Connect with us

Features

The Dark Side of Albert: Einstein and Mileva Marić, his First Wife

Albert Einstein with his first wife, Mileva Marić


By DAVID TOPPER Albert Einstein was the most photographed scientist of the 20th century. The scope of emotions depicted range from the serious to the silly: from looking like a secular saint with hands folded and deep in contemplation of supposedly solemn thoughts, to the image hanging in front of me on the bulletin board over my computer table, showing him sticking out his tongue at the cameraman. Living during the heyday of the development of the film camera, he and the press surely took advantage of it. The positive persona of the genius was formed out of these visual images. This visual disposition was supplemented with endless quotations on not only science and the universe, but also with homilies on life and how to live it, with much of that which you will find quoted, being things he never said. Overall, the general image of him and his personality has him coming out seemingly squeaky-clean.


Nonetheless, those of us who have looked into the man in more detail are aware of episodes of less than saintly behavior by Albert – the famous scientific idol. If, for example, you read any of the half-dozen or so lengthy biographies about him, you will find scattered therein stories of him speaking inappropriately or behaving, one might say, as a jerk. Having read all those books, and others – and even written three books on him myself – I knew this. So when I started reading a recent long biography of his first wife, Mileva Marić, I had no reason to think I’d be shocked, since I had already read a lot about her, including a book of letters to and from her best friend, which also contained a brief biography. But to my surprise, I was staggered in reading over 400 pages of his nasty behavior concentrated around this one woman – a woman whom he fell in love with as a university student, and who was the only mother of his children.
Here is the sad – and probably surprising to most readers – story of Mileva and Albert.


Mileva Marić was born on December 19, 1875, into a Christian Orthodox Serbian family. With a dislocated left hip, she walked with a limp throughout her life. (Her sister, Zorka, had the same congenital condition.) Forced to wear an orthopedic shoe, she was teased and mocked in school. Nonetheless, this very bright girl filled her lonely childhood with her studies (she was especially good at math) and piano lessons. Encouraged by a very loving father, she excelled in school, and was the first girl to attend high school physics courses in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. After graduating in 1896, she applied to the prestigious Zurich Polytechnic, since in Switzerland women were admitted to all classes. She passed the entrance exam and majored in mathematics. It was a small freshman class of about two-dozen students, she being the only woman. That’s where she met, in the even smaller physics course, fellow student, Albert Einstein. 


One of the earliest pictures we have of Mileva is dated 1897. In this portrait, I see a very serious, confident, determined woman with large penetrating eyes, a full crop of dark wavy hair and full lips. I would call her plain but attractive. I say this, because I was shocked at several instances when someone, upon first meeting Mileva, is quoted as describing her as “ugly.”
As a fellow student, Albert Einstein was attracted to her, and they quickly became a couple. He probably was the first male to take a romantic interest in her, overlooking her “handicap.” I suspect he was attracted to her gutsy attitude and her smartness. Plus, being Serbian, Mileva exuded an exotic “otherness” to the “German” in Albert. They spent most of their free time together, studying and falling in love. She did well in her courses, initially passing all of them, as Albert did too (of course). That is, until she was pregnant – a fact she tried to hide until she could not. And so she went home to her parents to inform them of this, and eventfully to have the baby.


Her parents were very supportive, which was unusual for the times. A girl was born early in 1902; they named her Lieserl (probably a Yiddish diminutive of Liese, a shortened Elizabeth). Albert stayed in Zurich and never saw his daughter; she was raised by Mileva’s parents, as Mileva returned to Zurich to continue her studies. No one knows what ultimately happened to Lieserl; she has seemingly vanished from all records. She may have died from Scarlet Fever as a child; or, she may have been adopted and grew up. One thing I do know: Mileva never forgot her. I believe that the loss of Lieserl is the major reason for Mileva’s depression and lingering melancholia throughout her life – as will be seen. As a result, she didn’t take care of her grooming and was a bit overweight – as seen in photos of her later in life. This, I suspect, may be a source of her “ugliness.”


Back to Zurich in the late 1890s and her studies: she passed all her courses over the first three years, and in her fourth year she started her thesis, hoping for a diploma and further work toward a PhD. But in 1900 she failed her final exams, while the other male students all passed. In July 1901 she repeated her final exams and flunked them again. I find it hard to believe that this sudden change in her performance was due to the tests being too tough for this woman, in light of all we know of her up to this time. Look at the last date above: she was pregnant with her child. I’m convinced that she just couldn’t concentrate on her studies. Albert passed, graduated, and started looking for a job – as well as working toward his PhD.

Mileva with her 2 boys: Eduard (b. 1910) & Hans Albert (b. 1904)


On January 6, 1903, they were married in a small civil ceremony. Mileva became a housewife; no more thinking of going any further in her studies. She then became the mother of two boys: Hans Albert (born in 1904) and Eduard (nicknamed Tete; in 1910).

All that promise came to nothing, not even a university degree. If she had not met Albert, who knows what she would have achieved?  But that was not the path taken, and since she married what became the most famous scientist of the 20th century – if not the most famous person, as Time Magazine said at the end of the millennium – that’s why there is a plethora of documentation about her life, terribly sad as it was.

Now briefly fast forward a century or so, to around 1987, and the publication of the early love letters between Albert and Mileva, which had only been known by a few, and purposely suppressed. For example, Hans Albert, who had the letters much earlier, had wanted to publish them. But he was thwarted by Helen Dukas and Otto Nathan, who threatened litigation. Dukas was Albert’s lifelong secretary and Nathan was an economist and close friend, who eventually was the executor of Einstein’s will. And so, the letters never surfaced until Dukas and Nathan were both dead.  

Even today, writing about these letters is an ideological minefield. Here’s why. The letters date from 1899 to 1903, when a new theory of physics was brewing in Albert’s mind. The result, in the so-called miracle year of 1905, was the publication of five papers that changed physics forever: two on what became his Theory of Relativity; one on a particle theory (much later called a photon) of light, as part of the emerging Quantum Theory; and two supporting the reality of atoms, which were still only hypothetical entities at this time. Knowing this, how much can we read into the love letters when Albert, in talking about his scientific ideas, uses “we” and “our work”? Well, it seems, a lot; for the initial response from primarily feminist quarters was that Mileva should at least be seen as a co-author of the famous papers, since it seemed that they conceived of the theory together. Given, as we will see, Albert’s shabby treatment of her later in life, then all the more sympathy was directed toward Mileva and her plight by history. Indeed, some went so far (you will still find websites saying this) that Albert stole the theory of relativity from Mileva. Nonetheless, after that initial flurry of debate, the consensus has moved away from this viewpoint, so that today the select scholars looking over the Einstein Papers Project in Pasadena, California assert unabashedly that Mileva made no input to Albert’s theory.

Nonetheless, I am one of the few “Einstein scholars” (if I may call myself such), who gives Mileva some credit in the 1905 marvel. She was good at mathematics, she had patience in her life and work, and she was a thorough researcher – all qualities severely lacking in Albert. Let me put it this way: over his life as a physicist, Einstein hired a series of companions (whom he called “calculators”) to do the tedious and complicated mathematics required for his theory, especially as it developed over the later years with the use of tensor calculus in his General Theory of Relativity. All were men; except, famously, his last calculator was the Israeli-American woman, Buria Kaufmann – about whom you will read in the literature as his “first female calculator.” (Incidentally, there is a website giving her credit for Einstein’s later theory, which is complete fiction.)  I, however, would assert that Buria was the second woman; for Mileva was Albert’s first “calculator.” She was also his researcher and proofreader. Since she knew the physics, as we know from the letters, she also was his sounding-board – Albert bouncing ideas off of Mileva, as they say.

So, what about Albert speaking of “we” and “our work”? Let me put this into context by quoting from some of the letters in chronological order. In a letter Mileva wrote to Helene Savić (née Kaufler), her closest and longest friend throughout her life (they roomed together in a boarding house in Zurich when they were students), she speaks of a paper “written” by Albert that will be published soon that is “very significant.” She then says that “we” sent it to an important physicist – revealing how much she was involved with Albert’s work. Later in a letter from Albert to Mileva, let me quote from the opening lines to give you a trace of their intimacy: “Thank you very much for your little letter and all the true love that’s in it. I kiss and hug you for it from all my heart, exactly the way you would want it & are entitled to, love.” He then goes into a discussion of other people, followed by his going back to how much they love each other, and ending with this key sentence. “How happy and proud I will be when the two of us together will have brought our work on the relative motion to a victorious conclusion.” I put in italics the famous (or is it infamous?) phrase: our work. But there’s nothing more on this, although a bit later in the letter he goes on to talk about another physics problem he is working on: specific heats. He discusses the physics problem in detail, with equations and his proposed solution, and he ends the topic with this: “Don’t forget to look up to what extent glass obeys the law of Dulong and Petit.” My guess is that it was this sort of task that was part of their work together. The letter ends where it began. “Tender greetings and kisses, my dear little dumpling, from your … Albert.”

I’ll leave the topic there, nonetheless aware of the possibility that Mileva did help Albert in even more significant ways, and that hence she’s been slighted by history. 
Back to Zurich in 1903. Initially, their life together was harmonious, a reflection of the camaraderie in the love letters, as she kept house and raised her boys. But by around 1909, when Albert was being seen as an important physicist, there clearly was a severe strain on the marriage. For example, in a letter that year to Helene, she says that Albert “lives only for his work” and the family is “unimportant to him.” By 1914, when they moved to Berlin for Albert’s prestigious position at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Physics, their marriage entered a new phase. In fact, Albert had been having relations with a divorced cousin, Elsa Löwenthal, who lived in Berlin. Moreover, Albert made it clear to Mileva that their previous relationship was over. He went so far as to give her a list of demands: that she do the laundry, prepare him three meals a day, and keep his office clean – all without any personal relations. No intimacy in the house, and no being together in public. It was degradingly cruel: Mileva’s role was reduced to being a maid and cook. She tried to accept it, but quickly found that she couldn’t endure the humiliation; and so she took her two boys back to Zurich, where she remained for the rest of her life.

They officially divorced in 1919, and Albert immediately married Elsa – all in the same year that he became the world-famous scientist, because of the solar eclipse experiment that proved that light from a star is bent around the sun, as predicted by his theory. He got the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921 and transferred the money to a bank in Zurich for the support of their boys, where Mileva had access to the interest in the account.

What happened after all that infatuation seen in the love letters and in their early life together? In retrospect, Mileva surely realized that she had ignored or overlooked what we might call the dark side of Albert. As a student he was overly sarcastic, often mocking and even degrading people whom he saw as inadequate or not too smart. He even teased her in ways that revealed an underlying hostility. When she pointed this out, he would laugh it off – and she’d forgive him. In a letter to Helena in 1900 she writes of Albert’s “wicked words with deeds! What an insolent boy he is, and yet I love him so much!” Telling words. Even after the acrimonious divorce, she still, as will be seen, was under Albert’s spell. I believe that she never got over that initial infatuation when they were students. It became a pattern: she was always trying to get on his good side.

Overall, Albert was very much a 19th century male chauvinist in his attitude and communications with women. Here are some of his words about women that reveal his overt misogyny: they are “passive, insecure, needy, and wanting to be dominated.” I knew that he liked to flirt with women throughout his life. But seeing him do so with other wives, with Mileva present, made it less frivolous and more malicious. In short, he was a cad and a rake, rolled into one.

The turnaround in their relationship seemed to bring out the worst in him. He was petty and vindictive, and especially very cruel towards her. There is no direct evidence of any real physical abuse. However, there was an incident in the spring of 1913 when a friend reported seeing Mileva with a badly swollen face, which was attributed to a “toothache” – and hence she and Albert missed some social events. Possibly the swollen face was a sign of something more malevolent, but we will never know the truth. Nonetheless, pondering this, I wish to quote something Albert wrote in a letter in 1925: “Not only children need a bit of thrashing, but also grownups and especially women.” And I’ll leave it there.

After the divorce, he accused her of poisoning his relationship with the boys – a common trope between divorcing couples. But it got more vicious as her financial situation became grave, and she asked for more money. She made some extra money tutoring students in math and giving piano lessons. But it wasn’t enough. Albert’s letters to her contain nasty personal attacks: saying she is “abnormal,” a “nonentity,” and that her pleading is “rubbish.” I can only imagine how Mileva felt being called this. At the time, she was in severe physical pain with chronic back problems, often forcing her into bed for long periods, even stays in hospital, when she was trying to raise two boys alone. Moreover, all this was exacerbated by problems in her Serbian family. Her sister Zorka was diagnosed as schizophrenic and was in and out of asylums; her only living brother disappeared into Russia after World War I; and her parents had serious financial problems.

Could it get any worse?  It could. And it did. Tete became a handful. He was very bright and creative; he had musical talent on the piano, and he wrote promising poems and stories. But he was also prone to falling into depressive episodes, for apparently no reason – anger fits, throwing things, being out of control. I suppose Mileva saw this coming: Tete, like her sister, eventually was diagnosed as schizophrenic.  

Albert, of course, knew all this, but being in Berlin, he didn’t have to deal with it. He did make occasional visits and took summer trips with the boys (giving Mileva short breaks), all while he was still living in Europe. But when he moved to Princeton, N.J., in 1933, with Hitler in power in Germany and Einstein’s name being high on a hit list, their meetings were over; until 1938, when Hans Albert (now with a wife and two children) moved to the USA. The last meeting between Albert and Tete is recorded in a 1933 photograph that bears a close look. Both are seated in a room, with Tete looking over a large, open portfolio – perhaps reading it. Albert is facing in a different direction (about 90-degrees away), holding a violin and bow, and staring off into space. It may be that Tete is reading to him, but more likely they are inhabiting two different worlds.  

In the years during World War II, living in Zurich, Switzerland (a country surrounded by a Nazi-occupied Europe), Mileva was terrified that the Nazis would swoop up this last free space. Moreover, she knew that they were rounding up Jews by the trainloads and moving them to Concentration Camps. She was somewhat safe as an Orthodox Christian, but Tete was “Jewish,” being a child of Einstein. She wrote pleading letters to Albert, asking him to take Tete to the USA. She even contacted the Red Cross, and they agreed that the best bet was to get Albert to sponsor him. “Bring us to safety,” she wrote. But being Mileva – ever still the dutiful wife, even though they had been divorced for two decades – she added (and I assert that she was not being sarcastic in saying this), “[I am] not intending to disturb your peace and freedom.” Petrified that “Tete is in danger because he is your son,” she concluded: “you can’t just leave him in the lurch.”

In fact, Einstein, Dukas, and Nathan were diligently rescuing Jews from Europe by using Einstein’s name to get emigration papers and such. Albert once spoke of this, saying that they were running a little refugee office over his cluttered “lawyer’s desk.” And they did save lives. Relevant here is a 1939 letter from Albert to Helena on this very topic. Helena’s father was Jewish, and she had numerous relatives whose lives were in peril, and so apparently, she was asking Albert for help. He wrote in response. “How gladly would I help! But I am desperately trying to at least get younger people out. Relocation of old people must under present horrible conditions be set aside.” In the end, we know of two aunts of Helena who died in gas chambers. Interestingly, in this same letter, Albert mentions that Hans is now in America, but that Tete is with Mileva in Zurich, saying that Tete is “incurably mentally ill.”  

So, what about Tete? And Mileva’s pleading letters? As far as we know, these pleading requests were never answered. Albert, it seems, did leave his son “in the lurch.” My guess is that he just couldn’t fathom the chaos in his life of dealing with someone with such a severe mental illness. Listen to what he later wrote to Hans about Tete after learning of Mileva’s death. “If I had been fully informed [apparently referring here to what he saw as a genetic mental illness in Mileva’s family], he [Tete] would never have come into the world.” I can only imagine how Hans must have felt after reading these appalling words from his father about his beloved brother. Sometimes Albert’s behavior is plainly pathetic. Fortunately, the Nazis never invaded Switzerland.   

 Much of Mileva’s adult life was centred on Tete, as she watched him descend into the depths of mental illness. Overweight and chain-smoking, he was in and out of mental institutions. For Mileva, he was a full-time job. She, being the caring mother, was obsessed with making sure he would be safe after she died. And she succeeded; for seven years after his mother died, he lived in the renowned Burghölzli psychiatric clinic in Zurich. He was 55 when he died.

I believe Mileva never got over two things: the loss of Lieserl and her infatuation with Albert. We don’t know what happened to Lieserl; but Mileva surely did, and it haunted her all of her life; as seen, she flunked her final chance for a university degree because of it. Lieserl was a source of her constant despondent behaviour and possibly her so-called “ugliness.” In a letter to Helena in 1925 she wrote of “my unfulfilled desire for a daughter”– another telling phrase, since she had a daughter, but was forced to abandon her.
Regarding Albert, no matter how abusive he was, Mileva still was open to forgiveness. She once asked herself this question: “When has a man ever listened to reason, when a woman is involved?” She should have listened to her own words.

Mileva Marić died on August 4, 1948, at the age of 72.
This story of Albert falling in and out of love with Mileva was not the first such episode in his life. It was previewed by and even overlapped with his first sweetheart: Marie Winteler.
In 1895 he spent a year enrolled in the cantonal school in the town of Aarau, near Zurich. He had taken the rigorous entrance exams for the Polytechnic (which Mileva later passed) and had flunked the non-science and non-math parts. But since he did so well on the science and math parts, it was recommended that he do a year of make-up in Aarau; plus, he was applying at age 16, a year early. He boarded with the family of Jost Winteler, a teacher at the school. Jost and Pauline had three daughters, the prettiest being Marie, two years older than Albert. Albert quickly fell for her, and she for him. She was an accomplished pianist, and so their love interests were supplemented with piano and violin duets. After that year, and after passing the entrance requirement at the Polytechnic, Albert moved to Zurich – where he met Mileva, and then broke off with Marie. In short, he jilted her, as he would later do with Mileva.

Marie, however, thought the relationship was to be forever, and wrote pleading letters when he stopped writing to her. After all, he was still mailing her his dirty laundry to wash and send back. (I am not making this up.) Being deeply hurt, she fell into a depression that (may have) plagued her throughout her life. She became a schoolteacher (whose records show that she missed a lot of classes due to sickness); in 1911 she married a man whose first name was Albert. They had two boys, but divorced in 1927. We also know that she tried to reach the first Albert in the 1940s about emigrating to the USA, but there is no record of his having received her letters. (Albert’s secretary was known to censor his mail.)  She died in a mental institution in 1957, two years after Einstein died.
I mention this for two reasons. One, the obvious – this being a preview to the story of Albert’s shabby treatment of Mileva and the parallel terrible consequences. The other reason is the dirty laundry. This, also obviously, needs to be explained.

In 2019 I published an historical novel on Einstein’s life, called A Solitary Smile. In it, Marie is one of the characters, especially near the end and in a dream sequence that has Einstein recalling their time together, where he realizes how he hurt her. In recalling this part of my book, while writing this story of Mileva, and now Marie again – I suddenly realized that I didn’t include the dirty laundry bit. Why? I knew it then, as I do now. So why not mention it? Ruminating on this, I can only surmise that I was subconsciously protecting Albert from more scorn. Why dig up all the dirt (seemingly, literally in this case). How interesting this is. Me, being part of the problem. Protecting Albert’s image.
Well, I caught myself. And here I acknowledge my error – to supplement my saga on the dark side of Albert Einstein. 
                                                * * *
Readings: Mileva Marić Einstein: Life with Albert Einstein, by Radmila Milentijević (United World Press, 2010). In Albert’s Shadow: The Life and Letters of Mileva Marić: Einstein’s First Wife, edited by Milan Popović (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003). A Solitary Smile: A Novel on Einstein, by David R. Topper (Bee Line Press, 2019).

https://www.kupid.ai/create-ai-girlfriend
 

Continue Reading

Features

A Half Century of Calumny at the UN

By HENRY SREBRNIK For the past half-century, the United Nations’ Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) has worked to delegitimize the State of Israel by amplifying Palestinian efforts to depict the Jewish state as a “colonial” and “apartheid” regime. The Palestinians are the only people to have such a dedicated propaganda organ inside the United Nations, while Israel is the only UN member state to face such attacks. 

The Committee is the child of that notorious day, November 10, 1975, when the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, equating Zionism with “racism.” The General Assembly also passed Resolution 3376, which created CEIRPP. In subsequent years, further resolutions expanded CEIRPP and provided it with greater resources. A UN report from 2024 shows that financial resources dedicated to servicing CEIRPP specifically stand at $3.1 million per year.

The language of Resolution 3379 encapsulated the antisemitic themes of Soviet and Arab propaganda. In his address to the General Assembly opposing Resolution 3379, Israel’s then-UN ambassador, Chaim Herzog, remarked that the draft was being debated on the 37th anniversary of the Nazi pogrom known as Kristallnacht, adding that Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler would have welcomed the proceedings. 

While that resolution was ultimately rescinded in 1991, CEIRPP continued to carry out its work, promoting the ideas at the heart of the Zionism-is-racism resolution, with its call for “the elimination of colonialism and neo-colonialism, foreign occupation, zionism, apartheid and racial discrimination in all its forms.” 

Within two years of the committee’s creation, its work and mission became further entrenched within the internal UN bureaucracy. On December 2, 1977, the General Assembly passed Resolution 32/40 (B), authorizing the creation of a “Special Unit on Palestinian Rights,” which would serve the committee by “preparing studies and publications” devoted to both Palestinian rights and the United Nations’ own efforts in that regard. This included the announcement of the annual observance of November 29, the anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly 1947 passage of Resolution 181 to partition Palestine, as the “International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.” 

The “Special Unit” created through Resolution 32/40 (B) grew into an entire Division for Palestinian Rights (DPR) in 1979, housed within what is now known as the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs. The DPR’s current role includes planning and servicing the committee’s various meetings in New York and internationally, maintaining an online database known as the United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine.

The CEIRPP is presently composed of 25 member states and 24 observers, the vast majority non-democratic countries in the Global South. Of these, 23 are Muslim countries. Observers include the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The committee works in five areas: promoting Palestinian self-determination, advocating for an “immediate end” to Israel’s control of territories conquered during the 1967 war, mobilizing international support, liaising with UN bodies on the Palestinian question, and working with civil society organizations and parliamentarians to advance the Palestinian cause. While the committee does not directly impact the foreign policy of member states, it influences policy discussions and provides anti-Zionist NGOs with access to UN diplomats, staff, and financial resources.

In addition to the CEIRPP, there are several other UN bodies solely dedicated to the Palestinian cause. Created to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinians displaced by the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), a billion-dollar agency with 30,000 employees, expanded its roster from an initial 750,000 to 5.9 million by embracing a uniquely expansive definition of refugees. It is the only refugee agency dedicated to one particular group. All others come under the aegis of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Israel estimates that as 25 per cent of UNRWA employees belong to terrorist organizations. Some were found to have not only supported but directly participated in the October 7 Hamas attacks.

The position of the Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories was launched by a resolution in 1993, and its occupant reports on the human rights situation in the territories. In July 2025, the United States announced sanctions against the present rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, accusing her of having “spewed unabashed antisemitism.” Albanese’s activities are supported by staff from the UN human rights office, at an estimated cost of $500,000 a year.

Launched in 1968, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices has produced annual 70-page reports, with legal analysis and recommendations on Israel’s alleged violations, summaries of Palestinian testimonies, and collections of statistics. Composed of Malaysia, Senegal, and Sri Lanka, and staffed out of the UN human rights office, the Special Committee also conducts regular field missions, including to Amman, Cairo, and Damascus. It has a mandate to investigate only alleged Israeli abuses. Its reports include unsubstantiated allegations, such as claims that Israeli excavations undermine the structural foundations of the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount.

Also since 1968, the World Health Organization (WHO) has maintained an agenda item dedicated to scrutinizing Israel’s health record at the annual meetings of the World Health Assembly, its decision-making body. Israel is the only state to face such an agenda item.

In 2024, the UN General Assembly adopted 164 resolutions on Israel and 84 on all other countries combined. From 2006 through 2024, the UN Human Rights Council adopted 108 resolutions against Israel, 44 against Syria, 15 against Iran, eight against Russia, and three against Venezuela.

Meanwhile, the anti-Israel machine goes on without pause. Yet another UN commission of inquiry on Israel, headed by Navi Pillay, on Oct. 28 presented a report accusing the Jewish state of genocide. This body was initiated by the Arab and Islamic states at a special session that they convened at the UN Human Rights Council in wake of the May 2021 Hamas-Israel war. It was tasked with examining the “root causes” of the conflict, including Israel’s alleged “systematic discrimination” based on race. Instead of the usual one-year term for such inquiries, the investigation of Israel was made perpetual — it has no end date.

So while most people focus on the attacks on Israel launched regularly both in the UN General Assembly and Security Council, behind the scenes an entire bureaucracy is engaged in slandering and defaming the world’s only Jewish state. This relentless campaign takes its toll and serves to continually paint Israel as a uniquely malevolent nation worthy of elimination. We have seen the fruits of these labours since October 7, 2023.

Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.

Continue Reading

Features

Streaming-only households are growing in Canada

More and more Canadians are cutting the cord and relying exclusively on internet-delivered video. Fresh industry data indicates streaming-only homes are approaching three in then households, while the share with no cable or satellite subscription hit roughly 46% in 2024, clear signs of a decisive shift toward SVOD and free ad-supported streaming.
Cord-cutting crosses a new threshold
The long-running trickle of cord-cutting has become a stream. Convergence Research’s latest “Couch Potato” outlook estimates that 46% of Canadian households had no cable, satellite or telco TV subscription in 2024, up four percent from 2023, with the figure projected to rise further in the next few years. Trade coverage of the same report underscores the trend: OTT revenues rose an estimated 15% in 2024 as traditional TV subscriptions continued falling. While individual timelines differ by source, the trend is the same: legacy TV is shrinking fast as Canadians rebuild their viewing stacks around apps.
At the same time, streaming is not only near-universal but increasingly standalone. Media in Canada reported “nearly three in 10” households are streaming-only, relying on online sources instead of cable bundles. It’s a trend we’ve seen in other fields as well, such as casino games, where people are more interested in the online alternatives instead of landbased sites. Thus, digitalization is not a TV-thing only, but a general trend in the country. Young adult Canadians are even more onboard on this trend, accelerating the generational hand-off from channel guides to connected-TV home screens.
Regulatory and market signals reinforce the shift as well. In June 2024, the CRTC required large online streaming services to contribute 5% of their Canadian revenues to support local news and domestic content. Major platforms challenged certain aspects of the framework, but the new contributions regime, according to reports, should add roughly C$200 million annually to the ecosystem.
What’s driving streaming-only growth
Three intertwined forces explain why this change keeps advancing. First come value and flexibility: with household budgets under pressure, Canadians are more selective about which services they keep year-round. MTM’s 2024/2025 read shows people are “streamlining” their subscriptions, maintaining one or two anchors and rotating others around tent-pole releases, while filling gaps with free ad-supported TV and platform freebies.
Technology and habit formation have an important role as well. The app grid on a smart TV has replaced the channel guide for many households; game consoles and streaming sticks have made it trivial to jump between different streaming apps. Once viewers get used to on-demand navigation, reverting to fixed-time channels feels limiting, especially for younger audiences that were born with immediacy and personalization.
Content economics are nudging straggles online too. Rights for premium series and more live sports are flowing to digital, thanks to options like NBA Pass, F1 TV Pro, and others. As subscription TV revenues are declining, broadcasters and distributors are experimenting with slimmer linear tiers, hybrid bundles that pair broadband with streamer discounts, and ad-supported options that meet price-sensitive households where they are. The result is a feedback loop: as more content and better prices accrue to streaming, more households find they no longer need traditional TV packages at all.

Continue Reading

Features

Exploring how to earn money in Tongits Go and GZone Tongits: Rewards and Myths

Tongits stands out as one of the most iconic card games in the Philippines, fusing fun, excitement, strategy, and social interaction. Spanning generations, this traditional game has remained a staple during family gatherings and leisure moments, bringing people together with its engaging mechanics. The emergence of mobile platforms such as Tongits Go elevated the experience further, offering Filipino players the opportunity to enjoy the thrill of the game anywhere and anytime. Alongside this advancement, however, a recurring question floods online forums: “Can I and how to earn money in Tongits Go? ”

Understanding the answer requires separating myths from facts surrounding Tongits Go, as well as examining alternatives like GZone Tongits, which brings competitive gameplay and tangible rewards into the picture.

Tongits Go: Digital Entertainment Rooted in In-Game Progress and Rewards

The appeal of Tongits Go lies in its seamless ability to deliver the essence of the traditional card game in a digital format. Widely accessible on mobile devices, the app continues to attract thousands of players seeking entertainment and lighthearted competition. However, misinformation about its ability to provide real monetary benefits stirs confusion, with claims linking how to earn money in Tongits Go to GCash as a source of cash withdrawals.

Myth: Real Money Withdrawals Are a Tongits Go Feature

Tongits Go is designed purely as an entertainment-centric platform. It operates as a digital space for online casino rather than an e-wallet or online casino. While players can earn in-app rewards such as Gold and Gostars, these hold value only within the game environment. Gold is primarily used for joining tables, competing in tournaments, and unlocking gameplay options. Gostars, meanwhile, are accumulated through completing daily missions or participating in special events. Occasionally, Gostars may be redeemed for prepaid loads or promotional digital vouchers, but these opportunities are infrequent and offer minimal monetary value.

Contrary to false claims about Tongits Go online acting as a money-making platform, there is no system in place for converting virtual winnings to genuine cash. The promotion of such statements often stems from unofficial or unreliable sources, heightening the need for player vigilance in protecting their personal information against scams.

Fact: In-Game Achievements Enhance the Fun Factor

How to earn real money in Tongits Go account rewards players through engaging in-game challenges that foster personal growth and development without monetary stakes. Tools such as the Battle Pass system, tournament leaderboards, achievement rewards, and daily missions help players track their progress and compete against others for prizes such as additional Gold and Gostars.

This approach motivates participants to focus on enhancing their gameplay skills and sharpening their strategies, contributing to a vibrant community atmosphere built on friendly competition.

Promoting Safe Play and Caution

How to earn real money in Tongits Go emphasizes ethical and responsible practices by encouraging players to moderate their time spent on the app. The developers position the game as a platform for relaxation and recreation rather than profit generation, warning users to remain alert against external claims promising “real cash withdrawals.” Ensuring safe and responsible play remains a cornerstone of Tongits Go’s philosophy.

GZone Tongits: Navigating Competitive Gameplay with Genuine Rewards

For players seeking higher stakes, GZone Tongits stands out as a viable alternative. Unlike Tongits Go, which functions purely as an entertainment platform, GZone Tongits combines skill-based gameplay with tangible rewards. As a PAGCOR-licensed platform adhering to Philippine online casino regulations, GZone guarantees fair competition, transparency, and a safe player experience.

Real-Time PVP Competitions

Unlike casual apps, GZone Tongits incorporates Player vs. Player (PVP) matchups where individuals compete against other real players rather than AI opponents. This format introduces a dynamic and unpredictable element to each round while maintaining familiar mechanics rooted in traditional Tongits online gameplay.

Several variations of how to play Tongits are offered through GameZone Tongits, catering to diverse player preferences. Tongits Plus sticks closely to the original Filipino rules, preserving cultural authenticity. Tongits Joker introduces Joker cards, adding new layers of challenge and strategy. Tongits Quick, on the other hand, is a streamlined, fast-paced version suited for shorter play sessions. With flexible table levels ranging from Newbie to Master, the platform accommodates players of all skill levels, fostering an inclusive environment.

Legal Regulation and Verified Rewards

Game Zone Tongits sets itself apart through its legal framework, which guarantees its credibility across game transactions. As a PAGCOR-certified online casino platform, it abides by strict regulatory guidelines, ensuring fairness, transparency, and security for every player involved in competitions. Key events, such as the prestigious ₱10,000,000 GameZone Tablegame Champions Cup (GTCC)—the Philippines’ first Tongits e-sports championship—offer significant rewards to top-performing individuals, elevating the competitiveness of the game.

Unlike Tongits Go, GZone Tongits creates earning opportunities that are verified and legitimate. The presence of regulated payout systems ensures real-value rewards for players, making competition profitable without compromising integrity.

Smart Reward Structures and Responsibility in GameZone casino

GameZone Tongits supports an ecosystem that rewards players strategically while promoting responsible practices. Features such as daily and weekly rebates return percentages of wagers to players, creating avenues to continually reinvest and optimize their play experience.

VIP levels unlock better rewards and exclusive access to high-stakes tables for loyal players, while regular tournaments and leaderboard placements recognize skill and consistency, offering tangible prizes and acknowledgment. Tools for establishing spending limits and setting playtime boundaries enable players to engage responsibly, reinforcing GameZone’s commitment to moderation and sustainability.

Exploring Tongits Platforms Based on Player Preferences

Tongits Go provides a welcoming space for casual gamers seeking entertainment, social connections, and lighthearted play. Its focus on digital rewards, such as prepaid loads and promotional incentives, keeps gameplay enjoyable without monetary pressure. Those who prioritize relaxation and shared laughs often gravitate toward Tongits Go as the ideal choice for convenient online casino experiences.

Meanwhile, GameZone online Tongits appeals to competitive enthusiasts ready to immerse themselves in tournaments offering real-world prizes. Its elevated gameplay merges professional standards with Filipino tradition, providing guaranteed payouts alongside thrilling matchups. GameZone Tongits delivers a regulated environment perfect for individuals looking to combine play skills with tangible rewards.

Preserving Filipino Tongits Culture Through Modern Play

The allure of Tongits transcends generations, blending strategy and camaraderie to create an experience steeped in Filipino tradition. Digital platforms such as Tongits Go and GameZone slot adapt this beloved pastime to modern online casino preferences, catering to players from varied backgrounds and interests. Whether pursuing casual engagement or competitive achievements, the game retains its heart through its ability to build connections and challenge players to think intelligently.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News