Uncategorized
The battle for Jewish hearts and minds returns to the printed page
(JTA) — The last 20 years haven’t been kind to Jewish journalism, with local weeklies shrinking or folding and even big city papers suspending their print publications and going completely digital. Publishing online has allowed these papers to cut costs and given them the potential for a wide reach — albeit a potential undermined by an increasingly siloed and ideologically polarized market for news and ideas.
Yet still there are those who aren’t giving up on print — at least in small, carefully targeted batches. This spring has seen the launch of two Jewish journals — Masorti, a reboot of the former Conservative Judaism, and Fragments, a product of the left-leaning Jewish human rights group T’ruah. The two magazines join a small but scrappy fraternity of journals aiming to steer the Jewish conversation.
“We’re the people of the book. I think print is having a moment,” said Rabbi Lev Meirowitz Nelson, who as director of Emor, T’ruah’s affiliated think tank, edits Fragments. “In the midst of all the [digital] bombardment people experience, there’s something very grounding about picking up a hard copy and being able to mark it up or carry it with you.”
Of course, Fragments and its more established cousins — from a legacy Modern Orthodox quarterly like Tradition to the interdisciplinary journal Modern Judaism — are all available online, and few print more than 1,000 copies at a time. The goal, the editors and publishers of some of the newer publications told me, is to establish a brand and repair what each one said was a broken communal discussion about Israel, domestic politics and religion.
“I hate what’s become of discourse in Jewish life, which largely goes on on Twitter and other places like that,” said Mark Charendoff. “I think Jews like longform discussions, and we’ve become very, very impatient. I wanted to carve out a space for that long type of writing and reading.”
Charendoff is president of the Maimonides Fund, which publishes Sapir, perhaps the best known of the newish journals. It has a high-profile editor — Bret Stephens, the conservative columnist on the New York Times opinion page — and a penchant for hot-button topics that rally conservatives and enrage liberals. Recent issues of the two-year-old journal have focused on “cancel culture” and a campus environment that most of its contributors consider hostile to conservatism and Jewish life.
“I think society and the Jewish community has become so polarized that people are afraid of articulating controversial views. We need to take a breath and say, ‘You’re not going to be harmed by reading something you disagree with,’” said Charendoff.
T’ruah believes there are plenty of controversial views being aired, but mostly on the right: It has explicitly positioned its new journal as a “necessary alternative to well-funded right-wing Jewish publications.” The news release announcing Fragments did not name those publications but presumably they include Sapir; Mosaic, supported by the right-leaning Tikvah Fund; and Tablet, which is published by Nextbook, Inc., whose president, Mem Bernstein, is on the board of Tikvah and is the widow of its founder. Tablet has published writers from across the political spectrum, but has drawn howls from the left for its frequent articles denouncing “wokeness” and cancel culture and a recent piece questioning the motives of donors who support gender-affirming care for trans people.
(Another journal, The Jewish Review of Books, was initially backed by Tikvah, but recently spun off under its own foundation.)
The premiere issue of Fragments includes essays on concepts of freedom by Laynie Soloman, a director at SVARA, an LGBTQ yeshiva based in Chicago, and Joelle Novey, the director of an interfaith environmental group in the Washington, D.C. area.
Nelson sees two audiences for Fragments: “It’s definitely speaking to the left and offering a deepening of language and of conversation around Jewish sources and Jewish ideas,” he said. “And it’s an effort to speak to the center, which often shares our values and can be spooked by the language they see coming from the right.”
Fittingly for a magazine published by a group formerly known as Rabbis for Human Rights, Fragments leans into Jewish text and religious perspectives. That sets it apart from Jewish Currents, a legacy journal of the Jewish left that, after a relaunch in 2018, now aims for an audience of young, left-wing, mostly secular Jews who, when not anti-Zionist, are deeply critical of Israel. Arielle Angel, editor in chief of Jewish Currents, has said that the magazine has become “a reliable and essential space for challenging, rigorous, surprising work that has shifted the discourse even beyond the American Jewish left.”
The aspiration that the “discourse can be shifted” by gladiators writing for small magazines harkens back to the post-World War II period, a sort of golden age of Jewish thought journals. Jewish and Jewish-adjacent publications like the Menorah Journal, Partisan Review, Commentary and Dissent provided a launching pad for an ideologically fluid cohort of “New York intellectuals” that over the years included Sidney Hook, Hannah Arendt, Lionel Trilling, Saul Bellow, Irving Howe, Delmore Schwartz, Norman Podhoretz, Paul Goodman, Midge Dector, Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Alfred Kazin.
Partisan Review was among a spate of magazines that offered a platform for Jewish intellectuals in the years immediately after World War II. (Open Culture)
While writers like these tackled Jewish issues, or general issues through a Jewish lens, many of them influenced the wider national conversation. Angel has said she has drawn inspiration from Commentary: Founded in 1945 by the American Jewish Committee, the magazine became hugely influential in promoting neoconservative ideas and thinkers in the 1980s and ’90s.
The “golden age” was an explosion of Jewish creativity, and political influence, that would be difficult to replicate today. Benjamin Balint, a former editor at Commentary and author of a history of the magazine, says the flowering of Jewish journals in the mid-20th century was the result of “terrific pent-up pressure among the children of immigrants who were pushed down for so long and were able to explode into the mainstream.” Small magazines “provided that release — pushing critics and writers into the larger culture,” said Balint, who previously edited Sources, the journal of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America.
A long piece in Tablet recently argued that such Jewish influence is in steep decline “anywhere where American Jews once made their mark,” from academia to Hollywood to government. Author Jacob Savage doesn’t blame the loss of the immigrant work ethic, however, but rather “American liberalism” for marginalizing Jews.
Whatever the cause, few of the newer journals aspire to that kind of influence on the larger culture, and acknowledge that they are trying to shape the conversation within the Jewish community.
“We believe that Jewish leaders need great ideas to do their work well,” said Rabbi Justus Baird, senior vice president for national programs at the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America and publisher of its journal Sources, launched in 2021. “The way we invest in ideas is by cultivating a large group of Jewish thinkers and scholars who are doing not just the scholarship for its own sake, but really trying to work collaboratively on how Jewish thought can apply to the challenges facing the Jewish people.”
The Hartman Institute (which also counts the Maimonides Fund among its long list of major donors) is a religiously pluralistic, liberal Zionist think tank with outposts in New York and Jerusalem. Recent essays in Sources include lengthy essays by Yale religious studies professor Christine Hayes on the ethics of shaming and Hartman scholar Mijal Bitton on how relationships can heal the breach between the Diaspora and Israel.
Part of Hartman’s goal in publishing the journal is to provide a space for such long-form articles, filling what Baird calls “a gap between the quick, super-responsive, news-oriented Jewish publication landscape, the hot takes about what is going on, and the academic Jewish work.”
“It’s a space where ideas can really percolate,” said Claire Sufrin, who now edits Sources. “The written word, the printed word is there and can be shared in that way and people can engage with it over and over again.”
Masorti, the relaunched journal of Conservative Judaism, is also trying to bridge a gap, in this case between Jewish scholarship and the synagogue.
“Rabbis have responsibilities to serve as congregational leaders, and also the obligation to engage in Jewish learning and scholarship,” said Rabbi Joseph Prouser, the editor of Masorti.
The original Conservative Judaism was published from 1945 through 2014. The reboot is sponsored by the movement’s Rabbinical Assembly and its five seminaries, including the Jewish Theological Seminary, the New York flagship. Its readership base is rabbis and cantors affiliated with the movement.
Masorti arrives at a critical time for the Conservative movement: In an essay in the first issue, its associate editor, Rabbi Jonathan Rosenbaum, says what was once America’s largest Jewish denomination is at a “precipice.”
“At its summit, the plurality of [North American] Jews identified with the Conservative movement, something like 40%,” Rosenbaum said in an interview. “There was something like 1.6 million Jews who were thought to be part of the Conservative movement up to maybe the late ‘80s, early ‘90s. Today, there are about 500,000.
“Part of the goal of the journal,” he said, is to “look at the problems and the means of solving them.”
In the past the Conservative Judaism journal had been a forum for debate within the movement. It published dueling papers, for example, on the decision to ordain women and what is and isn’t permissible on Shabbat. Prouser says he’ll uphold that tradition of dissent: The current issue features an essay by Michal Raucher, a Jewish studies professor at Rutgers University, who criticizes the movement’s establishment for embracing a justification for abortion that doesn’t go far enough in recognizing the bodily autonomy of women (an argument she also advanced in a JTA oped).
And Prouser does hope these arguments are heard beyond the movement, positioned between traditionalist Orthodoxy and liberal Reform. “One of the beauties of the Conservative movement is that we can talk to people to our right to our left right, we can talk to the entire spectrum of the Jewish community,” he said.
The editors of the new journals agree that there are fewer and fewer spaces for civil conversation among Jews, blaming the filter bubble of the internet and the take-no-prisoners style of current political debate. And each said they would like to be part of the solution.
Sufrin, the editor of Hartman’s journal, calls it a “bridge, because people can talk about it together, they can engage with the ideas together, and it’s in that conversation that they can develop a relationship and ultimately, talk together more productively.”
The question is whether it is too late: At a time when algorithms reward readers with the kind of material they are likely to agree with, will even an elite reach across ideological divides and listen to what the other side is saying? When institutions — from government to religion — regard compromise as surrender, who dares to concede that your ideological opponent might have a point?
“Difference and disagreement are productive when we engage with the best versions of those with whom we disagree,” Hayes writes in Sources. That sounds like a call to action. Or is it an epitaph?
—
The post The battle for Jewish hearts and minds returns to the printed page appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Janet Mills Drops Out of Maine Senate Democratic Primary, Clearing Path for Anti-Israel Candidate Graham Platner
Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner speaks at a campaign town hall meeting in Ogunquit, Maine, US, Oct. 22, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday announced that she is ending her campaign in the Democratic primary for US Senate, a move that effectively clears the path for progressive challenger Graham Platner to secure the nomination in a high-stakes race against incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins.
In a statement, Mills cited the financial demands of a competitive statewide campaign, acknowledging she lacked the resources to continue. Her withdrawal came after weeks of trailing Platner in grassroots fundraising and momentum, despite support from establishment Democrats.
“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else — the fight — to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” Mills said.
“That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate,” she continued.
The development represents a sharp ideological shift in the Democratic field. Mills, a two-term governor, had been viewed by party leaders as a pragmatic candidate with broad appeal and a traditionally strong stance on US alliances, including support for Israel. Mills’s candidacy failed to gain traction in the state, with observers pointing to a Democratic primary electorate that is both incensed and deeply desirous for a shakeup from the status quo.
Platner, in contrast to Mills, has built his campaign on an anti-establishment message and drawn increasing scrutiny in part for his rhetoric on the Middle East. Some of his past statements criticizing Israel have alarmed more centrist Democrats and foreign policy observers, who argue his framing downplays Israel’s security concerns and risks alienating key constituencies in a general election.
Platner has repeatedly accused Israel of “genocide” in Gaza and vowed to vote against further military assistance to the Jewish state. Earlier this month, Platner accused Israel of “exterminating” people in Gaza and refused to clarify his stance on whether Israel should remain a Jewish state. Most of his criticisms of Israel’s military conduct in Gaza omit any mention of the Hamas terrorist organization, framing Israel as an aggressor with intent of wiping out the Palestinian population.
Further, Platner came under scrutiny last year after it was revealed that the Democratic insurgent possesses a tattoo of a Totemkopf — a symbol historically used by Nazi military units. Though Platner has emphatically denied any knowledge of the tattoo’s connections to Nazism, skeptics have pointed out that the oyster farmer identifies as a military historian, raising serious doubts about his claims.
Concerns about Platner’s conduct and Totemkompf tattoo are already emerging as a potential liability in a race Democrats had hoped to make competitive. Collins, a moderate Republican with a long record of electoral success in Maine, has historically attracted independents and crossover voters, groups that could be wary of candidates perceived as ideologically extreme.
Mills’s exit also highlights a broader dynamic within the Democratic Party, as insurgent candidates in several primaries continue to gain traction over more traditional figures. While that energy has reshaped races across the country, it has also raised questions about general election viability in closely divided states.
Many observers have argued that Platner’s ascendance in the Democratic Party serves as another signal that the party is shifting further away from Israel and becoming more tolerant of antisemitism. Across the country, support for Israel has emerged as a litmus test within Democratic primary competitions, with candidates vowing to curtail support for Israel and being pressured to condemn the Jewish state as a perpetrator of “genocide.”
Despite Platner’s vulnerabilities and personal baggage, he has racked up a bevy of endorsements from Democratic power-players such as Rep. Ro Khanna (CA) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA). On Thursday, the Democratic Party officially endorsed Platner as the nominee to take on Collins.
As of now, polling indicates a close race in the Maine general election, with several polls showing Platner with a narrow lead over Collins. However, the Republican National Committee (RNC) has not yet aired ads against Platner, and the Republicans are expected to weaponize Platner’s history of controversial commentary in the lead-up to Election Day in November.
Uncategorized
Analysis: As Democrats unite behind Platner, Schumer’s future as leader faces tests
National Democrats on Thursday moved swiftly to unite behind Graham Platner — a progressive candidate whose past Nazi-linked tattoo and sharp criticism of Israel have alarmed some Jewish groups — after he became the presumptive nominee for Maine’s Senate seat.
The move made political sense. Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer, had already been leading in polls against Gov. Janet Mills, who dropped out of the race on Thursday, citing fundraising struggles. Once Platner became the de facto Democratic nominee against incumbent Republican Sen.Susan Collins, party unity was all but automatic.
But that unity comes with serious risks.
Joel Rubin, a Democratic commentator and foreign policy expert, called Platner’s candidacy for a much-desired seat a “nightmare scenario” for the party.
“For Jewish Democrats, wanting to defeat Collins, to have a candidate who makes them very uncomfortable on Jewish issues could potentially dampen support for him,” Rubin said in an interview. “Typically, Jewish Democrats are the most enthusiastic of democratic constituencies for Democratic candidates.”
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who had recruited Mills to run, is focused on winning back the majority, and Maine is a must-win in the pursuit to flip at least four Republican seats. “After years of allowing Trump’s abuses of power, Senator Collins has never been more vulnerable and we will work with the presumptive Democratic nominee Graham Platner to defeat her,” Schumer said in a joint statement with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who heads the Democratic campaign arm.
Schumer navigates new tensions
Schumer could play a pivotal role in mobilizing national donors, including Jewish donors, to support the Platner campaign.
Nonetheless, Schumer, who has seen his popularity decline since he supported a Republican spending bill to avert a shutdown last year, may be helping build a majority that won’t back him, as his longtime support for Israel increasingly becomes a liability in a party where many voters object to the United States providing funds to the Jewish state.
Platner has aligned himself with a new guard of candidates who could emerge from competitive primaries ready to challenge Democratic leadership — as well as the longstanding Democratic consensus in support of Israel.
Abdul El-Sayed, a U.S. Senate candidate from Michigan rising in the polls, and Zach Wahls, a progressive candidate from Iowa, have both said they oppose Schumer as leader.
These insurgents could also alienate moderate and pro-Israel Jewish voters in closely contested races in the fall. Figures like Platner and El-Sayed have adopted language and positions that would have been politically risky — if not disqualifying — in earlier cycles. Now, those stances are survivable.
And even if they win their races in the general election and Schumer stays on as leader, his role is getting harder to maintain as the party’s base has shifted, especially amid the wars in Gaza and Iran.
For years, Schumer has cast himself as an institutional anchor on issues important to the Jewish community, including support for Israel. In a speech for Jewish audiences, he bragged about preserving Democratic unity on Israel aid. In 2024, he told the Forward that “having a majority leader who’s committed to Israel is vital for Israel’s relationship with the U.S.”
But shifting dynamics suggest the balance may be slipping.
Earlier this month, 40 Senate Democrats voted to block $295 million for the transfer of bulldozers — used by the Israeli military to demolish homes in the West Bank and Gaza — and 36 of them also supported a measure to block the sale of 1,000-pound bombs to the Jewish state. Those counts shattered a previous high of 27 Democrats who backed a similar pair of resolutions last year.
Schumer was in the minority of his party on both votes.
If a future roster of Democratic senators includes more legislators elected on platforms critical of Israel and skeptical of party leadership, Schumer’s ability to manage internal divisions could be tested in ways it hasn’t been before. Schumer came under fire from progressives in February after telling a Jewish group that he will keep “fighting” for military assistance to Israel.
In a recent interview with Politico, Sanders asserted he has now become the leader for Senate Democrats on Israel policy. “I mean, we got 40 votes, and Schumer got seven,” he said. “We have more support for our position than Chuck has for his.”
What Jewish Democrats are watching
For many Jewish voters, Platner’s rise and the party’s embrace of him are another signal of changes many are finding hard to swallow.
Platner faced backlash last year after acknowledging that a black skull-and-crossbones tattoo on his chest resembled a Nazi symbol. He has since covered it up. In past Reddit posts, Platner made incendiary comments, including in defending a man with a Nazi SS lightning bolt tattoo who impersonated a federal officer at a Black Lives Matter protest in Las Vegas in 2020.
Last month, Platner accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza and suggested the U.S. should cut off all aid to Israel.
Platner has done some outreach to the Jewish community across Maine. Recently, his campaign hosted a Passover Seder in Bath, Maine with some 50 community members, during which he discussed rising antisemitism. It was co-hosted with Steven Koltai, the state chair of the progressive Jewish political fundraising group J Street, who is a key Platner supporter.
For now, Democrats have little choice but to unite behind the presumptive nominee. But if candidates like Platner help deliver a majority, the real test will be holding it together.
The post Analysis: As Democrats unite behind Platner, Schumer’s future as leader faces tests appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Hamas Exploits Gaza Ceasefire to Tighten Civilian Control, Rebuild Military Power as Second Phase Talks Stall
Palestinians displaced during the two-year Israel-Hamas war shelter at a tent camp in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 10, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
As the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement remains stalled, Israeli officials warn that the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas is quietly exploiting the pause in fighting to tighten its control over civilian life while simultaneously rebuilding its military capabilities behind the scenes.
Under the leadership of military wing commander and de facto Gaza ruler Izz ad-Din al-Haddad, Hamas is reinforcing its authority across the enclave, further undermining already fragile efforts to advance the truce.
Al-Haddad is said to be operating three parallel systems intended to secure the terrorist group’s survival and restore its military capabilities, according to a report by the Israeli news outlet Walla, which cited security sources.
The first line of effort seems to focus on reestablishing Hamas’s civilian governance and restoring its authority across the war-torn enclave, with its presence still visibly entrenched through checkpoints, strict regulation of goods, and the takeover of key civilian institutions, including hospitals.
Under the ceasefire, the Israeli military currently controls 53 percent of Gaza, while Hamas remains entrenched in the nearly half of Gazan territory it still controls, where the vast majority of the population lives.
The Palestinian terrorist group has also been reactivating internal security mechanisms to enforce day-to-day order while carrying out extensive intelligence operations aimed at identifying alleged collaborators with Israel and any opposition.
Hamas’s second line of effort has been focused on a violent internal campaign against armed militias and local gangs, particularly in southern Gaza, as the group seeks to reassert control and shore up its weakened position by targeting Palestinians it labels as “lawbreakers and collaborators with Israel.”
With its security control tightening, Hamas’s brutal crackdown has escalated, sparking widespread clashes and violence as the group seeks to seize weapons and eliminate any opposition.
A third line of effort reportedly centers on rebuilding military capabilities, including recruiting new operatives, conducting training both in the field and at command sites, restoring intelligence and surveillance systems, and rebuilding underground infrastructure and weapons stockpiles.
Israeli officials estimate that Hamas’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, is rebuilding its forces, with its ranks now totaling roughly 27,000 members.
Despite Israeli intelligence assessments that Hamas’s smuggling capabilities have been significantly degraded, the group is reportedly seeking to rebuild its arsenal through local means by recovering Israeli Air Force munitions remnants and converting them into improvised explosive devices.
The Islamist group is also attempting to revive rocket and mortar production using makeshift materials, while reorganizing stockpiles buried under rubble or left largely intact.
Israeli officials have repeatedly warned that Hamas’s ongoing rebuilding efforts are allowing the group to retain control over much of the war-torn enclave and steadily sustain its influence despite over two years of military conflict.
According to a report by the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, a new draft proposal has been presented to Israel and Hamas, with talks potentially beginning this week on moving forward with the second phase of US President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan.
Earlier this year, the US-backed plan to end the war in Gaza hit major roadblocks after proposals surfaced that would allow Hamas to retain some small arms.
Israel has previously warned that the Islamist group must fully disarm for the second phase of the ceasefire to move forward, pointing to tens of thousands of rifles and an active network of underground tunnels still under the terrorist group’s control.
If Hamas does not give up its weapons, Israeli officials have vowed not to withdraw troops from Gaza any further or approve any rebuilding efforts, effectively stalling the ceasefire agreement.
The new draft allegedly proposes creating an “Implementation Verification Committee,” to be formed under Nickolay Mladenov, the high representative for Gaza on Trump’s Board of Peace, bringing together guarantor states, the International Stabilization Force, and a Peace Council to ensure compliance by all parties.
Under this proposed draft, the Peace Council would be granted authority over Gaza’s governance, reconstruction, and development until a reformed Palestinian Authority is able to resume its responsibilities.
The document also reportedly states that Hamas and other extremist Palestinian factions would have no role in governing the Gaza Strip, and that governance would be based on “one authority, one law, and one weapon,” as all armed groups would cease military activity and a phased disarmament process would transfer weapons to the incoming body.
By this framework, Israel’s withdrawal would take place in stages under an agreed timetable, contingent on verifiable progress in the process of disarmament.