Uncategorized
Judaism doesn’t want you to wander and live just anywhere — or does it?
(JTA) — I was a remote worker long before the pandemic made it a thing, but it was only last month that I really took advantage of it. Early on the morning of New Year’s Day, I boarded a plane from Connecticut bound for Mexico, where I spent a full month sleeping in thatch-roofed palapas, eating more tacos than was probably wise and bathing every day in the Pacific. I’ll spare you the glorious details, but suffice it to say, it wasn’t a bad way to spend a January.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, I found myself again and again coming into contact with expats who had traded in their urban lives in northern climes for a more laid-back life in the tropics. There was the recently divorced motorcycle enthusiast slowly wending his way southward by bike as he continued to work a design job for a major American bank. There was the yoga instructor born not far from where I live in Massachusetts who owned an open-air rooftop studio just steps from the waves. There were the countless couples who had chosen to spend their days running beachfront bars or small hotels on the sand. And then there were the seemingly endless number and variety of middle-aged northerners rebooting their lives in perpetual sunshine.
Such people have long mystified me. It’s not hard to understand the lure of beachside living, and part of me envies the freedom to design your own life from the ground up. But there’s also something scary about it. Arriving in middle age in a country where you know nobody, whose language is not your own, whose laws and cultural mores, seasons and flora, are all unfamiliar — it feels like the essence of shallow-rootedness, like a life devoid of all the things that give one (or at least me) a sense of comfort and security and place. The thought of exercising the right to live literally anywhere and any way I choose opens up a space so vast and limitless it provokes an almost vertiginous fear of disconnection and a life adrift.
Clearly, this feeling isn’t universally shared. And the fact that I have it probably owes a lot to my upbringing. I grew up in an Orthodox family, which by necessity meant life was lived in a fairly small bubble. Our house was within walking distance of our synagogue, as it had to be since walking was the only way to get there on Shabbat and holidays. I attended a small Jewish day school, where virtually all of my friends came from families with similar religious commitments. Keeping kosher and the other constraints of a religious life had a similarly narrowing effect on the horizons of my world and thus my sense of life’s possibilities. Or at least that’s how it often felt.
What must it be like — pardon the non-kosher expression — to feel as if the world is your oyster? That you could live anywhere, love anyone, eat anything and make your life whatever you want it to be? Thrilling, yes — but also frightening. The sense of boundless possibility I could feel emanating from those sun-baked Mexicans-by-choice was seductive, but tempered by aversion to a life so unmoored.
The tension between freedom and obligation is baked into Jewish life. The twin poles of our national narrative are the Exodus from Egypt and the revelation at Sinai, each commemorated by festivals separated by exactly seven weeks in the calendar, starting with Passover. The conventional understanding is that this juxtaposition isn’t accidental. God didn’t liberate the Israelites from slavery so they could live free of encumbrances on the Mayan Riviera. Freedom had a purpose, expressed in the giving of the Torah at Sinai, with all its attendant rules and restrictions and obligations. Freedom is a central value of Jewish life — Jews are commanded to remember the Exodus every day. But Jewish freedom doesn’t mean the right to live however you want.
Except it might mean the right to live any place you want. In the 25th chapter of Leviticus, God gives the Israelites the commandment of the Jubilee year, known as yovel in Hebrew. Observed every 50 years in biblical times, the Jubilee has many similarities to the shmita (sabbatical) year, but with some additional rituals. The text instructs: “And you shall hallow the 50th year. You shall proclaim liberty throughout the land for all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you: each of you shall return to your holding and each of you shall return to your family.”
Among the requirements of the Jubilee was that ancestral lands be returned to their original owners. Yet the word for liberty is a curious one: “d’ror.” The Talmud explains its etymology this way: “It is like a man who dwells [medayer] in any dwelling and moves merchandise around the entire country” (Rosh Hashanah 9b).
The liberty of the Jubilee year could thus be said to have two contrary meanings — individuals had the right to return to their ancestral lands, but they were also free not to. They could live in any dwelling they chose. The sense of liberty connoted by the biblical text is a specifically residential one: the freedom to live where one chooses. Which pretty well describes the world we live in today. Jewish ancestral lands are freely available to any Jew who wants to live there. And roughly half the Jews of the world choose not to.
Clearly, I’m among them. And while I technically could live anywhere, I’m pretty sure I don’t want to. I like where I live — not because of any particular qualities of this place, though I do love its seasons and its smells and its proximity to the people I care about and the few weeks every fall when the trees become a riotous kaleidoscope. But mostly because it’s mine.
A version of this essay appeared in My Jewish Learning’s Recharge Shabbat newsletter. Subscribe here.
—
The post Judaism doesn’t want you to wander and live just anywhere — or does it? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
JD Vance Argues Against the Pope’s Calls for Peace As Iran’s LEGO AI Videos Stoke America’s Religious Divisions
An Iranian propaganda video attacks President Donald Trump in response to social media postings critical of the Pope and regarded as insensitive to Christians. Photo: Screenshot.
Vice President JD Vance, who converted to Catholicism in August 2019 at age 35 criticzed Pope Leo’s call for peace between the United States and Iran, another example of growing religious disagreements among Christians which Iranian propagandists have sought to exacerbate in new propaganda videos.
On Thursday at an event organized in Georgia by conservative activist group Turning Point USA, Vance said when asked about the head of his church disagreeing with President Donald Trump’s policies, “I do think we have to remember that each of us has our own role. I’m the Vice President of the United States. The fundamental way I understand my role is I’m trying to take the lessons, the moral truths that are rooted in Christianity and I’m trying to apply to a whole host of complicated real world scenarios.” Tepid applause broke out in response with Vance then thanking the crowd.
The Vice President’s comments came in the days following social media postings from Trump which included a broadside against Pope Leo and an AI-generated image depicting the Commander-in-Chief wearing white and red flowing robes as he placed one of his glowing hands on the head of a sick man. Trump later removed the image following the criticism of longtime Christian members of his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement.
Iran took advantage of the social media kerfuffle, on Wednesday the Iranian embassy in Tajikistan posted an AI animation which took the original image and modified it to mock Trump.
Another propaganda video released by a pro-Iran group this week also responded to Trump’s social media postings about the Pope and the Jesus image, again deploying the AI-generated animation style depicting the president and other American officials as LEGO characters while a soundtrack delivers rhyming insults.
The Occupy Democrats Facebook group which has 11 million followers celebrated another pro-Iran propaganda video that has started circulating online.
While the president’s opponents on the progressive left may enjoy Iran’s jabs at Trump, the video’s themes casting him as an enemy of Christianity seek to exacerbate pre-existing intra-theological conflicts among the MAGA base.
This year, other recent Catholic converts — notably far-right podcaster Candace Owens and her supporter Carrie Prejean Boller, the former beauty queen contestant ejected from a White House Religious Liberty Panel on antisemitism following her questioning about Christian Zionism — have also advanced positions counter to Catholic teachings.
Prejean Boller claims that Zionism and Catholicism are incompatible, writing on X after her dismissal from the panel that “I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy [sic]. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation.”
In response to her actions, the group Catholics for Catholics awarded Prejean Boller a “Catholic Champion” award at its gala, an event also featuring Owens and Joe Kent, the recently-resigned director of the National Counterterrorism Center who has suggested that Israel controls America’s foreign policy and may have have had a hand in the Sept. 10, 2025 assassination of Turning Point USA chief Charlie Kirk.
Uncategorized
Antisemitic Beliefs More Common Among Young Social Media Users, Yale Poll Reveals
Uncategorized
Columbia Graduate Students Amend Complaint Against Union Dominated by Anti-Zionist Bosses
Protesters gather at the gates of Columbia University, in support of student protesters who barricaded themselves in Hamilton Hall, in New York City, US, April 30, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/David Dee Delgado
Students at Columbia University are escalating their fight against a graduate workers union dominated by anti-Israel advocates, having recently updated a federal complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) last year to include new troubling accusations.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the students allege that the bosses who run Student Workers of Columbia (SWC), an affiliate of United Auto Workers (UAW), devote more energy and resources to pursuing “radical policy proposals” than improving occupational conditions. In collective bargaining negotiations, it allegedly pressures the university to adopt the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel and to enact other measures, such as ending its partnership with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and closing a dual-degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response, the students formed the Graduate Researchers Against Discrimination and Suppression (Columbia GRADS) organization and petitioned the NLRB to rein the SWC in.
The National Right to Work Foundation (NRTW), which represents the petitioning students has told The Algemeiner that the SWC subjects students to abuses which magnify problems inherent in compulsory union membership.
The amended complaint enumerates a slew of new examples, including that the SWC, under the threat of a strike, has demanded that the university dismantle CCTV security cameras, proclaim the campus a “sanctuary space” for illegal immigrants, and revoke the authority of public safety officers to detain and arrest students who pose a danger to themselves and others.
“The charges point out that many of these demands are so radical that even the SWC’s parent union, the UAW, has directed the SWC union to retract them,” the group said. “The UAW has also demanded, to no avail, that the SWC union drop its strike threats over these topics, as striking over such extraneous demands is a violation of federal labor law.”
It added, “The charges declare that these actions discriminate against Columbia GRADS and constitute bad-faith bargaining, all of which is prohibited under the National Labor Relations Act.”
“Under the National Labor Relations Act, the only bargaining that is required for a good faith sit down is over mandatory subjects of bargaining such as wages, hours, benefits, and the like,” NRTW staff attorney Glenn Taubman, told The Algemeiner during an interview on Wednesday.” Everything else is either a permissive subject, meaning the parties can choose to bargain or not…what is going on here is the union is trying to force Columbia to bargain over things that are permissive at best, and the items in dispute don’t really benefit the employees that they purport to represent. Instead the union is using bargaining to push an ideological agenda against Israel.”
He added, “All of this adds up to a union that is out of control, and I note that they don’t have an agenda against the Mullahs in Iran, against the dictator who runs Turkey, against the Chinese Communists who oppress their citizens or the North Koreans. But they have an agenda against Israel, the one democracy in the Middle East.”
The SWC is not the only higher education union sidelining important objectives to pursue politics and anti-Zionist policies which cross the line into antisemitism. In a letter sent to Congress in August, NRTW said the problem is also present in unions affiliated with United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE).
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
