RSS
The Torah Can Help Simplify Our Choices
Reading from a Torah scroll in accordance with Sephardi tradition. Photo: Sagie Maoz via Wikimedia Commons.
The acclaimed Iowa-born travel writer, Bill Bryson, known for his witty observations and upbeat take on life, offers a unique perspective on the modern world’s obsession with proliferate choice.
In his 1998 book I’m a Stranger Here Myself, Bryson humorously chronicles his return to the United States after two decades in England. Among other things, he is confronted by the overwhelming variety of consumer goods in American supermarkets in contrast to the somewhat more limited choices available at that time in the UK.
Bryson’s experience in the US retail world perfectly captures the complications and confusion thrown up by too many choices. For, as Bryson discovered, more options doesn’t lead to better decisions and good outcomes. Instead, it leads to frustration and bad choices.
In one particularly hilarious piece, Bryson writes vividly about his attempt to buy breakfast cereal on a visit to his local supermarket: “The breakfast cereals alone could have occupied me for most of the afternoon. There must have been 200 types, and I am not exaggerating. Every possible substance that could be dried, puffed, and sugar-coated was there.”
As he continued exploring the aisles, Bryson’s amazement at the level of choice grew: “I had no idea how the market for junk food had proliferated. Everywhere I turned I was confronted with foods guaranteed to make you waddle.” He lists a barrage of options: “jelly creme pies, moon pies, pecan spinwheels, peach mellos, root beer buttons, chocolate fudge devil dogs”—illustrating an excess of choice that left him more bewildered than satisfied.
Perhaps the most striking example was at Aisle Seven, or as Bryson dubbed it: “Food for the Seriously Obese.” There was “a whole section devoted exclusively to a product called Toaster Pastries, which included, among much else, eight different types of toaster strudel. And what exactly is toaster strudel? Who cares? It was coated in sugar and looked drippy. I grabbed an armload.”
Bryson later reflected on how many of the items he had somehow ended up buying were never even eaten; they lingered in his pantry for ages until they were finally discarded — proof, in his mind, of the folly of excessive choice.
Bryson’s humorous take on the overwhelming abundance of choice highlights a phenomenon unique to modern Western living. Unsurprisingly, sober studies on excessive consumer choices have begun to emerge in recent years, and the picture they paint is not pretty.
Professor emeritus of psychology at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, Barry Schwartz, coined the term “the paradox of choice” in his influential 2004 book The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. He argues that while having some choice is essential to human autonomy and well-being, an overload of options inevitably leads to decision paralysis and often also to anxiety and deep dissatisfaction.
Over the years, Schwartz has conducted experiments showing that when people are presented with too many options, they are more likely to feel overwhelmed and make poorer decisions — or worse, they avoid making decisions altogether, dovetailing with Bryson’s anecdotal experience in the supermarket, where the endless options he faced didn’t enhance his shopping experience, instead leaving him frustrated and, ultimately, unfulfilled.
Schwartz’s research and Bryson’s experiences highlight a critical aspect of human psychology: when faced with too many choices, we tend to second-guess our decisions, or we are hasty and impulsive, usually with poor results, resulting in us feeling less satisfaction. The bottom line is that the very freedom that abundant choice promises often backfires, leading to increased stress and painful regret.
In stark contrast to the modern dilemma of seemingly overwhelming choice, Parshat Re’eh presents a refreshingly simple definition of choices. The parsha begins with a clear, binary proposition: “See, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: the blessing if you obey the commandments of God that I am giving you today; the curse, if you disobey the commandments of God and turn from the way that I command you today by following other gods” (Deut. 11:26-28).
Rashi, commenting on this verse, highlights the significance of the word ‘See’ (רְאֵה). He explains that the Torah urges each individual to open their eyes and truly perceive their choices. This isn’t just about physical sight but about clarity of understanding—being able to discern the real nature of the choices presented. The Torah wants us to see beyond the superficial appeal of specific options and recognize their actual value, or, more accurately, lack thereof.
In this passage, the Torah doesn’t clutter the decision-making process with a multitude of options, nor does it leave room for ambiguity. Instead, it draws a clear line between two paths — one that leads to positive outcomes and the other to adverse outcomes.
Clearly, the Torah’s intention here is not to simplify life’s complexities but rather to provide a framework that guides us in the whole area of making choices – teaching us that what may seem like options may not actually be anything other than a range of bad options, all tantalizingly attractive, but ultimately no good.
Schwartz’s concept of the “paradox of choice” highlights how excessive options paralyze us; the Torah’s approach in Re’eh reminds us that the best way to navigate life’s decisions is to simplify them. The Torah empowers us to choose wisely by reminding us not to be dazzled by choices that appear attractive but which, in reality, prevent us from making the decisions that are good for us.
In Parshat Re’eh, we are guided by Moses to maintain crystal clarity in all our decision-making — essentially a call to rise above the confusion of too many choices and to focus on making the decisions that truly matter without getting distracted.
There is a famous story of the Greek conqueror Alexander the Great. As he advanced eastward towards Asia to expand his empire, he arrived in Gordium, the capital of Phrygia. There, he encountered the Gordian Knot, an intricate and tightly tangled knot tied to the yoke of an ox-cart.
The Roman historian Quintus Curtius Rufus described it as having “several knots all so tightly entangled that it was impossible to see how they were fastened.” According to an ancient local legend, whoever could untie this knot would be destined to rule all of Asia. Over the many years that the knot had been there, many had attempted to unravel it and failed.
When Alexander confronted the knot in 333 BC, he initially tried to untie it by conventional means. However, after abortive efforts, he chose a different approach: he drew his sword and cut through the knot, solving the problem with a single, decisive action.
Since then, Alexander’s act has become a powerful metaphor for addressing seemingly intractable problems through bold solutions. Because, more often than not, the best way to address overwhelming complexity is through clear, decisive action — cutting through the complications and making the one choice that truly matters.
Sir Winston Churchill remarked, “The price of greatness is responsibility.” The choices we make define us, and in a world filled with distractions and diversions, the Torah helps us focus on what truly matters. By simplifying our decisions into “good” and “bad,” we not only avoid the pitfalls of decision paralysis but also align ourselves with the path of blessing, ensuring that our choices lead to meaningful and fulfilling lives.
The post The Torah Can Help Simplify Our Choices first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish Synagogue, Holocaust Memorial Vandalized in Poland After Politician Denies Holocaust
An antisemitic slur spray-painted on the ruins of a former synagogue in Dukla, Poland. Photo: World Jewish Restitution Organization
Two Jewish sites in Dukla, Poland, were vandalized over the weekend mere days after Polish member of the European Parliament (MEP) Grzegorz Braun claimed gas chambers at the former Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp were fake and repeated an antisemitic blood libel in a live radio interview.
Vandals spray-painted the word “F–k” followed by a Star of David on the ruins of a former synagogue that was destroyed by the Nazis during the Holocaust, and a memorial commemorating Holocaust victims located at the entrance of the Jewish cemetery in Dukla was defaced with a swastika and the word “Palestine,” according to the World Jewish Restitution Organization (WJRO). The memorial honors Jews of Dukla and the surrounding areas who were murdered by Nazis during the Holocaust.
The two Jewish sites in Dukla are cared for by the Foundation for the Preservation of Jewish Heritage in Poland (FODZ), which was established in 2002 by the Union of Jewish Communities in Poland and the WJRO to protect and commemorate Poland’s Jewish heritage sites.
“These hateful acts are not only antisemitic, but they are also attempts to erase Jewish history and desecrate memory,” said WJRO President Gideon Taylor in a released statement on Tuesday. “Polish authorities must take swift and serious action to identify the perpetrators and ensure the protection of Jewish heritage sites in Dukla and across the country.”
“The vandalism of Jewish sites in Dukla—with swastikas and anti-Israel slurs—is not an isolated act,” insisted Jack Simony, director general of the Auschwitz Jewish Center Foundation (AJCF), in a statement to The Algemeiner. The nonprofit focuses on preserving the memory of the Jewish community in Oświęcim (Auschwitz) and maintains the Auschwitz Jewish Center, the last remaining synagogue in town.
“While we cannot say definitively that it [the vandalism] was sparked by Grzegorz Braun’s Holocaust denial, his rhetoric contributes to an atmosphere where hatred is emboldened and truth is under assault,” added Simony. “Braun’s lies are not harmless — they are dangerous. Holocaust denial fuels antisemitism and, too often, violence. This is why Holocaust education matters … because when we fail to confront lies, we invite their consequences. Memory must be defended, not only for the sake of the past, but for the safety of our future.”
On July 10, a ceremony was held commemorating the 84th anniversary of the 1941 Jedwabne massacre, when hundreds of Polish Jews were massacred – mostly by their neighbors – in the northeastern town in German-occupied Poland. The ceremony was attended by dignitaries and faith leaders including Poland’s Chief Rabbi Michael Schudrich and Israeli Deputy Ambassador Bosmat Baruch. Groups of anti-Israel and far-right activists — including MEP Braun and his supporters – tried to disrupt the event by holding banners with antisemitic slogans and blocking the vehicles of the attendees, according to Polish radio.
Hours later, during a live radio broadcast, Braun falsely claimed the Auschwitz gas chambers were “a lie” and the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum was promoting “pseudo-history.” He also claimed that Jewish “ritual murder is a fact.” Polish prosecutors launched an investigation into Braun’s comments, they announced that same day. Under Article 55 of the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN), Holocaust denial is a criminal offense in Poland.
The Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum issued a swift condemnation of Braun’s remarks and said it intents to pursue legal action. The Institute of National Remembrance — which is the largest research, educational and archival institution in Poland – also denounced Braun’s remarks, saying there is “well-documented” evidence supporting the existence of gas chambers. His comments were also condemned by the Embassy of Israel in Poland, Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski and the US Embassy in Warsaw, which said that his actions “distort history, desecrate memory, or spread antisemitism.” AJCF called on the European Parliament to consider disciplinary measures against Braun, including potential censure or expulsion.
Auschwitz Jewish Center Director Tomek Kuncewicz said Braun’s comments are “an act of violence against truth, against survivors, and against the legacy of our shared humanity.” AJCF Chairman Simon Bergson called the politician’s remarks “blatant and baseless lies,” while Simony described them as “a calculated act of antisemitic incitement” that “must be met with legal consequences and universal moral condemnation.”
The post Jewish Synagogue, Holocaust Memorial Vandalized in Poland After Politician Denies Holocaust first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Coalition of 400 Jewish Orgs and Synagogues Urge Teachers Union to Reverse Decision Cutting Ties with ADL
Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt. Photo Credit: ADL.
Following a vote by the National Education Association (NEA) on July 6 to end its relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), 400 Jewish communal groups, education organizations, and religious institutions have come together to call for the influential teachers union to change course.
“We are writing to express our deep concerns about the growing level of antisemitic activity within teachers’ unions, particularly since the Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023,” the letter to NEA President Becky Pringle stated. “Passage of New Business Item (NBI) 39 at the National Education Association (NEA) Representative Assembly this past weekend, which shockingly calls for the boycott of the Anti-Defamation League, is just the latest example of open hostility toward Jewish educators, students and families coming from national and local teachers’ unions and their members.”
In addition to the ADL, signatories of the letter included American Jewish Committee (AJC), Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Jewish Federations of North America, #EndJewHatred, American Jewish Congress, B’nai B’rith International, CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting & Analysis), Combat Antisemitism Movement, Democratic Majority for Israel, StandWithUs, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Zioness Movement, and Zionist Organization of America (ZOA).
The group told Pringle that “we have heard directly from NEA members who have shared their experiences ranging from explicit and implicit antisemitism within the union to a broader pattern of insensitivity toward legitimate concerns of Jewish members – including at the recently concluded Representative Assembly. We are also deeply troubled by a broader pattern of union activity over the past 20 months that has targeted or alienated Jewish members and the wider Jewish community.”
The letter to Pringle included an addendum providing examples of objectionable rhetoric. These named such incidents as the Oakland Education Association (OEA) putting out a statement calling for “an end to the occupation of Palestine” and the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) accusing Israel of genocide.
The coalition of 400 organizations urged the NEA to “take immediate action” and suggested such steps as rejecting NBI 39, issuing a “strong condemnation” of antisemitism within the union, drafting a plan to counter ongoing antisemitism in affiliate chapters, and opposing “any effort to use an educator’s support for the existence of Israel as a means to attack their identity.”
ADL CEO and National Director Jonathan Greenblatt wrote on X that “Excluding @ADL’s educational resources from schools is not just an attack on our org, but on the entire Jewish community. We urge the @NEAToday Executive Committee to reverse this biased, fringe effort and reaffirm its commitment to supporting all Jewish students and educators.”
The post Coalition of 400 Jewish Orgs and Synagogues Urge Teachers Union to Reverse Decision Cutting Ties with ADL first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Zohran Mamdani Won’t Condemn Calls for Violence Against Jews; Why Are Jewish Leaders Supporting Him?
Zohran Mamdani. Photo: Ron Adar / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
In the wake of Zohran Mamdani’s surge in New York City politics, a disturbing trend has emerged: prominent Jewish leaders are being urged to join “Jews for Zohran,” a newly formed effort to legitimize a candidate whose record and rhetoric are alarmingly out of step with Jewish communal values.
In a city that’s home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel — and where antisemitic incidents are on the rise — this is a profound mistake.
Mamdani has refused to explicitly condemn the slogan “Globalize the Intifada,” which has been widely understood as a call to violence against Jews. His defenders insist it’s a symbolic plea for Palestinian rights. But nuance offers little comfort when the phrase glorifies violent uprisings, and is routinely chanted alongside calls for Israel’s destruction.
Institutions such as the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and watchdogs like StopAntisemitism.org have made it clear: attempts to sanitize violent language must be firmly rejected.
Mamdani’s vocal support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is equally troubling. BDS does not merely critique Israeli policy; it seeks to economically isolate and politically delegitimize the Jewish state. When a candidate stands against the most visible symbol of Jewish survival — Israel — while brushing off violent slogans as misunderstood metaphors, we must ask what message this sends to our communities.
The answer should be clear. Jewish New Yorkers were the targets of over half the city’s reported hate crimes last year. From Crown Heights to Midtown, visible Jews have been harassed, assaulted, and mocked. Mamdani was flagged by national antisemitism monitors in December for promoting material that mocked Hanukkah. This is not abstract. This is personal, present, and dangerous.
Yes, Mamdani has pledged to increase hate crime funding from $3 million to $26 million. But that’s not enough. The Jewish community — especially now — needs more than budgetary gestures. We require moral clarity, as Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel powerfully stated: “Morally speaking, there is no limit to the concern one must feel for the suffering of human beings, that indifference to evil is worse than evil itself….”
Moral clarity demands more than financial promises, it requires principled rejection of rhetoric that endangers Jews. Belonging isn’t forged by slogans; it’s proven through sustained empathy, shared responsibility, and unwavering commitment to safety.
Calls for Jewish leaders to publicly support Mamdani, including those made to officials like Brad Lander and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), aim to provide political cover for a candidate whose worldview clashes with core Jewish values. These aren’t harmless endorsements. They’re symbols. And symbols matter.
Endorsing Mamdani sends a troubling signal: that political convenience or progressive branding outweighs communal safety and historical memory. When Jewish leaders align with someone who flirts with the delegitimization of Jewish statehood and refuses to condemn slogans rooted in violence, they are telling our adversaries that our moral lines are negotiable.
New York’s Jewish community has long been a moral compass in American politics. What happens here echoes across the nation. If our leaders can be cajoled into supporting a candidate like Mamdani, what message does that send to Jews in swing districts, smaller cities, and across college campuses? It normalizes equivocation. It emboldens the fringe. It tells the next generation that Jewish dignity is up for debate.
This is about more than Mamdani. It’s about whether Jewish pride and Jewish safety remain non-negotiable pillars of our political participation. Some have argued that this is simply politics as usual — that strategic alliances are part of coalition-building. But the Jewish people know better than most that what begins as a small compromise can metastasize into a much greater danger.
Former Democratic Councilman Rory Lancman said it best: “If ever there was a time to put principle over party, this is it.” He’s right. And that’s why this moment requires Jewish leaders to speak not just as political actors, but as moral stewards.
Jewish leaders are free to engage with any candidate they choose. But engagement is not endorsement. One can listen, challenge, and debate without aligning oneself publicly with a candidate whose positions cross communal red lines. Outreach does not require complicity.
If Jewish political figures join “Jews for Zohran,” they risk helping mainstream dangerous ideologies. They risk fracturing communal unity even further at a time when Jewish communal unity is our best defense. They risk allowing today’s ambiguity to become tomorrow’s regret.
Jewish history teaches us the cost of silence, of appeasement, and of looking away. We cannot afford those mistakes again — not in this city, not in this era; history is beginning to repeat itself and we cannot allow that to happen.
To every Jewish leader now weighing their public stance: choose principle. Choose safety. Choose the kind of moral leadership our tradition demands; reject the logic of “Jews for Zohran.” The stakes are too high — and the message matters.
Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
The post Zohran Mamdani Won’t Condemn Calls for Violence Against Jews; Why Are Jewish Leaders Supporting Him? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.