Uncategorized
What I learned about antisemitism from a remarkable new archive about Jewish Civil War soldiers
(JTA) — Max Glass, a recent immigrant from Hungary, had an unhappy Civil War.
Tricked out of his enlistment bonus when he joined the Eighth Connecticut Infantry — recent arrivals were soft touches for scam artists — Glass was then “abused for reason [sic] that I never understand” by men in his regiment. “It may have been,” he speculated,
becaus I did not make them my companions in drinking, or as I am a Jew. If I went in the street or any wher I was called Jew. Christh Killer & such names. I also had stones, dirt thrown at me.
He complained to his commanding officer, begging to be transferred, because “no man that had feeling could stand such treatment,” but to no avail. Finally, Glass fled his regiment, hoping to receive better treatment if he enlisted in the Navy. Instead he was tried as a deserter and sentenced to hard labor.
Glass was not the only Jewish soldier to be cruelly mistreated when serving in the Union Army. But as the new Shapell Roster of Jewish Service in the Civil War demonstrates, his experience was far from typical.
I explored the Shapell Roster while working on my new book, on the experience of Jewish soldiers in the Union army. What I learned from the vast collection of documents and data was that indifference, benign curiosity and comradeship appear to have been much more common than conflict for the majority of Jewish soldiers in the Union army.
For every Max Glass there was a Louis Gratz. Born in Posen, Prussia, Gratz scraped by as a peddler before the war. Enlisting in April 1861 — just days after the war started — he took to military life. By August he had become an officer. As he proudly wrote to his family,
I have now become a respected man in a respected position, one filled by very few Jews. I have been sent by my general to enlist new recruits so I am today in Scranton, a city in Pennsylvania only twenty miles from Carbondale, where I had peddled before. Before this no one paid any attention to me here; now I move in the best and richest circles and am treated with utmost consideration by Jews and Christians.
In contrast to Max Glass, his letters whisper not a word about prejudice. As my new book on the experience of Jewish soldiers in the Union army demonstrates, Gratz’s experience was not unusual.
Max Glass ultimately escaped his sorry start in the army through the intercession of General Benjamin Butler. After reading Glass’ tale of woe, the general pardoned the hapless Hungarian. In doing so, Butler seemingly followed Abraham Lincoln’s lead when confronted by antisemitism within the Union army. The president, after all, had quickly countermanded Ulysses S. Grant’s General Orders Number 11 expelling Jews from the districts under his command, the “most notorious anti-Jewish official order in American history,”
But alas this story does not have a redemptive ending. Beyond the rank and file, Jews felt the sting of prejudice. The damage done in wartime left a legacy of antisemitism that continues to this day.
For even as General Butler was pardoning Max Glass, he was locked in a heated public exchange that reveals how wartime warped attitudes towards Jews. The imbroglio began when Butler took special note of the fact that a small group of smugglers, recently detained by the Union army, were Jewish. When challenged, the combative general refused to apologize. Instead, he countered that deceit and disloyalty were among the defining characteristics of Jews, and that avarice was a particularly Jewish avocation. According to his logic, Jews could never become loyal Americans because they preferred profit to patriotism.
An 1877 cartoon from the satirical newspaper Puck illustrates the antisemitic practices of the Grand Union Hotel in Saratoga, New York. The cartoon compares the corrupt gentile clients favored by the hotel, center, with respectable (albeit stereotypical) Jewish figures, including Jesus. (Library of Congress)
Butler’s corrosive claims reflected a steady drip of acid on the home-front that began in 1861. In the first year of the war, Jews felt the sting of prejudice as the “shoddy” scandals captured the public imagination. Military contractors were publicly accused of fleecing the army by supplying substandard uniforms and gear, even as soldiers shivered in the field for want of decent clothing.
In seeking to explain the profiteering and corruption that attended the rush to war, the press summoned the specter of the venal and disloyal Jew. Cartoonists delighted in identifying Jews as the archetypal cunning contractors, who not only refused to enlist but also actively undermined the war effort. Jews were also imagined as the speculators who profited at the expense of the common good and as smugglers who traded with the enemy. Butler, in other words, was drawing on calumnies that became common currency during wartime.
The contractor, smuggler, speculator and shirker, however, were more than just figures of scorn. Jews and other “shoddy aristocrats” came to be seen as the creators and beneficiaries of the new economic and social order produced by the war. This “shoddy aristocracy” — whose morals and manners marked them as undesirable, whose profits were ill gained, and whose power derived from money alone — was imagined to lord it over a new and unjust social heap summoned into being by the chaos and disruption of war.
Even as the heated rhetoric of the war years receded after 1865, these ideas remained primed for action. They were returned to service in the Gilded Age.
It was no coincidence that the episode traditionally identified as initiating modern antisemitism in America — the exclusion of Joseph Seligman by Henry Hilton from the Grand Union Hotel in Saratoga Springs on May 31, 1877 — had at its center a man who had made a fortune as a contractor and banker during the Civil War. Seligman, a friend of President Grant, was viewed as an exemplar of the new capitalism that was remaking America.
Henry Hilton slandered Seligman as “shoddy—false—squeezing—unmanly,” a social climber who “has to push himself upon the polite.” Hilton drew upon themes familiar from wartime antisemitism: the Jew as speculator who trafficked in credit and debt; the Jew as obsequious ingratiator who attached himself to the powerful; the Jew as profiteer who advanced by improper means; the Jew as vulgarian who flaunted his (and her) obscene wealth and did not know his (or her) place; and the Jew as overlord whose money allowed him (or her) to displace others. In short, the “Seligman Jew” was the “shoddy aristocrat” by another name.
In an age of inequality and excess, the antisemite imagined the Jew as embodying all that was wrong with American capitalism. And during an age of mass immigration from Romania and the Russian Empire, they soon added another theme familiar from General Butler’s wartime diatribe: The Jew could not be trusted to become fully American.
Sadly, even as Louis Gratz, Max Glass and many other Jewish soldiers became American by serving in the Union army, the Civil War produced a range of pernicious ideas about Jews that have proven remarkably durable. We have escaped the everyday torments that afflicted Max Glass, but are still haunted in the present by the fantasies of Benjamin Butler and Henry Hilton.
—
The post What I learned about antisemitism from a remarkable new archive about Jewish Civil War soldiers appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Erdogan Names Prosecutor Who Led Opposition Crackdown as Turkey Justice Minister
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan speaks during a ceremony for the handover of new vehicles to the gendarmerie and police forces in Istanbul, Turkey, Nov. 28, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Murad Sezer
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan appointed as his new justice minister Akin Gurlek, the Istanbul chief prosecutor behind the unprecedented crackdown on the main opposition party, drawing fierce criticism and defiance from the party on Wednesday.
Since his appointment as chief prosecutor in 2024, Gurlek has overseen a wave of arrests and indictments targeting the Republican People’s Party (CHP), including investigations into the Istanbul mayor, Ekrem Imamoglu, Erdogan‘s main political rival who has been jailed since his arrest in March last year.
In a 4,000-page indictment last November, Gurlek demanded a prison sentence of more than 2,000 years for Imamoglu for allegedly leading a vast corruption network, sparking Turkey‘s largest street protests in a decade.
The first hearing in that case, accusing hundreds of defendants linked to the Istanbul municipality of corruption and bribery, will be held next month.
A scuffle broke out in Turkey‘s parliament ahead of Gurlek’s swearing-in after opposition lawmakers protested against his appointment.
Main opposition CHP deputies gathered around the speaker’s podium to block Gurlek, calling his nomination “an attack on the rule of law.” TV footage showed lawmakers pushing and throwing punches and ruling AK Party lawmakers forming a protective ring around Gurlek as he read his oath.
FIRST CABINET SHUFFLE SINCE 2023 VOTE
In the first cabinet shuffle since mid-2023 elections, Gurlek replaced Yilmaz Tunc, who was first elected as a member of parliament in 2007.
The Official Gazette announcement also said that Erdogan had appointed Erzurum provincial governor Mustafa Ciftci as interior minister, replacing Ali Yerlikaya, who was the Istanbul governor before his appointment as minister.
A reason for the shuffle was not given.
Hundreds of party members and elected officials have been detained in Gurlek’s crackdown, which has been criticized as anti-democratic and politicized by opposition parties, rights groups and some foreign leaders – claims the government denies, saying the judiciary is independent.
CHP leader Ozgur Ozel said Gurlek’s cabinet appointment continued a “judicial coup attempt” while he was prosecutor and amounted to the latest step in a major attack on his party.
“We will not surrender… They cannot stop our march to power,” Ozel told reporters at a memorial ceremony for a former party leader, adding that there was no fair political competition left.
Uncategorized
France to Increase Visas for Iranian Seeking Refuge Amid Crackdown, Minister Says
French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noel Barrot holds a press conference at the Pine Residence, the official residence of the French ambassador to Lebanon, in Beirut, Lebanon, Feb. 6, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
France will increase the number of visas for Iranians seeking asylum as a result of the recent crackdown by Iranian authorities, Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Wednesday.
Speaking in parliament, Barrot said Paris wanted to support the Iranian people by any means possible.
“In particular by welcoming opponents persecuted by the regime who are seeking asylum and refuge in France. We will increase our humanitarian visas for asylum purposes for these individuals whom we must protect,” he said.
Uncategorized
How Social Media Got Hamas Casualty Figures Wrong
A Palestinian man points a weapon in the air after it was announced that Israel and Hamas agreed on the first phase of a Gaza ceasefire, in the central Gaza Strip, October 9. Photo: REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
As the Israel-Hamas ceasefire continues to hold, many analysts have begun examining available data to better understand Hamas’ casualties throughout the war. This is no easy feat, considering Hamas has consistently lied and inflated the civilian casualty figures. The reality of urban warfare provides other challenges for the IDF to count every eliminated terrorist.
Varying numbers regarding Hamas’ casualty figures have been recently touted on social media. But many of them lack sources, or a breakdown of the statistics.
Conversely, some analysts, such as HonestReporting board member Salo Aizenberg, have done an exceptional job at critically analyzing the available casualty numbers.
The Hamas-run Ministry of Health has reported over 70,000 deaths in Gaza, including civilians.
But closer examination of these numbers displays that it also includes an estimated 22,000-25,000 Hamas fighters, around 11,000 natural deaths, and 4,000 casualties caused by internal fighting amongst Gazans. With 1,000 deaths attributed to reporting errors, this suggests that 25,000 casualties were terrorists, and 36,000 were civilians.
One suggestion that has gained momentum on social media suggests that the actual number of Hamas casualties is double this number, at 50,000 combatant deaths.
However, pre-war estimates by the IDF suggest that Hamas had 35,000 combatants. US estimates believe that Hamas recruited 10,000-15,000 new combatants throughout the war. This means that if the IDF had killed 50,000 Hamas terrorists, there would be virtually no Hamas terrorists left — an analysis that is unfortunately not accurate.
Hamas had an estimated 50K combatants during the war (35K pre-war + 15K recruits). It is thus impossible that 50K have been killed. The best estimate remains about 25K combatants from all groups killed. The ME24 report misinterpreted what Hamas announced. https://t.co/LID34TpYAP
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) February 9, 2026
The claim of 50,000 eliminated Hamas terrorists is based on an announcement by the Hamas-run Ministry of Social Development of the start of a new program that would provide NIS 500 to the widows of Gazans killed in the war.
By February 8, 2026, payments had been made to 19,306 widows, totaling NIS 9.653 million or over three million US dollars.
This claim, which is about a new Hamas-run Ministry of Social Development program is untrue on multiple levels — on figures, characterization, and comparison with the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry’s death toll. Short
to explain: https://t.co/KrAYiFvvBK
— Gabriel Epstein (@GabrielEpsteinX) February 8, 2026
The Ministry of Social Development further stated that 50,000 widowed families were set to receive these benefits, implying that more than widowed wives would be receiving the payments. This is likely where some analysts misinterpreted Hamas’ statement and took it to mean that for every Hamas terrorist, one wife would receive a payment. However, this payment is not exclusively for the wives of terrorists, and not every Hamas combatant would have been married by the time of his death.
What these numbers do suggest, however, is that claims of unreported casualties are likely to be false. The ability to receive a payment for reporting a death would presumably encourage many Gazans to submit claims of being widowed.
Since the early days of the war, news outlets and influencers on social media have blindly repeated Hamas’ claim that the majority of casualties were women and children. The claim implied that the IDF was specifically targeting both groups.
Beyond this claim not being true — men of combat age account for around 46.7% of total casualties — data from the World Health Organization (WHO) displays that 603,000 children under the age of 10 were vaccinated at the beginning of 2025. This number exceeds the pre-war population of that age group, indicating that the overall population of young children has remained stable or even grown despite the war.
The WHO—not Hamas or Israel—delivered one of the most decisive Gaza war data points. It reported 603,000 children under 10 vaccinated in early 2025—MORE than the pre-war population of that age group! Every claim of excessive or undercounted fatalities collapses with this data. pic.twitter.com/HmfRJuY1zT
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) January 21, 2026
With births being the same as, if not higher than, pre-war numbers, the claims of underreported casualties and casualties disproportionately targeting children fall apart. Despite this data being publicly available and offering important information about the war’s human toll, it has received no attention in media coverage, allowing the misleading child casualty narrative to persist.
These two case studies of terrorist casualty statistics and the reported number of children under 10 during the war highlight the need to analyze all available data with scrutiny. It is not enough to rely on unverified claims about casualty figures. Instead, accurate conclusions must be based on transparent analysis conducted by credible analysts who rely on publicly available data, verifiable sources, and clear methodology. Only through rigorous examination can casualty figures be properly understood, rather than simply repeated without question.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.