The Whitney Museum of American Art has over 27,000 pieces in its collection. On July 3, artist Jonathan Allen tried to add a couple more to call attention to what he considers “Israeli atrocities.”

Late that night, Allen vandalized two electronic displays outside the Whitney, a contemporary art museum in Manhattan, plastering them with posters accusing Israel of genocide and targeting Palestinian children.

Staff soon removed the posters after being notified of the vandalism, the museum said in an emailed statement.“I think it’s important artists take risks and use private property and unconventional spaces towards political and social ends,” Allen told the Forward.

Whitney Director of Communications Ashley Reese wrote, “The Museum maintains a zero-tolerance policy for vandalism, harassment, discrimination, or bias of any kind.”

This is not the first time a pro-Palestinian protest has targeted the Whitney. Last year, the museum planned to hold a performance mourning Palestinians killed during the Israel-Hamas war. When footage surfaced of a performer telling audience members to leave a previous performance if they “believe in Israeli in any incarnation,” the Whitney canceled the event.

Shortly afterward, the group Writers Against the War on Gaza held a protest at the Whitney, passing out brochures demanding “the removal of board members tied to genocide, militarism and apartheid.”

Allen’s installation is part of his Interruptions series, where he puts translucent poster-size vinyl stickers with political messages atop digital advertising screens to create a flickering effect.

Since 2019, Allen has installed over 400 interruptions, which began with traditional paper posters. When New York City and the MTA added more digital ad displays, he transformed the posters into their current iteration, most recently featuring quotes from public figures that criticize either Trump or Israel. Allen installs most of his interruptions on city-owned property, such as sidewalk ads or subway monitors — even the children’s entrance of the Brooklyn Public Library.

He acknowledges his project “is temporary vandalism, technically,” but explains that the pieces are very easily removable and don’t damage the displays underneath.

For his most recent interruption, Allen used monitors owned by the Whitney without authorization from the museum. Allen chose the Whitney because he believes it “is the contemporary corporate sphere of the art industry.”

“I feel like bringing attention to this sort of issue in that context was important,” he said.

A joint Instagram post by Allen and Eye on Palestine said the installation highlights the findings of a recent UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry report.

The Israeli government has heavily criticized the report, calling it “defamatory” and a “libellous sham,” and from its inception has accused the commission of bias. Israel did not provide any information to the commission for the investigation.

“The Israeli security forces have deliberately targeted and killed Palestinian children,” one poster says. Another poster stated: “If you can’t draw the line at genocide, you probably can’t draw the line at democracy.”

Critics of the installation echo the Israeli government’s criticisms. Hen Mazzig, an Israeli writer and content creator, called the display “blood libel.” The StopAntisemitism campaign also criticized the display on X. “they don’t care about Palestinian children,” they wrote. “The goal is to vilify Jews.”

Allen believes this is a mischaracterization. “I fully support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, and I support Israel, insofar as its right to exist,” he said. “I don’t think the discussion about what’s happening in Gaza hinges at all on that.”

Though Allen’s installations are typically removed “within hours,” he says each one “has a second life, because it lives on social media, which is where it tends to get the most attention.”

The post Artist alters Whitney Museum display screens to protest Israel’s conduct in Gaza appeared first on The Forward.

A new White House report accusing the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History of “extreme political activism,” and demanding the museum revise its exhibitions to elide the darker elements of the nation’s past, mirrors a troubling trend in Europe, where right-wing nationalist governments have spent the past decade forcing museums to minimize their countries’ roles in the Holocaust.

The 162-page report, issued this past weekend, faults the Smithsonian museum for dwelling, in the administration’s eyes, too heavily on slavery, and for teaching about race and gender in ways that President Donald Trump’s administration considers to “divide, dispirit, and discourage our citizens.” It follows a 2025 executive order, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” that directed federal institutions to purge “improper ideology” from their exhibits.

Reasonable people can disagree about specific details in museum exhibitions. But there is a difference between engaging in productive disagreements about historical emphases and demanding a national museum be solely devoted to make citizens feel good about their country. And the way that the latter approach has been used to downplay crimes against Jews in Europe should give American Jews, in particular, pause about it being deployed in their own country.

Propaganda in Poland 

In 2017, Poland opened a permanent exhibit at the Museum of the Second World War in Gdańsk, which delivered a multi-layered account of the war. The exhibit highlighted Polish suffering under Nazi occupation as well as the Holocaust and the pogroms Poles carried out against their own Jewish neighbors, including the infamous 1941 Jedwabne massacre, in which several hundred Jews were burned alive in a barn by their fellow townspeople.

The right-wing Law and Justice party, known as PiS, called the exhibit “not Polish enough,” forced a merger that replaced the museum’s director, and altered the exhibition to foreground Polish heroism while softening material on Polish complicity in the extermination of three million Polish Jews. Five hundred eminent historians labeled those changes an attempt to turn the museum into a “propaganda institution.”

The following year, the Polish parliament went further, criminalizing any claim that Poland bore responsibility for Nazi crimes, with penalties of up to three years in prison. Yad Vashem warned that the law “jeopardizes the free and open discussion of the part of the Polish people in the persecution of the Jews at the time.” Under international pressure, Poland later dropped the criminal penalty, but the campaign to legislate a flattering national story had made its point.

Hungarian ahistoricism

The nation of Hungary offers an even starker case.

Former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government spent years developing the House of Fates, a Holocaust museum on the site of the Budapest rail station from which 437,000 Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz in a matter of weeks in 1944. Yad Vashem and Hungary’s largest Jewish federation, Mazsihisz, boycotted the project, warning that its planned narrative would leave visitors believing “the citizens of Hungary were essentially blameless for what was inflicted upon their Jewish neighbors.” In fact, Hungarian gendarmes rounded up and deported their Jewish neighbors with minimal direct German involvement.

Orbán separately made efforts to rehabilitate Miklós Horthy, Hungary’s Nazi-allied wartime ruler, as an “exceptional statesman,” and backed a Budapest statue honoring Holocaust victims that was widely seen as covering up Hungary’s role in the deportations by depicting the country as an angel attacked by a Nazi eagle. The implication: all Hungarians were equal victims of the Nazi occupation, an idea that conveniently overlooks the fact that the Nazis had many Hungarian collaborators.

The museum sat empty for years amid the dispute. Jewish leaders in Hungary have only recently reported progress toward a version that names Hungarian, and not just German, responsibility for atrocities against Jews.

The dangers of whitewashing

The recent histories of Poland and Hungary demonstrate that when a government decides that its national story shouldn’t include honest examinations of what its people did to vulnerable minorities, the nation’s integrity as a whole is imperiled.

This is the same demand the Trump administration has issued to the Smithsonian. The White House report does not claim that the museum has facts wrong; rather, it objects that the museum treats history as a tool for “social justice.” The administration demands, instead, “patriotic history” — exactly the same ultimatum issued by governments in Warsaw and Budapest.

Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III says his institution’s goal is scholarship, not partisanship. The administration’s answer is that scholarship itself is the problem, if the story it tells is not celebratory enough.

The kind of “patriotic history” the administration wants entails, instead, a thinner historical accounting, built to avoid making visitors uncomfortable with the actions of their ancestors. A country pressured to foreground its heroism while pushing its failures to the margins is one that shows its own people that, effectively, minorities do not belong.

When Poland won’t discuss Jedwabne, or Hungary won’t acknowledge its own role in the deportation of Hungarian Jews, they send the message that they don’t see Jewish citizens as fully human — in either the past or the present. A U.S. that treats discussing the facts of slavery — or the immigration quotas that helped trap Jews in Europe — as a betrayal of national values is one that suggests the people it wronged, and their descendants, don’t matter.

A serious national museum has to depict a nation’s failures and achievements in the same frame. What the White House is proposing for the Smithsonian is very different, and very dangerous. Jews have watched this play out before and seen where it leads. A nation’s museums are essential to its capacity to reckon with the worst of its history. This is a capacity worth defending in Gdańsk, in Budapest, and now in Washington.

The post European leaders downplayed the Holocaust. Now Trump is using their tactics against the Smithsonian appeared first on The Forward.

The collapse of Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s campaign in the wake of rape allegations is prompting Jewish Democrats to assess what they see as lessons about the perils of piling on to support untested candidates who are winning voter support by targeting the Democratic establishment as too supportive of Israel.

Platner’s candidacy had already exposed deep divisions within the Democratic Party before a former girlfriend accused him of sexual assault while drunk — allegations he denies but that have fueled calls for him to drop out of the race.

For some, the latest allegations are a decisive breaking point after months of controversy surrounding Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer whose tattoo resembling the Nazi-era Totenkopf insignia and sharp criticism of Israel have alarmed some Jewish groups.

Halie Soifer, chief executive of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, said the episode reinforces why her organization declined to endorse Platner, even after Gov. Janet Mills suspended her primary campaign and he became the presumptive nominee to challenge incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins.

“I think a lesson for Democrats is that we shouldn’t compromise,” Soifer said. “There were red flags about Platner from the outset. They just continued to compound on each other as more stories came out. But the Nazi tattoo for us alone was one too many.”

Changing minds

The breadth of calls for Platner to step aside intensified on Tuesday after a former girlfriend accused him of drunken rape.

Chief among them was Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who had been one of Platner’s earliest supporters and appeared with him at campaign rallies. The Maine Democratic Party urged Platner to withdraw as its Senate nominee, saying Democrats must “refocus this campaign” on defeating Collins.

The race has national significance —  considered one of the party’s best opportunities to flip a Republican-held seat as Democrats seek to regain the Senate majority. Platner has until Monday to withdraw from the race and avoid appearing on the ballot, allowing Democrats to nominate a replacement before the July 27 ballot deadline.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose criticism of Israel and progressive politics align with Platner’s worldview, also called on Platner to quit. Platner’s campaign was advised by Morris Katz, the strategist credited with helping engineer Mamdani’s victories in New York City’s June Democratic primaries.

Some progressive politicians calling for Platner to drop out raised the Totenkopf skull-and-crossbones tattoo as an early sign he never should have run.

“Sorry to the well-intentioned people who made the mistake of supporting this guy,” New York State Sen. Julia Salazar, a democratic socialist, posted on X. “But: having a Nazi tattoo doesn’t pass the sniff test for running for US Senate, nor did his excuses. And far worse that he faces a credible allegation of rape.”

Yet not everyone believes the earlier controversies should have disqualified Platner.

Steve Sheffey, a longtime Chicago Democratic activist who writes an influential insider political newsletter, said he believed Platner had adequately addressed questions surrounding his tattoo — which he has since covered up — and prior Reddit posts. But the latest accusation “is a deal breaker,” he said.

“He’s not antisemitic,” Sheffey said. “But he is credibly accused of sexual assault, and that’s unacceptable.” The calls for his withdrawal, he added, show that Democrats haven’t lost their compass.

Others who had previously defended Platner have reached similar conclusions.

New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg, who had written favorably about Platner after meeting him on the campaign trail, reversed course on Monday.

“I deeply regret that, impressed by Platner’s political charisma, I wrote that he was ‘nothing like the edgelord caricature I encountered online,’” Goldberg wrote. “If anything, he seems to be significantly worse.”

The path forward 

Maine Democrats are now racing to prepare contingency plans should Platner step aside, hoping to salvage one of their best opportunities in the midterms. Platner reportedly told campaign staff Monday he believes he can still influence who replaces him on the ticket.

Possible successors being discussed include former state Senate President Troy Jackson, former gubernatorial candidate Nirav Shah and Secretary of State Shenna Bellows. Shah said Monday that he opposes sending U.S. aid to Israel and believes Israel’s conduct in Gaza amounts to genocide.

For Jewish Democratic leaders, the moment has reopened a debate that began months ago, when many questioned whether the party should rally behind a nominee whose campaign had already generated repeated controversies. Soifer said she hopes that the next candidate selected will be one that everyone can get behind.

“A candidate must align with the Jewish community in terms of prioritizing its security and safety, recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state, and support the U.S.-Israel security relationship,” Soifer said about JDCA’s broader approach to endorsements. “JDCA only supports Democrats, but we do not support all Democrats.”

The post After Platner’s collapse, Jewish Democrats say party can’t ignore candidates’ red flags appeared first on The Forward.