Uncategorized
Which side are you on: Jewish American or American Jew?
(JTA) — Earlier this month the New York Times convened what it called a “focus group of Jewish Americans.” I was struck briefly by that phrase — Jewish Americans — in part because the Times, like the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, tends to prefer “American Jews.”
It’s seemingly a distinction without a difference, although I know others might disagree. There is an argument that “American Jew” smacks of disloyalty, describing a Jew who happens to be American. “Jewish American,” according to this thinking, flips the script: an American who happens to be Jewish.
If pressed, I’d say I prefer “American Jew.” The noun “Jew” sounds, to my ear anyway, more direct and more assertive than the tentative adjective “Jewish.” It’s also consistent with the way JTA essentializes “Jew” in its coverage, as in British Jew, French Jew, LGBT Jew or Jew of color.
I wouldn’t have given further thought to the subject if not for a webinar last week given by Arnold Eisen, the chancellor emeritus at the Jewish Theological Seminary. In “Jewish-American, American-Jew: The Complexities and Joys of Living a Hyphenated Identity,” Eisen discussed how a debate over language is really about how Jews navigate between competing identities.
“What does the ‘American’ signify to us?” he asked. “What does the ‘Jewish’ signify and what is the nature of the relationship between the two? Is it a synthesis? Is it a tension, or a contradiction, or is it a blurring of the boundaries such that you can’t tell where one ends and the other begins?”
Questions like these, it turns out, have been asked since Jews and other immigrants first began flooding Ellis Island. Teddy Roosevelt complained in 1915 that “there is no room in this country for hyphenated Americans.” Woodrow Wilson liked to say that “any man who carries a hyphen about with him carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of the Republic.” The two presidents were frankly freaked out about what we now call multiculturalism, convinced that America couldn’t survive a wave of immigrants with dual loyalties.
The two presidents lost the argument, and for much of the 20th century “hyphenated American” was shorthand for successful acculturation. While immigration hardliners continue to question the loyalty of minorities who claim more than one identity, and Donald Trump played with the politics of loyalty in remarks about Mexicans, Muslims and Jews, ethnic pride is as American as, well, St. Patrick’s Day. “I am the proud daughter of Indian immigrants,” former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said in announcing her run for the Republican presidential nomination this month.
For Jews, however, the hyphen became what philosophy professor Berel Lang called “a weighty symbol of the divided life of Diaspora Jewry.” Jewishness isn’t a distant country with quaint customs, but a religion and a portable identity that lives uneasily alongside your nationality. In a 2005 essay, Lang argued that on either side of the hyphen were “vying traditions or allegiances,” with the Jew constantly confronted with a choice between the American side, or assimilation, and the Jewish side, or remaining distinct.
Eisen calls this the “question of Jewish difference.” Eisen grew up in an observant Jewish family in Philadelphia, and understood from an early age that his family was different from their Vietnamese-, Italian-, Ukrainian- and African-American neighbors. On the other hand, they were all the same — that is, American — because they were all hyphenated. “Being parallel to all these other differences, gave me my place in the city and in the country,” he said.
In college he studied the Jewish heavy hitters who were less sanguine about the integration of American and Jewish identities. Eisen calls Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan, the renegade theologian at JTS, “the thinker who really made this question uppermost for American Jews.” Kaplan wrote in 1934 that Jewishness could only survive as a “subordinate civilization” in the United States, and that the “Jew in America will be first and foremost an American, and only secondarily a Jew.”
Kaplan’s prescription was a maximum effort on the part of Jews to “save the otherness of Jewish life” – not just through synagogue, but through a Jewish “civilization” expressed in social relationships, leisure activities and a traditional moral and ethical code.
Of course, Kaplan also understood that there was another way to protect Jewish distinctiveness: move to Israel.
A poster issued by the National Industrial Conservation Movement in 1917 warns that the American war effort might be harmed by a “hyphen of disloyalty,” suggesting immigrants with ties to their homelands were working to aid the enemy. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)
The political scientist Charles Liebman, in “The Ambivalent American Jew” (1973), argued that Jews in the United States were torn between surviving as a distinct ethnic group and integrating into the larger society.
According to Eisen, Liebman believed that “Jews who make ‘Jewish’ the adjective and ‘American’ the noun tend to fall on the integration side of the hyphen. And Jews who make ‘Jew’ the noun and ‘American’ the adjective tend to fall on the survival side of the hyphen.”
Eisen, a professor of Jewish thought at JTS, noted that the challenge of the hyphen was felt by rabbis on opposite ends of the theological spectrum. He cited Eugene Borowitz, the influential Reform rabbi, who suggested in 1973 that Jews in the United States “are actually more Jewish on the inside than they pretend to be on the outside. In other words, we’re so worried about what Liebman called integration into America that we hide our distinctiveness.” Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, the leading Modern Orthodox thinker of his generation, despaired that the United States presented its Jews with an unresolvable conflict between the person of faith and the person of secular culture.
When I read the texts Eisen shared, I see 20th-century Jewish men who doubted Jews who could be fully at home in America and at home with themselves as Jews (let alone as Jews who weren’t straight or white — which would demand a few more hyphens). They couldn’t imagine a rich Jewishness that didn’t exist as a counterculture, the way Cynthia Ozick wondered what it would be like to “think as a Jew” in a non-Jewish language like English.
They couldn’t picture the hyphen as a plus sign, which pulled the words “Jewish” and “American” together.
Recent trends support the skeptics. Look at Judaism’s Conservative movement, whose rabbis are trained at JTS, and which has long tried to reconcile Jewish literacy and observance with the American mainstream. It’s shrinking, losing market share and followers both to Reform – where the American side of the hyphen is ascendant — and to Orthodoxy, where Jewish otherness is booming in places like Brooklyn and Lakewood, New Jersey. And the Jewish “nones” — those opting out of religion, synagogue and active engagement in Jewish institutions and affairs — are among the fastest-growing segments of American Jewish life.
Eisen appears more optimistic about a hyphenated Jewish identity, although he insists that it takes work to cultivate the Jewish side. “I don’t think there’s anything at stake necessarily on which side of the hyphen you put the Jewish on,” he said. “But if you don’t go out of your way to put added weight on the Jewish in the natural course of events, as Kaplan said correctly 100 years ago, the American will win.”
—
The post Which side are you on: Jewish American or American Jew? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Germany Reports ‘New Normal’ of Antisemitism as Islamist and Left-Wing Extremist Networks Fuel Rising Threats
Graffiti reading “Kill all Jews” was discovered on a residential building in Berlin-Pankow on April 26, 2026, part of a wave of antisemitic vandalism reported across the German capital over the past week, including swastikas and other hate-filled slogans scrawled on multiple sites. Photo: Screenshot
Germany is confronting what Jewish leaders describe as a “new normal” of antisemitism, with nearly half of Jewish communities across the country reporting incidents and officials warning that Islamist and left-wing extremist networks are driving a surge in hostility amid ongoing Middle East tensions.
According to a new survey released on Friday by the Central Council of Jews in Germany, 46 of more than 100 Jewish communities nationwide have been targeted in antisemitic incidents, underscoring the growing scale and urgency of the crisis.
Among the most commonly reported incidents were verbal abuse, threatening phone calls, hate speech, property damage, and antisemitic graffiti, with 68 percent of respondents saying they feel “very unsafe.”
“Following the explosive rise in antisemitism after Oct. 7, a ‘new normal’ has emerged,” Central Council President Josef Schuster said in a statement, referring to the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel over two years ago.
“A situation in which Jewish communities require constant protection and antisemitism has become normalized as part of the public sphere,” he continued.
In the wake of the recent war with Iran, 62 percent of respondents said their sense of insecurity has further intensified.
“This finding clearly shows that the war in the Middle East was always just a pretext, never a reason for antisemitic attacks and hate speech in Germany,” Schuster said.
Only 35 percent of respondents reported feeling a sense of solidarity and support from broader society, underscoring a widespread perception of isolation.
Even though religious and communal life continues largely with only minor restrictions in most communities, many Jews increasingly avoid displaying visible signs of their identity in public.
“Things that used to be taken for granted — openly wearing religious symbols, walking carefree to the synagogue — are now often accompanied by caution and more conscious consideration. At the same time, the emotional strain has increased significantly,” said one unnamed survey participant, according to the Central Council.
Amid a sharply deteriorating security climate in Germany, officials warn that surging antisemitism and hostility toward Israel are increasingly being driven by Islamist networks and left-wing extremist groups, with threats against Jewish and Israeli communities intensifying nationwide.
According to a study by the Hessian State Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Islamist and left-wing extremist actors are exploiting the Middle East conflict and rising regional tensions to spread antisemitic rhetoric, contributing to an increase in violence and harassment against Jews and Israelis.
The newly released report warns that such antisemitic narratives have become a central mobilizing force since the Oct. 7 atrocities, shaping public discourse and being used to justify acts of violence and intimidation.
“Antisemitism is no longer an isolated phenomenon, but a cross-cutting issue that connects various extremist groups,” the study notes.
After more than two years of escalation, German officials warn that the threat to Jewish life has risen dramatically, with antisemitic hate speech surging as extremist actors deliberately exploit the war in Gaza for propaganda.
The report points to extremist groups merging anti-imperialist ideology with entrenched antisemitic narratives in their propaganda around the Israel–Hamas war, including claims of a “genocide in Gaza,” depictions of the Jewish state as a “colonial power,” and labels such as “child murderer.”
These narratives are being used to justify violence against Israel and to exploit the humanitarian crisis to increase hostility and advance their agenda.
German Interior Minister Roman Poseck, who commissioned the report, warned of a deteriorating social climate, saying that “antisemitic sentiments are becoming increasingly intolerable, even in public spaces.”
“Antisemitism is one of the greatest threats to our social cohesion – especially from Islamism and the left-wing extremist spectrum,” the German official said in a statement.
“I am deeply ashamed of what Jews in Germany have to endure 80 years after the end of the Second World War,” he continued. “We Germans, in particular, bear a lasting responsibility never to forget what happened.”
According to Germany’s Radicalization Monitoring System and Transfer Platform, 45 percent of Muslims under the age of 40 in the country show an inclination toward Islamism — defined as support for Islamist ideas, preference for Sharia-based principles over the constitutional order, and the presence of antisemitic prejudices.
Among those surveyed, 23.8 percent view an Islamic theocracy as the most desirable form of government.
Even though right-wing extremism may be less normalized in mainstream discourse, the study warns it “remains a danger, as antisemitic prejudices and conspiracy myths continue to be deliberately spread there as well.”
The western German state of Hesse has seen a particularly visible surge in antisemitic expression, with chants such as “Child-murderer Israel,” “From the river to the sea,” and “Resistance is international law” heard at pro-Palestinian demonstrations, across social media, and on university campuses.
The study notes that these narratives act as a unifying thread, bringing together Islamist, left-wing, and right-wing extremists who adopt similar rhetoric to reinforce shared enemies and legitimize violence.
Notably, the German Left Party has repeatedly been at the center of controversy and public outrage over its continued use and promotion of anti-Israel rhetoric, reinforcing a recurring pattern of incidents within its ranks that have sparked allegations of antisemitism.
Last year, the party’s youth wing passed an anti-Israel resolution labeling the world’s lone Jewish state a “colonial and racist state project.”
More recently, Andreas Büttner, the commissioner for antisemitism in the state of Brandenburg in northeastern Germany, resigned from the Left Party, citing a rise in antisemitism within the ranks, relentless personal attacks, and a party climate that has become intolerable.
Beyond extremist circles, the report also points to antisemitism extending across segments of society, finding resonance in mainstream discourse where it is often disguised as legitimate criticism of Israel.
“This is shifting the boundaries of what society considers acceptable, normalizing antisemitic thinking while trivializing, legitimizing, and in some cases even glorifying violence against Jews,” the study says.
Earlier this month, the Hesse government introduced new legislation that would criminalize denying Israel’s right to exist, as authorities move to confront a surge in anti-Israel demonstrations and a growing tide of antisemitic rhetoric and attacks that have intensified pressure on Jewish communities across the country.
The proposed legislation would close what officials describe as a legal loophole by explicitly criminalizing the denial of Israel’s right to exist, with penalties of up to five years in prison or a fine, aligning it with existing provisions that punish Holocaust denial.
Uncategorized
Hasan Piker Campaigns With Pennsylvania Democrat as Star Rises Despite Antisemitism Controversies
Hasan Piker. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Tensions in Philadelphia intensified this week after Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb, a Democrat running for US Congress, appeared on a livestream hosted by far-left commentator Hasan Piker, drawing criticism from political opponents and some Jewish community leaders over Piker’s expressed hostility toward Israel and support for foreign terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
Rabb, who is seeking the Democratic nomination in Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District, joined Piker’s widely watched online broadcast as part of an effort to reach younger, digitally engaged voters. The district, a safely Democratic seat centered in Philadelphia, is expected to be decided in the primary, where Rabb faces a competitive field that includes state Sen. Sharif Street and physician Ala Stanford.
Piker arrived in Philadelphia from Los Angeles to help Rabb fundraise for the campaign and joined him for a rally. While talking with Piker on the livestream, Rabb addressed backlash over his decision to meet with the streamer, dismissing his critics as being motivated by racial animus.
“I’m going to be slammed for even talking to you,” Rabb told Piker. “But there’s a double standard, because as a Black progressive, I can’t do this. I’m part of the problem or whatever.”
During the livestream, Rabb discussed progressive policy priorities and his campaign message. But the appearance quickly became a flashpoint in the race, as critics pointed to Piker’s history of inflammatory comments.
“Hasan Piker has a documented record of statements that we find deeply troubling,” said Jason Holtzman, chief of the Jewish Community Relations Council at the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia. “He dismissed the sexual violence of [Hamas’s attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023]. He called Orthodox Jews ‘inbred.’ He compared Zionists to Nazis. He characterized Hamas as preferable to the state of Israel.”
Holtzman added, “These are not edgy opinions. They are statements that minimize Jewish suffering, dehumanize Jewish people, and normalize violence against Jews and the Jewish state.”
Since entering the race, Rabb has attempted to establish the Israel-Hamas conflict as a central feature of the competition. He has lambasted his opponents for stopping short of accusing Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza and has repeatedly pressed other Democrats on where they stand on the conflict.
Ala Stanford, an establishment Democrat who is widely considered the favorite in the race, has refused to accuse Israel of “genocide” and has stated that such accusations are harmful to the local Jewish community.
Piker, a prominent left-wing streamer with a large following on platforms like Twitch, has previously drawn backlash for rhetoric which critics say crosses into antisemitism. In addition to repeatedly praising Hamas, he has even said “it doesn’t matter” if sexual assault took place during the terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.
This week, US Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Mike Lawler (R-NY) introduced a bipartisan resolution that condemns “antisemitic, hate-filled rhetoric and content” promoted by Piker and podcaster Candace Owens.
Piker has denied accusations of antisemitism.
“They are once again conflating legitimate critics of Israel with actual antisemites,” he told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) in response to this week’s resolution in Congress. “They would rather complain about fake antisemitism in defense of Israel than call out the real sources of Jew hatred with a full chest. I have spent my entire career combating all forms of bigotry including antisemitism and will continue to do so in spite [of] this cynical ploy to satisfy donors.”
Most recently, Piker has come under fire for praising Graham Platner, the presumptive Democratic nominee for US Senate in Maine, for previous Reddit comments in which he complimented Hamas.
During Thursday’s rally in Philadelphia, Piker urged the crowd to help Rabb secure the congressional seat instead of a “do nothing Democrat” who would not accuse Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza.
The controversy underscores how the Israel-Hamas conflict has become a defining issue in Democratic primaries across the country, exposing deep divisions within the party. In Philadelphia, where there is a significant Jewish population, candidates have faced increasing scrutiny over their positions and associations. However, the district, which is disproportionately Black and lower income, is unlikely to be heavily swayed by the conflict in Gaza when considering their vote.
Rabb’s campaign defended Piker’s appearance, framing it as an effort to broaden political participation and engage younger voters who consume news and commentary online rather than through traditional media outlets.
Further, the episode highlights a broader shift in campaign strategy, as candidates increasingly turn to digital influencers to expand their reach. But it also illustrates the risks of entering highly polarized online spaces, where associations can quickly become liabilities.
Over the past few weeks, Piker has traversed across the country, appearing alongside a litany of rising progressive stars during fundraisers and rallies. Recently, he appeared at the University of Michigan alongside the controversial Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. Similar to Rabb, El-Sayed has accused Israel of “genocide” in Gaza. The Senate candidate has also come under criticism for seemingly sympathizing with a Hezbollah-linked terrorist who attempted to attack a Michigan synagogue in March.
Uncategorized
New Report Exposes Docters Without Borders for Pursuing Anti-Israel Activism
A Palestinian woman helps a burn victim, Maria Abu Aawad, at a Doctors Without Borders (MSF) hospital in Zawaida, in the central Gaza Strip, Jan. 26, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
A new report is raising questions about whether one of the world’s most prominent humanitarian organizations has crossed the line from medical advocacy into political campaigning in its approach to Israel and the war in Gaza.
The analysis — published by NGO Monitor, an independent Jerusalem-based watchdog group that monitors nongovernmental organizations — scrutinizes the statements and activities of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), also known as Doctors Without Borders, following the Palestinian terrorist group’s Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza.
“Despite the slaughter of over 1,200 people, the injuries to thousands, and the kidnapping of over 250 hostages into Gaza [during Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities], MSF’s public communications and almost daily updates immediately pivoted to a singular focus on condemning Israel’s response,” the report says.
NGO Monitor also points to a December 2023 finding by former MSF Secretary General Alain Destexhe, who found that many MSF employees celebrated Hamas’s brutal incursion into Israel, contending that “over 40 percent of statements by staff, including senior figures, praised Hamas and the attacks.”
Destexhe warned last year that “MSF is no longer neutral; its humanitarian language now serves a political cause.”
According to NGO Monitor’s report, MSF, which purports to be a neutral provider of emergency medical care, has increasingly adopted language and positions that align with political advocacy, including accusations that Israel is committing “genocide” in Gaza. NGO Monitor argues that such claims are not supported by verified evidence and risk distorting the realities of a complex and ongoing conflict.
The report contends that MSF’s public messaging has relied on incomplete or unverified information while omitting key context, including the role of Hamas in embedding military infrastructure within civilian areas such as hospitals and residential neighborhoods. Israel has repeatedly cited these conditions as a central challenge in its efforts to target terrorist networks while minimizing civilian harm.
Further, the report accuses the MSF of “systematically omitting essential details and context” such as “the basic military requirements faced by Israel for neutralizing a terror organization with a massive underground tunnel network embedded in civilian infrastructure, and in which hostages were hidden.”
Critics highlighted in the report say that by failing to acknowledge these dynamics, MSF presents a one-sided narrative that could mislead policymakers, media organizations, and international institutions. The watchdog group further argues that statements from globally recognized NGOs carry significant weight and can influence legal proceedings and diplomatic pressure against Israel.
The report criticizes the MSF for asserting that Israel’s military tactics are tantamount to “death sentences,” claiming that the humanitarian organization “sought to leverage its influence” on world leaders” to pressure them to curtail supposed “indiscriminate violence unleashed on a helpless people.”
NGO Monitor also raises concerns about accountability within large humanitarian organizations, calling for greater transparency in how public claims are verified and communicated. It suggests that NGOs operating in conflict zones must maintain strict standards of neutrality to preserve credibility and avoid contributing to misinformation.
MSF has repeatedly defended its work in Gaza, emphasizing the dire humanitarian conditions and the urgency of medical needs on the ground. The organization maintains that its statements are based on firsthand observations by its staff and reflect the severity of the crisis facing civilians.
The report came out two months after Doctors Without Borders publicly acknowledged that armed individuals — many of them masked — were present inside the large compound of Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza, citing intimidation of patients, arbitrary arrests, and suspected weapons movement as reasons for halting some of its work there.
The admission, buried in a rarely referenced FAQ page on the group’s website, lends factual support to claims long asserted by Israeli authorities about the use of medical facilities by Hamas and allied terrorists during the conflict in Gaza.
Last year, NGO Monitor obtained documents revealing that Hamas has long run a coordinated effort to penetrate and influence NGOs in the war-torn enclave — contradicting years of denials from major humanitarian organizations.
The study showed how Hamas has for years systematically weaponized humanitarian aid in Gaza, tightening its grip over foreign NGOs operating in the territory and exposing patterns of complicity and collaboration that contradict the groups’ persistent denials.
According to the documents, Hamas officials designated specific points of contact with “highly respected” international NGOs, including Doctors Without Borders and several others.