Uncategorized
More than 25% of Israelis want to leave the country. How did we get here?
Amid this brutal cycle of war, trauma and sacrifice, more than 25% of Israelis are now considering leaving Israel behind.
The stunning results of this survey, conducted in April 2025 and published on Sunday by the Israeli Democracy Institute, reveal an existential fissure in the country. Israelis are losing faith in their nation’s future, and they don’t believe they can get it back.
It’s a shocking turnaround, after narratives of Israeli society’s exemplary resilience and social cohesion sprang up in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 massacre. And while this survey predates major events like the Israel-Iran war and the ceasefire and hostage deal, its findings align with other concerning trends.
“Tens of thousands of Israelis have chosen to leave Israel in the past two years,” Gilad Kariv, chairperson of the Knesset’s Research and Information Center, said at a Knesset meeting in October. “This is not a wave of emigration; it’s a tsunami of Israelis choosing to leave the country.”
Since the beginning of 2022, 125,000 more people have emigrated from Israel than have immigrated to it. The number of official requests to terminate residency in 2024 was more than double the total requests made between 2015 and 2021.
It’s not just because war is difficult. It’s because the last few years have posed a fundamental challenge to Israel’s promise to global Jewry — and Israel is failing.
Israel has never been an easy country to live in. Residing there means facing economic hardship, a constant threat of violence, existential dread and insufferable bureaucracy. What drew immigrants in and kept citizens around was their shared commitment to the Jewish state’s ultimate vision: a renewed Jewish homeland serving its inhabitants, built on “freedom, justice and peace.”
That sense of shared purpose was crucial to Israel’s founding. “The State of Israel and the Jewish people share a common destiny,” David Ben-Gurion, the country’s founding prime minister, wrote in a 1954 letter. “This state cannot exist without the Jewish people, and the Jewish people cannot exist without the state.”
As Anita Shapira explains in her 2015 book Ben-Gurion: Father of Modern Israel, Ben-Gurion recognized the need to keep all Jews invested and connected to the state of Israel — and the danger of severing that connection.
But in recent years, Israel’s leaders have failed to nurture that investment and connection. What distinguishes this period from the conflict-ridden years around the 1948, 1967 and 1973 wars is how out of sync a vast number of today’s Israelis are with their own state and government.
And the IDI’s survey reveals just how far the country has strayed from Ben-Gurion’s vision.
Those more likely to leave are less religious and more liberal — a demographic politically isolated in a country steered by a power-hungry and extremist right-wing government. While the Oct. 7 attack and the first months of war pulled many Israelis toward new or deeper religious commitment, the grueling conflict, which dragged on for months without a clear endgame, also pushed others further and further away.
Just before the United States-brokered ceasefire went into effect on Oct. 5, the Institute for National Security Studies reported that 72% of Israelis were dissatisfied with the government’s handling of the war, while more than 40% thought the country was worse off since Oct. 7. More than half believed another Oct. 7 could happen again.
But this fundamental mistrust of the country’s leadership took hold well before Oct. 7. It goes back to 2022, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu brought far-right extremists like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich into the Israeli political mainstream. Then, his government’s widely reviled plans for a judicial overhaul in 2023 brought fears of Israeli authoritarianism into reality.
The Oct. 7 attack could have been a wake-up call that Israel desperately needed to reverse this course. Instead, within a year’s time, it became clear that Netanyahu was still guided by his own interests — prolonging the war, sabotaging hostage deals and turning Israel into an international pariah.
Israel’s economy has also suffered from this turbulence. The tech sector has seen investment decline and talent flee, while the cost of living has worsened.
Yossi Klein Halevi, a senior fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute, warned me of the consequences of all these trends during a podcast interview in August 2024.
“My deepest fear is for a mass emigration of young secular Israelis, those Israelis who are the backbone of the next generation of startup nation, of Israel as an economic success story,” he told me. “I’m terrified of that, and I see this government ultimately as a threat to the Israeli success story.”
It is understandable why much of the Israeli electorate feels disillusioned, unsafe, nihilistic and betrayed. And those feelings ought to be a cause for major concern.
Jewish tradition repeatedly warns that civil fragmentation can lead to a break between Jews and the land of Israel. The Talmud explains that senseless hatred and a breakdown of trust between Jews have historically led to ruptures between our people and our homeland. This is precisely what organizations like The Fourth Quarter — a grassroots movement seeking to build consensus among Israelis through dialogue — seek to repair. We cannot know if it will be enough.
What we do know is that Israel — both its citizens and its leaders — must respond to those who feel abandoned by the country that promised to be a Jewish homeland for all.
If we want Israelis to remain committed to their country, the government must make good-faith efforts to show they still have a home here.
That means, first, political reform. There must be real political accountability with independent probes into Oct. 7 — not the internal probe the government currently plans — long-overdue elections, and a fresh focus on creating economic stability backed by strategic foreign policy. Above all, there must be restored democratic norms, and a shelving of authoritarian plans.
Unfortunately, Netanyahu and his government seem uninterested in repairing what they have broken. The Jewish state will not crumble overnight if Netanyahu and his ilk remain indifferent to these needs. But the country’s morale will weaken. And everything that has kept it strong and surviving — its defenses, its international supporters, its belief in its own mission — will do the same. The educated, the entrepreneurial and the young will leave, and they will not look back.
Israelis need something to believe in. Without that, they will flee a country unrecognizable to them.
The post More than 25% of Israelis want to leave the country. How did we get here? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Trump endorsement of Netanyahu blasted by liberal policy advocates, Democrats
(JTA) — A day after President Donald Trump endorsed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli election eight days from now, U.S. policy analysts, Democratic lawmakers and liberal advocacy groups slammed the decision.
Trump announced his support for Netanyahu, who is running for reelection, in a Sunday Truth Social post that described the Israeli leader as “a Great Warrior Prime Minister” and a critical partner in eliminating the Iranian threat. Netanyahu has been trailing former IDF chief-of-staff Gadi Eisenkot in recent surveys.
Tali deGroot, vice president of political and digital strategy for the liberal Zionist group J Street, described Trump’s declaration as “an endorsement of endless war for Israelis,” in a statement sent to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. She warned of “endless occupation and control of Palestinian life and land, and Israel’s growing isolation on the world stage.”
“The president is once again acting against the wishes of American taxpayers and choosing to uphold a failed, unpopular foreign policy that has brought devastation to Israelis, Palestinians and countless civilians,” deGroot added.
A spokesperson for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, meanwhile, said that the lobby had no comment about the endorsement.
David Makovsky, director of the Program on Arab-Israel Relations at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, criticized Trump’s decision, writing on X that “in one fell swoop, Trump has broken with the longstanding U.S. practice of avoiding explicit endorsements in Israeli elections.” The president, Makovsky added, went a step further by threatening to sever a partnership against Iran if Israelis choose a different leader.
“It is up to the Israeli people to choose their own leader and threatening that the U.S. will walk away from the conflict with Iran is beyond stunning,” Makovksy said.
Makovsky also pointed out that “a Trump endorsement is no electoral guarantee,” noting that Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s support for Viktor Orbán in Hungary did not end in a victory.
“The ultimate test is assembling a 61-seat Knesset majority,” Makovsky added. “Yet Netanyahu appears more focused on preventing an Eisenkot-led coalition from reaching that threshold than on demonstrating a viable path to 61 seats himself.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland, offered another scathing perspective, observing that “authoritarians of a feather flock together.”
“They started a war together,” Van Hollen stated. “They crack down on press freedom together. They lie about everything together.”
Rep. Analilia Mejia, a New Jersey Democrat running for reelection, said that the endorsement “tells us everything we need to know about both of these men.” She then went on to list Netanyahu, North Korea leader Kim Jong Un, Orbán and Russian President Vladimir Putin, adding that “this guy has a ‘type.’”
On the other side of the aisle, Rep. Carlos Gimenez, a Republican from Florida, reposted a video in which Netanyahu thanked Trump for his support. The congressman then added that “America will always stand with the Jewish State of Israel and our dear friend Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has championed our alliance for decades.”
Matt Brooks, CEO of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said he believes that “President Trump is incredibly popular with the people of Israel,” in a written statement to JTA.
“His support will carry considerable weight as Israelis make their choice for Prime Minister in a pivotal election this month,” Brooks added.
American Orthodox Rabbi Shmuley Boteach likewise celebrated the endorsement “by our great President Trump,” writing on X that he has “known and loved BIBI Netanyahu for some 35 years.”
Conservative radio personality Mark Levin described Trump’s Truth Social post as “an extraordinarily strong statement,” while accusing the opposition of “barking about election interference.”
“Trump makes clear it’s also in our national security interest for Netanyahu to remain PM,” Levin stated, calling complaints “unserious and a partisan political whine.”
Conservative influencer Evan Kilgore, on the other hand, fumed at Trump’s decision. Kilgore, whose X profile says “Christ is King,” announced that he is “so done with the GOP,” following Trump’s endorsement of Netanyahu. Kilgore described Trump as “TOTALLY fu*king subverted by Jewish and Zionist interests.”
Political analysts are divided as to whether Trump’s official support would have any sway on the results of an election 6,000 miles away.
Joyce Karam, editor-in-chief of the Washington-based site Al-Monitor, described the endorsement as a signal to both Israel and Iran that renewed escalation and a push for regime collapse could occur after the U.S. midterm elections. She also predicted that Trump’s backing could tip the balance in a tight race where neither side holds a majority.
However, Dov Waxman, director of the Israel Studies program at the University of California, Los Angeles, expressed doubt that support from Trump, who has become less popular in Israel, could significantly influence Netanyahu’s election chances.
“For a long time, most polls have shown his bloc falling well short of a parliamentary majority,” Waxman added.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Trump endorsement of Netanyahu blasted by liberal policy advocates, Democrats appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Macklemore’s ‘Free Palestine’ tour will benefit group that called Oct. 7 a ‘prison break’
(JTA) — Macklemore, the rapper of hits such as “Thrift Shop” and “Can’t Hold Us,” is facing backlash from Jewish organizations over plans to donate proceeds from his forthcoming concert tour to the Palestinian Youth Movement, which described the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attacks on Israel as a “prison break.”
The rapper was dropped on Sept. 14 from an opening slot on Ed Sheeran’s U.S. stadium tour after making pro-Palestinian remarks onstage. He announced his “Free Palestine” tour on Sept. 24, pledging that all proceeds would benefit organizations supporting Palestinians. PYM is among 12 organizations named as beneficiaries.
The tour includes concerts in Dublin on Oct. 26, Paris on Oct. 29 and London on Oct. 30.
Macklemore received a surge of support after being dropped from Sheeran’s tour, with all of Sheeran’s remaining opening acts quitting in solidarity. He said on Instagram that the “Free Palestine” tour “sold out immediately.”
PYM is a grassroots movement of Palestinian and Arab youth in the United States, Canada and Britain. On Oct. 7, 2024, the first anniversary of the Hamas attacks, the group described the assault as a “prison break” and called the fighters “the men who broke through” in an essay published in The New Inquiry.
“Those fighters had trained for months, and now found themselves stepping foot onto the same hills and plains that their grandfathers and grandmothers had lived upon,” said PYM, without mentioning the killing and abduction of Israeli civilians.
PYM also said a week after the attacks, “Understand Palestinian resistance as fundamentally just and as a means of survival for our people; it will not stop in the weeks and months to come, and you must be prepared not to waver again.”
Jewish and pro-Israel groups have slammed Macklemore for supporting PYM. The Jewish Leadership Council, which represents British Jewish and pro-Israel groups, told The Jewish Chronicle, “When the PYM describes the 7 October massacre as a ‘prison break’, it risks legitimizing violence against Jews.”
The Israeli-American Council, which petitioned Sheeran to drop Macklemore, told Fox News Digital that “Live Nation and the concert organizers must now publicly explain their vetting process and ensure that concert proceeds do not benefit organizations that justify violence against innocent civilians.”
Macklemore, Live Nation and the Palestinian Youth Movement did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Macklemore’s ‘Free Palestine’ tour will benefit group that called Oct. 7 a ‘prison break’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Why is the biggest soccer team in the world talking about Joseph Goebbels?
The biggest rivalry in international soccer — between Real Madrid and FC Barcelona — has erupted in recent months, as Madrid pushes the Spanish soccer federation to punish Barca for alleged referee bribery.
But the ugly sparring between the clubs took an unexpected turn last week when Spanish league president Javier Tebas entered the fray with a shocking comparison.
“Real Madrid’s management directs an orchestra of mouthpieces and Real Madrid TV leads the singing,” Tebas wrote Oct. 15 on X. “Their score is always the same: select the plays that suit them, repeat the grievance, feed the suspicion, and point fingers at the enemies.
“That method recalls propaganda mechanisms exploited by Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s minister of propaganda: systematic repetition, construction of an enemy, and subordination of facts to the narrative.”
Real Madrid, which has employed such stars as Cristiano Ronaldo and David Beckham, condemned the remark with a statement calling for Tebas’ resignation both from the Spanish league, La Liga, and the Royal Spanish Football Federation, where Tebas serves as vice president.
“Real Madrid C. F. considers it absolutely intolerable and extraordinarily serious that someone holding two positions of utmost responsibility in Spanish football resorts to a comparison with the propaganda methods of the Nazi regime to discredit our club, its management, and its television,” the club wrote Oct. 16.Tebas has thus far refused to resign or even take down the post, and has defended his critique by pointing to other Spanish leaders who have made similar comparisons in the past.
The Goebbels controversy comes amid growing concerns about antisemitism in Spain, including in sports, where thousands of protesters blocked an Israeli-branded cycling team from competing in the Vuelta race last year.
The bribery accusations against Barcelona first surfaced in 2023, when it was revealed the club had paid millions of dollars to companies linked to the former vice president of the Spanish refereeing body, José María Enríquez Negreira. A Spanish court dismissed the bribery charges in 2024, but the investigation continued, and earlier this month Madrid submitted a tranche of documents it said proved the bribery claims.
The conflict between the club and Tebas dates back at least to 2021, when Madrid club president Florentino Perez spearheaded a breakaway international league that would have threatened Spanish competition. Barcelona had also agreed to join the so-called Super League, but the plan was scuttled after enormous backlash from fans across the continent.
Joseph Goebbels, one of Hitler’s most devoted followers, led the German Propaganda Ministry after the Nazi party came to power in 1933. He and his wife died by suicide in 1945 after killing their six children with cyanide.
The post Why is the biggest soccer team in the world talking about Joseph Goebbels? appeared first on The Forward.
