Connect with us

RSS

Following Abraham’s Lesson, Donald Trump Should Focus on US Unity

Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump takes the stage with his wife Melania, his son Eric, and his daughter-in-law Lara, following early results from the 2024 US presidential election in Palm Beach County Convention Center, in West Palm Beach, Florida, US, Nov. 6, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

The 20th-century Methodist pastor Ralph W. Sockman, best remembered for his weekly presentations on NBC’s National Radio Pulpit for over 40 years, observed that “the test of courage comes when we are in the minority, but the test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.”

In the wake of this week’s stunning US election results, Sockman’s words feel particularly relevant. Donald Trump decisively triumphed over Kamala Harris in a victory that marks a significant political comeback for someone who has faced challenges and setbacks like no previous US president. What lies ahead during his second term will shape the country – and the world — for decades to come.

Trump’s sweeping electoral success, with wins in key swing states like Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, gave him a solid majority in the Electoral College. But perhaps even more striking is the breadth of his appeal, extending even to states he lost. Across diverse demographics, including the Latino community and first-time voters, Trump gained substantial support — a surge that also won him the national popular vote, making him the first Republican to do so since 2004.

Alongside Trump’s personal triumph, the Republican Party has regained control of the Senate, securing key victories in states like Montana, Ohio, and West Virginia. The House of Representatives remains undecided at the current time.

Politically speaking, the Democrats have been routed. Trump’s sweeping success has left the Democratic Party facing a comprehensive defeat. The media and pollsters are also now forced to reckon with just how deeply they misjudged Trump’s reach and influence.

In the aftermath of such a decisive victory, it is tempting for those in power to press their advantage, exploiting their position to make opponents feel the sting of loss. But true leadership demands magnanimity, especially for those with the power to pursue their agenda unchecked. History offers powerful examples of leaders who rose above the temptations of victory, using their success not for vengeance but to foster reconciliation and unity.

One historical example is William of Normandy, better known as William the Conqueror. After winning the Battle of Hastings in 1066, William faced the challenge of consolidating power over a suspicious English public.

Rather than obliterating the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy, he took a pragmatic approach, granting land to his Norman supporters but also allowing some English nobles to retain their titles and estates. He preserved existing laws and administrative systems, blending Norman rule with English customs.

By respecting local traditions after such a decisive military triumph, William helped stabilize England, enabling a smoother transition to Norman rule and averting the threat of perpetual civil war.

Another example is Emperor Meiji of Japan. Japan was split in two when he took power in the late 19th century. The old samurai elite deeply resented the sweeping changes of Meiji’s modernization program. They had been in charge for centuries, living by a strict code and resisting any outside influence. Seeing Japan shift toward Western ideas and a centralized government felt like betrayal to them. Their opposition was fierce and unrelenting.

Meiji could easily have cracked down, sidelining or eliminating his critics to secure his power. Instead, he extended an olive branch, welcoming former samurai into the new government and military and offering them roles in Japan’s emerging society.

This move was crucial: Japan became unified and focused instead of a country divided by endless resentment. Meiji’s restraint allowed Japan’s rapid modernization to thrive — paving the way for the global economic powerhouse we see today.

Similarly, Abraham Lincoln faced a profound test after the Civil War. At his second inaugural address in 1865, with the country ravaged and divided, he spoke not of punishing the defeated South but of healing – a vision he captured in his famous words, “With malice toward none, with charity for all…”

Lincoln understood that what the nation needed most was reconciliation, which meant choosing empathy over retribution. Rather than using his hard-won victory to exact revenge, he focused on rebuilding trust and unity, knowing that the country’s future success depended on it.

This approach helped lay the foundation for a truly united United States to emerge from one of its darkest hours. Without Lincoln’s commitment to compassion and healing at that pivotal moment, it’s hard to imagine America becoming the global symbol of freedom and democracy that it is today.

This principle of restraint, choosing integrity over self-interest, finds a powerful parallel in the Torah, in Parshat Lech Lecha. After Abraham’s victory over the four kings, the King of Sodom offers him the spoils of war. The king proposes that Abraham take the material wealth while he retains the captives — a seemingly fair offer, given Abraham’s role in the victory.

But Abraham refuses, saying (Gen. 14:23), “I will not take so much as a thread or a sandal strap of what is yours, so you shall not say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’” Abraham’s rejection of the offer reveals his deep commitment to ethical integrity over material gain. Rather than capitalizing on his success for personal benefit, he displays a higher vision of leadership focused on principles.

At the same time, Abraham also encounters Malkitzedek, the King of Shalem, whose approach vastly differs from that of the King of Sodom. Malkitzedek, both a king and a priest, greets Abraham — now the most powerful figure in the region — with bread, wine, and a blessing. This simple offering speaks to spiritual fulfillment rather than material wealth.

Malkitzedek’s welcome is rooted in goodwill and mutual respect, without the trappings of temporal power. He acknowledges Abraham’s victory and blesses him in the name of “God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth” (Gen. 14:19), framing Abraham’s success not as mere conquest but as part of a divine mission.

By choosing Malkitzedek’s blessing over the King of Sodom’s offer of wealth, Abraham aligns himself with a model of leadership grounded in moral clarity and cooperation rather than exploitation.

Abraham’s refusal of the King of Sodom’s spoils, in contrast to his acceptance of Malkitzedek’s blessing, presents us with a profound lesson in the exercise of power. The King of Sodom represents a leadership model based on taking advantage and seeking gain in times of vulnerability, while Malkitzedek embodies a model that prioritizes spiritual values and seeks common ground through shared ideals.

Abraham’s reaction to these two figures symbolizes a profound moral choice: he wanted to build a lasting legacy based on higher principles rather than the short-term satisfaction of showing who is boss.

As Trump and his team navigate the aftermath of this remarkable election, and particularly in the wake of the impressive Republican victory, they should draw inspiration from Abraham’s actions and from leaders like William the Conqueror, Emperor Meiji of Japan, and President Lincoln.

In his victory speech, President-elect Trump promised, “We’re going to help our country heal.” That is music to my ears. The real test of winning lies not in how much one can take but in how much one can give — how one can build bridges rather than nurture divisions, and inspire unity rather than discord.

By choosing restraint and respect over exploitation, true leaders — especially those with the most power — can transform moments of triumph into powerful opportunities for renewal, goodwill, and hope.

The author is a rabbi in Beverly Hills, California.  

The post Following Abraham’s Lesson, Donald Trump Should Focus on US Unity first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Harvard Faculty Oppose Deal With Trump, Distancing From Hamas Apologists: Crimson Poll

Harvard University president Alan Garber attending the 373rd Commencement Exercises at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, May 23, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder

A recently published Harvard Crimson poll of over 1,400 Harvard faculty revealed sweeping opposition to interim university President Alan Garber’s efforts to strike a deal with the federal government to restore $3 billion in research grants and contracts it froze during the first 100 days of the second Trump administration.

In the survey, conducted from April 23 to May 12, 71 percent of arts and sciences faculty oppose negotiating a settlement with the administration, which may include concessions conservatives have long sought from elite higher education, such as meritocratic admissions, viewpoint diversity, and severe disciplinary sanctions imposed on students who stage unauthorized protests that disrupt academic life.

Additionally, 64 percent “strongly disagree” with shuttering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, 73 percent oppose rejecting foreign applicants who hold anti-American beliefs which are “hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence,” and 70 percent strongly disagree with revoking school recognition from pro-Hamas groups such as the Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC).

“More than 98 percent of faculty who responded to the survey supported the university’s decision to sue the White House,” The Crimson reported. “The same percentage backed Harvard’s public rejection of the sweeping conditions that the administration set for maintaining the funds — terms that included external audits of Harvard’s hiring practices and the disciplining of student protesters.”

Alyza Lewin of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law told The Algemeiner that the poll results indicate that Harvard University will continue to struggle to address campus antisemitism on campus, as there is now data showing that its faculty reject the notion of excising intellectualized antisemitism from the university.

“If you, for example, have faculty teaching courses that are regularly denying that the Jews are a people and erasing the Jewish people’s history in the land of Israel, that’s going to undermine your efforts to address the antisemitism on your campus,” Lewin explained. “When Israel is being treated as the ‘collective Jew,’ when the conversation is not about Israel’s policies, when the criticism is not what the [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism] would call criticism of Israel similar to that against any other country, they have to understand that it is the demonization, delegitimization, and applying a double standard to Jews as individuals or to Israel.”

She added, “Faculty must recognize … the demonization, vilification, the shunning, and the marginalizing of Israelis, Jews, and Zionists, when it happens, as violations of the anti-discrimination policies they are legally and contractually obligated to observe.”

The Crimson survey results were published amid reports that Garber was working to reach a deal with the Trump administration that is palatable to all interested parties, including the university’s left-wing social milieu.

According to a June 26 report published by The Crimson, Garber held a phone call with major donors in which he “confirmed in response to a question from [Harvard Corporation Fellow David M. Rubenstein] that talks had resumed” but “declined to share specifics of how Harvard expected to settle with the White House.”

On June 30, the Trump administration issued Harvard a “notice of violation” of civil rights law following an investigation which examined how it responded to dozens of antisemitic incidents reported by Jewish students since the 2023-2024 academic year.

The correspondence, sent by the Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, charged that Harvard willfully exposed Jewish students to a torrent of racist and antisemitic abuse following the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre, which precipitated a surge in anti-Zionist activity on the campus, both in the classroom and out of it.

“Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard’s relationship with the federal government,” wrote the four federal officials comprising the multiagency Task Force. “Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges, and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again.”

The Trump administration ratcheted up pressure on Harvard again on Wednesday, reporting the institution to its accreditor for alleged civil rights violations resulting from its weak response to reports of antisemitic bullying, discrimination, and harassment following the Oct. 7, 2023 massacre.

Citing Harvard’s failure to treat antisemitism as seriously as it treated other forms of hatred in the past, The US Department of Educationthe called on the New England Commission of Higher Education to review and, potentially, revoke its accreditation — a designation which qualifies Harvard for federal funding and attests to the quality of the educational services its provides.

“Accrediting bodies play a significant role in preserving academic integrity and a campus culture conducive to truth seeking and learning,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. “Part of that is ensuring students are safe on campus and abiding by federal laws that guarantee educational opportunities to all students. By allowing anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination to persist unchecked on its campus, Harvard University has failed in its obligation to students, educators, and American taxpayers.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Harvard Faculty Oppose Deal With Trump, Distancing From Hamas Apologists: Crimson Poll first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Balancing Act: Lebanese President Aoun Affirms Hope for Peace with Israel, Balks At Normalization

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun attends a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, March 28, 2025. REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier/Pool

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Friday carefully affirmed his country’s desire for peace with Israel while cautioning that Beirut is not ready to normalize relations with its southern neighbor.

Aoun called for a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, according to a statement from his office, while reaffirming his government’s efforts to uphold a state monopoly on arms amid mounting international pressure on the Iran-backed terror group Hezbollah to disarm.

“The decision to restrict arms is final and there is no turning back on it,” Aoun said.

The Lebanese leader drew a clear distinction between pursuing peace and establishing formal normalization in his country’s relationship with the Jewish state.

“Peace is the lack of a state of war, and this is what matters to us in Lebanon at the moment,” Aoun said in a statement. “As for the issue of normalization, it is not currently part of Lebanese foreign policy.”

Aoun’s latest comments come after Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar expressed interest last month in normalizing ties with Lebanon and Syria — an effort Jerusalem says cannot proceed until Hezbollah is fully disarmed.

Earlier this week, Aoun sent his government’s response to a US-backed disarmament proposal as Washington and Jerusalem increased pressure on Lebanon to neutralize the terror group.

While the details remain confidential, US Special Envoy Thomas Barrack said he was “unbelievably satisfied” with their response.

This latest proposal, presented to Lebanese officials during Barrack’s visit on June 19, calls for Hezbollah to be fully disarmed within four months in exchange for Israel halting airstrikes and withdrawing troops from its five occupied posts in southern Lebanon.

However, Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem vowed in a televised speech to keep the group’s weapons, rejecting Washington’s disarmament proposal.

“How can you expect us not to stand firm while the Israeli enemy continues its aggression, continues to occupy the five points, and continues to enter our territories and kill?” said Qassem, who succeeded longtime terrorist leader Hassan Nasrallah after Israel killed him last year.

“We will not be part of legitimizing the occupation in Lebanon and the region,” the terrorist leader continued. “We will not accept normalization [with Israel].”

Last fall, Israel decimated Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, following the group’s attacks on Jerusalem — which they claimed were a show of solidarity with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas amid the war in Gaza.

In November, Lebanon and Israel reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended a year of fighting between the Jewish state and Hezbollah.

Under the agreement, Israel was given 60 days to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and UN forces to take over security as Hezbollah disarms and moves away from Israel’s northern border.

However, Israel maintained troops at several posts in southern Lebanon beyond the ceasefire deadline, as its leaders aimed to reassure northern residents that it was safe to return home.

Jerusalem has continued carrying out strikes targeting remaining Hezbollah activity, with Israeli leaders accusing the group of maintaining combat infrastructure, including rocket launchers — calling this “blatant violations of understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”

The post Balancing Act: Lebanese President Aoun Affirms Hope for Peace with Israel, Balks At Normalization first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Peace Meals: Chef José Andrés Says ‘Good People’ On Both Sides of Gaza Conflict Ill-Served By Leaders, Food Can Bridge Divide

Chef and head of World Central Kitchen Jose Andres attends the Milken Institute Global Conference 2025 in Beverly Hills, California, US, May 5, 2025. Photo: Reuters/Mike Blake.

Renowned Spanish chef and World Central Kitchen (WCK) founder José Andrés called the Oct. 7 attack “horrendous” in an interview Wednesday and shared his hopes for reconciliation between the “vast majority” on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian divide who are “good people that very often are not served well by their leaders”

WCK is a US-based, nonprofit organization that provides fresh meals to people in conflict zones around the world. The charity has been actively serving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank since the Oct. 7 massacre in southern Israel. Since the Hamas attack, WCK has served more than 133 million meals across Gaza, according to its website.

The restaurateur and humanitarian has been quoted saying in past interviews that “sometimes very big problems have very simple solutions.” On Wednesday’s episode of the Wall Street Journal podcast “Bold Names,” he was asked to elaborate on that thought. He responded by saying he believes good meals and good leaders can help resolve issues between Israelis and Palestinians, who, he believes, genuinely want to live harmoniously with each other.

“I had people in Gaza, mothers, women making bread,” he said. “Moments that you had of closeness they were telling you: ‘What Hamas did was wrong. I wouldn’t [want] anybody to do this to my children.’ And I had Israelis that even lost family members. They say, ‘I would love to go to Gaza to be next to the people to show them that we respect them …’ And this to me is very fascinating because it’s the reality.

“Maybe some people call me naive. [But] the vast majority of the people are good people that very often are not served well by their leaders. And the simple reality of recognizing that many truths can be true at the same time in the same phrase that what happened on October 7th was horrendous and was never supposed to happen. And that’s why World Central Kitchen was there next to the people in Israel feeding in the kibbutz from day one, and at the same time that I defended obviously the right of Israel to defend itself and to try to bring back the hostages. Equally, what is happening in Gaza is not supposed to be happening either.”

Andres noted that he supports Israel’s efforts to target Hamas terrorists but then seemingly accused Israel of “continuously” targeting children and civilians during its military operations against the terror group.

“We need leaders that believe in that, that believe in longer tables,” he concluded. “It’s so simple to invest in peace … It’s so simple to do good. It’s so simple to invest in a better tomorrow. Food is a solution to many of the issues we’re facing. Let’s hope that … one day in the Middle East it’ll be people just celebrating the cultures that sometimes if you look at what they eat, they seem all to eat exactly the same.”

In 2024, WCK fired at least 62 of its staff members in Gaza after Israel said they had ties to terrorist groups. In one case, Israel discovered that a WCK employee named Ahed Azmi Qdeih took part in the deadly Hamas rampage across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Qdeih was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Gaza in November 2024.

In April 2024, the Israel Defense Forces received backlash for carrying out airstrikes on a WCK vehicle convoy which killed seven of the charity’s employees. Israel’s military chief, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, said the airstrikes were “a mistake that followed a misidentification,” and Israel dismissed two senior officers as a result of the mishandled military operation.

The strikes “were not just some unfortunate mistake in the fog of war,” Andrés alleged.

“It was a direct attack on clearly marked vehicles whose movements were known by” the Israeli military, he claimed in an op-ed published by Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot. “It was also the direct result of [the Israeli] government’s policy to squeeze humanitarian aid to desperate levels.”

In a statement on X, Andres accused Israel of “indiscriminate killing,” saying the Jewish state “needs to stop restricting humanitarian aid, stop killing civilians and aid workers, and stop using food as a weapon.”

The post Peace Meals: Chef José Andrés Says ‘Good People’ On Both Sides of Gaza Conflict Ill-Served By Leaders, Food Can Bridge Divide first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News