Uncategorized
Synagogues are joining the ‘effective altruism’ movement. Will the Sam Bankman-Fried scandal stop them?
(JTA) — A few years ago, Adam Azari was frustrated over how little he could do to alleviate suffering in the world with his modest income as a writer and caretaker for people with disabilities.
He kept thinking about a set of statistics and ideas he had encountered during his graduate studies in philosophy. For example, he remembered reading that for the price of training a guide dog for the blind in the United States, one could prevent hundreds of cases of blindness in the developing world.
This hyper-rational way of thinking about doing good was called effective altruism, and it was growing into a movement, known as E.A. for short. Some proponents were even opting to pursue lucrative careers in finance and tech that they otherwise might not have chosen so they would have more money to give away.
Azari, meanwhile, had become a believer who was stuck on the sidelines. Then, one day, he had what he calls a “personal eureka moment.” Azari would return to his roots as the son of a Reform rabbi in Tel Aviv and spread the word of E.A. across the Jewish denomination and among its millions of followers.
“It suddenly hit me that the Reform movement has this crazy untapped potential to save thousands and thousands of lives by simply informing Jews about effective giving,” he recalled.
He badgered his father, Rabbi Meir Azari, and, for a moment, thought of becoming a rabbi himself. But he abandoned the idea and focused on pitching E.A. to the Reform movement’s international arm, the World Union for Progressive Judaism. Azari found an ally in WUPJ’s president, Rabbi Sergio Bergman, and the organization soon decided to sponsor his efforts, paying him a salary for his work.
Over the past year, Azari’s Jewish Effective Giving Initiative has presented to about 100 rabbis and secured pledges from 37 Reform congregations to donate at least $3,000 to charities rated as the most impactful by E.A. advocates and which aid poor people in the developing world. Per E.A. calculations, it costs $3,000 to $5,000 to save a single life.
“Progressive Judaism inspires us to carry out tikkun olam, our concrete action to make the world better and repair its injustices,” Bergman said. “With this call we not only do what the heart dictates in values, but also do it effectively to be efficient and responsible for saving a life.”
This charitable philosophy appears to be gaining traction in the Jewish world just as one of the figures most associated with it, who happens to be Jewish, has become engulfed in scandal.
Sam Bankman-Fried built a cryptocurrency empire worth billions, amassing a fortune he pledged to give away to causes such as artificial intelligence, combatting biohazards and climate change, all selected on criteria developed by the proponents of effective altruism.
A few weeks ago, Bankman-Fried’s fortune evaporated amid suspicions of financial misconduct and revelations of improper oversight at his company, FTX, a cryptocurrency exchange that was worth as much as $32 billion before a run of withdrawals ultimately left it illiquid. The situation has drawn comparisons to the implosion of Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, and authorities investigating the situation have said Bankman-Fried could face criminal penalties over his role.
In the wake of FTX’s collapse, Bankman-Fried has suggested that his embrace of E.A. was insincere, a tactic to bolster his reputation.
But Azari and the organizer of another initiative, a growing reading and discussion group called Effective Altruism for Jews, are undaunted and don’t believe the scandal should taint the underlying principles of the movement.
“Whether you call it E.A. or just directly donating to global health and development, it doesn’t matter,” Azari said. “The basic idea is to support these wonderful charities, and I don’t think the FTX scandal changes any of that. Malaria nets, vitamin A supplements and vaccine distribution are still super cost-effective, evidence-based ways of helping others.”
Azari added that he has had several meetings with rabbis since the news about Bankman-Fried broke and that no one has asked him about it.
“I don’t think people are making the connection,” he said. “And to me, there is no connection between us and FTX.”
When talking to rabbis about why E.A. would make a good fit with their congregation’s charitable mission, Azari cites the Jewish value of tikkun olam, a mandate to “repair the world” often used to implore people to care for others. He explains that donating to charities with a proven track record is a concrete way to fulfill a Jewish responsibility.
That kind of thinking proved attractive to Steven Pinker, the prominent Harvard psychologist, who has endorsed Azari’s initiative. In a recorded discussion with Azari and others last year, Pinker recalled his Reform upbringing, which included Hebrew school, summer camp and synagogue services.
“The thing I remember most is how much of my so-called religious education was like a university course in moral philosophy,” Pinker said. “We chewed over moral dilemmas.”
As an adult, Pinker returned to Jewish teachings on charity and, in particular, those of the medieval philosopher Maimonides, examining these ideas through the lens of E.A. He began to wonder about the implications of Maimonides’ focus on evaluating charity based on the motives of the donor. That focus, he concluded, doesn’t always lead to the best outcomes for the beneficiary.
“What ultimately ought to count in tzedakah, in charity, is, are you making people better off?” he said.
Also on the panel with Azari and Pinker was the man credited with authoring the foundational texts upon which E.A. is built. Peter Singer, who is also Jewish and whose grandfather died in the Holocaust, teaches bioethics at Princeton. Starting in the 1970s, Singer wrote a series of books in which he argues for a utilitarian approach to ethics, namely, that we should forgo luxuries and spend our money to save lives. The extremes to which he has taken his thinking include suggesting that parents of newborn babies with severe disabilities be permitted to kill them.
From Bankman-Fried to Singer, the list of Jews who have either promoted E.A. or lead its institutions is long. With their estimated fortune of $11.3 billion, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz and his wife Cari Tuna have eclipsed Bankman-Fried as the wealthiest Jews in the field. There’s also popular philosopher Sam Harris and New York Times columnist Ezra Klein, who have each dedicated episodes of their podcast to the topic.
The website LessWrong, which defines itself as “a community blog devoted to refining the art of rationality,” is seen as an important early influence; it was founded by Eliezer Yudkowsky, an artificial intelligence researcher who grew up in a Modern Orthodox household but does not identify religiously as a Jew anymore. Two other Jews, Holden Karnofsky and Elie Hassenfeld, left the hedge fund world to establish GiveWell, a group whose research is considered the premier authority on which charities are deserving of E.A. donations.
The prevalence of Jews in the movement caught the attention of E.A. enthusiast Ben Schifman, an environmental lawyer for the federal government in Washington, D.C. About two years ago, Schifman proposed creating a group for like-minded individuals in hope of helping grow the movement. In an online post, he laid out the history of Jewish involvement and wrote a brief introduction to the topic of Judaism and charity.
Today, Schifmam runs a group called Effective Altruism for Jews, whose main program is an eight-week fellowship involving a reading and discussion group with designated facilitators. Schifman said about 70 people spread across 10 cohorts are currently participating. There’s also a Shabbat dinner program to bring people together for informal meetings with funding available for hosts.
Participants discuss how ideas that are popular in E.A. might relate to Jewish traditions and concepts, and also brainstorm ways to popularize the movement in the wider Jewish community, according to Schifman.
“There’s a lot of low-hanging fruit with regards to the Jewish community and sharing some of the ideas of Effective Altruism, like through giving circles at synagogues or, during the holidays, offering charities that are effective,” Schifman said in an interview that took place before the Bankman-Fried scandal broke.
Asked to discuss the mood in the community following the collapse of Bankman-Fried’s company and an affiliated charity, FTX Future Fund, Schifman provided a brief statement expressing continued confidence in his project.
He said, “While we’re shocked by the news and our hearts go out to all those affected, as an organization EA for Jews isn’t funded by FTX Future Fund or otherwise connected to FTX. We don’t expect our work will be impacted.”
Even if Schifman and Azari are right that their movement is robust enough to withstand the downfall of a leading evangelist, a debate remains about what impact E.A. can or should have on philanthropy itself.
Andres Spokoiny, president and CEO of the Jewish Funders Network, wrote about the question with skepticism in an article published more than two years ago. He argued against “uncritically importing the values and assumptions” of effective altruists, whose emphasis on the “cold light of reason” struck him as detached from human nature.
In a recent interview, Spokoiny echoed similar concerns, noting that applying pure rationality to all charitable giving would mean the end of cherished programs such as PJ Library, which supplies children’s books for free to Jewish families, that may not directly save lives but do contribute to a community’s culture and sense of identity.
He also worries that too strong a focus on evidence of impact would steer money away from new ideas.
“Risky, creative ideas don’t tend to emerge from rational needs assessments,” he said. “It requires a transformative vision that goes beyond that.”
But Spokoiny also sounded more open to E.A. and said that as long as it does not try to replace traditional modes of philanthropy, it could be a useful tool of analysis for donors.
“If donors want to apply some of E.A. principles to their work, I’d say that is a good idea,” he said. “I am still waiting to see if this will be a fad or buzzword or something that will be incorporated into the practice of philanthropy.”
—
The post Synagogues are joining the ‘effective altruism’ movement. Will the Sam Bankman-Fried scandal stop them? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Israel’s reputation is in free fall. One radical change could help
Israeli settlers spent months ramping up a campaign of terror against Palestinians in the West Bank — torching mosques, Qurans and farmland; attacking innocent civilians; and defacing IDF bases — before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even weakly condemned these “riots” for violating Israeli law. And that statement, issued on Sunday, only came because of international outrage.
If you want to understand why Americans are abandoning Israel, that long silence is your answer. Israel’s opponents frame the state as hellbent on ridding the land of Palestinians by any means necessary, and the American public increasingly believe them. When Israel’s leaders and supporters turn a blind eye to lawless settlers, and the Palestinian suffering they create, that belief is reinforced.
For that to change, the response to settler violence has to change. Israel and its supporters must try to expunge this extremism from its circles.
That will not be easy, because settler violence is not a new phenomenon.
For the last 50 years, a radical ideology preaching Israeli dominance, and advocating Palestinian expulsion, has spread among settlers’ ranks. And they have come to expect impunity for extremist acts, because for much of that time, Israeli leadership failed to impose strict or meaningful consequences.
The attacks hit a fever pitch in the last two years, reaching an all-time high this October. In one notable example from two years ago, swaths of settlers rampaged through the Palestinian village of Huwara, leaving one Palestinian dead, about 100 injured and the entire town ablaze. The Israeli army did not intervene, and hardly anyone was punished.
The fact that extremists like the far-right cabinet ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich — who often defend settlers in these cases — are prominently serving in Israel’s government indicts the Jewish state even further.
I understand that criticizing the state of Israel is a big no-no among pro-Israel organizations, which usually excuse their silence by saying they do not comment on domestic Israeli affairs. But this inaction is de facto acceptance. It’s a long-standing norm that needs to change.
In Tablets Shattered: The End of an American Jewish Century and the Future of Jewish Life, Joshua Leifer traces this loyalty to the 1967 Six-Day War, which provoked a broad deepening of Zionist sentiment among American Jews. The result was a relationship in which diaspora supporters of Israel were expected to support the state without criticism — because criticism was seen as playing into the hands of Israel’s enemies, who had so recently posed an existential threat to the state’s continuance.
The overwhelming power of that expectation was perhaps best shown in the experience of Elie Wiesel — the Nobel Prize-winning human rights defender who survived the Holocaust — who was met with outrage when he tried to critique Israeli treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank in the 1970s, particularly taking aim at settlement expansion.
“Wiesel was so upset by the Israeli reaction that he made a pledge to himself never to criticize Israel again,” writes Joseph Berger in his 2024 biography Elie Wiesel: Confronting the Silence. “And he never did.”
Against this backdrop, for pro-Israel groups and advocates to stand against settler violence is no simple choice — but it is doable.
The American Jewish Committee consistently calls out acts of settler violence, urging accountability and punishment. Other groups — such as the Anti-Defamation League — did the same in prior years, although the drop-off of such advocacy over the last few years has been stark.
But much remains to be done, because the silent devotion to Israel by generations past does not work today. Not for Americans at large, and certainly not for young American Jews.
“For an older generation of American Jews, a mythologized vision of a progressive, social democratic Israel served as a source of moral inspiration,” Leifer writes in Tablets Shattered. “That view is much less prevalent today.”
While many young Jews still view Israel in such a light, Leifer explains, increasing numbers “have only known Israel as an authoritarian state and regional military power hurtling down a path of ever more extreme ethnonationalism.”
Pairing these conceptions with countless videos depicting masked Israelis brutalizing Palestinians and ransacking their properties in the West Bank, in addition to the devastation of the war in Gaza, it is no wonder why public opinion on Israel is in free fall.
American sympathy for Israel hit a 25-year low in March 2025. Views of Israel and its government worsen each year. Even American Jews are drifting — with 41% opposing more U.S. military aid to Israel and 39% believing Israel committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
The violence in the West Bank is almost certainly not the primary factor in that slide. But silence on it suggests that Israeli violence against Palestinians is acceptable — a stance that needs urgent and public correcting.
Condemnation is a necessary step, but words will not be enough to change the minds of opponents of the Jewish state. More crucially, supporters of Israel need to start taking steps to systematically combat extremism.
First, they must show zero tolerance for those who excuse or minimize crimes like those committed by settlers in the West Bank. Words without actions are meaningless, so pro-Israel groups must take steps to weed out those espousing views within their own community that align with the extremism now rife within settlement communities.
Second, they must unequivocally condemn violent rhetoric and actions against Palestinians. During the war against Hamas, for example, slogans like “no innocents in Gaza” and jokes mocking starving Palestinians ran rampant on social media from Israelis, including many Knesset members. Some were echoed by Israel’s supporters abroad. Pro-Israel groups must reject such rhetoric, as it applies to the West Bank as well as Gaza, immediately and forcefully.
Third, they must recognize Israel’s failure to subdue extremists and demand real accountability. They must demand investigations, prosecutions and punishments for violent settlers, insist that the Israeli government follow its own laws, and be prepared to impose consequences if those calls go unmet.
Claiming moral superiority while accepting extremism only reinforces distrust in Israeli narratives. Moreover, extremism of this flavor endangers the Jewish state itself by prolonging the conflict and degrading law and order.
This is not the behavior of a country committed to peace, justice and democracy — and the American public sees that. The absolutist narrative of total Israeli innocence is not only materially untrue but also entirely unconvincing.
Now is the time to pivot on the pro-Israel playbook and stand up for what we profess to care about. What Americans are looking for is not whether injustice takes place in Israel — but how the country and its supporters respond.
The post Israel’s reputation is in free fall. One radical change could help appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Exclusive: In bid for Nadler’s seat, Jack Schlossberg makes Jewish security his first priority
Jack Schlossberg, the online influencer turned political candidate running to succeed Rep. Jerry Nadler, is making Jewish security a central pillar of his campaign in one of the nation’s largest Jewish districts. In an interview on Tuesday, Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, said that if elected next year, he would immediately introduce legislation to nearly double federal funding for security upgrades at synagogues and other Jewish institutions.
He dubbed it the “Jack-fast-track” plan — a strategy that would involve introducing the bill while simultaneously collecting the 218 signatures needed for a discharge petition, allowing him to force a floor vote and bypass any potential delays in committee. “I don’t think we have any time to waste here because of how important this is,” said Schlossberg, who identifies as Jewish. “So no matter who’s in leadership in the House, this bill will see a floor vote.”
The Nonprofit Security Grant Program, established by Congress in 2005 and administered by FEMA under the Department of Homeland Security, provides funding to nonprofit organizations, including houses of worship, to bolster protection against potential attacks. Congress began significantly increasing its appropriations in 2018, in bipartisan fashion, following a wave of synagogue attacks nationwide.
The program currently stands at $270 million. Major Jewish groups have been pushing to raise it to $500 million amid rising antisemitic threats. Earlier this year, the Trump administration briefly froze the program as part of broader federal agency cuts, and some organizations have been hesitant to apply because of requirements that grantees affirm cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Schlossberg said there are at least 10 prominent institutions in New York’s 12th District that would benefit from this increase, including the Park East Synagogue on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, where his grandfather, Alfred Schlossberg, was president. The measure is a “big deal for NY12 because it’s a critical funding stream that these institutions really need and rely on to strengthen their security,” he said. “Here is something the federal government can do immediately for this district, and something that I will put my energy behind.”
Raised Catholic by his mother, Caroline Kennedy, the 32-year-old Schlossberg said he also identifies as Jewish and “occasionally” goes for services at Temple Shaaray Tefila with his aunt on his father’s side. He also attends Church services on Sundays.
Schlossberg is one of several candidates vying for the seat. Other candidates include Micah Lasher, Liam Elkind, and Cameron Kasky, who are Jewish; Assemblymember Alex Bores, whose wife, Darya Moldavskaya, is Jewish; and Councilmember Erik Bottcher. Jews account for about 30% of the vote in the Democratic primary.
In the last Democratic primary for New York City mayor, Schlossberg endorsed Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist who is critical of Israel. In an interview with The New York Times after Mamdani’s victory in the general election, Schlossberg said it served as an encouraging sign for his own campaign. Mamdani has pledged to increase funding for hate crime prevention and to provide protection to Jewish institutions.
Addressing that Nazi salute, the first controversy of his campaign
Schlossberg, who announced his candidacy last week, has come under fire for performing a Nazi salute in a since-deleted Instagram video, after Elon Musk, the powerful billionaire, appeared to do a Sieg Heil salute at a celebration rally following President Donald Trump’s inauguration in January. The Anti-Defamation League excused Musk’s move as an “awkward gesture,” but other Jewish organizations called it a dog whistle. Musk, the Tesla CEO whose relationship with Trump has since soured, has a history of endorsing antisemitic conspiracies online and allowing antisemitism on his platform, X.
In Tuesday’s phone interview, Schlossberg said that the video published by the Washington Free Beacon takes his motion out of context. “What I was trying to do is be like, ‘Okay, well, he just did it and claimed that that wasn’t it. And so that’s the world we’re living in now. How ridiculous is that?’” Schlossberg explained, saying his act was an attempt to draw attention to Musk. The Washington Free Beacon said that he was referencing Musk’s motion as well.
Schlossberg said that the hateful rhetoric and antisemitic attacks “have, in large part, been driven by the hard-right silo in American politics, especially Elon Musk.”
The post Exclusive: In bid for Nadler’s seat, Jack Schlossberg makes Jewish security his first priority appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Outgoing NYC Mayor Adams Says He’s Concerned About Safety of Jewish New Yorkers Under Successor Mamdani
New York City Mayor Eric Adams (L) speaks with Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) CEO Sacha Roytman at a special event in Tel Aviv, Israel, Nov. 16, 2025. Photo: CAM
Outgoing New York City Mayor Eric Adams said on Sunday that Jewish New Yorkers should be worried about their safety and the prevalence of antisemitism in the city when Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani takes office in January.
“If I were a Jewish New Yorker, I would be concerned about my children,” he added. “When it comes down to the energy that is brewing, there’s a level of concern that I know I have. And we need to be honest about the moment, because people want to sugarcoat the moment.”
Mamdani, a far-left democratic socialist and anti-Zionist, is an avid supporter of boycotting all Israeli-tied entities who has been widely accused of promoting antisemitic rhetoric. He has repeatedly accused Israel of “apartheid” and “genocide;” refused to recognize the country’s right to exist as a Jewish state; and refused to explicitly condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been associated with calls for violence against Jews and Israelis worldwide.
Mamdani was elected as the new mayor of New York City earlier this month, beating former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa. Adams, who was running for reelection as an independent, pulled out of the mayoral race in late September.
Leading members of the Jewish community in New York have expressed alarm about Mamdani’s victory, fearing what may come in a city already experiencing a surge in antisemitic hate crimes.
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) hosted a special gathering on Sunday in Tel Aviv’s Dubnov Gallery to honor Adams’ strong support for Israel and the Jewish communities in New York over the past four years, particularly after the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and the global rise in antisemitism that followed. When it comes to confronting the rise in antisemitism, Adams was asked if he thinks anything has changed in New York over the last two years – following his famous “We Are Not Alright” speech in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities.
“No, we’re not [alright],” Adams replied. “We’re far from being alright. We’re going in the wrong direction.”
The outgoing mayor said that antisemitism is becoming “cool and hip” among younger generations due in large part to social media indoctrination, and organized efforts to normalize and spread anti-Israel and anti-Jewish false narratives. He called on Jewish organizations and their allies to formulate and carry out a “well-executed business plan” to fight antisemitism. He also expressed concern that the incoming Mamdani administration will not push forward on efforts to unite the city.
“I knew part of the role [as mayor] was to heal the city and bring us together, and there’s more healing to do. And I’m not confident that this incoming administration understands that,” he explained. “A lot of the work that we’ve started on many areas, but particularly the area of healing and bringing our city together, I think we are going to lose some ground on that, and that sort of troubles me.”
Adams stressed that leaders must not stay silent about hatred, urging Mamdani to understand that “being a mayor is both substantive and symbolic. They both go together. Your words can translate into the actions of others. Even if you disagree, you must be a leader for everyone.”
“The symbolism … There are things that we do to send a symbol that one is welcome. And he has failed to do that,” Adams said. “You cannot be slow on defining that you do not embrace a ‘globalize the Intifada.’ The symbolism of being a leader is just as important as the substance. I think he must stand up and show that he can be a leader of the city with all of this diversity. Even if you don’t agree or disagree, you must be a leader for everyone in the city because your words actually can translate into the actions of others.”
In his opening remarks at Sunday’s event, CAM CEO Sacha Roytman highlighted Adams’ longtime commitment to combating antisemitism.
Adams created the first-of-its-kind mayor’s office dedicated to combating antisemitism; signed an executive order adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism; established the city’s first Jewish Advisory Council; and launched the New York City-Israel Economic Council. He participated in CAM’s Mayors Summit Against Antisemitism in Athens, Greece, in 2022.
“You stood before leaders from across the globe and said that mayors must act and must not allow antisemitism to rise in their cities,” Roytman said.
“After Oct. 7, when antisemitism surged, you were out in the streets standing with us,” he continued, referring to Adams. “Your famous words — ‘We are not alright’ — still echo in our minds, because that is exactly how we feel when we see antisemitism rising and when we see who New York elected as its next mayor.”
“Your voice brings people together — Jews and Muslims, African Americans, and so many others,” Roytman added. “The friendship between Jews and the Black community is essential. Together, we can push back against hatred and build a better world.”
Reflecting on his tenure as mayor, Adams, who is Black, described it as “a relay” and talked again about Mamdani taking over in January.
“You run your mile and you hand a baton off, and my transition team, we’re going to do everything possible to hand off lessons learned, some of the things that we thought were great, and some of the things we could have done differently,” he said.
Adams also hinted that he might have a future connection to Israel. “I want to start speaking to the real estate agents here so I can find my place in Israel,” he concluded.