Connect with us

Features

Trump Raises Questions About Miriam Adelson’s Priorities and Sparks Debate Over Donor Influence on Politics

During a speech in the Knesset, Donald Trump unexpectedly pointed to the special role of Miriam Adelson in shaping U.S.–Israel relations. His remarks addressed not only the well-known philanthropist herself, but also a broader issue: how significant is the influence of private donors on a country’s foreign policy becoming? Society once again turns its attention to the boundaries of what is acceptable in the alliance between politics and big capital.

Who Is Miriam Adelson and Why She Receives So Much Attention

Dr. Miriam Adelson is a physician, scientist, and millionaire of Jewish origin, born in Israel and living in the United States for many years. She actively supports educational, medical, and cultural projects related to Jewish and Israeli identity, as well as programs aimed at combating drug addiction. Her foundation finances scholarships, memorials, and medical research.

Miriam Adelson is known for having continued her late husband’s political course after the death of Sheldon Adelson, a businessman and the founder of the casino company Las Vegas Sands, by maintaining strong support for the U.S. Republican Party. Over recent decades, the Adelson family has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to election campaigns, becoming one of the leading donors to the conservative wing of American politics. It is precisely the scale of her influence and her close contacts with the Trump administration that draw particular interest from experts and observers.

How Miriam and Sheldon Adelson Influenced U.S. Decisions on Israel

A series of cases is widely discussed in which funding from the Adelson family coincided with major political decisions made by the White House. Among the most prominent examples is the relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. According to reports by Reuters and The New York Times, this move was actively lobbied by Adelson and her circle, and the opening ceremony itself took place in the personal presence of the philanthropists.

In addition, Miriam Adelson has repeatedly been honored for her philanthropy and support of Israeli military organizations. In 2018, Trump awarded her the Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of the highest state honors in the United States. It is known that Adelson regularly visited the White House and maintained personal contact with the president on key issues.

The term “major donor” in this context refers to an individual or organization that contributes substantial sums to the campaigns of politicians or political parties. Lobbying is the activity of promoting the interests of private entities through lawful mechanisms of influence on those in power.

What Donald Trump Said and Why His Words Caused a Stir

During his speech, broadcast on Israeli and American channels, Trump stated: “Every president for decades said they would move the embassy to Jerusalem, but I got it done. Right, Miriam? Look, here’s Miriam—stand up, Miriam.”

Trump then spoke about how the Adelson couple frequently visited his office and actively participated in discussions on issues related to Israel. He added: “I once asked Miriam: which do you love more—Israel or the United States? She didn’t answer. Maybe it’s Israel.” These remarks became the subject of heated debate: can a donor with such priorities be considered capable of influencing U.S. foreign policy?

The context of the speech intensified the overall atmosphere—on the eve of the address, a temporary ceasefire regime between Israel and Hamas had been agreed upon, and Trump presented himself as a peacemaker. His jokes and rhetorical questions energized the audience, but also generated new suspicions regarding the transparency of the decisions being made.

Reaction of Public Organizations and Experts

Immediately after Trump’s speech, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a statement condemning such close ties between politicians and private donors. In a comment to Casino.org, CAIR representatives noted: “We welcome Trump’s candor in openly acknowledging the level of influence Miriam Adelson has on policy. We urge all U.S. politicians to refuse support from donors who place the interests of a foreign state above national ones.”

CAIR’s primary mission is to protect the interests of American Muslims and to combat discrimination and double standards. The council actively responds to any manifestations of interference in U.S. politics by foreign lobbyists. According to experts, such statements reflect growing public concern about the transparency of the political process.

The Debate Over Donor Influence and Possible Consequences

Public anxiety is increasing over whose hands hold the levers of control over foreign policy. Some experts argue that donations are a way of exercising civic engagement and supporting chosen politicians. Others see this as a threat to national interests and a risk of substituting public demand with private interests.

Where is the line between lawful support for a candidate and manipulation of foreign policy? What measures can prevent conflicts of interest between donors and state institutions? There are still no clear answers to these questions. Discussions of lobbying, donor ethics, and the influence of capital are becoming increasingly intense amid global challenges.

Similar mechanisms of influence also exist in less large-scale but no less illustrative forms, including in the gambling sector. In various countries, politicians and government officials often receive financial support from the gambling business, including casino owners and online platform operators. In return, such industries expect favorable regulation: license extensions, relaxed requirements, more lenient tax legislation, or delays in restrictive measures. Formally, such relationships fall within the bounds of the law, yet they increasingly become the subject of public debate about conflicts of interest and the transparency of decision-making.

Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that the gambling industry is developing not only in offline formats but also in the digital sphere, where state oversight is often weaker. Online casinos and live games attract audiences through mobility and ease of access, while the projects themselves quickly build up an ecosystem of apps and services. For example, through FunkyTimeGame.org Apps, users can download Funky Time applications and play in a live show format directly from a smartphone, without being tied to physical casinos or a specific location.

In a broader context, this once again brings the discussion back to the core issue: the influence of capital—whether from major political donors or the gambling industry—gradually permeates various spheres of public life. That is why questions of transparency, regulation, and public oversight are becoming increasingly relevant, regardless of whether the issue concerns foreign policy, domestic legislation, or the entertainment industry.

Context and Explanations for a Broad Audience

The Knesset is Israel’s parliament and the country’s highest legislative body. The relocation of the American embassy to Jerusalem was perceived as a historic victory for Israeli diplomacy; it signified the official recognition of the city as the capital. For the United States, this step became the subject of sharp criticism from other Middle Eastern countries as well as allies in the European Union.

World history has seen other instances in which major donors, such as George Soros or the Koch brothers, exerted notable influence on politics by financing campaigns, think tanks, or media outlets. The Adelson case only underscores that such practices have become universal, while questions of transparency remain unresolved.

Who determines strategic foreign policy decisions—presidents, parliaments, or shadow donors with their own preferences? Do parallels arise with other countries where political elites are closely intertwined with big capital? Behind the façade of philanthropy often lie complex mechanisms of influence that require public oversight and reflection.


































During
a speech in the Knesset, Donald Trump unexpectedly pointed to the
special role of Miriam Adelson in shaping U.S.–Israel relations.
His remarks addressed not only the well-known philanthropist herself,
but also a broader issue: how significant is the influence of private
donors on a country’s foreign policy becoming? Society once again
turns its attention to the boundaries of what is acceptable in the
alliance between politics and big capital.Who Is Miriam Adelson and
Why She Receives So Much AttentionDr. Miriam Adelson is a
physician, scientist, and millionaire of Jewish origin, born in
Israel and living in the United States for many years. She actively
supports educational, medical, and cultural
projects related to Jewish and Israeli identity, as well as programs
aimed at combating drug addiction. Her foundation finances
scholarships, memorials, and medical research.Miriam Adelson is known for
having continued her late husband’s political course after the
death of Sheldon Adelson, a businessman and the founder of the casino
company Las Vegas Sands, by maintaining strong support for the U.S.
Republican Party. Over recent decades, the Adelson family has donated
hundreds of millions of dollars to election campaigns, becoming one
of the leading donors to the conservative wing of American politics.
It is precisely the scale of her influence and her close contacts
with the Trump administration that draw particular interest from
experts and observers.How Miriam and Sheldon
Adelson Influenced U.S. Decisions on IsraelA series of cases is widely
discussed in which funding from the Adelson family coincided with
major political decisions made by the White House. Among the most
prominent examples is the relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel
Aviv to Jerusalem in 2018. According to reports by Reuters and The
New York Times, this move was actively lobbied by Adelson and her
circle, and the opening ceremony itself took place in the personal
presence of the philanthropists.In addition, Miriam Adelson
has repeatedly been honored for her philanthropy and support of
Israeli military organizations. In 2018, Trump awarded her the
Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of the highest state honors in the
United States. It is known that Adelson regularly visited the White
House and maintained personal contact with the president on key
issues.The term “major donor”
in this context refers to an individual or organization that
contributes substantial sums to the campaigns of politicians or
political parties. Lobbying is the activity of promoting the
interests of private entities through lawful mechanisms of influence
on those in power.What Donald Trump Said and
Why His Words Caused a StirDuring his speech, broadcast
on Israeli and American channels, Trump stated: “Every president
for decades said they would move the embassy to Jerusalem, but I got
it done. Right, Miriam? Look, here’s Miriam—stand up, Miriam.”Trump then spoke about how
the Adelson couple frequently visited his office and actively
participated in discussions on issues related to Israel. He added: “I
once asked Miriam: which do you love more—Israel or the United
States? She didn’t answer. Maybe it’s Israel.” These remarks
became the subject of heated debate: can a donor with such priorities
be considered capable of influencing U.S. foreign policy?The context of the speech
intensified the overall atmosphere—on the eve of the address, a
temporary ceasefire regime between Israel and Hamas had been agreed
upon, and Trump presented himself as a peacemaker. His jokes and
rhetorical questions energized the audience, but also generated new
suspicions regarding the transparency of the decisions being made.Reaction of Public
Organizations and ExpertsImmediately after Trump’s
speech, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a
statement condemning such close ties between politicians and private
donors. In a comment to Casino.org, CAIR representatives noted: “We
welcome Trump’s candor in openly acknowledging the level of
influence Miriam Adelson has on policy. We urge all U.S. politicians
to refuse support from donors who place the interests of a foreign
state above national ones.”CAIR’s primary mission is
to protect the interests of American Muslims and to combat
discrimination and double standards. The council actively responds to
any manifestations of interference in U.S. politics by foreign
lobbyists. According to experts, such statements reflect growing
public concern about the transparency of the political process.The Debate Over Donor
Influence and Possible ConsequencesPublic anxiety is increasing
over whose hands hold the levers of control over foreign policy. Some
experts argue that donations are a way of exercising civic engagement
and supporting chosen politicians. Others see this as a threat to
national interests and a risk of substituting public demand with
private interests.Where is the line between
lawful support for a candidate and manipulation of foreign policy?
What measures can prevent conflicts of interest between donors and
state institutions? There are still no clear answers to these
questions. Discussions of lobbying, donor ethics, and the influence
of capital are becoming increasingly intense amid global challenges.Similar mechanisms of
influence also exist in less large-scale but no less illustrative
forms, including in the gambling sector. In various countries,
politicians and government officials often receive financial support
from the gambling business, including casino owners and online
platform operators. In return, such industries expect favorable
regulation: license extensions, relaxed requirements, more lenient
tax legislation, or delays in restrictive measures. Formally, such
relationships fall within the bounds of the law, yet they
increasingly become the subject of public debate about conflicts of
interest and the transparency of decision-making.Against this backdrop, it is
hardly surprising that the gambling industry is developing not only
in offline formats but also in the digital sphere, where state
oversight is often weaker. Online casinos and live games attract
audiences through mobility and ease of access, while the projects
themselves quickly build up an ecosystem of apps and services. For
example, through FunkyTimeGame.org
Apps
, users can download Funky Time applications and play in a
live show format directly from a smartphone, without being tied to
physical casinos or a specific location.In a broader context, this
once again brings the discussion back to the core issue: the
influence of capital—whether from major political donors or the
gambling industry—gradually permeates various spheres of public
life. That is why questions of transparency, regulation, and public
oversight are becoming increasingly relevant, regardless of whether
the issue concerns foreign policy, domestic legislation, or the
entertainment industry.Context and Explanations for
a Broad AudienceThe Knesset is Israel’s
parliament and the country’s highest legislative body. The
relocation of the American embassy to Jerusalem was perceived as a
historic victory for Israeli diplomacy; it signified the official
recognition of the city as the capital. For the United States, this
step became the subject of sharp criticism from other Middle Eastern
countries as well as allies in the European Union.World history has seen other
instances in which major donors, such as George Soros or the Koch
brothers, exerted notable influence on politics by financing
campaigns, think tanks, or media outlets. The Adelson case only
underscores that such practices have become universal, while
questions of transparency remain unresolved.Who determines strategic
foreign policy decisions—presidents, parliaments, or shadow donors
with their own preferences? Do parallels arise with other countries
where political elites are closely intertwined with big capital?
Behind the façade of philanthropy often lie complex mechanisms of
influence that require public oversight and reflection.



Continue Reading

Features

New book highlights relationship between Kabbalah and science

Edward Shyfrin

By MYRON LOVE In his new book, “The Relativity of Death: Part One: Basic Principles of Kabbalah of Information. Complete Theory of Information Space, Miracles and Maxwell’s Demon,” Dr. Eduard Shyfrin demonstrates the complementary relationship between Kabbalah – the ancient practice of Jewish mysticism – and science.
“The Relativity of Death” is a  follow up to “From Infinity to Man: the Fundamental Ideas of Kabbalah Within the Framework of Information Theory and Quantum Physics,” Shyfrin’s previous work  on the subject, which he published in 2018.
In his introduction to “The Relativity of Death”, the author, himself a scientist by training –  observes that while “science is absolutely necessary for humankind, it nevertheless does not constitute the whole truth.  Science is morally neutral,” he continues.  “Two plus two equals four is neither good nor bad. Science doesn’t provide an answer to the basic questions about our existence: Why are we here? What is our mission? How should we live? Do we have a freedom of choice? Why are we destined to die? And finally, the famous question posted by Gottfried Leibniz as to why is there something rather than nothing?
“I believe that it is impossible and wrong to try to describe Creation while at the same time excluding the Creator.
“When I started reading the works of kabbalists,” he notes, ‘I realised that Kabbalah is deeply ‘scientific,’ that it is a theory of Creation of which our Universe is just a part. Kabbalah is not a textbook – it doesn’t provide equations and laws. Instead, it’s a live body comprised of the teachings and opinions of kabbalists, which often diverged.
“The main notions of Kabbalah,” he writes, “for example the notion of light, are not well defined. As the great kabbalist Rabbi Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto explained in his book, “Philosopher and Kabbalist,” the notion of ‘Light has no definition and is used as some sort of synonym for G-dliness.
 “The original works of kabbalists,” he points out, “are very difficult to read and comprehend, since the main ideas are usually expressed through allegories, parables and hints. This makes them largely inaccessible to contemporary readers. With this in mind, I attempted to create the Theory of Kabbalah of Information based on traditional Kabbalah, Theory of Information and the body of scientific knowledge accumulated by humankind, written in simple language accessible to the reader.”
 
Eduard Shyfrin is a remarkable individual – a man of many parts. In addition to his roles as scientist and author – he has also published a children’s book – the Ukrainian-born Shyfrin is a musician who writes his own words and music, a billionaire, and an important  community leader who generously supports his fellow Ukrainian Jews and our Israeli homeland.
 Growing up during the last years of the Soviet Union though, it comes as no surprise that he knew nothing about Judaism except that he was Jewish.  In the Soviet Union, being Jewish was simply a label that kept you from being accepted into top universities and leadership roles.
“We tried to hide out Jewishness,” he recalls.  “I wanted to be a physicist but wasn’t accepted into university.”
Instead, he followed in his father’s footsteps and became a metallurgist.  In 1983, he started work at a Ukrainian steel plant. Over the next few years, he was promoted from assistant foreman to manager to head of marketing. 
He was able to earn a PhD in physical chemistry in 1993.
In 1993, he changed jobs – becoming a representative in Ukraine of a Hong Kong-based company called Linkfull.  He was responsible for buying steel for export. In 1994, he joined forces with  Alex Schnaider and co-founded a company called the Midland Group, with partner Alexander Shnaider. The company deals in steel, shipping, real estate, agriculture and sport ventures.
Shyfrin’s interest in Judaism was sparked by the arrival of Chabad rabbis in the lands of the former Soviet Union in the mid 1990s and, in particular,  Rabbi David Bleich, the Chief Rabbi of Ukraine. Shyfrin recalls that Rabbi Bleich got him involved in Jewish charities.   He helped rebuild the oldest synagogue in Kiev, provided funds for the Jewish schools in the city, and and financed the construction of the Jewish Education Centre in Kiev, which was dedicated to his late father.
Still, Shyfrin remained largely secular.
It was in 2002, he recalls,  that he experienced a midlife crisis when he began questioning the meaning of life –  and death.
“My rabbi,” he says, “encouraged me to commit to a more Jewish lifestyle.  I began keeping kosher, putting on tefillin and studying Torah.  I found in my Torah study that there were a lot of contradictions and inconsistencies in what I was reading in the Torah and what I had learned as a scientist.”
Shyfrin began to find his answers in Kabbalah, which he approached through a scientific perspective.  As a result , he came to understand kabbalah and reality as “fundamentally information based and that physics and Torah describe different layers of the same structure”.
That epiphany led to his first book, which has sold around 8,000 copies.  He followed up the book’s success by writing numerous articles for the Jerusalem Post. Shyfrin also gives a yearly lecture in London, where he now makes his home.
He is also the founder of the Shyfrin Alliance, an initiative dedicated to advancing understanding of Jewish mysticism and spiritual thought.
Alongside his delving into Jewish mysticism,  Shyfrin remains very much involved in the real world and the crises affecting Israel, the Jewish people, and his Ukrainian homeland.  He currently serves as Vice President of the World Jewish Congress, representing Ukraine. He continues to fund Jewish schools, synagogues and community centres across Ukraine and Russia.
Since the invasion of Ukraine, Shyfrin has helped finance evacuations of Jewish elderly people and children to Hungary and Israel and continues to support communities on a monthly basis.
“For me, a Jew is a Jew,” he has been quoted as saying. “It does not matter where he lives. We are one family.”
 As for the rising antisemitism in Europe, he points out that – unlike the 1930s – today, we have Israel.
“Israel is our country and we must be strong enough to protect it,” he is quoted as saying..
 “The Relativity of Death” was released in February, and, Shyfrin reports, has already sold over 5,000 copies.  The book is available on Amazon and Kindle.

Continue Reading

Features

Manitoba Has No iGaming Framework. So Where Are Winnipeg Players Actually Gambling Online?

Ontario’s regulated iGaming market hit a 91.1% channelization rate in May 2026, according to an AGCO/Ipsos study. Meaning nine out of ten Ontario players who gamble online are doing so through a licensed, registered operator. That’s a real number, and it took years of regulatory architecture to get there. Manitoba has none of that architecture. Zero. There’s no provincial iGaming framework, no registered operator list, and no equivalent to the iGaming Ontario regime that launched in April 2022. So when Winnipeg players open a browser and look for somewhere to play, they’re not choosing between regulated sites. They’re choosing between offshore ones.

For players trying to make sense of that offshore market, the most practical move is to compare no verification casinos side by side. Withdrawal speeds, licensing jurisdiction, and bonus terms vary far more than most review sites admit. A Curaçao-licensed site and a Malta Gaming Authority-licensed site can look identical on the homepage and behave completely differently when you try to withdraw CAD on a Sunday night.

Why Manitoba Is Still Waiting

The short answer: political will and provincial lottery revenue protection. Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries (MBLL) runs PlayNow.com, which is the province’s only officially sanctioned online gambling platform. It’s a Crown corporation product. Expanding regulation to private operators means cannibalizing that revenue stream, and no provincial government has been willing to absorb that trade-off yet.

Alberta moved first, announcing in 2024 that it would follow Ontario’s open-market model. The Jewish Post covered the Alberta question in its opinion piece on provincial iGaming regulation. Saskatchewan and British Columbia have their own Crown-run online products. Manitoba? MBLL runs PlayNow, and that’s where the conversation stops.

The practical consequence is straightforward. PlayNow offers a limited game library, deposit methods that exclude several major e-wallets, and. Critically. A full KYC process that requires government-issued ID before a player can withdraw. For anyone who has spent time on offshore platforms, PlayNow’s withdrawal processing feels closer to a 2009 bank wire than a modern iGaming product.

What ‘No Verification’ Actually Means

The term gets used loosely, so let’s be precise. No-verification casinos. Sometimes called no-KYC casinos. Don’t require you to upload a passport or utility bill to open an account and withdraw. Most operate on a tiered model: you can deposit and withdraw up to a threshold (often around C$2,000 to C$5,000 cumulative) without identity documents. Go above that, and they’ll ask for verification at that point.

That’s meaningfully different from a blanket “no ID ever” claim, which doesn’t really exist at licensed operators. Any site claiming zero KYC under all circumstances is either very small, unlicensed, or not being straight with you about their AML obligations.

The ones worth looking at are licensed under jurisdictions that actually enforce standards. Curaçao eGaming being the most common for Canadian-facing sites, Malta Gaming Authority and Isle of Man for the better-resourced operators. Licensing matters because it determines what happens when a dispute arises. A Curaçao license at least gives you a complaints pathway. No license gives you nothing.

The Real Variables Winnipeg Players Should Check

Withdrawal speed is where most offshore sites either earn or lose the trust. I’ve tested CAD withdrawals via Interac e-Transfer on three different offshore platforms in the last six months. Two cleared within 90 minutes on a weekday. The third flagged my withdrawal for a manual review that took four business days and required a second round of document uploads. Same deposit method, very different outcomes.

Bonus terms are the other landmine. A 100% match up to C$500 sounds good until you read the wagering requirement. Anything above 35x on slots. And some no-verification sites are running 45x or 50x. Makes the bonus money functionally worthless unless you’re grinding low-volatility games for hours. The max bet cap during bonus play is equally critical. C$5 per spin on a C$500 bonus means you need 100 spins minimum just to cycle through once, and the dead spins add up fast.

Payment method availability for Canadian players specifically is worth a dedicated check. Not every offshore site offers Interac. Some push crypto as the primary withdrawal rail, which works fine if you’re comfortable converting CAD to USDT and back. But adds friction and exchange rate risk most players don’t account for. A few have added MuchBetter and eZeeWallet as alternatives, which process faster than bank transfers and don’t trigger the same scrutiny from Canadian banks that some gambling-coded transactions do.

The Legal Position for Manitoba Players

This comes up constantly, and the honest answer is that Canadian gambling law places regulatory authority under provincial jurisdiction, meaning the federal Criminal Code doesn’t prohibit individuals from playing at offshore sites. It prohibits operating an unlicensed gambling business in Canada. Players are not operators. No Canadian has been prosecuted for accessing an offshore gambling site.

That said, “not illegal” and “fully protected” are different things. If an offshore operator disappears with your funds, you have limited recourse. If a withdrawal is declined and the operator ghosts your support ticket, no provincial regulator is going to intervene on your behalf the way the AGCO can intervene for an Ontario player. You’re relying on the operator’s licensing body, which may or may not respond in a useful timeframe.

Gowling WLG’s 2025 analysis of Manitoba’s enforcement posture notes that the province has moved against offshore operators directly. Including action against Bodog. But has taken no steps toward building a regulatory framework that would bring players back onto licensed domestic ground. The enforcement is pointed at operators, not players, and it hasn’t changed what’s available to Winnipeg residents looking for alternatives to PlayNow.

Where This Lands

Manitoba’s regulatory gap isn’t closing soon. Alberta’s framework is still being built. The realistic picture for Winnipeg players in 2026 is that offshore, no-verification operators remain the de facto alternative to PlayNow. And the quality gap between a well-run licensed offshore site and a badly run one is significant enough that doing due diligence before depositing is not optional.

Check the license, read the withdrawal terms before the bonus terms, and know your method’s processing time. The market isn’t going away; it’s just not regulated to protect you yet.

Gambling involves risk. Please play responsibly and only wager what you can afford to lose. If you feel gambling is becoming a problem, visit BeGambleAware.org or call 1-800-GAMBLER.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal for Manitoba players to gamble on offshore casino sites? Canadian federal law targets operators running unlicensed gambling businesses, not individual players. Manitoba residents accessing offshore sites are not violating federal law. However, there’s no provincial regulatory protection if a dispute arises. You’re relying on the operator’s licensing body, which may be slow or unresponsive.

What is the difference between PlayNow and offshore no-verification casinos? PlayNow is Manitoba’s Crown-run online gambling platform, requiring full KYC and offering a limited game library. Offshore no-verification casinos skip the document upload process up to a withdrawal threshold, typically run larger game libraries, and often process CAD withdrawals faster. But without provincial regulatory protection backing you up.

Are no-verification casinos licensed? The reputable ones are. Curaçao eGaming and the Malta Gaming Authority are the most common licensing jurisdictions for Canadian-facing no-KYC operators. Unlicensed sites exist and should be avoided entirely. No license means no complaints pathway and no enforceable player protection if a dispute arises.

Why doesn’t Manitoba have a regulated iGaming market like Ontario? Political and financial reasons. Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries earns revenue from PlayNow, its Crown-run platform. Bringing private operators into a licensed open market would cannibalize that revenue stream. No provincial government has been willing to accept that trade-off, though pressure from Alberta’s move toward an Ontario-style framework may eventually shift the calculus.

What should I check before depositing at a no-verification casino as a Canadian player? Four things: licensing jurisdiction, withdrawal speed for CAD specifically, wagering requirements on any bonus (anything above 35x is a red flag), and whether Interac e-Transfer is available as a withdrawal method. Crypto rails are faster but add exchange rate risk most players underestimate.

Continue Reading

Features

A Left-wing Yiddishist in Western Canada

haim Zhitlovsky

By HENRY SREBRNIK I recently presented a paper on Khaim Zhitlovsky, a major proponent of secular Jewish diaspora nationalism and Jewish nationhood, at the Association for Canadian Jewish Studies annual conference at York University in Toronto.

Zhitlovsky was born in Ushachi near Vitebsk in what is now Belarus in 1865. A leading architect of secular Jewish culture and thought, he was a central figure in the progressive Jewish intelligentsia of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century in Canada and the United States.

At a Jewish International Cultural Conference organized in Paris in September 1937, the Alveltlekher Yiddisher Kultur Farband (YKUF) was founded, and he was one of the supporters. As the honorary president of the YKUF in the United States, Zhitlovsky became an icon of the Yiddishist Communist movement, particularly in western Canada, where he had inspired the founding of a strong secular Yiddish school system. At the fifth Canadian Labour Zionist conference, held in Montreal in 1910, Zhitlovsky had made a plea for Yiddish schools, saying, “If you reject Yiddish, the Jewish proletariat will reject you.” 

During the Second World War, the Communist-dominated YKUF became the most important ideological vehicle for the pro-Soviet Jewish movement in Canada. It included Winnipeg activists such as Dr. Benjamin A. Victor, who had come to Canada in 1912 as a child, from the small town of Zhlobin in Belarus, and grew up in Winnipeg’s North End. He and others devoted their political energies to YKUF work and by early 1941 there were three YKUF reading circles in Winnipeg. 

Much of this activity was also due to the arrival in Winnipeg of the new principal of the Communist-organized Sholem Aleichem School (formerly the Liberty Temple School), Labl Basman. Victor addressed meetings, speaking about the works of Zhitlovsky and Zishe Weinper, both prominent New York-based Yiddishists and YKUF leaders. 

“Dr. B.A.Victor must be counted as being one of the most important workers in the progressive Jewish cultural movement in Winnipeg, and in particular the YKUF,” wrote Basman in the Kanader Yidishe Vochenblat, the weekly newspaper of the Canadian Jewish Communists, in the spring of 1942. “Dr. Victor has always stood in the forefront of every cultural-social movement that has been progressive and in the interests of the masses.”

Winnipeg, which Zhitlovsky visited frequently over the years, was, in the words of Jack Switzer, “a Zhitlovsky fortress.” Zhitlovsky’s 75th birthday in the autumn of 1941 had been celebrated by the organization in all of its branches across the country. When he again visited Canada in April 1942, a new YKUF men’s club was named in his honour in Winnipeg.  Montreal poet Sholem Shtern, in one laudatory profile, depicted Zhitlovsky’s struggle on behalf of Yiddish language and culture, against assimilationists on both left and right, and against Zionist Hebraists. “In Yiddish Zhitlovsky sees that great progressive strength which will enable it to bring into being a new era in Jewish life.” 

So Zhitlovsky’s sudden death on May 6, 1943, in Calgary, while he was on a cross-Canada lecture tour, “hit us like a thunderbolt” and “brought about sadness throughout the country,” declared the Vochenblat.

Labl Basman reported on Zhitlovsky’s last trip to Winnipeg. His two lectures had been attended by some 1,300 people, and, Basman observed, “provided the progressive Jewish community with a clear and outstanding analysis of these catastrophic times.” Zhitlovsky had stressed that support for the Soviet Union was imperative; the USSR needed to emerge from the war strengthened and with a prominent role in any post-war settlement. The Soviet Union was the centre of world progress and Jews would benefit greatly from a strong USSR, since this would mean the end of anti-Semitism and the solution of the Jewish question.

Louis Pearlman of Calgary, who was cultural chair of that city’s Peretz Shule, described Zhitlovsky’s visit to the city where he would pass away, in the Vochenblat. Zhitlovsky arrived in Calgary from Winnipeg on April 28, in good spirits, and was scheduled to give six lectures over a two-week period.  About 100 people turned out for his first lecture on April 30, in the Peretz Shule, on “Socialism and Religion.” 

He spoke again May 2, to 150 people, on “The Spiritual Battle of the Jewish People for its Survival.” His third lecture, on May 4, dealt with Judaism and Christianity and was also well received. But a day later he had a heart attack and was taken to a hospital; he died on May 6. Pearlman accompanied Zhitlovsky’s body back to New York and attended his funeral there.

The Vochenblat reprinted Zhitlovsky’s greetings to Birobidzhan, the Jewish Autonomous Region in the Soviet far east, on its 15th anniversary, which he had released on April 25. “Our Jewish people now has two countries in which a new Jewish life is being built, a normal life” one where Jews will live in Jewish towns and Jewish cities, “just like all the other peoples on earth,” he wrote. “The two countries are Birobidzhan and Erets Yisroel.” They ought not to be seen as antagonistic alternatives, he declared. In both, Jewish life would become “normalized” and Jews would flourish. 

“Every Jewish accomplishment in both countries gives us courage in the struggle for our survival, elevates the prestige of our people in the eyes of the non-Jewish world, and strengthens our desire for the complete national liberation of our people, with the complete rights and strengths of membership in the fraternal family of nations. May the Jewish nation of Birobidzhan have long life and mature in freedom!” 

Of course we now know the Birobidzhan project was a dismal failure, nor was the Soviet Union the “promised land” dreamt of by the Jewish left. Perhaps an entry in the third volume of the Leksikon Fun Der Nayer Yidisher Literatur, published in 1960 by the Congress of Jewish Culture, sums Zhitlovsky up best:

“A man who adopted, abandoned, or lost interest in so many different political programs and causes; who joined, left, or drifted away from so many parties was probably destined, at least in the short run, to oblivion. At varying times, he was a sharp opponent of Zionism and a Zionist, an anti-territorialist and a territorialist, a supporter of the Jewish Labour Bund and one of its harshest critics, a Socialist Revolutionary and an apologist for Bolshevism. He was a kind of ideological nomad, forever on the move” — and so now virtually forgotten.

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

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News