Uncategorized
Beyond the ‘Day of Hate’: The best strategy to keep American Jews safe over the long term
(JTA) — My synagogue sent out a cautiously anxious email yesterday about an event coming this Shabbat, a neo-Nazi “Day of Hate.” The email triggered fuzzy memories of one of the strangest episodes that I can remember from my childhood.
Sometime around 1990, in response to local neo-Nazi activity, some Jews from my community decided to “fight back.” I don’t know whether they were members of the militant Jewish Defense League, or perhaps just sympathetic to a JDL-style approach. When our local Jewish newspaper covered the story, it ran on its front cover a full-page photo of a kid from my Orthodox Jewish high school. The photo showed a teenage boy from behind, wearing a kippah and carrying a baseball bat that was leaning threateningly on his shoulder.
As it happens, “Danny” was not a member of the JDL, he was a kid on his way to play baseball. Sometimes, a baseball bat is just a baseball bat. But not for us anxious Jews in America: We want to see ourselves as protagonists taking control of our destiny, responding to antisemites with agency, with power, with a plan. I’m sorry to say that as I look around our community today, it seems to me that we have agency, and we have power — but we certainly don’t seem to have a plan.
The tactics that the American Jewish community uses to fight back against antisemitism are often ineffective on their own and do not constitute a meaningful strategy in the composite. One is that American Jews join in a partisan chorus that erodes our politics and fixates on the antisemitism in the party they don’t vote for. This exacerbates the partisan divide, which weakens democratic culture, and turns the weaponizing of antisemitism into merely a partisan electoral tactic for both sides.
Another tactic comes from a wide set of organizations who have declared themselves the referees on the subject and take to Twitter to name and shame antisemites. This seems to amplify and popularize antisemitism more than it does to suppress it.
A third common tactic is to pour more and more dollars into protecting our institutions with robust security measures, which no one thinks will defeat antisemitism, but at least seeks to protect those inside those institutions from violence, though it does little to protect Jews down the street. Richer Jewish institutions will be safer than poorer ones, but Jews will continue to suffer either way.
A fourth tactic our communal organizations use to fight antisemitism is to try to exact apologies or even fines from antisemites to get them to retract their beliefs and get in line, as the Anti-Defamation League did with Kyrie Irving, an approach that Yair Rosenberg has wisely argued is a no-win proposition. Yet another tactic is the insistence by some that the best way to fight antisemitism is to be proud Jews, which has the perverse effect of making our commitment to Jewishness dependent on antisemitism as a motivator.
And finally, the most perverse tactic is that some on both the right and the left fight antisemitism by attacking the ADL itself. Since it is so hard to defeat our opponents, we have started beating up on those that are trying to protect us. What could go wrong?
Steadily, like a drumbeat, these tactics fail, demonstrating themselves to be not a strategy at all, and the statistics continue to show a rise in antisemitism.
Perhaps we are too fixated on the idea that antisemitism is continuous throughout Jewish history, proving only that there is no effective strategy for combating this most persistent of hatreds.
Instead, we would do well to recall how we responded to a critical moment in American Jewish history in the early 20th century. In the aftermath of the Leo Frank lynching in 1915 – the murder of a Jewish man amid an atmosphere of intense antisemitism — Jewish leaders formed what would become the ADL by building a relationship with law enforcement and the American legal and political establishment. The ADL recognized that the best strategy to keep American Jews safe over the long term, in ways that would transcend and withstand the political winds of change, was to embed in the police and criminal justice system the idea that antisemitism was their problem to defeat. These Jewish leaders flipped the script of previous diasporic experiences; not only did they become “insiders,” they made antisemitism anathema to America itself. (And yes, it was the Leo Frank incident that inspired “Parade,” the forthcoming Broadway musical that this week attracted white supremacist protesters.)
For Jews, the high-water mark of this strategy came in the aftermath of the Tree of Life shooting in Pittsburgh. It was the low point in many ways of the American Jewish experience, the most violent act against Jews on American soil, but it was followed by a mourning process that was shared across the greater Pittsburgh community. The words of the Kaddish appeared above the fold of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. That is inconceivable at most other times of Jewish oppression and persecution. It tells the story of when we are successful – when antisemitism is repudiated by the general public. It is the most likely indicator that we will be collectively safe in the long run.
We were lucky that this move to partner with the establishment was successful. I felt this deeply on a recent trip to Montgomery, Alabama. Seeing the memorials to Black Americans persecuted and lynched by and under the very system that should have been protecting them from the worst elements of society is a reminder that not all minorities in America could then — or today — win over the elements of American society that control criminal justice.
Visitors view items left by well-wishers along the fence at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh on the first anniversary of the attack there, Oct. 27, 2019. (Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)
A strategic plan to defeat antisemitism that must be collectively embraced by American Jews would build on this earlier success and invest in the infrastructure of American democracy as the framework for Jewish thriving and surviving, and continue the historic relationship-building that changed the Jews’ position in America. It would stop the counterproductive internecine and partisan battle that is undermining the possibility of Jewish collective mobilization.
It means more investment, across partisan divides, in relationships with local governments and law enforcement, using the imperfect “definitions of antisemitism” as they are intended — not for boundary policing, but to inform and help law enforcement to monitor and prevent violent extremism. It means supporting lawsuits and other creative legal strategies, like Integrity First for America’s groundbreaking efforts against the Unite the Right rally organizers, which stymie such movements in legal gridlock and can help bankrupt them.
It means practicing the lost art of consensus Jewish collective politics which recognize that there must be some baseline agreement that antisemitism is a collective threat, even if any “unity” we imagine for the Jewish community is always going to be be instrumental and short-lived.
It means supporting institutions like the ADL, even as they remain imperfect, even as they sometimes get stuck in some of the failed strategies I decried above, because they have the relationships with powerful current and would-be allies in the American political and civic marketplace, and because they are fighting against antisemitism while trying to stay above the partisan fray.
It means real education and relationship-building with other ethnic and faith communities that is neither purely instrumental nor performative — enough public relations visits to Holocaust museums! — so that we have the allies we need when we need them, and so that we can partner for our collective betterment.
And most importantly, it means investing in the plodding, unsexy work of supporting vibrant American democracy — free and fair elections, voting rights, the rule of law, peaceful transitions of power — because stable liberal democracies have been the safest homes for minorities, Jews included.
I doubt we will ever be able to “end” individual antisemitic acts, much less eradicate antisemitic hate. “Shver tzu zayn a Yid” (it’s hard to be a Jew). We join with our fellow Americans who live in fear of the lone wolves and the hatemongers who periodically terrorize us. But we are much more capable than we are currently behaving to fight back against the collective threats against us. Instead, let’s be the smart Americans we once were.
The real work right now is not baseball bats or billboards, it is not Jewish pride banalities or Twitter refereeing: It is quiet and powerful and, if done right, as American Jews demonstrated in the last century, it will serve us for the long term.
—
The post Beyond the ‘Day of Hate’: The best strategy to keep American Jews safe over the long term appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Yiddish has a long list of words for ‘cemetery‘
נישט אַלע ווייסן אַז אויף ייִדיש איז דאָ אַ גאַנצער וואָקאַבולאַר וועגן דעם, וווּ מע לייגט ייִדן נאָכן טויט.
וואָס טוט מען טאַקע מיט אַ מת? מע באַגראָבט אים אָדער מע באַהאַלט אים, אָדער מע איז אים מקבר, אָדער מע ברענגט אים צו קבֿר־ישׂראל. „באַגראָבן“ האָט דאָך אויך אַ פֿאַרשפּרייטן מעטאַפֿאָרישן טײַטש, „רויִנירן“. אָט איז דאָ אַ ווערטערשפּיל: „שטאַרבן איז נאָך ווי ס’איז, אָבער דאָס אַרײַנלייגן אין דר’ערד, דאָס באַגראָבט אַ מענטשן!“
וועגן דעם אָרט, וווּ ס’ליגן ייִדן נאָכן טויט, איז דאָ אַ לאַנגע רשימה ווערטער, כּמעט אַלע אייפֿעמיזמען. נאָך די הונדערט יאָר ליגן ייִדן און ייִדישע טעכטער, קודם־כּל, אויף אַ בית־עולם. אויף לשון־קודש איז „עולם“, פֿאַרשטייט זיך, טײַטש „וועלט“ און אויף ייִדיש — „אַ גרופּע מענטשן“; אָבער אויף לשון־קודש האָט „עולם“ נאָך אַ טײַטש, „אייביקייט“. איז אַ בית־עולם דאָס אָרט, וווּ מע בלײַבט אויף אייביק. דאָס אייגענע איז שייך צום אַרמיש־שטאַמיקע „בית־עלמין“.
אַ פֿאַל פֿון לשון סגי־נהור, דאָס הייסט וווּ מע זאָגט איין זאַך אָבער מע מיינט דאָס פֿאַרקערטע, איז „בית־חיים“, טײַטש „דאָס הויז פֿון לעבן“. אַן אַנדער וואָרט, נישט קיין אייפֿעמיזם, איז „בית־הקבֿרות“, דאָס הייסט, דאָרטן, וווּ ס’געפֿינען זיך קבֿרים.
אָבער נישט אַלע ווערטער נעמען זיך פֿון לשון־קודש. מע זאָגט דאָך אויך „דאָס פֿעלד“, „דאָס גוטע־אָרט“, „דאָס הייליקע אָרט“, „דאָס ריינע אָרט“. אַ טשיקאַווער משל דערפֿון: איך בין אַ מאָל געפֿאָרן אין דער שטאָט גער, נישט ווײַט פֿון וואַרשע, וואָס ביזן חורבן איז זי געווען דער זיץ פֿונעם באַקאַנטן גערער רבין. אין 2007 זענען אין דער שטאָט געבליבן גאַנצע דרײַ ייִדן, האָב איך געהאַט די זכיה זיך צו באַקענען, און צו כאַפּן אַ ייִדישן שמועס, מיט צוויי. (וויפֿל מאָל אין לעבן איז מיר אויסגעקומען צו שמועסן אויף ייִדיש מיט אַ ייִד, וואָס האָט איבערגעלעבט דעם חורבן און וווינט נאָך אין זײַן מיזרח־אייראָפּעיִשער היימשטאָט?)
איינער פֿון זיי, וועלוול קאַרפּמאַן, האָט מיט אַ פּאָר יאָר שפּעטער געגעבן אַן אינטערוויו דער ייִדישער ראַדיאָ־אוידיציע פֿונעם פּוילישן ראַדיאָ (צום באַדויערן, האָט מען די ראַדיאָ־אוידיציע דערנאָכדעם אָפּגעשאַפֿט). ווען די זשורנאַליסטקע האָט אים אַ פֿרעג געטאָן וועגן דעם גורל פֿונעם גערער בית־עולם, האָט ער זי איבערגעפֿרעגט: „איר מיינט ס’גוטע־אָרט?“ יעדעס מאָל, וואָס זי האָט ווײַטער געזאָגט „בית־עולם“, האָט ער געענטפֿערט „ס’גוטע־אָרט“.
אויך בײַ די אומות־העולם זענען די ווערטער דערפֿאַר אייפֿעמיזמען. דאָס פֿאַרשפּרייטסטע וואָרט אין אייראָפּע איז ס’ענגלישע cemetery, ס’פֿראַנצייזישע cimetière אד”גל, פֿון אַן אַלטגריכישן ווערב פֿאַר „ליגן/לייגן שלאָפֿן“. גאָר אַ מאָל, פֿאַר דער הײַנטיקער צײַט־רעכענונג, איז ס’גריכישע וואָרט געווען טײַטש „שלאָפֿשטוב“; בײַ די קריסטן בשעתּו האָט עס באַקומען דעם מאָדערנעם טײַטש. אַ ווײַטער קרובֿ פֿון דעם וואָרט איז ס’ייִדישע „היים“, אַ פּנים, ווײַל אין דער היים שלאָפֿט מען, אָבער נישט פּונקט אַזוי ווי אויפֿן בית־עולם…
דאָס דײַטשישע Friedhof איז דער „שלום־הויף“; און Kirchhof „קלויסטערהויף“ איז מגולגל געוואָרן אינעם פּוילישן Kirkut „ייִדישער בית־עולם“!
און אַזוי ווי מאַמע־לשון האָט פּאַראַלעלע וואָקאַבולאַרן פֿאַר ייִדן און פֿאַר קריסטן איז גאָר קיין חידוש נישט, וואָס אויפֿן אָרט, וווּ ס’ליגן קריסטן זאָגט מען „צווינטער“ אָדער „צמענטער“, מסתּמא, פֿון פּוילישן cmentarz פֿונעם זעלביקן גריכישן שורש וואָס cemetery.
The post Yiddish has a long list of words for ‘cemetery‘ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
IHOP denies inviting Florida GOP candidate who said ‘Americans shouldn’t die for Israel’
(JTA) — James Fishback, the fringe GOP candidate courting the online far right in his long-shot bid for governor of Florida, had a bit of food-service drama this week — and it wasn’t about the “goyslop” he previously claimed was being served in the state’s school cafeterias.
Waffle House, he alleged, had banned him from every restaurant in the state after he announced his intent to campaign at the chain’s Florida locations. The reason, he claimed, was because he said that “Americans shouldn’t die for Israel.”
But not to worry, Fishback quickly announced: Another breakfast chain, International House of Pancakes, had extended an invitation to him personally.
“Hey, wanna come over?” reads a direct message Fishback posted to social media, a photo of which appears to come from IHOP’s official corporate account. An elated Fishback soon posted photos from a campaign stop at an IHOP, which he deemed “International House of Patriots.”
Not so, an IHOP spokesperson told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
“Since our founding, IHOP and its franchisees have been committed to providing warm and welcoming dining experiences for all guests. We are not working with James Fishback or his campaign in any capacity,” the spokesperson told JTA in an email. “Additionally, we have confirmed that the image circulating on social media is not authentic.”
Fishback did not return a request for comment by JTA about IHOP’s claim. The former investment banker has used terms on the campaign trail considered dogwhistles to the online far right and boasts a large online profile that has included interviews with Tucker Carlson and antisemitic podcaster Myron Gaines. He has also praised the followers of antisemitic streamer Nick Fuentes.
Asked by JTA why he had made his earlier “goyslop” comments, Fishback replied, “Because it’s funny. Get a life.”
He then posted the exchange to his X account under the caption, “Journalists are insufferable.”
Earlier in the same conversation, asked about recently revealed racist and antisemitic messages from a Florida Young Republicans regional group chat, Fishback replied, “I condemn all forms of hatred.”
The post IHOP denies inviting Florida GOP candidate who said ‘Americans shouldn’t die for Israel’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Iran Names Khamenei’s Hardline Son Mojtaba as New Supreme Leader
FILE PHOTO: Mojtaba Khamenei, the second son of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, visits Hezbollah’s office in Tehran, Iran, October 1, 2024. Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
Iran on Monday named Mojtaba Khamenei to succeed his father Ali Khamenei as Supreme Leader, signaling that hardliners remain firmly in charge in Tehran a week into its conflict with the United States and Israel.
Mojtaba, a mid-ranking cleric with influence inside Iran’s security forces and vast business networks under his father, had been seen as a frontrunner in the lead up to the vote by the assembly, a body of 88 clerics charged with choosing the new leader after Ali Khamenei.
“By a decisive vote, the Assembly of Experts, appointed Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei as the third Leader of the sacred system of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the assembly said in a statement issued just after midnight Tehran time.
The position gives Mojtaba the final say in all matters of state in the Islamic Republic.
Mojtaba’s appointment will likely draw the ire of US President Donald Trump, who said on Sunday that Washington should have a say in the selection. “If he doesn’t get approval from us, he’s not going to last long,” he told ABC News. Israel, ahead of the announcement, threatened to target whoever was chosen.
Mojtaba’s father, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, was killed in one of the first strikes launched against Iran more than a week ago.
The US military on Sunday reported a seventh American has died from wounds sustained during Iran’s initial counter-attack a week ago, a day after Trump presided over the return to the United States of the remains of the six others who died.
The US-Israeli attacks have killed at least 1,332 Iranian civilians and wounded thousands, according to Iran’s U.N. ambassador.
As Trump pressed for an “unconditional surrender,” Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker, said Tehran was not seeking a ceasefire to the war and would punish aggressors.
Israel continued to target senior Iranian figures, including Abolqasem Babaian, the recently appointed head of the military office of the supreme leader, saying he was killed in a Saturday strike.
BLACK SMOKE HANGS OVER TEHRAN
As fighting escalated on day nine of the US-Israeli campaign against Iran, thick black smoke hung over Tehran on Sunday, residents said, after strikes on oil storage facilities had lit up the night sky with plumes of orange flame.
Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said the large-scale attack marked a “dangerous new phase” of the conflict and amounted to a war crime.
“By targeting fuel depots, the aggressors are releasing hazardous materials and toxic substances into the air,” he wrote on X.
Israeli military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani told reporters the depots were used to fuel Iran’s war effort, including producing or storing propellant for ballistic missiles. “They are a legal military target,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government would press on with the assault and strike Iran’s rulers “without mercy.”
“We have an organized plan with many surprises to destabilize the regime and enable change,” he said in a video statement.
US special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner will visit Israel on Tuesday, according to Axios, citing a senior US official.
Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he was not seeking negotiations to end the conflict, which has driven up global energy prices, disrupted business and snarled air travel.
“At some point, I don’t think there will be anybody left maybe to say, ‘We surrender,’” he said.