RSS
The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor
There are plenty of examples of blatant antisemitism and attacks on Jews that have occurred over the past 10 months. It seems that every day, we read about a synagogue being attacked, a Jewish student being spat on or assaulted, or the all too mainstream protester chants calling for Intifada or for Jews to go back to Poland — and the list goes on.
Perhaps less obvious — but more frequent — is the antisemitism that’s happening under the radar: things that are circumstantial and much harder to prove.
I’m not talking about Jewish writers having their lectures cancelled out of concern “for their safety” — it’s clear to everyone (except the organizers) where the motivation comes from.
No, this is the kind of discrimination that Black people and others experienced before the Civil Rights movement — and even after: being rejected as a tenant on a lease to an apartment, passed over for a job or promotion based on the color of their skin , or — as in my case — perhaps not having a contract renewed at a college after speaking out against their policies regarding “free speech.”
Do I have proof that me being Israeli or Jewish had anything to do with my dismissal?
Absolutely not.
But are the circumstances suspicious? Yes.
Two years ago, I accepted a Visiting Assistant Professorship in the English Department of a private Midwestern college in the United States. It was a one-year contract, and following the first year, the Chair of the Department notified me how much he appreciated my work — noting the anonymous student evaluations that gave me high marks, that a large number of students requested to take a second class with me, and that I helped raise the visibility of the college through public performances by my students. He also informed me that there was restructuring going on in the English Department, which would result in some of the classes I was teaching being offered only periodically.
In short, he asked me if I would be interested in remaining affiliated with the school, and return either every other semester, or, for instance, if another English teacher took a sabbatical. That suited me fine, as it allowed me to continue teaching, but also gave me time for my own creative endeavors back in Los Angeles, where I was commuting from every week.
On October 7, I was not teaching on campus. But like so many other colleges, a segment of the student population rose up to protest Israel. And even though I was a thousand miles away, I received an email from a student member of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) notifying all faculty that the group was calling for a one-day strike to protest, accompanied with a list of atrocities Israel had allegedly committed, even listing the bombing of the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza two weeks earlier, which had already been attributed to a stray missile from Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
How was it possible for one student to access the entire faculty and student body to spew their propaganda?
I contacted the Provost and Dean of the college to inquire. She replied that this was a recent policy change put into place two years earlier to encourage freedom of expression. I asked how this policy might play out if I rebutted the student’s charges through the college-wide email system, only to have another student rebut my defense, and so on and so on?
She replied that if it got out of hand, the school would shut it down.
I replied that the situation had already gotten out of hand, and trusted I wouldn’t be receiving anymore emails from such organizations.
The student newspaper got wind of this, and contacted me for my opinion. Here’s what they wrote in their article:
Safdie, who is of Israeli and Syrian Jewish descent, found sections of the message antisemitic and questioned why he received the email. “I’m all for freedom of expression, but I’m not sure this decision was able to foresee such a situation where students might abuse the privilege and create a hostile work/study environment for other members of the community.”
Fast forward several months, when I returned to campus for the Spring semester. Within a week of arrival, I received an email from the new chair of the English Department (who was also the associate Dean of the Race and Ethnic Studies program). She wanted to set up a Zoom meeting with me — even though our offices were 10 feet apart.
In a carefully worded statement that sounded like it was crafted by an attorney, she got to the point. Although the college was extremely pleased with all the work that I’d done, and that all my students loved my teaching, the college was making budget cuts and were not going to be able to renew my contract.
When I tried to explain to her my prior arrangement with the previous Chair, she simply replied that she’d be happy to write me a letter of recommendation.
Something about the Zoom call and her demeanor felt suspicious.
On a whim, I did an Internet search on my new Chair.
The first thing that came up on her Twitter Feed was a statement on the masthead of a literary magazine she edited, condemning the alleged mass killing and displacement of Palestinians in the wake of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks.
As I explored further, I discovered other parts of the statement:
The Israeli military—with the support of the U.S. government—has bombarded Palestinian civilians relentlessly, in violation of international law, and deprived Palestinians of food, water, fuel, and electricity.
And:
Because we work to “bring our readers into the living moment, not as tourists, but as engaged participants,” we believe that Palestinians need space to speak directly, whether from siege in Palestine or in diaspora. So too do others who bear witness to the ongoing settler-colonial violence in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Two days after the Zoom meeting, I figured I might as well take the Chair up on her offer to write me a letter-of-recommendation; it was March, and I could still apply to other universities for employment the following year. (Universities can be suspicious if you leave a position after just two years, so a letter would be crucial to securing a position.)
After a week of email silence, the Chair wrote me back, saying that she wasn’t familiar with my teaching and requested to attend one of my classes to observe my skills. I invited her the following week to attend a class, which fit her schedule, but she did not show, and didn’t even write to give an explanation.
I followed up with an email to offer her another opportunity, followed by a second and third, but there was nothing but email silence.
I should also mention that, at the one faculty meeting we had, she stayed as far away from me as possible, and if I approached, she would quickly engage in discussion with another professor. The topic that day was adding a requirement for English Majors to take an anti-Racism class. One of the new offerings for the following year was focused on racism against Palestinians.
By the end of April, I decided to contact the Associate Dean of Humanities who oversaw the English Department, and sure enough, within an hour of my email, I finally received an email back from the Chair of the English Department, offering to attend my class, but letting me know that she was too busy to write me a letter of recommendation until the end of May — well past the end of the semester, and too late to help with a teaching application for the following year.
If there was ever a thought of going to the administration to complain about my treatment, that was quickly extinguished following an SJP demonstration that demanded that the college divest from Oracle. Apparently, Oracle’s website had stated support for Israel, and the Head of Financial Aid for the college felt the need to apologize for the school’s actions.
A response from the school’s administration read thus:“The business strategy or public statements from Oracle do not represent the viewpoints of the College. Due to the College’s contract with the business and the cost it took to make such major system changes, the College does not have any feasible or affordable alternative.
It also went on to assure protesters:
Less than 0.5 percent of the College’s investments are tied to Israeli companies and that none of these investments are directly held by the college.
As the semester ended, on another whim, I searched the Human Resources page of the college, and sure enough, there was a listing for a new English professor. The skills they were looking for were for someone who taught poetry as well as Race and Ethnic studies courses — none of which I was qualified to teach.
Was the college looking to shift away from courses like Screenwriting, Playwriting, and Non-Fiction — three popular courses I had taught that were always in high demand and had long waiting lists?
I guess I’ll never know.
Oren Safdie is a playwright and screenwriter.
The post The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
When It Comes to Antisemitism, People Can’t Handle the Truth
Police officers gather on Pearl Street in front of the Boulder County Courthouse, the scene of an attack that injured multiple people, in Boulder, Colorado, US, June 2, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mark Makela
At a recent event at the Center for Jewish History in Manhattan, Jewish historian and Holocaust expert Deborah Lipstadt said she has had to explain to people that antisemitism is real. It’s quite ironic, considering that she had to have a court battle with Holocaust denier David Irving that was made into the film Denial.
There are many Jews in denial about antisemitism, because they think if they lie and claim it doesn’t exist, all the problems will go away. This has been proven false time and time again throughout history.
Sadly, some are in another kind of denial — they claim that antisemitic attacks are preventable by combating “misinformation.” This is simply not true.
Was the antisemitic attack in Colorado preventable by the Egyptian terrorist who was residing in the US illegally? Only if he’d been deported — or never let in to begin with. It also perhaps could have been prevented if he’d told anyone about his plans, and they reported him to police.
The sad truth is that the majority of antisemitic attacks, or violent attacks against anyone, are not preventable. But that truth doesn’t make anyone feel good. Instead, people would like to promote a false sense of security that is actually dangerous. Just as people wanted to tell Lipstadt that antisemitism wasn’t a real problem, people like Professor Cynthia Miller-Idriss of American University want to claim that the Colorado attack was preventable by equipping people against misinformation.
In her article on MSNBC.com, titled “Boulder, Colorado terror attack victims deserved better from Trump-and Biden,” Miller-Idriss conveniently neglects to mention the attacker was in the country illegally. Nor does she mention what former President Joe Biden or President Trump should have done/should do to combat misinformation. I have interviewed numerous experts on antisemitism in my more than two decades of covering the topic, and there is no magic bullet. That’s why Miller-Idriss has nothing specific that Biden or Trump should have done/do.
I don’t like the term “misinformation” because something is either true, it’s a lie, or a person is spreading information without caring if it is true or not. The term “misinformation” lets the liar get away with it.
Zionism is the right for a self-determinate Jewish State. But there are many who learn that Zionism means Jewish supremacy over any other person — because they are taught that lie by their professors, their parents, podcasters, or so many others. Those who believe antisemitic tropes are not going to simply unlearn it in 30 seconds.
But wait! According to Miller-Idriss, “There is strong evidence that people can be dissuaded from believing in harmful online propaganda and conspiracy theories in as little as 30 seconds, just by learning about the manipulative tactics of persuasive bad actors and becoming more skeptical.”
Maybe this is true of a tiny amount of people, but not in any real numbers — and certainly not someone who has decided he is ready to kill Jews. Jews need to learn self-defense and be armed as much as possible. Kumbaya idealism is suicidal. But have no fear — Miller-Idriss lays out in the article that the solution is “upstream prevention,” a nonsense term meant to pacify uncritical eyes. When schools barely teach the Holocaust and many believe Israel woke up one day in 1948 and decided to simply steal someone else’s land, authors like this professor miss the point entirely.
The author correctly writes that people blame American Jews for the actions of Israel. But why? Russia invaded Ukraine unprovoked, but no American Russians fear getting attacked.
No Chinese Americans fear being attacked for what has been done to the Uyghurs.
The reason is that they aren’t Jews.
Even if it was only “misinformation” there is no way to combat it to a significant degree. It would be like trying to dry the ocean with a paper towel. It is about long-taught hatred, and not relegated to what is currently happening in the Middle East. That is simply used as the inspirational flashpoint to claim it has nothing to do with antisemitism and is anti-Zionism.
We are either serious about combating antisemitism or we are not. If we are, it involves calling out major outlets that spew antisemitic bile. If the professor wanted to criticize Biden, she should have rebuked his staff for barely responding to people who called him “Genocide Joe.” His lack of a response to this did irreparable damage to American Jews that will be felt for decades to come.
Either Biden or one of his representatives should have once a day for a week explained why Israel is not committing a genocide and rebuke professors teaching that it is.
There is no more “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” and it is time to stop living in the land of make-believe.
The author is a writer based in New York.
The post When It Comes to Antisemitism, People Can’t Handle the Truth first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Despite the Ongoing War, Israel Must Build Up Its Natural Strengths
An Israeli flag flies at a past Israel Day Parade.
Since October 2023, the State of Israel’s main strategic vector has been a campaign against enemies in the region centered around Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran. This campaign is nearing its end. In the coming months, the open challenges will be decided. Whether by force, agreement, or a combination of the two, the issues of the hostages and Hamas’s full disarmament and removal in Gaza as well as the nuclear project in Iran will reach decisions.
The other challenges are undergoing processes of change that are mostly positive from Israel’s perspective. In Lebanon, a new order is taking shape, influenced by the weakening of Hezbollah. In Syria, a new order – not without risks – is being built without the presence of Iran and its proxies. In Judea and Samaria, the system is converging around the question of the day after Abbas; and the Trump administration is pushing for the promotion and expansion of the Abraham Accords and the integration of Israel into the region.
In this situation – even if the military operation in Gaza continues for several more months or an Israeli or Israeli-American campaign is conducted against Iran – it is clear that within six months to a year at most, Israel will emerge from the war into a reality of the continuous use of force.
It is appropriate to return to the basics of David Ben-Gurion’s national security strategy and realign the national focus from the security level “Strike Force” to the national level “Prime Force,” as Ben-Gurion did after the War of Independence. One of the basic conventions of his strategy is that Israel should strive as much as possible for long periods of national capability-building and reduce as much as possible the time it takes to transform into a “Strike Force” for the purpose of defeating enemies.
The ongoing mobilization and activation of the “Strike Force” since October 2023, along with the clear victory already achieved and its expected completion in the coming months, gives even greater validity to this principle. Unlike in the days of Ben-Gurion, the “Strike Force” will remain in the form of increased regular and permanent service and in the periodic but significantly reduced mobilization of the reserves. This will make it possible to maintain ongoing security efforts across the various arenas.
A significant acceleration of “Prime Force” national efforts – in terms of security, the economy, and society – is needed to place Israel on a path of renewed strength. I will not touch on the regional and international political aspects, though extensive action must also be promoted in these areas. One, for example, is the effort to enlarge Israel’s “Competitive Identity.”
The Israeli government’s work plans for 2025 show noteworthy efforts to accelerate the development of national strengths. The main challenge is the national need to make a substantial leap forward in the arrangement, inclusion, and implementation of core components of the next national strength. To this end, it is important to focus execution on core issues, consolidate existing plans and their completion, allocate executive attention (ministerial committees, teams of Directors General), abolish execution barriers, and move forward vigorously and quickly to execute clear planning goals.
Israel should define a limited number of national efforts, the implementation of which would be led by the executive branch. Without ignoring other important efforts, the focus should be on those that can provide a public and business growth engine for other issues as well. Some, like the housing issue, are already being addressed.
The following are what I consider the top five national projects:
- National public transportation network: Israel needs to accelerate construction of an integrated network of public transportation solutions that will provide a comprehensive, relevant, and available door-to-door response to the population’s residential, employment and service needs. This network includes the deployment of several international airports, including one additional major airport parallel to Ben-Gurion Airport; a passenger and cargo rail network; (electric) buses; and improvements in maritime access to Israel. This network must connect the periphery to the center in order to expand the connection between housing and employment solutions. In terms of cost, it should be accessible to all segments of the public. Metropolitan transportation authorities will be needed to best adapt the plans. Reducing the scope of vehicle use will also require providing a respectful response to transportation needs on Shabbat.
- National computer network: Israel must complete both a leap forward in physical communications infrastructure (cellular and fiber optics) in a way that allows for bandwidth tailored to future needs and the full digitization (applications, cloud infrastructure) of national and local services and supporting infrastructure for businesses.
- Advanced computing infrastructures: Israel must significantly accelerate the establishment of the computing infrastructure required for artificial intelligence needs, the promotion of a national response to the challenge of quantum computing, and the supporting frameworks that enable the implementation of these capabilities. The implementation of national plans for AI is currently too slow to keep pace with developments in the field.
- Health and welfare response to population growth: The expected growth requires a significant expansion of the pace and scope of construction of response infrastructure. There is already a National Strategic Outline Plan at the Ministry of Health and the Planning Directorate for Health Institutions. There are plans to expand the response to the challenge of an aging population, but the necessary increases in infrastructure and manpower must be accelerated.
- A relevant and strong security solution over time: Security capabilities are a key component of the “Prime Force,” and in the current period also a significant engine of technologies and exports. During the war, the defense establishment received – and will continue to receive – increased resources to create a robust response after the revelation of insufficiencies in October 2023 and thereafter. The historical phenomenon of waves of increases and decreases in the IDF’s response capacity must be stopped. This time, lessons must be learned and a response built that will create a strong and relevant army and security system while avoiding excessive reductions in investment during periods of apparent calm. The goal is to ensure that the investment is carried out not as a concentrated effort but as an ongoing process over decades. This will require close examination and control by elements within and outside the IDF.
Alongside the five “national projects” will be some “national challenges.” The legislative branch (the Knesset) should lead the handling of these challenges as a basis for strengthening its position (see below), and because they require dialogue, agreements, legislation and control of implementation processes. I have tried to define what I consider the five “national challenges” on which to focus (though this is of course open to discussion):
- Rebalancing the three branches of government: Defining the relationship between the three branches and returning powers and capabilities to the legislative branch. The executive branch should focus on the efficient execution of processes. One way to do this is to significantly reduce the number of ministers and stop viewing the Knesset as an “employment solution” for legislators. Small ministries should be consolidated into “super-ministries.” A limited number of ministers should serve as horizontal projectors (by, for example, leading the integration of “national projects”). All others should return to essential key roles in the legislative branch. At the same time, the process of transforming the judiciary – mainly the High Court – into a legislative branch (“legislators in judges’ robes”) should be stopped. The determination of norms and principles should be returned to legislators. Judges should focus on examining compliance with the law.
- Integrating the ultra-orthodox into the economy and sharing the civic burden: The Israeli economy will have difficulty functioning if the growing ultra-orthodox population does not share in the national security effort and the economic burden. A fundamental change in the current situation will require agreements that address the unique needs of this population.
- Eliminating crime in Arab society: Organized crime is a source of chaos at the national level and hinders the normal development of Arab society. Significant efforts are being made to deal with it, but close monitoring of the effectiveness of these efforts as well as legislation are required.
- Lowering the cost of living by increasing competitiveness: The cost of living in Israel is a national problem that requires serious solutions. The many efforts in this area do not sufficiently address the main problem: the concentration of power in key industries in the hands of a few corporations and the lack of competitiveness. A legislative and practical leap is needed to increase competitiveness and reduce the control of these corporations.
- Reconstruction of the South and the North: Considerable efforts are being made on this issue as well, but the depth of national commitment to the issue and the need to assist and develop the population will require dialogue, in-depth monitoring, and legislation.
The next strategic vector of the State of Israel, after stabilizing a desirable security environment and perhaps even a political one for the country in the coming year, is a significant acceleration of national strengths. To this end, Israel should begin a strategic process of defining a limited number of “national projects” and responding to “national challenges” to strengthen its capabilities with a forward-looking vision.
Col. (res.) Shay Shabtai is a senior researcher at the BESA Center and an expert in national security, strategic planning, and strategic communication. He is a cyber security strategist and a consultant to leading companies in Israel. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Despite the Ongoing War, Israel Must Build Up Its Natural Strengths first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Parshat Naso: Finding Peace By Working Together Towards Common Goals
A Torah scroll. Photo: RabbiSacks.org.
In this week’s parsha, we find the three-part blessing of Birchas Kohanim, which culminates in a blessing of “Shalom” — peace. We find the blessing of peace to be a culminating one in a number of places across Jewish liturgy. It is the final blessing in Shmoneh Esreh, the silent conversation we have with Hashem three times a day, and it is also the way we end almost all versions of Kaddish (aside from the half Kaddish).
Clearly, peace is important on a national level. Not having enemies actively attacking us and calling for our destruction has been hard to come by at many times in our history, and our present. We certainly want to be at peace as a nation, but is this all that this blessing of peace means?
Instead, we should ask what peace is on the individual, family, and team levels. The ending words of Kaddish give us a clue.
As we finish Kaddish, we say “oseh shalom b’mromav, hu ya’aseh shalom aleinu” — “He who makes peace in the heavens should place peace upon us.” What peace is made in Heaven? Are there potential attackers that need to be quieted? Is there divisiveness in heaven that Hashem needs to adjudicate?
This phrase comes from the book of Iyov (25:2) — from one of Bildad’s speeches where he is waxing poetic about the awesomeness of Hashem. Rashi, in his second explanation, says that the Shalom needed in Heaven is because the elements of fire and water are present, and Hashem orchestrates them working together in peace rather than the water putting out the fire. The Targum also explains that there are different angels that have the force of these elements, and Hashem helps them work in unison. Shalom, in this understanding, may be better translated as harmony.
Rav Yitzchak Arama, in explaining this concept says, “Peace and harmony are trademarks of G-d’s creation and handiwork. Nothing is functional or endures in this universe unless it represents the successful merging of a variety of elements.” Instead of a level of unity that we might imagine is closer to the oneness of Hashem, we find that Hashem specifically has opposing forces working together towards a similar goal, and this is the hallmark of heavenly harmony — Shalom.
In our current reality, avoiding the echo chamber is hard. Our phones and technology are programmed to track our preferences and give us more of what we like and agree with. Debate in the political arena (and many others) has become so emotional and personal that many would rather just not bring up an opposing viewpoint instead of risking awkwardness, embarrassment, or anger. But this is not the way Hashem runs Heaven. It is not the way of Shalom.
This concept of Shalom should also influence our leadership. A number of the school leaders I work with have been very excited by the book, The 6 Types of Working Genius. It lays out a construct for recognizing the different steps needed from initially generating ideas to executing the best idea. In breaking down the process, the author also recommends identifying which steps are areas of strength and weakness for each team member, to better understand how to involve team members in projects so that they will enjoy their work and add maximum value.
These leaders have found this system to cultivate a sense of teamwork, and help facilitate people working together towards a common goal. It seems that part of the power of the construct is that it acknowledges that everyone has areas of natural talent and enjoyment, as well as areas they find frustrating when working on a team. Instead of being embarrassed or hesitant to share that I dislike some of the work I know needs to get done, it becomes an expected preference that I am encouraged to share with my team so we can play to everyone’s strengths. This construct leans into Rav Yitzchak Arama’s concept of Shalom — nothing will be successful unless it includes a variety of team members with different strengths and weaknesses. Accepting this premise and assuming that team functionality will be strongest when such harmony exists, is critical for leading teams well.
There is also another place where peace is the final blessing. It is the way that Rav Yehudah HaNasi ends the Mishna. His epic work encapsulating the skeletal structure of all of Jewish law ends with a final Mishna in Uktzin: Hashem found no better utensil to hold blessing for the Jewish people than peace. As it says, “Hashem gave strength to His nation. Hashem blessed His nation with peace.” Perhaps here as well, the ultimate blessing is the Shalom, not from an external threat, but that of the Jewish people working together in harmony toward the same goal.
May we be given the wisdom to create this peace in our own leadership and life, and may Hashem grant the Jewish people the strength and the gift of peace, from external enemies and from internal divisiveness, speedily in our days.
Maury Grebenau is the director of JNTP’s Administrator Support Program, coaching dozens of school leaders each year. Maury publishes and speaks widely on topics of leadership and education.
The post Parshat Naso: Finding Peace By Working Together Towards Common Goals first appeared on Algemeiner.com.