Uncategorized
Andreas E. Mach’s Monument to Memory: Jüdische Familienunternehmer in Hitlers München
A store damaged during Kristallnacht. Photo: German Federal Archives via Wikimedia Commons.
In an age of slogans and shortcuts, Andreas E. Mach has written a meticulous, unflinching book. Jüdische Familienunternehmer in Hitlers München (“Jewish Family Entrepreneurs in Hitler’s Munich”) is not only a history of businesses — it is a map back to a city that once existed, and a ledger of how it was unmade.
Mach’s canvas is Munich from the 19th century through the aftermath of 1945. His method is documentary and patient: city directories and business registers; police and tax files; contemporary newspapers; memoirs and family papers. From this archive he reconstructs the families who shaped Munich’s modern economy — department stores like Bamberger & Hertz, fashion and textile manufacturers, breweries and beverage firms, banks, and the great art dealerships (Bernheimer, Drey, Heinemann, Thannhauser, Rosenthal, Helbing). He shows how these Jewish-founded enterprises fueled jobs, style, philanthropy, and civic leadership — and how, step by step, they were boycotted, expropriated, “Aryanized,” and erased from the city’s commercial map.
The book opens with a foreword by Dr. h.c. Charlotte Knobloch (July 2024), president of the Jewish Community of Munich and Upper Bavaria and former president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany. Her message is clear: remembrance is responsibility amid rising antisemitism.
Mach is a political scientist and historian from a southern German entrepreneurial family, with studies in Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands (M.A.) and in the U.S. (M.P.I.A.), early work in investment banking, and, since 2005, the founding of the international family-enterprise forum ALPHAZIRKEL.
A photographic essay explains the cover image: in March 1933, Munich lawyer Dr. Michael Siegel was beaten, forced barefoot through the city, and made to wear a placard. Mach places that humiliation inside a system that very quickly moved from intimidation to dispossession. He then widens the lens: a historical overview traces the growth of Munich’s Jewish community — from 1,206 members in 1852 to more than 11,000 by 1910 — its institutions (the 1887 main synagogue on Herzog-Max-Straße with roughly 2,000 seats; Ohel Jakob; prayer houses and charities), and its contributions to a capital that became internationally respected in art and culture. He notes that by 2022 the community again counted roughly 11,000 members, and that Jewish life is once more visible in the cityscape with the 2006 synagogue and cultural center at Jakobsplatz.
Mach’s narrative is careful about complexity. He documents assimilation and civic engagement — business leadership, philanthropy, even sports (Kurt Landauer’s presidency at FC Bayern) — but he also records the persistence of antisemitism before 1918, debates over Zionism, and the arrival of poorer Eastern Jews whose visibility fed prejudice. He includes wartime service and suspicion side by side: around 100,000 Jews served in the German army in World War I; the humiliating Judenzählung of Nov. 1, 1916 sought to prove Jews shirked the front, yet subsequent figures showed similar front-line rates (and decorations) to non-Jews — but the results were not published at the time. Mach quotes and paraphrases contemporary Jewish voices who felt they were fighting “on two fronts” — for the country and for equal rights.
The revolutionary crisis of 1918–1919 is presented as prelude rather than detour. Mach recounts the proclamation of the Free State of Bavaria on Nov. 8, 1918, by Kurt Eisner; his assassination on Feb. 21, 1919; the brief council republics; and the brutal “white terror” that followed. He names the murdered and condemned — Gustav Landauer beaten to death after arrest; Eugen Leviné executed; Ernst Toller sentenced; Erich Mühsam imprisoned — and records the double standard in sentencing: perpetrators from the Reichswehr and Freikorps often received lenient treatment while revolutionaries were abused and, in some cases, murdered. The period also ushers in figures who will define the next era: Rudolf Heß, Alfred Rosenberg, Hans Frank, Dietrich Eckart, and Adolf Hitler’s first steps in 1919 under Captain Karl Mayr, including the antisemitic “Mayr letter.” Mach’s point is cumulative: explanations, enemies, and habits of looking away were practiced in these years, and Munich became the stage on which they would later be performed.
When Mach turns fully to “Hitler’s Munich,” the argument is anchored by street-level facts. He documents the April 1, 1933 boycott — photographed, staged, and effective as intimidation. He details the demolition of the main synagogue in June 1938 on Hitler’s order: the contractor (Leonhard Moll), the speed (within a month), and the compensation (200,000 Reichsmarks) to remove what Hitler called an “eyesore.” He tracks the Nov. 9–10, 1938 pogrom in Munich with specific images and captions (smashed windows at the Bernheimer gallery on Lenbachplatz; the boycott poster at Bamberger & Hertz on Kaufingerstraße), and notes that nearly all adult Jewish men were deported to Dachau in the aftermath. Individual fates punctuate the narrative — among them the arrest of banker Emil Krämer. Administrative theft is made visible: Jews were compelled to declare assets; by 1938, Jewish losses in Germany totaled roughly 12 billion RM; in Munich alone Mach cites roughly 600 million RM in real estate and nearly 150 million RM in securities and balances registered in 1938. On countless forms, one formula recurs: “The property falls to the Reich.”
Mach also reproduces the texture of “Aryanization” as it appeared to the public. He cites a Völkischer Beobachter advertisement of July 25, 1938 announcing that the porcelain, glass, and household goods firm “formerly Martin Pauson” had been transferred into “German ownership.” He shows how city paperwork could continue to list Jewish firms even as their owners were being forced from homes into Judenhäuser, or into hiding. At Munich’s liberation on April 30, 1945, only 34 Jews were found in hiding in the city. Mach references research on Jews who attempted to survive underground in Munich and Upper Bavaria, the dangers they and their helpers faced, and the gap between postwar stories of universal assistance and the record of denunciation and greed.
The book’s architecture makes its case. After the narrative chapters — “Jüdisches Leben in München – ein historischer Überblick bis 1918” (“Jewish Life in Munich – A Historical Overview Until 1918”), “Das München der Revolution – Prélude des Holocaust” (“The Munich of the Revolution – Prelude to the Holocaust”), “Hitlers München: die ‘braune’ Stadt” (“Hitler’s Munich: the ‘brown’ city”), “Arisierung und Restitution” (“Aryanization and Restitution”), and the detailed account of November 1938 — Mach opens into registers readers can use: a directory of businesses affected during the pogrom; a reprint-based listing of Jewish business owners recorded by the trade police in 1938; and studies of Nazi art plunder in Munich. He then offers sector and firm profiles: leading art dealers (A.S. Drey, Heinemann, Thannhauser, Bernheimer, Helbing, Caspari, and others); selected family companies (including bank and retail houses); Jewish lawyers; and a long section on fashion and textiles (department stores, manufacturers, tailors, wholesalers). A distinct contribution is the inclusion of Lotte Bamberger’s memoir (with German translation), which threads one family’s trajectory through the commercial and moral topography Mach has drawn.
Throughout, Mach refuses euphemism. He writes with moral clarity but without sermonizing: he lays out the documents, then the consequences; he names who benefited, who signed, who looked away, and who helped. He proves that the story of Jewish family enterprise is not ancillary to Munich’s identity — it is central. When those families were expelled, the city did not simply “change”; it lost part of itself.
On a personal note, I met Andreas once — and that was enough. Charismatic and purposeful, he cuts through the noise with a quiet insistence on truth at a moment when too many remain silent or choose the wrong side as antisemitism rises worldwide. For years I heard about him from one of my closest friends, Emil Schustermann, who spoke of Andreas with steady admiration. This past summer I was fortunate to meet the legend in person. The integrity you feel in his book is the integrity you feel across a table: steady, unsentimental, anchored in facts and responsibility.
Jüdische Familienunternehmer in Hitlers München is, finally, a usable history. It helps citizens, students, and leaders see Munich differently: storefronts as testimonies, plaques as prompts, absences as questions. It closes the distance between numbers and names, between street addresses and fates. And it leaves readers with the task the book so plainly sets — to remember precisely, to teach honestly, and to stand, now, against the same old hatred in its new clothes.
Eli Verschleiser is a NYC-based entrepreneur, financier, real estate developer, and investor. In his philanthropy, he is Chairman for Our Place, among other nonprofit organizations that provide support, shelter, and counseling for troubled Jewish youth. He is a frequent commentator on political and social services matters and can be followed on X (formerly Twitter): @E_Verschleiser
Uncategorized
Israel Prepares for ‘Extreme Scenario’ With Iran, Warns Regime Will Face ‘Unimaginable’ Response if Tehran Strikes
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a news conference in Jerusalem, Sept. 2, 2024. Photo: Ohad Zwigenberg/Pool via REUTERS
Amid escalating regional tensions, Israel has warned Iran that any attempt to attack the Jewish state will be met with an “unimaginable” response, attempting to deter Tehran while preparing for an “extreme scenario” in which the Iranian regime strikes the Israeli homeland with an unprecedented level of force.
“Extremist forces refuse to lay down their arms and are regrouping to confront us once more … We are ready and remain on high alert to defend ourselves against any threat,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a speech at the graduation ceremony of the 74th Combat Officers Course of the 1st Airborne Division on Thursday.
“We are coordinating closely with our key ally, the United States. One thing is certain: If the ayatollahs [Iranian leaders] make the mistake of attacking us, they will face a response they can’ even imagine,” the Israeli leader continued. “We are prepared to fight to safeguard our security.”
According to Hebrew media reports, Israeli officials have been on high alert in recent weeks over what they describe as an “extreme Iranian scenario,” amid concerns about a potential surprise attack involving hypersonic missiles, drone swarms, and covert operatives targeting critical infrastructure and key air bases.
Under this scenario, Tehran could launch a coordinated, multi-front attack targeting Israeli Air Force bases, military headquarters, power and water infrastructure, fuel depots, major transport routes, and airports, with the goal of paralyzing the Israel Defense Forces’ air defenses, degrading strike capabilities, and disrupting reserve mobilization.
Israel’s main concern is that a sudden, concentrated barrage of Iranian weapons could overwhelm its air defense system, potentially forcing the IDF to focus on protecting key strategic sites while leaving population centers more exposed, according to Israeli news outlet Walla.
However, Israel has also seen increased backing from the US, which has expanded its military presence in the Persian Gulf and across the Middle East with additional air defense batteries and advanced radar systems.
Amid reports that nuclear talks between the US and Iran have yet to produce any meaningful results, large numbers of US forces are deploying to the region, signaling heightened tensions and the potential for renewed conflict.
According to military news site The War Zone, a significant fleet of fighter, surveillance, and intelligence aircraft have been sent to the Gulf, marking the fastest deployment pace seen in the past month.
At least a dozen F-22 fighter jets from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia and F-16s from bases in Italy, Germany, and South Carolina have been deployed to the region.
Meanwhile, F-35 jets from the United Kingdom are now headed to Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan — a recent hub of US air operations — while a dozen US Navy warships are also active in the area.
Amid mounting regional tensions, Washington could launch military strikes on Iran as soon as Saturday, CBS News reported.
On Thursday, US President Donald Trump warned that Iran must reach a “meaningful deal” in its negotiations with the White House within the next 10 days, or “bad things will happen.”
In the case of renewed conflict, US and Israeli officials reportedly expect to cooperate with regional partners to enhance surveillance and provide early warning before threats reach Israeli airspace.
As has often been the case in the past, Iran appears to be receiving only limited public backing from its allies, even as regional tensions continue to rise.
While the regime prepares for the possibility of a US strike, its proxy terrorist groups have so far held back from publicly pledging to take part in any confrontation — although some have vowed to join in the event of an attack on Iran.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem stopped short of promising a direct response to an attack on Iran, opting for cautious language while expressing public support for Tehran.
“We do not want war, but we are ready to defend ourselves and will not surrender,” Qassem said during a televised speech.
However, Israel has made it clear that if Hezbollah joins a potential war scenario, it will face a severe and damaging response.
The Houthis have warned against any “adventure” against Yemen, signaling the terrorist group could take part in any retaliatory escalation, reportedly with the US presence in the region as a primary target.
In Iraq, pro-Iranian militias urged fighters to prepare for what they described as a “total war” in support of Iran.
“It must be made clear to our enemies that war against Iran will not be a walk in the park — they will taste the terrible bitterness of death, and nothing of them will remain in our region,” terrorist leader Abu Hussein al-Hamidawy said in a statement.
On Tuesday, in response to US and Israeli threats, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei shared an AI-generated image depicting a US aircraft carrier sinking to the bottom of the ocean.
“The US president constantly says that the US has sent a warship toward Iran. Of course, a warship is a dangerous piece of military hardware,” the Iranian leader wrote in a post on X. “However, more dangerous than that warship is the weapon that can send that warship to the bottom of the sea.”
US and Israeli pressure is not the only challenge facing Tehran, as the European Union on Thursday formally designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization, freezing its funds and financial assets in EU member states and prohibiting EU operators from making economic resources available to the group.
Meanwhile, the regime continues to face growing domestic unrest, with Iranians now marking the traditional chehelom — a Shiite mourning ritual observed 40 days after a person’s death — not only in cemeteries but also in streets and hospitals to honor those killed during last month’s violent government crackdown on nationwide anti-government protests.
Uncategorized
IHRA Definition of Antisemitism Advances Toward Approval in Two US States
Part of an exhibit on the Holocaust supported by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). Photo: courtesy of IHRA.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism continues to make progress through state legislatures across the US, with the Wisconsin State Assembly on Tuesday approving a measure which would apply it to hate crime prosecutions and anti-discrimination statutes.
The bill, AB 446, allows for government officials to refer to the IHRA definition for guidance when “evaluating evidence of discriminatory intent for any law, ordinance, or policy in this state that prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, color, or national origin” or determining “enhanced criminal penalties for criminal offenses” in which a criminal chooses their victim based on racial, ethnic, or religious hatred.
AB 446 passed easily in the State Assembly by a vote of 66-33. Another similar bill awaits consideration by the Senate. If it succeeds there, both legislative proposals will have to be reconciled into a single, signable bill before being presented to Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
On Monday, the Missouri House of Representatives also passed a bill to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism as a reference tool for assessing civil rights violations and a provision of policy handbooks for educational institutions. That bill also has a companion in the upper house of Missouri’s bicameral legislature.
The legislation, which would require schools to use the definition, aims to combat antisemitism in K-12 schools and on college campuses. In addition, the bill would require schools to outline prohibited antisemitic actions in their codes of conduct.
Both states advanced the legislation weeks after the City Council of Chicago voted to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
The measure was passed on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which commemorated the 81st anniversary of the day when Jewish prisoners were liberated from Auschwitz, the Nazis’ deadliest extermination camp during World War II.
“Chicago now proudly joins a global consensus of more than 1,200 entities worldwide, including the United States, 37 US state governments, and 98 city and country bodies who have adopted this definition,” city council member Debra Silverstein, alderman of the 50th Ward, said in a statement at the time praising the action. “At a time when antisemitic hate crimes are surging locally, this unanimous City Council action sends an unmistakable message that anti-Jewish hate has no place in Chicago.”
Local governments’ embracing the IHRA definition of antisemitism comes amid a historic surge in antisemitic incidents across the US and the world.
In 2024, as reported by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) latest annual audit, there were 9,354 antisemitic incidents — an average of 25.6 a day — across the US, creating an atmosphere of hate not experienced in the nearly thirty years since the ADL began tracking such data in 1979. Incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault all increased by double digits, and for the first time ever a majority of outrages — 58 percent — were related to the existence of Israel as the world’s only Jewish state.
The ADL also reported dramatic rises in incidents on college campuses, which saw the largest growth in 2024. The 1,694 incidents tallied by the ADL amounted to an 84 percent increase over the previous year. Additionally, antisemites were emboldened to commit more offenses in public in 2024 than they did in 2023, perpetrating 19 percent more attacks on Jewish people, pro-Israel demonstrators, and businesses perceived as being Jewish-owned or affiliated with Jews.
New York City, under its new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, recently revoked the IHRA definition along with a series of other executive orders enacted by his predecessor to combat antisemitism
US Jewish groups have sharply criticized the move.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry similarly lambasted the reversal as an invitation for intensified bigotry against Jewish New Yorkers, saying, “On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face: He scraps the IHRA definition of antisemitism and lifts restrictions on boycotting Israel. This isn’t leadership. It’s antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
Uncategorized
Green Party Congressional Candidate Vows to ‘De-Zionize’ US Government
Former US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) is running for Congress again in the 2026 election cycle, this time as a Green Party candidate. Photo: Screenshot
Former US Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney has launched a bid to return to Washington under the Green Party, unveiling a campaign platform that sharply denounces Israel and accuses the US government of being controlled by what she calls a “dual-loyalty regime.”
In a statement posted to her campaign website, McKinney alleges a “powerful Zionist lobby has infiltrated every level of our government,” claims US tax dollars are funding what she describes as a “genocide” in Gaza, and calls the US–Israel alliance “a hostage situation.” She further references the “Epstein files,” a series of documents detailing the communications of deceased serial sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein, to suggest Israeli intelligence has engaged in criminal wrongdoing, allegations for which she provides no evidence.
McKinney’s platform proposes sweeping measures such as immediately ending all US military aid to Israel, revoking tax-exempt status for organizations she characterizes as foreign agents, supporting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, backing Palestinian “right of return” claims, and ceasing US diplomatic protection for Israeli officials at international courts.
Additionally, she has posted campaign graphics calling to “De-Zionize the government” and shared a quote blaming her 2006 reelection loss on pro-Israel supporters, claiming “Zionists undermined Dr. McKinney’s reelection.” The candidate also shared a quote from the antisemitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan which claimed that she lost reelection because “she was not pro-Zionist.”
The rhetoric marks one of the most stridently anti-Israel campaign platforms in recent US political history. While debate over US policy toward Israel has intensified amid the ongoing war in Gaza, McKinney’s framing goes well beyond the positions held by most Democrats, including many progressive lawmakers critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
Advocacy groups and Jewish organizations have long warned that language describing a shadowy “Zionist lobby” controlling American institutions echoes historical antisemitic tropes about dual loyalty and secret influence. Mainstream critics of Israeli policy typically distinguish between opposition to specific government actions and broader conspiratorial claims about Jewish political control.
McKinney, who represented Georgia in Congress for six terms before losing her seat in 2006, has a history of clashing with pro-Israel groups and Democratic leadership. After her congressional career, she became the Green Party’s presidential nominee in 2008. She has also previously participated in attempts to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, including voyages on the SS Dignity and Spirit of Humanity.
Moreover, McKinney is running to fill the seat previously vacated by former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Greene came under fire over issuing a series of antisemitic remarks suggesting that Israel exerts control over US foreign policy and that the war in Gaza is a “genocide.”
The US–Israel relationship, spanning more than seven decades, includes extensive military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and economic ties. Israel is widely viewed by US officials as a key strategic ally in the Middle East.
Under US law, foreign lobbying is regulated through the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and tax-exempt status is governed by strict Internal Revenue Service rules. Legal experts note that broad revocations based on political advocacy would face significant constitutional hurdles.
McKinney’s campaign announcement comes at a moment of heightened polarization over the Israel-Hamas war and US involvement in the Middle East. Whether her uncompromising platform resonates with Georgia voters remains to be seen, but it is likely to reignite debate over the boundaries between legitimate criticism of Israeli policy and rhetoric critics say veers into conspiracy and antisemitism.