Uncategorized
Hating Israel Isn’t New; How the CIA and State Department Undermined the Jewish State
“Teddy Roosevelt’s great-great-great grandson is an anti-Israel protester at Princeton,” blared a New York Post headline on May 4, 2024.
The Post reported that Quentin Colon Roosevelt, an 18-year-old freshman, and descendant of the 25th President, is an anti-Israel activist at the Ivy League university. But far from being hip and new, Quentin’s brand of anti-Zionism is old hat — he is merely continuing a long family tradition of anti-Israel activism.
There is an abundance of literature on Franklin D. Roosevelt’s views on Jews and Zionism, the belief in Jewish self-determination. Both FDR and his wife Eleanor had made antisemitic remarks. In a private conversation in 1938, then-President Roosevelt suggested that by dominating the economy in Poland, Jews were themselves fueling antisemitism. And in a 1941 Cabinet meeting, FDR remarked that there were too many Jewish Federal employees in Oregon. In his final days, FDR promised Saudi leader Abdul Aziz Ibn al Saud that he would oppose the creation of Jewish state in the Jewish people’s ancestral homeland.
FDR is the president who led the United States to victory against Adolf Hitler. He also employed Jews in high-ranking positions in his government. But he is also the president whose administration failed to save more Jews fleeing Nazism, and who refused to bomb the railway tracks leading to Auschwitz and other death camps where millions of Jews met a ghastly end. Accordingly, it makes sense that his beliefs regarding Jews have been the subject of books and belated study.
Less examined, however, is the Oyster Bay branch of the Roosevelt clan, and their beliefs regarding Zionism. In part, this is easily explained by the unique place that FDR holds in American history. He is the only president to serve four terms, and presided over both the Great Depression, World War II, and arguably the beginning of the Cold War. His branch of the family, the Hyde Park Roosevelts, were Democrats and remained active in public life for decades after his 1945 death.
At first glance, the Oyster Bay Roosevelts were more of a turn of the 19th century affair. They were Republicans, and their scion was Teddy Roosevelt, a war hero turned governor of New York state who, thanks to an assassin’s bullet, found himself as the nation’s leader in 1901.
The famously ebullient Roosevelt helped redefine the country’s idea of a president, and served as an inspiration for his cousin Franklin. But Teddy largely presided over an era of peace and tranquility, not war and upheaval.
Teddy was a philosemite. He was the first occupant of the Oval Office to appoint a Jewish American to the Cabinet. He championed the rights of Jews, both at home and abroad, and was harshly critical of the numerous pogroms that unfolded in czarist Russia.
As Seth Rogovoy has noted, Roosevelt’s “special relationship with Jews was forged during his time serving as police commissioner in New York City, a post he assumed in 1904.” When an antisemitic German preacher named Hermann Ahlwardt gave speeches in the city, Roosevelt assigned a contingent of Jewish police officers to guard the man.
Roosevelt was also a Zionist. In 1918, shortly after the Balfour Declaration, he wrote: “It seems to me that it is entirely proper to start a Zionist state around Jerusalem.” He told Lioubomir Michailovitch, the Serbian Minister to the United States, that “there can be no peace worth having … unless the Jews [are] given control of Palestine.” Six months later Roosevelt died in his sleep.
Not all his descendants would share his belief in Jewish self-determination, however.
Two of Teddy Roosevelt’s grandchildren, Kermit and Archie, served their country in the CIA during the early years of the Cold War. Both were keenly interested in Middle East affairs, and were fluent in Arabic. Both were well read and highly educated, authoring books and filing dispatches for newspapers like the Saturday Evening Post, among others.
They were also prominent anti-Zionists.
Kermit Roosevelt, known as “Kim,” played a key role in anti-Zionist efforts in the United States and abroad. He was not, by the standards of his time, an antisemite. But he was ardently opposed to the creation of Israel.
As Hugh Wilford observed in his 2013 book America’s Great Game: The CIA’s Secret Arabists and the Shaping of the Modern Middle East: “the anti-Zionism of the overt Cold War foreign policy establishment is well known” but “less widely appreciated is the opposition to Jewish statehood of the individuals responsible for setting up the United States’ covert apparatus in the Middle East.”
This began with the OSS, the CIA’s precursor. And it included men like Stephen Penrose, a former American University of Beirut instructor, and Kim Roosevelt’s boss during his wartime service in the OSS.
“Documents among Penrose’s personal papers reveal him engaged in a variety of anti-Zionist activities at the same time that he was commencing his official duties with the OSS,” Wilford notes.
Like many of his fellow Arabists, Penrose was the son of American missionaries who, failing to convert the native population to Christianity, sought to foster Arab nationalism instead. Penrose described himself as a “chief cook” who was “brewing” opposition to Zionism. He became one of Kim Roosevelt’s mentors.
In a January 1948 Middle East Journal article entitled, “Partition of Palestine: A Lesson in Pressure Politics,” Kim called the 1947 UN vote in favor of a Jewish state an “instructive and disturbing story.”
Roosevelt believed that the US media was unduly supportive of the creation of Israel, and claimed that almost all Americans “with diplomatic, educational, missionary, or business experience in the Middle East” opposed Zionism.
Kim’s pamphlet was reprinted by the Institute for Arab American Affairs, a New York-based group whose board he sat on. He also began working with the Arab League’s Washington, D.C., office and “turned elsewhere for allies in the anti-Zionist struggle, starting with the Protestant missionaries, educators, and aid workers.”
This nascent group soon received financial support from the American oil industry, which maintained close links to Kim’s OSS/CIA colleague, William Eddy.
As Wilford noted, the Arabian consortium ARAMCO “launched a public relations campaign intended to bring American opinion around to the Arab point of view.”
In addition to missionaries and big oil, Kim gained another important ally in the form of Elmer Berger, a rabbi from Flint, Michigan. Berger served as executive director of the American Council for Judaism, an anti-Zionist group that, among other things, opposed the creation of a Jewish army during World War II at the height of the Holocaust. Berger and Roosevelt became drinking buddies and close collaborators on their joint effort against the Jewish State.
Kim eventually became “organizing secretary” for a group called The Committee for Justice and Peace. The committee’s original chair, Virginia Gildersleeve, was both a longtime friend of the Roosevelts of Oyster Bay and the dean of New York City’s Barnard College, which today is part of Columbia.
Gildersleeve was “also a high-profile anti-Zionist” who “became involved with the Arab cause through her association with the Arabist philanthropist Charles Crane and the historian of Arab nationalism George Antonius.”
Crane, a wealthy and notorious antisemite, had lobbied against the creation of a Jewish state since the beginning of the 20th century, even advising then-President Woodrow Wilson against supporting the Balfour Declaration.
By 1950, the Committee had managed to recruit famed journalist Dorothy Thompson to their cause. Thompson was reportedly the basis for actress Katharine Hepburn’s character in the 1942 movie Woman of the Year. A convert to anti-Zionism, Thompson’s extensive network of reporters and celebrities proved crucial to Kim and Berger’s efforts to rally opposition to the Jewish State. In a 1951 letter to Barnard College’s Gildersleeve, Thompson wrote: “I am seriously concerned about the position of the Jews in the United States.” People, she claimed, “are beginning to ask themselves the question: who is really running America?”
Another ally emerged that year: the Central Intelligence Agency.
The CIA began funding the Committee, as well as its successor, the American Friends of the Middle East (AFME). Beginning in June 1950, Kim’s correspondence with Berger began making veiled references to the ACJ head taking on “official work” in Washington. This, Wilford believes, is a reference to working with the CIA. Indeed, the well-connected Kim and Archie Roosevelt had known top CIA officials like Allan Dulles since childhood.
With support from figures like Eddy, AFME also began encouraging Muslim-Christian alliances — ostensibly to counter Soviet influence, but also to attack the Jewish state. This led to some awkward alliances, including with Amin al-Husseini, the founding father of Palestinian nationalism and an infamous Nazi collaborator.
Husseini had ordered the murders of rival Palestinians, incited violence against Jews since the 1920s, and had led forces, equipped with Nazi-supplied arms, to destroy Israel at its rebirth in 1948. Now, along with the Secretary General of the Arab League, and Saudi King Ibn Saud, he was meeting with Eddy to discuss a “moral alliance” between Christians and Muslims to defeat communism. Kim himself knew Husseini, having interviewed him for the Saturday Evening Post after World War II.
AFME lobbied for the appointment of anti-Zionist diplomats and in favor of Eisenhower administration efforts to withhold aid from Israel. And both Berger and Thompson pushed for favorable coverage of the new Egyptian dictator, Gamal Nassar, who would wage war on the Jewish state for nearly two decades. Initially, they were successful, with TIME magazine writing that Nasser had the “lithe grace of a big, handsome, all-American quarterback.” Of course, there was nothing “all-American” about Nasser, who would become a Soviet stooge.
AFME officials like Garland Evans Hopkins would draw rebukes after claiming that Jews were bringing violence against themselves — a staple of antisemitism. Hopkins claimed that Zionists “could produce a wave of antisemitism in this country” if they continued acting against “America’s best interests in the Middle East.”
AFME itself would eventually lose influence, particularly after its boosting of figures like Nasser was revealed as foolhardy. Berger would go on to advise Senator J. William Fulbright (D-AR) in his efforts to get pro-Israel Americans to register as foreign agents.
In 1967, as Arab forces gathered to annihilate Israel, Berger blamed the Jewish State, accusing it of “aggression” and its supporters of “hysteria.” Top ACJ officials resigned in protest. That same year, Ramparts magazine exposed CIA support, financial and otherwise, of AFME.
Kim and Archie Roosevelt, however, would continue their careers as high-ranking CIA officers before eventually starting a consulting business and making use of their extensive Middle East contacts.
For some college protesters, attacking Israel — and American support for Israel — might seem new and trendy. Yet, both the CIA and big oil were precisely doing that, decades ago, forming alliances with anti-American dictators, antisemitic war criminals, the press, Protestant groups, academics, university administrators, and fringe Jewish groups claiming to represent “what’s best” for American Jewry.
As William Faulkner once wrote: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”
The writer is a Senior Research Analyst for CAMERA, the 65,000-member, Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis
The post Hating Israel Isn’t New; How the CIA and State Department Undermined the Jewish State first appeared on Algemeiner.comhttps://www.algemeiner.com/.
Uncategorized
Project Esther created a blueprint for Trump to fight antisemitism. The ‘Shofar Report’ is a liberal response.
Most American Jews have taken a dim view of the Trump administration’s approach to fighting antisemitism, saying his policies are disingenuous and prone to exacerbate the problem rather than solve it.
But beyond rejecting the crackdown on universities, liberal Jews have lacked a singular blueprint for fighting antisemitism akin to what the conservative Heritage Foundation offered the Trump administration with Project Esther.
The Nexus Project is hoping to change that with Tuesday’s release of the Shofar Report, a 63-page document that combines policy recommendations with essays arguing that leaders interested in countering antisemitism should focus on strengthening democratic institutions.
Its authors hope that it will fill a vacuum for both politicians and individual Jewish Americans.
“People are really hungry for solutions,” said Amy Spitalnick, chief of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. “They’re frustrated by the false choice of either protecting democracy or countering antisemitism.”
Spitalnick’s organization has been one of the leading voices alongside Nexus in arguing that the Trump administration’s moves to deport student protesters and cancel grants to universities accused of antisemitism are endangering Jews by weakening American democracy.
“We’re saying fighting the weaponization of antisemitism is a strategy for fighting antisemitism.”
Jonathan JacobyNational director of the Nexus Project
The Shofar Report builds on these arguments with a set of nine key recommendations focused on funding educational initiatives and civil rights protection while avoiding limits on free speech by directing enforcement at “clear discrimination and harassment.”
It calls for providing universities with more resources to combat harassment toward Jews, teaching more about the Holocaust and expanding investments in programs that help people leave extremist movements.
John Ruskay, the former director of UJA-Federation of New York, said that the Shofar Report comes at a time when Jewish leaders have poured resources into fighting antisemitism often without much basis in data or a cohesive strategy and that it could help “those who want to go beyond sloganizing.”
It also serves as counter-programming to Project Esther, released by the Heritage Foundation shortly before last year’s presidential election with advice for how a future Trump administration should fight antisemitism. The document described a “Hamas Support Network” (composed of progressive nonprofits and foundations) threatening Jews that could be dismantled by the federal government.
Jonathan Jacoby, the national director of Nexus, said that the Shofar Report’s narrative is that there is no tension between protecting civil liberties and countering antisemitism. “People think that we need to fight antisemitism and then, as a separate matter, you need to fight the weaponization of antisemitism,” he said. “And we’re saying fighting the weaponization of antisemitism is a strategy for fighting antisemitism.”
Nexus, which expanded from an academic task force focused on defining antisemitism into a full-fledged advocacy organization in 2024, quickly gained influence with the Biden administration and among Democrats in Congress who were looking for advice on how to respond to increasingly illiberal policy recommendations around antisemitism put forth by both Republicans and legacy Jewish organizations like the Anti-Defamation League.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, the New York Democrat, has become a champion of Nexus’s approach, which focuses as much on concern for freedom of expression as on raising the alarm about antisemitism itself. He praised Tuesday’s report in a statement, saying it “highlights some of the most timely and acute challenges facing the Jewish community and American democracy today.”
The second half of the report, which was edited by Forward opinion columnist Emily Tamkin, features longer essays by academics seeking to contextualize the contemporary conversation around antisemitism for Jewish clergy and lay leaders trying to guide their communities.
The Shofar Report’s reliance on so many authors can muddle its message around the line between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism — arguably the central question in today’s debates.
Rabbi Seth Limmer, for example, kicks off the policy briefs by focusing on the protests that followed the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack, and dwells on other quandaries coming from progressives, like the absence of Jewish studies experts at the University of Chicago’s Department of Race, Diaspora and Indigeneity.
But a few pages later, David Myers, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, offers a forceful defense of higher education. He writes that the threat to Jews at universities comes from “new attempts to silence protesters in the name of protecting Jews.”
The varied perspectives add weight to what Jacoby said was an attempt to create a document that could transcend traditional partisan lines, and Limmer said his hope is that readers understand the need for a holistic approach to the problem: “It is definitely time for a new conversation around antisemitism that removes this fictitious partisan divide that pretends like only some people are responsible for the problem.”
While the report offers a detailed diagnosis of what it refers to as “authoritarian shortcuts” — in one section Judith Lichtman, a civil rights attorney, assails “attacks on nonprofits under the guise of fighting terrorism” — many of its recommendations lack specificity. Lichtman, for instance, called for Congress to “address white supremacy in law enforcement,” but does not detail how lawmakers should do so.
Project Esther’s public report also included somewhat vague advice to the executive branch, though these were partially fleshed out in private donor presentations created by the Heritage Foundation that detailed the mechanics of pressuring universities and civil society groups.
Other recommendations in the Shofar Report include expanding media literacy programs to help students recognize conspiracy theories, incorporating Jewish content into school curriculum and supporting partnerships between Jews and other minority groups. Some of its more concrete policy advice — like fully funding the Education Department’s civil rights office, which is less than half the size it was at the start of 2025 and being further reduced during the government shutdown — seem almost certain to be nonstarters so long as President Donald Trump is in office.
Jacoby acknowledged that the Shofar Report is being released at a time when Democrats, who are more likely to be receptive to its perspective, are out of power and focused on responding to actions from the White House rather than driving their own policy agenda.
“This is a plan for the present, not for the future,” Jacoby said. “We’ll work on that next.”
The post Project Esther created a blueprint for Trump to fight antisemitism. The ‘Shofar Report’ is a liberal response. appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Meet the 83-year-old Jewish activist who stars in Zohran Mamdani’s campaign ads
When Zohran Mamdani’s first TV ad of the general election went live last week, the first person viewers saw was an 83-year-old Jewish woman from the Upper West Side.
Rosalind Petchesky, a retired political scientist and progressive activist, has become a recurring star of Mamdani’s social media video campaign, which is widely seen as crucial to vaulting him from a local politician in Queens to the frontrunner for mayor.
“I used to love New York,” Petchesky says at the beginning of the 30-second spot. “But now, it’s just where I live.”
The ad then shifts to a hopeful tone centered around Mamdani’s message of affordability, with the title, “Things Can Change.”
The real-life Petchesky says the sentiment didn’t actually resonate with her. “I kept thinking, ‘I wouldn’t say I used to love New York. I still love New York! I never didn’t love New York,’” she said, laughing, in an interview.
But she said she was not bothered that a second, more hopeful line she’d initially spoken — “But now, I feel like everything’s starting to change” — had ended up on the cutting-room floor.
“I think they must have decided the positive part was going to be done by Zohran, so they didn’t need that,” Petchesky said. “To me, it’s just another way of helping the campaign. And they want me to do something? I do it.”
How did Petchesky come to be a loyal volunteer for Mamdani, a half-century her junior? As with many of Mamdani’s earliest Jewish supporters, the answer lies in opposition to Israel.
Petchesky is a longtime critic of the country, since she first visited as a teenager in 1959. Active for the last decade in Jewish Voice for Peace, the anti-Zionist organization, she first met Mamdani in May 2023 when she and other JVP members travelled to the state legislature in Albany to lobby for his Not On Our Dime Act. The legislation, which failed to advance, proposed blocking New York nonprofits from supporting Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Petchesky has been involved with JVP since retiring from teaching at Hunter College in 2013. During her scholarly career, Petchesky earned a MacArthur Fellowship (known as the “genius award”) in 1995, and became recognized as a “leading theorist on international reproductive rights.” A feminist activist and thinker, Petchesky’s work has dovetailed with the Israel-Palestine conflict. In 2021 she co-edited the book, “A Land With a People: Palestinians and Jews Confront Zionism.”
After meeting Mamdani in Albany, Petchesky said the pair had “a number of encounters that were fascinating and fun” in the following months.
Mamdani posted a photo of the two linking arms at a demonstration on Oct. 13, 2023, less than a week after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, calling on Sen. Chuck Schumer to support a ceasefire. The pair were among the 60 New Yorkers arrested that night for blocking traffic outside Schumer’s home.
“Rosalind Petchesky is an 81-year old Jewish New Yorker who deeply inspires me,” Mamdani wrote in his post about that night.
“As we sat handcuffed on the bus to the police precinct, Ros told me that she’d been away from home for two weeks and had only gotten back that day,” he wrote. “She was supposed to be at home that night eating dinner with her partner, but she decided she couldn’t be at home when we were on the brink of genocide.”
A few months later, Mamdani and Petchesky appeared on the “Laura Flander & Friends” podcast together, along with JVP member Jay Saper. The episode, titled “Organizing for Ceasefire Through Policy & Protest: Meet the People of JVP & NY Assemblymember Mamdani,” focused on JVP’s and Mamdani’s pro-Palestinian activism and their efforts with the Not On Our Dime Act.
Petchesky spoke about the Israeli military campaign in Gaza, including through a feminist lens, saying she sees “Israeli persecution of Palestinians as a form of reproductive injustice and attack on families.” She also spoke about Canadian-Israeli peace activist Vivian Silver, who was killed on Oct. 7, 2023 when Hamas attacked and killed over 100 people at her home community, Kibbutz Be’eri.
“Vivian Silver was amazing,” Petchesky said. “She actually helped ferry Palestinian children from Gaza to hospitals in Israel. She worked with Gazans. … It’s horrible that she was killed and we don’t know for sure whose bombs killed her.”
By the time Mamdani launched his mayoral campaign in October 2024, the two had formed a “deep bond of trust,” Petchesky said — enough so that he asked her to be in his announcement video.
“I’ll make buses fast and free,” Mamdani says in the video. “So I can just get where I’m going,” Petchesky says defiantly.
“He called me up at home and said, ‘We’re gonna send a car for you. We want you to come to Astoria and be in this video,’” Petchesky recalled.
She added, “He wanted an old lady to talk about buses. And I’m the person he first thought of, because he knew me.”
Petchesky said she’s most excited to see Mamdani bring together Black, Asian, Latinx and Jewish activists to “stand up to Trump and ICE”; to make a rent freeze happen; and to instate free buses for all New Yorkers — the democratic socialist candidate’s most prominent pledges. But it’s clear that her vision around Israel also overlaps with Mamdani’s — and while some critics say Mamdani’s stances on Israel amount to antisemitism, Petchesky countered that those accusations discount the segment of Jews who share Mamdani’s views.
“There’s a big split in what’s called the Jewish community — there’s no single Jewish community,” she said. “There’s many.”
Petchesky’s own Jewish story involved a decades-long breach — and a return through her involvement with JVP.
During the podcast with Mamdani, Petchesky spoke about her experience growing up in an observant Jewish family in Tulsa, Oklahoma, before recoiling from Judaism after witnessing racism during a 1959 trip to Israel.
She expanded on that experience in a recent interview. She said she sang in the temple choir with her mother but became disaffected after returning from Israel and sharing what she’d witnessed. A local rabbi dismissed her concerns, she said.
“I was very angry, and when I went to college I said, ‘I’m done, I’m not going to synagogue anymore, these people are hypocrites, I have nothing to do with it,’” said Petchesky, who was involved in civil rights advocacy at the time. “I was young, you know, I was just angry.”
After decades of being disconnected from Judaism, Petchesky said she accompanied a grieving friend to a service at B’nai Jeshurun, a non-denominational synagogue on the Upper West Side. Petchesky said she began attending more regularly; she was a fan of the rabbi, and felt particularly moved by the music.
But she stopped attending when she felt the rabbi at the time did not take a strong stance against the Iraq War. After a few years of unsuccessfully trying other places (“They were all, what I would say is too Zionist, they were supporting Israel”), she was introduced to JVP in 2013.
“I felt, after all those years and decades, I had found my political home,” said Petchesky, who attends services at Kolot Chayeinu, the progressive synagogue where Mamdani and City Comptroller Brad Lander, who is a member, attended a Rosh Hashanah service. (Lander has joked that Kolot Chayeinu is a place where JVP Jews and J Street Jews come together, with “minimal side-eye.”)
About a decade after finding her political home with JVP, Petchesky’s path became intertwined with Mamdani’s. And when JVP’s political branch organized a celebratory “Jews for Zohran” event this August, following his primary victory, Mamdani gave Petchesky a shoutout while speaking to the crowd of more than 150.
“It is lovely to see so many of you,” Mamdani said before singling out Petchesky. “It is lovely to see the star of our launch video, who is right here, who ‘just wants to get where she’s going.’”
Petchesky was just one of Mamdani’s many Jewish allies at the event, but her shoutout drew a big applause.
“I don’t know, I mean we kind of bonded,” Petchesky said of her and Mamdani. “I think he’s just fond of me — you know, little old Jewish lady who gets arrested.”
Unlike with her comment in the new ad, Petchesky said her role in the campaign announcement video has resonated with her more as time has passed.
“At the time I thought, ‘Oh, that’s nice,’” she said. “And between that video and now, I’m realizing that will really help me. I mean I stood and waited 15 minutes the other day for the bus. I finally did sit down, but it was very hard.”
She added, “I almost did yell out on the bus, ‘People! Vote for Zohran because we’ll have free fast buses!”
—
The post Meet the 83-year-old Jewish activist who stars in Zohran Mamdani’s campaign ads appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
The Trump administration is targeting Jewish organizations — what are we prepared to do?
Kol Yisrael Areivim Zeh La’Zeh, goes the aphorism: All Jews are responsible for one another.
Well, now we’re about to find out if it’s true.
Even as American Jews celebrate the long-yearned-for release of Israeli hostages, some in our community are being threatened by the Trump
administration, which has promised to investigate and prosecute nine left-leaning organizations that, it says, have funded or encouraged protests that led to violence. Some are household names: George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, ActBlue, Indivisible. Others are lesser known, like the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights.
Two are Jewish: IfNotNow and Jewish Voice for Peace.
Per Reuters, the Trump administration is considering “IRS investigations to strip them of tax-exempt status; criminal probes by the Justice Department and FBI; surveillance by federal law enforcement agencies; the use of RICO statutes typically used for organized crime and financial investigations under anti-terror laws to identify donors and funders, according to people familiar with investigations and public statements by officials.”
Will the Jewish community rally to the defense of two relatively small Jewish-led organizations? I wonder.
To be sure, neither IfNotNow nor JVP has endeared itself to the majority of American Jews. Both have been extremely critical (to put it mildly) of Israel — not just the war in Gaza or the occupation in the West Bank but, often, of the Jewish state itself. Most JVPniks are anti-Zionist. Some of their leaders can be loud, obnoxious and arrogant. I have been verbally pilloried by their members many times, even as I have defended them in these pages.
But none of that should matter. These are Jewish-led political organizations doing political activism, and the apparatus of the state is being utilized to punish and immiserate them. (It’s notable that non-Jewish pro-Palestine groups, like Students for Justice in Palestine, were not named in the Trump administration’s list.) Whether you want to use the ‘F’ word or not, this is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes. We’re not talking about some speaker being deplatformed at a college event. We’re talking about innocent people being investigated, thrown into jail, and even, as we have seen, deported.
Moreover, government actions are just the tip of the spear when it comes to reactionary populist violence. Unofficial harassment can be even worse, and it is already happening. Academics on Turning Point USA’s “Watchlist” have been doxxed and harassed. Some have fled their homes as a result. One, at Rutgers, just fled the country out of fear for his family members.
I know what this feels like. During the 2016 election, I was one of many Jews targeted online by anonymous right-wing trolls (we now suspect they were fake accounts being utilized by Russian operatives seeking to sow discord – a wildly successful strategy). The harassment I received was less than others like Bethany Frankel and Jonathan Weisman received. But it was enough to cause me to change my life. I no longer donate to political campaigns, because doing so puts my home address in the public record. I pay DeleteMe hundreds of dollars every month to scrub my information from online sources. I don’t post any pictures of my child.
This is what it is to be a liberal commentator or activist in Trump’s America — again, not just cancellation (which I have also experienced from the Right) but harassment, vandalism and worse.
Now imagine being a radical one.
For years, organizations like Canary Mission and Turning Point USA have been posting the names and pictures of people they deem to be anti-Israel or anti-America. There’s no due process in these campaigns, no way to get one’s listing taken down. (Ironically, while White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “We will continue to get to the bottom of who is funding these organizations,” we still don’t know who is funding Canary Mission.)
And once you’re listed, the torrent of hate begins.
And now, that torrent is set to be accompanied by sham indictments, expensive tax proceedings, and intrusive financial investigations. The Open Society Foundation can afford to defend itself from these actions, but any one of them can bankrupt a random JVP activist.
Now, has the Far Left’s incendiary rhetoric encouraged criminal actions like the vandalism of the home of Brooklyn Museum director Anne Pasternak? Undoubtedly. But does that justify the weaponization of the DOJ, IRS, and FBI against political dissidents? No, it doesn’t.
Jewish organizations, including those who have condemned JVP and IfNotNow, should speak out against Trump/Miller’s anti-democratic persecution of liberal organizations. (It’s not only radicals of course: ActBlue, which helps fundraise for Democrats, is hardly a radical antifa operation.) It doesn’t matter that Miller is Jewish or that JVP is anti-Israel. It matters that Jews are being disproportionately targeted by a radically anti-American crusade that would’ve made Joe McCarthy blush.
Moreover, given the extremely broad and fact-free ways in which these “enemies of the state” have been described, there are no bright lines dividing JVP from progressive organizations like T’ruah, Bend the Arc, and others. One needn’t be Pastor Niemoller to recognize that targets can easily be placed on many of our backs.
Indeed, the Jewish billionaires who have funded Trump should be wary of the monster they have created. Remember, at this moment, the MAGA movement is splintering over Israel. The majority still stand with Trump, who is deservedly riding the wave of his greatest foreign policy accomplishment. But a large minority, including Marjorie Taylor-Greene, Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlso and Candace Owens, are increasingly taking strong anti-Israel positions, including conspiracy theories that nefarious Israeli agents assassinated Charlie Kirk. Many of those are explicitly antisemitic.
Many Jewish institutions and leaders are standing by while the foundations of our democracy are being battered — as American citizens are pulled out of their homes and arrested by ICE, as media companies bend to the state’s ideology in order to stay in business, and now, as political foes of the regime are investigated and indicted. Where do we think this will lead? And, looking at the sweep of Jewish history, how could we possibly think this will end well for our community?
The post The Trump administration is targeting Jewish organizations — what are we prepared to do? appeared first on The Forward.