Uncategorized
Everyone knows about Herzl. Is it time for Max Nordau, the intermarried father of Zionism, to get his due?
(JTA) — In the weeks since Israel’s latest government was sworn in, questions relating to assimilation, defining Jewish identity and what it means to be a Zionist have been central to the public and political discourse, which in some ways is perhaps more heated and divisive than it has ever been.
One useful addition to the discourse might be recalling the thought and example of an author and Zionist leader who died 100 years ago last month. Max Nordau was a central figure in the early years of the modern political Zionist movement, literally founding the Zionist Organization (today’s World Zionist Organization) with Theodor Herzl and heading multiple Zionist congresses. A physician and renowned man of letters prior to his “conversion” to Zionism following the Dreyfus Affair in France, Nordau’s joining the Zionist movement gave it a notable boost in terms of renown and respectability.
He also coined the term “Muscular Judaism” — a redefinition of what it meant to be a Jew in the modern world; a critical shift away from the traditionally insular, “meek” Jewish archetype devoted solely to religious and intellectual pursuits. The “Muscular Jew” in theory and practice was necessary in order for a modern Jewish state to be established.
Reviving interest in Nordau now is a continuation of a conversation that an Israeli historian kicked off four decades ago. The historian, Yosef Nedava, embarked on a crusade to renew interest in and appreciation of Nordau. Nedava was a proponent of Revisionist Zionism, a movement led by Zeev Jabotinsky and later Menachem Begin that was considered to be the bitter ideological rival to the Labor Zionism of David Ben-Gurion and others. Broadly speaking, Revisionist Zionism was more territorially maximalist when it came to settling the Land of Israel, and favored liberal principles as opposed to the socialist ones championed by Ben-Gurion and his colleagues.
Nedava had a penchant for fighting the battles of unsung heroes of history who he thought should be better remembered. He led a crusade to clear the name of Yosef Lishansky, the founder of the NILI underground movement that assisted the British during World War I who was executed by the Ottomans. He also worked to exonerate fellow Revisionist Zionists accused of murdering Labor Zionist leader Haim Arlozorov — an event that shook Mandatory Palestine in the early 1930s and beyond.
About Nordau, Nedava said at the time, “For 60 years he wasn’t mentioned and he was one of the forgotten figures that only a few streets were named after.”
Nedava’s sentiment was clear, even if his words were somewhat hyperbolic. Nordau had in fact been studied and cited over the years, and there were in fact at least a few streets named after him in Israel. At the official state event marking six decades since Nordau’s death, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin even declared, “We never forgot Max Nordau, his teachings and his historical merits.”
Following Nedava’s efforts leading up to the 60th anniversary of Nordau’s death in 1983, Begin set up an official committee to memorialize the Zionist leader. The committee was tasked with publishing Nordau’s works, establishing events and honoring him in other ways like getting his face on a stamp “and maybe on a monetary bill,” according to Nedava.
But no bill was ever printed with Nordau’s visage, and there’s no question that Nordau never has gotten nearly the credit nor recognition that Herzl received. If the streets referenced by Nedava are any indicator, there are currently a respectable 33 streets named after Nordau in Israel, though that’s just about half of what Herzl’s got. There’s a city called Herzliya, with a massive image of the Zionist founder overlooking one of Israel’s most-trafficked highways. Nordau has a beach in Tel Aviv, a neighborhood in Netanya and a small village far in the north — but no city of his own.
Trees line alongside Nordau Avenue in Tel Aviv, March 4, 2017. (Anat Hermoni/FLASH90)
That’s not to say he didn’t have his fans. The Revisionist movement and Begin’s Herut and Likud parties idolized him, often mentioning and depicting him alongside Herzl and Vladimir Jabotinsky. Revisionist historian Benzion Netanyahu, father of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, greatly admired Nordau, even editing four entire volumes of his writings.
“Alongside Herzl, the Revisionists loved him, as he was a liberal. Yet he was also accepted and respected by those on the other side of the political spectrum,” Hezi Amiur, a scholar of Zionism and the curator of the Israeli Collection at the National Library of Israel, told me.
Like many of his generation and ilk, Nordau, himself the son of a rabbi, rejected religion and tradition as a teenager, opting to join mainstream European secular culture. He changed his name from Simon (Simcha) Maximilian Südfeld to Max Nordau. The shift in surname from Südfeld — meaning “southern field” — to Nordau — meaning “northern meadow” — was very much an intentional act for Nordau, the only son in his religiously observant family who chose northern European Germanic culture over the traditions of his fathers. He even married a Danish Protestant opera singer, a widow and mother of four named Anna Dons-Kaufmann.
In a congratulatory letter sent to Nordau following his marriage to Anna, Herzl, who was also not a particularly observant nor learned Jew, wrote:
Your concerns regarding the attitudes of our zealous circles [within the Zionist movement] regarding your mixed marriage are perhaps exaggerated. … If our project had already been fulfilled today, surely we would not have prevented a Jewish citizen, that is, a citizen of the existing Jewish state, from marrying a foreign-born gentile, through this marriage she would become a Jew without paying attention to her religion. If she has children, they will be Jews anyway.
This particular vision of Herzl’s has certainly not come to fruition, and the topic remains a particularly heated one, continuing to roil the Israeli political system, and — no less — Israel-Diaspora relations.
Similar political forces to those that have kept this particular Herzlian vision at bay may have also been responsible for ensuring that Nordau’s impressively whiskered face never made its way onto Israeli currency.
According to one report, Begin’s Likud government abandoned its efforts to get Nordau’s onto a shekel note in 1983 in order to avoid a potential coalition crisis. The concern was that the religious parties that were part of the ruling coalition could become outraged at the prospect of having someone married to a non-Jew on Israeli money. Whether the report was fully accurate or not, the sentiments behind such a potential coalition scare are certainly familiar to anyone following contemporary Israeli politics.
Nonetheless, perhaps the two most influential religious Zionist rabbis of the 20th century, Rabbi Abraham Isaac HaKohen Kook and his son, Rabbi Zvi Yehuda, not only somewhat overlooked Nordau’s assimilationist tendencies and intermarriage, they even celebrated the man and his vision.
The elder Rabbi Kook, who served as the rabbi of Jaffa, Jerusalem and the Land of Israel in the opening decades of the 1900s, uncompromisingly criticized some of Nordau’s views, especially with respect to the separation of religion from Zionism. But he was a big fan of Nordau’s “Muscular Judaism,” writing among other things, that:
…a healthy body is what we need, we have been very busy with the soul, we have forgotten the sanctity of the body, we have neglected physical health and strength, we have forgotten that we have holy flesh, no less than we have the holy spirit… Through the strength of the flesh the weakened soul will be enlightened, the resurrection of the dead in their bodies.
Decades later his son, likely the most influential Israeli religious Zionist spiritual leader until his death in 1982, defined Nordau (as well as seminal Hebrew poet Shaul Tchernichovsky, who also married a non-Jew) as a “baal tshuvah” — a term imprecisely translated as “penitent” that is generally used to refer to non-observant Jews who become more religiously observant. Yehuda based his designation on a Talmudic teaching that “Anyone who transgresses and is ashamed of it is forgiven for all of his sins.”
Like anyone, Max Nordau probably regretted and felt ashamed of various decisions and actions in his life, but marrying a non-Jewish woman does not seem to be one of them. He and Anna stayed married for decades until his death in 1923.
Both Kooks were able to overlook the decidedly non-religious (if not outright anti-religious) life Nordau chose to lead. Instead of his personal choices, they focused on the central contribution he made to ensuring the reestablishment of a Jewish home in its ancestral land.
The majority of Israel’s current ruling coalition claims to be the ideological descendants of Begin and the Rabbis Kook, men who managed to have great admiration for the teachings and achievements of Nordau, even if they may have found his anti-religious, assimilationist tendencies and intermarriage reprehensible. Nedava wanted Israel to learn from Nordau 40 years ago. It’s possible the country still could today — if only the striking level of tolerance and respect with which he was considered in the past can still be summoned.
—
The post Everyone knows about Herzl. Is it time for Max Nordau, the intermarried father of Zionism, to get his due? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
What rabbinic wisdom taught me in the wake of the BAFTA scandal
When I woke up Monday, the first message I saw was from a friend asking if I’d seen the “Sinners Tourette’s thing from the BAFTAs.” The “Sinners Tourette’s thing” took place Sunday night, when John Davidson, the subject of the BAFTA-nominated film I Swear, about living with Tourette’s, shouted the N-word while Black Sinners actors Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo presented an award.
This sparked thoughtful online conversations about racism and understanding coprolalia, a form of Tourette’s that presents as involuntarily uttering obscenities. It also led to criticism of BAFTA and the BBC for not intervening after the reportedly slur was thrown at other attendees earlier and for censoring a pro-Palestine statement but not the N-word (a BBC spokesperson said the statement was cut for time and has now censored the slur on the BBC iPlayer video of the BAFTAs).
Of course, productive dialogue online was overshadowed by vitriolic racism and ableism attempting to villanize both parties involved.
As I read about the controversy, I was reminded of ona’at devarim, a Talmudic prohibition against verbally harming someone else, through purposefully shaming them, spreading gossip or giving bad advice.
The embarrassment here, to me, appears twofold. Shaming Davidson could have further embarrassed him. But Jordan and Lindo had already been publicly embarrassed, and that needed to be rectified.
When is publicly calling out behavior useful — such as establishing boundaries around slurs — and when is it vengeful? And how much does intent versus impact matter?
I reached out to several rabbis to learn how Jewish values could help me understand this situation — and how to think about accountability when a billion people can see your mistakes in a matter of seconds.
Rabbi Shais Rishon, known by his pen name MaNishtana, leads the congregation Ohel Eidot CHeMDaT’’A, a D.C. synagogue for African American and Caribbean Jews. In our conversation, he noted that many people were embracing racism or ableism, when they should be acknowledging the situation’s nuances.
“There’s a lot of little parts here and in these kinds of conversations. I always say it’s important to move into them with three sort of goal posts in mind,” said Rishon. “The first is that multiple things can be true at the same time. Second is multiple things can be wrong at the same time. And the third is explaining how to make this work so it doesn’t absolve from accountability or agency.”
Rabbi Lauren Tuchman, who focuses on disability access and inclusion in the Jewish world, emphasized making sure accountability is not overlooked.
“Sometimes I actually worry that the standards are not applied appropriately when harm happens when a disabled person causes the harm,” said Tuchman, who is a fully blind person. “You don’t want a situation where any kind of apology is like meeting the needs of the offender and not at all meeting the needs of those who are harmed.”
Even so, everyone’s unique situation must be accounted for. Both Tuchman and Rishon believed Davidson should apologize to Jordan and Lindo, but cautioned against mistaking Davidson owning what he did as him admitting to having done it on purpose.
“Nothing can be universalized here and everything is so case-specific, especially when that offensive speech is actually not in this person’s control,” said Tuchman.
Tuchman noted that everyone is entitled to their feelings when met with offensive language, even if it’s unintentional, something she has dealt with a lot. Sometimes she decides “They didn’t mean it, I’m just gonna try to let it go.” But, she said, “you make that choice for yourself and your own integrity.”
“I think that there are ways in which we need to be able to allow for us to feel what we feel, and then to make wise choices about how we act,” she added.
It doesn’t seem to me that what Davidson needs and what Jordan and Lindo need have to be in conflict with one another. Rishon pointed to tochecha, the obligation in Leviticus to reprimand and correct improper behavior in a way that betters the community.
“It’s not supposed to be done in sort of that embarrassing way,” said Rishon. “It’s not about spectacle. It’s about transformation.”
Next, Tuchman said, we must embrace the value of teshuva: correcting our mistakes by realigning with our morals in our actions and deeds.
“The Rambam talks about needing to acknowledge the wrongdoing [and] really take responsibility,” Tuchman said. “And then engage in restitution in whatever way that makes sense.”
“This is somebody with a personal challenge, and maybe there’s a personal conversation and apology to happen,” Rishon said. “There’s no need for us to excoriate him because he has no control.”
Rishon suggested scrutiny should be focused on the BBC and BAFTA, for their “ lack of attentiveness, their lack of fastidiousness, [and] their lack of sensitivity.”
As I spoke to Rishon and Tuchman, I couldn’t help but think that what Judaism asks of us feels more difficult when social media demands its users have instant and loud reactions to anything and everything. In another world, those involved could sort it out privately, and heal in their own time. But when an incident can be shared across the world in minutes, the apology becomes a public matter. And if you don’t do what the internet demands of you immediately, you’re automatically villanized.
From Rishon and Tuchman, I gathered that instead of focusing on who is right and who is wrong, we should take a breath and ask what we need to move forward in community. It’s embarrassing to be called a slur on television; it’s embarrassing to utter that slur when you can’t control it. But it’s happened. How can we respond as people who want to be better than we were before?
I still wouldn’t say I have all the answers for this situation or whatever the next attempt at public shaming may be. But I feel a lot more confident knowing I can turn to the advice of the rabbinic sages — and not just someone on X.
The post What rabbinic wisdom taught me in the wake of the BAFTA scandal appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
US to Offer Passport Services in West Bank Settlement for First Time
The Israeli national flag flutters as apartments are seen in the background in the Israeli settlement of Efrat in the West Bank, Aug. 18, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
The US will provide on-site passport services this week in a settlement in the West Bank, marking the first time American consular officials have offered such services to Israeli settlers in the territory, US officials said on Tuesday.
Much of the international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law.
Israel disputes this, citing historical and biblical ties to the area. It says the settlements provide strategic depth and security. Defenders of Israel also note that, while about one-fifth of the country’s population is Arab and enjoys equal rights, Palestinian law forbids selling any land to Israelis.
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN-ISRAELIS IN WEST BANK
US President Donald Trump, a staunch supporter of Israel, has said he opposes Israeli annexation of the West Bank. But his administration has not taken any measures to halt settlement activity, which has reportedly risen since he took office last year.
In a post on X, the US Embassy in Jerusalem said that as part of efforts to reach all Americans abroad, “consular officers will be providing routine passport services in Efrat on Friday, Feb. 27,” referring to a settlement south of the Palestinian city of Bethlehem.
The Embassy said it would plan similar on-site services in the Palestinian West Bank city of Ramallah, in the settlement of Beitar Illit near Bethlehem, and in cities within Israel such as Haifa.
The US offers passport and consular services at its Embassy in Jerusalem as well as at a Tel Aviv branch office. The number of dual American-Israeli nationals living in the West Bank is estimated to be in the tens of thousands.
Asked for comment, an embassy spokesperson said: “This is the first time we have provided consular services to a settlement in the West Bank.” The spokesperson said similar services were being offered to American-Palestinian dual nationals in the West Bank.
The move came after Israel’s cabinet last week approved measures to make it easier for settlers to buy land, a move Palestinians called a “de facto annexation.”
Much of the West Bank is under Israeli military control, with limited Palestinian self-rule in areas run by the Western-backed Palestinian Authority.
Efrat, the Jewish settlement where American consular officials will provide passport services on Friday, is home to many American immigrants. The US Embassy said it did not have data on the number of Americans living there.
More than 500,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, home to 3 million Palestinians. Most settlements are small towns surrounded by fences and guarded by Israeli soldiers.
Uncategorized
CAIR Official Claims Israel Harvests, Collects Skin of Palestinians
Executive Director of the Ohio chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-OH) Khalid Turaani, speaks at a press conference, July 9, 2025. Photo: USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
A senior Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) official claimed Israel harvests and collects the skin of deceased Palestinians at a recent Ohio state Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
“Israel has the largest human skin bank in the world,” Khalid Turaani, executive director of CAIR’s chapter in Ohio, said last week at a hearing on adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.
“Where do you think they got all this skin from? They have more human skin than China and India. They are literally skinning the dead bodies of my brothers and sisters in Palestine,” Turaani continued. “And if I call them Nazis, your law [adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism] is going to punish me.”
CAIR-Ohio Executive Director Khalid Turaani spread a blood libel in the Ohio State Senate, falsely claiming Israel “skins” Palestinians and runs the “largest human skin bank in the world.”
An outrageous and dangerous old antisemitic conspiracy. pic.twitter.com/U5aj4EwRMl
— Combat Antisemitism Movement (@CombatASemitism) February 26, 2026
Scholars and activist groups have described the conspiracy theory of Israeli organ harvesting as a modern version of the antisemitic blood libel rooted in medieval conspiracies charging that Jews murdered Christian children and drank their blood during the holiday of Passover. The organ harvesting claim dates back to 2009, when a Swedish tabloid published an erroneous article saying that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) kills Palestinians to provide organs to Israeli hospitals.
“In the 1990s, one Israeli facility (the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute) [ran by Dr. Yehuda Hiss] took organs from IDF soldiers, Israeli civilians, Palestinians, foreign workers, and others whose corpses came into the institute, without seeking permission from the families of the deceased,” the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) noted in an article debunking the conspiracy.
“In a state inquiry report, Israeli authorities found ‘no evidence that Hiss targeted Palestinians; rather, he seemed to view every human body that ended up in his morgue, whether Israeli or Palestinian, as fair game for organ harvesting,” the ADL continued. “The families of dead Israeli soldiers were among those who complained about Hiss’s conduct.”
There is no evidence that such activity has happened since the 1990s.
Nonetheless, Palestinian media has repeatedly invoked the organ harvesting conspiracy, which has been picked up by anti-Israel activists in the West.
Last week’s hearing came about four months after Turaani took part in an online event in October alongside a senior member of Hamas who has been sanctioned by the US government and other individuals tied to the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorist organizations.
Turaani moderated the event hosted by the Beirut-based Al-Zaytouna Center titled “Palestinians Abroad and Regional and International Strategic Transformations in the Light of Al-Aqsa Flood.” The term “Al-Aqsa Flood” is the name Hamas gave to its Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel, in which Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people and dragged 251 hostages back to Gaza.
Among the speakers was Majed al-Zeer, who was sanctioned by the US Treasury Department in October 2024 for his role as a senior Hamas operative in Europe.
Also featured was Ziad el-Aloul, a Hamas-linked activist involved with the European Palestinians Conference and the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad, both groups accused by Israeli authorities of operating as Hamas fronts in Europe.
CAIR has drawn scrutiny in the past over its alleged ties to foreign terrorist groups. In the 2000s, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing case. Politico noted in 2010 that “US District Court Judge Jorge Solis found that the government presented ‘ample evidence to establish the association’” of CAIR with Hamas.
According to the ADL, “some of CAIR’s current leadership had early connections with organizations that are or were affiliated with Hamas.”
CAIR has strongly disputed the accuracy of the ADL’s claim and asserted that it “unequivocally condemn[s] all acts of terrorism, whether carried out by al-Qa’ida, the Real IRA, FARC, Hamas, ETA, or any other group designated by the US Department of State as a ‘Foreign Terrorist Organization.’”
In November 2023, CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad said “yes, I was happy to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land, and walk free into their land, which they were not allowed to walk in,” referring to Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities.
“The people of Gaza only decided to break the siege — the walls of the concentration camp — on Oct. 7,” he said.
About a week later, the executive director of CAIR’s Los Angeles office, Hussam Ayloush, said that Israel “does not have the right” to defend itself from Palestinian violence. He added in his sermon at the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City that for the Palestinians, “every single day” since the Jewish state’s establishment has been comparable to Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught.
CAIR has been a fierce critic of IHRA’s definition of antisemitism, arguing it aims to silence legitimate criticism of Israel.
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.