As New York City’s mayoral election moves ahead, there appear to be three major issues that trouble many of my friends within the Jewish community about Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic candidate and frontrunner.

Will Mamdani take pains to appropriately protect the city’s Jewish community during this period of heightened antisemitism, they ask? Should his views on the Middle East disqualify him from the support of Jewish voters? And is he sufficiently experienced to serve as Mayor of the largest and most complex city in the nation?

As a one-time city official deeply involved in the city’s Jewish community, I think each of those questions is valid — and each easily answerable, in Mamdani’s favor.

Concerns about antisemitism

There are understandable fears within the Jewish community about our safety at a time of rising antisemitism. To that, I say: It’s hard to imagine a stronger program of protection against hate than that which Mamdani has outlined.

Mamdani has proposed a 800% increase for funding hate crime prevention — a comprehensive investment that should reassure those of us who are most alarmed. Antisemitism “is a real crisis that we have to tackle, and one that I’m committed to doing so through increased funding for actually preventing hate crimes across the city,” Mamdani told NPR this summer, adding “my commitment is to protect Jewish New Yorkers and that I will live up to that commitment through my actions.”

Compare that to the plans put forward by Mamdani’s opponents, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who is running as an Independent, after Mamdani defeated him in the Democratic Primary — and Curtis Sliwa, a Republican. Cuomo has promised to prioritize fighting antisemitism, but has focused on forms of antisemitism more associated with the political left, in a fashion that leaves open the question of whether he’s prepared to address the often more violent threats of right-wing antisemitism. And Sliwa, who has a record of offensive statements about Jews, appears to be less interested in having the city directly involved in Jewish safety. “I, unlike any of the candidates, have said Jews must protect themselves,” he said in an interview with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “If you depend strictly on Gentiles, history is replete with instances where you’re going to be horribly disappointed.”

Notably, Mamdani’s proposals appear to be resonating with Jewish voters: Despite concerns about his positions when it comes to the Middle East, a new poll suggests his support among Jewish New Yorkers is effectively equivalent to Cuomo’s.

The Middle East

Jewish New Yorkers are not single-issue voters living in fear. We are looking for a mayor who can build a coalition to improve our already great city.

As for the Middle East, it is true that Mamdani has been harshly critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government. What’s also true: Most American Jews agree with him. According to a recent Washington Post poll, a majority of American Jews believe Netanyahu’s government has overseen war crimes in Gaza, and almost 40% believe Israel has committed genocide.

In that context, Mamdani seems like a candidate much more aligned with Jewish perspectives on Israel than Cuomo, who joined one of Netanyahu’s legal defense teams pro bono. In the weeks leading up to the current ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war, Cuomo expressed some concern about the shocking events in Gaza — but continued to broadly align himself with Netanyahu’s talking points. While his position might be reassuring to the majority of American Jews who feel a close attachment to Israel, it doesn’t suggest that he’s ready or able to handle the nuances of today’s changing environment — and changing Jewish perspectives.

I am a founding member of J Street, a Zionist, pro-peace organization that supports a two-state solution and opposes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. I differ with some of Mamdani’s views about the future for Israelis and Palestinians, including his failure to vocally support a two-state solution.

But one doesn’t have to agree with all of his views about the Middle East to conclude that he is the best candidate for mayor. As Mamdani himself said in a recent appearance, “We’re not looking for a litmus test that we feel the same way we do on every single issue, and that includes Israel and Palestine.

“There may be a Jewish New Yorker who will not see themselves in me because of a disagreement we have on that question,” he added, “but I want to make sure they still see themselves in the city.”

The issue of experience

I served as Corporation Counsel, the city’s chief legal officer, under former Mayor David N. Dinkins, which means I have some experience with the challenges facing any new administration. Upon taking office, I found that with the assistance of experienced managers in the City’s civil service, I could bring myself up to date quickly. That leads me to believe that if Mamdanis is elected as mayor, he will find that, with the right help, learning the ins and outs of the city’s many agencies will be strenuous but doable.

Mamdani has been taking significant steps toward crafting a transition team that should comfort any New Yorkers concerned about his youth and relative inexperience. (It’s worth remembering that Mamdani is already well acquainted with how complicated it can be to work within a government, with his six years’ experience as a New York Assemblyman from Queens.) According to public reports, the transition efforts have already included meetings with plenty of experienced public servants, including Dan Doctoroff, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s former deputy mayor for economic development; Janette Sadik-Kahn, Bloomberg’s former commissioner of transportation; and Alicia Glen, who served as deputy mayor for housing and economic development under former Mayor Bill De Blasio. Doctoroff, for example, has been quoted saying “I will help him in any way possible.”

What this shows me: Mamdani knows he’s going to need a crack team to be a successful mayor. True leadership isn’t about being personally able to take on every challenge: It’s about knowing how to assemble and run a team that has that ability.

Notably, Bloomberg — to my view the most successful mayor we have had in this century — had no governmental experience and little familiarity with the complexity of the city’s public administration before taking office.

Yet through the selection of an outstanding group of municipal leaders and public servants, he was able to assemble a first-rate administration. He led the city’s amazing and effective efforts to recover quickly from 9/11, in part by attracting outstanding and often non-political experts to serve as senior members of his administration.

In contrast, De Blasio, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and current Mayor Eric Adams each came into the role with many years of governmental experience. Yet the record of each was, shall we say, unsuccessful. The Adams administration is known for serious allegations of corruption at the highest levels. The De Blasio administration, after a promising start, deteriorated, as the mayor was too often distracted by other political ambitions, and proved prone to confusion and dispiriting inefficiency. The Giuliani administration was marred by racial insensitivity and defense of unacceptable police misconduct.

Why should we have less hope for Mamdani than we did for Bloomberg? And why should we expect that, in light of the ineffective recent mayoralties, a more traditional candidate would be more effective?

Mamdani has told those with whom he is consulting that he admired many of the accomplishments of the Bloomberg administration — a strong sign that he’s noticed the most important lesson of Bloomberg’s mayoralty. With the aid of experienced and well-qualified city officials, such as former Comptroller Brad Lander, and with the active support of experienced public officials like Rep. Jerry Nadler, Assemblyman Micah Lasher and Gov. Kathy Hochul, there is every reason to hope his administration will be thoughtful about hiring experienced managers, and crafting a new generation of dedicated New Yorkers to lead us into the future.

The post Jews are worried about Zohran Mamdani. Here’s why they shouldn’t be appeared first on The Forward.

Zohran Mamdani wants New York City’s Jews to believe he can protect them from antisemitism.

It’s easy to take Mamdani, the Democratic candidate for mayor and current frontrunner in the race, at his word when it comes to right-wing antisemitism. Progressives like him tend to have little difficulty calling out white supremacy, Holocaust denial or far-right conspiracy theories.

But what will happen when New York’s Jews face antisemitism coming from the left?

Left-wing antisemitism — which is almost always entangled with anti-Zionism — can be more difficult to recognize than its right-wing counterpart. It often targets Jews or Jewish institutions under the guise of protesting Israel, including blacklisting Zionist therapists, banning Zionists from appearing at bookstores and accusing organizations like Hillel of supporting genocide.

Which raises the question: Given Mamdani’s lifelong pro-Palestinian activism, can Jews rely on him to recognize when anti-Zionism crosses the line into antisemitism?

Based on his record of double-talk when it comes to Israel, there are serious reasons to be skeptical. While Mamdani’s beliefs about Middle East foreign policy aren’t directly relevant to his suitability to be mayor of New York City, his beliefs about Israel will affect his readiness to identify left-wing antisemitism — and that will affect Jewish New Yorkers.

During a recent Fox News interview, when asked if Hamas should “lay down its arms,” Mamdan refused to answer. “I don’t really have opinions on Hamas and Israel beyond the question of justice and safety,” he responded.

At the mayoral debate days later, he backpedaled and said that “of course” Hamas should disarm.

Mamdani did not explain his initial refusal to call out Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization with genocidal aims against the Jewish state. He acted as if he was merely clarifying his position, not changing it.

During a June podcast interview, Mamdani was evasive when asked about the phrase “globalize the intifada,” a popular pro-Palestinian chant, which some see as calling for violence against Jews. He sidestepped a request to condemn it weeks later during a Meet the Press interview. In July, he finally said he would “discourage” the phrase’s use, a meek response to a bare-minimum ask — that language inciting antisemitic violence be outright rejected.

Both of these cases ought to have been easy wins for Mamdani. He could have shown his ability to discern when rhetoric and ideas related to Israel can come across as threatening to Jews.

Full-throatedly calling for Hamas’ disarmament, and condemning the phrase “globalize the intifada,” would not have compromised Mamdani’s commitment to the Palestinian cause, which is served neither by Hamas — which is notoriously brutal against Palestinian civilians — nor Western protesters who parrot its rhetoric. And it would have gone a long way toward reassuring Jews that their potential future mayor understands and empathizes with their concerns.

Other examples of Mamdani’s waffling reinforce his unreliability in this department.

Mamdani has decried those whom he describes as “progressive except for Palestine,” but also insists he will have Zionists in his administration. Which leaves Jewish voters wondering: Which of those apparently opposed positions should they believe represents his actual intention?

His campaign has reassured New York Jews that he will not defund the annual Israel Day Parade. However, if he already supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, why would he permit a parade celebrating a country he views as broadly violating human rights and, in Gaza, committing genocide? Yes, every politician adjusts their promises to resonate with the electorate they’re courting, but this degree of inconsistency in this one, focused area still provides reasons to be anxious.

Mamdani has made good-faith efforts to engage with Jews from across the spectrum, in Haredi communities and liberal ones alike. But he’s yet to show that he’s able to meaningfully grow in his views either on the Middle East, or on how its politics touch the lives of his potential future constituents. Zionism is closely intertwined with the identities of the vast majority of American Jews. And failing to respond to the threat that anti-Zionism can pose to Jewish lives could be a grave mistake.

After all, as the editorial board of The New York Times has noted, “the demonizing, delegitimizing rhetoric of the left” on Israel “bears some responsibility” for deadly antisemitic attacks in Boulder, Co., and Washington, D.C. this past year.

However, recognizing when anti-Israel rhetoric becomes antisemitic can come at a cost for progressives.

Last year, the Democratic Socialists of America withdrew support from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for participating in a panel on antisemitism. Their rejection of the congresswoman for even acknowledging the rise in antisemitism following the Hamas attack of Oct. 7, 2023 came despite the fact that she is among Israel’s fiercest critics.

As a proud progressive like Ocasio-Cortez, Mamdani, who is aligned with DSA, could face serious backlash if he confronts left-wing versions of antisemitism — yet another reason to question his ability to do so.

All this is frightening for Jewish New Yorkers. In a moment of historic spikes in antisemitism, New York’s Jews need a mayor who understands their fears and will not hesitate to confront them. Without that, how can they be expected to feel safe in New York City?

The post Why I don’t trust Zohran Mamdani to fight left-wing antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.

On a quiet corner of the internet, a new website asks us to listen.

That site — “https://www.yiddishculture.co/” — is more than a digital exhibit; it’s an act of cultural restitution. Each page restores the sound, movement and texture of Jewish life that once animated the streets of Poland and Lithuania, before silence fell.

Yiddishculture.co. is the latest project by sociologist and educator Adina Cimet, founder of the Educational Program on Yiddish Culture (EPYC). The site opens with a single, evocative idea: that language is not only speech, but atmosphere.

“The goal,” she told me, “is to make the world in which Yiddish lived visible again — its humor, its music, its human geography.” Through layered maps, archival photographs and classroom modules, EPYC transforms the abstraction of Eastern European Jewry into a living landscape of shtet, shtetlekh un derfer — cities, towns and villages.

A map of memory

At first glance, the site’s interface feels deceptively simple: a rotating globe dotted with the names Vilna, Lublin, Lodz, Kuzmir and Czernica. Click on any of them, and the screen opens on an illustrated panorama — markets alive with movement, children’s schools, synagogue facades and Yiddish signs appearing quietly amid the rhythm of Jewish life. The pages are not static memorials, but invitations to explore.

For Cimet, who has spent decades teaching Yiddish language and culture to younger generations at YIVO, this project grew out of her frustration with what she calls the “flattening” of Jewish Eastern Europe. “When people say the shtetl,” she said, “they imagine one homogenous place. But there were many shtetlekh, each with its own accent, customs and political life. I wanted to restore that diversity.”

The culture of a people, not a relic

The site’s culture section expands that vision. In elegant bilingual typography — Yiddish and English — the reader encounters the interwoven strands of Jewish civilization: Language, religion, food, political life, Shoah. Each topic reveals vivid artifacts and explanatory essays. A 1930s cookbook, for example, reveals how “the Jewish kitchen was a bridge between faith and economy.” Political cartoons appear beside essays that trace the tensions between Bundist, Zionist and religious ideologies.

“The famous linguist Max Weinreich called Yiddish a ‘fusion language,’” one caption notes. “But fusion is not confusion — it’s creativity.” The site seems to take that statement as a guiding principle: Yiddish as an adaptive art of survival, where humor and holiness share the same breath.

Teaching the future to hear the past

“We’re not trying to resurrect the past,” Cimet told me, “but to help students inhabit its worldview — to see what those people saw, to feel how they felt about language and belonging.” The project is structured for educators, with lesson plans and cultural modules designed for middle and high school classrooms. Teachers can build units around geography, literature or history, while students trace Yiddish culture’s evolution from market stalls to modern universities.

What makes “When These Streets Heard Yiddish” so moving is that it resists both sentimentality and detachment. It speaks to the generation that grew up hearing their grandparents’ Yiddish mixed with English or Hebrew, only half-understanding its cadences. Here, those cadences are given back — paired with images, texts, and sounds that reanimate them. The result is part museum, part curriculum, part memorial and wholly alive.

Memory as education

EPYC’s design quietly models an educational philosophy that feels deeply Jewish: learning as remembrance, remembrance as responsibility. The Shoah section concludes with a simple line:“The Jews of Poland were not strangers to the winds of war” and a photo of deported children walking away from the camera. Yet even here, the tone is not only tragic. The placement within the broader framework of language, food and song reminds the reader that destruction came after centuries of creativity.

Cimet, who worked with YIVO and taught for decades in Mexico before moving to the United States, understands that digital space is now where memory must live. “If we can’t walk these streets anymore,” she said, “we can at least hear them. And by hearing, begin to imagine again.”

The post Yiddish life in prewar Eastern Europe comes alive on this website appeared first on The Forward.