-based social media influencers, self-promotion is seen by many as the only way to make an impact. But the thousands who gathered in Baltimore for Rabbi Hauer’s funeral, the thousands more who gathered in Jerusalem for his burial, the thousands visiting his home daily to pay their respects to the family, the countless tributes from faith leaders and politicians of all persuasions, and more important to Rabbi Hauer, the many simple regular people who felt touched by his greatness, are proof that genuine modesty and humility are exceptionally effective tools in making a real difference.
May his memory be for a blessing.
Rabbi Yisrael Motzen is the rabbi of Ner Tamid and the Special Assistant to the EVP at the Orthodox Union.