Connect with us

Uncategorized

A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’ 

(JTA) — Magda Teter’s new book, “Christian Supremacy,” begins in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Aug. 11, 2017. Hundreds of white nationalist neo-Nazis who ostensibly gathered to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee from a local park broke into a chant: “Jews will not replace us.”

Other writers and scholars would note how antisemitism shaped white nationalism. But Teter, professor of history and the Shvidler Chair of Judaic Studies at Fordham University, saw something else: how centuries of Christian thought and practice fed the twin evils of antisemitism and racism.

“The ideology espoused by white supremacists in the US and in Europe is rooted in Christian ideas of social and religious hierarchy,” she writes. “These ideas developed, gradually, first in the Mediterranean and Europe in respect to Jews and then in respect to people of color in European colonies and in the US, before returning transformed back to Europe.”

In the book, subtitled “Reckoning with the Roots of Antisemitism and Racism,” she traces this idea from the writings of the early church fathers like Paul the Apostle, though centuries of Catholic and Protestant debates over the status of Jews in Europe, to the hardening of racist attitudes with the rise of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. 

Antisemitic laws and theology, she argues, developed within Christianity a “mental habit” of exclusion and dominance that would eventually be applied to people of color up to and including modern times.

Teter is careful to acknowledge the different forms antisemitism and racism have taken, distinguishing between the Jews’ experience of social and legal exclusion and near annihilation, and the enslavement, displacement and ongoing persecution of Black people. And yet, she writes, “that story began with Christianity’s theological relation with Jews and Judaism.”

Teter is previously the author of Blood Libel: On The Trail of an Antisemitic Myth,” winner of the 2020 National Jewish Book Award. At Fordham, the Catholic university in the Bronx, she is helping assemble what may be the largest repository of artifacts and literature dedicated to the Jewish history of the borough.

We spoke Thursday about how groups like the Proud Boys embrace centuries-old notions of Christian superiority, how “whiteness” became a thing and how she, as a non-Jew raised in Poland, became a Jewish studies scholar.

Our conversation was edited for length and clarity. 

Your book was conceived and written during the COVID lockdown. Where did the idea for the book come from? 

It’s an accidental project. I’ve been teaching the history of antisemitism for years, and I live in Harlem so questions of race and racism are very stark in my daily life. And since I grew up in Poland, and American history was not something we were taught or studied, I’ve never been satisfied with the various explanations for the strength of antisemitism and history of racism. And as I mentioned in my prologue, I watched the Raoul Peck documentary, “I Am Not Your Negro,” which has a clip with James Baldwin saying that white people have to figure out why they invented the idea of the N-word and must “embrace this stranger that they have maligned so long.” You could also say that the European Christians created the idea of “the Jew” and that sort of caricature had absolutely nothing to do with flesh and blood Jews. I kept noticing these parallels, as an outsider, reading American and African-American history. 

I was also thinking about this idea of servitude that was attached to Jews in Christian theology, and then in law. 

You write in your book that “Over time, white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” What do you mean by servitude in this context?

In Christian theology, from the earliest Christian texts, the idea of servitude and slavery is attached to the concept of Jews and Judaism. Paul does it in his Epistles. He uses this quote from the book of Genesis that “the elder shall serve the younger,” which becomes really embedded in Christian theology. It is the Jews, the elder people, who should serve the Christians, the younger people. Later on in medieval theology and canon law, Jews are in a servile position, consigned for their sin of rejecting Jesus to perpetual servitude. So even though Jews were free people and could live mostly where they wanted to live, marry whoever they wanted to marry — nobody was sold and some even had slaves — that idea of Jews as confined to perpetual servitude to Christians created a habit of thinking of Jews as having an inferior social status. 

That language became secularized in modern times, and we see the development of the [antisemitic] trope of Jewish power: that they are in places where they shouldn’t be. I worked on fleshing out the parallels between the idea and then legal status of Jewish servitude and the conceptual perception of Black people in servile and inferior positions.

Magda Teter’s new book explores how “white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” (Chuck Fishman)

What other kinds of parallels did you find between racism and antisemitism?

In the Christian theology, Black people, like Jews, will be seen as cursed by God. Jews were [portrayed as] lazy because they didn’t work physically — they made money and exploited Christians. Black people were [portrayed as] lazy because they were trying to avoid physical labor at the expense of white men. Both people were seen as carnal, both as sexually dangerous, and so on.

I was struck by the fact that the racist turn of Christian supremacy — justifying the enslavement of Black people on theological grounds — is a fairly late development, taking hold in the early modern period when Europeans established slaveholding empires. 

That’s right. In the summer of 2020, the summer of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter, we were all thinking about these issues of race and racism and America. And as I was in the middle of writing the article that became the book, I felt that there was a deeper history that needed to be told, and that slavery is not bound by color until the enslavement of Black Africans by Europeans during the colonial expansion of Europe.

After the French Revolution, when Jews were offered “emancipation” in much of Europe, there were deep debates about whether they could be citizens and be entitled to the same rights and protections as Christian citizens of France and England and other countries. How was that debate informed by Christianity?

In pre-modern Europe, there was obviously both a religious and legal framework under which Jews existed. They had their place in a social hierarchy. After the French Revolution, people are creating a new political reality. The idea of equality obviously challenged the social hierarchies that existed, including the idea that Christians were the superior religion. And that begins to play a role on two levels. One is the level of, well, “how can you be equal and be our judges and make decisions about us?” It’s fear of power — political power and political equality. That challenges the habit of thinking that sees Jews as inferior, in servitude and otherwise insolent and arrogant.

The other level comes from Enlightenment scholars who begin to place Jews in the Middle East and in the Holy Land, in Palestine. Jews are no longer seen as European. They are seen as “Oriental,” and they are compared to the non-European religions and practices that these Enlightenment scholars have been studying. Their differences are now also racialized. “They are not like us, they can’t assimilate. They can never be Frenchmen, they can never be Germans.”

And I guess it’s a short step from that to regarding people with dark skin as inferior and subordinate. 

That’s right. Enlightenment scholars are also trying to to understand why it is justified to enslave Black Africans and they do it through “scientific” and other means. They classify Africans as inferior intellectually and they create this idea of race.

I began to think about these European politicians and intellectuals in terms of creating their identities, and what I ended up arguing is what we saw in Charlottesville, what we’re seeing in Europe. It’s not necessarily just about hate, but it’s about exclusion and rejection of Jews and people of color from equality, from citizenship. 

And the common thread here is that whiteness and Christianity become inseparable. You write that “freedom and liberty now came to be linked not only to Christianity, but to whiteness, and servitude and enslavement to blackness.”

That’s right. White Christian “liberty” becomes embedded and embodied in law.

Did you see any pitfalls in drawing parallels between the Black and Jewish experiences? I am thinking of those in either community who might say, “How dare you compare our suffering to theirs!” 

Yes, I was tempered. I think what some call “comparative victimhood” has paralyzed conversations about this subject, and I kept it in my mind all the time. What I hope comes through is that there’s incredible value in a comparative approach. Coming from Jewish studies as my primary field, the comparison with the Black experience gave me clarity on the nature of antisemitism as well as on the nature of the Jewish experience, and vice versa: The Jewish experience can also give clarity to some of the aspects of anti-Black racism. 

What’s an example?

So, for instance, questions like, “Are Jews white? Are they not white? When did they become white?” That’s a whole genre of scholarship. And when you look at it through the lens of law and ideology, you begin to see that from a legal perspective, Jews were considered white in the United States because they could immigrate and they could be naturalized according to law. They did not have to go to court to become American. Their rights to vote were not challenged. There was discrimination, they couldn’t stay in hotels and in some places they couldn’t find employment, but by law, they were considered citizens. The debate about the whiteness of Jews is creating a fog of misunderstanding. 

Black Americans were targeted by specific legal statutes from the very beginning in the Constitution and then in naturalization law and so on. And then there was the backlash even after the Civil War to the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments [aimed at establishing political equality for Americans of all races]. 

Statues at the Strasbourg Cathedral depict Ecclesia and Synagoga, representing the triumph of the church, at left, and the servitude of Judaism, which is represented by a blindfolded figure, drooping and carrying a broken lance. (Edelseider/Wikimedia Commons)

How much do modern-day white supremacists, like the Oath Keepers or the Proud Boys, see themselves as Christian? Or is this a kind of white supremacy that doesn’t name itself Christian but doesn’t even realize how many of its ideas are based in theology?

I think they might not be conscious of this legacy, but neo-Nazis take from the legacy of the Nazis who themselves were not thinking of themselves as Christian necessarily. But what I argue in the book is that white Christian supremacy becomes white supremacy. It never discards the Christian sense of domination and superiority that emerges from its early relationship with Jews and Judaism. 

In the United States, Black people serve as contrast figures to whiteness, in the law and in the culture. You cannot have whiteness without Blackness. For Christians, Jews serve as that contrast figure. Consciously or unconsciously, the Proud Boys are embracing that. They talk of “God-given” freedoms for white people. That is the Christian legacy.

You said that the Nazis didn’t necessarily see themselves as a Christian movement. But I must ask, even though it is not the scope of your book, was the Holocaust a culmination of white Christian supremacy? Because I think many Christian theologians would want to say that Nazism was godless, and a perversion of the true faith.

I’ll say that when exclusionary ideology is coupled with the power of the state, that’s where it can lead. 

In the years since the Holocaust especially, there have been many efforts by Christian leaders to address the ideological failings of the past. You write about Nostra Aetate, the 1965 declaration by the Catholic Church absolving Jews of collective guilt in the death of Jesus and some Protestant documents of contrition. But I got the feeling you were disappointed that many denominations haven’t gone far enough in reckoning with the past.

There was a sort of a moral sense that something needs to be addressed after the Holocaust. But then it is not fully addressed. I don’t think anybody has addressed the issue of power — the roots of hate, yes, but not the dynamics of power. We’ll see where the book goes, but maybe theologians will begin to grapple with this legacy of superiority and domination, and the way hierarchical habits of thinking have been developed through theology and through religious culture.

What other impact do you hope the book may have?

White supremacy is very much in the air. We need to speak up against it, and make connections and allyships. I hope that maybe because the book deals with law and power, it may create bridges among people who care about “We the People” as a vision of people who are diverse, respectful and equal, and not the exclusionary vision offered by white and Christian supremacy.

A cross burns at a Ku Klux Klan rally on Aug. 8, 1925. (National Photo Company Collection)

I’d love to talk about your background. You’re not Jewish but you are chair of Jewish Studies at Fordham, a Catholic university. What drew you to the study of Judaism and the Jews?

I grew up in Poland with a father who from the time I was a little girl would point out to me that there had been Jews in Poland. We would drive through the countryside, and he’d say, “This used to be a Jewish town and there used to be a synagogue and there was the Jewish cemetery.” I grew up being very conscious of the past’s presence and this kind of stark absence of Jews in Poland, where in the 1970s when I grew up Jewish history was taboo. 

As soon as Jewish books on Jewish subjects began to be published, including those that dealt with antisemitism, we would read it together. We would talk about it. He wouldn’t just shift the destruction and murder of Jews in Poland on to the Nazis.

There was no Jewish studies program in Poland when I was applying to universities, so I studied Hebrew in Israel, and then studied Yiddish in New York at YIVO. I came to Columbia University to get my PhD in Jewish history and my career went in the direction it did. I was a professor of history and director of the Jewish and Israel studies program at Wesleyan University. I came to Fordham eight years ago and created a program in Jewish studies.

Your previous book was about the blood libel, the historic canard that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood. This one’s about antisemitism. I don’t want to presume, but is your interest in these subjects in any way an act of contrition?

I grew up in a very secular household. I did not grow up Catholic. But I think growing up in Poland made me very, very aware of antisemitism and the history of antisemitism. I got my PhD from Columbia University in Jewish history, which did not emphasize Jewish suffering, but Jewish life, and I have studied Jewish life and teach about Jewish life — not just about Jewish suffering. 

However, in the last few years, antisemitism has certainly been on the minds of many of us. I also am committed to the idea of shared history, and therefore all my scholarship, as much as it is about Jews, it is also about the church and Poland and the law. Jews are an integral part of that history and culture. And, as such, I’m committed to that, to teaching about the vibrancy of Jewish life as much as the dynamics of what made that life difficult over the centuries.


The post A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’  appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

US May Ask Israel to Put Palestinian Tax Money Toward Trump’s Gaza Plan, Sources Say

US President Donald Trump takes part in a charter announcement for his Board of Peace initiative aimed at resolving global conflicts, alongside the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF), in Davos, Switzerland, Jan. 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse

The US is considering asking Israel to give some tax money it is withholding from the Palestinian Authority to Donald Trump’s Board of Peace to fund the US president’s post-war plan for Gaza, five sources familiar with the matter said.

The Trump administration has not yet decided whether to make a formal request to Israel, said three of the sources, officials with knowledge of US deliberations with Israel.

The two other sources, Palestinians with knowledge of the deliberations, said that under the proposal a portion of the tax money would go to a US-backed transitional government for Gaza and other funds to the PA if it makes reforms.

The PA puts the amount of tax being withheld at $5 billion.

The prospect of the Palestinians’ own tax money being repurposed toward Trump’s Gaza rebuilding plan, over which their government has had no input, could further sideline the Western-backed PA even as Israel‘s withholding of the funds begets a financial crisis in the West Bank.

The PA exercises limited self-rule in the West Bank but has not had any sway over Gaza since it was exiled from the territory after a brief civil war with terrorist group Hamas in 2007.

Trump’s plan for Gaza, shattered after more than two years of war, has been held up by a refusal by Hamas to lay down their weapons.

MONEY HELD IN A BANK DOES NOTHING’

The Board of Peace declined to comment on whether a proposal to use Palestinian tax money was under consideration.

A Board official said it had asked all parties to leverage resources to support Trump’s rebuild plan, estimated to cost $70 billion.

“That includes the Palestinian Authority and Israel. There is no doubt that money held in a bank does nothing to further the President’s 20-Point Plan,” the official said.

That appeared to refer to the PA tax revenue that Israel has withheld from the body in a long-running dispute over payments it makes to Palestinians and their families for carrying out terrorist attacks against Israelis.

Under this policy, official payments are made to Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, the families of “martyrs” killed in attacks on Israelis, and Palestinians injured in terrorist attacks.

Reports estimate that approximately 8 percent of the PA’s budget has been allocated to paying stipends to convicted terrorists and their families.

Israel collects taxes on imported goods on behalf of the PA and is meant to transfer the revenue under a longstanding arrangement. The PA is supposed to use the funds to pay civil servants and fund public services.

The sources did not say how much of the tax money Washington was considering asking Israel to transfer to the Board.

The US State Department, Israeli government, and PA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The US and Israel have long pressured the PA to abolish payments to Palestinian prisoners and families of those killed by Israeli forces, arguing it encourages violence.

In response to US pressure, the PA in February 2025 said it was reforming the payment system, but the US said those changes did not go far enough. As punishment, Israel has withheld taxes it collects on the PA’s behalf, an amount that Palestinian officials say has reached $5 billion – well over half of the PA’s annual budget.

That has set off a financial crisis in the West Bank, with the PA slashing salaries of thousands of civil servants.

Israel accepted a US invitation to join the Board of Peace. The PA was not invited.

Under Trump’s plan, a group of Palestinian technocrats dubbed the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza would take control of Gaza from Hamas as the terrorists lay down their weapons.

Nickolay Mladenov, Trump’s Board of Peace envoy for Gaza, said during a press conference in Jerusalem on Wednesday that reconstruction planning was in advanced stages.

“We’re doing it sector by sector. We’re costing things. We’re coordinating with donors and we’re ready to begin in earnest once the conditions allow it,” Mladenov said, without mentioning the tax issue.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

UK Man Appears in Court Over Stabbing of Two Jewish Men in London

A police officer stands by a cordon at the scene, after a man was arrested following a stabbing incident in the Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population, in London, Britain. Photo: REUTERS/Hannah McKay

The trial of a 45-year-old man charged with attempted murder over a knife attack during which two Jewish men were stabbed will take place next March, a London court heard on Friday.

Essa Suleiman, a British national who was born in Somalia, is alleged to have tried to kill two Jewish men on April 29 in north London‘s Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population.

The incident was the latest in a spate of attacks targeting Jewish premises in the area, which have left Jewish communities fearing for their safety, prompting British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to vow stronger action.

Suleiman is also charged with a third count of attempted murder, relating to an unconnected incident at the home of a former acquaintance earlier the same day, and with possession of a bladed article.

He appeared at London‘s Old Bailey court on Friday and was not asked to enter pleas to any of the four charges he faces. A date of March 1, 2027, was set for his trial, and he remains in custody.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Trump Leaves Beijing With No Major Breakthroughs on Iran, Trade

Chinese President Xi Jinping inspects an honor guard with US President Donald Trump during a welcome ceremony at the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, China, May 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/Pool

US President Donald Trump left China on Friday with no major breakthroughs on trade or tangible help from Beijing to end the Iran war, despite two days spent heaping praise on his host, Xi Jinping.

Trump‘s visit to America’s main strategic and economic rival, the first by a US president since his last trip in 2017, had aimed for tangible results to lift his sagging approval ratings before midterm elections in November. Xi will visit the US in the fall at Trump‘s invitation, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said.

The summit was filled with pageantry, from goose-stepping soldiers to tours of a secret garden. But behind closed doors, Xi issued a stark warning to Trump that any mishandling of China’s top concern, Taiwan, could spiral into conflict.

During a huddle with reporters on the way back to the US, Trump said Xi told him he opposed Taiwan’s independence.

“I heard him out. I didn’t make a comment … I made no commitment either way,” said Trump. He added that he will decide on a pending arms sale to Taiwan shortly, after speaking to “the person that right now is … running Taiwan.”

It was unclear if Trump was referring to Taiwan’s president, Lai Ching-te.

A direct conversation between a sitting US president and Taiwan’s leader would be unprecedented in the period since Washington shifted diplomatic recognition to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, and would likely anger China, which sees the democratically governed island as its own territory.

These were the first freewheeling remarks after two days in Beijing during which Trump stayed unusually restrained, with his off-the-cuff comments mainly focused on feting Xi‘s warmth and stature.

“It’s been an incredible visit. I think a lot of good has come of it,” Trump told Xi at their final meeting at the Zhongnanhai complex, a former imperial garden.

While Trump searched for immediate business wins, such as a deal to sell Boeing jets that did not impress investors, Xi talked up a long-term reset and pact to maintain stable trade ties with Washington, underscoring their differing priorities.

Xi pushed a new term by describing the relationship as “constructive strategic stability” – a sharp departure from the framing of “strategic competition” used by former US President Joe Biden, which Beijing disliked.

“Until now, China hasn’t proposed an alternative – now they have – if the US side agrees, that is progress,” said Da Wei, director of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

NO HELP ON IRAN

A brief US summary of Thursday’s talks highlighted what the White House called the leaders’ shared desire to reopen the Strait of Hormuz off Iran, and Xi‘s interest in American oil purchases to pare its dependence on the Middle East.

But just before the leaders met for tea on Friday, China’s foreign ministry issued a blunt statement outlining its frustration with the war.

“This conflict, which should never have happened, has no reason to continue,” the ministry said, adding that China supported efforts to reach a peace deal in a war that had disrupted energy supplies and the global economy.

At Zhongnanhai, Trump said the leaders had discussed Iran and felt “very similar,” though Xi did not comment. On the flight back home, Trump added that he wasn’t “asking for any favors” on Iran.

Still, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had urged Beijing to use its leverage with Tehran to make a deal. But analysts doubt Xi will be willing to push Tehran hard or end support for its military, given Iran’s value to Beijing as a strategic counterweight to the US.

“What’s notable is that there’s no Chinese commitment to do anything specific with regards to Iran,” said Patricia Kim, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution.

BOEING SHARES SLIDE ON UNDERWHELMING DEAL

In another sign of a diminished scale of the summit, Trump’s readout did not mention the broad structural reforms on which previous presidents pressed Xi.

Unlike his previous trip in 2017, Trump did not discuss “structural reforms,” “global economic governance,” or the “international trading system” with Xi, according to the readout.

Even the deal touted as the biggest single deliverable from the meetings underwhelmed. Boeing stock fell 4% when Trump said on Thursday that China would ​buy 200 Boeing jets, significantly fewer than the roughly 500 that sources told Reuters had been under discussion.

He later added that the order could go up to 750 planes “if they do a good job with the 200.”

US officials said they had agreed deals to sell farm goods and made progress on mechanisms to manage future trade, with both sides expected to identify $30 billion of non-sensitive goods.

There were scant details of the deals, however, and no signs of a breakthrough on selling Nvidia’s advanced H200 AI chips to China, despite CEO Jensen Huang’s dramatic last-minute addition to the trip.

Trump also left without official resolution to the rare earths supply problem that has dogged ties since China imposed export controls on the vital minerals in response to Trump‘s tariff barrage in April 2025.

While the leaders struck a truce last October for Washington to lower tariffs in exchange for China keeping rare earths flowing, Beijing‘s controls have caused shortages for US chipmakers and aerospace companies.

When asked if the two sides extended the truce beyond later this year, Trump said he and Xi “did not discuss tariffs.”

Such an extension would be “the most basic benchmark” for the success of the summit, said Brookings’ Kim.

Xi‘s remarks to Trump that mishandling Taiwan, the democratically governed island Beijing claims, could lead to conflict, delivered a sharp warning during a summit that otherwise appeared friendly and relaxed.

Taiwan, 50 miles (80 km) off China’s coast, has long been a flashpoint in ties, with Beijing refusing to rule out use of military force to gain control of the island and the US bound by law to provide it the means of self-defense.

“US policy on the issue of Taiwan is unchanged as of today,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC News. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung said Taiwan would continue to deepen ties with the US and like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific, adding that China was increasing regional “risks.”

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News