Uncategorized
Half of America’s 25 most generous philanthropists are Jews. Few give to Jewish groups.
(JTA) — Jews made up nearly half of America’s biggest philanthropic donors last year, according to a calculation by Forbes of who gave the most money away in 2022.
In a year that saw their fortunes take a hit amid declines in the stock market, America’s 25 “most generous givers” donated a collective $27 billion, up from $20 billion in 2021, for a lifetime total of $196 billion, according to Forbes. They included 12 billionaires with Jewish backgrounds — a dramatic overrepresentation when compared to the proportion of Jews in the overall U.S. population.
The Jews on the list include financier George Soros, who gave away at least $300 million to racial justice and humanitarian work in Ukraine and other causes; businessman and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg with $1.7 billion in donations to charter schools, clean energy, and fighting heart disease; and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, whose charity donated more than $900 million, with much of the money going to fund research into artificial intelligence and genomics at universities.
One thing that stands out about these Jewish philanthropists is that almost none focuses giving on the Jewish community. Only Lynn and Stacy Schusterman of the Tulsa oil dynasty, who are paired together on the list, are prominent donors to Jewish causes.
To be sure, many, if not all of the others have given at least small amounts to Jewish charities. In 2021, for example, Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, announced $1.3 million in gifts to 11 Jewish groups; last year they distributed more than $900 million in total, according to Forbes. Meanwhile, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and his wife, Connie, have donated at least $1 million to the Jewish National Fund; they gave away more than $800 million last year. And Michael Dell, the founder of the Dell computing company, donated the land for a Jewish community center in his home of Austin, Texas, and supported a recent renovation.
But only the Schustermans, who donated $370 million last year, have prioritized Jewish giving with hundreds of millions of dollars over their decades of involvement in the Jewish communal world.
It’s hard to make comparisons to the past and say whether Jews at the apex of philanthropy ever tended to focus on Jewish causes because the level of wealth today is almost unprecedented, according to Andrés Spokoiny, the president and CEO of the Jewish Funders Network.
“Historically, individuals, except for during the Gilded Age, perhaps, didn’t amass these types of fortunes, and there weren’t many Jews at this economic caliber,” Spokoiny said.
As to why many of the philanthropists don’t dedicate themselves to the Jewish community, Spokoiny offered three explanations. One is, simply, assimilation. “They don’t necessarily have a strong Jewish upbringing or Jewishness does not play a major role in their lives, and in that way they are not different from the rest of us,” Spokoiny said.
Another reason is that, given their immense resources, some prefer to tackle massive global issues such as climate change or pandemics. And lastly, Spokoiny said, some philanthropists think that being associated with Jewish causes might not fit with their political aspirations or personal brand.
Mark Charendoff, who ran the Jewish Funders Network before Spokoiny, is now president of the Maimonides Fund, which has emerged as a major Jewish charity in recent years. He echoed some of the same explanations as Spokoiny. He also said that in past generations, wealthy Jews who wished to enter philanthropy didn’t always have the option of donating outside the Jewish community.
“Universities, hospitals, symphonies weren’t always excited about having Jewish donors, particularly active ones,” Charendoff said. “Now you would be hard-pressed to find a not-for-profit that isn’t eager for Jewish representation.”
Successful fundraising by Jewish recipients in what Charendoff calls the “more competitive landscape” of today will require long-term investments in fostering Jewish identity, he said.
“If we want the biggest philanthropists to give more Jewishly then we need to invest more in Jewish education and engagement for all Jews,” he said.
Here are the philanthropists with Jewish roots who made Forbes’ “America’s Most Generous Givers” list.
George Soros: +$300 million in 2022
Michael Bloomberg: +$1.7 billion
Jim & Marilyn Simons: +$1.9 billion
Mark Zuckerberg & Priscilla Chan: +$900 million
Edythe Broad & family: +$340 million
Steve & Connie Ballmer: +$800 million
Sergey Brin: Newcomer to the list
Lynn & Stacy Schusterman: +$370 million
Michael & Susan Dell: +$177 million
Donald Bren: +$470 million
Dustin Moskovitz & Cari Tuna: +$670 million
George Kaiser: +$120 million
—
The post Half of America’s 25 most generous philanthropists are Jews. Few give to Jewish groups. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Prized Sketchbook at Palace of Versailles Was Stolen by Nazis During WWII, Investigation Reveals
The Palace of Versailles. Photo: Sandrine Marty / Hans Lucas via Reuters Connect
The Palace of Versailles said it will conduct further research into the origins of a sketchbook owned by French painter Jacques-Louis David after a recent investigation revealed that it was stolen by the Nazis during World War II before joining France’s national collection.
Radio France said on Monday that it launched an investigation into the provenance of the prized sketchbook after being contacted by a descendant of its original owner. The broadcaster said just “a few weeks” later, it had compiled enough evidence to support the descendant’s claim about the sketchbook being looted by the Nazis during the war.
The evidence relies on public data accessible online, such as diplomatic archives and the French Holocaust Memorial’s database of Nazi-stolen property. France’s Ministry of Culture admitted that both the ministry and the Palace of Versailles did not know the sketchbook was stolen by Nazis during World War II, but they vowed to “continue research on this notebook and have discussions with the descendants of the owners.”
The Ministry of Culture told Radio France that in the Palace of Versailles, a team of three people are “actively working and reviewing works in the collections to verify their provenance” but the team “had not yet examined this notebook.”
A relative of the sketchbook’s original owner took Radio France he was shocked when he discovered by chance that the Nazi-looted sketchbook was a part of the collection at Versailles. “It’s a key work by David, and the Palace of Versailles does a lot of publicity around these notebooks … So, I’m very surprised that there isn’t more research into their provenance,” he said. “At the moment, there are 100 police officers looking for jewels stolen from the Louvre while to return the works stolen – and there are many at the Louvre and other museums – I find that the means are very, very low.”
The sketchbook dates back to 1790 and includes drawings, sketches, and notes related to one of David’s most famous works, “The Tennis Court Oath” (1790), a painting about the French Revolution that was never finished. The painting belongs to the Palace of Versailles but is currently on display in the Louvre as part of its limited time exhibition that celebrates the 200th anniversary of David’s death. The sketchbook is not part of the exhibit.
German Nazi soldiers stole an entire library, including David’s sketchbook, from Professor Lereboullet in July 1940 when they occupied his home. Lereboullet’s daughter Odile reported the theft in November 1945 to the Commission for Art Recovery (CRA), a French public body responsible for recovering and returning looted pieces of art to their rightful owners or their heirs. She never received a response from the CRA. The sketchbook reappeared in January 1943, when it was sold at auction by the Karl & Faber art gallery in Munich, Germany. It came into the possession of German Jewish art dealer and art historian Otto Wertheimer. A former German professor of art history and curator at the National Museum in Berlin, Wertheimer himself fled Nazi persecution and settled in Paris in 1944. He became a well-known art dealer who provided museums with masterpieces and missing pieces of European art. He sold the David sketchbook to the Palace of Versailles in 1951.
The Palace of Versailles has previously returned only one Nazi-looted item to its original owners: a small Louis XVI era writing table that was returned in 1999.
Uncategorized
Israeli Singer Noa Kirel Blasts Anti-Israel Boycotts of Eurovision Contest: ‘Letting Politics Ruin the Celebration’
Noa Kirel performing “Unicorn” for Israel at the first semifinal at the 2023 Eurovision Song Contest. Photo: ESC/Sarah Louise Bennett
Israeli pop star Noa Kirel lambasted the countries that have decided to boycott the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest because of Israel’s participation, defended her country’s involvement in the competition.
On Wednesday, Iceland joined Ireland, Spain, Slovenia, and The Netherlands in announcing that it will pull out from next year’s Eurovision in protest of Israel’s participation due to its military actions in the Gaza Strip during its war against Hamas terrorists. The war started after Hamas-led terrorists carried out a deadly massacre in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Ireland, Spain, Slovenia, and The Netherlands made their announcement last week after the European Broadcasting Union, which organizes the competition, decided to allow Israel to participate in the song contest.
Kirel, who represented Israel in the 2023 Eurovision and finished in third place, told the BBC podcast “The World Tonight” on Wednesday she was “deeply disappointed” that countries have decided to withdraw from the 2026 Eurovision, set to take place in Vienna, Austria, in May. She spoke to the podcast before news broke about Iceland’s withdrawal.
“Eurovision is a bridge, not a wall, and the heart of this competition is to connect hearts through music,” she said. “Unfortunately, some countries are letting politics ruin the celebration. Israel has not violated any rules of the Eurovision. Israel is a peace-seeking nation.”
Kirel also clarified key details about the deadly Hamas-led terrorist attack in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which launched the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. “On Oct. 7, Israel did not attack anyone,” the singer noted. “Israel was brutally attacked in a way unseen before. Entire families were murdered, including children. Civilians were kidnapped. Israel defended itself like any other nation would do and those countries are choosing to see the opposite, to ignore the reality. And to boycott Israel – that is antisemitism. I think boycotting Israel on political fronts – it’s not just an injury to us; it’s an injury to everything that Eurovision represents.”
Kirel further noted that claims about Israel manipulating votes during the 2025 Eurovision are total “nonsense” and added, “Instead of searching for excuses for [Israel’s] success, let’s focus on music.”
Wednesday was the deadline for countries to confirm whether they will join the 2026 Eurovision or withdraw without being penalized. Eurovision Director Martin Green said, “We respect the decision of all broadcasters who have chosen not to participate in next year’s Eurovision Song Contest and hope to welcome them back soon.”
Iceland’s national broadcaster RÚV said it believes Israel’s participation in the Eurovision has “created disunity among both members of the European Broadcasting Union and the general public.”
“There is no peace or joy connected to this contest as things stand now. On that basis, first and foremost, we are stepping back while the situation is as it is,” added RÚV Director-General Stefan Eiriksson.
Israel has won the Eurovision Song Contest four times, most recently in 2018, and came second in last year’s contest.
Uncategorized
Columbia University Antisemitism Task Force Calls for Viewpoint Diversity on Israel, Zionism
Students walk on campus at Columbia University in New York City, US, Sept. 2, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ryan Murphy
Columbia University’s Antisemitism Task Force on Tuesday implored the school to foster “intellectual diversity” with respect to the subjects of Zionism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, concluding its fourth and final report on the origins of antisemitism on the campus.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Columbia University was, until the enactment of recent reforms, the face of anti-Jewish hatred in higher education in the aftermath of the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel. Dozens of reported antisemitic incidents transpired on its grounds, including a student’s proclaiming that Zionist Jews deserve to be murdered and are lucky he is not doing so himself and the participation of administrative officials, outraged at the notion that Jews organized to resist anti-Zionism, in a group chat in which each member took turns sharing antisemitic tropes which described Jews as privileged and grafting.
In its report, the Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism cited ideological conformity — as well as professors’ discussing the Middle East as would politicians framing a narrative which aims for accessibility and the swaying of democratic opinion — as an outsized contributor to the climate which yielded the slew of outrages.
“The [Columbia Faculty Handbook] is clear that [professors] should stick to the subject matter of the course and avoid political advocacy in the classroom,” the report said. “We heard from many students that an academic perspective that treats Zionism as legitimate is underrepresented in Columbia’s course offerings, compared to a perspective that treats it as illegitimate. The university should work quickly to add more intellectual diversity to these offerings.”
The task force also said that it is the university’s responsibility to reconcile viewpoint diversity —which may give voice to ideas which some deem offensive — with an American culture which prizes unfettered free speech, meritocracy, social equality, and racial and ethnic plurality, all at once. The university must not censor ideas, the report said, but it also cannot facilitate discrimination — which the American government, responding to popular outrage over racism perpetrated against African Americans, proscribed by passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964. In the 60 years since the law’s passage, lawmakers and the courts have affirmed the law’s applicability to other protected groups, including, women, sexual minorities, the Jewish people, and, among many others, Arab Muslims.
“When faculty members publish books, studies, articles, or other academic work, drawing on their expertise and using the methodologies of their disciplines, this work generally should be protected, even if it offends other members of our community, so long as it does not violate antidiscrimination laws,” the report continued. “We recommend seeking ways to comply with antidiscrimination laws that do not limit offensive speech. In some cases, for example, the university may be able to respond to offensive speech by condemning it instead of limiting it.”
It added, “Admittedly, condemning speech might at times be in tension with a commitment to institutional neutrality. Yet, when a university is faced with a choice between limiting speech, on the one hand, or condemning it, on the other, the latter strikes us as a less restrictive response.”
Even as it pursues a policy of “no orthodoxies,” the university must also protect itself from “outside influence” which may, for political purposes, demand its adoption of a particular viewpoint, the report continued. Donors, federal and state governments, or American voters, whose agents of action are their representatives in government, all “present challenges to academic freedom.”
In a statement, Columbia University president Claire Shipman thanked the task force for its work and said the university will “work on” translating its recommendations into policy.
“The work of this task force has been an essential part of the university’s efforts to address the challenges faced by our Jewish students, faculty, and staff,” Shipman said. “We have also been working this semester to focus on discrimination and hate more broadly on our campuses — which has long been a strong recommendation of the task force. All of this work must become part of our DNA.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Columbia University agreed in July to pay over $200 million to settle claims that it exposed Jewish students, faculty, and staff to antisemitic discrimination and harassment — a deal which secured the release of billions of dollars in federal grants the Trump administration had impounded to pressure the institution to address the issue.
Claiming a generational achievement for the conservative movement, which has argued for years that progressive bias in higher education is the cause of anti-Zionist antisemitism on college campuses, US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said the agreement included Columbia’s pledging to “discipline student offenders for severe disruptions of campus operations” and “eliminate race preferences from their hiring and admission practices and [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI] programs that distribute benefits and advantages based on race” — which, if true, could mark the opening of a new era in American higher education.
“Columbia’s reforms are a roadmap for elite universities that wish to retain the confidence of the American public by renting their commitment to truth-seeking, merit, and civil debate,” McMahon added. “I believe they will ripple across the higher education sector and change the course of campus culture for years to come.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.